Видео

why would anyone think that the apostles didn't think they were writing scripture when they were clarifying scripture to those who didn't seem to understand it??? smh that's just silly.

there is a sermon on RUclips by St Thomas Aquinas that quotes from the excised books. How pathetic is this Lutheran controversy.

In the New Testament there are 360 quotes from the Septuagint. only 33 from Hebrew texts. The Church in its infallibility put the bible together. Jesus promised not to let the gates of hell prevail. Jews who rejected these 7 Septuagint books had no standing. Jesus founded the Church Not Simon the Magician or Shabiti Zevi. Protestants called these books apocryphal never has the Catholic Church called them that. these 7 books were a part of the Christian Bible for 1500 years. Luther had issues with relics and prayers for the dead so he didn't like Macabres. No Jews were not unanimous in rejecting these books. Jews were all over the place on canons. only judaizers side with Jewish canons.

the canon eas used "in littergy" not in protestsnt bible study.

AD 390 cannon. thst settled tbe canon. tgats in the second century.

the books have authority but only the Church has the wisdom of the holy spirit to descern brcause the Church was handed doen by the apostles to their successors.

the new testament scripture were all used in tbr littergy, the littergu that tgr protestants latter dropoed like a hot potato when thr masd was banbed.

This guy is awesome! Never heard of him until now!!❤

Jenny!

Anyone know where the Q&A can be found? Thanks!

I recommend this Bible educator on RUclips. GOD BLESS YOU ruclips.net/video/rkXhOHPAPLM/видео.htmlsi=UWgBR9joKUW2g0h2

If there were arguments on what books were canonized. Wouldn’t some in that time consider apocryphal books “canon”?

29:39 well tell me you don’t anything about Mormonism without telling me you don’t know anything about Mormonism

This quote at 22:00 is really messed up when you understand in which the context Kruger gives the quote. This is not good. Not good at all. I have had my suspicions about Paul but the way the church seems to have placed authority to scripture is... problematic to say the least. My struggle with Paul recently started with two specific quotes he makes in Romans 10:18-21. Those quotes from Isaiah and Hosea is supposed to give support to the calling of heathens to the word of God. Because Israel rejected him. But Paul took those verses totally out of context. I mean TOTALLY. Both those verses from Isaiah and Hosea is about Israel!! If he can make that mistake in what other ways is his ideas at fault? Why should I believe the rest? Think about it.

Thank you and praise the Lord, for preachers and teachers like Dr Carson. For the first time in my life, I had a clearer understanding of Mt 11:11-19.

such truth! highly recommend reading The Anxious Generation

The "extra books" were not adopted at the council of Trent, the canon was confirmed at Trent as the Canon already in use for the last at least 1300 years. Protestants removed these books from their bibles over the next 100 years after Trent.

Christians didn't have a BIBLE until the end of the 4th century. They had some books (letters), the larger cities had somewhat complete collections of NT writings. They also had the Septuagint version of the OT which was more dispersed than the Hebrew version. We have a complete collection of the 73 books by the mid 3rd century or end of the 4th century.

Mr. Kruger speaks to the audience as if they are stupid and uninformed, he has an arrogant way about him, that speaks self love thy self, and he does.

Wow someone recommended me to listen to him and I honestly had a great hope I was optimistic ready to listen the most important point for me was his first one and I man I couldn't believe it.. yes he offers an explanation thanks for that but nevertheless that's just an idea, an inference or hypothesis at best.. I was ready to listen to something more definitive. For a Christian protestant obviously this will be sufficient since you already believe in Martin Luther sola scriptura ideology but not for someone that is not into protestantism. Well I tried and I tried hard for my girlfriend only for here but someone must follow the truth and the most reasonable path which is that the early church was oral tradition, Christ founded a church not a scripture and the Bible also requires us to follow tradition. I will not leave my orthodox Christian faith and if that's the reason of she breaking out with me then I will accept it and trust Jesus Christ my lord

Campus ! Please you mean a church !!!!!

This is so beneficial to so many!

