Bible put together by Catholics?

  • Thread starter Thread starter CatherineofA
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

CatherineofA

Guest
I am not Catholic. However, I was having a short discussion with some fellow Protestants. I mentioned that it was my understanding that the books that were chosen that make up the Bible were chosen by men who were Catholics. They were members of the church. They met in councils, etc. and the books were chosen to make up the collection we have today. Correct? Do you have anymore background information on these people being Catholics who were members of the church?
 
I am not Catholic. However, I was having a short discussion with some fellow Protestants. I mentioned that it was my understanding that the books that were chosen that make up the Bible were chosen by men who were Catholics They were members of the church. They met in councils, etc. and the books were chosen to make up the collection we have today. Correct? Do you have anymore background information on these people being Catholics who were members of the church and how this came about?
 
Yup!
Praise God for the Catholics!!!😃 I am actually studying that in school right now! I think thats what started the split of the church, or my understanding of it anyway. The Catholics of that time, not everyone even the high officials were following what the Bible said, so Luther said something and then the Church excommunicated him. Its a cool story. 🙂
 
40.png
april_hosen:
Yup!
Praise God for the Catholics!!!😃 I am actually studying that in school right now! I think thats what started the split of the church, or my understanding of it anyway. The Catholics of that time, not everyone even the high officials were following what the Bible said, so Luther said something and then the Church excommunicated him. Its a cool story. 🙂
Click to expand...
I don’t know who is teaching you but this is just plain nonsense. Maybe you should try reading about these events from a unbiased point of view?
 
40.png
CatherineofA:
I am not Catholic. However, I was having a short discussion with some fellow Protestants. I mentioned that it was my understanding that the books that were chosen that make up the Bible were chosen by men who were Catholics They were members of the church. They met in councils, etc. and the books were chosen to make up the collection we have today. Correct? Do you have anymore background information on these people being Catholics who were members of the church and how this came about?
Click to expand...
What you want to read is: Where We Got the Bible: Our Debt to the Catholic Church by Rev. Henry G. Graham. It’s an eye-opener. 😉
 
The Holy Spirit guided the Catholic Church over time to recognize and determine the canon of the New and Old Testaments in A.D. 382 at the synod of Rome, under Pope Damasus I. This decision was ratified again at the councils of Hippo (393) and Carthage (397 and 419)
I just read about this last night in my new book. The Essential Catholic Survival Guide. The Authors are the staff at CA. (Thank You Guy’s)
Hope This answers your question 👍

MM
 
Here is a short history that will help clarify the issue.

The name Vulgate means ‘‘disseminated’’ or people’s bible. The Latin Vulgate was translated by the Catholic monk, Jerome around the year 384. The Catholic canon of scripture was essentially settled in the 4th century at the Councils of Hippo, Carthage and Rome around A.D. 393. The Council of Rome included the Decree of Pope Damasus concerning the canon. The Catholic canon was affirmed once more by the Council of Florence in 1431 and again at the Council of Trent in 1546.

Luther rejected the 7 deuterocanonical books of the bible and also eliminated Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelaton from the NT, but later Protestants reinserted them. Today the Catholic and Protestant NT books are identicle. Until 1873 the authorized version of the King James had the 7 books they call the apocrapha. When the first edition of the King James version was published there was a one year prison term to be given to anyone that published the KJV bible without the deuterocanonicals. Some new Protestant editions are restoring these books, but those publishing them do not necessarily consider them inspired.

I hope this helps.
 
40.png
CatherineofA:
I am not Catholic. However, I was having a short discussion with some fellow Protestants. I mentioned that it was my understanding that the books that were chosen that make up the Bible were chosen by men who were Catholics. They were members of the church. They met in councils, etc. and the books were chosen to make up the collection we have today. Correct? Do you have anymore background information on these people being Catholics who were members of the church?
Click to expand...
That is correct. Catholics were the only Christians up until after the 1400’s. The Catholic Church councils of Hippo and Carthage in the late 300’s first listed the books officially… They were listed prior to that and were listed officially because of the attempts of some to assert other material as being Scripture.
 
Catholics not only compiled and canonized the Bible.

They also wrote it!

(i.e., the NT)
 
40.png
april_hosen:
Yup!
Praise God for the Catholics!!!😃 I am actually studying that in school right now! I think thats what started the split of the church, or my understanding of it anyway. The Catholics of that time, not everyone even the high officials were following what the Bible said, so Luther said something and then the Church excommunicated him. Its a cool story. 🙂
Click to expand...
are you implying that somebody actually has been teaching you that the bible was put together at the time of, or as the result of, the reformation? Are you aware that this is complete hogwash? :eek:
 
