(This is a reply to Kristian from the Signs thread: http://motheofgod.com/threads/signs.7937/page-228#post-199273) Just so we are clear: The Roman Catholic Canon originated in the 300s when three separate synods, held in three separate locations, without anyone attending more than just one, and over a period of about 60 years, decided on the same set of 27 books to make up the Christian Canon. These were not just some weekend getaways, but serious and in-depth discussions over several months regarding which books should be included. If it were just one or two sets of books at one synod that should have been included but weren't, then I might see your point. However, these books continued to be excluded at the other two synods. Now, remember: we do not consider these books to have been dictated by G_D and transcribed word for word. That is a pagan view, or one that is held by Muslims regarding the Koran. We consider the Bible to have many writers but only one author. Because there are many writers, we have a variety of language and style. Amos describes himself as "a herdsman and a dresser of sycamores." His language will not be the prayerful, style of David in the Psalms. However, because there is only one author, the Holy Spirit, there will be a consistent message across the works. The differences in language are blurred because we're reading the works in translation, but they are present in the original languages. By invoking the guidance of the Holy Spirit and submitting themselves to His influence AND doing this over many, many years, consensus -- NOT "majority vote" -- would have been achieved in each synod over which works consistently contained the message that all the other works contained.
Thank you so much for this explanation Muzhik. I always wondered how the books of the Bible were chosen.
Ok. I get your point, but you said it yourself....that MAN INVOKED the guidance of the Holy Spirit and his influence over many, many years. So tell me... is The Holy Spirit or Man the author of The Bible? You say The Holy Spirit is the 'only one author'. I disagree. Man is the author through the best of their ability to invoke the guidance of The Holy Spirit. Man is the one saying they are invoking guidance of the Holy Spirit.
If you are saying that "Man is the Author", then that is the same as saying that "Man is the Creator". Maybe he listened to the Holy Spirit, but he probably listened to many, many other people, with their opinions, etc., and in the end, MAN decided what would be written in that book. If that were the case, we would not have a divinely inspired work, but a man-made work full of errors and contradictions. If you want an example of that, read the Koran. In there you'll find a multitude of errors (where Muhammad confused and conflated different people in Scripture with the same names) as well as a multitude of contradictions and confusions. One thing Islamic apologists have yet to agree on is why the messages delivered in the first part of the Koran differ from the messages in the later parts, and where there is a contradiction, which writing should be followed. Another example would be the Book of Mormon, purportedly Joseph Smith's translation of golden tablets given to him by an angel; he translated these using a "scrying stone", aka a crystal ball. IOW, he used occult methods to purportedly decipher these texts. For over a century Mormon scholars have attempted to map the geography described in the Book of Mormon onto the New World, without success. At this stage the Mormon Church itself won't acknowledge or attempt to "correct" these inconsistencies. These are examples of what you get when you have MAN as the author. No, in the case of the Bible, GOD is the author. There is a consistency in the writings to the extent where modern archaeologists can use Scripture to decide where to dig to find old structures and cities, and find evidence of events described in Scripture. You don't get this consistency when you have over 70 human authors over 3 millennia writing down what just pops into their heads. No, for this consistency, you must have one and only one Author, who is telling the story. Different writers over the millennia have heard different parts of the story, and have written them down to the best of their abilities, but there is only one Author.
Kristian, haven't you heard the term "ghost writer?". ghost·writ·er ˈɡōstˌrīdər/ noun a person whose job it is to write material for someone else who is the named author. In lay terms "man is the ghost writer" for the Holy Spirit. Hence, man is the writer for the author the Holy Spirit.
Muzhik, Great post, wow! I printing this one out and hanging it on my fridge! Honestly, this is the sort of stuff that should be taught the first day of theology class in 9th grade and then the first day of 10th, 11th and 12th grade too!!! My son was recalling how they taught him the wrong thing in the public middle school, instead of BC they taught him BCE. Now he is in graduate school but when my children were younger I used this simple example of how amazing it is that the most of the world uses a calendar that was created around the birthdate of Our Lord. Then they went to public middle school and the school replaced my teaching with their crazy PC lesson of BCE instead of BC, for starters. So, then I pulled my children out of the public school but obviously they are still having flash backs.
Here is an example: I am currently reading a book by Ian Doescher called "The Phantom of Menace: Star Wars Part the First" (aka William Shakespeare's Star Wars). Ian Doescher has re-written the Star Wars films in iambic pentameter as Shakespeare might have done it. If you're a fan of both Shakespeare and Star Wars, it is not to be missed! Jar-Jar Binks is cast not as the idiot in the movie, but as a Shakespearean clown. This means he has an interior dialog where he comments to the audience on the events around him and does so showing he is far more clever than portrayed. Now, is this story written by Shakespeare, by Doescher, or by George Lucas? I submit that the story is by George Lucas. IOW, Lucas is the author. Doescher is the writer, using the inspiration of the original author to write the story in the manner of Shakespeare. Likewise, in the Bible, the story being told is by GOD. He has sent the Holy Spirit to all of these writers and prophets to inspire them as to what they need to say and write. In so far as they align their wills to that of GOD's will, the writings are good, true, and consistent. In so far as they are NOT aligned with GOD's will, then the writings are flawed and in error, such as the Books of Enoch, which contain factual errors. Such errors as these become apparent when you have spent years and years studying both them and other works; and having aligned YOUR will with that of GOD's, you can discern which work is truly by the Author and which are not.
Dolours---Who said Sacred Scripture is the inspired word of God? Man did, because he said God told him so.
Did God tell you He didn't inspire them? We get Sacred Scripture from Sacred Tradition. We get Sacred Tradition from the people who were witnesses to the public ministry, passion, death and resurrection of Jesus. Jesus promised that he would not leave us orphans and sent the Holy Spirit to guide His Church. You seem to believe that the bible can only be authentic if God used the hands of the authors like a ouija board. Good luck with that.
Did God tell you he did inspire them? I'm making the point that whether you like it or not, man is the author of the Bible and its quite authentic without God moving man's hands with magic to do his will. I agree Sacred Scripture is from Sacred Tradition from witnesses of Jesus' life.....but those witnesses were men.
Why do you believe that Jesus is the Son of God, second person of the Blessed Trinity? Did you discover that all by yourself or did you take the word of men who learned it from Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition? Your silly little trolling question doesn't deserve an answer.
