Debate with anti-catholic bigot... help appreciated

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

exoflare

Guest
So this is what he says to me. My previous reply wasn’t very important in the context of all this. He pretty much covers his stand here. I’m still trying to double-check all my sources and make sure I find the right stuff to say, so if any of you have some specific points that may be helpful I would really appreciate it! 😃

**The RCC reference is not “callous” - its a fact. Ask any Greek Orthodox if there is only one church and you will get a healthy argument. I use the initials so I don’t have to type the long form of the title, not out of any disrespect.

If you understood the Apocrypha (meaning “hidden” or “doubtful”) history, you would know they were held separately from the full canon of Scripture in nearly every Bible BY THE RCC prior to Luther’s time. They had good reasons. There is not a single quotation from the Apocrypha to be found anywhere in the New Testament as a legitimizing cross-reference. The New Testament never refers to any document outside the canon as authoritative.

Nor did Jesus or any Apostle ever quote from the Apocrypha. Kind of makes you wonder, huh?

Early church fathers did not accept the Apocrypha as Scripture either – including Jerome, who wrote the Latin translation of the Bible held as THE RCC standard of Biblical scholarship for centuries. Check also such pillars of theology as Athanasius, Cyril and Origen – none saw the Apocrypha as part of the canon.

Even Cardinal Cajetan, the Pope’s designated condemner of Luther at Augsburg (1518), published his “Commentary on All the Authentic Historical Books of the Old Testament” and it DID NOT INCLUDE the Apocrypha!

The impact of the Reformation caused a Counter Reformation and at the Council of Trent, the RCC specifically absorbed (they would say “elevated”) the Apocrypha (and condemned anyone who refused to do so). This was done 1,000 years after the Apocrypha were written – something never done in the entire history of the church anywhere by anyone.

I believe the Council of Trent quote went something like this:

“. . . if anyone receives not as sacred and canonical the books with all their parts as they have been used in the Catholic Church, let him be anathema.”

So, I politely stand by what I said.**
 
Some thoughts that just quickly came to me right after I posted that…

paragraph 1: I have no idea what his point is, nor do I really care.

" 2: this is just an outright lie, isn’t it? And anyways, I’m pretty sure there are several other books in the OT that are never quoted in the NT that are still accepted as canonical by protestants… not sure I can name them all, though.

" 4: Did Jerone really leave the “apocrypha” out of his vulgate translation? Even so, I guess it wouldn’t matter because he wasn’t the authority on which books were canon anyway.

In paragraph 6 he mentions the council of Trent as where the “apocrypha” were finally accepted as canon. The part he leaves out is, weren’t ALL the other books of the NT and OT first accepted (by an ecumenical council) here too??
 
Council of Rome

*“Now indeed we must treat of the divine scriptures, what the universal Catholic Church accepts and what she ought to shun. The order of the Old Testament begins here: Genesis, one book; Exodus, one book; Leviticus, one book; Numbers, one book; Deuteronomy, one book; Joshua [Son of] Nave, one book; Judges, one book; Ruth, one book; Kings, four books [that is, 1 and 2 Samuel and 1 and 2 Kings]; Paralipomenon [Chronicles], two books; Psalms, one book; Solomon, three books: Proverbs, one book, Ecclesiastes, one book, [and] Canticle of Canticles [Song of Songs], one book; likewise Wisdom, one book; Ecclesiasticus [Sirach], one book . . . . Likewise the order of the historical [books]: Job, one book; Tobit, one book; Esdras, two books [Ezra and Nehemiah]; Esther, one book; Judith, one book; Maccabees, two books” (Decree of Pope Damasus [A.D. 382]).
*

Council of Hippo

“[It has been decided] that besides the canonical scriptures nothing be read in church under the name of divine Scripture. But the canonical scriptures are
as follows: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua the Son of Nun, Judges, Ruth, the Kings, four books, the Chronicles, two books, Job, the Psalter, the five books of Solomon [Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Wisdom, and a portion of the Psalms], the twelve books of the prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Ezekiel, Tobit, Judith, Esther, Ezra, two books, Maccabees, two books . . .” (Canon 36 [A.D. 393]).

