Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Catholic and Protestant Bibles: What is the Difference?
Catholic Exchange.com ^ | 02-06-07 | Mary Harwell Sayler

Posted on 03/07/2007 9:10:18 AM PST by Salvation

Mary Harwell Sayler  
Other Articles by Mary Harwell Sayler
Printer Friendly Version
 
Catholic and Protestant Bibles: What is the Difference?

March 6, 2007

Question: What's the difference between a Catholic Bible and a Protestant one? Is our Old Testament the same as a Jewish Bible? If not, why?

Answer: The most noticeable differences occur in the number of books included and the order in which they have been arranged. Both the Jewish Bible and the Hebrew canon in a Protestant Bible (aka Old Testament) contain 39 books, whereas a Catholic Bible contains 46 books in the Old Testament. In addition, the Greek Orthodox, or Eastern Orthodox, Church accepts a few more books as canonized scripture.

To give you a quick overview of a complicated subject, here's what happened: Several hundred years before the birth of Christ, Babylonian conquerors forced the Jews to leave Jerusalem. Away from their Temple and, often, from their priests, the exiled people forgot how to read, write, and speak Hebrew. After a while, Jewish scholars wanted to make the Bible accessible again, so they translated Hebrew scriptures into the Greek language commonly spoken. Books of wisdom and histories about the period were added, too, eventually becoming so well known that Jesus and the earliest Christian writers were familiar with them. Like the original Hebrew scriptures, the Greek texts, which were known as the Septuagint, were not in a codex or book form as we're accustomed to now but were handwritten on leather or parchment scrolls and rolled up for ease in storage.

 Eventually, the Jewish exiles were allowed to return to Jerusalem where they renovated the Temple. Then, in A.D. 70, warring peoples almost completely destroyed the sacred structure, which has never been rebuilt. Without this central place of worship, the Jews began looking to the Bible as their focal point of faith, but to assure the purity of that faith, only Hebrew scriptures were allowed into the Jewish canon. By then, however, the earliest Christians spoke and read Greek, so they continued to use the Septuagint or Greek version of the Bible for many centuries. After the Reformation though, some Christians decided to accept translations into Latin then English only from the Hebrew texts that the Jewish Bible contained, so the seven additional books in the Greek translation became known as the Apocrypha, meaning "hidden." Since the books themselves were no secret, the word seemed ironic or, perhaps, prophetic because, in 1947, an Arab boy searching for a lost goat found, instead, the Dead Sea scrolls, hidden in a hillside cave.

Interestingly, the leather scrolls had been carefully wrapped in linen cloth, coated in pitch, and placed in airtight pottery jars about ten inches across and two feet high where, well-preserved, they remained for many centuries. Later, other caves in the same area yielded similar finds with hundreds of manuscripts no longer hidden. Indeed, the oldest copies of the Bible now known to exist are the Dead Sea scrolls of the Septuagint.

Because of this authentic find from antiquity, many publishers in the twentieth century added back the books of Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, First and Second Maccabees, as well as additions to Esther and Daniel. So now, when an edition of the Bible says "with Apocrypha" on the cover, the extra books from the Septuagint will usually be placed between the Old and New Testaments or at the end of the Bible. Catholic Bibles already contained those books, however, so you'll find them interwoven with other Old Testament books of history and wisdom writings. 

For the New Testament, it's a different story — and short. All of the books were written in Greek or Aramaic from the start. Although some debate occurred about which Gospels or Epistles should be included, all Christians eventually accepted all of the same 27 books in the same order. So, as long as you choose an edition that does not add explanatory notes opposed to a Catholic perspective, any reputable translation of the New Testament is fine.



TOPICS: Catholic; Evangelical Christian; Judaism; Mainline Protestant
KEYWORDS: 327; bible; catholiclist; kjv
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 1,121-1,135 next last
To: Forest Keeper
Brother, as much as you'd like to get rid of men from the equation, God has chosen to work through us - not only in our daily lives, but in the incredible work of the Incarnation. Christians cannot escape it - God has decided to allow men to participate in His salvation plan. There is no use in getting upset over this. Sacred Scripture says as much in Psalm 8.

