The Canon - for Eastern Orthodox

[crazzeto]

Dear brother crazzeto,

My posts #42 and #44 amply responds to this, IMHO.

Blessings,
Marduk

I missed #44, I’ll be looking forward to Fr. Pacwa’s comments tomorrow assuming he picks up my email (if he doesn’t I’ll try calling the next week).

 

[crazzeto]

And the East should care about all this, why?

I also suggest you do a bit of research into the Orthodox Church before you ask your next question, in addition to making sure you understand the Catholic position. The idea that one can create doctrine is quite blasphemous to Orthodox Christians. We hold to that doctrine which was given to us by Christ and the Apostles, and no more. Doctrine is unchanging. Therefore the Church can not come up with doctrine that contradicts Holy Tradition without ceasing to be The Church.

Doctrine is formed by the leadership of the church, through ecumenical counciles (i.e. Trent) which is guided by the Spirit. But sltimatly this is a seperate debate. Regardless of whether or not you accept councils past trent, my statement stands.

 

[Nine_Two]

Doctrine is formed by the leadership of the church, through ecumenical counciles (i.e. Trent) which is guided by the Spirit. But sltimatly this is a seperate debate. Regardless of whether or not you accept councils past trent, my statement stands.

Do more research on the Catholic position. I think I made a suggestion that the Catholic Church creates doctrine when I first joined here and was promptly told off.

 

[mardukm]

Dear brother crazzeto,

Doctrine is formed by the leadership of the church, through ecumenical counciles (i.e. Trent) which is guided by the Spirit. But sltimatly this is a seperate debate. Regardless of whether or not you accept councils past trent, my statement stands.

Doctrine is not formed by the leadership of the Church. What the Church does is simply transmit apostolic doctine. At certain times, when the need arises, the Church authoritatively asserts the truth of a doctrine in the face of challenges and disputes. That authoritative assertion is called dogma.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[crazzeto]

Do more research on the Catholic position. I think I made a suggestion that the Catholic Church creates doctrine when I first joined here and was promptly told off.

Replace the word create with define… Though if one did as you were sounding like you were suggesting then that would in fact be, creating doctrine.

 

[Nine_Two]

Replace the word create with define… Though if one did as you were sounding like you were suggesting then that would in fact be, creating doctrine.

If one is simply defining then what’s the worry about contradicting Holy Tradition? Your entire argument has lost all consistency.

And yes, if I said creating doctrine, I would in fact mean creating doctrine.

 

[adstrinity]

Thank you for the links to those of you who provided them.

What I got from Wikipedia, the “extra” books are:

Odes – Which is a Wisdom Book. It includes canticals from the Old & New Testament, and was based on a finding from a 5th Century Greek Bible.

1 Esdras – en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1_Esdras
------1 Esdras (Greek Έσδράς Αˊ), Greek Ezra, is an ancient Greek version of the Biblical book of Ezra in use among ancient Jewry, the early church, and many modern Christians with varying degrees of canonicity and a high historical usefulness.
In all, 1 Esdras includes 99 more verses than Masoretic Ezra. These lie almost entirely in one section and serve a literary purpose; one other, short passage is in a different position. Modern texts continue with the last two short chapters of the preceding Biblical work, 2 Chronicles. Thus like Ezra, it is used as evidence for a once larger Chronicles-Ezra that has since been split canonically.

------First Esdras contains the whole of Ezra with additions equivalent in size to four chapters of Ezra. Moreover, just as Ezra begins with the last two verses of 2 Chronicles, 1 Esdras begins with the last two chapters; and it concludes with a section closely resembling part of Nehemiah.

3 Maccabees – en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3_Maccabees
-------The book of the 3 Maccabees is found in most Orthodox Bibles as a part of the Anagignoskomena, while Protestants and Catholics consider it non-canonical[1], except the Moravian Brethren who included it in the Apocrypha of the Czech Kralicka Bible.
The book actually has nothing to do with the Maccabees or their revolt against the Seleucid Empire, as described in 1 Maccabees and 2 Maccabees. Instead it tells the story of persecution of the Jews under Ptolemy IV Philopator (222-205 BC). The name of the book apparently comes from the similarities between this book and the stories of the martyrdom of Eleazar and the Maccabeean youths in 2 Maccabees; the High Priest Shimon is also mentioned.