Council of Carthage III

*"[It has been decided] that nothing except the canonical scriptures should be read in the Church under the name of the divine scriptures. But the canonical scriptures are: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, Paralipomenon, two books, Job, the Psalter of David, five books of Solomon, twelve books of the prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Ezekiel, Tobit, Judith, Esther, two books of Esdras, two books of the Maccabees . . ." (Canon 47 [A.D. 397]). *

Jerome

*“What sin have I committed if I follow the judgment of the churches? But he who brings charges against me for relating [in my preface to the book of Daniel] the objections that the Hebrews are wont to raise against the story of Susannah [Dan. 13], the Song of the Three Children [Dan. 3:29–68, RSV-CE], and the story of Bel and the Dragon [Dan. 14], which are not found in the Hebrew volume, proves that he is just a foolish sycophant. I was not relating my own personal views, but rather the remarks that they are wont to make against us. If I did not reply to their views in my preface, in the interest of brevity, lest it seem that I was composing not a preface, but a book, I believe I added promptly the remark, for I said, ‘This is not the time to discuss such matters’” (Against Rufinius 11:33 [A.D. 401]).
*
Also, Apocrypha is more of a Protestantism. These books are usually termed deuterocanonical (second canon)
 
40.png
arieh0310:
Also, Apocrypha is more of a Protestantism. These books are usually termed deuterocanonical (second canon)
Click to expand...
Yeah, I knew about that part already. Thanks a lot for the quotes, though! This guy may have taught classes on church history for years (what he told me), but he’s clearly using a selective history. I wouldn’t care so much myself if there weren’t others on that same e-mail thread that I have to set an example for. 😉

btw: I’m probably not going to reply to this guy until later tonight (it’s about 3:30p here). There’s really no reason to hurry. If anyone else has more specific advice you can still go ahead and let me know.
 
I hope that these two links help. They give references to the deutrocannicals(SP?) in the NT, I know that HEbrews 11:35 is a reference to a mother in a story that is told in 2 Maccabees. Also, somewhere in the gospels Jesus celebrates the festival of lights. This is a reference to Hanukah whose origin is told in Maccabees. I don’t know if that helps.

cin.org/users/james/files/deutero3.htm

matt1618.freeyellow.com/cloud.html
 
I can’t seem to find the article I read that pointed this out, but there are several allusions to the deuterocanonical texts in the NT. Plus there are 8 books (or so) in the Palestinian canon that are not referenced in the NT (like Esther). And, there was no single Jewish canon at the time of Christ’s sojourn here on earth. The canon that Protestants like was the result of a Jewish council in AD 90 (after the destruction of the temple, hmmm) and they also denounced NT books. Why should be take their advise on the canon of our Scripture?
 
Thank you as well, deb1, those pages should help as well. 🙂

I also just found out that apparently Jude 1:14-15 was taken from the Apocryphal - this time really Apocryphal LOL - book of Enoch (1:9).

So much for his “legitimizing” cross-references… unless he just happens to accept Enoch as inspired. 😛
 
exoflare said:
**There is not a single quotation from the Apocrypha to be found anywhere in the New Testament as a legitimizing cross-reference. The New Testament never refers to any document outside the canon as authoritative. **

Nor did Jesus or any Apostle ever quote from the Apocrypha. Kind of makes you wonder, huh?
Click to expand...

To begin with, I’m guessing that all references to “the Apocrypha” in the original post are really references to “the Deuterocanonicals.”

There are actually three classes of ancient texts relating to the Bible: protocanonical (first canon) books, which all ancient Christians agreed were inspired Scripture; deuterocanonical (second canon) books, which some Christians considered to be divinely inspired Scripture while others disagreed; and apocrypha, which all orthodox Christians agreed were not divinely inspired. The Old Testament deuterocanonical books are Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus (Sirach), Baruch, 1 and 2 Maccabees, chapters 10-16 of Esther, and three sections of Daniel: Dan. 3:24-90, Dan. 13, and Dan. 14. The New Testament deuterocanonical books and passages are: Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, Jude, Apocalypse, Mk. 16:19-20, Lk. 22:43-44, Jn. 5:4, and Jn. 8:1-11. There are numerous apocryphal books which no Christians believe to be part of Scripture, like the Gnostic scriptures collected in the Nag Hammadi Library.

The Catholic Church has long recognized all of the deuterocanonical books listed above as inspired Scripture, and that is why the Bible has 73 books (46 Old Testament, 29 New Testament). Protestants, beginning with Martin Luther, rejected the Old Testament deuterocanon in the 1500s, and that is why their Bibles have only 66 books, plus shorter versions of Esther and Daniel. The Eastern Orthodox accept the 73 books Catholics accept, plus Psalm 151, 3 and 4 Maccabees, a book of Esdras, and the Prayer of Manasseh.