14:29: Respectfully sir, Jesus did not say, "Behold I am making a New Covenant." He said, "This cup is the New Covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you." (Luke 22:20, NKJV). So... the New Covenant is not simply some sort of agreement. The New Covenant, according to Jesus, is a cup filled with the blood of Jesus. Pretty clear. Sure, it can be argued that the idea of writing down the nature of the covenant into a document could have been a factor in assembling the NT canon, but let's not allow ambiguity regarding what the New Covenant actually is. The New Covenant is the physical blood of Jesus (and, one can easily argue, the bread which is his body as well). Our Lord tells us so. No, Jesus did not say, "Behold I am making a New Covenant." Sounds like the Catholic Eucharist to me, according to the document. :)

It is astonishing that in 2023, people believe all these ancient mythologies. To this day nobody knows what God is let alone what God did or will do. Can anyone here tell me what Drook did? Does Drook exist? Did Drook created the Universe? No one can answer these questions because none of you have any idea what Drook is. We all agree that no one knows what God is, right?

He gave me reasons to question the Bible I never thought of

He's just making stuff up

Speaking to an audience eager to have presuppositions confirmed, his lecture makes sense. People have to be ready to ask hard questions and hear uncomfortable answers. I don’t think that was his audience. When out in the ocean, you don’t drill holes in the hull of the ship in which you want to be, no matter how curious you are about its integrity and solidity.

Ahh, but the authority of the scriptures DOES come from the Church, specifically the Catholic Church, which was the ONLY Church in existence for the first 1000 years. The Bible itself says, in 2 Thess. 2:15, "Therefore, brothers, stand firm and cling to the traditions we taught you, whether by speech or by letter." This tells us that the REAL authority is in the Apostle's teaching, which is referred to as TRADITION, both in the Oral form, and in the Written form as letters. We know that these letters were passed around from church to church. Multiple copies were made, and they were sent out from place to place. The actual authority of the Bible comes FROM the Church. Is there a place that the bible confirms this? Yes, there is: 1 Timothy 3:14-15 14 Although I hope to come to you soon, I am writing you these things 15 in case I am delayed, so that you will know how each one must conduct himself in God’s household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth. So, by looking at this verse in 1 Timothy, we can ask, what is the pillar and foundation of the truth? Is it the Bible? NO! It is the Church of the Living God. So, Mr. Kruger is correct. If the Bible is a late book, then the authority for it comes from the Church! Exactly! Jesus gave us a Church, not a bible. The Church gave us a Bible, and the main reason was to combat confusion in the 4th century, which is when a lot of books were being produced. Prior to this, books were very expensive and hard to come by. Also, the format was scrolls, which were bulky and hard to carry around. The growing popularity of the Codex (our present book format) really caused more people to learn to read, and more books to be produced. Even with this, it was only a small fraction of people who could actually read, so people relied on going to Mass in order to hear the Bible read out loud. By the 4th century there were MANY books floating around Christendom, and this was causing a lot of confusion. People did not know which books were actually from REAL Apostles, and which were fakes. This prompted the Catholic Church to undertake the task of producing a canonized New Testament. The Catholic Bishop of Antioch, St. Athanasius gives us our precise twenty-seven book New Testament in his Festal Letter (AD 367). Additionally, regional church Synods at Hippo (AD 393) and Carthage (AD 397) both affirm the twenty-seven book New Testament canon. Earlier, in the year AD 331, Emperor Constantine commissioned 50 bibles to be produced. This was a huge undertaking, because they all had to be produced by hand.