 

[adstrinity]

4 Maccabees – en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4_Maccabees
--------The book of 4 Maccabees is a homily or philosophic discourse praising the supremacy of pious reason over passion. It is not in the Bible for most churches, but is an appendix to the Greek Bible, and in the canon of the Georgian Bible. It was in the 1688 Romanian Bible where it was called “Iosip” but is not printed in the Orthodox Bible today. It is included as an appendix in the recently published Eastern Orthodox Bible.[1]

--------The work consists of a prologue and two main sections; the first advances the philosophical thesis while the second illustrates the points made using examples drawn from 2 Maccabees (principally, the martyrdom of Eleazer and the Maccabeean youths) under Antiochus IV Epiphanes. The last chapters concern the author’s impressions drawn from these martyrdoms. The work thus appears to be an independent composition to 1 Maccabees and 2 Maccabees, merely drawing on their descriptions to support its thesis. It was composed originally in the Greek language, in what Stephen Westerholm of the Eastern / Greek Orthodox Bible calls “very fluently… and in a highly rhetorical and affected Greek style.”

Letter of Jeremiah – en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Letter_of_Jeremiah
-------The Letter of Jeremiah, also known as the Epistle of Jeremy, is a deuterocanonical (or apocryphal) book of the Old Testament; this letter purports to have been written by Jeremiah to the exiles who were to be taken captive into Babylon. It is included in Catholic Bibles as the final chapter of the Book of Baruch. It is also included in Orthodox Bibles as a standalone book.

Alright, so, IT SEEMS, that the “extra” books are broken up differently than in the Catholic Bible, they offer more explination, or are not necessarily canon.

This is through a site that somebody else gave a link, to. I didn’t see a list here, nor did I read it: vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/pcb_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20020212_popolo-ebraico_en.html

 

[crazzeto]

If one is simply defining then what’s the worry about contradicting Holy Tradition? Your entire argument has lost all consistency.

And yes, if I said creating doctrine, I would in fact mean creating doctrine.

No it hasn’t, I’ve been saying the same thing this whole time though I do admit I can suffer from not being entirly clear at times.

However from my perspective it sounded a whole like you were suggesting that doctrine actually superseeds the oral and written tradition.

 

[adstrinity]

Orthodox, do these look like the books in your Bibles? There’s six.

 

[crazzeto]

Orthodox, do these look like the books in your Bibles? There’s six.

Thank you for posting your findings, I think this sheds a lot of light on the matter.

 

[adstrinity]

Thank you for posting your findings, I think this sheds a lot of light on the matter.

You’re welcome. This is why I had it as, “extra”, in quotes. I didn’t think there was an issue with it. I thought it was just a matter of groupings. No books that were considered canon were removed, but, they were considered/inspired as parts of other books. I believe it was markdum (is that the handle) who said that the ABSOLUTE MINIMUM FOR A LEGITMATE BIBLE is the 73 Books of the Catholics. Also, according to Wikipedia, list of the Septuagint:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Septuagint#Table_of_books

 

[josephdaniel29]

Orthodox, do these look like the books in your Bibles? There’s six.

I’m not familiar enough with the Catholic Canon. Here is the list from the table of contents of the EOB which is a translation based on the Patriarchal Texts used by the Patriarchate of Constantinople. Please excuse the poor Greek transliterations.

1. 
   *]GENESIS (GENESIS)
   *]EXODUS (EXODOS)
   *]LEVITICUS (LEUITIKON)
   *]NUMBERS (ARIQMOI)
   *]DEUTERONOMY (DEUTERONOMION)
   *]JESUS NAUË (JOSHUA) (IHSOUS NAUH)
   *]JUDGES (KRITAI)
   *]RUTH (ROUQ)
   *]I KINGDOMS (1 SAMUEL) (BASILEIWN A)
   *]II KINGDOMS (2 SAMUEL) (BASILEIWN B)
   *]III KINGDOMS (1 KINGS) (BASILEIWN G)
   *]IV KINGDOMS (2 KINGS) (BASILEIWN D)
   *]CHRONICLES I (PARALEIPOMENWN A)
   *]CHRONICLES II (PARALEIPOMENWN B)
   *]EZRA (ESDRAS)
   *]I ESDRAS (ESDRAS A)
   *]ESTHER (ESQHR)
   *]JUDITH (IOUDIQ)
   *]TOBIT (TWBIT)
   *]I MACCABEES (MAKKABAIWN A)
   *]II MACCABEES (MAKKABAIWN B)
   *]III MACCABEES (MAKKABAIWN G)
   *]IV MACCABEES (APPENDIX) (MAKKABAIWN D)
   *]JOB (LXX) (IWB)
   *]PSALMS (YALMOI)
   *]PROVERBS (PAROIMIAI)
   *]ECCLESIASTES (EKKAHSIASTHS)
   *]SONG OF SONGS (ASMA)
   *]WISDOM OF SOLOMON (SOFIA SALWMWN)
   *]WISDOM OF SIRACH (SOFIA SEIRAX)
   *]ISAIAS / ISAIAH (HSAIAS)
   *]JEREMIAH (LXX) (IEREMIAS)
   *]JEREMIAH (HEBREW)
   *]LAMENTATIONS (QRHNOI)
   *]BARUCH (BAROUX)
   *]EZEKIEL (IESEKIHL)
   *]DANIEL (DANIHL)
   *]HOSEA (WSHE)
   *]JOEL (IWHL)
   *]AMOS (AMWS)
   *]OBADIAH (OBDIOU)
   *]JONAH (IWNAS)
   *]MICAH (MIXAIAS)
   *]NAUM (NAOUM)
   *]AMBACUM / HABAKKUK (AMBAKOUM)
   *]SOFONIAS / ZEPHANIAH (SOFONIAS)
   *]HAGGAI (AGGAIOS)
   *]ZACARIAS / ZECHARIAH (ZAXARIAS)
   *]MALACIAS / MALACHI (MALAXIAS)
   *]ODES: THE PRAYER OF MANASSES (PROSEUXH MANASSH)

