Early Church Fathers - Lets be honest

[youngsaint]

I don’t see wht this is such an argument, its a historical fact that they were in there until some protestant took em’ out it the 1800s.

And just curious,
Protestants, why can’t anything else be inspired? Why does it end at the Revelation? And weren’t some of the books taken out written before the Revelation of St. John (which happened in 80ish ad)?

 

[SemperReformada]

I understand history can be complicated and you seem to be nuancing quite a bit, but how would you order the following statements for how true they are?

A. The Catholic Church adapted the canon of the Septuagint (circa 2000BC) as their canon of the Old Testament.
B. **The Catholic Church adapted their canon of the Old Testament based on the Septuagint. **
C. The Catholic Church added seven books to the Hebrew Canon (circa 90AD) in the 4th century.
D. The Catholic Church added seven books to the Hebrew Canon at the Council of Trent(16th century).

My answer would be B, A, C, D.

If you believe the RCC adopted the canon of the LXX I challenge you to demonstrate for us which manuscript of the LXX contains precisely the OT canon the RCC recognizes today.

 

[Stephen168]

If you believe the RCC adopted the canon of the LXX I challenge you to demonstrate for us which manuscript of the LXX contains precisely the OT canon the RCC recognizes today.

You are asking me; if I believe ‘B’ then prove ‘A.’ I believe history can be complicated and ‘B’ is the most true statement. Which do you believe is most true?

 

[SemperReformada]

You are asking me; if I believe ‘B’ then prove ‘A.’ I believe history can be complicated and ‘B’ is the most true statement. Which do you believe is most true?

I don’t believe your church made any dogmatic declaration until Trent but that isn’t an option is it?

I guess I would say that “C” would be the better of the choices since the earlier councils did list the dc’s as part of the canon.

 

[greggy53]

It could also be that no one understood the councils as being binding. For a reference look at the Augustine quote I provided earlier. He apparently did not see the councils as settling the issue of the canon although he not only presided over the council but also accepted the dc’s as canonical.
I guess I just don’t see how he can “submit” to the councils and at the same time publicly reject the dc’s.
It’s also curious that the Vulgate was sent out complete with Jerome’s disparaging prologues to the dc’s. If the North African councils were binding or somehow settled the issue of the OT canon why would the church turnaround and undermine it’s position in such an obvious way?
In fact, it’s Jerome’s prologues to the dc’s in the Vulgate that caused many in the middle ages to reject the dc’s.

This is what was decreed by the Council of Rome in 382 AD
Sounds pretty binding to me. You

The “Damasine list”, issued by Pope Damasus I at the council, is as follows:

It is likewise decreed: Now, indeed, we must treat of the divine Scriptures: what the universal Catholic Church accepts and what she must shun. The list of the Old Testament begins: Genesis, one book; Exodus, one book: Leviticus, one book;Numbers, one book; Deuteronomy, one book; Jesus Nave, one book; of Judges, one book; Ruth, one book; of Kings, four books [First and Second Books of Kings, Third and Fourth Books of Kings]; Paralipomenon, two books; One Hundred and Fifty Psalms, one book; of Solomon, three books: Proverbs, one book; Ecclesiastes, one book; Canticle of Canticles, one book; likewise, Wisdom, one book; Ecclesiasticus (Sirach), one book;

Likewise, the list of the Prophets: Isaiah, one book; Jeremias, one book; along with Cinoth, that is, his Lamentations; Ezechiel, one book; Daniel, one book; Osee, one book; Amos, one book; Micheas, one book; Joel, one book; Abdias, one book; Jonas, one book; Nahum, one book; Habacuc, one book; Sophonias, one book; Aggeus, one book; Zacharias, one book; Malachias, one book.

Likewise, the list of histories: Job, one book; Tobias, one book; Esdras, two books; Esther, one book; Judith, one book; of Maccabees, two books.

Likewise, the list of the Scriptures of the New and Eternal Testament, which the holy and Catholic Church receives: of the Gospels, one book according to Matthew, one book according to Mark, one book according to Luke, one book according to John. The Epistles of the Apostle Paul, fourteen in number: one to the Romans, one to the Corinthians [2 Corinthians is not mentioned], one to the Ephesians, two to the Thessalonians [First Epistle to the Thessalonians and Second Epistle to the Thessalonians], one to the Galatians, one to the Philippians, one to the Colossians, two to Timothy [First Epistle to Timothy and Second Epistle to Timothy], one to Titus, one to Philemon, one to the Hebrews.

