How did the Church select the books of the Bible?

  • Thread starter Thread starter jmsgirl
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

jmsgirl

Guest
+JMJ+

Could someone help me find online resources about how the Church compiled the Bible?

What is the history? What rigors did they use? What questions did they ask? What proofs did they have when choosing the canon we have today?

Why do so many people claim that the Church hid certain books (or even burned them) from the public?

Thank you!!!
 
Four Criteria for Canonicity (why certain books were eventually accepted into the NT Canon, while others were rejected):


  1. *]**Apostolic Origin **- attributed to and/or based on the preaching/teaching of the first-generation apostles (or their closest companions).
    *]**Universal Acceptance **- acknowledged by all major Christian communities in the Mediterranean world (by the end of the fourth century).
    *]**Liturgical Use **- read publicly along with the OT when early Christians gathered for the Lord’s Supper (their weekly worship services).
    *]**Consistent Message **- containing theological ideas compatible with other accepted Christian writings (incl. the divinity and humanity Jesus).

    A Visual Diagram of the History of the New Testament Canon
    Why do so many people claim that the Church hid certain books (or even burned them) from the public?
    Click to expand...
    Because anti-Catholics exploit those who did poorly in school.
 
Because anti-Catholics exploit those who did poorly in school.
Click to expand...
Haha, I love it.

We have this problem today. There are a lot of websites online that ‘claim’ to be Catholic but provide a distorted picture of Catholicism.
 
The Church did choose which books would be considered canonical and in so doing, excluded others. Some they determined were worthy of study and devotional reading, although not inspired. Some they determined were bogus, fanciful or even heretical. There are many today who regard that decision-making process as authoritarian rather than authoritative, and like to proclaim it as evidence against Catholic tradition.

Ironically, those who decry the process include both modern skeptics and heretics who think all the ancient books were equally worthy (which is to say that they don’t think the canonical books are inspired, either) and those of our Evangelical and Fundamentalist brethren who think their 66-book Bibles are inspired but reject the role that the Church had in preserving and defining the contents.
 
Part of the confusion comes from the Jewish Canon. Some Protestants make the claim that the so-called “Deuterocanonical” books were not part of the Hebrew Canon. This is a half-truth. There was no set Hebrew Canon. We do know that the Pharisees did not include them. We also know that the Sadducees only included the Pentateuch and the Psalms (but none of the other writings). The Jews of the diaspora, that is, the Greek-speaking Jews, used the Septuagint (LXX) for their Canon. This was the Canun that would have been used by Jesus and the Apostles. This Old Testament Canon was the Canon translated into Latin my St. Jerome. Now he did have reservations about these books, but the consensus among the Fathers was that they were canonical, and there is no early Church consular evidence that lists any canon other than the canon used by the Catholic Church today. The 66 book canon was not arrived at for another 1200 years.
 
kepha1, I could not get your visual diagram link to work. Could you check it, please?
 
is anyone going to mention the council of trent?~~~just asking…
 
well apparently even that wasnt good enough because we still squabble about it today.
Its main object was the definitive determination of the doctrines of the Church in answer to the heresies of the Protestants. Just throwing that out there, LOL
 
jmsgirl said:
+JMJ+
Could someone help me find online resources about how the Church compiled the Bible?
Click to expand...
Largely upon the basis of what had already been become the de facto canon before rubber stamping in 397. The current canon of the NT was already largely in place by the end of the second century. During that century, selection was on the basis of what was believed to have been written by one of the twelve apostles (and Paul of course).
 
Ahhhhhhhhhhhh,I just think sohttp://www.photosnag.com/img/4713/n09x0302vnsn/clear.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top