Posted on 12/25/2012 9:50:07 AM PST by narses
So why does the Catholic Bible have 73 books, while the Protestant Bible has only 66 books? Some protestants believe that the Catholic Church added 7 books to the Bible at the Council of Trent in response to Luther’s Reformation, but that couldn’t be further from the truth.
In about 367 AD, St. Athanasius came up with a list of 73 books for the Bible that he believed to be divinely inspired. This list was finally approved by Pope Damasus I in 382 AD, and was formally approved by the Church Council of Rome in that same year. Later Councils at Hippo (393 AD) and Carthage (397 AD) ratified this list of 73 books. In 405 AD, Pope Innocent I wrote a letter to the Bishop of Toulouse reaffirming this canon of 73 books. In 419 AD, the Council of Carthage reaffirmed this list, which Pope Boniface agreed to. The Council of Trent, in 1546, in response to the Reformation removing 7 books from the canon (canon is a Greek word meaning “standard”), reaffirmed the original St. Athanasius list of 73 books.
So what happened? How come the King James Bible only has 66 books? Well, Martin Luther didn’t like 7 books of the Old Testament that disagreed with his personal view of theology, so he threw them out of his bible in the 16th Century. His reasoning was that the Jewish Council of Jamnia in 90 AD didn’t think they were canonical, so he didn’t either. The Jewish Council of Jamnia was a meeting of the remaining Jews from Palestine who survived the Roman persecution of Jerusalem in 70 AD. It seems that the Jews had never settled on an official canon of OT scripture before this. The Sadducees only believed in the first 5 books of the Bible written by Moses (the Pentateuch), while the Pharisees believed in 34 other books of the Old Testament as well. However, there were other Jews around from the Diaspora, or the dispersion of the Jews from the Babylonian captivity, who believed that another 7 books were also divinely inspired. In fact, when Jesus addressed the Diaspora Jews (who spoke Greek) he quoted from the Septuagint version of the scriptures. The Septuagint was a Greek translation by 70 translators of the Hebrew Word. The Septuagint includes the disputed 7 books that Protestants do not recognize as scriptural.
Initially, Luther wanted to kick out some New Testament Books as well, including James, Hebrews, Jude, and Revelation. He actually said that he wanted to “throw Jimmy into the fire”, and that the book of James was “an epistle of straw.” What is strange is that Luther eventually accepted all 27 books of the New Testament that the Catholic Pope Damasus I had approved of in 382 AD, but didn’t accept his Old Testament list, preferring instead to agree with the Jews of 90 AD. Luther really didn’t care much for Jews, and wrote an encyclical advocating the burning of their synagogues, which seems like a dichotomy. Why trust them to come up with an accurate canon of scripture when you hate and distrust them so much? And why trust the Catholic Church which he called “the whore of Babylon” to come up with an accurate New Testament list? Can you imagine the outrage by non-Catholics today if the Pope started throwing books out of the Bible? But strangely, Luther gets a pass on doing that exact same thing.
For the record, Jesus took the Kingdom away from the Jews (Matthew 21:43), and gave it to Peter and His new Church (Matthew 16:18), so the Jewish Council of Jamnia had no Godly authority to decide anything in 90 AD. They used 4 criteria for deciding whether or not certain books were canonical –
1. The books had to conform to the Pentateuch (the first 5 books of the Bible- ......Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy);
2. They could not have been written after the time of Ezra (around 400 BC);
3. They had to be written in Hebrew;
4. They had to be written in Palestine.
So this method employed by first century Jews would automatically exclude all of the Gospels, and the Epistles of the New Testament, which were also written in the first century. But there were other books written before Christ, after Ezra, and some in Greek as well. These 7 books were accepted by the Diaspora Jews (the Alexandrian Canon) who were not in Palestine. These 7 books are Tobit, Judith, Baruch, Wisdom, Sirach, First Maccabees, and Second Maccabees, as well as additional verses of Daniel and Esther. These books are called the “deuterocanon”, or second canon, by Catholics, and the “apocrypha”, or hidden/obscure, by Protestants (Christians who protest against the Catholic Church).
