Council Statements of the Old Testament

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guardian
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
G

Guardian

Guest
Does anyone know of a website which quotes the Councils of Rome (382), Hippo (393), Carthage (397, 419), II Nicea (787), Florence (1442), and Trent (1546) listing out what specifc books belong in the Old Testament?

I know there is one and I am pulling my hair out trying to find it!

Thanks for any help.
 
Does anyone know of a website which quotes the Councils of Rome (382), Hippo (393), Carthage (397, 419), II Nicea (787), Florence (1442), and Trent (1546) listing out what specifc books belong in the Old Testament?

I know there is one and I am pulling my hair out trying to find it!

Thanks for any help.
piar.hu/councils/ has the later councils, although the site which Thistle posted actually has the full text from Trent.

We do not actually have the documents of the 382 Council of Rome; instead, we have a somewhat debatable reference in the C6th Decretum Gelasianum. That site includes other early lists.

bible-researcher.com/canon8.html also has several of the early lists, including Carthage 397, which is all that we have with reference to Hippo 393.
 
piar.hu/councils/ has the later councils, although the site which Thistle posted actually has the full text from Trent.

We do not actually have the documents of the 382 Council of Rome; instead, we have a somewhat debatable reference in the C6th Decretum Gelasianum. That site includes other early lists.

bible-researcher.com/canon8.html also has several of the early lists, including Carthage 397, which is all that we have with reference to Hippo 393.
What? We don’t have the documents to the 382 Council of Rome nor Hippo 393? Where did they go? Why were they not preserved?
 
I see there were some questions concerning the Councils at Hippo and Rome. I think it should be noted that these two councils is not considered by the Roman Catholic Church as ecumenical.

In regards to the scriptures in general and the OT in particular, the council at Rome basically affirmed the list of canonical books that was originally presented in a letter by Anthanasius. The council at Hippo confirmed this list as well.

I think it should also be remembered that these two councils as well as the other regional and Ecumenical Councils of this era were not called for the primary task of establishing the Canon of Scripture.Rather, they were to address the various heresies (such as Arianism) challenging the Church at the time. Part of the council’s task was to establish the list of inspired books to oppose the those books the heretics held as inspired. So the list of canonical text were important, however, these list were the primary reason for the councils.
 
I tried to correct my own post but was too slow. I wrote that the councils of Hippo and Rome in particular the “OT” affirmed the canon as presented originally by Athanasius. My “OT” should have been “NT”. As we all know the OT’s canon was finally established once and for all by the Council of Trent (at least as far as the Roman Catholic Church is concerned).
 
What? We don’t have the documents to the 382 Council of Rome nor Hippo 393? Where did they go? Why were they not preserved?
We have references to these councils in other documents, rather than the full texts of the Councils themselves. This is not unusual. There are whole texts, including aesthetic works by great poets and philosophical works by early Church Fathers, which only survive to us as quotations in the works of others. We hope that the quotations are accurate. In 1 Corinthians 5:9, Paul refers to an earlier letter which he had written to them, a letter which is not mentioned in the canon lists of the second century, presumably indicating that it had already disappeared by that stage.

The problem was that these things were written down on perishable, and often scarce, materials. Books were often destroyed by fires, whether accidentally, in a world which used fire as a light-source, or on purpose, during the sacking of captured cities. Because materials were so scarce, many texts were scraped off the page, which was essentially a piece of leather, and another one which was more important to the scribe was written over the top of it.

When the Roman Empire was shattered by the Goth invasions, the number of houses of learning plunged, and the incidence of violence soared. We lost a lot of knowledge in that period, so much so that, when the Franks went to West Asia in the Crusades, they rediscovered much which they had lost but which the Arabs had preserved. Thank God for the Muslims!

In other words, these texts were (probably) not lost as a result of indolence, but rather as the unfortunate consequence of one thousand seven hundred years of intervening history.
 
Mystophilus,

I think your last post is a very good answer to Guardian’s question. I hope others read this as well because I think it would help shed some light on bible translations as well and why it is so difficult to find and use ancient manuscripts as original sources. Difficult but may I add very necessary.

I would just like to add a little historical antedote, it doesn’t have to do with the councils of Rome and Hippo, but it also shows why the earliest christian writings are scarse. I remember reading about one of the Roman persecutions, I believe happened in the Eastern Empire. The Emperor’s orders were in effect to first destroy all Christian writings and if the opportunity present itself destroy the leaders as well. The Emperor saw books as more dangerous than people.

One last point, I think the loss of the library at Alexanderia, Egypt can never be forgotten and the lost of knowledge as the result of that fire(s). But perhaps we should look at this lost as a positive because what would so many of us who participate in these forum discussions do if we had copies of the gospels autographed by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top