73 Book Bible...How Important?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ernie07
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
E

Ernie07

Guest
Hi everyone,

I wanted to start this thread for two reasons: 1) I believe the answer to my question is “vitally important” and I’d like to share why, 2) It seems like Catholics don’t seem to think what Bible is used (66 or 73 book) is a big deal and I want to know why.

My reason for believing a 73 book Bible is “vitally important” is for the following reasons:
  1. Council of Trent formally reaffirmed that a 73 book Bible is to be used and anyone who disagrees is anathema.
  2. The 7 books that are not found in the Protestant Bible contain clear language as to the “holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead” (2 Macc 12:46). Someplace other than heaven or hell (Purgatory) is the only logical interpretation of why to pray for the dead. To not be able to use this verse to make our case for Purgatory (and salvation as a whole) is like asking a boxer to fight with one arm (can still win, but man is it going to be harder!)
  3. There are translation issues between the 66 and 73 books Bibles. The clearest one is Luke 1:28 where the 66 book Bible declares Mary to be “highly favored” while the 73 book Bible says that Mary is “full of grace”. Huge difference in that “highly favored” doesn’t connote anything extraordinarily unique as many could be “highly favored”. Rather, “full of grace” is to connote something where you can’t have more, which is key to explaining the uniqueness to Mary of being immaculately conceived. It’s a big deal.
  4. Because Catholics are so wishy-washy on this topic it allows some Protestants to spread the lie that it was the Catholic Church that added 7 books to the Bible. Many believe that still today and I wonder how many fallen-away Catholics left the Church, in part, because of this misunderstanding.
I’ve heard from my pastor, others on this board, and Catholics that I know who just don’t see which Bible we use as being a big deal. I’ve even heard of a 66 book Bible on the shelves of a Catholic Church (I haven’t checked at my church yet). Why is this the case? Wouldn’t you think that a person was a heretic if they started preaching that the “real” Bible only had 64 or 77 books? If so, then why are we as Catholics so casual when it comes to the 66 book Bible?

Anything other than a 73 book Bible has been declared as anathema so why is it that many Catholics don’t believe they have to obey this? Are there other beliefs that have been declared anathema that we can likewise disobey?

I know it’s been like 500 years, but they changed the Bible!! Why aren’t we as Catholics driving this point harder when it comes to defending and promoting our faith? It’s like we’ve given up that point and rather spend most of our time in a “my interpretation is better than yours” type debates and arguments…each using different Bibles to make our point!

As you can probably tell this drives me crazy!! So, please help me understand. Thanks.

-Ernie-
 
See the various articles on the Main Catholic Answers site on the matter.
 
Catholics are not properly educated about their faith and are afraid of it, from my own experience.
 
Ernie07 said:
  1. There are translation issues between the 66 and 73 books Bibles. The clearest one is Luke 1:28 where the 66 book Bible declares Mary to be “highly favored” while the 73 book Bible says that Mary is “full of grace”. Huge difference in that “highly favored” doesn’t connote anything extraordinarily unique as many could be “highly favored”. Rather, “full of grace” is to connote something where you can’t have more, which is key to explaining the uniqueness to Mary of being immaculately conceived. It’s a big deal.
Click to expand...
This can hardly be attributed to the number of books!? Most notably, the New American Bible (a *73 Book Bible *produced by the Catholic Church) renders the verse:
And coming to her, he said, “Hail, favored one! The Lord is with you.”
Click to expand...
:twocents: If you mean “The importance of a Catholic Bible over non-Catholic ones”, just say so. (But, NB, see parentheses above) :twocents:

tee
 
Crucially important, as those seven books are God’s revealed truth - if not in historical accuracy as some demand - in principle, and as a clear and precise demonstration of how God acts and the natures and virtues of the people He uses to accomplish His will.
 
Ernie07 said:
Hi everyone,

I wanted to start this thread for two reasons: 1) I believe the answer to my question is “vitally important” and I’d like to share why, 2) It seems like Catholics don’t seem to think what Bible is used (66 or 73 book) is a big deal and I want to know why.