The majority of Christians do not take such a dark view towards humans as you do.

Regards

121 posted on 03/08/2007 7:04:50 AM PST by jo kus (Humility is present when one debases oneself without being obliged to do so- St.Chrysostom; Phil 2:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: Quix

I was told by a Baptist that Maccabbess is not in the King James because of they don't believe in purgatory and in that book they pray for the dead's souls. is that the reason you don't have Macabbee?


122 posted on 03/08/2007 7:05:26 AM PST by Suzy Quzy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: ScubieNuc

Why is the King James Version named that? Was there a King James that wrote it? Distributed it?


123 posted on 03/08/2007 7:07:00 AM PST by Suzy Quzy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Quix

Protestants deny the authority Christ invested in the Pope and then confer that authority on each and every individual, as though the Holy Spirit would council each of us to reach differing and contradicting conclussions about the meaning of a variety of Biblical passages.


124 posted on 03/08/2007 7:09:47 AM PST by G Larry (Only strict constructionists on the Supreme Court!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

The Dead Sea Scrolls PROVE that the Bible that the Catholics use is all TRUE. Protestants ommitted certain books with things they left the Catholic Church about when they formed their new churches.


125 posted on 03/08/2007 7:10:59 AM PST by Suzy Quzy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kawaii
Your constant obsession with the law and the minutiae of technical commentaries is what Jesus criticized in the Pharisees. I believe that it is about the attitude of the heart. Salvation does not come from wearing a hat.
126 posted on 03/08/2007 7:18:52 AM PST by Bainbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: Suzy Quzy
What kind of Bible is the New International Version?

One of the two translations of the Bible Catholics usually choose.
Bible Translations Guide from Catholic Answers.

Literal translations are an excellent resource for serious Bible study. Sometimes the meaning of a verse depends on subtle cues in the text; these cues are only preserved by literal translations.

The disadvantage of literal translations is that they are harder to read because more Hebrew and Greek style intrudes into the English text. Compare the following renderings of Leviticus 18:6-10 from the New American Standard Bible (NAS—a literal translation) and the New International Version (NIV—a dynamic translation):

The NAS reads: "None of you shall approach any blood relative of his to uncover nakedness. . . . You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father’s wife; it is your father’s nakedness. The nakedness of your sister, either your father’s daughter or your mother’s daughter, whether born at home or born outside, their nakedness you shall not uncover. The nakedness of your son’s daughter or your daughter’s daughter, their nakedness you shall not uncover; for their nakedness is yours."

The NIV reads: "No one is to approach any close relative to have sexual relations. . . . Do not have sexual relations with your father’s wife; that would dishonor your father. Do not have sexual relations with your sister, either your father’s daughter or your mother’s daughter, whether she was born in the same home or elsewhere. Do not have sexual relations with your son’s daughter or your daughter’s daughter; that would dishonor you."


127 posted on 03/08/2007 7:44:09 AM PST by reformed_democrat ("... it's a dishonor to leave your allies." President Traian Basescu, Romania)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: Bainbridge

St Paul called it 'the commandments of God'.

Forgive me for thinking that God intended for for folks to follow that and not call it 'a dated a fad unapplicable today'.

The fact of the matter is this is plainly illustrative of what protestants have done since day one; Bible Buffet. They take what they like and they leave the rest as though it weren't even there.


128 posted on 03/08/2007 8:01:09 AM PST by kawaii (Orthodox Christianity -- Proclaiming the Truth Since 33 A.D.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: kawaii

If you hear a pastor talk about how happy he will be when Mary Cheney marries her partner, both you and I know that he is of the same ilk as any Catholic who says the same thing. Don't paint with a big brush.


129 posted on 03/08/2007 8:10:07 AM PST by irishtenor (Save the whales. Collect the whole set.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: Suzy Quzy

http://www.britannia.com/history/monarchs/mon46.html


130 posted on 03/08/2007 8:14:29 AM PST by GoLightly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: kosta50; Salvation; Kolokotronis; jo kus; annalex; Agrarian; kawaii; johnsantosjr; Quix; Sloth; ...
Saint John Chrysostom also tells us why scriptures are a necessary "second best."

