@88mph121 Assuming you are Catholic, the Eastern Orthodox would suggest you are rejecting a few deuterocanonical books
On what basis does the RCC reject books that the Orthodox accepts as Apostolic Tradition?
English
Woke up feeling dangerous
734 posts
The Deuterocanon was used by the Lord and His Apostles.
They weren’t “rejected” from the Jewish canon until well after Christianity had been established.
So, if your Bible only has 66 books, you’re using an OT canon of the kind of people who rejected and killed Christ.
English
@VaclavzAmeriky Sure. A letter isn’t by itself authoritative. It matters who wrote it. If that’s what you are saying, I agree.
Paul the Apostle of Christ wrote it as he had been inspired to do so by God. It’s God’s Word that is authoritative
Let me know where we disagree
English
@feeling_woke The letter is only authoritative because St Paul wrote it. Later generations recognized that it was an important part of the Tradition written down. But the letter is not an authority. St Paul is the authority. But the letter was accepted because it was Orthodox.
English
@VaclavzAmeriky Sure Paul was authoritative. so was the letter that Paul wrote to the Romans immediately received as authoritative seeing as Paul wrote it, or did it take some time for it to be accepted?
And would the later generations of Romans atthe church not have seen it as authoritative?
English
@feeling_woke Well St. Paul was authoritative. There is no letter without the person. This is the difference between the Church and the heterodox: letters aren’t authorities. The person who writes them is the authority. If our bishop tells us to do something, the email isn’t the authority.
English
@AJ1084683435656 @ShaneSchaetzel So it’s by numbers/quantity to determine which tradition is correct?
English
@feeling_woke @ShaneSchaetzel By following the church that has prospered more
English
Catholics use the longer Greek Canon for the Old Testament, overwhelmingly preferred by the Apostles.
Protestants use the shorter Hebrew Canon for the Old Testament, overwhelmingly preferred by the Pharisees.
And that’s why Catholic Bibles have more books.
English
@VaclavzAmeriky The people that Paul was addressing. The letter’s immediate recipients.
From the EO perspective, How long did it take for them to see the letter as authoritative? Or did it take generations to finally see it as authoritative?
English
@feeling_woke Are you talking about the people to whom St Paul addressed the letter? Ir are you talking about later generations of Orthodox Christians in Rome?
English
@ShaneSchaetzel Prior to hippo/Carthage, we have over 12 existing canon lists with the majority excluding deuteros.
That’s 400 years into the church.
there is a divide between east and west in canon (which you have no issue with when determining Gods Word?)
How do I know which is correct?
English
The Catholic Church did not “remove” any books from the biblical canon that the Eastern Orthodox preserved through apostolic tradition. The premise of your question reflects a common misunderstanding of the issue. The differences in the Old Testament canons between the Catholic Church (46 books) and the Orthodox Churches (typically 49–52 books, depending on local tradition and how appendices are counted) come from longstanding regional variations in how the early Church received and used the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testament), not from any act of excision by Catholics.
The Catholic Church never “removed” them because they were never part of the standard Western canon lists. In short, this is not a case of one side “removing” books the other “preserved.” It’s parallel development from shared roots in the early Church, with each tradition standardizing differently after the Great Schism. Clergy from both Catholic and Orthodox traditions generally do not consider this issue divisive.
English
@TomValencia13 @ShaneSchaetzel Correct. It varies by jurisdiction
English
@feeling_woke @ShaneSchaetzel And by 76-79, are you meaning that the Orthodox don't even agree on a canon?
English
@TomValencia13 @ShaneSchaetzel These were regional synods.
The Catholics recognized that these were merely regional synods - thus the need for the declaration of the Canon at Trent
English
@feeling_woke @ShaneSchaetzel Were the Eastern bishops part of the Councils of Rome (382), Hippo (393), and Carthage (397)? These councils canonized the 73 book Bible...so where (and when) did the universal Church canonize these additional books of which you speak?
English
@JoshuaLWatson Concurred.
And it’s a red flag that Augustine is a Catholic Saint, an Eastern Orthodox saint, and had so much influence in the Reformed branch - it’s interesting much influence in general he had… despite such terrible ideas (plural) and exegesis.
English
Augustine was full of bad ideas: original guilt, eternal conscious torment, an account of the fall of the Devil of dubious intelligibility.
None of this helps understand reality & none of it is needed in order to think within a broadly Platonist or even Christian view.
English
@EcciusMaximus So you are agreeing with the Pharisees and think the had precedence for their oral teachings?
