What do you mean when you say, "The Bible is the Word of God"?

[Dibby53]

To me the Bible is made up of manuscripts that has been decided upon by the catholic church as authoritative and inspirational. Irenaeus, the early church father, had 21 books that he considered authoritative. And I don't think the final form that the bible took was finally settled until the 1500s at the Council of Trent (Revelation was a late entry for inclusion). To this day there are slight variations between the catholic, protestant and orthodox versions of scripture. Also modern scholarly analysis of the letters of St. Paul have shown that it wasn't the same person who wrote them all (the letters to Timothy, for example, were not written by the person who wrote collosians). So while scripture is useful for inspiring and edifying us, I don't consider it absolute or infallible. To me the Word of God is not a book, but Christ. And as we read it the word of God is the meaning and wisdom Christ gives us as we read scripture.
For the first 500 years of Christianity there was no bible as we understand it. So they couldn't have thought of the "Word of God" as the bible we have.
Anyway, I look forward to seeing what your understanding is. Thanks guys. X

 

[Mii]

Have you done a good bit of research into the topic? Making such a statement based of what you related lacks a good deal of circumstantial evidence. I hope that you have looked into all the opposing arguments to what you have proffered? A mountain of circumstantial evidence cannot be discount nor overlooked in regards to this discussion.

I'm not inclined to accept "scholarly analysis" readily.

Personally utilizing a man's opinion to formulate my own seems like a failed venture based off the finitude of humanity. Somewhat useful in formulating a personal argument/exercise but beyond that?


You haven't exactly engaged how you view the "Old testament". Since this is the most compelling witness of Christ that there is to the unbeliever.

Mt 17:17 comes to mind...if you choose to, explain what you think brought this on...as that is the crux of the argument.

 

[Melach]

To me the Bible is made up of manuscripts that has been decided upon by the catholic church as authoritative and inspirational. Irenaeus, the early church father, had 21 books that he considered authoritative. And I don't think the final form that the bible took was finally settled until the 1500s at the Council of Trent (Revelation was a late entry for inclusion). To this day there are slight variations between the catholic, protestant and orthodox versions of scripture. Also modern scholarly analysis of the letters of St. Paul have shown that it wasn't the same person who wrote them all (the letters to Timothy, for example, were not written by the person who wrote collosians). So while scripture is useful for inspiring and edifying us, I don't consider it absolute or infallible. To me the Word of God is not a book, but Christ. And as we read it the word of God is the meaning and wisdom Christ gives us as we read scripture.
For the first 500 years of Christianity there was no bible as we understand it. So they couldn't have thought of the "Word of God" as the bible we have.
Anyway, I look forward to seeing what your understanding is. Thanks guys. X

then i can just make it up as i go along. which actually makes sense if you are catholic. thats what they did, make up many idolatry practices and unscriptural.

i dont put any trust in "modern scholarly analysis" of st.paul's letters. they are evil people working day and night to undermine the bible and have succeeded in your case.

i hope you stop believing in the lies and ifs and maybes of the world and stop caring about the worst church on planet roman catholic and instead come to truth and accept the bible as infallible word of God divinely inspired by Holy Spirit. just like bible says it is:

2Pe 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

2Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

 

[Nehemiah6]

So while scripture is useful for inspiring and edifying us, I don't consider it absolute or infallible.

If the Word of God is not (1) inspired, (2) inerrant, and (3) therefore infallible, it is worthless. You might as well read Shakespeare.
To me the Word of God is not a book, but Christ.[/QUOTE]
You are not alone in holding to such fallacies. The Word of God is BOTH the written Word (a book) and Christ (the eternal Word, or the Divine Expression). See Hebrews 4:12,13.

As to Catholic and Orthodox bibles, they are full of non-inspired, non-canonical writings, Only the 66 books of the Protestant Bibles are Scripture (provided they have been translated from the traditional Hebrew and Greek texts as were all the Reformation bibles).

 

[Dino246]

I'm thinking that some popcorn is in order.

