Bagong Tipan - kinasihan, kinanon, kinontra

O siya aminado ang mga brad nating Katoliko na ang lahat ng Kasulatan sa NT eh kinasihan, bale ba sa ngayon wala na palang isyu dyan.

Tungkol naman sa pagka-kanon, wala rin akong tutol, nung mga panahong ang mga protestante pa eh nasa hanay ng mga Katoliko, tanggap naman nila ang pagka-kanon dahil nga kasali pa sila sa kanila nung mga panahong yaon.

Aba! Nung katagalan napagtanto ng mga nasa Katoliko na maraming kinontra dun sa kinanon, naghangad ng pagbabago, kaso mo nga ayaw magbago kaya ayan tiniwalag sila - nahati ang iglesia!!!

Isang hanay ng mga kumontra, isang hanay ng mga bumalik sa kanon.

Ano ngayon ang masasabi nyo dyan?

BibleBot wrote:O siya aminado ang mga brad nating Katoliko na ang lahat ng Kasulatan sa NT eh kinasihan, bale ba sa ngayon wala na palang isyu dyan.

Tungkol naman sa pagka-kanon, wala rin akong tutol, nung mga panahong ang mga protestante pa eh nasa hanay ng mga Katoliko, tanggap naman nila ang pagka-kanon dahil nga kasali pa sila sa kanila nung mga panahong yaon.

Aba! Nung katagalan napagtanto ng mga nasa Katoliko na maraming kinontra dun sa kinanon, naghangad ng pagbabago, kaso mo nga ayaw magbago kaya ayan tiniwalag sila - nahati ang iglesia!!!

Isang hanay ng mga kumontra, isang hanay ng mga bumalik sa kanon.

Ano ngayon ang masasabi nyo dyan?

Please give a specific example. Thanks.

Finally, you believe that it is the Catholic Church that is responsible for the canon of the Bible.

Para makita nyo ang itsura ng kasaysayan ng iglesia at NT na kinasihan, kinanon at kinontra,

BibleBot wrote:Para makita nyo ang itsura ng kasaysayan ng iglesia at NT na kinasihan, kinanon at kinontra,

Give us your source please.

Dhugz wrote:Talagang pilit na tinutularan si kaps ah. Saan ba diyang ang UFSCPI?

alam ko po yung UFC nasa pasig po yung pabrika ng ketsup

ramcam2 wrote:Finally, you believe that it is the Catholic Church that is responsible for the canon of the Bible.

Ibig kong sabihin, nung sinulat yung mga aklat sa NT, hindi pa yun kinasihan nun. Naging "kinasihan" lamang nung kinanon na "di-umano" ng iglesia katolika.

BibleBot wrote:

Ibig kong sabihin, nung sinulat yung mga aklat sa NT, hindi pa yun kinasihan nun. Naging "kinasihan" lamang nung kinanon na "di-umano" ng iglesia katolika.

It is the authority of the Church the we believed these books are inspired. What about you? Remember there was no Bible yet during those times. Thanks for believing it was the Catholic church that canonized the Bible.

ramcam2 wrote:

It is the authority of the Church the we believed these books are inspired. What about you? Remember there was no Bible yet during those times. Thanks for believing it was the Catholic church that canonized the Bible.

ramcam hindi mo ba alam ang salitang di-umano

yun po ang statement ng pagdududa

pero Brad, namnamin natin ang sinabi mo.

A because B

Di ba ibig sabihin niyan totoo yung A dahil sa B. Bale basihan mo B kaya totoo ang A?

A) We believe that all the books of the NT are inspired
because B) of the authority of the Catholic Church

Ako naman ganito

A) We believe that all the books of the NT are inspired
because
B) God inspired All Scriptures for the benefit of the Church

BibleBot wrote:

ramcam hindi mo ba alam ang salitang di-umano

yun po ang statement ng pagdududa

pero Brad, namnamin natin ang sinabi mo.

A because B

Di ba ibig sabihin niyan totoo yung A dahil sa B. Bale basihan mo B kaya totoo ang A?

A) We believe that all the books of the NT are inspired
because B) of the authority of the Catholic Church

Ako naman ganito

A) We believe that all the books of the NT are inspired
because
B) God inspired All Scriptures for the benefit of the Church

I do believe also God inspired Scripture but how did you know this? Who is your authority for believing God inspired all Scripture? I remind you the Bible was not yet In existence during those times. To me, my authority is the Church. The Church declared these books inspired and hence canonical.

Until now I am waiting for the source of your graph. Where did you copy it?

Pero yung pagiging "inspayrd" ba ng mga aklat sa NT brad, nakasalalay dun sa pag-canon? O "inspayrd" na talaga yung mga aklat bago pa ang pagbuo ng canon?

BibleBot wrote:Pero yung pagiging "inspayrd" ba ng mga aklat sa NT brad, nakasalalay dun sa pag-canon? O "inspayrd" na talaga yung mga aklat bago pa ang pagbuo ng canon?

Of course we both knew these books were inspired before they became the Bible, but how did the early Christians knew they were inspired when the Bible came some 3-4 centuries later. There were many writings circulating in those times. A lot were spurious and not genuine, so how did the early Christians knew which were inspired and which were not? They cannot refer to the Bible for it is not yet in existence. There has to be an outside authority.

ramcam2 wrote:

Of course we both knew these books were inspired before they became the Bible, but how did the early Christians knew they were inspired when the Bible came some 3-4 centuries later. There were many writings circulating in those times. A lot were spurious and not genuine, so how did the early Christians knew which were inspired and which were not? They cannot refer to the Bible for it is not yet in existence. There has to be an outside authority.

Ang punto ko kasi matapos kinasihan di ba kinanon?

Bakit kinontra pagkatapos?

Yup, the Church, after accepting its inspiration, canonized these writings to become the Bible.

Please give an example why you claim the Church contradicted what it canonized.