YT YouTube2Text

YouTube2Text → Transcripts → How can Protestants know the canon of Scripture?

How can Protestants know the canon of Scripture? — Transcript

by Redeemed Zoomer · 5,772 words · 864 segments · language en · Watch on YouTube

Open in transcriber Summarize with AI Download SRT/VTT

Full transcript

0:01hey guys I'm R Zoomer and today we're
0:03going to talk about how Protestants can
0:05know the Canon of scripture I'm doing
0:07this as part of a new series made by
0:10Presbyterians for the kingdom which is
0:12the nonprofit I started to retake the
0:14pcusa um you can make a tax deductible
0:17donation to it in the description we
0:19decided to start making videos
0:20explaining reformed and Protestant
0:22theology for people who want to know
0:24more about it and to answer some
0:26potential objections people might have
0:28to it so this one is about the Canon of
0:31scripture Protestants believe in
0:33something called solos scriptor solos
0:35scriptor is Latin for the Bible alone
0:37and a lot of people misunderstand it a
0:39lot of people think it means the Bible
0:40is our only Authority that's not what it
0:42means it means the Bible is our only
0:44infallible Authority and that means the
0:46Bible is our highest Authority but a
0:49common question is okay if the Bible is
0:51the highest Authority then how do you
0:53know which books go in the Bible so
0:55that's the question we're going to be
0:57answering today uh how do we know which
0:59books belong in the Bible
1:00do we really have a fallible list of
1:02infallible books and is it true that
1:05Martin Luther removed seven books from
1:07the Bible uh so this question is
1:08actually really easy to answer but a lot
1:10of Protestants just don't know how to
1:12answer this question so they get tripped
1:13up on it it's kind of like how the
1:15Trinity is really easy to explain when
1:17you actually study the councils and
1:19church history but when a lot of Muslims
1:21press Christians on the Trinity a lot of
1:23Christians just don't know how to answer
1:25it's the same with Protestants a lot of
1:26modern Protestants don't know that the
1:28Protestant tradition has had answers to
1:30these questions for centuries just the
1:32way a lot of Christians when they get
1:33challenged by atheist or Muslim
1:35questions they don't realize the
1:36Christian tradition has been answering
1:38these questions for centuries all right
1:40so the simple answer is the Bible is
1:43just a collection of writings from the
1:44prophets and the apostles so the
1:46Presbyterian Church is clear that the
1:48scriptures get their Authority from God
1:50they don't get the authority because
1:52some human gave them Authority it's not
1:55like some church or some Pastor said uh
1:58these books are scripture because we say
2:00so and that's the only reason there's
2:01scripture because God gives them the
2:03authority but how do we know which books
2:05have God's Authority it's the recorded
2:08teachings of the prophets and the
2:09apostles the prophets are people in the
2:11Old Testament who spoke with God's
2:13Authority and Jesus affirms their
2:15Authority because Jesus affirms the
2:17Divine authority of written scripture
2:20Jesus also gave the apostles the same
2:22prophetic Authority so when we receive
2:24their writings we receive the New
2:26Testament as having the same prophetic
2:28Authority as the Old Testament so this
2:30is the basic answer this doesn't answer
2:32all potential objections but this is the
2:33starting Place how do we know what goes
2:36in the scripture it's the record of the
2:38prophets and the apostles so more
2:39specifically Jesus talks about scripture
2:41a lot sometimes he calls it scripture
2:43sometimes he talk calls it Moses or
2:45Moses and the prophets the Jews of
2:47Jesus's time had this three-fold
2:49division of the Old Testament called the
2:51law which is synonymous with the law of
2:53Moses or Moses the law the prophets and
2:55the writings sometimes the writings are
2:57just subsumed under the category of the
2:59the prophets but basically it refers to
3:01the Old Testament as a whole the law the
3:03prophets and the writings so that's the
3:05Old Testament and Jesus gives the
3:07authority to the Old Testament so if you
3:09believe Jesus is authoritative which
3:11every Christian does if they are
3:12Christian it's in the name Christian
3:14then we believe the Old Testament is
3:16also authoritative not just
3:17authoritative but infallible because
3:18Jesus said the scripture cannot be
3:20broken in the scripture of Jesus's day
3:22was the Old Testament the New Testament
3:24hadn't been written yet so what about
3:25the New Testament well like we said
3:27Jesus gave the apostles the same
