Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: OLD REGGIE; Dr. Eckleburg; bkaycee
The Council of Carthage was but one of many local African Councils. It was, in no way, binding on the entire Church

It was binding in the jurisdiction of the western patriarch (the pope of Rome), not the eastern four patriarchates.

Catholic Encyclopedia - The 21 Ecumenical Councils. The most explicit definition of the Catholic Canon is that given by the Council of Trent , Session IV, 1546. For the Old Testament its catalogue reads as follows:

The Council of Carthage stipulates the following canon of the OT (AD 397): "It was also determined that besides the Canonical Scriptures nothing be read in the Church under the title of divine Scriptures. The Canonical Scriptures are these: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua the son of Nun, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, two books of Paraleipomena, Job, the Psalter, five books of Solomon, the books of the twelve prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezechiel, Daniel, Tobit, Judith, Esther, two books of Esdras, two books of the Maccabees."

Note that the five books of Solomon inlcude Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Wisdom of Solomon, and Ecclesiasticus. Ecclesiasticus, the Wisdom of Solomon and Maccabees (2 in Catholic, 3 in Orthodox canon) are not included in the Protestant canon. So, all the apocrypha of the Council of Trent were included in the Council of Carthage (397 AD), which was finally ratified in 411 AD.

What the Cathodic encyclopedia means by "most explicit" is that the books were individually mentioned (explicitly) rather than inclusively (implicitly), such as "Paraleipomena" = Chronicles, Esdras — Ezra and Nehemiah, etc. It does not mean that Trent added any new books. That is a Protestant myth or just plain ignorance.

5,087 posted on 09/15/2010 10:38:09 AM PDT by kosta50 (God is tired of repenting -- Jeremiah 15:6, KJV)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5065 | View Replies ]


To: kosta50; OLD REGGIE; Dr. Eckleburg; bkaycee
The Christian church had NO authority to add or subtract any books to the OT.

The OT is Gods revelation to the Jews.. It was never given to the church. It remains under the authority of the jewish people

The NT is Gods revelation to the church..

Rom 3:1 ¶ What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit [is there] of circumcision?
Rom 3:2 Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.

5,147 posted on 09/15/2010 12:42:04 PM PDT by RnMomof7 (Jhn 8:43 Why do ye not understand my speech? [even] because ye cannot hear my word.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5087 | View Replies ]

To: kosta50; Dr. Eckleburg; bkaycee
What the Cathodic encyclopedia means by "most explicit" is that the books were individually mentioned (explicitly) rather than inclusively (implicitly), such as "Paraleipomena" = Chronicles, Esdras — Ezra and Nehemiah, etc. It does not mean that Trent added any new books. That is a Protestant myth or just plain ignorance.

I am not aware of any "Protestant" claiming the "Apocrypha" was added at Trent. Claiming such is myth or just plain ignorance.

It is fact; however, that the Catholic Old Testament Canon was cast in concrete at the Council of Trent otherwise this would not have been necessary.

5,197 posted on 09/15/2010 1:52:15 PM PDT by OLD REGGIE (I am a Biblical Unitarian?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5087 | View Replies ]

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