Suan seems unfamiliar with the messy history of ecumenical councils in the 1st millennium and necessity of papal authority to identify them. Can you tell I just finished Erick Ybarra's massive book on the papacy? 😊 I'm working on yours now William. Shocked by just how novel the first chapter is.
Protestants just dont like thinking about the canon too much. The way they reinterpret scriptures to mean whatever they like, it makes any additional or missing book irrelevant. They could accept Tobit and just reinterpret anything they find troublesome. You have prayers for the Dead in Maccabees and currently in Jewish modern tradition but clear evidence for a practice that existed before and apart from the catholic church. Does this phase guys like Ortlund? Not in the slightest…. People like him arent thinking well i guess the catholics didnt make this stuff up after all! Theyre thinking “the catholics added that book at somepoint but i cant trust history so ill just hold to my opinions and ignore any facts that might change my mind” all they think about is “this aint what my granny said christiality was”
Good stuff. One minor critique: you are a Catholic, stop using CE/BCE rather than AD/BC. It's just an attempt to remove Christ from common parlance. There is no other rational reason for the change. And a bogus way to signal who is most academically orthodox.
Thanks for sharing your detailed presentation. You make some thought-provoking points about the Protestant canon, but I'm throwing five theological flags as I believe your argument raises a few concerns that are worth discussing. Unauthorized Judgment and Presumption (Penalty: 20 Yards - Overreach into Divine Insight) It seems like you’re assuming Protestants lack divine guidance or legitimacy in recognizing the canon. While there are certainly differences in how we approach the formation of the canon, assuming that Protestant efforts result in an inherently flawed or illegitimate canon overlooks the possibility of genuine faith and discernment on their part. As Matthew 7:1 reminds us, “Do not judge, or you too will be judged.” Presumption of Ambiguity in Scripture (Penalty: 10 Yards - Assumption of Scriptural Ambiguity) By framing the Protestant canon as subject to the "Burden Problem" and the "Impartiality Problem," you imply that Scripture itself is unclear or ambiguous without the guiding authority of the Catholic Church. However, scripture affirms its clarity and ability to impart wisdom. As 1 Corinthians 14:33 states, “For God is not a God of confusion but of peace.” Overconfidence in Defining God’s Nature (Penalty: 15 Yards - Presumption on Defining the Infinite) Your argument suggests that only the Catholic Church can definitively determine the correct canon, implying a near-complete understanding of God’s revelation through a particular theological lens. Romans 11:33 reminds us, “Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable his judgments, and his paths beyond tracing out!” Overstepping Human Limitations in Defining ‘True Worship’ (Penalty: 10 Yards - Presumption on Defining Worship) Implying that only the Catholic Church’s canon allows for ‘true worship’ seems to overlook the broader reality that many Christian traditions genuinely worship God in spirit and truth, even with different canons. John 4:24 reminds us that “God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth.” Failure to Recognize the Relational Nature of Theology (Penalty: 15 Yards - Ignoring the Relational Core of Worship) Finally, your presentation appears to focus heavily on institutional authority, which, while important, risks overshadowing the relational and communal nature of faith and worship in the broader Christian body. As Jesus said in Matthew 22:37-40, the greatest commandments are to love God and love our neighbor, which should be at the heart of our theology. I think we can all agree that the process of discerning the canon and engaging with Scripture requires humility, openness, and respect for how God works across different Christian traditions. Dismissing other approaches risks limiting the diverse ways in which God reveals Himself to His people.
I haven't even bothered to listen to the video. More than 2 hours. But this whole argument is pointless. There are only so many books that could be canonical. I've been through the whole apocrypha and important letters and books that could have been cannon. Nothing makes that much difference to Christian doctrine anyway. The only thing notable is a strong theme in Tobit that almsgiving can wipe out sins. That idea appears in another couple of books aswell so you you could justify indulgences but that's about it. Maccabees doesn't prove prayers for the dead or purgatory or anything close to it. It is simply a story what some leaders of Israel did. No commands, no doctrine laid down. Its history, that's all. There are some weird ideas in Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus but none of them have become mainstream. I like Gavin Ortland. He a is very careful and well-studied theologian. I thought what he taught on this was quite reasonable.
Maccabees doesn't just say prayers for was something Judas Maccabeus did. It specifically says that is a GOOD thing that WORKS: "It is therefore a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead, that they may be loosed from sins." 2 Maccabees 12:46. That's a prescription, not a mere description, buddy. Saying they are weird is just a subjective label you placed on it and is therefore useless if you want to have an actual dialogue. And whether you do or don't is obvious by your statement that you didn't listen to the video.
Stream starts 0:56
Suan’s Presentation starts 4:59
Suan seems unfamiliar with the messy history of ecumenical councils in the 1st millennium and necessity of papal authority to identify them. Can you tell I just finished Erick Ybarra's massive book on the papacy? 😊 I'm working on yours now William. Shocked by just how novel the first chapter is.