Having said that, Jesus and the Apostles did quote from the Deuterocanonicals, plenty of times in fact… check out scripturecatholic.com/deuterocanon.html

And at least one Apostle (Paul) does quote from a book in no one’s Bible… check out Acts 17:28: "For ‘In him we live and move and have our being,’ as even some of your poets have said, ‘For we too are his offspring.’ " ‘In him we live and move and have our being’: some scholars understand this saying to be based on an earlier saying of Epimenides of Knossos (6th century B.C.). ‘For we too are his offspring’: here Paul is quoting Aratus of Soli, a third-century B.C. poet from Cilicia.
 
40.png
arieh0310:
I can’t seem to find the article I read that pointed this out, but there are several allusions to the deuterocanonical texts in the NT. Plus there are 8 books (or so) in the Palestinian canon that are not referenced in the NT (like Esther). And, there was no single Jewish canon at the time of Christ’s sojourn here on earth. The canon that Protestants like was the result of a Jewish council in AD 90 (after the destruction of the temple, hmmm) and they also denounced NT books. Why should be take their advise on the canon of our Scripture?
Click to expand...
Is this what you mean?
The Jews removed the deuterocanonicals from their canon at the Council of Jamnia in 90 AD, a wee bit after Jesus came and established His Church. Part of the reason the books were removed is that they were being used to convert people to Christianity, which did not make the Jews happy.
Click to expand...
I got that from this thread while I was digging through some of the old posts in this subforum:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=60423
 
Please tell us how your answer goes over with your Protestant friend, exoflare.🙂
 
40.png
Erich:
To begin with, I’m guessing that all references to “the Apocrypha” in the original post are really references to “the Deuterocanonicals.”
Click to expand...
Correct. We started a discussion on this e-mail thread yesterday about good ol’ Mr. “throw Jimmy into the stove”.
 
I’m sort of getting conflicting dates on the councils…

arieh0310 said:
Council of Hippo

“[It has been decided] that besides the canonical scriptures nothing be read in church under the name of divine Scripture. But the canonical scriptures are
as follows: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua the Son of Nun, Judges, Ruth, the Kings, four books, the Chronicles, two books, Job, the Psalter, the five books of Solomon [Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Wisdom, and a portion of the Psalms], the twelve books of the prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Ezekiel, Tobit, Judith, Esther, Ezra, two books, Maccabees, two books . . .” (Canon 36 [A.D. 393]).

Council of Carthage III

“[It has been decided] that nothing except the canonical scriptures should be read in the Church under the name of the divine scriptures. But the canonical scriptures are: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, Paralipomenon, two books, Job, the Psalter of David, five books of Solomon, twelve books of the prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Ezekiel, Tobit, Judith, Esther, two books of Esdras, two books of the Maccabees . . .” (Canon 47 [A.D. 397]).
Click to expand...

But on newadvent.com it says Carthage was in 419 A.D.:
Councils
Click to expand...
Can somebody give me verification on the real date? Thanks.
 
Thanks Genesis.

I think I’ve figured out that last question, though. :o

EDIT: wow… that article DID help a lot, Genesis! I found this quote most interesting…

And more than once, Christ Himself drew on the text of Sirach 27:6, which reads: "The fruit of a tree shows the care it has had; so too does a man’s speech disclose the bent of his mind."
 
40.png
exoflare:
I’m sort of getting conflicting dates on the councils…

But on newadvent.com it says Carthage was in 419 A.D.:

Can somebody give me verification on the real date? Thanks.
Click to expand...
Good question, I got the dates from here:

catholic.com/library/Old_Testament_Canon.asp

However if you go to the Council of Carthage at New Advent and go to Canon XXIV you will see a notation with a date of 393.

And New Advent also notes the councils of Carthage (397) and Hippo (393) here (towards the bottom of the article)
 
You’re indeed correct. Thank you. Looks like I’m finished with my reply. Here’s what I wrote. I think he will like it! :bounce:

btw, I’ll let you know how he answers…

If you understood the Apocrypha (meaning “hidden” or “doubtful”) history, you would know they were held separately from the full canon of Scripture in nearly every Bible BY THE RCC prior to Luther’s time.

Yes, I know what “apocryphal” means. The problem is, the Protestants were the ones that coined the term for these 7 books, and only after Luther’s time. There are Catholic apocryphal books, but they are different ones that were never considered canon by the church. Some of these books are Jubilees and Enoch in the OT and the Apocalypse of Peter and Infancy Gospel of James in the NT.

