=Jim Dandy;8081344]Let’s see. God “divinely protected the Church’s teachings” except “the part Luther later tossed out”? Did God appoint Luther to “correct” the canon in the 16th century?
J
Did God appoint a council that lacks ecumenical status to do so?
Luther was acting in a way that was permitted within the Church at the time - pre-Trent. It becomes rhetoric to say that Luther took it upon himself to “change the canon”, but not say that of, for example, Cardinal Cajetan, a contemporary of Luther who also stated that the D-C’s were not on a par with the canon. Either both should be condemned (for not knowing in advance what Trent would say), or both should be provided the same understanding that they were expressing opinions that were permitted by the Church at their time.
Jerome disagreed with the writings that were then preversed only in the Greek, but he was a loyal son of the Church. Following the Council of Rome, he was commissioned by Pope Damasus I to translate into Latin what became the Vulgate, which contained the 73-book canon first defined by the Council of Rome. Jerome put his personal opinion aside and followed the Church’s decision.
And so did Luther. What makes it quite impressive about Luther who, with help, translated 74 (not 73) books is that he did all of it after he was excommunicated. He didn’t have to translate the D-C’s. Why would he do that if this was simply his arrogant determination of what scripture should be?
The Greek Septuagint (LXX) was translated from the Hebrew (or Aramaic) around 250 B.C. Only two of the LXX writings are from original Greek. The LXX was considered Scripture even in Palestine. Some of the Hebrew writings later disintegrated, or for whatever reason, disappeared. They were then preserved only in the Greek. The Palestinian Rabbis rejected the Septuagint because it was used by the Church to evangelize Jews (and Gentiles) in the entire Mediterranean world.
Luther found it convenient to also reject the Greek writings from his German translation of the Bible. He put them in an appendix between the OT and the NT and left the pages unnumbered so readers would know he didn’t regard them as “Scripture.” 2 Macabees – which supports belief in purgatory and prayer for the dead and didn’t fit with Luther’s novel doctrines – was among them.
OK, let’s say that you are correct, that Purgatory is supported by 2 Mac., and forgetting for the moment that Luther did not totally reject Purgatory, how does that apply to the other 6 books of the deuterocanon? Are you saying that Luther figured, “well since 2 Mac supports Purgatory, I’ll throw out Tobit, Wisdom and Judith for good measure.”?
Luther also removed Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation from the canon of his German translation of the Bible, again leaving the pages unnumbered, and put them in an appendix at the end of the NT with prefaces explaining why he did not consider them “Scripture.”
No, because he considered them “disputed”. And they were disputed (antilegomena),
all the way back to Eusebius.
The Church canonized Macabees along with Matthew, and Baruch along with Isaiah centuries before Luther lived.
Say what you want, but those councils were local, and not ecumenical, otherwise the East would have the same canon.
Please explain how you know God approved of Luther’s cuts to the OT canon? Should we accept his cuts to the NT also?
Once again, to say that Luther cut books is inaccurate. He translated and included 74 books. To my knowledge, the order of the books is not dogmatic, and the grouping reflects the historic disputes regarding the D-C’s and the antilegomena.
It is also quite irrelevent to ask the question, as the answer is universal acceptance of the 27 NT books. Luther’s opinion is simply that, Luther’s opinion.
Let me ask you, why did Rome cut 1 Esdras, and 3 and 4 Mac out of the Bible?
Jon
In so many words she stated that can’t be. I asked her did it just fall out of the sky…
