Can an unpleasurable act be out of love?

I'm talking about the greatest commandment man

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Commandment

And that commandment has a meaning

Yes

thing is, many can interpret it many ways

which is why we have Eccumenial Councils

Obviously man, for brevity I am summarising heavily here

That's the thing I despise about sola scriptura

it degenerates and causes schisms in theology everywhere, ultimately making ethics completely relative

Sorry

But how

the denial of a single Truth

Which one

So you're protestant, right?

I'm Reformed

so yeah

I think that man is born into sin

Man is unable to save himself

Jesus incarnated into human history in accordance with God the Father's plan from before time

sola fide

Tell me, how do the Reformed declare an interperation of scripture infallible?

In the reformed camp, the exegetical methodology is to interepret scripture in accordance with what else is said in scripture

So where something is vague, look at in context with what is said before and after it, along with other passages in scripture

But yeah, we also heavily follow the writings of Augustine, and his work on the sovereignty and grace of god

Along with of course Calvin

but what about declaring infallibility?

well scripture is infallible

Scripture is the inspired and authorative word of god

Everyting else is the work of mere men

Some of those dudes have a lot of insight

but they don't stand higher than scripture

Do you have a problem with biblical inerrancy?

>an interperation

@Deleted User hmm

scripture is obv infallible

but it's interperation

what is

interperation of scripture

What is your point?

@Deleted User

The interperation of scripture, how do we make interperation infallible?

Well..

you can't

by definition

Like, there are points in the text where it is pretty obvious

Why not use an Eccumenial Council <:thinkHD:306271252254031873>

And you can't weave around it

Well yeah

We have the nicene creed

also, who dictates what Books belong in the Bible?

And we have the Westminister confession of faith

Well the early councils decided that didn't they man

We have used what was used since then haven't we

For almost 2000 years

>Well the early councils decided that didn't they man
what did he mean by this

Ok

The bible in its current 66 books form came to be over many years very early on in the church bro

I mean unless you have some greater insight into the matter

I'd love to hear

But who allowed that?

You're asking a pretty broad question that has been covered at lengths in varous books by people way more knowledgable of the subject than you or me man

I'm curious, what about yourself and your background man

You said you're orthodox

Actually no, wasn't it Eccumenial Councils?

and idk what you want from me, I'm Orthodox, yeah

ok

Well um, actually after having done some reading, i don't really know you can point to a specific point in history where suddenly bam we had the new testament. It was a historical process or development.

actually it took a couple of hundred years to get Revelations in

But for the really councils in use by the eastern church it was the septuagint

because greek was still relatively common

what does a translation have to do with anything?

ok

So, because most of the world at the point in history around the mediteranean was greek speaking

The Septuagint was the greek translation of the old testament (including the Torah)

This included several deutro-canonical books

Like Maccabees and Esdras

The New Testament likewise was composed almost entirely in greek

The only book that wasn't originally hebrew was daniel which was written in Aramaic

This matters because since the early church still was largely greek speaking, the canon already included the Old testament (ie the Septuagint)

With the various letters and books of the new Testament being really, really widespread

the letters being the Epistle I assume

As in, we literally have the best textual evidence for it because theres just so many damn copies and manuscripts

yes, correct

The use of the current canon as it currently stands was pretty concrete pretty early on, because it is referenced by different authors

Along with manuscripts like Codex Vaticanus and Alexandrianus

So, nah bro. No council really

Just the Holy Spirit at work orchestrating the effort of God's holy scripture coming together

I'm going to research myself

No worries man

But yeah, you are correct

Revelations is a bit of fruit cake

🤔

Well first of all what you describe what happened was simply as ''it simply happened''. This cannot be, Revelation was very gradually accepted into Christendom so *something* has to declare something as Scripture instead of individuals simply ''yeah this seems alright''

I think you mischaraterised what I said

It was a gradual development

Over time

Councils simply ratified was already largely in place. Most of what the councils did was reactionairy to solidify a certain position of the church in opposition to heretics

I agree, I did say it was a reaction

In fact, that's how it started