3:29prophetic Authority as he gave to the
3:30prophets in the Old Testament and the
3:32New Testament is the collection of the
3:34writings of the Apostles just the way
3:36the Old Testament is the collection of
3:37the writings of the prophets so that's
3:39the basis for how we get our list but
3:41some someone might ask is the list of
3:43books infallible because we believe that
3:45the books are infallible but is our list
3:48of books infallible and our answer is no
3:51and it doesn't have to be because
3:52there's an important distinction between
3:54authoritative and infallible basically
3:57every criticism of protestantism fails
4:00to make this distinction you you'll see
4:02this again and again authoritative isn't
4:04the same as infallible some people think
4:06that just because the Canon is fallible
4:08meaning it has the possibility to be
4:11wrong that means it will be wrong no if
4:14you live your life thinking that nothing
4:16is authoritative if it's not infallible
4:18then you're going to be a total
4:19anarchist because the vast majority of
4:20authorities in the real world like
4:22pastors or parents or government are
4:24fallible authorities and we're going to
4:25get to that later so just because the
4:27matter of scripture like the material of
4:29scripture just because the material of
4:30scripture is infallible doesn't mean the
4:32form of scripture is infallible the form
4:35of scripture includes the list of books
4:37it includes the translations of
4:38scripture that we use like I use the NIV
4:41translation some people use the KJV
4:43translation the translations of
4:45scripture aren't infallible and the
4:46translations can always be corrected by
4:48better translations the interpretation
4:50of scripture is not infallible
4:51everything we think every time we are
4:54reading something we are reading our own
4:55interpretation of it and none of us are
4:57individually infallible I maybe you
5:00think you're infallible guess what
5:01you're not none of us are individually
5:03infallible so even if we are reading a
5:05text that we are certain is infallible
5:07we can't know if our interpretation of
5:09that text is infallible and even if we
5:11have someone else who is infallible to
5:13interpret that text for us we still
5:14don't know if our interpretation of them
5:17is infallible so unless you are
5:19infallible you will always have a
5:21problem of fallibility somewhere along
5:23the chain um and the organization of
5:26scripture like the cannon of scripture
5:28and the recognition of scripture that's
5:30all fallible that doesn't mean it's
5:31unreliable if it was unreliable then we
5:33couldn't trust any written document ever
5:36so once again fallible does not mean
5:38unreliable infallible does not mean not
5:41authoritative so I like to say the Bible
5:43is like a destructible box of
5:45indestructible weapons and weapons is a
5:47good analogy because the word of God in
5:49scripture is compared to a double-edged
5:51sword so the fact that there's this
5:53destructible box to transport these
5:56indestructible weapons which are the
5:57books of scripture that doesn't mean
6:00that um the box is useless because the
6:02box is helpful for um transporting the
6:05weapons like theoretically we don't even
6:07need like a Canon theoretically we could
6:10just individually recognize the books as
6:13prophetic Authority because they come
6:14from God the Canon is very helpful to
6:16organize these individually infallible
6:19books um so the Canon is normatively
6:23necessary it's not absolutely necessary
6:24because there's been cases of people
6:26having the scriptures benefit them
6:28without having a Canon so at first
6:30glance a fallible list of infallible
6:32scriptures can seem like a problem but
6:34we're going to show why this is not a
6:35problem at all because there's many
6:37examples of scripture doing what it
6:39needs to do without being part of some
6:41infallible Canon list the biggest
6:43example is that Jesus held the people of
6:45his date to the authority of scriptures
6:47even though there was no infallible list
6:49of books back then there wasn't this
6:51strict closed Cannon for example the
6:53Pharisees held to basically the same Old
6:55Testament cannon that we do today
6:57where's the Sadducees another group that
6:59oppos Jesus only held to the Torah and
7:01this didn't destroy the authority of
7:03scriptures Jesus simply held the
7:05Pharisees to the books that they
7:07considered authoritative and when Jesus
7:08confronts the Sadducees he only quotes
7:10from books in the Torah um so what this
7:13means is that an infallible Canon is not
7:16necessary for the scriptures to be
7:18recognized as infallible so Jesus
