Protestants and the Bible?

[steve_b]

Besides, Luther was not being admonished/excommunicated for his canon opinion, right?

He was excommunicated for his errors (which were listed for him), that he refused to answer for, and correct.

 

[rcwitness]

He was excommunicated for his errors that he refused to answer for, and correct.

…and further, he began his translation after excommunication, right? And his translations bible contained the full canon. It was later protestants who professed a 66 book canon.

 

[steve_b]

…and further, he began his translation after excommunication, right?

Yes
r:

And his translations bible contained the full canon.

no.

Luther in his apocrypha, changed the status of 7 OT canonical books, calling THEM apocrypha, i.e. (not scripture)

lutherbibel.net/ click on his bible. Then scroll down the page for his listing of the canonical books in his bibel.

Count the books in his OT. NOT the apocrypha, just the OT books in his OT. It’s 39 books, NOT 46.

Now for reference to Luther’s mindset, Re: “apocrypha” here is a quote from Luther.

"Apocrypha–that is, books which are not regarded as equal to the holy Scriptures, and yet are profitable and good to read."
r:

It was later protestants who professed a 66 book canon.

Protestantism, of which Luther was the Father, merely continued Luther’s canon of 39 OT books.

 

[simspt]

His reasoning for that is simple: the author of James was generally writing to established Christians about how a Christian ought to live. We might call a great deal of what James wrote Law. Paul, on the other hand, was writing about the good news of Christ - the Gospel. Now, what is more valuable to a Christian - the Law that we can never measure up to, or the Good News that Jesus Christ has died to forgive us? Obviously, Paul’s message is more central to our faith.

Look, Luther’s message is a comparative one. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Saying “Joe Flacco isn’t a good quarterback” is false. He’s very good. But saying “Joe Flacco isn’t a good quarterback compared to Aaron Rodgers” is true. That’s what Luther is saying in his preface to the book.

I think the author of James might disagree with you and Luther…re the “value” of his teaching compared to Paul

 

[rcwitness]

I think the author of James might disagree with you and Luther…re the “value” of his teaching compared to Paul

Yes. James’ Scripture was inspired by God. And his words are very similar to Jesus’ own message.

When James expresses the Law of Christ and its works, he is not implying that these are the cause of Justification with God. He is recognizing that they are what continue one in Justification. This is an important message Jesus hammered over.

He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him.

But he said, “Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and keep it!”

“Other seeds fell on good soil and brought forth grain…”

What do you think? A man had two sons; and he went to the first and said, ‘Son, go and work in the vineyard today.’ And he answered, ‘I will not’; but afterward he repented and went. And he went to the second and said the same; and he What do you think? A man had two sons; and he went to the first and said, ‘Son, go and work in the vineyard today.’ And he answered, ‘I will not’; but afterward he repented and went.*And he went to the second and said the same; and he answered, ‘I go, sir,’ but did not go. Which of the two did the will of his father?” They said, “The first.”answered, ‘I go, sir,’ but did not go. Which of the two did the will of his father?” They said, “The first.”

James is saying the same thing… only those who do the will of the Father will be justified in the Lord’s judgement.

 

[steve_b]

His reasoning for that is simple: the author of James was generally writing to established Christians about how a Christian ought to live. We might call a great deal of what James wrote Law. Paul, on the other hand, was writing about the good news of Christ - the Gospel.

You make it either/or. Both James and Paul were Jews, they both knew the law, they knew what good works are, & they knew the good news, the Gospel.

James & Paul complemented each other in their writing. NOT as Luther thought, James contradicting Paul. Luther as a result, called James an epistle of straw.

Paul writes,

Eph 2:8-10
8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not your own doing, it is the gift of God— 9 not because of works, lest any man should boast. 10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them."

Paul; is making a comparison between works of law and good works. Would his statement make sense if he used “good works” in both places? No. He would have a contradiction. If we are created by God to do something and we don’t do it, can we even claim to operate under grace or faith? No. And that’s also James point

James writes

Jas 2: 22 You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by works, 23 and the scripture was fulfilled which says, “Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness”; and he was called the friend of God. 24 You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone. 25 And in the same way was not also Rahab the harlot justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out another way? 26 For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so faith apart from works is dead."

Good works verify faith is alive and active. This isn’t a legal argument.

Paul and James are completely complementary.

As an aside, keep in mind, In Abraham’s time, the “law” hadn’t been given yet.
s:

Now, what is more valuable to a Christian - the Law that we can never measure up to, or the Good News that Jesus Christ has died to forgive us? Obviously, Paul’s message is more central to our faith.

