sotto voce

Spell checks don't actually change anything.

Sheshbazzar

Still nothing but blowing wind and crickets as you slither and weave to avoid answering the the questions.

From the Christian point of view there is only one force at work that is dedicated to the accusing and dividing The Body of Christ, The Christian Church;
It is that -snake-, the Accuser and Slanderer of the brotherhood that insinuated itself, and works from the inside, with vile accusations and condemnations of the beliefs and motivations of other believers.
Not loving, not forbearing, not preferring other Believers in Christ, but ever boasting, accusing, and finding fault.
Guess which 'Christian' this describes.



.

Sheshbazzar

Returning to the subject of The Christian Canon.
Does that number include The Book of Jude?
Was Jude inspired?
'Jude' quoted directly from The Book of Enoch, and The Book of Enoch was read from, and was accepted as being among the inspired Scriptures by generations of Christians for hundreds of years, as was The Shepherd of Hermas.

What happened? WHEN did it happen? And what recognized religious body FIRST made the official decision, and enforced that decision?

The Protestants??? :hysterical:




__Being that I'm neither 'Catholic' nor 'Protestant. I accept 84 Books as comprising the entire text of my 'Bible'.

.

Duvduv

Unless I missed something Harnack does not answer the question as to which senior authority authorized the naming of a set of texts as a canon prior to the 4th century.

outhouse

there was no senior authority early on.


why dont you look at how and when the scholarships state the gospels took on their attrubuted authors names??

Duvduv

It doesn't matter whether the gospels are called by the names we know or by gospels named for Fred, Sam, Keith and Jeff. The point is that we still do not know on the basis of what authority and consensus a set of texts (including 4 gospels, epistles) was identified as authoritative for the masses of Christians.

outhouse

it never needed to be authoritative because early on there were no masses.


we kno wthere were many different versions of christianity with many different gospels that just dont flat exist today.

the canon evolved into what it is and turned into a canon as one christian movement of many took control.

Marcion had his little oddball collection of script and we know he took heat for his less then normal views, and he wasnt the only one with different beliefs. look how long it took to get jesus divinty defined, and the trinity half ironed out to be in its current state of confusion.

Sheshbazzar

So there wasn't any official 'Canon' until the Christian Church officially declared there to be such. There were lists drawn up, and reported by various 'church fathers' but they differed from place to place and time to time, and bore no official Church policy nor endorsement.

And different branches of The Church drew up and endorsed quite different lists of texts for centuries, and even changed their list of accepted 'canonical' texts as time went on.

(It would be most amusing if a certifiably genuine 1st century CE text turned up that confirmed most all of their theological views, _they would be falling all over themselves with demands that it be added to their 'Canon')

It wasn't until the Synods of the 4th and 5th centuries CE that the various Church 'Canons' became somewhat settled in the various branches of Christianity, and to this present day these Churches are still not agreed as to their exact make up.


.

Iskander

Harnack does not mention it because there was no one "senior authority” that decided. Harnack explains how a collection of writing happened to have been selected by those who were engaged in preaching.

The leaders or managing committee of the churches of Rome, Antioch ... got together to decide on one set of ‘books’ to be used by all.


The author of the Lord of the rings, was a very devout catholic and he used many biblical motifs in his books .The one ring to rule them all, hints at the formation of that collection .The burning of the ring means that the world will never again be confronted with chaos and the malevolence of unworthy selectors.

sotto voce

How that must have hurt.