Catholics were the only Christians up until after the 1400’s
Click to expand...
This is incorrect. There were heretics right from the start of the Church. Look at what Augustine said in the 4th century:
“[T]here are many other things which most properly can keep me in [the Catholic Church’s] bosom. The unanimity of peoples and nations keeps me here. Her authority, inaugurated in miracles, nourished by hope, augmented by love, and confirmed by her age, keeps me here. The succession of priests, from the very see of the apostle Peter, to whom the Lord, after his resurrection, gave the charge of feeding his sheep [John 21:15–17], up to the present episcopate, keeps me here. And last, the very name Catholic, which, not without reason, belongs to this Church alone, in the face of so many heretics, so much so that, although all heretics want to be called ‘Catholic,’ when a stranger inquires where the Catholic Church meets, none of the heretics would dare to point out his own basilica or house” (Against the Letter of Mani Called “The Foundation” 4:5 [A.D. 397]).
(emphasis mine).
I’m not saying you don’t have a point, I just think we should be clear on this. I guess the difference is that nobody today disputes that these groups were all heretics, as the groups are no longer around. If, for example, the Lutherans were to cease as a church, then people in a 100 years time would probably call them undisputed heretics as well. And I’m only using the Lutherans as an example, I have nothing against them personally 🙂
 
40.png
Atreyu:
This is incorrect. There were heretics right from the start of the Church. Look at what Augustine said in the 4th century:"[T]here are many other things which most properly can keep me in [the Catholic Church’s] bosom. The unanimity of peoples and nations keeps me here. Her authority, inaugurated in miracles, nourished by hope, augmented by love, and confirmed by her age, keeps me here. The succession of priests, from the very see of the apostle Peter, to whom the Lord, after his resurrection, gave the charge of feeding his sheep [John 21:15–17], up to the present episcopate, keeps me here. And last, the very name Catholic, which, not without reason, belongs to this Church alone, in the face of so many heretics, so much so that, although all heretics want to be called ‘Catholic,’ when a stranger inquires where the Catholic Church meets, none of the heretics would dare to point out his own basilica or house" (Against the Letter of Mani Called “The Foundation” 4:5 [A.D. 397]). (emphasis mine).

I’m not saying you don’t have a point, I just think we should be clear on this. I guess the difference is that nobody today disputes that these groups were all heretics, as the groups are no longer around. If, for example, the Lutherans were to cease as a church, then people in a 100 years time would probably call them undisputed heretics as well. And I’m only using the Lutherans as an example, I have nothing against them personally 🙂
Click to expand...
Not counting the East/West split. I’m talking about large numbers of Catholic Christians spliting off from the Catholic Church and making their own version of Christianity. There were groups who claimed to be Christians who were not.
 
40.png
CatherineofA:
I am not Catholic. However, I was having a short discussion with some fellow Protestants. I mentioned that it was my understanding that the books that were chosen that make up the Bible were chosen by men who were Catholics. They were members of the church. They met in councils, etc. and the books were chosen to make up the collection we have today. Correct? Do you have anymore background information on these people being Catholics who were members of the church?
Click to expand...
The Canon of Scripture was decided by the Catholic Church as indicated in the above posts in this thread. Even the Protestant Reformers gave credit to the Catholic Church for the Scriptures.

It was the Protestant Reformers themselves also who were Catholic until their rebellion in the 16’th century.

Ken
 
Hi Catherine,

The thought behind the statement that Catholics chose the book of the bible is in the right direction. However, your way of stating it is not.

The Church did not “approve” the books that are in the Bible. It “received” them as inspired from apostlic times. The Old Testament was accepted because Jesus and the apostles used it, and the New Testament was accepted because it states the teaching of the apostles.

It is correct to say that the Church was a “witness” to the inspiration of the Bible.

It would also be correct to say that the Bible came to us through the Catholic Church.

Verbum
 
Hi Catherine and welcome! Let’s look at this another way. The Catholic Church was the only organized Christian Church of the time. That being said, of course they are responsible for the holding the councils that determined which books were inspired and belonged in the bible. We do however believe that these councils were guided by the Holy Spirit. That being said, aren’t you curious about the oldest Christian religion and our impact on the world? Stick around, we don’t bite (hard) and we are always happy to explain any of our beliefs you have questions about.
 
Verbum,

There is much wisdom in what you say. I would, however, add that there were many spurious writings circulating in the early church. There were also many works that were quite good and in full keeping with the faith. The Letter of Clement would be an example. This letter and other writings, however, were rejected as not inspired. The Church had to discern what works were inspired and those that were not.
 
40.png
Neilbass2:
are you implying that somebody actually has been teaching you that the bible was put together at the time of, or as the result of, the reformation? Are you aware that this is complete hogwash? :eek:
Click to expand...
Huh?
Uh…did I say that? Umm no! Thats not what they are teaching in school. I meant that the Catholics had already assembled theBible before reformation and then Luther saw that a few of 'em werent leading lives according to what it said so he broke away from the church and was decalared a heretic…that not what happened?
 
40.png
Della:
I don’t know who is teaching you but this is just plain nonsense. Maybe you should try reading about these events from a unbiased point of view?
Click to expand...
And the UNBIASED POINT OF VIEW would be what ?
 
40.png
april_hosen:
Huh?
Uh…did I say that? Umm no! Thats not what they are teaching in school. I meant that the Catholics had already assembled theBible before reformation and then Luther saw that a few of 'em werent leading lives according to what it said so he broke away from the church and was decalared a heretic…that not what happened?
Click to expand...
Actually, it’s much more complicated than this. It was both religious and political. And, no it didn’t happen quite like you have described.

Please get a copy of books on the Reformation by Hillaire Belloc: How The Reformation Happened and Characters of the Reformation. These are excellent books and will give you a much better understanding than what you will likely get from your teacher.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top