 

[FollowtheShepherd]

The test for any who claim to speak for God:

Deuteronomy 13:1-18, " 1 If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder, 2 And the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them; 3 Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for the LORD your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul. 4 Ye shall walk after the LORD your God, and fear him, and keep his commandments, and obey his voice, and ye shall serve him, and cleave unto him. 5 And that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams, shall be put to death; because he hath spoken to turn [you] away from the LORD your God, which brought you out of the land of Egypt, and redeemed you out of the house of bondage, to thrust thee out of the way which the LORD thy God commanded thee to walk in. So shalt thou put the evil away from the midst of thee. 6 If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which [is] as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers; 7 [Namely], of the gods of the people which [are] round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the [one] end of the earth even unto the [other] end of the earth; 8 Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him: 9 But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people. 10 And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the LORD thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage. 11 And all Israel shall hear, and fear, and shall do no more any such wickedness as this is among you. 12 If thou shalt hear [say] in one of thy cities, which the LORD thy God hath given thee to dwell there, saying, 13 [Certain] men, the children of Belial, are gone out from among you, and have withdrawn the inhabitants of their city, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which ye have not known; 14 Then shalt thou enquire, and make search, and ask diligently; and, behold, [if it be] truth, [and] the thing certain, [that] such abomination is wrought among you; 15 Thou shalt surely smite the inhabitants of that city with the edge of the sword, destroying it utterly, and all that [is] therein, and the cattle thereof, with the edge of the sword. 16 And thou shalt gather all the spoil of it into the midst of the street thereof, and shalt burn with fire the city, and all the spoil thereof every whit, for the LORD thy God: and it shall be an heap for ever; it shall not be built again. 17 And there shall cleave nought of the cursed thing to thine hand: that the LORD may turn from the fierceness of his anger, and shew thee mercy, and have compassion upon thee, and multiply thee, as he hath sworn unto thy fathers; 18 When thou shalt hearken to the voice of the LORD thy God, to keep all his commandments which I command thee this day, to do [that which is] right in the eyes of the LORD thy God.

 

[Dibby53]

If the Word of God is not (1) inspired, (2) inerrant, and (3) therefore infallible, it is worthless. You might as well read Shakespeare.
To me the Word of God is not a book, but Christ.
You are not alone in holding to such fallacies. The Word of God is BOTH the written Word (a book) and Christ (the eternal Word, or the Divine Expression). See Hebrews 4:12,13.

As to Catholic and Orthodox bibles, they are full of non-inspired, non-canonical writings, Only the 66 books of the Protestant Bibles are Scripture (provided they have been translated from the traditional Hebrew and Greek texts as were all the Reformation bibles).

Well Shakespeare can be very inspirational and I,m sure it speaks alot about life and the human condition! I wouldn't say the bible needs to be infallible to be useful. Why? It was written by human beings like us. Some of it I find very spirational, some I do not. The mass murders in the promised land aren't particularly edifying, but the story of the prodigal son is.

It is definitely a creation (the bible as put together) that has come to us through catholic hands.That is historical fact. Even the names of the four gospels are given by the church through tradition. Matthew, for instance, is not signed by anyone called Matthew.

 

[wolfwint]

To me the Bible is made up of manuscripts that has been decided upon by the catholic church as authoritative and inspirational. Irenaeus, the early church father, had 21 books that he considered authoritative. And I don't think the final form that the bible took was finally settled until the 1500s at the Council of Trent (Revelation was a late entry for inclusion). To this day there are slight variations between the catholic, protestant and orthodox versions of scripture. Also modern scholarly analysis of the letters of St. Paul have shown that it wasn't the same person who wrote them all (the letters to Timothy, for example, were not written by the person who wrote collosians). So while scripture is useful for inspiring and edifying us, I don't consider it absolute or infallible. To me the Word of God is not a book, but Christ. And as we read it the word of God is the meaning and wisdom Christ gives us as we read scripture.
For the first 500 years of Christianity there was no bible as we understand it. So they couldn't have thought of the "Word of God" as the bible we have.
Anyway, I look forward to seeing what your understanding is. Thanks guys. X

I mean what it is: the word of God. Doesnt matter what others think ore mean to think.
By the way i dont think that God will judge us ore hold us for stupid, because we believe that the bible is his word.

