the truth?
When the NT speaks of Christ's half siblings, we trust that Scripture said what it meant and meant what it said. We don't slip and slide and shuck and jive trying to come up with rationalizations for alternate words. The languages were quite robust enough to distinguish between siblings, cousins and uncles. The text mentions siblings. End of story.
Ours get read?
Quick Comparison of Bible Versions
It is often said that all Bible versions are basically the same, that their differences are just minor wording changes. Read the following comparison between the King James Version and the best-selling modern Bible translation, the New International Version, and then decide for yourself whether or not this is true.
Why did Jesus come to earth?
KING JAMES
BIBLE
Luke 9:56
For the Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them. And they went to another village.
Matt. 18:11
For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.
NEW INTERNATIONAL
VERSION
Luke 9:56
and they went to another village.
Matt. 18:11
(missing)
Is repentance important?
KING JAMES
BIBLE
Matt. 9:13
...I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.
NEW INTERNATIONAL
VERSION
Matt. 9:13
...I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.
For whom did Jesus die?
KING JAMES
BIBLE
I Cor. 5:7
...Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:
NEW INTERNATIONAL
VERSION
I Cor. 5:7
...Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed.
In Whom must you believe to be saved?
KING JAMES
BIBLE
John 6:47
Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.
NEW INTERNATIONAL
VERSION
John 6:47
I tell you the truth, he who believes has everlasting life.
Was Joseph really the father of Jesus?
KING JAMES
BIBLE
Luke 2:33
And Joseph and his mother marvelled at those things which were spoken of him.
NEW INTERNATIONAL
VERSION
Luke 2:33
The child's father and mother marveled at what was said about him.
Did Jesus give His disciples power to heal?
KING JAMES
BIBLE
Mark 3:15
...power to heal sickness, and to cast out devils.
NEW INTERNATIONAL
VERSION
Mark 3:15
...authority to drive out demons.
If it's hard to do, should we just remove it?
KING JAMES
BIBLE
Mark 11:26
But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses.
NEW INTERNATIONAL
VERSION
Mark 11:26
(missing)
Who is in charge?
KING JAMES
BIBLE
I Cor. 10:28
...for the earth is the Lord's and the fulness thereof:
NEW INTERNATIONAL
VERSION
I Cor. 10:28
(last part of verse missing)
How must we deal with our enemies?
KING JAMES
BIBLE
Matt. 5:44
...Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you.
NEW INTERNATIONAL
VERSION
Matt. 5:44
...Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.
Where did Jesus go?
KING JAMES
BIBLE
John 16:16
A little while, and ye shall not see me: and again a little while, and ye shall see me, because I go to the Father.
NEW INTERNATIONAL
VERSION
John 16:16
In a little while you will see me no more, and then after a little while you will see me.
Question: Aren't some of these things included in the NIV in the footnotes?
Answer: That is not the same as including them in the text. When a young Christian sees these passages have been moved to the footnotes, he or she will assume that they are probably not really part of God's Word. After all, the translators did not include them in the text, but simply implied that "some" manuscripts include them. What they are not told is that the vast majority of texts used by the early church included these words. They are God's Words!
Please notify me via FReepmail if you would like to be added to or taken off the Catholic Discussion Ping List.
We have more books.
| Bible Research > Canon > Disputed NT Books |
The table below shows which of the disputed New Testament books and other writings are included in catalogs of canonical books up to the eighth century. Y indicates that the book is plainly listed as Holy Scripture; N indicates that the author lists it in a class of disputed books; M indicates that the list may be construed to include the book as Holy Scripture; X indicates that the book is expressly rejected by the author. An S indicates that the author does not mention the book at all, which implies its rejection. See notes on the authorities and books following.
|
KEY TO BOOKS
|
| 1. Greek & Latin | Date | Heb. | Jas. | Jn. | Pet. | Jude | Rev. | Shep. | Apoc. | Barn. | Clem. |
| Muratorian Fragment | 170 | S | S | M | S | Y | Y | X | N | S | S |
| Origen | 225 | Y | N | N | N | N | Y | S | S | S | S |
| Eusebius of Caesarea | 324 | Y | N | N | N | N | N | X | X | X | S |
| Cyril of Jerusalem | 348 | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | S | S | S | S | S |
| Cheltenham list | 360 | S | S | Y | Y | S | Y | S | S | S | S |
| Council of Laodicea | 363 | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | S | S | S | S | S |
| Athanasius | 367 | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | X | S | S | S |
| Gregory of Nazianzus | 380 | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | S | S | S | S | S |
| Amphilocius of Iconium | 380 | Y | N | N | N | N | N | S | S | S | S |
| Rufinus | 380 | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | X | S | S | S |
| Epiphanius | 385 | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | S | S | S | S |
| Jerome | 390 | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | S | S | S | S |
| Augustine | 397 | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | S | S | S | S |
| 3rd Council of Carthage | 397 | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | S | S | S | S |
| Codex Claromontanus | 400 | M | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | S |
| Letter of Innocent I | 405 | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | S | X | S | S |
| Decree of Gelasius | 550 | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | X | S | S | S |
| Isadore of Seville | 625 | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | S | S | S | S |
| John of Damascus | 730 | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | S | S | S | S |
| 2. Syrian | Date | Heb. | Jas. | Jn. | Pet. | Jude | Rev. | Shep. | Apoc. | Barn. | Clem. |
| Apostolic Canons | 380 | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | S | S | S | S | Y |
| Peshitta Version | 400 | Y | Y | S | S | S | S | S | S | S | S |
| Report of Junilius | 550 | Y | N | N | N | N | N | S | S | S | S |
The most satisfactory treatment in English of the Church's New Testament canon is Bruce Metzger's The Canon of the New Testament: its Origin, Development, and Significance (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1987). Still useful is the earlier study by B.F. Westcott, A General Survey of the History of the Canon of the New Testament (London: MacMillan, 1855; 6th edition 1889; reprinted, Grand Rapids, 1980). For a popular conservative survey see Norman Geisler and William Nix, General Introduction to the Bible (Chicago: Moody Press, 1986).
