N
nearlycatholic
Guest
hey buddy, they asked if he “invented” it! That’s what I was addressing. Constantine didn’t invent Catholicism. The CC is clear in her doctrine that Jesus founded it!
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
D
De_Maria
Guest
The point is, that you admit and accept that the Catholic Church selected and compiled the Old Testament.So? The letters, the Septuagint were around. The Council was only where they were compiled. Any educated Jew could have helped compile the Old Testament. And really, what was so hard about it? They didnt have that much to choose from!
Q
Quaestor
Guest
Not sure what you mean… The original question I asked was if anyone know who started the myth that Constantine invented/started the Catholic Church… as I am writing and documenting this myth and I want to be as accurate as possible and I need to footnote and reference it. I write wikipedia articles as a hobbyhey buddy, they asked if he “invented” it! That’s what I was addressing. Constantine didn’t invent Catholicism. The CC is clear in her doctrine that Jesus founded it!
D
De_Maria
Guest
Good for you! Wikipedia gets a bad rap. But everyone I know, uses it.I write wikipedia articles as a hobby
Q
Quaestor
Guest
The Old testament was not canonized by Jews until between 850 - 870 AD. This is what the Masoretic text is. Catholicism canonized the Old Testament in 420 AD long before the Jews did.
D
De_Maria
Guest
What about the Septuagint? Is it not considered a canonized version? By that, I mean, all the books together in one “scroll or set”. I understand that 77 scholars got together and translated from the Hebrew to the Greek. I’ve heard it was considered miraculous, at the time.The Old testament was not canonized by Jews until between 850 - 870 AD. This is what the Masoretic text is. Catholicism canonized the Old Testament in 420 AD long before the Jews did.
Last edited:
Q
Quaestor
Guest
The LXX was not canonized … However every version of the LXX known contained all the books in the Formal Canon. So we know that all the Deuterocanonical books should be included in the Canon of the Old Testament. I can try and fined an article I wrote on the subject of Mesoretic vs LXX. Just be aware that the LXX is a gen1 translation … the Latin Vulgate uses a gen 2 translation (time of Christ) known as the Symmachus
Q
Quaestor
Guest
Canon of Scripture
During this second temple period most Jews did not speak Hebrew as it was a dead language and only used in a religious setting. The language spoken by Jews in general was Greek which was the lingua franca, and those living in and around Jerusalem and Palestine spoke a Syriac language called Aramaic. The Jewish Hebrew canon was translated into Greek by 72 Jewish scholars in Alexandria by between 210 – 190 BC and this text was in wide spread use among the Jewish people and was called the Septuagint (LXX). This is the scriptural canon used by Jesus Christ. According to scholars during the time of Jesus, both the Hebrew and Greek canon were considered co-equal and of equal veracity, in fact both versions were used in worship and by the Rabbis.
When Jesus is quoted in scripture or the apostles speak they use the LXX not the STP canon. The slight variations between the LXX and the STP canon are born out in the New Testament. Jesus Christ and his apostles used the LXX and that is the reason why the Catholic Church uses the LXX – if it is good enough for Jesus… The LXX did not include the Apocryphal books – by this I mean the real apocryphal books not the Protestant equivocation of the term. None of the Catholic nor Catholic Orthodox Bibles include any apocryphal books, not a single one. The Catholic Church uses both the Western and Eastern canon and this is dependent on the rite to which one may belong. Western churches include only the formal LXX canon which is used in the liturgy whereas the Eastern churches (including Eastern Catholics) use the general canon of the LXX. The Western LXX canon is sometimes called the Carthaginian canon. As for liturgical purposes both the Eastern and Western Churches can get by with the formal canon used by the Western Churches.
When the Temple of Jerusalem was destroyed during the First Jewish Roman War. The Roman army sought and destroyed all Hebrew writings they could get their hands on. All throughout Palestine synagogues were raided and the writings were destroyed. The Temple of Jerusalem was so integral to the living of the life and faith of Judaism. It was centered not on the reading and studying scripture but on liturgy and sacrifice administer by the priests and Levites (deacons). The destruction of the Temple resulted in the Jews not being able to practice the faith, as without the Temple no Jew could practice their faith, Judaism was essentially dead and there was no longer a requirement for the Jewish priesthood.
The Bar Kokhba Revolt is seen as a turning point in Catholic Jewish relations as Jewish Catholics did not join in the revolt against the Romans; given that the Jews considered Simon Bar Kokhba the messiah it is not hard to understand why Jewish Catholics would not join their kinsmen in the revolt. After the revolt was put down the Jewish Rabbis branded Bar Kokhba a heretic and a false messiah, however, the Catholics were continued to be considered traitors.