7:22there's many examples of this but in
7:23Mark 12:10 Jesus holds people to the
7:26authority of scripture he says haven't
7:27you read this passage of scripture the
7:29stone the builders rejected has been the
7:31Cornerstone and the Cornerstone is Jesus
7:34Jesus is telling people this Jesus is
7:35trying to point out to people that the
7:37scriptures testify to him so someone
7:40back then could have said well how do
7:42you know that this is really in the
7:44Bible how do you know this is really
7:45scripture um the the cannon of scripture
7:48was not a problem for Jesus it shouldn't
7:50be a problem for us and it wasn't a
7:51problem for the people that Jesus was
7:53talking to when people objected to Jesus
7:55they they made some objections their
7:57objection was never oh well how do you
7:59know that that's in the Canon of
8:00scripture if you don't have an
8:01infallible Canon none of them ever said
8:03that so this is mainly sophistry in my
8:05opinion also uh there was no like
8:08official Church uh Church Cannon of
8:11scripture until the 4th Century uh but
8:14before that before the church ever
8:16canonized the New Testament we see
8:18Church fathers appealing to the New
8:20Testament to refute various heresies the
8:23biggest example is St irus because he
8:25has this huge work called against
8:28heresies where he refused a lot of
8:29Gnostic Heretics he refers to the New
8:32Testament books as scripture he uses the
8:35authority of the New Testament
8:36scriptures meaning the writings of the
8:38Apostles irus says that um we have
8:41learned from none other the plan of our
8:42Salvation than from the apostles who
8:44proclaimed it in public and then later
8:46wrote it down in scripture so there's no
8:49infallible Canon at St aras's time in
8:52fact there's not even an official cannon
8:54at all there's just a gradual
8:56recognition of certain books as coming
8:57from the apostles but irus is still able
9:00to use those
9:01books as authoritative as infallible to
9:04refute the Heretics even though there's
9:06no infallible Canon of scripture at this
9:08time and even when the fourth century
9:10councils did canonize parts of the New
9:13Testament they weren't final and they
9:15sometimes contradicted each other
9:17especially on the Old Testament Cannon
9:19like the New Testament Cannon was pretty
9:20much settled by the 4th Century but the
9:23Old Testament canon in like the Catholic
9:24church for example wasn't settled until
9:26the Reformation uh before the
9:28Reformation it was kind of up in the air
9:30whether the dter canonical books like
9:32macbes or Judith or Tobit were on the
9:34same level as the rest of scripture um
9:38so the Catholics didn't have any
9:40infallible Council to clarify the Canon
9:43until 1546 in the Council of Trent so
9:46for from the time between 33 ad to 1546
9:50the Catholics didn't have an infallible
9:52Cannon but it was still good enough for
9:53them so Protestants don't believe the
9:55Canon is ever infallible but it's not a
9:57problem for us because it wasn't a
9:58problem for the Catholics before the
10:00Council of Trent it wasn't a problem for
10:02St irenaeus it wasn't a problem for the
10:04Jews in Jesus's name Jesus's day who
10:06were trying to recognize the
10:08scriptures okay so some people are still
10:10not convinced some people still insist
10:13that for a book to be recognized as
10:15infallible it needs to be in an
10:17infallible Cannon they say oh a fallible
10:19collection of infallible books is
10:21ridiculous and I'm a math major like I
10:24study mathematics in college and this is
10:27an absurd statement I'm sorry so so to
10:30uh see how absurd this is we can reduce
10:32it to a mathematical statement what
10:34they're basically saying is X is
10:36infallible if and only if it is in some
10:39infallible set let's call it X1 so this
10:42is like saying oh x y and z are
10:44different books of scripture and we can
10:45only recognize them as infallible if
10:47they are in some larger set X1 let's say
10:50X1 represents the Canon if they're in
10:52some infallible Cannon so that means you
10:53can only recognize the scriptures as
10:55infallible if they're in an infallible
10:57list if they're in some infallible Canon
10:59or in mathematical terms if they're in
11:02some infallible set but if this first
11:04statement is true then that means for X1
11:08for this thing to be infallible that
11:10itself needs to be in some infallible
11:12set X2 to make it more concrete because
11:15this might be too abstract for some
11:16people um if some people might say oh
11:20there's no table of contents in the
11:21Bible there's no divinely inspired table
11:24of contents if there were then we would