**
Works of law**, are the Mosaic laws, that effected Jews NOT Christians

 

[JB_Brother_4446]

You make it either/or. Both James and Paul were Jews, they both knew the law, they knew what good works are, & they knew the good news, the Gospel.

James & Paul complemented each other in their writing. NOT as Luther thought, James contradicting Paul. Luther as a result, called James an epistle of straw.

Paul writes,

Eph 2:8-10
8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not your own doing, it is the gift of God— 9 not because of works, lest any man should boast. 10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them."

Paul; is making a comparison between works of law and good works. Would his statement make sense if he used “good works” in both places? No. He would have a contradiction. If we are created by God to do something and we don’t do it, can we even claim to operate under grace or faith? No. And that’s also James point

James writes

Jas 2: 22 You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by works, 23 and the scripture was fulfilled which says, “Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness”; and he was called the friend of God. 24 You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone. 25 And in the same way was not also Rahab the harlot justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out another way? 26 For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so faith apart from works is dead."

Good works verify faith is alive and active. This isn’t a legal argument.

Paul and James are completely complementary.

As an aside, keep in mind, In Abraham’s time, the “law” hadn’t been given yet.

**
Works of law**, are the Mosaic laws, that effected Jews NOT Christians

That is why I’m Catholic.

 

[steido01]

You make it either/or. Both James and Paul were Jews, they both knew the law, they knew what good works are, & they knew the good news, the Gospel.

See my later posts. I am a Lutheran; believe me, no one understands the need for Law and Gospel better than we do. In my haste to respond to a ridiculous post, I was unclear.

James & Paul complemented each other in their writing.

Indeed, they do.

NOT as Luther thought,***** James contradicting Paul.

*****Initially thought. His further study confirmed what other Catholic/Lutheran/catholic scholars had read: that James did not contradict Paul in the least because a faith that does not bear fruit is not a saving faith.

Luther as a result, called James an epistle of straw.

Again, see my later posts. It’s also worth noting that Luther had that comment removed from later editions of his prefaces because too many people were taking his academic opinion as incontrovertible truth. From John Warwick Montgomery:

Few people realize -and liberal Luther interpreters do not particularly advertise the fact- that in all the editions of Luther’s Bible translation after 1522, the Reformer dropped the paragraphs at the end of his general Preface to the New Testament which made value judgments among the various biblical books and which included the famous reference to James as an “Epistle of Straw” compared to Paul]

 

[steido01]

You try to sidestep the main question. Did Catholics, no matter their personal opinion on the Canon, know before Trent, what books the Church held to be scriptural? They may not have known all the books, as the Canon had not been closed yet, but did they know from Florence that the 73 books the Catholic Church holds today as canonical were considered inspired scripture from the Church? Unequivocally yes!!

I think history simply has to disagree with you, or we wouldn’t see Cardinals and other learned men of the church siding with Jerome on the issue of the canon.

Had the Magesterium already spoken on this topic at Florence, at a council that was binding on the whole Catholic Church?

… There was no development of doctrine when the Church was just upholding a canon that had already been set.

I’m familiar with the text from Florence, but I don’t think it necessarily must be interpreted in the way you do, as I’ve explained. Obviously, plenty of Catholics prior to Trent disagree with your position. Even at the Council, the vote on the canon passed with just 24 out of 55 bishops in favor.:bigyikes:

All Trent did was close the canon. Trent exercised the authority that Jesus gave the Church. You Lutherans have done the same thing. I don’t see any of you in a hurry to include the writings of the Gnostics. So in a sense, you have narrowed Christian freedom.

Lutherans technically haven’t closed the canon; but you are correct that, in some sense, we’ve generally sealed out any extraneous books from the acceptable 73-74. I am happy to note our communions come to agreement here. But I see a double-standard for people vilifying Luther, who died before the canon was set at Trent, while commending “good Catholics” like Cajetan. Get what I mean?

 

[JB_Brother_4446]

See my later posts. I am a Lutheran; believe me, no one understands the need for Law and Gospel better than we do. In my haste to respond to a ridiculous post, I was unclear.

The author of James was generally writing to established Christians about how a Christian ought to live. We might call a great deal of what James wrote Law. Paul, on the other hand, was writing about the good news of Christ - the Gospel. Now, what is more valuable to a Christian - the Law that we can never measure up to, or the Good News that Jesus Christ has died to forgive us? Obviously, Paul’s message is more central to our faith.

What was more clear than that? Those are your exact words.

 

[Adonia]

I don’t believe that there are over 30,000 Christian denominations.
Give us the list and the names of each separate denomination.