During this second temple period most Jews did not speak Hebrew as it was a dead language and only used in a religious setting. The language spoken by Jews in general was Greek which was the lingua franca, and those living in and around Jerusalem and Palestine spoke a Syriac language called Aramaic. The Jewish Hebrew canon was translated into Greek by 72 Jewish scholars in Alexandria by between 210 – 190 BC and this text was in wide spread use among the Jewish people and was called the Septuagint (LXX). This is the scriptural canon used by Jesus Christ. According to scholars during the time of Jesus, both the Hebrew and Greek canon were considered co-equal and of equal veracity, in fact both versions were used in worship and by the Rabbis.
When Jesus is quoted in scripture or the apostles speak they use the LXX not the STP canon. The slight variations between the LXX and the STP canon are born out in the New Testament. Jesus Christ and his apostles used the LXX and that is the reason why the Catholic Church uses the LXX – if it is good enough for Jesus… The LXX did not include the Apocryphal books – by this I mean the real apocryphal books not the Protestant equivocation of the term. None of the Catholic nor Catholic Orthodox Bibles include any apocryphal books, not a single one. The Catholic Church uses both the Western and Eastern canon and this is dependent on the rite to which one may belong. Western churches include only the formal LXX canon which is used in the liturgy whereas the Eastern churches (including Eastern Catholics) use the general canon of the LXX. The Western LXX canon is sometimes called the Carthaginian canon. As for liturgical purposes both the Eastern and Western Churches can get by with the formal canon used by the Western Churches.
When the Temple of Jerusalem was destroyed during the First Jewish Roman War. The Roman army sought and destroyed all Hebrew writings they could get their hands on. All throughout Palestine synagogues were raided and the writings were destroyed. The Temple of Jerusalem was so integral to the living of the life and faith of Judaism. It was centered not on the reading and studying scripture but on liturgy and sacrifice administer by the priests and Levites (deacons). The destruction of the Temple resulted in the Jews not being able to practice the faith, as without the Temple no Jew could practice their faith, Judaism was essentially dead and there was no longer a requirement for the Jewish priesthood.
The Bar Kokhba Revolt is seen as a turning point in Catholic Jewish relations as Jewish Catholics did not join in the revolt against the Romans; given that the Jews considered Simon Bar Kokhba the messiah it is not hard to understand why Jewish Catholics would not join their kinsmen in the revolt. After the revolt was put down the Jewish Rabbis branded Bar Kokhba a heretic and a false messiah, however, the Catholics were continued to be considered traitors.
Last edited:
Q
Quaestor
Guest
Once the situation had calmed down somewhat after the Bar Kokhba Revolt (Second Jewish Roman War) the Jewish Rabbis (not the Levites or the priests) came together to seek to refound Judaism in around 170 AD. A decision was made at this council that all only the Jewish scripture in Hebrew have canonical validity. Due to the destruction of the Jewish writings, the only Hebrew texts available at his time was the pre-Babylonian canon in Hebrew which was dispersed in areas of the Middle East, which was supplemented by the LXX in its usage. This decision to accept only the then available canon in Hebrew essentially stripped the post-Babylonian books knows as the Deuterocanonical books from the Jewish Bible which were once available in Hebrew but no longer available when the Jewish canon was formalized for the second time in the 7th century. This new canon is called the Masoretic canon and is used by Jews today. While the Orthodox Jews of today do not consider the Deuterocanonical books a part of the canon they consider these book helpful in following the faith and not heretical in any way. The earliest Masoretic manuscript available is from the 11th century.
In the very early 1500’s two streams, humanism and biblical criticism flowed into a confluence. The humanists required that all work should be translated from the earliest sources and already has some scholarship. Biblical criticism on the other hand was just in its nativity. Humanism scholarship favored that translation from the source languages, namely Greek for the New Testament and Hebrew for the Old Testament. When the Protestant following the scholarship of the day decided to choose the Masoretic canon as it was in Hebrew, the original language of the OT. Since the deuterocanonical books were no longer available in the Hebrew, these were not included in the Protestant Old Testament.
The ancient Churches, which were all catholic continued to use the LXX, not following the then modern scholarship, but rather, following their tradition. This tradition provided an alternate historical narrative which provided a contrary counter narrative of historic usage within the Early Church to that of the newly minted scholars looking at scripture without the guide of tradition.
Fast forward to 1946 and the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls. We have to complete Jewish Essene Canon of the STP in Hebrew including the deuterocanonical books. Some Jews hid away the Jewish scriptures from the STP in some caves several caches of these began to be found in the Judean hill country. Which goes to prove Catholics were right all along, so much so that they were able to preserve Jewish Bible better than the Rabbinic Jews themselves.
In the very early 1500’s two streams, humanism and biblical criticism flowed into a confluence. The humanists required that all work should be translated from the earliest sources and already has some scholarship. Biblical criticism on the other hand was just in its nativity. Humanism scholarship favored that translation from the source languages, namely Greek for the New Testament and Hebrew for the Old Testament. When the Protestant following the scholarship of the day decided to choose the Masoretic canon as it was in Hebrew, the original language of the OT. Since the deuterocanonical books were no longer available in the Hebrew, these were not included in the Protestant Old Testament.