My reason for believing a 73 book Bible is “vitally important” is for the following reasons:
  1. Council of Trent formally reaffirmed that a 73 book Bible is to be used and anyone who disagrees is anathema.
  2. The 7 books that are not found in the Protestant Bible contain clear language as to the “holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead” (2 Macc 12:46). Someplace other than heaven or hell (Purgatory) is the only logical interpretation of why to pray for the dead. To not be able to use this verse to make our case for Purgatory (and salvation as a whole) is like asking a boxer to fight with one arm (can still win, but man is it going to be harder!)
  3. There are translation issues between the 66 and 73 books Bibles. The clearest one is Luke 1:28 where the 66 book Bible declares Mary to be “highly favored” while the 73 book Bible says that Mary is “full of grace”. Huge difference in that “highly favored” doesn’t connote anything extraordinarily unique as many could be “highly favored”. Rather, “full of grace” is to connote something where you can’t have more, which is key to explaining the uniqueness to Mary of being immaculately conceived. It’s a big deal.
  4. Because Catholics are so wishy-washy on this topic it allows some Protestants to spread the lie that it was the Catholic Church that added 7 books to the Bible. Many believe that still today and I wonder how many fallen-away Catholics left the Church, in part, because of this misunderstanding.
I’ve heard from my pastor, others on this board, and Catholics that I know who just don’t see which Bible we use as being a big deal. I’ve even heard of a 66 book Bible on the shelves of a Catholic Church (I haven’t checked at my church yet). Why is this the case? Wouldn’t you think that a person was a heretic if they started preaching that the “real” Bible only had 64 or 77 books? If so, then why are we as Catholics so casual when it comes to the 66 book Bible?

Anything other than a 73 book Bible has been declared as anathema so why is it that many Catholics don’t believe they have to obey this? Are there other beliefs that have been declared anathema that we can likewise disobey?

I know it’s been like 500 years, but they changed the Bible!! Why aren’t we as Catholics driving this point harder when it comes to defending and promoting our faith? It’s like we’ve given up that point and rather spend most of our time in a “my interpretation is better than yours” type debates and arguments…each using different Bibles to make our point!

As you can probably tell this drives me crazy!! So, please help me understand. Thanks.

-Ernie-
Click to expand...
IT IS VITALLY IMPORTANT! Why?

2 Timothy 3:16-17

[16]** All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching**, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, [17] that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work

The Bible is GOD"S WORDS spoken through Inspired Men, and EVERY book has Lessons for for possible salvatiomn:thumbsup:

GBY

Patrick
 
edwest2 said:
Unless we know what every Catholic thinks, it’s not good to put many or most in the same category, outside of our own experience. Here’s a good reference:

amazon.com/Why-Catholic-Bibles-are-Bigger/dp/1581880103

Ed
Click to expand...
Thank you for the link, Ed. I’m not really looking for why there are more books as I’ve already done that research. I’m more looking for why Catholics don’t argue the use of the 73 book Bible more. Good point on the use of many and most so let me rephrase then by saying “some”. Thanks.

-Ernie-
 
tee_eff_em said:
This can hardly be attributed to the number of books!? Most notably, the New American Bible (a *73 Book Bible *produced by the Catholic Church) renders the verse:

:twocents: If you mean “The importance of a Catholic Bible over non-Catholic ones”, just say so. (But, NB, see parentheses above) :twocents:

tee
Click to expand...
Man, thanks for that information. I must admit that I didn’t know that there was a Catholic Bible that translated that verse to “highly favored” rather than “full of grace”. It’s a bit frustrating to me knowing what we as Catholics believe when it comes to this verse and yet we translate it in a way that causes potential confusion or even an opening for attack. Foolish marketing in my opinion, but I digress!! Haha!

But, I believe my other points are still valid…I think…LOL

Thanks again.

-Ernie-
 
PJM said:
IT IS VITALLY IMPORTANT! Why?

2 Timothy 3:16-17

[16]** All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching**, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, [17] that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work

The Bible is GOD"S WORDS spoken through Inspired Men, and EVERY book has Lessons for for possible salvatiomn:thumbsup:

GBY

Patrick
Click to expand...
From seeing your other posts I respect your opinion, Patrick, so why do you think some Catholics seem to “give-away” this huge advantage we as Catholics have? What I mean is that to me, a disagreement on what constitutes the Word of God is a much bigger issue than having an interpretation argument on a particular verse and yet the debates I see focus more on particular beliefs and verses. If a group is not using the complete Word of God that would seem to undermine and disqualify them from claiming to have truths in other areas as well. So why don’t I see this used as a more focused strategy in every conversation with non-Catholics? Thanks for your thoughts.

-Ernie-
 
IMO, the current NAB/BABRE are the weakest English language Catholic bibles ever printed. They tilt way too far toward ecumenism, and risk obscuring the original meaning of the scriptures.

Now, as to Luke 1:28, the word used in the Greek is kecharitōmenē (“Graced to the full” “Filled with grace”). That word appears exactly one time in the entire Greek language, and only in Luke’s Gospel. Clearly, it is a superlative form of being graced.