Likewise, one book of the Apocalypse of John. And the Acts of the Apostles, one book.

Likewise, the canonical Epistles, seven in number: of the Apostle Peter, two Epistles [First Epistle of Peter and Second Epistle of Peter]; of the Apostle James, one Epistle; of the Apostle John, one Epistle; of the other John, a Presbyter, two Epistles [Second Epistle of John and Third Epistle of John]; of the Apostle Jude the Zealot, one Epistle. Thus concludes the canon of the New Testament.

Likewise it is decreed: After the announcement of all of these prophetic and evangelic or as well as apostolic writings which we have listed above as Scriptures, on which, by the grace of God, the Catholic Church is founded, we have considered that it ought to be announced that although all the Catholic Churches spread abroad through the world comprise but one bridal chamber of Christ, nevertheless, the holy Roman Church has been placed at the forefront not by the conciliar decisions of other Churches, but has received the primacy by the evangelic voice of our Lord and Savior, who says: “You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it; and I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you shall have bound on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you shall have loosed on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

If so, then why did the Eastern Church take so long to recognize these books as canonical?

Gabriel of 12;
If you recall, the Emperor Constantine, who lifted the persecution of the Catholic Church, financed the first council to settle once and for all the question of books to be used in the Liturgy of the Mass, which resulted in the canon of bible books we have today including the Deutero books. Because the Eastern Catholic Church looks to the Emperor Constantine as a saint, and the Western Church recognizes him as “good man” who lifted the persecution of the Catholic Church were both present from the start. Arguments over the canon including the deutero books continued.

There is much history here, because many of the famous Heretics and heresies came from the Eastern Catholic Church during the lifting of the persecution. There were many councils and synods that dealt with the bible canon issues and heresies. I cannot answer for the Eastern Orthodox in schism with the Pope, but those Eastern Rites in communion with the Pope have always accepted the canon because there Patriarch’s and Bishops were present. The question I would like to know is why the Eastern Orthodox recognize other books as inspired not included in the original canon?

Contarini;
No “remembering” is involved here. This is a polemical claim you are making without providing support. There is no evidence that there was ever an “original” Jewish canon that included these books. There is no direct evidence for anything as formal as an “Alexandrian canon,” for that matter. The only Jewish canonical statements of which I’m aware correspond to the “Palestinian” canon–and we have the evidence of Josephus (at least I think he’s the source for this) that the Sadducees had an even smaller canon (as did the Samaritans, I believe).

Edwin

Gabriel of 12;
I am surprised that you are not aware of the “Septuagint” containing the 7 Deutero books? Are you aware of how the Septuagint the 70 or 72 Hebrews who translated the Hebrew books into Greek resulting in what is called the “Septuagint”. The Septuagint predates Jesus and the apostles. True the first century Jews contained “The writings” in addition to the law and prophets. What is interesting here from the first century is that their remained two camps of Jews, the Pharisees who followed the law and the Prophets including the Oral Hebrew Traditions recorded from the Septuagint, the Sadducees only adhered to the written law which rejected such oral teachings of the Messiah to come, “Wisdom” books which taught an Afterlife, resurrection etc.

Ptolemy Philadelphus who financed the 72=Septuagint (Hebrew scholars) to translate the Hebrew written law and prophets which included the Deutero books into Greek. Resulting in the Alexandria Jewish canon which is undisputed from this period among biblical scholars.

The argument is whether or not if? first century Jews read or taught from the Septuagint? Jesus and the Apostles did, because they proclaimed the resurrection and the afterlife part of their Gospel message. True this gets fuzzy by the first century post exiled Jews, until after the destruction of the temple 70 a.d, the Jews from the school of Jamnia canonized the Palestinian canon which removed the Deutero books and added other writings into their Palestinian canon, which modifed the already existing Alexandria canon, by removing and adding books.

As far as the Samaritans the half (Jew) breeds were never considered part of the temple religious which included Pharisees and Sadducees. Samaritans are another topic, because they included pagan tendencies in their worship, not to mention they built their own temple of worship outside of Jerusalem.

 

[SemperReformada]

Gabriel of 12;
I am surprised that you are not aware of the “Septuagint” containing the 7 Deutero books? Are you aware of how the Septuagint the 70 or 72 Hebrews who translated the Hebrew books into Greek resulting in what is called the “Septuagint”. The Septuagint predates Jesus and the apostles. True the first century Jews contained “The writings” in addition to the law and prophets. What is interesting here from the first century is that their remained two camps of Jews, the Pharisees who followed the law and the Prophets including the Oral Hebrew Traditions recorded from the Septuagint, the Sadducees only adhered to the written law which rejected such oral teachings of the Messiah to come, “Wisdom” books which taught an Afterlife, resurrection etc.

