Jake Huether Posted April 22, 2004 Share Posted April 22, 2004 As it turns out, Ironmonk, we will all have a chance to practice the topic of this thread! LOL. Let's wipe the dust off our feet, but we should never wipe THE dUSt off our feet. Hahaha. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sammy Blaze Posted April 22, 2004 Share Posted April 22, 2004 "wipe the dust from your feet...:" Is that Jesus' way of saying "brush your shoulders off...." Much love to my phamily in Christ. ~S. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Huether Posted April 22, 2004 Share Posted April 22, 2004 [quote name='Sammy Blaze' date='Apr 22 2004, 03:10 PM'] "wipe the dust from your feet...:" Is that Jesus' way of saying "brush your shoulders off...." Much love to my phamily in Christ. ~S. [/quote] Jesus was refering to if the Apostles go to evangelize a certain area and that place rejects them. He told them to wipe the dust from their feet in a symbolic way of saying, "I don't want any part of you then". Kind of like they didn't want to be contaminated by the places lack of faith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the lumberjack Posted April 23, 2004 Share Posted April 23, 2004 post all the verses you want, they spoke that way because they were taught by those who were taught DIRECTLY by Jesus... they didn't have the Bible, which are the teachings of the apostles... and the collection of books in the Old Testament. the actual canon of the Bible is slightly different from what the Catholic Church claims it to be... its kinda like Al Gore saying he invented the internet...y'know? [quote]It is assumed that all NT books were written before the end of the 1st century. Paul wrote letters to several churches and asked that they be read publicly when the Christians assembled (I Thessalonians 5:27; Colossians 4:16). Early historical accounts clarify that apostolic writings were read on a regular basis in the Christian assemblies. In Paul's letter to the Colossians, he commands that they exchange letters with the church of the Laodiceans (4:16). It appears that early Christians soon began to circulate many of the apostolic writings. It is in this way, most likely, that various books of the NT began to be gathered into collections. Peter, in 2 Peter 3:16, indicates already a collection of Paul's letters (notice that Peter calls them "scriptures" and places them alongside that of the OT). In the 2nd century, following the death of all the apostles and the end of the direct inspiration by the Holy Spirit, the writings of the apostles became more valuable. The desire to exchange and collect such writings increased. The gospel accounts appear to be quickly accepted by the Christian community. Paul's letters were commonly accepted. There was yet, however, no mention of a canon of the NT; there were only casual collections of writings that were being passed around. Soon, however, spurious or pseudonymous letters came into circulation among the churches (letters falsely bearing apostolic names and/or claiming apostolic authority). Furthermore, false teachers arose claiming knowledge handed down by tradition. All this led to the beginning of the canon as Christians realized the need to determine what writings were genuine and what writings were not. By the end of the 2nd century, the idea of a NT canon was clearly understood. The extent of that canon, however, was yet to be determined. It is important to understand the criteria used by early scholars to determine the canonicity of any book. The true (and obvious) test of canonicity is/was inspiration. If a book was clearly inspired of God, then certainly it was accepted as part of the NT canon. The question then remains: how was inspiration to be demonstrated? There was a clear and distinguishable difference between those books that were genuinely inspired and those books that were not. The apocryphal writings (such as the Didache, Shepherd of Hermas, the Epistle of Barnabas, and the Gospel of the Hebrews) were of such an inferior class that such could be noted with reasonable certainty. These books were generally more concerned with such things as miracles than they were about teaching. Furthermore, there was little actual concentration on Jesus Christ Himself, and the moral, ethical, and spiritual effect of these books was inferior to that of genuinely inspired writings. On the other hand, books that were obviously written by one of the apostles were found to be clearly superior; they were therefore accepted by churches everywhere. According to history, several books were universally accepted by every church without any doubt or hesitation. These were the 4 gospels, Acts, the 13 letters of Paul, 1 Peter and 1 John (20 books). Several years would pass, however, before the acceptance of the complete canon of 27 books as we have today. In the 3rd century, Origen, a well-known scholar of that time, gave a list of generally accepted books. He acknowledged the four gospels, Acts, the 13 letters of Paul, 1 Peter, 1 John, and Revelation. He mentioned Jude, wavered in regard to James, 2 Peter, and 2 and 3 John, and he evidently hesitated concerning Hebrews because, as he said, "God alone knows who wrote it." In the early part of the 4th century, Eusibius expressed the general Christian thought of his time. He accepted Hebrews as authentic and indicated that James, Jude, 2 Peter and 2 John were beginning to find recognition. Finally, it was in 367 that a man named Athanasius first gave a list of canonical books identical with our 27 today. Scholars since that time have generally remained in agreement that the 27 books we have in our NT are all inspired of God and are the only available such writings.[/quote] and in conclusion, "Many believe that God has in some way overseen the work of establishing the canon of the Bible. Regardless of that, when we consider the amount of scholarship that went into this finalized collection, and when we consider the careful examination of each book before it was accepted, then we can have complete faith and confidence in our NT (and our OT) that it is the divinely inspired and authoritative word of God." amen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted April 23, 2004 Share Posted April 23, 2004 (edited) The teaching of the Apostles and disciples ARE the teachings of the Catholic Church. Canon was voted on by Church Council. It had to agree with what the Church had been teaching for 350 years and be linked to apostolic authority to get accepted. Edited April 23, 2004 by cmotherofpirl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ironmonk Posted April 23, 2004 Author Share Posted April 23, 2004 It's funny how all of the people he lists in the pre-NT times are Catholic. Though the article is wrong, which when you go to a real historical source like Britannica.com, and then read the writings from the people mentioned in it... then it's blindingly obvious for those whom the Lord has chosen to see... for those who have been given the gift of faith and love for Christ. lumber, Please quote your sources from now on. I am closing this thread now because the point has been amply proven. God Bless, for the Love of Christ's Truth, ironmonk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts