@JeradMac@riecker I already addressed how the Autocephalous Church structure can account for who can authoritatively recognize Scripture. You can't even authoritatively recognize what you do have within the Protestant framework.
@JeradMac@riecker Yeah, that's the dilemma. That's the only answer that gets you out of it, and it requires conceding Protestantism to be false. Whichever Church is the true one is irrelevant to solving the philosophical dilemma. That's a whole different debate.
@JeradMac@riecker And I sent an entire response as to why this fails entirely. Nothing has gotten you out of the dilemma.
Your criteria also doesn't even get you your entire canon, and it can never close the canon through reference. So it's not only logically false, it also flat out doesn't work
@Dominic4JChrist@riecker The early church recognized the canon through the power of the Holy Spirit. Does that now mean I have to choose a "one true church" authority?
You still never told me why you are EO.
@JeradMac@riecker -->principled basis for your 66 books.
You also never solved this dilemma. You gave a bunch of answers that had nothing to do with authority then just asserted that you gave an answer and I claimed fiat and then wanted to end the conversation.
@JeradMac@riecker You also just completely ignored my response on why your "start with Peter and trace it through" doesn't work at all. Then told me to answer a question I ignored. I didn't answer it because I said I'm not doing the side debates to change topics.
@Dominic4JChrist@riecker I was going to stop responding, but you never answered how you chose EO as the authority. How did you choose EO out of all of the "one true church" institutions?
"I don't need a perfect Jesus. I liked a biased Jesus who can own up to his shadow side"... and own up to his own shortcomings."
Jesus was racist, harsh, and made choices that were "over the line" according to Advent Lutheran Church pastor (ELCA)
@Dominic4JChrist@riecker You now have 50% of the Bible attested to through internal critique. This is the information and standards we should be looking for in the early church when they recognized what is Scripture.
It is not some arbitrary fiat by the church.
@Dominic4JChrist@riecker Acts is the continuation of Luke. So, if we use logic we can conclude that Luke and Acts are Scripture according to Paul.
Luke and Acts (37,933 words) make up 27% of the New Testament.
Paul's Epistles (32,408 words) make up 23.5% of the New Testament.
@JeradMac@riecker —> address the authority to close the canon question.
Also here’s an example. Say the curfew in your house is 9 and it’s 10 in your brother’s house. Asking who’s right and who’s wrong is not how you frame it. You’re right in your house and he’s right in his. Not at odds.
@Dominic4JChrist@riecker what the canon will be. That is an arbitrary declaration of authority to just declare by fiat the canon list. The early church had a reason and criteria that they included the books they did into the New Testament canon. They weren't pulling a Cartman.
@Dominic4JChrist@riecker I said the early church recognized the canon. The question you have to ask is it the canon just because of fiat or because the early church had certain criteria they used in order to recognize Scripture. You are claiming the early church just randomly declared by fiat this..
@JeradMac@riecker —> How do you account for that being Scripture? Who has the binding authority over Christians to say that Gospel is authentic and authoritative and another Gospel isn’t?