Very informative. Thank you. 🙏🏻🙌🏻🕊👍🏻💡
Thanks 👍
I love the mashup!
Protestants just dont like thinking about the canon too much. The way they reinterpret scriptures to mean whatever they like, it makes any additional or missing book irrelevant. They could accept Tobit and just reinterpret anything they find troublesome. You have prayers for the Dead in Maccabees and currently in Jewish modern tradition but clear evidence for a practice that existed before and apart from the catholic church. Does this phase guys like Ortlund? Not in the slightest…. People like him arent thinking well i guess the catholics didnt make this stuff up after all! Theyre thinking “the catholics added that book at somepoint but i cant trust history so ill just hold to my opinions and ignore any facts that might change my mind” all they think about is “this aint what my granny said christiality was”
Good stuff.
One minor critique: you are a Catholic, stop using CE/BCE rather than AD/BC. It's just an attempt to remove Christ from common parlance. There is no other rational reason for the change. And a bogus way to signal who is most academically orthodox.
Amen!
Thanks for sharing your detailed presentation. You make some thought-provoking points about the Protestant canon, but I'm throwing five theological flags as I believe your argument raises a few concerns that are worth discussing.
Unauthorized Judgment and Presumption (Penalty: 20 Yards - Overreach into Divine Insight)
It seems like you’re assuming Protestants lack divine guidance or legitimacy in recognizing the canon. While there are certainly differences in how we approach the formation of the canon, assuming that Protestant efforts result in an inherently flawed or illegitimate canon overlooks the possibility of genuine faith and discernment on their part. As Matthew 7:1 reminds us, “Do not judge, or you too will be judged.”
Presumption of Ambiguity in Scripture (Penalty: 10 Yards - Assumption of Scriptural Ambiguity)
By framing the Protestant canon as subject to the "Burden Problem" and the "Impartiality Problem," you imply that Scripture itself is unclear or ambiguous without the guiding authority of the Catholic Church. However, scripture affirms its clarity and ability to impart wisdom. As 1 Corinthians 14:33 states, “For God is not a God of confusion but of peace.”
Overconfidence in Defining God’s Nature (Penalty: 15 Yards - Presumption on Defining the Infinite)
Your argument suggests that only the Catholic Church can definitively determine the correct canon, implying a near-complete understanding of God’s revelation through a particular theological lens. Romans 11:33 reminds us, “Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable his judgments, and his paths beyond tracing out!”
Overstepping Human Limitations in Defining ‘True Worship’ (Penalty: 10 Yards - Presumption on Defining Worship)
Implying that only the Catholic Church’s canon allows for ‘true worship’ seems to overlook the broader reality that many Christian traditions genuinely worship God in spirit and truth, even with different canons. John 4:24 reminds us that “God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth.”
Failure to Recognize the Relational Nature of Theology (Penalty: 15 Yards - Ignoring the Relational Core of Worship)
Finally, your presentation appears to focus heavily on institutional authority, which, while important, risks overshadowing the relational and communal nature of faith and worship in the broader Christian body. As Jesus said in Matthew 22:37-40, the greatest commandments are to love God and love our neighbor, which should be at the heart of our theology.
I think we can all agree that the process of discerning the canon and engaging with Scripture requires humility, openness, and respect for how God works across different Christian traditions. Dismissing other approaches risks limiting the diverse ways in which God reveals Himself to His people.
Have you heard of the Holy Spirit?
I haven't even bothered to listen to the video. More than 2 hours.
But this whole argument is pointless. There are only so many books that could be canonical. I've been through the whole apocrypha and important letters and books that could have been cannon. Nothing makes that much difference to Christian doctrine anyway. The only thing notable is a strong theme in Tobit that almsgiving can wipe out sins. That idea appears in another couple of books aswell so you you could justify indulgences but that's about it.
Maccabees doesn't prove prayers for the dead or purgatory or anything close to it. It is simply a story what some leaders of Israel did. No commands, no doctrine laid down. Its history, that's all.
There are some weird ideas in Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus but none of them have become mainstream.
I like Gavin Ortland. He a is very careful and well-studied theologian. I thought what he taught on this was quite reasonable.
Your opening statement shows how utterly ignorant you are. Ignorance is Bliss I guess...
Maccabees doesn't just say prayers for was something Judas Maccabeus did. It specifically says that is a GOOD thing that WORKS: "It is therefore a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead, that they may be loosed from sins." 2 Maccabees 12:46. That's a prescription, not a mere description, buddy.
Saying they are weird is just a subjective label you placed on it and is therefore useless if you want to have an actual dialogue. And whether you do or don't is obvious by your statement that you didn't listen to the video.