There are several objections to these 7 books, besides not being approved at the Jewish Council Jamnia. Some say that since the New Testament never references these disputed books, then that proves that they are not canonical. But that isn’t right, because the non-disputed books of Ecclesiastes and Ezra aren’t mentioned in the New Testament at all, not even once. By this standard then, Ecclesiastes and Ezra aren’t canonical either. On the other hand, there are many references indeed from the deuterocanonicals in the New Testament. Anybody who reads the book of Wisdom 2: 12-20 would immediately recognize that this is a direct reference to the Jews who were plotting against Jesus in Matthew 27:41-43:
Wisdom 2:12-20: "Let us lie in wait for the righteous man, because he is inconvenient to us and opposes our actions; he reproaches us for sins against the law, and accuses us of sins against our training. He professes to have knowledge of God, and calls himself a child of the Lord. He became to us a reproof of our thoughts; the very sight of him is a burden to us, because his manner of life is unlike that of others, and his ways are strange. We are considered by him as something base, and he avoids our ways as unclean; he calls the last end of the righteous happy, and boasts that God is his father. Let us see if his words are true, and let us test what will happen at the end of his life; for if the righteous man is God's son, he will help him, and will deliver him from the hand of his adversaries. Let us test him with insult and torture, that we may find out how gentle he is, and make trial of his forbearance. Let us condemn him to a shameful death, for, according to what he says, he will be protected." Matthew 27: 41-43: So also the chief priests, with the scribes and elders, mocked him, saying, "He saved others; he cannot save himself. He is the King of Israel; let him come down now from the cross, and we will believe in him. He trusts in God; let God deliver him now, if he desires him; for he said, `I am the Son of God.’”
Another similar instance of this is Hebrews 11:35 being a direct reference to 2 Maccabees 7, where the mother and her 7 sons were slaughtered by the evil King for not forsaking the Jewish law. Romans 1:19-25 is also referenced in Wisdom 12-13. The clincher, of course, is that Jesus Himself observed the feast of Hannukah, or the Dedication of the Temple, in John 10. This can be found in the Old Testament book of First Maccabees, Chapter 4, which is in the Catholic Bible, but not in the Protestant Bible.
Additionally, there are some unscriptural books referenced in the New Testament, like Enoch and the Assumption of Moses (in the book of Jude), so if the standard is that books referenced in the New Testament are canonical, then Enoch and the Assumption of Moses would be in the Old Testament, but they are not.
Some people object to these 7 books because they claim some of the early church fathers like St. Jerome didn’t think they were divinely inspired. While it’s great that all of a sudden so many non-Catholics start quoting the early Church Fathers, it’s not right to quote them on this and then not on the Eucharist, the papacy, or the supremacy of Rome, all which prove that the Catholic Church was the only Church around in those days. St. Jerome initially had some concerns about these books, saying that the Palestinian Jews didn’t consider them canonical, but St. Jerome was not infallible, and later agreed that they were. All of the early Church Fathers accepted these disputed books as divinely inspired.
Still others object to some of the disputed 7 books because of historical or geographical errors in them. And there are some, but it has to be remembered that not all stories in the Bible are historical. For instance, was there really a rich man who died and went to hell, and then saw his poor servant in the bosom of Abraham? Was there really a young man who sold his inheritance and went off to a faraway country and squandered it, and returned home as the prodigal son? Was there really a vineyard where the workers who showed up late got paid the same as the workers who worked all day? Or is it rather not more important that these parables teach important theological lessons than it is for them to be 100% historically accurate? In other words, books of fiction that relate Biblical truths can be divinely inspired.
It’s important also to note that the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls included the book of Tobit and the book of Sirach, proving that the people back then thought them canonical, because they were found with the book of Isaiah and other Old Testament books.
And you can check all of this out for yourself. The first bible ever printed was the Gutenberg Bible, in the century BEFORE Luther started his Reformation. And the 7 books are indeed in that Bible. To see for yourself, click here.
And an interesting numerology coincidence occurs here as well. In the bible, the number 7 denotes perfection (God rested on the 7th day, 7 spirits that minister to God, 7 sacraments), and the number 3 represents the Holy Trinity. On the other hand, the number 6 represents imperfection (as in 666). Therefore, 73 books sure sounds a lot better than 66 books!
To check out a great list of all of the New Testament references to the deuterocanonicals by Catholic genius and all around good guy Jimmy Akin, click here.
Some of the more interesting items in these 7 books are as follows:
In 2 Maccabees 12:39-45, we learn how Judas Maccabees prayed for the dead and made atonement FOR THEM by sending money to the temple as a sin offering (purgatory).
In 2 Maccabees 6:12-14, we learn how God punishes nations.
In 2 Maccabees 2:4-7, we learn the final resting place of the Ark of the Covenant and when it will be found (Sorry Indiana Jones!).
In 2 Maccabees 15:12-17, we learn about how saints in heaven pray for us and help us out here on earth.
In Wisdom 7, we see a biblical type of the Blessed Virgin Mary known as "wisdom."
In Sirach 38:1-15, we learn about the role of the physician and how God uses him/her to cure us.
In Tobit, we learn about the Archangel Raphael (a name which means God Heals), the only place in the entire bible where he is mentioned. We also learn about the anti-marriage demon Asmodeus.
In Judith, we see a biblical type of Mary crushing the head of the serpent; Judith cuts off the head of the evil General Holofernes, and saves Israel.