Ptolemy Philadelphus who financed the 72=Septuagint (Hebrew scholars) to translate the Hebrew written law and prophets which included the Deutero books into Greek. Resulting in the Alexandria Jewish canon which is undisputed from this period among biblical scholars.

The argument is whether or not if? first century Jews read or taught from the Septuagint? Jesus and the Apostles did, because they proclaimed the resurrection and the afterlife part of their Gospel message. True this gets fuzzy by the first century post exiled Jews, until after the destruction of the temple 70 a.d, the Jews from the school of Jamnia canonized the Palestinian canon which removed the Deutero books and added other writings into their Palestinian canon, which modifed the already existing Alexandria canon, by removing and adding books.

As far as the Samaritans the half (Jew) breeds were never considered part of the temple religious which included Pharisees and Sadducees. Samaritans are another topic, because they included pagan tendencies in their worship, not to mention they built their own temple of worship outside of Jerusalem.

Does it matter what books were contained within the LXX? If it does, can you tell us which manuscript of the LXX contains the exact OT canon that the RCC uses today?

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

It could also be that no one understood the councils as being binding. For a reference look at the Augustine quote I provided earlier. He apparently did not see the councils as settling the issue of the canon although he not only presided over the council but also accepted the dc’s as canonical.

Gabriel of 12;

You are aware of **ST. Augustines famous quote? “I would not believe the Gospels if the Catholic Church had not told me so”?**It’s one thing to take quotes from the Early Church Fathers when they are refuting heresies from an intellectual level so that heretics can understand them, and its another thing to try to conflict their intellectual writings with their professed Catholic Faith.

 

[SemperReformada]

You are aware of **ST. Augustines famous quote? “I would not believe the Gospels if the Catholic Church had not told me so”?**It’s one thing to take quotes from the Early Church Fathers when they are refuting heresies from an intellectual level so that heretics can understand them, and its another thing to try to conflict their intellectual writings with their professed Catholic Faith.

Quoting Augustine here does not help you since he didn’t understand the North African councils as being binding throughout the church either. See my earlier post. Context is important.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Does it matter what books were contained within the LXX? If it does, can you tell us which manuscript of the LXX contains the exact OT canon that the RCC uses today?

It’s really not that complicated at all; Just open a Catholic bible, turn to the Old Testament table of contents and you are looking at the ancient Alexandria Canon from the B.C period.

If you want a manuscript, one would turn to St. Jeromes Vulgate, who translated the original Greek “Seputagint” who used the Hebrew transcripts also to translate into his “Vulgate” (Latin) bible. So for an official latest manuscript, one would look to St. Jeromes Vulgate who translated the Septuagint into Latin.

Yes it does matter to a Christian which books Jesus and his apostles taught their Gospel message from which included the Deutero books listed in the “Septuagint”.

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Quoting Augustine here does not help you since he didn’t understand the North African councils as being binding throughout the church either. See my earlier post. Context is important.

Oh, I beg to differ, you are relating a writing from Augustine, that questions the Catholic Church’s decision from a council? My point is Augustine has spoken, to go into his writings from an intellectual discussion gives credence to the Saint and the Catholic Church that she never damned anyone for disagreeing raising arguments to protect her from outside abuses. What you posted is debatable, but I see no reason for debate when Augustine has spoken his peace about the Catholic Church.
So I yield to you;

 

[SemperReformada]

It’s really not that complicated at all; Just open a Catholic bible, turn to the Old Testament table of contents and you are looking at the ancient Alexandria Canon from the B.C period.

In the habit of begging the question much?

If you want a manuscript, one would turn to St. Jeromes Vulgate, who translated the original Greek “Seputagint” who used the Hebrew transcripts also to translate into his “Vulgate” (Latin) bible. So for an official latest manuscript, one would look to St. Jeromes Vulgate who translated the Septuagint into Latin.

We aren’t just talking about any old manuscript of the LXX are we? We are talking about the one Jesus and the apostles supposedly used (your claim). The only manuscripts we have of the LXX are all Christian and date back no earlier than around the 4th century.

