>>895808

So you're saying there was a canon before there was actually a canon? Churches all over Europe, the Holy Land and Middle East read exactly the same Gospels before canonization? Well, I'll be damned. Sounds plausible, doesn't it?

>>895855

He said offshoots. What is your denomination because I'm pretty sure it wasn't around in the Roman era? Nice cop-out.

>>895864

So how is there a consensus if there is a dispute? LOL

>>896002

Please elaborate on "they affirmed what the churches had already received as Scripture" because you claim there was no council or any kind of group effort to discern what was or wasn't God's word. :)

>>896014

Fancy words but no arguments.

>>896211

Still no arguments.

>>896189

There was a canon but actually there was a dispute at the same time. There had always been a canon but we needed to discredit Gnostic gospels no one had ever read in a single church after Jesus was resurrected and Christianity was just getting off the ground. Okay. :D