 

[MastersApprentice]

To me the Bible is made up of manuscripts that has been decided upon by the catholic church as authoritative and inspirational. Irenaeus, the early church father, had 21 books that he considered authoritative. And I don't think the final form that the bible took was finally settled until the 1500s at the Council of Trent (Revelation was a late entry for inclusion). To this day there are slight variations between the catholic, protestant and orthodox versions of scripture. Also modern scholarly analysis of the letters of St. Paul have shown that it wasn't the same person who wrote them all (the letters to Timothy, for example, were not written by the person who wrote collosians). So while scripture is useful for inspiring and edifying us, I don't consider it absolute or infallible. To me the Word of God is not a book, but Christ. And as we read it the word of God is the meaning and wisdom Christ gives us as we read scripture.
For the first 500 years of Christianity there was no bible as we understand it. So they couldn't have thought of the "Word of God" as the bible we have.
Anyway, I look forward to seeing what your understanding is. Thanks guys. X

The Bible begins with the 5 books of Moses (Torah: The Law), which were dictated to him by God. By definition, this is indeed the word of God. I do not suppose that He has not the power to influence the refinement of what has been attached as relevant, especially the Prophets and Revelation. Taking The Holy Bible as a whole and reading from cover to cover like a novel, from Beginning (Alpha) to End (Omega), the saga of the Tribes of Israel is a cohesive and comprehensive metaphor for the passage of time and the purpose of the seasons, as history repeats itself in very specific patterns that continue to this day. He told the End from the Beginning.

In the Armor of God analogy, the Word of God is the Sword of Truth. It is depicted in Revelation as both held by the angel and coming from the mouth of the Rider who is called Faithful and True.

 

[Adstar]

To me the Bible is made up of manuscripts that has been decided upon by the catholic church as authoritative and inspirational. Irenaeus, the early church father, had 21 books that he considered authoritative. And I don't think the final form that the bible took was finally settled until the 1500s at the Council of Trent (Revelation was a late entry for inclusion). To this day there are slight variations between the catholic, protestant and orthodox versions of scripture. Also modern scholarly analysis of the letters of St. Paul have shown that it wasn't the same person who wrote them all (the letters to Timothy, for example, were not written by the person who wrote collosians). So while scripture is useful for inspiring and edifying us, I don't consider it absolute or infallible. To me the Word of God is not a book, but Christ. And as we read it the word of God is the meaning and wisdom Christ gives us as we read scripture.
For the first 500 years of Christianity there was no bible as we understand it. So they couldn't have thought of the "Word of God" as the bible we have.
Anyway, I look forward to seeing what your understanding is. Thanks guys. X

The scriptures contained in the Bible is the Message from God..

The catholic church has revealed it is in rebellion against the Holy Bible by the introduction of all their traditions of men.. the catholic Bible contains the 7 uninspired books called the Apocrypha and yes they declared them inspired in the 1500's..

In the end each individual will attest to believing and acknowledging the Word of God or they will reject the word of God and thus they will be judged on their personal response to the Word of God.. Let them add to or take away from the Word of God.. The Bible itself contains a curse on anyone who would add to or take away from the Word of God..

The Word of God causes a lot of people discomfort and conviction.. Instead of accepting the Message and being saved they choose to take away the authority of the Book or they add too the book or take away from the book because they want to be justified in their beliefs and what they believe God's Word should be.. In the end we shall be saved or damned because of our response to the Message of God..

 

[Nehemiah6]

It is definitely a creation (the bible as put together) that has come to us through catholic hands.That is historical fact. Even the names of the four gospels are given by the church through tradition. Matthew, for instance, is not signed by anyone called Matthew.

I see we have another Catholic apologist. But the Catholic Church cannot take credit for the Bible. Indeed when it insisted that the non-inspired apocryphal books were Scripture and included them (in spite of Jerome's proper inderstanding), that was the end of Catholic credibility.

In any event, since you regard the Bible as a purely human book, good luck to you.

 

[MattforJesus]

Well Shakespeare can be very inspirational and I,m sure it speaks alot about life and the human condition! I wouldn't say the bible needs to be infallible to be useful. Why? It was written by human beings like us. Some of it I find very spirational, some I do not. The mass murders in the promised land aren't particularly edifying, but the story of the prodigal son is.