I don’t want to misrepresent- so please expand if I am not understanding
English
Even during the time of Jesus no sect of judaism ever held to Sola Scriptura even with their own varying scriptures. They used the same system that Catholics use today, Scripture was interpreted by Priests.
Oral tradition + Scripture.
𝕊𝕠𝕝𝕒 ℂ𝕙𝕒𝕕 🎚️@sola_chad
Even Jesus was Sola Scriptura 💯
English
@Mattman34 Right. And I’d say it was a good thing that he prioritized scripture and what he saw as apostolic teaching OVER the whole physical institution of the church and apostolic succession.
As during the Arian Crisis, the church had been officially/properly ordaining Arian Clergy
English
It’s true he was exiled many times. He wasn’t even a member of the magisterium at the council of nicea; he served as an adviser to his bishop, who along with the other bishops at Nicea defined and promulgated the teaching regarding Christs divinity. He was a well formed theologian with profound respect for the scriptures, for apostolic tradition, and for teaching role of the church.
English
It’s not an attempt, Mr. White, to promote some external authority, or anything else that our Lord Jesus Christ didn’t establish. St. Athanasius was indeed a heroic witness, and thanks be to God for that. He absolutely argued from scripture, while also drawing from the apostolic tradition, and his defense went on to be promulgated by the teaching authority of an ecumenical council. Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition, and the Magisterium.
𝔚𝔥𝔦𝔱𝔢𝔅𝔢𝔞𝔯𝔡@HwsEleutheroi
This is either an obvious attempt to promote some external authority as the answer, or it is tremendously naive of history itself. It is hard to say. The author has clearly never read Orationes Contra Arionos that's for certain! The student of history knows the famous line from Jerome, "Ingemuit totus orbis et Arianum se esse miratus est." "The whole world groaned and was astonished to find itself Arian." The truth had to fight, and fight it did, and its primary defender never wavered on the truth that it was Scripture that was his bulwark and defense. The irony, if this is some poorly framed and commonly surface-level argument against SS by a Roman Catholic, is that it so effectively eviscerates modern Romanism as well. Look at the different understandings of the relatively recent document Fiducia Supplicans, and that while the author is still living! Truly makes one wonder at just how deeply these folks consider their arguments before putting them forth!
English
@JosiahHuggins1 @JackmanRobert So you wouldn’t interpret Ephesians 4:5 as water baptism?
So there are 2 different types of baptisms for Christians in your view- but one of them is not required.
Am I understanding your stance?
English
@feeling_woke @JackmanRobert If time or circumstances do not permit the application of the sign, the inward reality still stands. Unwillingness to recieve the sign, if time and circumstance permit, serves as a sign of the lack of an inward reality 2/2
English
@EcciusMaximus @LizzieMarbach To clarify your stance:
You are suggesting that when the christians in Rome received Paul’s letter to them, that they didn’t see it as authoritative?
And that nobody would have seen it as authoritative for hundreds of years after it was received?
English
The 73 book bible was compiled in the 300's, it took several hundred years to recognize them as Scripture.
Early Christians did not simply pick up NT letters and gospels and instantly recognize them as Scripture. @LizzieMarbach
Lizzie Marbach@LizzieMarbach
First century Christians read New Testament letters and gospels and recognized them as scripture.
English
@IronRodWarrior 2 questions:
1) where does this opinion come from?
2) Do you actually know why the pre Nicene Christians rejected the book of Enoch?
English
Triggering opinion.
Creedists deliberately left the book of Enoch out of the scriptural canon because it destroys the doctrine of the Trinity
English
@ThoughtfulSaint LDS are like the Donatists when it comes to baptism?
Additional question for LDS: what is the significance of baptism? What does it do? Why get baptized at age 8?
English
Your baptism is not valid unless it is done by someone acting under apostolic keys.
You are super close to being a Latter-day Saint.
If you love Jesus and want to help us build his kingdom come and be baptized and enter into a binding covenant relationship with him and become part of the modern house of Israel, his people, his church.
NYerinLV🇻🇦@NYerinLV
@dustinharding Sir, I have a genuine question...I follow Jesus Christ, I love Him with my whole heart, I'm baptized - am I LDS??? If I started to call myself LDS without believing in the Book of Mormon, would that be okay??
English
@JosiahHuggins1 @JackmanRobert To clarify, are you suggesting that there is no need/ordinance for water baptism, or are you suggesting there are multiple New Testament baptisms required for Christians?
Or if you mean something else entirely, please expand
English
@JackmanRobert He's right, just not in the way he thinks. Galations 2:20, 1 Corinthians 12:13. Spiritual baptism, being buried and raised with Christ is the moment of salvation.
English
