Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: HarleyD

I’m not following you. How on earth am I saying they were wrong in their first selection? First selection of what? What did they change their mind on?


21 posted on 10/30/2013 5:19:18 PM PDT by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]


To: dangus

The early church fathers agreed that certain books were considered infallible and inerrant. While some held in high regards the writings in the Apocrypha, it was their consensus that writings didn’t measure up to the same standards as what was considered to be the scriptures. That is how the early Bible was put together.

One thousand years later, the Council of Trent decided certain books of the Apocrypha should be included. That is the difference between the Protestants and Catholic versions of the Bible.


36 posted on 11/01/2013 2:57:43 AM PDT by HarleyD (...one of his disciples, whom Jesus loved.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies ]

To: dangus

“Many people, who do not give much attention to the holy scriptures, think that all the books contained in the Bible should be honored and adored with equal veneration, not knowing how to distinguish among the canonical and non-canonical books, the latter of which the Jews number among the apocrypha. Therefore they often appear ridiculous before the learned; and they are disturbed and scandalized when they hear that someone does not honor something read in the Bible with equal veneration as all the rest. Here, then, we distinguish and number distinctly first the canonical books and then the non-canonical, among which we further distinguish between the certain and the doubtful.

The canonical books have been brought about through the dictation of the Holy Spirit. It is not known, however, at which time or by which authors the non-canonical or apocryphal books were produced. Since, nevertheless, they are very good and useful, and nothing is found in them which contradicts the canonical books, the church reads them and permits them to be read by the faithful for devotion and edification. Their authority, however, is not considered adequate for proving those things which come into doubt or contention, or for confirming the authority of ecclesiastical dogma, as blessed Jerome states in his prologue to Judith and to the books of Solomon.

But the canonical books are of such authority that whatever is contained therein is held to be true firmly and indisputably, and likewise that which is clearly demonstrated from them. For just as in philosophy a truth is known through reduction to self-evident first principles, so too, in the writings handed down from holy teachers, the truth is known, as far as those things that must be held by faith, through reduction to the canonical scriptures that have been produced by divine revelation, which can contain nothing false.”

Care to know the source?


43 posted on 11/01/2013 9:12:01 AM PDT by Mr Rogers (Liberals are like locusts...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | 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