It doesn't. The original documents stand alone, with no chapter, verse or even testament designation. They are solely for the purpose of reference, and ease of locating specific texts.
You are asking where in the Old Testament Scriptures are prophecies or directions specifically about or to
Matthew, Mark, Luke John, Paul, Peter, James, Jude, and some unnamed authors to write book and/or letters. Then additional prophecies and directions to save then in a common book....
Actually the Mormons have a good scripture for this right up your exegesis alley.
The proof is that the New Testament is in perfect agreement with the Old Testament. There were books left out of the bible because they didn't agree with the scriptures the church already had. This is a silly question. Where in the Old testament is a direct command to compile all the books of the Old Testament?:rolleyes:
Using the Torah only (Sola Pentateuch), show me where in the Torah it Explicitly says
�these are the books and letters that are to go in The Old Testament.� Where in the Torah is the Canon of The Old Testament? Remember�no Implying�nothing Vague and definitely nothing From The Testament (after all it�s Canon is what we are searching for).
(It is like asking where in the Books of Moses does it say what to compile for the rest of the Old Testament Scriptures)
Archimedes, according to your own logic :
You would have to say since the Old Testament was compiled by Jewish Scribes, No one except a Orthodox Jewish Rabbi is allowed to interpret the Old Testament. Not even the Roman Catholic church has the right to interpret the Old Testament according to your logic.
You may have to rethink your logic that only the Roman Catholic church is allowed to interpret scripture.
Hmmm...I feel another deflection coming from Archimedes. How many is that now Archimedes? I has to be almost 20 questions you have deflected instead of answering so far.
I suppose in your round about way the answer is that there is nothing in Scripture stating that these are the books and letters that should go into The New Testament. Is that a fair assessment?
Don�t, I was not asking for proof, but rather where in Scripture does it say that these such and such books and letters are the ones that should go into The New Testament? Your reference to the Old Testament is nonsensical because obviously Scripture was not used to compile The Old Testament.
Chuck, you�re getting that copy and paste thing down pretty good and you�re right about
�(It is like asking where in the Books of Moses does it say what to compile for the rest of the Old Testament Scriptures)�
That�s exactly what I am asking (except of course with The New Testament). If you understand my question�why will you not answer? Instead you answer with a question.
Let me put it this way:
�Is it correct to say that nowhere in The Old Testament is there anything that spells out what The Canon of The New Testament should be?� If you agree�just nod your head. If you disagree�please show me where it is.
Simple�yes? No?
Chuck�I will reiterate one more time (and pay close attention). Anyone can read and interpret Scripture by THEMSELVES! Let me repeat that� Anyone can read and interpret Scripture by THEMSELVES!
It�s when I or anyone else has a problem with certain verses and I or anyone else needs a Final Court of Appeal (as to the correct interpretation)�I go to my Church which was the One that Complied Scripture, the One that was there when it was written and the One that was given the Correct Interpretation and the One given Sole Authority.
You Chuck�have no final court of appeal (not even your Pastor). You are the one that decides what Scripture means and says (sorry�you and The Holy Spirit).
Can we just cut to the chase? You will not find anywhere in Scripture anything saying which books and letters were to go into The New Testament. So my point is�how can you now say Scripture only when The early Church herself did not use Scripture only? If She did then you should be able to show me what verses She used and so on�instead of trying to DEFLECT my question with a question of a question that is questionable!
Again, this round started because I elaborated on Mary�s importance in God�s Plan of Salvation. Someone jumped in with �you should not pray to Mary�. I never even mentioned �praying to Mary�, but reflexes are reflexes and then others jumped in and now�here we are.
There is no way that anyone can show me where in The Old Testament it says��These are��
The question now is��how did The Catholic Church decide which books and letters were Inspired by God?
To answer your first question : The Old Testament Scriptures directly determined the content of the New Testament Scriptures.
Your second question:
The question now is��how did The Catholic Church decide which books and letters were Inspired by God?
Answer : The early Christian Church used the Old Testament Scriptures as a litmus test, asking is the book or content in question in agreement with the Old Testament? Does it contain any Old Testament references?
Btw, there are around 200 Old Testament quotes in the New Testament and around 1000 partial quotes.
Btw#2 According to catholic doctrine one can only in interpret scriptures as long as it agrees with catholic interpretation.
Hey, Did you see the post from MargoSolo about Joseph consummating his marriage to Mary is stated in scripture? ....that is a good one!...(the post and the woman)
Chosen2BHis, actually, the chapters and verses were originally put into the Old Testament by Hebrew scribes as a way to check for errors when copying. That tradition was carried into the new testament.
Are you saying that the Church used the Old Testament to determine which of the over 300 books and letters that were circulating around (many being read at Masses) to decide which were to be placed in The New Testament?
How did the Church use The Old Testament to decide that none of the following books and letters (just a small sampling) were Inspired by God?
Asclepius 21-29
Authoritative Teaching
The Book of Thomas the Contender
The Concept of Our Great Power
The Dialogue of the Savior
The Discourse on the Eighth and Ninth
Eugnostos the Blessed*
The Exegesis on the Soul
The Gospel of the Egyptians*
The Gospel of Philip
The Gospel of Thomas:
These are just a few of the many that did not make it into The New Testament.
Also�how on earth (no pun) did they figure Revelation was Inspired using your criteria?
Face it Chuck�The Church knew because She had The Complete and Full Deposit of faith left to Her by Christ Himself and that is what She used to compare those books and letters to ( The Old Testament being part of that Deposit of Faith).
The basic point is, scripture interprets scripture. And I know it's silly, I was trying to get you to see how silly it is. The Old Testament is the "scripture". If the New Testament disagreed with the Old Testament, it would be false. It's that simple. If the Catholic church, or any other church, said that there was a new book that they were going to introduce into the cannon of scripture, and in one of these new verses it said: "There is no resurrection", it would be false and thrown out because it disagrees with both the NT and the OT. If you can find a verse in the NT that disagrees with the OT, then I will agree that the early church put the NT together by "herself", without using scripture as the test. I agree that the early church interpreted the scripture correctly to decide this, but if it was the historic "catholic" organization, the bible would be completely different. I don't believe they would have left so much in the bible that contradicts their beliefs/traditions. There is no basis for most of that stuff in either the OT or the NT, so it's hard to believe that they got their "traditions" from the bible. There's a little "cart before the horse/chicken before the egg" scenario there, in my opinion.