11:26know what the books of scripture are but
11:27we can't know what the books of
11:28scripture are infallibly because there's
11:30no infallible table of contents but well
11:32let's Suppose there was a divinely
11:34inspired table of contents how do we
11:36know that that divinely inspired table
11:38of contents belongs in the scripture
11:40then we would need a second table of
11:41contents that includes the first table
11:43of contents but how do we know that in
11:46the Bible so basically if this idea that
11:49um something can only be infallible if
11:51it's in an infallible set if that's true
11:53then that goes on to Infinity then you
11:54need an infinite chain of infallible
11:57authorities confirming other infallible
11:59authorities as I said earlier unless you
12:02are infallible somewhere along the way
12:04you need to accept an in somewhere along
12:07the way you need to accept a fallible
12:09recognition of certain infallible
12:11authorities and everyone has a fallible
12:14list of infallible things whether that's
12:16books of the Bible or ecumenical
12:17councils or papal decrees uh you can
12:20never have an infinite chain of
12:23infallible lists of infallible things so
12:26what I'm saying is that fallibility is
12:29inevitable every Christian group that
12:31believes something is infallible has
12:34some fallible list of infallible things
12:36somewhere along the way so for example
12:39the East believes that the only
12:40infallible authority of the church today
12:43is The ecumenical councils but only the
12:44councils that are received as ecumenical
12:46councils by the church and the church is
12:48only infallible in councils so therefore
12:51the Eastern Orthodox have a fallible
12:53list of infallible ecumenical councils
12:56there's no one ecumenical council
12:59that has an infallible list of all the
13:02other ecumenical councils and even if
13:03there was how would you know that that
13:05ecumenical council is infallible without
13:07it being received by the church but the
13:09reception of the church is only
13:10infallible if there's an ecumenical
13:11council of the church so I'm not saying
13:13this discredits the process I'm not
13:15saying this discredits Eastern Orthodoxy
13:17I'm just saying everyone has that at
13:19some point everyone has some fallible
13:21list of infallible authorities that's
13:23why different Eastern Orthodox people
13:25different Eastern Orthodox authorities
13:27will often disagree on which ecumenical
13:29councils are infallible some will say
13:30it's just the first seven some will say
13:32there's nine ecumenical councils some
13:34will say it's The ecumenical councils
13:36plus the pan Orthodox councils in the
13:38second Millennium uh so they have a
13:40fallible list of infallible councils and
13:43that's not a problem for them they still
13:45function even if there's not some
13:47infallible list the same is true of
13:49Roman Catholics they believe that the
13:51councils are infallible if they're
13:52approved by the pope and there's also ex
13:54Cathedral papal statements which can be
13:56infallible Catholics do not believe the
13:58pope is always infall and everything he
13:59says they believe when the pope makes an
14:01ex Cathedral papal statement that is
14:03infallible but Catholics don't have an
14:05infallible list of EX cathedr papal
14:08statements sometimes they disagree on
14:10which statements of popes have actually
14:12been ex cathedra some say there's only
14:14been like two infallible statements of
14:16the Pope some say there's been more than
14:18that even so they don't have this
14:20infallible list of Bible books plus
14:23councils plus papal decrees they just
14:25don't have it so it's not a problem then
14:27if Protestants have a fallible list of
14:30infallible books once again fallible
14:33does not mean unreliable if you think
14:35fallible means unreliable then you
14:37cannot function at all and that's what
14:39I'm trying to say a lot of people think
14:41that a fallible church or a fallible
14:43canid is not reliable and therefore
14:44can't have authority this is a very
14:46severe either or fallacy where either
14:48you have an infallible Authority or you
14:50have no Authority and most criticisms of
14:53protestantism have no concept of a
14:56fallible Authority that is still an
14:58authority it's a very modernist way of
15:01thinking actually people didn't use to
15:02think like this by the way it's very
15:04modernist to think that an authority
15:06must be infallible for it to be a real
15:08Authority and this is a very dangerous
15:10way of thinking it's a very modern
15:11Enlightenment way of thinking because
15:13the vast majority of authorities that