It is definitely a creation (the bible as put together) that has come to us through catholic hands.That is historical fact. Even the names of the four gospels are given by the church through tradition. Matthew, for instance, is not signed by anyone called Matthew.

I believe the Bible is the word of God, and I read through it and it is the same theme throughout the Bible, and I do not see how humans alone could write a book to that extent, and keep it all together, and it was written over a course of 1500 years, and by 40 different writers yet in a world that is changing it is the same theme, and not abandoned.

Look at America until now it is not the same as far as values, and traditions, and beliefs, as years ago among many people.

If a book was written concerning the start of America it would be different than what would be written today concerning America.

And that is only 243 years ago, and some people say they do not teach American history the same as years ago, and many changes have taken place in America, and their values, and beliefs, among many people.

So how can the Bible be the same theme all the way through when the world changes, and why would they have an interest to keep it going on, and how did they keep it all together and did not abandon it.

Especially when Jerusalem was overthrown so many times, the Jew scattered so many times, the Jews rebellious many times, and many nations was against the ways of the Bible but yet it still remains, and the same theme all the way through the Bible.

It seems like their attitude among the nations like England, kingdom the Roman Empire, if you can't beat it, join it, for they could never overcome it.

It seems like that is a tactic of England is if the people start to believe something contrary to the government and it gets out of hand instead of fighting against them and maybe lose their authority they embrace them and go along with them to keep control, but they will make it a pagan interpretation to them.

It is obvious when the Roman Empire embraced Christianity they did not get rid of their pagan, and occult ways, and it became their foundation for the interpretation of scriptures, which is why they have so many other books for it is human endeavor that is in charge.

The Roman Catholic Church is human endeavor in charge.

God said He identifies Himself as the one true God by showing the end from the beginning, which He told us the whole history of mankind from Adam and Eve to when God puts down the world, and the saints with Jesus forever.

And said no other religion or person will be able to do the same.

Which He told us of all the kingdoms on earth.

Which the next kingdom to come is the 10 horn kingdom, which is the world split in to ten sections with a leader in each section.

Which the book of Daniel says the saints will be able to understand the end time because many shall run to and fro, advanced travel, and knowledge shall be increased, advanced technology, which the saints can see, hear, and know of what is going on in the earth, and how it is possible for the nations to come together for they can communicate with each other, and travel to each other, and the problems on earth will escalate driving the nations together to combat against it for they will set aside their fighting, and arrogance, for peace and safety of the world.

God warns the saints of the new age movement that has a false interpretation of the Bible based on the occult, and evolution, and people can still evolve, and interpret all religions that way.

Which the new age movement will pave the way to the New Age Christ when the nations come together, and evolution will be religion as they believe they will evolve to be greater and spiritual, which they will go against the truth of the Bible.

The Bible is the same theme all the way through, and tells us of the history of mankind, and each kingdom that would be on earth until the beast kingdom, the 8th kingdom.

Nah 2:3 The shield of his mighty men is made red, the valiant men are in scarlet: the chariots shall be with flaming torches in the day of his preparation, and the fir trees shall be terribly shaken.
Nah 2:4 The chariots shall rage in the streets, they shall justle one against another in the broad ways: they shall seem like torches, they shall run like the lightnings.

Tells us of automobiles but Nahum did not know to call them that so he used chariot for it is a form of transportation, but this is sure not describing chariots of old time.

Isa 31:4 For thus hath the LORD spoken unto me, Like as the lion and the young lion roaring on his prey, when a multitude of shepherds is called forth against him, he will not be afraid of their voice, nor abase himself for the noise of them: so shall the LORD of hosts come down to fight for mount Zion, and for the hill thereof.
Isa 31:5 As birds flying, so will the LORD of hosts defend Jerusalem; defending also he will deliver it; and passing over he will preserve it.

This appears to be the 6 day war, 1967, when Israeli fighter pilots paved the way to win the war, and they took control of Jerusalem, which Israel became a nation again in 1948, and it is God's plan to restore the kingdom on earth back to them.

The Bible could of not come from humans alone, and it is all inspired by God.

Isa 41:21 Produce your cause, saith the LORD; bring forth your strong reasons, saith the King of Jacob.
Isa 41:22 Let them bring them forth, and shew us what shall happen: let them shew the former things, what they be, that we may consider them, and know the latter end of them; or declare us things for to come.

