Posted on 02/15/2017 5:19:25 AM PST by Gamecock
“[Jesus] said to them, ‘These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.’ ” - Luke 24:44
Facing the prospect of losing Europe to Protestantism, Roman Catholics convened a council to respond to the Protestant Reformers and their ideas. This gathering, the Council of Trent, met on and off from 1545 to 1563. Trent is one of the most important councils Rome has ever held, as it codified Roman Catholic dogma regarding justification, the sacraments, and other subjects.
One of the key questions Trent was tasked to answer for the church of Rome was the extent of the canon of Scripture—the list of books that the church acknowledges as divinely inspired and thus considers to be sources of theology. Against the Protestants, Trent declared that in addition to the thirty-nine books of the Old Testament that the Reformers received as Scripture, the Apocryphal or Deuterocanonical books are also canonical for the Roman Catholic Church. But in stating that Apocryphal/Deuterocanonical books such as 1–2 Maccabees, Tobit, Judith, and others are Scripture, the Council of Trent also went against church tradition. The top Bible scholars in church history, including Jerome, did not believe the Apocryphal books were Scripture, and even many Roman Catholics who attended the Council of Trent did not want Rome to declare those books canonical.
When we look to Jesus and the Apostles, it is clear that the Protestants were right. Every time Jesus and the Apostles quote from a book they regard as Scripture, they introduce the quote with a formula such as “it is written” or “Scripture says” (for example, Matt. 4:4; Rom. 10:11). Sometimes, the New Testament refers to Apocryphal books, but such books are never quoted as if they are Scripture (for example, Jude 14–15).
Today’s passage shows us clearly that Jesus’ Old Testament canon included only the books in our Protestant canon. He refers to “the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms” (Luke 24:44), which corresponds to the traditional Jewish canon that contains the same books as our Old Testament canon, albeit in a different order. The Law refers to Genesis–Deuteronomy. The Prophets are Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings, and Isaiah–Malachi minus Daniel and Lamentations. The Writings are everything else in our Old Testament; sometimes first-century Jews called this section “the Psalms” because Psalms is the largest and most famous book in the Writings.
Coram Deo
Jesus is our Lord, so if we are to be faithful to Him, we do not want to have an Old Testament canon that is any different than the one He had. The Apocryphal books can be useful as historical works and even as repositories of human wisdom, but they are not divinely inspired and cannot determine doctrine. We must derive our theology only from divinely inspired works, so let us be careful to prove all of our beliefs by the inspired Scriptures.
Passages for Further Study
Daniel 9:1 In the first year of Darius the son of Ahasuerus, by descent a Mede, who was made king over the realm of the Chaldeans— 2 in the first year of his reign, I, Daniel, perceived in the books the number of years that, according to the word of the Lord to Jeremiah the prophet, must pass before the end of the desolations of Jerusalem, namely, seventy years.
Nehemiah 8:1 And all the people gathered as one man into the square before the Water Gate. And they told Ezra the scribe to bring the Book of the Law of Moses that the Lord had commanded Israel. 2 So Ezra the priest brought the Law before the assembly, both men and women and all who could understand what they heard, won the first day of the seventh month. 3 And he read from it facing the square before the Water Gate from early morning until midday, in the presence of the men and the women and those who could understand. And the ears of all the people were attentive to the Book of the Law. 4 And Ezra the scribe stood on a wooden platform that they had made for the purpose. And beside him stood Mattithiah, Shema, Anaiah, Uriah, Hilkiah, and Maaseiah on his right hand, and Pedaiah, Mishael, Malchijah, Hashum, Hashbaddanah, Zechariah, and Meshullam on his left hand. 5 And Ezra opened the book in the sight of all the people, for he was above all the people, and as he opened it all the people stood. 6 And Ezra blessed the Lord, the great God, and all the people answered, “Amen, Amen,” zlifting up their hands. And they bowed their heads and worshiped the Lord with their faces to the ground. 7 Also Jeshua, Bani, Sherebiah, Jamin, Akkub, Shabbethai, Hodiah, Maaseiah, Kelita, Azariah, Jozabad, Hanan, Pelaiah, the Levites, helped the people to understand the Law, dwhile the people remained in their places. 8 They read from the book, from the Law of God, clearly, and they gave the sense, so that the people understood the reading.
Matthew 7:12 “So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.
John 1:45 Philip found Nathanael and said to him, “We have found him of whom Moses in the Law and also the prophets wrote, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.”
My statement (if you could have understood that in context, I'm not sure that you did) was factual enough.