It is comical to see Romanist make claims about how they defined the cannon. Same arguments that atheists make. News flash, nobody in the early church was running around distraught not knowing what was scripture and what wasn’t and they were just waiting for Rome to tell them. The fathers weren’t sitting around wondering what to read or believe. There was nearly universal agreement in the early church what was scripture and what wasn’t, what took time was to combine them into a “cannon”. Nobody needed Rome for that. Nobody in the early church, NOBODY, affirmed or believed what Rome now believes about itself or many of its dogmas. There is zero biblical or historical evidence for their dogmas that they claimed from pagan, mystic and gnostic sources-see the Marian Dogmas, and the papacy was invented out of whole cloth and is now desperately crammed back into scripture by taking verses out of context and twisting them into pretzels. In fact, there were ecumenical councils in the early church that Rome wasn’t even invited to, much less consulted for their “primacy”. This “authority” Rome claims for itself was invented hundreds of years later. They don’t have and never had the “authority” that they claim they have. Difference between now and then, is in the early church even those in Rome didn’t believe what Rome now does. The Catholic Church is the universal church. All those who have been saved by grace, through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. It’s not Rome, or the East or any one place. It is Christ’s church, handed to the fathers by the Apostles. There was no imaginary succession from Peter. Not even Peter believed that, just read scripture. Rome’s “official cannon” that they use now wasn’t canonized until the 1500s. Don’t try and pretend what the early church did is by extension now Rome. It isn’t. Rome has departed from the faith and over hundreds of years introduced all manner of heresy. In fact, Rome’s cannon added books that the Jewish Cannon didn’t recognize. The Reformers simply returned to scripture and the early church and away from the accretions of Rome. Scripture has been scripture from the moment it was written. It didn’t take hundreds of years for that to be recognized. It did take time and some development to organize them and combine them into an “official cannon” but that is something that happened organically as the Lord lead his people. It wasn’t Rome, never has been, never will be.

Praise God!

While Jesus Peter Paul John etc… never cite the apocrypha books as scripture, it does seem like Jude does, at least with 1 Enoch. In Jude 14-15 Jude says ”But Enoch, in the seventh generation from Adam, also prophesied about these men, saying, “Behold, the Lord came with many thousands of His holy ones, to execute judgment upon all, and to convict all the ungodly of all their ungodly deeds which they have done in an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things which ungodly sinners have spoken against Him.” Jude here quotes directly from 1 Enoch 1:9 and says that Enoch prophesied this, meaning Jude thought the writer of Enoch was under the influence of the Holy Spirit when he said this. Now I don’t think that 1 Enoch is inspired but i think Jude clearly thought it was. So if Jude that an uninspired book was inspired, I think that raises serious questions of whether Jude was inspired. ‭

There is more happening here than we even know. Beautifully put together, Kevin, and all those involved 🤩

Who is the guy on the right? Kruger was fine on his own, lol.

If we found a letter of Paul today this guy doesn’t know if it’d be canon or not? What a scholar, doesn’t even understand God’s promise of preservation. If it wasn’t preserved to every generation then it isn’t inspired.

This message moved my heart deeper into the presence of the shepherd. Which brings pure clarity and peace and gentle action. In the green pasture 🙏🏼💫

This guy is not giving facts. He’s giving assumption. He think he knows what happened almost 2000 years ago. The way he’s talking is the same way Muslims say the Quran is the word of God. or Judaism say the Hebrew bible is the word of God. Please be open minded that people wrote these books. Also be open that Jesus (Yeshua) was talking about something that even the disciples didn’t fully understand.

Gnostics are not real Christians. They were trouble makers to the first century church. The gnostic scriptures ARE NOT real scripture. Gnostics did not follow Jesus as the disciples did. The gnostics even taught Jesus did not die on the cross because God can't die. Don't be fooled, because gnosticism is a lie of satan

“Busyness can choke out a lot of things” yes 🕊️🙏🏼

Stunning. Well made. And honored both what has been, what is, and what will come. In Christ’s love 🙏🏼🕊️

would have liked to see the Q & A

Confirmation bias, speculation and very little evidence of the early church and their involvement in Canonization. Besides academic thought and because God did it... Let's all swim with Alligators, and note God's holyest of work. By who survives...

Incredible! I wonder what the next 170 years will hold.

Tears everytime

Wow! Amazing work.

Excellent video telling the story of these two congregations and God's faithfulness.

“In the early church” “The church in the beginning” All these phrases this guys uses makes me laugh. Be honest.. it was the catholic Church!!! The one true church… by the way started by an Apostle.

Your video has issues. Flashing light bars going across the screen.

Just ask Siri. Thank you Catholic Church

Re: translation, this raises the question of who has the authority to translate considering exegesis is part of all translations as you point out. Is this exegesis by the translators infallible? I sure hope so, otherwise sola scriptura is rendered meaningless. But it’s also rendered meaningless if your hold that the translations are infallible- which is why so many Protestants hold that only the *original* scriptures are infallible… which we don’t have. So, in reality, we don’t know if the scriptures we have are infallible… unless they came from an infallible body empowered by God with the authority to “bind and loose.” In other words, no infallible church = no infallible text.