Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: metmom
Even this link from a Catholic source states that Luther did not remove the books from the Bible.

Did you actually read the link you gave?

The version of the Bible in use at the time of Jesus was the Septuagint (abbreviated LXX, for the 70 men who translated it from Hebrew into Greek by the beginning of the first century B.C.). This version of the Bible included the seven Deuterocanonical books. This was the version of the Old Testament used by the New Testament authors and by Christians during the first century A.D.

The early Church continued to accept the books of the LXX version, although some debate about these books continued through the 5th century. This list, as accepted by the Catholic Church, was affirmed by the Council of Hippo in 393 A.D., by the Council of Carthage in 397 A.D., and by Pope Innocent I in 405 A.D. At the Ecumenical Council of Florence in 1442, the Catholic list was again restated, against those who wanted to include even more books.

In the 16th century, Martin Luther adopted the Jewish list, putting the Deuterocanonical books in an appendix. He also put the letter of James, the letter to the Hebrews, the letters of John, and the book of Revelation from the New Testament in an appendix. He did this for doctrinal reasons (for example: 2 Maccabees 12:43-46 supports the doctrine of purgatory, Hebrews supports the existence of the priesthood, and James 2:24 supports the Catholic doctrine on merit). Later Lutherans followed Luther’s Old Testament list and rejected the Deuterocanonical books, but they did not follow his rejection of the New Testament books.

Finally, in 1546, the Council of Trent reaffirmed the traditional list of the Catholic Church.

Luther removed these books from the accepted canon of Scripture that was used since the 1st century and reaffirmed a number of times. He also removed some books from the New Testament, only to be restored later by his followers. And please, don't plead that because he included them in an appendix that he actually did not remove them. They were excluded from the list of books that he considers as canonical, i.e. inspired Scripture. Today Protestants do not even include them in an appendix.
286 posted on 01/02/2015 3:31:31 PM PST by Petrosius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 284 | View Replies ]


To: Petrosius

Your comment was that he removed them from the Bible.

That is not true and that Catholic site says as much.

They were INCLUDED in the Bible that he translated.

He translated them and put them in the book.

How is that *removing* them and why do you persist in stating that he did when he didn’t?

His opinion about whether they belonged in the canon is not what you stated. You stated that he removed them and he didn’t.

If you wish to argue about his opinion of whether they belonged in the canon, then address that, but don’t keep saying that he did something he didn’t do.


287 posted on 01/02/2015 3:36:30 PM PST by metmom (...fixing our eyes on Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of our faith...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 286 | 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