Isa 41:26 Who hath declared from the beginning, that we may know? and beforetime, that we may say, He is righteous? yea, there is none that sheweth, yea, there is none that declareth, yea, there is none that heareth your words.

Isa 41:28 For I beheld, and there was no man; even among them, and there was no counsellor, that, when I asked of them, could answer a word.

God told us the whole history of mankind as proof that He is the one true God.

 

[Dibby53]

I see we have another Catholic apologist. But the Catholic Church cannot take credit for the Bible. Indeed when it insisted that the non-inspired apocryphal books were Scripture and included them (in spite of Jerome's proper inderstanding), that was the end of Catholic credibility.

In any event, since you regard the Bible as a purely human book, good luck to you.

I,m not a roman catholic. It is just a historical fact that while there was much agreement on the majority of scriptures, the final canon took centuries to decide. There was agreement, but also much disagreement about what should be included. I,m interested in the scholarship. Why did they decide on particular scriptures? Who was at the councils that decided the canon? So, yes I do see a very human involvment. The bible never fell from heaven fully formed. People decided on what to include, but just as important what to exclude. This was largely done by the catholic councils. The reformers, such as Luther, rejected the apochrypha.... but why? So I find it fascinating. So this is why I say that the bible is not inerrant or infallible ( only God is) because it is the result of fallible human decisions and reasoning. But this view doesn't denigrate the bible. It makes it richer, more fascinating and a great source of wisdom.

 

[Dibby53]

The scriptures contained in the Bible is the Message from God..

The catholic church has revealed it is in rebellion against the Holy Bible by the introduction of all their traditions of men.. the catholic Bible contains the 7 uninspired books called the Apocrypha and yes they declared them inspired in the 1500's..

In the end each individual will attest to believing and acknowledging the Word of God or they will reject the word of God and thus they will be judged on their personal response to the Word of God.. Let them add to or take away from the Word of God.. The Bible itself contains a curse on anyone who would add to or take away from the Word of God..

The Word of God causes a lot of people discomfort and conviction.. Instead of accepting the Message and being saved they choose to take away the authority of the Book or they add too the book or take away from the book because they want to be justified in their beliefs and what they believe God's Word should be.. In the end we shall be saved or damned because of our response to the Message of God..

Adstar, for me Christ is the Word of God. My relationship is with God and is a living one. God can speak to our hearts in many ways, including reading the bible. To me it is this: the inspiration and wisdom we gain from reading the bible is the word of God to us. It is just stories and words until the spirit brings it to life for us. Paul says, "the letter kills, but the spirit brings life". This is gained from our lived relationship with him. Jesus tells us to "consider the lilies of the field and the "birds of the air" in other words, let God speak to you through what is around you. The word of god is what genuinely speaks to our hearts to inspire wisdom in us. I think that the elevation of an "inerrant and infallible" bible can become an idol that gets in the way of a living, personal relationship with God.

 

[Victor1999]

I,m not a roman catholic. It is just a historical fact that while there was much agreement on the majority of scriptures, the final canon took centuries to decide. There was agreement, but also much disagreement about what should be included. I,m interested in the scholarship. Why did they decide on particular scriptures? Who was at the councils that decided the canon? So, yes I do see a very human involvment. The bible never fell from heaven fully formed. People decided on what to include, but just as important what to exclude. This was largely done by the catholic councils. The reformers, such as Luther, rejected the apochrypha.... but why? So I find it fascinating. So this is why I say that the bible is not inerrant or infallible ( only God is) because it is the result of fallible human decisions and reasoning. But this view doesn't denigrate the bible. It makes it richer, more fascinating and a great source of wisdom.

The Word of God did not become the Word of God when the church canonized it. It was the Word of God from the beginning. God allowed it to be canonized this way, if he wanted it otherwise He would make sure it was the other way.

 

[Dibby53]

The Word of God did not become the Word of God when the church canonized it. It was the Word of God from the beginning. God allowed it to be canonized this way, if he wanted it otherwise He would make sure it was the other way.