15:15God places above us whether parents or
15:17pastors or government are fallible and a
15:19lot of the justification for rebelling
15:22against these authorities which happens
15:23in modernity comes from this idea that
15:26an authority must be infallible for to
15:29be an authority at all people will say
15:31oh my parents are fallible so I can
15:33rebel against them I mean people won't
15:34use that exact language they'll just say
15:36oh my parents have problems so that's
15:37why I'm rebelling but even Christians
15:39today do this Christians used to not do
15:41this uh the Bible says that in the end
15:44times with in the wicked times there
15:45will be people rebelling against their
15:46parents it used to not be normal for
15:49kids to rebel against their parents that
15:50used to be a a strange thing but because
15:53of modern culture because modern culture
15:55said oh if an authority isn't perfect
15:57you can rebel against it um
15:59lots of people think that their parents
16:01having problems is a justification to
16:02rebel against them and people say oh the
16:04government isn't perfect so I'm going to
16:06rebel against the government and people
16:08say oh my pastor isn't perfect my pastor
16:10can get things wrong so I don't have to
16:11obey my pastor yeah once again it's a
16:13very modernist idea to say that if an
16:15authority is fallible then it's
16:16unreliable so a fallible Cannon for
16:18Protestants is still a reliable Cannon
16:20it's still an authoritative
16:22Canon okay now some people say okay if
16:24the Canon's authoritative then why did
16:26Luther remove seven books from the Canon
16:28of scripture
16:29and this is just not true it it it would
16:33be a good argument if it was true it's
16:34just straight up not true uh so it's not
16:36like the church had one consistent
16:39Cannon for 1500 years until Luther came
16:41along was like I don't agree with these
16:43books so I'm just going to take them out
16:44that's not what happened the church was
16:47not really settled on the cannon until
16:49after the Reformation Luther did not
16:51remove any books that were completely
16:53agreed upon he actually tried to briefly
16:56he tried to remove James in Revelation
16:58but every else didn't let him do it
16:59because Luther was never the pope of
17:01protestantism Luther was one of many
17:05many reformers and everyone else was
17:07like dude stop it that's ridiculous and
17:09then he dropped it and that was it in
17:11fact Luther had no impact on the Bibles
17:14we have today um the reasons that
17:17Protestants made the decisions they did
17:18about the Canon didn't have that much to
17:21do with the person of Luther himself
17:23maybe if you're in the Lutheran
17:23tradition kind of but generally speaking
17:26no so the shorter Old Testament Cannon
17:30and the longer Old Testament Cannon were
17:32both options in the church up until the
17:34Reformation because Cardinal ctin was
17:37Luther's main opponent in the Catholic
17:39Church Cardinal kitin still agreed with
17:41Luther on the cannon and even uh during
17:43the Reformation there were some
17:44Protestants who held to a longer Cannon
17:46so it's not like oh the Catholics had
17:48always held to the longer Cannon till
17:49the Protestants came along made a
17:51shorter Cannon no during the Reformation
17:53there were Catholics who held to the
17:54longer Cannon Catholics who held to the
17:55shorter Cannon Protestants who held to
17:57the longer Cannon Protestants held to
17:58the shorter Canon uh so before the
18:00Reformation the Doral canonical books
18:02meaning the books that are in the longer
18:04Canon but not the shorter Canon the
18:05Doral canonical books were seen as
18:07scripture but not on the same level as
18:10the rest some church fathers say yeah
18:11these are scriptures that you can read
18:12in church but they're not canonical
18:14scriptures in fact St feret of Moscow in
18:17the Orthodox Church in the 1600s has the
18:20Protestant Canon of scripture he says
18:21that the other books you know you can
18:22read them in church they're important
18:23but they're not on the same level as the
18:25rest of scripture even the modern
18:27Orthodox dogmatic theology book by
18:29Michael pansi which I read when I was
18:31studying Eastern Orthodoxy even that
18:33book says basically the same thing that
18:35yeah the the Doral conical books are not
18:37on the same level as the rest of
18:38scripture in fact the Orthodox uh
18:41Theologian Craig trua um who does a lot
18:43of online Orthodox apologetics he
18:45basically admits that the 66 book Canon
18:48of scripture is the most common canon in
18:50church history so it's not like Luther