 

[jimmy]

Doctrine can not violate scripture, as it is at least half of the raw material from which doctrine is formed. The church leadership forms doctrine, but that formation had better be based upon a study of scripture and tradtion. Otherwise your doctrine will likely end up being invalid.

Is it that doctrine can’t violate scripture or that scripture can’t violate doctrine? The early Church judged what books were canonical based on whether they conformed to the formula of faith. Orthodoxy was one of the major determining factors in what was scripture. Consequently the gospels of Philip or Peter or any other gnostic writing were rejected.

 

[Nine_Two]

Orthodox, do these look like the books in your Bibles? There’s six.

Yes, I think that’s about it.

A note about IV Macabees is that even in the Orthodox bibles which have it, very little emphasis is put on it. It is usually attached as an appendix when present at all.

Edit: Also I apologize for not answering your inquiry earlier, I was running out the door when I saw it.

 

[adstrinity]

josephdaniel29, yep! That matches. Five “extra” books.

Yes, I think that’s about it.

A note about IV Macabees is that even in the Orthodox bibles which have it, very little emphasis is put on it. It is usually attached as an appendix when present at all.

Edit: Also I apologize for not answering your inquiry earlier, I was running out the door when I saw it.

Cool.

Does 4 Macc help with anything, explain or clarify particular Orthodox beliefs? It’s not for nothing it’s included.

Alright, what can you tell me about Odes? According to Wikipedia, it has OT and NT songs in it and was found in the 5th Century. If it was lost until then (?) and it has NT songs, why is it included within the OT?

 

[Nine_Two]

Does 4 Macc help with anything, explain or clarify particular Orthodox beliefs? It’s not for nothing it’s included.

Not particularly, it’s basically the story of the seven brothers who are mentioned in (I believe, it’s been a while since I read any of them) the first two books. It’s very different than any other book in the bible, and is quite hard to explain. It’s an interesting read but I think the only reason it is there is because it does explain that one bit in more depth. To be honest I don’t even own a bible with it in it, it just happens to be in a book of apocrypha which I own.

Alright, what can you tell me about Odes? According to Wikipedia, it has OT and NT songs in it and was found in the 5th Century. If it was lost until then (?) and it has NT songs, why is it included within the OT?

The copy I have (OSB) doesn’t have Odes in it. If Wikipedia is correct it looks like it’s just gathered prayers.

 

[Byzman]

Yes, the Councils of Hippo and Carthage determined the Books that are to be read as Divine Scripture, and these were local councils for the Western Church, but we need to also mention that the Council of Trullo, which the Orthodox accept as Ecumenical, Canon 2 of that Council ratifies and affirms everything from the previous councils listed there.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.xiv.iii.ii.html
So, one would wonder than as to why does the Orthodox Church have more books in their Canon? Well I have read before, and dont have time to look it up now, but that the Canons from the local councils say “Books that are read as Divine Scripture,” meaning no other books other than these listed can be read in the liturgy as Divine Scripture.

 

[Nine_Two]

Yes, the Councils of Hippo and Carthage determined the Books that are to be read as Divine Scripture, and these were local councils for the Western Church, but we need to also mention that the Council of Trullo, which the Orthodox accept as Ecumenical, Canon 2 of that Council ratifies and affirms everything from the previous councils listed there.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.xiv.iii.ii.html
So, one would wonder than as to why does the Orthodox Church have more books in their Canon? Well I have read before, and dont have time to look it up now, but that the Canons from the local councils say “Books that are read as Divine Scripture,” meaning no other books other than these listed can be read in the liturgy as Divine Scripture.

So which Canon at Carthage forbid anything in addition to what Catholics use?

 

[Byzman]

So which Canon at Carthage forbid anything in addition to what Catholics use?

Canon 24
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf214.xv.iv.iv.xxv.html