As for the rejection of these books by the “RCC” up until that time, I’ll ask you once again to tell us which council or papal decree (you know, actual Catholic teaching of some sort) reject these books. Meanwhile, these councils seem to have approved them.

Council of Hippo

"[It has been decided] that besides the canonical scriptures nothing be read in church under the name of divine Scripture. But the canonical scriptures are

as follows: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua the Son of Nun, Judges, Ruth, the Kings, four books, the Chronicles, two books, Job, the Psalter, the five books of Solomon [Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Wisdom, and a portion of the Psalms], the twelve books of the prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Ezekiel, Tobit, Judith, Esther, Ezra, two books, Maccabees, two books . . ." (Canon 36 [A.D. 393]).

Council of Carthage III

“[It has been decided] that nothing except the canonical scriptures should be read in the Church under the name of the divine scriptures. But the canonical scriptures are: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, Paralipomenon, two books, Job, the Psalter of David, five books of Solomon, twelve books of the prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Ezekiel, Tobit, Judith, Esther, two books of Esdras, two books of the Maccabees . . .” (Canon 47 [A.D. 397]).

(Note: Some books of the Bible have gone under more than one name.)

Sirach is also known as Ecclesiasticus.

1 and 2 Chronicles AKA 1 and 2 Paralipomenon.

Ezra and Nehemiah AKA 1 and 2 Esdras.

1 and 2 Samuel AKA 1 and 2 Kings.

1 and 2 Kings AKA 3 and 4 Kings.

Here on this website, you can look at digital scans from each book of the 1455 Gutenberg Bible - before Luther was ever born.

Wait, how did those extra books get in there?

Gutenberg Bible: Comparing the Texts

(cont…)
 
(cont…)
They had good reasons. There is not a single quotation from the Apocrypha to be found anywhere in the New Testament as a legitimizing cross-reference.
Code: 
 So there are NO cross-references to be found in here?
http://www.scripturecatholic.com/deuterocanon.html

Not to mention possibly some of these:

Deuterocanonical References in the New Testament
Code: 
 Who do you think would probably say something like this?  Take a wild guess.
“The fruit of a tree shows the care it has had; so too does a man’s speech disclose the bent of his mind.”
Code: 
 And what does this remind you of?

 "'Let us beset the just one, because he is obnoxious to us; he sets himself against our doings, reproaches us for transgressions of the law and charges us with violations of our training.  He professes to have knowledge of God and styles himself a child of the LORD.  To us he is the censure of our thoughts; merely to see him is a hardship for us, because his life is not like other men's, and different are his ways.  He judges us debased; he holds aloof from our paths as from things impure.  He calls blest the destiny of the just and boasts that God is his Father.  Let us see whether his words be true; let us find out what will happen to him.  For if the just one be the son of God, he will defend him and deliver him from the hand of his foes.  With revilement and torture let us put him to the test that we may have proof of his gentleness and try his patience.  Let us condemn him to a shameful death; for according to his own words, God will take care of him.'  These were their thoughts, but they erred; for their wickedness blinded them, and they knew not the hidden counsels of God; neither did they count on a recompense of holiness nor discern the innocent souls' reward."
Look at John 10:22, where Jesus celebrates the Feast of the Dedication (now referred to as “Hanukah” by the Jews). I’m sure that if Jesus knew the only recording of this holy day came from 1 and 2 Maccabees, he certainly would have decided not to celebrate it instead. But oops, too late it’s already in the Bible. Somebody should have told poor Jesus!

Read 2 Maccabees chapter 7 sometime, and tell me with a straight face that this is not what Hebrews 12:35 is alluding to.

By the way, did you know that Jude (1:14-15) quotes from the (really) apocryphal book of Enoch (1:9)? Maybe Enoch should be in scripture too? I don’t think it would be a good idea, myself.

The New Testament never refers to any document outside the canon as authoritative.

Where does the NT “refer” to any document as authoritative, much less specify a “canon”, on its own? Is there some sort of divinely inspired table of contents?
Code: 
 Nor did Jesus or any Apostle ever quote from the Apocrypha. Kind of makes you wonder, huh?

 It makes me wonder why you apparently consider Judges, 1 Chronicles, 2 Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, (...stops to take a breath... *gasp...) Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Lamentations, Obadiah, Nahum, and Zephaniah to all be inspired, because none of those books are ever quoted in the NT themselves.
(cont…)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top