18:52was the first person to think of using
18:54the the shorter Cannon of the Old
18:55Testament so after the Reformation
18:57Catholics settled on the longer Cannon
18:59and Protestants settled on the shorter
19:00Cannon but it's not like it was
19:01arbitrary Protestants had reasons for
19:03doing this and we'll go over them uh so
19:06this is not this video is not really an
19:08argument for why the shorter Cannon is
19:09the correct Cannon this is more of an
19:11argument of how Protestants can have a
19:13cannon of scripture but here's why just
19:16in summary why Protestants settled
19:18eventually on the 66 book Cannon so the
19:20main reason Protestants don't believe
19:22that dorical books are on par with the
19:24rest of scripture is because they're not
19:25used as part of the Jewish cannon in
19:27Romans 32 says the Jews are entrusted
19:29with the Oracles of God now some people
19:31will say oh the Jews changed their
19:33cannons so the modern Jewish Cannon
19:35isn't the same thing as the Jewish
19:36cannon in Jesus's day but Josephus who
19:38is a first century Jewish historian
19:40records the Jews using the same cannon
19:42that they do today he records the Jews
19:44using the same Canon as the Protestants
19:45do today and the second reason is that
19:48whichever Old Testament Canon Jesus and
19:49the apostles used should be the
19:50normative Canon for us today and they
19:52likely use the Jewish shorter Old
19:54Testament Cannon some people will say oh
19:56well they use the the sepagan because
19:58they spoke Greek
19:59but the thing is there's many septu
20:00agents floating around there's not just
20:01one unified septu agent and it's not
20:04100% clear that they did and regardless
20:07of which translation of the Old
20:09Testament they used it is telling that
20:11they almost all of the New Testament
20:14quotes of the Old Testament are from the
20:15protoc Canon and not the dudo Canon some
20:18people say there's some vague references
20:20to the dudo canonical books but a vague
20:22reference isn't the same as a quotation
20:24most of the direct quotations are from
20:25the uh protoc Canon now some people will
20:27point out oh the protoc Canon I mean the
20:29New Testament never quotes like Esther
20:31which is in the Protestant canons so
20:32does that mean we have to get rid of
20:33Esther well not really all that we're
20:36saying is that because the New Testament
20:38almost entirely quotes from the Jewish
20:40Canon of today uh then we can trust that
20:43as the most accurate Canon and Esther is
20:45part of that so we just sort of accept
20:46it with the package so the third reason
20:49is that the Old Testament books derive
20:51their Authority from the prophets like
20:52we said in the beginning the Old
20:54Testament books get their Authority from
20:55the prophets and the New Testament books
20:57get their Authority from the apostles
20:59really they all get their Authority from
21:00God but the prophets and the apostles
21:02speak for God and their the Doral
21:04canonical books were written after
21:06Malachi who was the last prophet and we
21:08know this because one of the dudo
21:09canonical books mccabes actually admits
21:11this it says there were no prophets
21:13during that time it was during the inter
21:14testamental period during the 400 years
21:16of Silence so these three reasons are
21:19why it makes sense to accept the 66 book
21:23Cannon now this is not an infallible
21:25Cannon if somewhere along the way some
21:27scholarship reveal
21:29that I don't know maybe barook was
21:31actually from a prophet or maybe some
21:32scholarship reveals that oh certain
21:35chapters of these books uh are actually
21:37not authentic yeah um there there can
21:39always be minor updates to the scripture
21:41and there have been cuz you know there's
21:43like the longer ending of Mark like that
21:45whole debate or the the woman caught in
21:47adultery which is not originally in the
21:48original manuscript there's little
21:50tweaks and stuff but it's not like
21:52Protestants are just Reinventing the
21:53cannon every 10 years that that just
21:55doesn't happen all right so the next is
21:58a question of normative Authority so
22:01sometimes we'll say we don't have an
22:02infallible Canon we have an
22:03authoritative Cannon but the criticism
22:05is okay but how do you have any
22:07normative Authority outside the Bible if
22:09the Bible is the only infallible
22:11Authority they don't have any infallible
22:12Authority outside the Bible then anyone
22:15can just choose whatever Canon they want
22:17if you think that the Bible is above all
22:19traditions and the Canon is a tradition
22:21which it is uh then anyone can just
22:24choose their own Cannon and that's not