To demonstrate to non-Catholics, a good bible to use is the Oxford Press (Not a Catholic source) Revised English Bible or its Study Version. They translate Luke 1:28 as “Greetings, most favored one. The Lord is with you.”, which is a superlative form of being favored.

As to the canards and red herrings regarding the Deutrocanonical books, they were in use by faithful Jews before Christ! They are in the Septuagint version, from which the majority of New Testament quotations come from. The heresy of the reformation demanded a response from the Church, and Trent declared those books for all time to be inspired and part of the canon. They cannot have been “added” if they pre-existed the Incarnation.
 
po18guy said:
IMO, the current NAB/BABRE are the weakest English language Catholic bibles ever printed. They tilt way too far toward ecumenism, and risk obscuring the original meaning of the scriptures.

Now, as to Luke 1:28, the word used in the Greek is kecharitōmenē (“Graced to the full” “Filled with grace”). That word appears exactly one time in the entire Greek language, and only in Luke’s Gospel. Clearly, it is a superlative form of being graced.

To demonstrate to non-Catholics, a good bible to use is the Oxford Press (Not a Catholic source) Revised English Bible or its Study Version. They translate Luke 1:28 as “Greetings, most favored one. The Lord is with you.”, which is a superlative form of being favored.

As to the canards and red herrings regarding the Deutrocanonical books, they were in use by faithful Jews before Christ! They are in the Septuagint version, from which the majority of New Testament quotations come from. The heresy of the reformation demanded a response from the Church, and Trent declared those books for all time to be inspired and part of the canon. They cannot have been “added” if they pre-existed the Incarnation.
Click to expand...
Thank you for that explanation. I read the article about Luke 1:28 as well, which was helpful. I guess since I’m looking for any truthful advantage in defending and promoting the Catholic faith I just wish Catholic translations would align with Catholic teaching. I know that’s not the first thing on the minds of translators, but one can still wish!! Haha!
 
Thank you for your thoughts, Deacon. I understand where you’re coming from. But, as you probably could tell in our discussions regarding Alpha I’m a black and white kind of guy especially when it comes to my faith. There isn’t a 99% truth…only 100% especially when evangelizing. With this in mind there is only one true Bible. To use the KJV or NIV version is to lend credence to them. To lend credence to them lessens our ability to question their validity. Anything other than a 73 book Bible is anathema and we should not even give the appearance that we condone a Bible with anything less than 73 books especially when evangelizing. And we can do this in a charitable and respectful yet effective way.

We need to be unafraid of speaking the truth and the truth is there is only one true Bible. In my mind we’re doing an injustice by knowing the truth and not speaking it. We vigorously oppose those that say the Eucharist is a symbol, that Jesus didn’t mean Peter was the Rock, or that Mary wasn’t ever-virgin, but even though we know they use a 66 book Bible we don’t make a big deal about this. A different version of the Word of God and we say nothing. Seems odd to me. And because we don’t make a big deal out of it some start to even use a Bible that has been anathematized themselves. And then what else that has been anathematized will we start to think is not that big of a deal? Slippery slope in my mind.

Thank you for the discussion.

-Ernie-
 
Ernie07 said:
I know that’s not the first thing on the minds of translators, but one can still wish!! Haha!
Click to expand...
Well, in the minds of modern translators, anyway. The King James Version is actually quite good for defending Catholic doctrine. The Douay-Rheims, Knox, Douay-Confraternity bibles, etc. are also good. But, keep in mind that bible alone grants license to the believer to privately interpret - and the ego is then certain that it is correct. Bible-based Christianity rejects the Church and her authority and interpretation out of hand, so no luck there. Far better to talk little and pray much for their conversion.
 
po18guy said:
Well, in the minds of modern translators, anyway. The King James Version is actually quite good for defending Catholic doctrine. The Douay-Rheims, Knox, Douay-Confraternity bibles, etc. are also good. But, keep in mind that bible alone grants license to the believer to privately interpret - and the ego is then certain that it is correct. Bible-based Christianity rejects the Church and her authority and interpretation out of hand, so no luck there. Far better to talk little and pray much for their conversion.
Click to expand...
Thank you for pointing out those Bible versions. I’m not really looking for a particular Bible to prove Catholic doctrine because then a non-Catholic will use a different one to prove their doctrine. And then the frustrating back and forth exchange occurs.

This is going to sound strange, but I’m trying to eliminate Bible interpretations from the initial dialogue in defending the faith. Don’t misunderstand that though. I’m not afraid to have a Bible based discussion and go toe to toe with the Church’s interpretation of Scripture versus their private interpretation, but it has been my experience that they dig their heels in so hard that they just won’t listen.

