Protestants who are concern with the Septuagint

[Mannyfit75]

No it wouldn’t. There are several references in the New Testament (don’t have them available now) were Holy Scripture cites books that were never canonized by the Church. Just because a book is quoted in a New Testament passage does not mean that the quoted book is canonical or even inspired. What it does mean is that the particular passage quoted was found to be inspired by means of being included in the New Testament.

Here are some NT that have their sources that came directly from the Septuagint and the Deutrocanonical.

I posted these before.

Matt. 2:16 - Herod’s decree of slaying innocent children was prophesied in Wis. 11:7 - slaying the holy innocents.

Matt. 6:19-20 - Jesus’ statement about laying up for yourselves treasure in heaven follows Sirach 29:11 - lay up your treasure.

Matt… 7:12 - Jesus’ golden rule “do unto others” is the converse of Tobit 4:15 - what you hate, do not do to others.

Matt. 7:16,20 - Jesus’ statement “you will know them by their fruits” follows Sirach 27:6 - the fruit discloses the cultivation.

Matt. 9:36 - the people were “like sheep without a shepherd” is same as Judith 11:19 - sheep without a shepherd.

Matt. 11:25 - Jesus’ description “Lord of heaven and earth” is the same as Tobit 7:18 - Lord of heaven and earth.

Matt. 12:42 - Jesus refers to the wisdom of Solomon which was recorded and made part of the deuterocanonical books.

Matt. 16:18 - Jesus’ reference to the “power of death” and “gates of Hades” references Wisdom 16:13.

Matt. 22:25; Mark 12:20; Luke 20:29 - Gospel writers refer to the canonicity of Tobit 3:8 and 7:11 regarding the seven brothers.

Matt. 24:15 - the “desolating sacrilege” Jesus refers to is also taken from 1 Macc. 1:54 and 2 Macc. 8:17.

Matt. 24:16 - let those “flee to the mountains” is taken from 1 Macc. 2:28.

Matt. 27:43 - if He is God’s Son, let God deliver him from His adversaries follows Wisdom 2:18.

Mark 4:5,16-17 - Jesus’ description of seeds falling on rocky ground and having no root follows Sirach 40:15.

Mark 9:48 - description of hell where their worm does not die and the fire is not quenched references Judith 16:17.

Luke 1:42 - Elizabeth’s declaration of Mary’s blessedness above all women follows Uzziah’s declaration in Judith 13:18.

Luke 1:52 - Mary’s magnificat addressing the mighty falling from their thrones and replaced by lowly follows Sirach 10:14.

 

[Mannyfit75]

To my Protestant Brothers and Sisters,

If you want to take a look at the verses you can take a look at the
Douy Rheims Catholic Bible since it has the The seven
Deutero-Canonical books not present in the Protestant Bible.

If you have a King James Bible with the Deutero-Canonical Books , you can use that as well.

drbo.org/

or the RSV

etext.virginia.edu/rsv.browse.html

 

[Reformed1]

I gave a quote from the NT, just read the citations I provided. The Apostles and Jesus used them.

We Catholics don’t consider the Septuagint or the Deutorcanonical books as Apocryphal.

The Canon of Scripture was settled in Council of Rome (382 AD), Council of Hippo (392 A.D), Council of Carthage (396 A.D), Council of Nicaea II (787 A.D), Council of Florence (1442), and finally it was finalized in Council of Trent (1536 A.D).

Resource: davidmacd.com/catholic/timeline_of_how_the_bible_where.htm

Okay Manny, what exactly is your point in this?

Is it that the septuagint was used by Jesus and the apostles?

Do you carry this a step further and attempt to prove that since Jesus and the apostles used the septuagint they must have believed that Maccabees and Tobit, for example, were inspired?

What exactly is the point of this thread? I know of no one that disputes the use of the septuagint.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Okay Manny, what exactly is your point in this?

Is it that the septuagint was used by Jesus and the apostles?

Do you carry this a step further and attempt to prove that since Jesus and the apostles used the septuagint they must have believed that Maccabees and Tobit, for example, were inspired?

What exactly is the point of this thread? I know of no one that disputes the use of the septuagint.

The point of this thread is to open any Protestant who maybe interested about the Septuagint. I know there are those Protestants educated in Scripture history and find these books interesting reading material.

There are those Protestants who don’t think these books are inspired. The CC declared these books to inspired.

 

[Reformed1]

The point of this thread is to open any Protestant who maybe interested about the Septuagint. I know there are those Protestants educated in Scripture history and find these books interesting reading material.

There are those Protestants who don’t think these books are inspired. The CC declared these books to inspired.

Well, at least we agree that the septuagint was what was used by the apostles an Jesus too.

Let me ask you this, didn’t the septuagint include books such as 3 Maccabees and 4 Maccabees (for example) that neither you or I would consider inspired or canonical?

 

[Mannyfit75]

Well, at least we agree that the septuagint was what was used by the apostles an Jesus too.

Let me ask you this, didn’t the septuagint include books such as 3 Maccabees and 4 Maccabees (for example) that neither you or I would consider inspired or canonical?

It does include 3 Maccabees and 4 Maccabees. The Roman (Rite) Catholic Church doesn’t have those books. However, the Eastern Orthodox does.

I think the Eastern Rite Catholics might have those books, but you may have to ask an Eastern Catholic what kind of Bible they used.

 

[Reformed1]

It does include 3 Maccabees and 4 Maccabees. The Roman (Rite) Catholic Church doesn’t have those books. However, the Eastern Orthodox does.

I think the Eastern Rite Catholics might have those books, but you may have to ask an Eastern Catholic what kind of Bible they used.

Well, we will have to see what develops on this thread but I am not aware of anyone that would dispute that the apostles used the septuagint.

Maybe some KJV onlyists won’t be aware of this…let’s see what happens.

 

[Mannyfit75]

No it wouldn’t. There are several references in the New Testament (don’t have them available now) were Holy Scripture cites books that were never canonized by the Church. Just because a book is quoted in a New Testament passage does not mean that the quoted book is canonical or even inspired. What it does mean is that the particular passage quoted was found to be inspired by means of being included in the New Testament.

I cited them already. Take a look at the post I cited.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Well, we will have to see what develops on this thread but I am not aware of anyone that would dispute that the apostles used the septuagint.

Maybe some KJV onlyists won’t be aware of this…let’s see what happens.

I’m looking forward with this discussion and hope we both show good charity. I really hate to turn this thread into argument.

I love the Scripture and I love Christian History. It brings me closer to Jesus when I read the Bible and other Christian writings.

 

[Reformed1]

I’m looking forward with this discussion and hope we both show good charity. I really hate to turn this thread into argument.

I love the Scripture and I love Christian History. It brings me closer to Jesus when I read the Bible and other Christian writings.

I am 100% confident that someone, maybe not you or I, will turn this into a argument…that darn original sin thing.