22:26true because Protestants do have have
22:28normative Authority it should be pointed
22:30out that normative Authority is a very
22:33modern word which doesn't often get
22:35defined very clearly uh I did a Google
22:38engram to see when the word when the
22:40phrase normative Authority was actually
22:42used and it's a very very modern thing
22:44like most of its usage is like after
22:462000 so it's a very modern term and the
22:49reason you don't see the reformers
22:50addressing the question of normative
22:52authorities cuz that really wasn't a
22:53concept back then normative Authority is
22:55kind of a post-modern concept but if
22:58Define it as a legitimate Authority that
23:00must be obeyed that's the Google
23:02definition then Protestants do have that
23:05because Protestants say the church is a
23:07normative Authority now a lot of times
23:09criticism criticisms of protestantism
23:11are really criticisms of evangelicalism
23:14or non- denominationalism where it's
23:16just me and my Bible and my personal
23:18relationship and if I go to church it's
23:20only like a completely voluntary thing
23:22so I can fellowship with other believers
23:24on the same personal Journey as me
23:26that's not protestantism though
23:29historic protestantism Mainline
23:31protestantism has the church as an
23:33authority not just one of many
23:35authorities but the normative Authority
23:36you're supposed to submit to your church
23:39it's not up to each individual
23:40Protestant to decide the Canon for
23:42himself he submits to the normative
23:44authority of his denomination what's my
23:46normative Authority the pcusa the
23:48Presbyterian Church USA which is in
23:50communion with all of their Mainline
23:51Protestant denominations it's not like I
23:54went on this big personal journey of
23:56investigating each book for the the
23:58Bible myself to see if it's really in
24:00the Canon no I just accept the normative
24:03authority of the pcusa when they gave me
24:06a Bible I trust that they are an
24:08authoritative church so I'm like yeah
24:10this is probably correct now if someone
24:12gives me some really good reason to
24:14doubt that Canon then I'll that's one
24:16thing but that's just not what happens
24:19and that's not the way normative
24:20Authority Works normative Authority is
24:22not synonymous with infallible Authority
24:25like we said an authority can still be
24:27an authority it can still be normative
24:28Authority even if it's not
24:31infallible and some people Define
24:32normative Authority as an authority that
24:34can actually enforce itself well yes the
24:36church can enforce itself once again
24:39protestantism is not evangelicalism it's
24:42not non- denominationalism in non-
24:43denominationalism if your church tries
24:45to enforce something you can just split
24:46off and start a new church that's not
24:48what Mainline protestantism is why it's
24:51in the name Mainline Protestant Mainline
24:54protestantism is defined as the
24:56Protestant denominations that did not
24:59split off you might say oh it wasn't the
25:00Reformation is Schism no Luther got
25:02kicked out but ever since then the
25:04mainline Protestant denominations have
25:06been pretty consistent now the
25:08Evangelical denominations they're the
25:10ones that split off for Mainline
25:12protestantism so I do think the question
25:13of Norma of authority really is a
25:15problem for evangelicalism not just non-
25:17denominationalism but also Protestant
25:19offshoot denominations like if you can
25:21split off from the mainline Protestant
25:22Church voluntarily without getting
25:25kicked out which is how all the
25:26conservative offo denominations formed
25:28then what prevents endless Schism
25:30whenever anyone disagrees with his
25:32denomination so that is really a problem
25:34but if you're Mainline Protestant like I
25:36am your Mainline Protestant denomination
25:38is your normative
25:40Authority and there's also a lot of
25:42epistemic nihilism when people really
25:44challenge the Canon of scripture because
25:46theolog is never as clear-cut as we like
25:48in our Modern Age we want every argument
25:51to be able to be summarized in a tweet
25:53but the church has never worked this way
25:55um and the church has never been so
25:57clear cut about theology ever no
25:59theology is ever super clearcut in the
26:02Bible there's always been certain verses
26:04chapters and even books which are
26:05debated that does not destroy the
26:08authority of scripture overall even if
26:10there are some books in the Bible which
26:11have been debated that doesn't destroy
26:13the authority of the whole Bible so just
26:15because Esther or third John have been
