Canon Of Books

487 Words2 Pages

In the Bible, we can trace all the papers back to the days of Peter and the early church fathers. They have numerous amounts of evidence from documents and records from the Church Councils. Multiple religions believed their books were divinely inspired such as the Muslims and Mormons. Catholics believed otherwise, they though it had a unique style and language. We know the books in the Bible should be in the Bible because the church tells us so. The canon is the books the church decides are scripture. The Protestants and fundamentalists had a problem with this idea. In the first century all the New Testament was written. In the second century there was evidence for many works in the New Testament and it was universally accepted as the word of God. The items …show more content…

Then the period of Fixation (67-405 AD) it was a non-ecumenical synod called by Pope Damusus. Next, there was the Decretal of Gelasius of 382 AD it was about which books were considered scripture and which ones were not. Then there was the letter from Pope Innocent the first to be a bishop in Ton louse; they also had the same list. In the African councils (Hippo 393 AD, Cathage) they too also had the same list. After that the western church kept using the same canon of books through out the Renaissance. The eastern churches had also adopted the same list with an addition to the three books of Maccabees. In 1442 the Council of Florence gave a list of books that are scripture. In 1546 the Council of Trent makes an infallible dogmatic declaration on the canon. Dogma is a set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true. Then the Council of Florence of 1442 gave a list of books that are scripture. Finally, there was the Vatican Council of 1870, which stated that, everything scripture is inspired by God. Also, We must suppose a church with teaching authority because it has the knowledge or power of judgment, superior to our own. Catholics approached the

Open Document