Here, I'll offer it again, reworded;
For long ages the writings referred to as Deuterocanon were not fully accepted as being fully Scripture equivalent with the rest of the Old Testament.
In comment #39 this thread, I had posted excepts from this link http://www.christiantruth.com/articles/canon.html which holds a significant amount of commentary from early Church and Catholic Church noteworthies (ECF's, later Cardinals etc., even a "pope") who themselves did not look upon the books Jerome referred to as Apocrypha as being properly canonical, but instead were along lines of being "ecclesiastical writings", good for edification, yet not for basis of Christian doctrines -- thus -- Not canonical as was the rest of the Old Testament.
Let me ask you this; when you encountered the word "hint" did you stop right about there, deciding to fire back comment asserting I was wrong? Why not investigate further? You have another chance to do so now.
Oh, Jesus and the Jews had the canon alright...Says so right here...
Luk_24:44 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.
Why would anyone believe your Church when Jesus provides the truth???
I always get a kick out of protestants who tell Catholics all about their faith.
I am copying Campion post which you obviously didnt bother to read:
Trent declared that in addition to the thirty-nine books of the Old Testament that the Reformers received as Scripture, the Apocryphal or Deuterocanonical books are also canonical for the Roman Catholic Church. But in stating that Apocryphal/Deuterocanonical books such as 1–2 Maccabees, Tobit, Judith, and others are Scripture, the Council of Trent also went against church tradition.
Not hardly.
[The Council] accepts and venerates their books, whose titles are as follows. Five books of Moses, namely Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy; Joshua, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, two of Paralipomenon, Esdras, Nehemiah, Tobit, Judith, Esther, Job, Psalms of David, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Baruch, Ezechiel, Daniel; the twelve minor prophets, namely Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi; two books of the Maccabees; the four gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John; fourteen letters of Paul, to the Romans, two to the Corinthians, to the Galatians, to the Ephesians, to the Philippians, two to the Thessalonians, to the Colossians, two to Timothy, to Titus, to Philemon, to the Hebrews; two letters of Peter, three of John, one of James, one of Jude; Acts of the Apostles; Apocalypse of John. — Council of Florence, Session 11, February, 1442
[T]he Canonical Scriptures are as follows: * Genesis * Exodus * Leviticus * Numbers * Deuteronomy * Joshua the Son of Nun * The Judges * Ruth * The Kings (4 books) * The Chronicles (2 books) * Job * The Psalter * The Five books of Solomon (includes Wisdom and Sirach) * The Twelve Books of the Prophets * Isaiah * Jeremiah * Ezechiel * Daniel * Tobit * Judith * Esther * Ezra (2 books) * Maccabees (2books). The New Testament: * The Gospels (4 books) * The Acts of the Apostles (1 book) * The Epistles of Paul (14) * The Epistles of Peter, the Apostle (2) * The Epistles of John the Apostle (3) * The Epistles of James the Apostle (1) * The Epistle of Jude the Apostle (1) * The Revelation of John (1 book). Let this be sent to our brother and fellow bishop, [Pope] Boniface, and to the other bishops of those parts, that they may confirm this canon, for these are the things which we have received from our fathers to be read in church.” — Fourth Council of Carthage, AD 419, Canon XXIV, substantially identical to canon xxxvi of the Council of Hippo, AD 393.
The list of the Old Testament begins: Genesis, one book; Exodus, one book: Leviticus, one book; Numbers, one book; Deuteronomy, one book; Jesus Nave, one book; of Judges, one book; Ruth, one book; of Kings, four books; Paralipomenon, two books; One Hundred and Fifty Psalms, one book; of Solomon, three books: Proverbs, one book; Ecclesiastes, one book; Canticle of Canticles, one book; likewise, Wisdom, one book; Ecclesiasticus (Sirach), one book; Likewise, the list of the Prophets: Isaiah, one book; Jeremias, one book; along with Cinoth, that is, his Lamentations; Ezechiel, one book; Daniel, one book; Osee, one book; Amos, one book; Micheas, one book; Joel, one book; Abdias, one book; Jonas, one book; Nahum, one book; Habacuc, one book; Sophonias, one book; Aggeus, one book; Zacharias, one book; Malachias, one book. Likewise, the list of histories: Job, one book; Tobias, one book; Esdras, two books; Esther, one book; Judith, one book; of Maccabees, two books. Likewise, the list of the Scriptures of the New and Eternal Testament, which the holy and Catholic Church receives ... — Tome of [Pope] Damasus, AD 382
Clearly, any claim that Trent added books to the Old Testament, and did so against the tradition of the Church, is ahistorical nonsense.
