" This book isn't good enough"

[StephenL]

Ok, so the other day I was thinking that we Catholics have I think 6 books more than the King James Version. I was also watching a debate from Karl Keating on YouTube with a protestant minister. I was just thinking that if I were a Protestant and I knew there six books taken out of the original the books of The Bible. I begin to question if my Pastors thought this book isn’t good enough then I would begin to question every book.
Feel free to correct me if I am wrong:}
We’ll thank God I am a Catholic Christian!

 

[edward_george]

Ok, so the other day I was thinking that we Catholics have I think 6 books more than the King James Version. I was also watching a debate from Karl Keating on YouTube with a protestant minister. I was just thinking that if I were a Protestant and I knew there six books taken out of the original the books of The Bible. I begin to question if my Pastors thought this book isn’t good enough then I would begin to question every book.
Feel free to correct me if I am wrong:}
We’ll thank God I am a Catholic Christian!

And of course the standard response to that idea is that the Catholic Church, somewhere along the line, added those books in, in which case the Bible had been tampered with at that time. Of course, that response is ahistorical since the reverse is true, but be aware of covering all the bases, so to speak.

-ACEGC

 

[JRKH]

Ok, so the other day I was thinking that we Catholics have I think 6 books more than the King James Version. I was also watching a debate from Karl Keating on YouTube with a protestant minister. I was just thinking that if I were a Protestant and I knew there six books taken out of the original the books of The Bible. I begin to question if my Pastors thought this book isn’t good enough then I would begin to question every book.
Feel free to correct me if I am wrong:}
We’ll thank God I am a Catholic Christian!

Well - if you were a protestant, who would you most likely ask about the discrepancy in the number of books? My guess is that it is most likely going to be another protestant…and you will receive a protestant answer - and that answer might vary somewhat depending on the specific denomination…
But basically - as Edward says above - the most common answer you would get will be something to the effect that the Catholics added books rather than that the protestants removed them.

Peace
James

 

[Newsy]

Well - if you were a protestant, who would you most likely ask about the discrepancy in the number of books? My guess is that it is most likely going to be another protestant…and you will receive a protestant answer - and that answer might vary somewhat depending on the specific denomination…
But basically - as Edward says above - the most common answer you would get will be something to the effect that the Catholics added books rather than that the protestants removed them.

Peace
James

When I was protestant, I asked about that. I was told that “dueterocanonical” means “second canon”. That is, that the Catholic Church added them to the Canon much later. Of course, I was also told that “who ever adds to this will be cursed”, from Revelation, was addressing this (i.e. adding books to the Bible).

 

[JerryZ]

When I was protestant, I asked about that. I was told that “dueterocanonical” means “second canon”. That is, that the Catholic Church added them to the Canon much later. Of course, I was also told that “who ever adds to this will be cursed”, from Revelation, was addressing this (i.e. adding books to the Bible).

You are correct “Deuterocanonical” does mean 2nd canon however the “term” came into use in the 16th Century a long time after the “Canon” or “Bible” had been closed.

The reason behind this is that the Jews around 100 started ommiting these books claiming they were NOT biblical.

Let’s see how these claims stack up.

The Septuagint, the OT that Jesus and all His Apostles (well most of them anyway) quote did have these books in it.
We know this because we have quotes from these books in the NT.

Further, more recently the Dead Sea Scrolls have been found with fragments from precisely these books.

Even further these books are a damning indictement of the Jews that want to attack Jesus’s claims. Any wonder why they wanted to silence them?

For all these reasons we keep them in the “Bible”

By the way and as a sidenote when Luther et all started their revision of the “Canon” they compared the OT from KJ with the OT that the Jews of the day were using, and they “discovered” that they did NOT include those books.

They TRUSTED and believed the word of 16th Century NON Christians over the teachings of the true Church.

The irony of this is amazing

 

[JimR-OCDS]

JerryZ;

The reason behind this is that the Jews around 100 started ommiting these books claiming they were NOT biblical.

Actually they didn’t reject just the 7 books, but the entire Septuagint and only accepted the Hebrew version of the Old Testament text.

After the diaspora, in 70AD, the Rabbinical School in Jaminia, wanting to distance Judaism from Christianity as far as possible, rejected the use of the Septuagint. In fact, until the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, they claimed that the Septuagint was never treated as an official text for Jews.

Jim

 

[chosen_people]

The Septuagint, the Rabbinic translation of the Hebrew to Greek, was only of the Torah or the five books of Moses. Christians often mistakenly refer to the Septuagint regarding this translation by the Rabbanim as also being a translation of the Prophets. Secondly, the Torah is held in Jewish tradition to have been dictated from God to Moses. There are no “versions” of the Torah. A Torah scroll with even a single letter wrong may not be used. When the mass in-gathering of Jews occurred following the Jews regaining their independence over their homeland, Torah scrolls from Jewish communities around the world, many isolated, were gathered together. There were no textual differences in any of the Torah scrolls except for a single letter in scrolls from a single isolated Yemenite community, which had no effect on the textual meaning and was immediately corrected. Thirdly, the Rabbi’s feared the possibility that their translation of the Torah into Greek could be tampered with. Therefore 15 key passages of the Septuagint translation were placed in the Talmud, Tractate Megilla 9a-9b, so that the Septuagint could always be compared to the original translation of these passages. In the current version of the Septuagint, Christian translators have altered the translation of thirteen of the fifteen passages that the rabbi’s placed into the Talmud.In other words, Christian translators have falsified the rabbi’s original Septuagint translation of the Torah and it cannot be relied upon for linguistic proof.

I can not speak for Protestants, however the books you are referring to that were added to the Catholic scriptures, are not in the Jewish scriptures for a very good and simple reason. These relatively later works contain ideas and concepts that were found to be not compatible with Judaism, its concepts and definitions.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

I can not speak for Protestants, however the books you are referring to that were added to the Catholic scriptures, are not in the Jewish scriptures for a very good and simple reason. These relatively later works contain ideas and concepts that were found to be not compatible with Judaism, its concepts and definitions.

And the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls refutes this.

The books were not added to the Septuagint by Catholics, but were part of it to begin with.

The Septuagint was the Old Testament Canon accepted by the Church from the 1st Century of Christianity.

Jim