26:17debated doesn't mean anyone in their
26:19right mind would question Matthew or
26:21Exodus as being Canon it's like uh this
26:24is a level of scrutiny that never gets
26:26applied to other things like no nobody
26:28questions like oh how can you read
26:30Plato's writings without an infallible
26:32Cannon of which writings are actually
26:35from Plato right you can just have a
26:37general sense you follow the general
26:39consensus It's like Star Wars fans will
26:42debate whether the sequels are Canon
26:44which I don't think they are I don't
26:45care what Disney says I'm a I'm a Star
26:47Wars Protestant I protest the authority
26:51of of Disney to make crappy TV shows
26:54every year um where the where the main
26:58character character is some child social
26:59justice Warrior I'm I'm a Star Wars
27:02Protestant I reject the canonicity of
27:05movies 789 but some people think that
27:08the sequels are Canon um Jordan Cooper
27:12uh who's a Lutheran YouTuber he thinks
27:13that the sequels are Canon and that is
27:16anathema okay no but nobody in their
27:18right mind who's a Star Wars fan would
27:20question whether a New Hope or Empire
27:22Strikes Back is Canon still some people
27:25say oh if you want to talk about
27:27scripture if you want to say that
27:29scripture is your highest Authority you
27:31must give a complete definition of which
27:33books are in scripture and this is just
27:35absurd you can talk about Americans
27:38without giving a list of every single
27:40American if I said Americans are the
27:42best which is because Americans are the
27:44best I don't need to give you a list of
27:46every single American nor do I need to
27:49resolve every debatable case of who
27:51counts as an American like nobody would
27:53question whether I don't know George
27:55Washington is American I mean maybe you
27:57could question that because I don't
27:59think he was born in America um nobody
28:02could I'm not sure I'm not sure if he
28:03was like born overseas or if he was just
28:05born in the colonies before they gained
28:07independence I don't know that's an
28:08example um you could debate whether an
28:11immigrant who moved here two years ago
28:13is American but nobody would really
28:15debate whether someone who's been here
28:17since the founding of America and is
28:19descended from Mayflower people no one
28:21would debate whether that's an American
28:23but just because there's a debate about
28:25who counts is American and just because
28:27you can't give a list of every American
28:29that doesn't mean you can't talk about
28:30Americans as a category this is like
28:32really really basic stuff so um when
28:35people are raising these challenges
28:36that's just epistemic nihilism which is
28:38not how people function in the real
28:40world all right that's about it for this
28:42video so this video is made by
28:44Presbyterians for the kingdom and we
28:47would like to make resources to explain
28:49reformed theology on the internet in an
28:51accessible Manner and once again I'm the
28:53one who puts these videos together
28:55because I'm the one with the YouTube
28:56platform but I'm doing so under the
28:58guidance of pastors and seminarians and
29:00other people in my organization so I'm
29:02the spokesperson but it's not just me
29:04behind this so you can donate to us uh
29:07at Kingdom
29:08preses there's going to be a link in the
29:10description we're also part partnered
29:12working in collaboration with theology
29:14matters which is an organization of
29:16conservative pcusa Seminary professors
29:19so thank you guys for watching this
29:20video and I will see you all later God
29:21bless

About this transcript

This page contains the full transcript of How can Protestants know the canon of Scripture? by Redeemed Zoomer, generated from the public captions YouTube serves with the video. The transcript has 5,772 words across 864 segments, with the original timestamps preserved so you can click any line to jump to that moment in the embedded player.

What you can do with it

Use the transcript to take notes, quote the speaker, build a study guide, generate a summary with ChatGPT or Claude via the YouTube Summary tool, or export it as a timed subtitle file with YouTube to SRT. You can also re-open it in the transcriber to translate the transcript into 100+ languages.

Free YouTube transcript tool

YouTube2Text is a free YouTube transcript generator — no signup, no daily limit. Paste any YouTube link and get the full transcript instantly, with timestamps, click-to-jump, translation to 100+ languages, AI prompts for ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini, and exports to TXT, SRT, VTT, or Markdown.