30 posted on 2/15/2017, 12:02:23 PM by Campion (Halten Sie sich unbedingt an die Lehre!)
AMDG
I’ve read a lot of the Shepherd. I’m sure the prophetic nature was cause for some apprehension.
Nothing you posted in any way overturned what I said. A claim was made that is directly refuted by the very existence of certain texts in the Dead Sea Scrolls. It’s just that simple.
“What are matt1618’s qualifications?”
Apparently better than yours.
“He did. Did what? “included them”?”
If you can’t keep up, you have other issues to think about.
Apparently better than yours.
I ask a simple question and you respond like a jerk.
You just can't help yourself.
Thankfully you're not teaching classes anywhere.
“I ask a simple question and you respond like a jerk.”
No, I responded appropriately according to the question.
“You just can’t help yourself.”
Are you going to assume you’re more qualified than he is? Based on what exactly? Can you help yourself?
“Thankfully you’re not teaching classes anywhere.”
You can think that if you want. That doesn’t mean it’s true, but you’re allowed to make all the errors you want. It’s what you do anyway.
The arrogance of catholicsm on display again. It even comes across in your handle.
“The arrogance of catholicsm on display again.”
While you’re just dripping with sincerity and humility is just oozing out of your pores, right?
“It even comes across in your handle.”
No, it doesn’t. But it will be intensely amusing to see you explain how. Go ahead and explain your claim.
Keep up? I'm way ahead of you, and explained it to you too.
More troll games out of you though, I see. Some things never change...
Have a good evening Vlad.
“Have a good evening Vlad.”
And there we have it.
You said: “It even comes across in your handle.”
I said: “No, it doesn’t. But it will be intensely amusing to see you explain how. Go ahead and explain your claim.”
And the result? eagleone fails again. As expected.
nope. any effort to have a reasonable conversation is wasted on you as evidenced by this thread.
Show me where the canon that Jesus quoted as the word of God contained all these 7 books as Scripture,
It is unlikely that those who sat in the seat of Moses held the apocryphal texts as the authorative word of God, and if not, we can be sure that if the Lord invoked them as that in refuting the devil and religious leaders, as He did with texts from the Hebrew canon, then those who sat in the seat of Moses would have made that an issue.
And show us where "Jesus quoted (not merely expressed similar teachings, or things which are found in the Hebrew canon) from those books many times" as the authorative word of God, as He often did from the Hebrew canon, and where merely selectively quoting or referencing sources means that they are Scripture.
Lists such as this http://www.ewtn.com/v/experts/showmessage.asp?number=351097&Pg=&Pgnu=&recnu= will not do it .
That the NT may been seen alluding or referring certain things in some apocryphal material is not the issue, but there authorative status.
Out of the multitudes of OT texts in the NT , Paul at least (re. Wisdom lit.) invokes Proverbs 25:21, "If thine enemy be hungry, give him bread to eat; and if he be thirsty, give him water to drink," for "Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head." (Romans 12:20)
And Job 5:13 "He taketh the wise in their own craftiness: and the counsel of the froward is carried headlong," for For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness." (1 Corinthians 3:19)
And the writer of Hebrews quotes Proverbs 3:11-12, "My son, despise not the chastening of the Lord; neither be weary of his correction:" "For whom the Lord loveth he correcteth; even as a father the son in whom he delighteth," for "And ye have forgotten the exhortation which speaketh unto you as unto children, My son, despise not thou the chastening of the Lord, nor faint when thou art rebuked of him:" "For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth." (Hebrews 12:5-6)
And Peter quotes Proverbs 26:11, "As a dog returneth to his vomit, so a fool returneth to his folly," for, "But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire." (2 Peter 2:22)
Correct, as with establishing who the real men of God are (sometimes even in dissent from leadership), and which establishment is essentially due to the unique Divine qualities and attestation of both men and writings of God.
However, this does not and need not mean that the discerners of what is of God possesses ensured infallibility as a people or an office.
The Church existed prior to books of the Bible even being written and this same Church determined which books should be in the canon of scripture
Which is contradictory nonsense. Most of what we call Scripture was already written, and laity ascertained both men and writings of God as being so, before there was a a self-proclaimed church which presumed she was essential for this. And the real NT church abundantly invoked OT texts as authoritative support for its Truth claims, and established itself upon Scriptural substantiation in word and in power. Thanks be to God. As it must today, versus merely declaring itself as being of the living God.
Meaning you should get more than the usual 5 or so responses that caucus threads typically get!
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.