The first Christians weren't Bible Christians

[Phatt Matt s]

TC, you seem to be making the point that since the Bible wasn't available to the earliest Christians, they wouldn't have been 'Bible Christians.' Could we possible get you on Mastermind? Your special subject could be 'The Ridiculously Fucking Obvious.'

Additionally, if you're going to copy-and-paste entire passages verbatim from other websites, have the decency to source them. Otherwise, people might come to the erroneous conclusion that you're some kind of pig-ignorant slug who wouldn't know an original thought if it jumped up and bit you on the arse.

Boru

It was called a letter to a fallen away Catholic. I know from memory that the councils of Rome, Carthage, and Hippo, decided the Canon of Scripture in the late fourth century.

I was also addressing it to some of the Bible Christians who posted on this thread.

More from that letter:

The Majority of Christians did not have the Bible before the Fifteenth Century

Not only was the Bible not the Christian’s written Rule of Faith during the first four centuries, but it was not during the next thousand years, for the simple reason that there was no widespread use of paper to print on until the thirteenth century, and the moveable-type printing press itself was not invented until the year 1450, more than one thousand years after the collection of books which were considered inspired was determined.

It required several years of work, distributed over many hours of the day to produce one copy of the Bible.
For more than a thousand years Not one in 50,000 Christians had a Bible.

Would our Divine Lord have left so many souls without that book if it were necessary to man’s salvation?

Now, this is not for atheists or Catholics or orthodox Christians or Muslims. I'm writting this for Christians who beleive the Bible to be the sole rule of Faith. If you aren't infected with that disease please don't read these posts. Thank you!