Help me please quick!


#1

How do I rebutt this???

My Original statement:

"Are you kidding me, there was no new testament cannon developed for him to use back then, even the old testiment itself was in flux. It was 400 years before a consitent and true bible cannon was developed, and that was in 397 by the council of carthage. Tell me what did he use before then!?!?!? "

Matthew 22:29
Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.

Act 17:11

11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

Acts 18:28
For he mightily convinced the Jews, and that publicly, shewing by the scriptures that Jesus was Christ.

1 Corinthians 15:3
For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins** according to the scriptures;**

2 Peter 3:16
As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

We have here but a few verses referanceing to scriptures, which means they had the Jewish writtings, And by the time of 2 Peter. Pauls writings was considered. Scripture.

They didnt seem confused on scriptures, and seemed to accept them as a authority.
In Acts 11, there even TESTED what the apostles Taught to SCRIPTURES.

Notice they didnt compare teachings to “traditions”

Even Christ stated authority of scriptures in MAtt 22


#2

Don’t have a lot of time to answer but really quick…if you take these verses at face value, they only apply to the Old Testament! It is only through the infallible declaration of the “table of contents” of the New Testament that these writings could be seen as referring to each other as Scripture.

Also, read the tracts here:
catholic.com/library/scripture_tradition.asp


#3

I would answer, that the Jews of the time of Christ and the first generation Christians were referring to the Septuagint when they were referring to scriptures.

newadvent.org/cathen/13722a.htm
The NT was probably not written before Christ or the skeptics would have some esplan’ng to do. :smiley:


#4

[quote=Valtiel]How do I rebutt this???

My Original statement:

"Are you kidding me, there was no new testament cannon developed for him to use back then, even the old testiment itself was in flux. It was 400 years before a consitent and true bible cannon was developed, and that was in 397 by the council of carthage. Tell me what did he use before then!?!?!? "
[/quote]

There were several different canons of the Old Testament. The Septuagint version, which was in use from the 3rd century BC included all of the books found in the Old Testament in Catholic bibles. There was also a canon that was missing the seven books that Protestants removed from the Old Testament, which Christians had always used. There was another canon - I think it was the Canon of the Saducees - that only had the first 5 books of the Bible. So, there were different canons with different groups.

Regarding the New Testament. Some of the books that are in the New Testament today were questioned in the early years. Hebrews was questions by some, and I think 1st Peter. Also, there were several books that were considered inspired in the early years, which were not included in the final Canon of the New Testament. A few of these were: the Shepherd of Hermas; the Didache, and St. Pauls Epistle to the Church at Laodicea.

You may also want to point out that Luther not only rejected the Divine Inspiration of the 7 books from the Old Testament, but also several from the New Testament: James, Hebrews, 1st Peter, Apocalypse (revelation), and a few others.

I am going to post an article in a moment that gives a lot of good quotes from Luther. I will title it “Luther and the Bible”. You will find some excellent quotes to give Protestants.


#5

Get right in there and explain that you KNOW the OT, while somewhat in flux, had a core of agreed-upon books (notwithstanding the Saducee rejection of everything but Torah) that Jesus and the early Church knew and accepted.

then quote:

I Cor 11:2: I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain thetraditions even as I have delivered them to you.

and

2 Thess 2:15: So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to thetraditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter.

It’s not about setting tradition ABOVE Scripture; it’s about the balance between Scripture and Tradition that brings out the fullness of Truth. Scripture without Tradition is just an outline; Tradition without Scripture is idolatry.

Deus Solus’ point about these quotes referring only to the OT is well taken. Don’t mount an argument where there is none.


#6

But I mean, he claims that what bible used them were kjv versions, and I need to show him that these criptural referances do not imply that the OT cannon was entirely fixed and what were the actual historical developments of the OT and why it nor the new testiment, (and that scriputre alone couldn’t have been enough back then, wasn’t ever fixed) until the council of carthage developed the cannon…


#7

…The King James Version was created in 1611, though. You mean he actually thinks the Christians used the KJV? O.o;


#8

[quote=A&O]…The King James Version was created in 1611, though. You mean he actually thinks the Christians used the KJV? O.o;
[/quote]

Well, you know, if the KJV is good enough for Jesus & Martin Luther, I’m sure it’s good enough for this guy. :wink:


#9

[quote=Valtiel]But I mean, he claims that what bible used them were kjv versions, and I need to show him that these criptural referances do not imply that the OT cannon was entirely fixed and what were the actual historical developments of the OT and why it nor the new testiment, (and that scriputre alone couldn’t have been enough back then, wasn’t ever fixed) until the council of carthage developed the cannon…
[/quote]

If you are engaged with someone who thinks Jesus used the King James Bible, then you have a lot of work to do. What your interlocutor is probably saying is that the Jewish Bible did not include the Deuterocanonical books. You should go to the home page of Catholic Answers and print out the articles on the canon of Scripture.


closed #10

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.