On Friday, we learned that Catholics are "born again" through Baptism (still some dissenting views out there, but we proved it regardless of what others choose to believe).
Yesterday, we 'discovered' that the key to recognizing where the Bible came from is to sneak a peek at the Table of Contents. Whose Bible Is It, Anyway? . BTW, that discussion thread is still active.
Today being a 'day of rest', you have an opportunity to gain some insight into the Deuterocanonical Books of the Old Testament. These appear in the Cathoic Bibles but not those of the Protestants. So what's up with that?
Hope you enjoyed this series of threads and have gained a better understanding of your catholic faith, as a result. That's doubly true for those who reside in those diocese where catechesis has been turned down to a simmer.
I surely do like Mark Shea. This was really nicely done, and he's a great guy to boot.
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/didache.html
Above URL is to the DIDACHE, it is one of the oldest Christian writing.
It was not included in the Bible because it says "If a prophet asks for money, he is a false prophet".
bookmark for later reading
Good article. But it is as old as the world. I recall I read it some two years ago on CatholicExchange. But nevertheless it is a very good post. It shatters the myth that Catholics somehow "improved" the Bible.
CERC now CatholicEducation.org is an excellent resource.
This is the article that shoved me into the Tiber. I should finish my swim this Easter. :)
Mark Shea is a gem.
http://www.biblebelievers.net/BibleVersions/kjcapocr.htm
”Though some of the Apocryphal books do have historical value, giving information regarding the inter-testament "quiet years" prior to the coming of Christ, there is no justification for giving these a place in the Holy Scripture. Their proper place is on the same level as (if not lower than) the writings of the historian Josephesus or of some other uninspired writer of that period.”
1) Neither Yeshua nor any of the Apostles cited any apocryphal/deuterocanonical book as Scripture (e.g., with the formula, "it is written," or "It says in the Scriptures . . .").2) If the apocryphal books were true Scripture, Catholics wouldn't need them as sole witnesses to their theology (e.g., quoting 2 Macc. in support for praying for the dead).
Saved for further study.
I made sure my current bible has these books in the old testament.
Bumpus ad summum