The ancient Churches, which were all catholic continued to use the LXX, not following the then modern scholarship, but rather, following their tradition. This tradition provided an alternate historical narrative which provided a contrary counter narrative of historic usage within the Early Church to that of the newly minted scholars looking at scripture without the guide of tradition.
Fast forward to 1946 and the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls. We have to complete Jewish Essene Canon of the STP in Hebrew including the deuterocanonical books. Some Jews hid away the Jewish scriptures from the STP in some caves several caches of these began to be found in the Judean hill country. Which goes to prove Catholics were right all along, so much so that they were able to preserve Jewish Bible better than the Rabbinic Jews themselves.
Q
Quaestor
Guest
As for the term apocrypha when concerning the Bible, the Protestants are equivocating as usual. There is an apocrypha but neither do the Eastern or Western Churches use these books in their scriptural canons. The books of the STP/LXX canon which are not in the Masoretic canon are called the deuterocanonical books, not by the equivocation of terms, the Apocrypha. The Apocrypha and the deuterocanonical books different sets of books. Books belonging to the apocrypha are any number of books (there is no standard at all) such as the Enoch, Jubilee, etc. The term apocrypha has been abused so badly by Protestants in an attempt to validate their choice of the Masoretic that there is much confusion in this regard. They are under the false impression that the books which appear in the King James Bible’s (regarded today as the very worst mainstream bible by academics) apocryphal section are actually Apocryphal books, they are not.
There was no canonized canon of Jewish scripture during the time of Jesus. The Sadducees only accepted the five books of Moses. Flavius Josephus list of 22 books of the Jewish canon includes deuterocanonical books such as Ecclesiasticus and the Wisdom of Solomon. The Essenes accepted all the deuterocanonical books. Each Jewish sect had their own canon to a certain extent.
Keep in mind, Testament quotes the Old Testament 360 times. Of these 360, the New Testament quotes the Septuagint 300 times, the DSS (Hebrew texts) 20 times and the rest of the time it is ambiguous or no clear preference for either the LXX or the DSS was used for the quote. Since Jesus and the apostles apparently were using the LXX most of the time 83% vs 6% we can only surmise that Christ accepted the LXX.
There was no canonized canon of Jewish scripture during the time of Jesus. The Sadducees only accepted the five books of Moses. Flavius Josephus list of 22 books of the Jewish canon includes deuterocanonical books such as Ecclesiasticus and the Wisdom of Solomon. The Essenes accepted all the deuterocanonical books. Each Jewish sect had their own canon to a certain extent.
Keep in mind, Testament quotes the Old Testament 360 times. Of these 360, the New Testament quotes the Septuagint 300 times, the DSS (Hebrew texts) 20 times and the rest of the time it is ambiguous or no clear preference for either the LXX or the DSS was used for the quote. Since Jesus and the apostles apparently were using the LXX most of the time 83% vs 6% we can only surmise that Christ accepted the LXX.
D
De_Maria
Guest
Thanks. That would be interesting.I can try and fined an article I wrote on the subject of Mesoretic vs LXX.
Q
Quaestor
Guest
Posted in three parts (look above Canon of scripture) but need an update due further information.
D
De_Maria
Guest
Great job! Keep up the good work!
Q
Quaestor
Guest
Keep in mind that there are 4 generations of Jewish OT writings. LXX is the original translation. Symmachus is the STP translation of gen2 OT during the time of Christ (essentially an LXX) When Jerome translated the bible he used the Symmachus instead of the LXX
D
De_Maria
Guest
Interesting. Is there an online translation of the Symmachus? I’m interested in why some of St. Jerome’s words differ so much from the Greek versions. For example, Gen 3:15Keep in mind that there are 4 generations of Jewish OT writings. LXX is the original translation. Symmachus is the STP translation of gen2 OT during the time of Christ (essentially an LXX) When Jerome translated the bible he used the Symmachus instead of the LXX
Q
Quaestor
Guest
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
The diagram explains how differing OT translations relate to each other. Solid Arrows are direct parents … Dashed arrows indicate that the text was corrected using …
The diagram explains how differing OT translations relate to each other. Solid Arrows are direct parents … Dashed arrows indicate that the text was corrected using …
Q
Quaestor
Guest
FYI yellow means that they were lost. At one time it was thought that gen 2 was lost the finding of the DSS means that we have gen 2 wirings. While the diagram is my own work, I do not claim any copyright to it so anyone is free to distribute it.
Last edited:
Q
Quaestor
Guest
Unfortunately I do not know where one can find this, St,. Jerome does indicate that the Symmachus contained errors which is the reason he corrected this against Hebrew texts when he wrote the vulgate.Symmachus
D
De_Maria
Guest
Thank God we have people to study that stuff in so much detail. It’s amazing. My mind doesn’t work that way.
B
BlackFriar
Guest
???There is some truth to it.
We still haven’t escaped an over emphasis on legalism, blind obedience and aggressive evangelisation and one true Church mentality.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.