Muratorian Fragment. The oldest known list of New Testament books, discovered by Muratori in a seventh century manuscript. The list itself is dated to about 170 because its author refers to the episcopate of Pius I of Rome (died 157) as recent. He mentions only two epistles of John, without describing them. The Apocalypse of Peter is mentioned as a book which "some of us will not allow to be read in church." See English text.
Origen. An influential teacher in Alexandria, the chief city of Egypt. His canon is known from the compilation made by Eusebius for his Church History (see below). He accepted Hebrews as Scripture while entertaining doubts about its author. See English text.
Eusebius of Caesarea. An early historian of the Church. His list was included in his Church History. He ascribed Hebrews to Paul. See English text.
Cyril of Jerusalem. Bishop of Jerusalem. The omission of Revelation from his list is due to a general reaction against this book in the east after excessive use was made of it by the Montanist cults. See English text.
Cheltenham list. A catalog of uncertain date contained in a tenth-century Latin manuscript of miscellaneous content, probably from Africa. See English text.
Council of Laodicea. The authenticity of this list of canonical books has been doubted by many scholars because it is absent from various manuscripts containing the decrees of the regional (Galatian) Council. The list may have been added later. On the omission of Revelation see Cyril of Jerusalem above. See English text.
Athanasius. Bishop of Alexandria. His list was published as part of his Easter Letter in 367. After the list he declares, "these are the wells of salvation, so that he who thirsts may be satisfied with the sayings in these. Let no one add to these. Let nothing be taken away." See English text.
Gregory of Nazianzus. Bishop of Constantinople from 378 to 382. On the omission of Revelation see Cyril of Jerusalem above. See English text.
Amphilocius of Iconium. Bishop of Iconium in Galatia. See English text.
Rufinus. An elder in the church in Aquileia (northeast Italy), and a friend of Jerome. The Latin text is given in Westcott, appendix D. See English text.
Epiphanius. Bishop of Salamis (isle of Cyprus) from 367 to 402. The Greek text is given in Westcott, appendix D. See English text.
Jerome. Born near Aquileia, lived in Rome for a time, and spent most of his later life as a monk in Syria and Palestine. He was the most learned churchman of his time, and was commissioned by the bishop of Rome to produce an authoritative Latin version (the Vulgate). The Latin text is given in Westcott, appendix D. See English text.
Augustine. Bishop of Hippo (in the Roman colony on the northern coast of western Africa). The Latin text is given in Westcott, appendix D. See English text.
Third Council of Carthage. Not a general council but a regional council of African bishops, much under the influence of Augustine. See English text.
Codex Claromontanus. A stichometric catalog from the third century is inserted between Philemon and Hebrews in this sixth century Greek-Latin manuscript of the epistles of Paul. The list does not have Hebrews, but neither does it have Philippians and 1 and 2 Thessalonians, and so many scholars have supposed that these four books dropped out by an error of transcription, the scribe's eye jumping from the end of the word ephesious (Ephesians) to the end of ebraious (Hebrews). Besides the books indicated on the table the list includes the apocryphal Acts of Paul. See English text.
Letter of Innocent I. A letter from the bishop of Rome to the bishop of Toulouse. The Latin text is given in Westcott, appendix D. See English text.
Decree of Gelasius. Traditionally ascribed to Gelasius, bishop of Rome from 492 to 496, and thought to be promulgated by him as president of a council of 70 bishops in Rome, but now regarded by most scholars as spurious, and probably composed by an Italian churchman in the sixth century. The Latin text is given in Westcott, appendix D. See English text.
Isadore of Seville. Archbishop of Seville (Spain), and founder of a school in that city. His list appears in an encyclopedia he compiled for his students. The Latin text is given in Westcott, appendix D.
John of Damascus. An eminent theologian of the Eastern Church, born in Damascus, but a monk in Jerusalem for most of his life. His list is derived from the writings of Epiphanius. The Greek text is given in Westcott, appendix D. See English text.
