"Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path" (Psalm 119:105)
"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, furnished unto all good works" (2 Timothy 3:16-17)
These verses are from the King James Version, I wanted an excuse to use my King James Bible for Catholics Bible Walsingham Publishing - King James Bible for Catholics
Okay, so, I am not going to argue over whether or not Sola Scriptura is true. That is a post for another time. But, thinking about it, I think that the canon of scripture is a problem for the Protestant. Now, I want to put a caveat, as some Protestants do use the so called "Apocrypha" such as Anglicans.
But, ultimately, I think, if you are going to establish doctrine from the Bible, you first have to know what's in it. One of the most common things I hear is that the Bible is self attesting. Okay, how? By praying and having a warm fuzzy feeling? I can have a warm fuzzy feeling about the communist manifest, it doesn't make it true.
I've also heard that some Protestants believe that if the New Testament quotes it, then we can accept it as scripture. So, how many Protestants accept Enoch as scripture? What about the books that Protestant accepts as scripture, but aren't quoted at all, or even alluded to, in the New Testament?
I think the ultimate problem with self attestation is it's circular. You have to already assume that you have inspired books, to know they're inspired. I don't think that's a good way to prove it. If only we had some sort of extrabiblical source to know which books are in the Bible.
Anyway, more, here The Canon Question and, here: Apocrypha Apocalypse