You have a pretty big gap to hurdle to get back to the time of Jesus. BTW, the LXX manuscripts we have do not match precisely what the RCC accepts as canonical. Some manuscripts have more books such as 3rd and 4th Maccabees and some omit books your church now recognizes.

Yes it does matter to a Christian which books Jesus and his apostles taught their Gospel message from which included the Deutero books listed in the “Septuagint”.

If Jesus or the apostles ever quoted from the LXX in such a way that demonstrated that the dc’s were thought to be inspired you might have a point but as it is, there isn’t one signle quote anywhere in the NT that would lead anyone to believe the apostles or Jesus held the dc’s as inspired.

 

[Stephen168]

The lingua franca of the region from about 300BC to 300AD was Greek, The Septuagint (200BC) and the New Testament (50-90AD) were written in Greek. The Hebrew Bible (canon developed 200BC-200AD) was written in Hebrew.

I guess I would say that “C” would be the better of the choices since the earlier councils did list the dc’s as part of the canon.

Are you proposing the writers of the New Testament only used the Hebrew Bible and wrote the New Testament in Greek and after the Catholic Bishops selected books for the New Testament, they selected 7 books which happen to be in the Greek Septuagint and added them to the Hebrew Bible they had always read?

 

[Hisalone]

Apochrypha is never attached to the Deutero books as you percieve to be indicating. Protestants reference the Deutero books as Apochrypha = not inspired, the Catholic Church label then canonized and Duetero as I explained above. They only came to us in the Greek translation from the Septuagint which is the original Hebrew/ Greek translation which included the Duetero books, long before the Jamnia council who rejected them in order to prove Jesus a false prophet because he and his apostles quoted from the Greek Septuagint Deutero books as I have provided above.

Once again the main argument for the dispute of the Duetero books because the Hebrew translation (counter parts) were missing at that time until 1947 which difused the ancient argument over the Hebrew counter parts to the dispsuted books.

St. Jerome disputed the books as well as other catholic theologians, Luther and the Jews removed them from their cannons. This is huge difference in action which resulted. The Catholic Church never removed them. St. Jerome does not speak alone for the Catholic Church. Peter his successor and the successors to the apostles, which was and remains today in the Present Pope and Unity with all the Bishops who canonized the Deutero books, not St. Jerome and other independent thinkers.

No one told Jerome or countless other theologians that the Cannon was settled. The fact that there remained discussion and dispute before Trent and none after is proof positive that the Apocrapha was not settled until Trent. It is that simple.

 

[Hisalone]

St. Jerome was not a Rebel. He has nothing incommon with Arius, Hus, or Fr. Luther.

Jerome did not know the cannon was settled. He clearly stated the Apocrapha is no inspiried.

 

[Hisalone]

It doesn’t matter what books the Hebrews included or excluded. The Church had the authority and guidance of the Holy Spirit. You may recall from Acts at the council of Jeruselem where the Church decided to go against the Old Testament and not require circumcision. St Peter and the Church had the authority to do so. Whatever the Holy Catholic Church decided to call scripture is scripture.
“Whatsoever you bind on earth is bound in Heaven.”

Yadi Yadi but it was not settled until Trent.

 

[Hisalone]

It doesn’t matter what books the Hebrews included or excluded. The Church had the authority and guidance of the Holy Spirit. You may recall from Acts at the council of Jeruselem where the Church decided to go against the Old Testament and not require circumcision. St Peter and the Church had the authority to do so. Whatever the Holy Catholic Church decided to call scripture is scripture.
“Whatsoever you bind on earth is bound in Heaven.”

The oracles of God were entrusted to the Jews.

 

[Hisalone]

You are asking me; if I believe ‘B’ then prove ‘A.’ I believe history can be complicated and ‘B’ is the most true statement. Which do you believe is most true?

Statement B ignores the dispute between the Palestinian and Hellenized Jews.

 

[SemperReformada]

Are you proposing the writers of the New Testament only used the Hebrew Bible and wrote the New Testament in Greek and after the Catholic Bishops selected books for the New Testament, they selected 7 books which happen to be in the Greek Septuagint and added them to the Hebrew Bible they had always read?

Go back and read my post. I was “forced” to choose from several items, none of which represent the truth.

Which version of the LXX contains the precise OT canon of the Catholic church? The truth is that we have no idea what books were included in the LXX of Jesus’ time.

 

[greggy53]

Yadi Yadi but it was not settled until Trent.

Well that is a very sophisticated and well thought out response…I suppose you could stick your tongue out at me too, that would do as much to back your argument..