If I can call into question the version of the book they base their entire faith system on then everything they stand for comes crashing down. It’s kind of like why should I worry about chopping down individual branches from a dead tree when I can chop down the trunk and bring the whole thing down? Alot less time and way more effective.

And I hear you on the praying part, but the talk little part doesn’t work so well for me!! LOL!

-Ernie-
 
Ernie07 said:
From seeing your other posts I respect your opinion, Patrick, so why do you think some Catholics seem to “give-away” this huge advantage we as Catholics have? What I mean is that to me, a disagreement on what constitutes the Word of God is a much bigger issue than having an interpretation argument on a particular verse and yet the debates I see focus more on particular beliefs and verses. If a group is not using the complete Word of God that would seem to undermine and disqualify them from claiming to have truths in other areas as well. So why don’t I see this used as a more focused strategy in every conversation with non-Catholics? Thanks for your thoughts.

-Ernie-
Click to expand...
THANKS Emie07:)

PERSONALLY, I don’t think any Catechist, or any person called to share our Catholic Faith can afford to omit EITHER the 73 books or wrong interpretations.

We’re dealing with GOD"S Divinely Inspired WORDS & Teachings here and SOULS are the stake.

Girding and underlying ALL Faith -sharing is the issue of TRUTH, which I have time & time again insisted can only be SINGULAR be defined issue. NOTHING else is a logical or a MORAL possibility.

If sticking to GOD"S TRUTHS gets Us branded as “rigid” & inflexible; so be it:shrug:

Matthew 5:12
Be glad and rejoice, for your reward is very great in heaven. For so they persecuted the prophets that were before you.

John 15:20
Remember my word that I said to you: The servant is not greater than his master. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you: if they have kept my word, they will keep yours also

Either GOD is permitted to be in charge or He’s not:eek:

We live in an age of “MEISM”, and we must not bow to it; as it is a FALSE god.

So with Charity AND clarity [FACTS], we must continue to fight the “GOOD” fight

GOD Bless you and thanks for reading my post!

Patrick
 
Zerg said:
Catholics are not properly educated about their faith and are afraid of it, from my own experience.
Click to expand...
😃 Have you been READING MY POST?

And by FAR, I am not the only informed; Catholic Faith sharing person on the CAF

Thanks for sharing, and WELCOME to CAF

GBY!

Patrick [PJM]
 
Ernie07 said:
From seeing your other posts I respect your opinion, Patrick, so why do you think some Catholics seem to “give-away” this huge advantage we as Catholics have? What I mean is that to me, a disagreement on what constitutes the Word of God is a much bigger issue than having an interpretation argument on a particular verse and yet the debates I see focus more on particular beliefs and verses. If a group is not using the complete Word of God that would seem to undermine and disqualify them from claiming to have truths in other areas as well. So why don’t I see this used as a more focused strategy in every conversation with non-Catholics? Thanks for your thoughts.

-Ernie-
Click to expand...
[GOOGLE SEARCH]
How many books in Bible King James?
There are 80 books in the King James Bible—39 in the Old Testament, 14 in the Apocrypha, and 27 in the New Testament. Most modern editions omit the Apocrypha; in those editions the number of books totals 66
Click to expand...
The other issue as it relates to THIS FORUM is the need to stay on topic; so the OPQ has to present the opportunity. In my years here, I don’t recall ever being involved in this 66 book discussion, so I’ll START a new THREAD and see where it leads

GBY
 
OK:shrug:

BUT WHAT is the relevance of that point to this passage?

GBY and THANKS for you’re ministry!

Patrick
 
Hi Deacon,

I don’t want to sound like I’m up on my high horse (which I’m on frequently by the way!!), but 99.5% is not good enough. Jesus said, “be perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect”. Perfect to me is 100%. With all due respect we can’t condone anything less than 100% and now I know why you’re OK with Alpha. We just have a fundamentally different view of things.

99.5% holiness doesn’t get us into heaven, only being 100% purified will do. And to me, that’s what we must strive for while here on earth. We can’t do it, but that’s OK. I’ve said it before on a different thread that I’m actually looking forward to purgatory (now don’t get me wrong if the Lord allows me to bypass then I will!!). To me, I deserve purgatory whatever it is. I’m looking forward to being purified 100% as anything less doesn’t cut it.

I’m babbling again, but 100% truth has become so darn important to me that I fight it when I don’t see it. And from an evangelization standpoint if we preach anything less than that I think we do a disservice to many. And from an apologetics standpoint as soon as we relinquish our hold on the truth it becomes harder to change hearts.

Just my opinion. Thanks for candidly sharing your thoughts.

-Ernie-
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top