Instead of quoting theologians attempting to promote their particular sects doctrines why not quote Scripture? Where does it say in Scripture that man made traditions should have more importance than the inspired Word of God?

131 posted on 03/08/2007 8:22:17 AM PST by wmfights (LUKE 9:49-50 , MARK 9:38-41)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: Suzy Quzy
This website goes pretty in depth in the defense of the King James Bible. I think it was given that name because King James commissioned the scholars to come up with a reliable English version of the Bible.

I have read many different versions, but King James is my favorite. It takes a little to get used to a first, but the way the text flows really is great.

Sincerely
132 posted on 03/08/2007 8:44:40 AM PST by ScubieNuc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: Suzy Quzy
I was told by a Baptist that Maccabbess is not in the King James because of they don't believe in purgatory and in that book they pray for the dead's souls. is that the reason you don't have Macabbee?

Macabbee's is part of the Apocrapha which are also called the Deuterocanonical Books. Here is a site which has a good discussion on why Protestants don't have the Apocrypha as part of their Bibles.

Sincerely
133 posted on 03/08/2007 9:56:00 AM PST by ScubieNuc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: ScubieNuc

Thanks.


134 posted on 03/08/2007 9:57:05 AM PST by Suzy Quzy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl; All; Dr. Eckleburg; HarleyD; Blogger; blue-duncan; Forest Keeper; Marysecretary; ...
Yes, those are important errors/omissions, imho. I agree.

Nevertheless, Angel-Gal,

it is clear to me

. . . and I think to all who wish to look Jesus squarely in His Fiercely Loving eyes . . .

That there is more than SUFFICIENT LIVING WORD IN ALL THE EARNEST TRANSLATIONS

for individuals in any congregation to read, pray over, seek God over, invite Holy Spirit's counsel over

and thereby

be led into a RELATIONSHIP WITH CHRIST OUR LORD, THE FATHER AND SPIRIT . . .

AND . . . on into a maturing OVERCOMING WALK WITH GOD IN HIS SPIRIT.

There is NO EXCUSE for not doing so with any of the earnest translations.

There is NO EXCUSE for NOT PUTTING GOD FIRST ABOVE DENOMINATION, TRADITIONS OF MEN, TRADITIONS OF SCRIPTURE, ORGANIZATION, STRUCTURE, GOVERNING COUNCILS AND MAGICSTERICALS; MOTHER, FATHER, SPOUSE, CHILDREN, DOGS, CATS AND GOLDFISH.

I think some of the issues of the different translations and translation traditions and the edifices that have been built up around them and supposedly justified by them--some of those issues, imho, are important--such as the one about the names of God. I think they are important regarding truth, walking in truth and walking led of God's Spirit in growing intmacy with Him.

# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #
NOTE: THIS IS TO THE BODY OF CHRIST GENERICALLY--for each individual's discernment as to personal applicability:
# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #

But in the pontificating and haggling over such often minutae . . . it seems that I see Christ looking around for another cat of 9 tails whip. Not only what a waste of time and energy . . . what an insult and travesty.

"Oh, but WE'RE NOT money changers gouging the serfs!"

Really.

But the serfs for whom Christ died get ground up and cast aside in all the machinery invested in traditions of men.

And, really, that's what the different Scriptural translations boil down to. Water fights over who's Scriptural tradition/translation is . . . longer, more gold encrusted, had Peter's shadow pass over it more times . . . more celebrated, applauded, sanctioned, 'proven' by the larger, older, more hide-bound and self-righteous magicsterical . . . than THOSE other.PSEUDOChristians over THERE!

Whoop-tee-do. . . . BARF.

And Christ says . . . Matthew 12:30
He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathers not with me scatters abroad.v

Are we WITH Christ, or not?

Our petty little, puny little clubs will not amount to one Twit’s worth. Even our little mostly [and MOSTLY is the most all of us can expect]—even our mostly ‘Biblical’ clubs-in-the-flesh will not measure up to anything of substance, in the final analysis.

Only what’s done for Christ will last. And what’s done for Christ is measured first, foremost and last in terms of individual choices before God—NAKED BEFORE GOD.