>> “Where did Paul teach that the Church was a mystical body?” <<
.
In Romans when he introduced it.
>> “Where did Paul teach that the Church was a mystical body?” <<
.
In Romans when he introduced it.
>> “Where did Paul teach that the Church was a mystical body?” <<
.
In Romans when he introduced it.
The ‘Roman’ occupiers were mostly natives. This is the best known facet of Roman rule, and its reason for success. They spoke Hebrew throughout the region.
Chapter and verse?
Papias called me a liar?
Any evidence for this beyond, “I pulled that out of my own butt?”
“All over the place. “Out of the mouth of two witnesses” is mentioned literally in Deut 17:6 and Deut 19:15 in the law, and is practiced throughout the Torah and the prophets. Why do you think that everything is repeated at least twice?”
Ok. You have Jesus, and the Gospel writer for the things that they witnessed. Everything that’s in the Gospel qualifies.
“That is not true. I am not saying to ignore any part.”
But you are. You are saying that ‘unless it meets my arbitrary criteria’, we don’t have to follow it.
“exactly why the law cannot be changed in one jot or tittle.”
And that includes the Gospels. You are attempting to alter the Gospels by ignoring one verse that you don’t like. This is wrong.
“YHWH does not, because YHWH’s Word is sure.”
Then why are you arguing that this one passage is not ‘sure’, and that we can safely ignore it without incurring God’s wrath?
“Which is contrary to what you are teaching here.”
How so? I am arguing that when Jesus gave St. Peter the power to bind and loose that St. Peter was given this authority by God himself, at God’s own time and place, and at his own choosing. I am affirming this principle that the Gospels are inviolate - you are denying this is the case.
“The burden is upon YOU to show that the changes y’all have inflicted upon the Torah are ordained”
Jesus himself said this was the case, and taught this in the Gospels. Ergo, I have met the burden you have asked. You have simply dismissed the citation.
I have then challenged the origin of the rule, and I have now shown why everything in the Gospels qualifies.
So far, you’ve pulled everything you’ve posted here out of that location.
Actually, everything I’ve cited here has been from the Bible. :)
I do not claim infallibility. I do not create new laws. I have made no new rite or order. My consequence is upon my own head. And I am truly open to correction - within the structures that I KNOW to be true.
Your organization is immune to correction though. And has made new law and orders and rites, which plainly confound the law of YHWH. What of that? Who shall correct them, and their folly? And what consequence will they bear? Shall you follow Yeshua or the laws of men?
Actually everything you’ve posted has been opposed to the Bible.
>> “ I am arguing that when Jesus gave St. Peter the power to bind and loose that St. Peter was given this authority by God himself” <<
.
Peter was given no ‘power,’ he was given a commandment that what he bound on Earth had to be that which was bound in Heaven. This is born out by the rest of the NT. Acts 10 is a good example, and there are many more, such as when Paul had to rebuke him for his hypocrisy, and James backed Paul up solidly.
Peter had no ‘power’ but the spiritual gifts of the apostle.
Qualifies as what? one still cannot use the Gospels, or the words of Yeshua to change the Torah. Nothing changes the Torah.
But you are. You are saying that ‘unless it meets my arbitrary criteria’, we don’t have to follow it.
I said no such thing, and my criteria is not arbitrary, as I have already proven.
What I have said is that if the interpretation thereof destroys the Torah, then the interpretation is needfully wrong.
And that includes the Gospels. You are attempting to alter the Gospels by ignoring one verse that you don’t like. This is wrong.
I have ignored nothing.
And that includes the Gospels. You are attempting to alter the Gospels by ignoring one verse that you don’t like. This is wrong.
The passage is sure - it is the interpretation and extrapolation that is false.
How so? I am arguing that when Jesus gave St. Peter the power to bind and loose that St. Peter was given this authority by God himself, at God’s own time and place, and at his own choosing. I am affirming this principle that the Gospels are inviolate - you are denying this is the case.
They can only be inviolate on the sure foundation of the law - To use such a passage to assert authority over the Torah is obviously malformed. And that is exactly what has happened.
Jesus himself said this was the case, and taught this in the Gospels. Ergo, I have met the burden you have asked. You have simply dismissed the citation.
Unless you can demonstrate how that fits within Yeshua's clear command to do and teach the Torah, you have met no such burden. For if Yeshua actually sanctioned such as you desire, he can only be a false prophet. Ergo, your interpretation and extrapolations there from must be incorrect.
I have then challenged the origin of the rule, and I have now shown why everything in the Gospels qualifies.
You have shown nothing. There is no cause with which one can change the Torah. YHWH said so, and so did Yeshua.