Lutheran, Episcopalian, Anglican, Church of Christ, Church of God, Church of Christ in God, Evangel Temple, Evangel Temple of God, The Cathedral of Love, One Way Bible Church, Old Time Bible Church, Maranatha Bible Church, Assemblies of God, Solid Rock Church, The Rock Church, Solid Rock Bible Church, The Way Church, Salem Church, Salem Baptist Church, 1st Baptist Church, Baptist Grace Church, Loving Family Temple Church, God in Love Church, and on and on and on until you reach 33,000.

 

[Michael68]

​

Lutheran, Episcopalian, Anglican, Church of Christ, Church of God, Church of Christ in God, Evangel Temple, Evangel Temple of God, The Cathedral of Love, One Way Bible Church, Old Time Bible Church, Maranatha Bible Church, Assemblies of God, Solid Rock Church, The Rock Church, Solid Rock Bible Church, The Way Church, Salem Church, Salem Baptist Church, 1st Baptist Church, Baptist Grace Church, Loving Family Temple Church, God in Love Church, and on and on and on until you reach 33,000.

Gateway Church, Church of the New Wine, Gracecenter, Shiloh Baptist Church. Holy Spirit Church, Calvary Baptist Church, Abundant Life, Pentacostal, First Pentacostal, Freedom Tabernacle, Triumph , Church of the Nazarine, etc. These are just a few in my area. Very easy to see how 33,000 may be reached

 

[steve_b]

Few people realize -and liberal Luther interpreters do not particularly advertise the fact- that in all the editions of Luther’s Bible translation after 1522, the Reformer dropped the paragraphs at the end of his general Preface to the New Testament which **made value judgments among the various biblical books **and which included the famous reference to James as an “Epistle of Straw” compared to Paul]

to address the topic of the thread,

by Luther reclassifying 7 OT canonical books to apocryphal status, THAT removed 7 canonical books from the canon of scripture. In the interest of seeing into Luther’s POV, Let’s not forget his quote regarding the apocrypha and scripture

"Apocrypha–that is, books which are not regarded as equal to the holy Scriptures, and yet are profitable and good to read."

putting 7 canonical books into apocryphal status, THAT is a value judgement on Luther’s part of those books, followed by an action, he had no authority or business to make.

 

[rcwitness]

I think history simply has to disagree with you, or we wouldn’t see Cardinals and other learned men of the church siding with Jerome on the issue of the canon.

Doesn’t this support the belief that one absolute Canon must be decreed? And so an ultimate leadership must be in place to pronounce this? There cannot be inspired books to one congregation, yet not to another.

 

[JonNC]

Well guess I won’t answer yours since you didn’t answer mine.

Here was my answer, JB:

** Yes. I believe the Blessed Mother is with her Son, though how this happened is not explained. So, either explanation is reasonable.

Yes, I believe in the PV **

The very first word was “yes”. I then followed with an appropriate response that I do not know how this was accomplished. Even the CC does not claim to know whether she was alive or dead when assumed. Why would you expect me to know?

Jon

 

[JonNC]

It appears to me that Jon answered yes to believing in the Assumption of Mary and her Perpetual Virginity.

… and like Catholics are free to not take a position whether she died first or was taken living (yet at the end of her life on earth), so Jon also seems to not take a position.

Thanks, Michael.

Jon

 

[JonNC]

That was my understanding as well.

Mary.

Thanks, Mary, And Don

Jon

 

[JonNC]

…and further, he began his translation after excommunication, right? And his translations bible contained the full canon. It was later protestants who professed a 66 book canon.

Correct. While Luther arranged the DC books in between the OT and NT, he translated and included 74 books.
Even the 1611 KJV had all the books in a typical western Bible

Jon

 

[JonNC]

to address the topic of the thread,

by Luther reclassifying 7 OT canonical books to apocryphal status, THAT removed 7 canonical books from the canon of scripture. In the interest of seeing into Luther’s POV, Let’s not forget his quote regarding the apocrypha and scripture

"Apocrypha–that is, books which are not regarded as equal to the holy Scriptures, and yet are profitable and good to read."

putting 7 canonical books into apocryphal status, THAT is a value judgement on Luther’s part of those books, followed by an action, he had no authority or business to make.

Hi Steve,
Does your NAB or DRV have only 66 books? If not, how can you say Luther removed them from the canon?
You’re right, it was Luther’s opinion, and one shared by numerous other Catholics, even as late as the Council of Trent itself. But that is all it is.

Jon

 

[Wannano]

​

Gateway Church, Church of the New Wine, Gracecenter, Shiloh Baptist Church. Holy Spirit Church, Calvary Baptist Church, Abundant Life, Pentacostal, First Pentacostal, Freedom Tabernacle, Triumph , Church of the Nazarine, etc. These are just a few in my area. Very easy to see how 33,000 may be reached

You forgot the Second Baptist Church…oops, better start saying 40,000!