Appeals to:

--But God, the magicsterical said . . .
--But God, !!!!OUR!!! TRANSLATION said . . .
. . .
--But God, !!!!OUR!!! TRADITIONS said . . .
--But God !!!!OUR!!! CUSTOMS said . . .
. . .
--But God !!!!OUR!!! CONGREGATION didn’t do it THAT way; didn’t think of it THAT way. . .
--But God !!!!OUR!!! ecclesiastical fuss budgets would have never approved of THAT!

Ahhhhh so, you chose to follow them instead of me—regardless of what Holy Spirit gently counseled you day in and day out for years. Impressive. And how many Red Seas did the magicsterical lead you through? And how many manna meals in the desert did your traditions provide for you?

Vanity, vanity. All is vanity. The Pharisees were smugly, ARROGANTLY confident they were doing it absolutely correctly and that my only begotten Son could not possibly have been right. Doesn’t that strike you as a familiar attitude? If not, please replace your broken mirror.

It would be bad enough if the fossilized edifices were your idols. That’s horrifically hideous and a stench in my nostrils. But you’re more arrogant than that. Your idol is your own construction on reality. Your idol is your own ego to have been so naturally and inherently brilliant as to chosen THE PERFECT holier than thou little club to belong to/be born into. Impressive.

I’ve got news for you. There is none righteous, no, not one. What makes you think a collection of unrighteous folks is going to be MORE righteous than all the individual snotty nosed brats running around in self-whitened robes and spring-loaded titanium neon halos?

Do you REALLY THINK that I allowed clusters of self-congratulatory rabble rousers to do THEIR own political thing with MY WORD and THEN for me to rubber stamp it?

What kind of idiot God do you take me for???

Do you REALLY THINK I’ve had absolutely NO HAND in vast spread of MY WORD through the Protesties? What kind of impotent clueless God do you take me for?

Your ways are—HINT—NOT my ways. I show mercy on whom I show mercy. I bless whomever I choose to bless. I do NOT need to get the magicsterical’s rubber stamp.

I have news for you 3rd grade squabblers over who’s marbles are who’s and who’s marbles are the finer gold. EVERY EARNEST, HONEST TRANSLATION (INCLUDING BTW, A NUMBER OF SO CALLED PARAPHRASES) has had my Holy Spirit’s involvement. EVERY NEW VERSION OF MY WORD IN THE COMMON TONGUE has elaborated, unfolded, illustrated, illuminated another facet, another nuance of my Person and my Glory and my plan—a bit better than those that went before. I happen to like that else I’d have prevented it. It is MY WORD, after all. I’M THE ONE WHO ISSUED IT AND WHO IS CAREFUL TO PERFORM IT.

Do you think MY WORD is just some sort of wind-up toy that I wound up and turned loose never more to bother about it??? . . . leaving it for all the arrogant wolves to shred and tear and plaster themselves with AGAINST other BELIEVERS??? Talk about clueless!

It is MY Word. It is NOT the magicstericals’ Word. It is not the pastor/priest’s Word. It is not Mary’s Word. It is not the deacons’ Word. It is not even the Apostles’ Word. It is MY WORD. And I am Faithful to protect it and to perform it.

Strain at gnats and swallow camels if you insist. But that’s not the route to Heavenly Blessing or even approval.

I DECLARED—THOSE WHO SEEK ME SHALL FIND ME. THAT’S TRUE WITHOUT A SINGLE SCRAP OF WRITTEN SCRIPTURE IN ANY TRANSLATION. IT’S CERTAINLY TRUE WITH. I can raise up rocks to sing my praises as well as raise up rocks as children of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob or John the Beloved. It is a small thing to use any and all the translations for my glory, for my Kingdom.

Oh, I know, this or that error in this or that translation is suddenly the fulcrum on which all the universe and creation suddenly hangs in the balance? I’m not that puny. My Word is not even that puny. Do you think it’s an accident that you do not have the original autographs?