“Qualifies as what? one still cannot use the Gospels, or the words of Yeshua to change the Torah. Nothing changes the Torah.”
Then you aren’t a Christian. :)
“my criteria is not arbitrary”
Yes, your criteria is arbitrary, unless you choose to toss out the entire Gospels. Which is consistant, but it also makes you not a Christian.
“What I have said is that if the interpretation thereof destroys the Torah”
You would have to prove that it does destroy the Torah. Which Jesus’s statement most definitely does not do.
“I have ignored nothing”
You are ignoring the passage that states that Jesus gave Paul the power to bind and loose.
“The passage is sure - it is the interpretation and extrapolation that is false.”
What interpolation? That Jesus told Peter that he gave Peter the power to bind and loose? That whatever he bound on earth would be bound in Heaven? That he gave Peter the Keys to the Kingdom of Heaven?
That is all in the actual verse. No interpolation necessary.
“To use such a passage to assert authority over the Torah is obviously malformed. And that is exactly what has happened.”
It is up to you to show that Jesus violated the torah by doing this. It is your thesis. You must demonstrate why. Just saying so is insufficient.
“Unless you can demonstrate how that fits within Yeshua’s clear command to do and teach the Torah”
We see the priestly authority from Melchizedek handed down to Aaron, to Moses, to Elijah. Each time, God gave them blessings and a command and an order to protect his people Israel.
Peter received the same commission, as did Paul - the Great Commission, to preach the Gospel to all nations.
“You have shown nothing”
You say that two witnesses are sufficient. I have shown that all the Gospels bear the testimony of at least two witnesses.
You have conceded this point. Now you are arguing that “Yeshua has no power to change the Torah” and that in commissioning the 12, and giving Peter the keys to the kingdom of heaven is contrary to what the Torah states. Now you must prove your contention by showing exactly how this is so.
“Peter had no ‘power’ but the spiritual gifts of the apostle.”
The disciples did not at that point in time, have the gifts of the Holy spirit, which did not come until Pentecost.
This is different.
Christ explicitly states, “I give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven”. He says this to Peter only, not the other Apostles, and he singles out Peter after Peter’s affirmation that Jesus is the Christ.
“Actually everything you’ve posted has been opposed to the Bible.
Your bible omits the Gospel of Matthew? It is a curious bible!
If you believe Yeshua gave Peter the means to call YHWH a liar then we have nothing more to talk about.
Where did Paul teach that the Church was a mystical body?
church == ekklesia in the koine greek. How does YHvH define "church" i.e.Ekklesia ? or What was the purpose of the Ekklesia ? Was it a temporal corporation to rule on earth ? No ! Was it to have a temporal head ? No ! It was a gathering of YHvH's chosen people to hear His Word ? and learn to Fear YHvH all their days ? And to teach their children the same ? Yes. ------------- Ekklesia is from the Hebrew Qahal (kof, hey, lamed) I notice a change in case of the first letter of church
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach
Is it all those called out by YHvH ?
A study of the word "church", in the Koine Greek : Ekklesia.
Was the "church" started at the YHvH commanded
Feast day of Shavuot (pentecost) as some say ?
Did the "church" exist earlier ?
Using the LXX as a guide we see that the Ekklesia
is first used in Deuteronomy 4:10 NAsbU Deuteronomy 4:10 "Remember the day you stood before YHvH, your God
Also see : Deu 4:10, Deu 9:10, Deu 18:16, Deu 23:3, Deu 23:4, Deu 23:9, Deu 31:30,
at Horeb, when YHvH said to me, 'Assemble the people to Me, that I may let
them hear My words so they may learn to fear Me all the days they live on
the earth, and that they may teach their children.'
Jos 9:2, Jda 20.2, Jda 21:5, Jda 21:8, Jdg 20:2 Jdg 21:5, Jdg 21:8, 1 Sa 17:47,
1 Sa 19:20, 1 Ki 8:14, 1 Ki 8:22, 1 Ki 8:55, 1 Ki 8:65, 1 Ch 13:2, 1 Ch 13:4, 1 Ch 28:2,
1 Ch 28:8 (kof => The HOLY ONE
which is haQahal The assembly (hey, kop, hey, lamed)
hey => grace, breath of G-d
lamed => teaching and learning)
In scripture it is always used to describe
those who have been assembled by YHvH.
It begins in Exodus 16:3 ( the bread from heaven )
and continues to Nehemiah 8:17 (living in Booths) NAsbU Nehemiah 8:17
The entire assembly of those who had returned from
the captivity made booths and lived in them.
The sons of Israel had indeed not done so
from the days of Joshua(Yehoshua)
the son of Nun to that day.
And there was great rejoicing.
The keys to the kingdom of heaven is salvation by faith.
He gave them to all of mankind, but most deferred.
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.