Apostolic Canons. One of many additions made by the final editor of an ancient Syrian book of church order called The Apostolic Constitutions. The whole document purports to be from the apostles, but this imposture is not taken seriously by any scholar today. Nevertheless, the work is useful as evidence for the opinions of a part of the Syrian churches towards the end of the fourth century. The list of canonical books was probably added about the year 380. On the omission of Revelation see Cyril of Jerusalem above. See English text.
Peshitta Version. The old Syriac version did not include the four disputed books indicated on the table. These were not generally received as Scripture in the Syrian churches until the ninth century.
Report of Junilius. An African bishop of the sixth century. After visiting the Syrian churches he wrote a work describing their practices, in which his list is given. See Latin text in Westcott, appendix D.
For a brief survey of works of this class and their place in the early Church, see Metzger, ch. 7
The Shepherd of Hermas. A autobiographical tale about a certain Hermas who is visited by an angelic Pastor (Shepherd), who imparts some legalistic teaching to him in the form of an allegory. Written probably in Rome around A.D. 100.
The Apocalypse of Peter. This work expands upon the Olivet discourse (Mat. 24-25) with descriptions of the last judgment and vivid scenes of heaven and hell. Written about A.D. 130.
The Epistle of Barnabas. A legalistic but anti-Jewish discourse on Christian life falsely ascribed to Barnabas, the missionary companion of Paul. Written probably about A.D. 120 in Italy.
The Epistle of Clement. A letter written about A.D. 100 to the church in Corinth from the church in Rome, and traditionally ascribed to Clement of Rome. The author has heard that the disorderly Corinthians have now ousted their elders, and in this letter he urges them to repent of the action.
| Bible Research > Canon > Disputed NT Books |
Luther's Treatment of the 'Disputed Books'
of the New Testament
Lutheran theologians like to make a distinction between the books of the New Testament which were unanimously received as canonical in the early church (the so-called Homologoumena or undisputed books) and the books which were disputed by some (the Antilegomena). In this class of 'disputed books' are the Epistle to the Hebrews, James, Jude, 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, and the Revelation of John. These books are considered to be canonical in modern Lutheran churches, with the caveat that they are not quite on the same level as the other books as complete expressions of evangelical truth, and should be used with care.
Luther himself took the liberty of criticizing some of these books in a polemical manner which few Lutherans today would find completely acceptable. He had a low view of Hebrews, James, Jude, and the Revelation, and so when he published his New Testament in 1522 he placed these books apart at the end. In his Preface to Hebrews, which comes first in the series, he says, "Up to this point we have had to do with the true and certain chief books of the New Testament. The four which follow have from ancient times had a different reputation."
Luther's criticism of these books will perhaps be found disgraceful and even shocking to modern Christians, but it should be pointed out that his attitude was not so shocking in the context of the late Middle Ages. Erasmus had also called into question these four books in the Annotationes to his 1516 Greek New Testament, and their canonicity was doubted by the Roman Catholic Cardinal Cajetan (Luther's opponent at Augsburg. See Reu, Luther's German Bible, pp. 175-176). The sad fact is, the Roman Catholic Church had never precisely drawn the boundaries of the biblical canon. It was not necessary to do so under the Roman system, in which the authority of the Scriptures was not much higher than that of tradition, popes, and councils. It was not until the Protestant Reformers began to insist upon the supreme authority of Scripture alone that a decision on the 'disputed books' became necessary.
If Luther's negative view of these books were based only upon the fact that their canonicity was disputed in early times, we would have expected him to include 2 Peter among them, because this epistle was doubted more than any other in ancient times. But it is evident from the prefaces that Luther affixed to these four books that his low view of them had more to do with his theological reservations against them than with any historical investigation of the canon.
From Biblical Researcher.com. (BTW, they reproduce Luther's introduction to each of the above writings farther down the page)
Sort of like some folk today, Marcion threw out all of the NT epistles, with the exception of the Pauline epistles. He also threw out all the Gospels except for Luke.
***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.***
Call it a hunch, but I suspect the Geneva Bible's footnotes are opposed to the Catholic perspective, esp Revelation 17:4.
When I was a boy my fav OT book was BEL AND THE DRAGON.
Martin Luther, being a relatively lazy type, deleted a good chunk of the Bible?
A British king, attempting to justify his own heresy and immorality, heavily edited a version to suit his own twisted lifestyle?
Protestants don't pray to imaginary friends ping.
Hardly anything cries tears of blood in our houses, either.
Our tortillas don't have images on them and our grilled cheese sandwiches don't have faces.
If they did, we'd be scared and toss 'em out, yo.
What did our pride avail us?
What have wealth and its boast-
fulness afforded us?
All of them passed like a shadow
and like a fleeting rumor;
Like a ship traversing the heaving
water,
of which, when it has passed, no
trace can be found,
no path of its keel in the waves.
One is read and one isn't?
Sometimes I am glad that I am too stupid to understand all the arguements in these areas. I am just gald that we have the scriptures and that God was gracious enough to show us how much he loves us through them. I am also thankful for those who can interpret them with authority, wisdom and love.
Mel
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.
What is to discuss? Anybody can buy all the versions he wants and compare the differences for himself. Fill a couple bookshelves and read them all. Won't damage much except the eyesight.