The original autographs would have just supported yet another crop of the purest of the pure Pharisees endlessly parsing what every little word and phrase meant to the elaboration of thousands of ‘illuminated’ interpretations that the truly truest truly true and righteous would be most diligent to follow—if they knew what was good for them and wanted to keep their heads.

As it is . . . THOSE WITH SOME DISCERNING HUMILITY AND UNDERSTANDING will realize that HOLY SPIRIT IS THE ONE AND THE ONE AND ONLY TO LEAD INTO ALL TRUTH.

ALL Others are usurpers, interlopers, Johnny come lately’s.

Seek ME and you shall find ME. I never told you to seek the magicsterical. I never told you to seek the spiritual leader with the purest bloodline back to Adam. I never told you to seek the comfort and security of !!!!TRADITION!!!! I never told you to seek the comfort and security of customs. I never told you to seek the comfort and security of rules and regulations; of parsing and analysis.

I told you to SEEK ME. AS IN GOD ALONE IS WORTHY! GOD ALONE IS ABLE! GOD ALONE HAS PROVIDED YOUR SALVATION. GOD ALONE IS THE PERFECTOR OF YOUR FAITH.

Oh, I know, millions will go blithely on with their RC and Protesty magicstericals as their God. They will keep telling Holy Spirit to hush up while they pour over yet more endless tedium over this or that nuance in this or that translation.

And the GOD PARADE will pass them by. Pity, that. A crying shame, horrendous pity.

SEEK ME. And you shall find ME—and Eternal Life.

Seek ANYthing else and you shall have wood, hay, stubble—chaff. And how long do you think your collection of chaff will last in the fiery furnace?

135 posted on 03/08/2007 9:58:36 AM PST by Quix (GOD ALONE IS WORTHY; GOD ALONE PAID THE PRICE; GOD ALONE IS ABLE; LOVE GOD WHOLLY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Suzy Quzy

No problem.

Like I posted to someone else, I'm not a Bible Scholar, so I rely on reading other people's work to try to figure things out.

Have fun reading.

Sincerely


136 posted on 03/08/2007 9:59:25 AM PST by ScubieNuc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: Salvation
Well, because I like you, I'll tell you "our Catholic secret"

In our bible, if you hold the book under a "black light" and quickly flip through the bottom corner front to back, you see a little "frame by frame" animation of the Pope having his hat blown off his head then trying to chase it down.

It's funny.

Of course because we have a new Pope, we all have to buy new bibles, so the animation could possible change.

(Actually I heard that the new animation shows Pope Benedict swinging a golf club)
137 posted on 03/08/2007 10:03:52 AM PST by WhiteGuy (GOP Congress - 16,000 earmarks costing US $50 billion in 2006 - PAUL2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl
On the subject of the thread, the most troubling difference I see between the Catholic/Orthodox and Protestant Bibles is with reference to the specially announced Name of God in the Song of Moses, i.e. the Rock. The Masoretic text retains the Name, the Septuagint washes over it and the Vulgate omits it.

Interesting - I'd never heard this before. I'll have to check out that research thread you linked to. Thanks for posting it!

138 posted on 03/08/2007 10:06:05 AM PST by Alex Murphy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: wmfights

Where does it say in Scripture that man made traditions should have more importance than the inspired Word of God?
= = =

INDEED.


139 posted on 03/08/2007 10:08:32 AM PST by Quix (GOD ALONE IS WORTHY; GOD ALONE PAID THE PRICE; GOD ALONE IS ABLE; LOVE GOD WHOLLY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: Quix
That there is more than SUFFICIENT LIVING WORD IN ALL THE EARNEST TRANSLATIONS for individuals in any congregation to read, pray over, seek God over, invite Holy Spirit's counsel over and thereby be led into a RELATIONSHIP WITH CHRIST OUR LORD, THE FATHER AND SPIRIT . . .

Amen, Quix! While I don't agree with or support a number of modern translations, I'm in total agreement with you. IMO there's "sufficient living word" in each that all men are rendered "without excuse" (Romans 1) when reading even the poorest of them (and I'm thinking of the horrid "New World Translation" when I say this).

140 posted on 03/08/2007 10:15:21 AM PST by Alex Murphy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 1,121-1,135 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson