Is the Catholic Bible correct?

[Gorgias]

But didn’t the Catholic Church add 27 books to What we call the New Testament?

Cute.

No… (with the Holy Spirit) the Church created the Bible.

Well, to be balanced on that, the reason that they ‘removed’ them, is because the protestant Reformation believed that Rome added those additional Greek texts.

I’m not sure that’s a fair approach. I mean… it’s a rationalization, to be sure, but is that even a claim that was made by the Reformers?

I mean, after all… it can be demonstrated that the evangelists quoted from the Septuagint, and we know that the LXX was in use in Galilee, so… isn’t it fair to say that the Catholic Church merely continued to use the books that were used by the Apostles themselves?

The Protestant Reformers removed them after the Church recognized the additional 7 as part of the Old Testament writings.

So… it was the Jewish diaspora that added the books? Meh… I can live with that.

However, the Jewish Rabbis also excluded them from their canon around A.D.100.

The “Council of Jamnia” is a fantasy. Modern scholars (including contemporary non-Catholic Christian Scripture scholars) recognize that it never happened in the way that it’s claimed to have happened.

 

[Vico]

…

Canon of the Holy Scriptures | Catholic Answers Encyclopedia

 

[hadulzo]

Those Rabbis did not believe in the resurrection. Maybe they are not the best folks to follow?

 

[rom]

The “Council of Jamnia” is a fantasy. Modern scholars (including contemporary non-Catholic Christian Scripture scholars) recognize that it never happened in the way that it’s claimed to have happened.

There was a real Council of Jamnia (ca. AD 90), and it did discuss the status of some of the books; so it wasn’t a pure fantasy. However, I concede that its decisions were neither authoritative nor final and, in that respect, it is hypothetical whether this council closed the Jewish canon at that time (as it was formerly believed).

Actually, the Jewish canon is the canon of Judaism. It is not the Catholic OT canon. So, I’d let the Jews decide for themselves when they thought their canon was closed. As far as Catholics are concerned, the Catholic Canon (OT and NT) was settled infallibly by the Council of Trent (AD 1546), although the same canon was affirmed earlier by several other local or non-ecumenical councils (for example, the Council of Rome in AD 382).

 

[Gorgias]

There was a real Council of Jamnia (ca. AD 90), and it did discuss the status of some of the books; so it wasn’t a pure fantasy.

I would disagree, as would historians (although there are still Christians who think that there was such a ‘council’): The Council That Wasn't | Catholic Answers

 

[rom]

I would disagree, as would historians (although there are still Christians who think that there was such a ‘council’): https://www.catholic.com/magazine/print-edition/the-council-that-wasnt

Let us not dispute this any further because I do not disagree with you. It really depends on how you use or define a “council.” According to the article that you provided a link to,

“The so-called "Council of Jabneh" was a group of Jewish scholars who were granted permission by Rome around the year 90 to meet in Palestine near the Mediterranean Sea in Jabneh (or Jamnia). Here they established a non-authoritative, "reconstituted" Sanhedrin (note 3, sidebar, page 25). Among the things they discussed was the status of several questionable writings in the Jewish Bible. They also rejected the Christian writings and made a new translation of the Greek Septuagint.”

That confirms what I said in my previous post. There was a council, but not an authoritative one. Now, if you define a council in a way that exclude those that are non-authoritative, then yes, there was no council. And I agree. Peace.