Hi Victor. There were hundreds of documents around for the first few centuries after Christ. Only some made it into the bible. There seems to be a lot of anti-catholic sentiment on this site, but historically they were the ones who decided what was canonical. So on the one hand some people on here dislike catholicism; on the other they say that God decided the bible, which would mean the holy spirit guided people that evangelicals find doctrinally and practically suspect!

 

[Dino246]

Hi Victor. There were hundreds of documents around for the first few centuries after Christ. Only some made it into the bible. There seems to be a lot of anti-catholic sentiment on this site, but historically they were the ones who decided what was canonical. So on the one hand some people on here dislike catholicism; on the other they say that God decided the bible, which would mean the holy spirit guided people that evangelicals find doctrinally and practically suspect!

Let's not make the error of anachronism.

The organization known today as the Catholic Church was not known as such, nor was it fundamentally corrupt, until several hundred years after Christ. The people who assembled the canon of Scripture would not have called themselves "Catholics" in the same sense the word is used today. They were church fathers, simple as that.

 

[Dibby53]

Let's not make the error of anachronism.

The organization known today as the Catholic Church was not known as such, nor was it fundamentally corrupt, until several hundred years after Christ. The people who assembled the canon of Scripture would not have called themselves "Catholics" in the same sense the word is used today. They were church fathers, simple as that.

Maybe I should have said ""orthodox" in belief. But they were the ones who won the battle to define Christian belief out of all the competing groups claiming the name Christian. They became orthodox only because they won the patronage of the roman emperor and could enforce that view with the power of the roman state. Even so the absolute final canon wasn't decided until the 1500s, so was ultimately a catholic enterprise. The protestants tweaked it a bit. The orthodox also have their slight variation on canon scriptures. So who got it right? According to the inerrantists the holy spirit still inspired the final result largely through catholics.......or was it through Luther? Or Calvin? Or greek orthodox?

 

[UnitedWithChrist]

The Word of God did not become the Word of God when the church canonized it. It was the Word of God from the beginning. God allowed it to be canonized this way, if he wanted it otherwise He would make sure it was the other way.

I think the right way to phrase this is that the Church can RECOGNIZE the canon, but it doesn't DEFINE the canon.

Roman Catholicism has claimed that it defined the canon, which is false. The "catholic" church recognized the canon of Scripture, but it didn't define the canon.

And, this was done by the "catholic" church, not the "Roman Catholic" church. Rome was only one of the bishoprics of the true church. It's claims to supremacy are prideful and boastful. Rome was only one of five different major bishoprics of the "catholic" church, which included Jerusalem, Antioch, Constantinople, Alexandria and Rome.

Their claims to supremacy began about 450 AD but it didn't have that kind of power in the catholic church to define the canon or doctrine until about 1054 AD, with the Great Schism. Even then, the Orthodox church didn't acknowledge their alleged authority.

 

[UnitedWithChrist]

Hi Victor. There were hundreds of documents around for the first few centuries after Christ. Only some made it into the bible. There seems to be a lot of anti-catholic sentiment on this site, but historically they were the ones who decided what was canonical. So on the one hand some people on here dislike catholicism; on the other they say that God decided the bible, which would mean the holy spirit guided people that evangelicals find doctrinally and practically suspect!

The "catholic" church (not the Roman Catholic church) was composed of five major bishoprics: Antioch, Alexandria, Rome, Jerusalem and Constantinople.

Rome did not have the preeminence that it claimed after AD 450, and did not have the power to canonize Scripture.

Instead, the "catholic church" recognized the canon of Scripture. They didn't canonize the specific books, but they recognized they were inspired and inerrant.

Later on, the Roman Catholic church claimed that it created the canon. This is one of many boastful claims Rome made, including changing the day of worship from Saturday to Sunday. In reality, these sorts of decisions occurred way before Rome had any real power. For instance, Christians had begun to worship on Sunday instead of Saturday in the first century, and virtually no Christian was worshiping on Saturday by AD 135.

Unfortunately, many believe the Roman Catholic church's claims, including the claim that they gave Protestants the canon of the Bible. This is not true. Rome was only one of five major bishoprics at that time.


I really recommend reading the church history set "2000 Years of Christ's Power" by Nick Needham to sort out fact from fiction. Online folklore, especially in regards to Christianity, is very destructive.