What are the books that protestants took out of the Bible?

[Peter_J]

Unless I am mistaken, the Catholic Canon wasn’t really spelled out in dogma until the Council of Trent,

Actually, you should say “the Catholic Canon wasn’t really made official until the Council of Trent.”

The Canon of Scripture was not dogmatically defined before the Council of Trent, during the Council of Trent, or since the Council of Trent. (When you really come down to it, I don’t even think we can dogmatically define the Canon – just like we can’t dogmatically define the statement “The first Ecumenical Council was held in 325 A.D.”)

 

[Peter_J]

A huge pet peeve of mine, however, is whenever I see it written on a site like this, or hear it on EWTN radio, that the contents of the Bible were undisputed for over 1,000 years until Martin Luther came along and on his own whim went against church tradition in disputing the canonicity of these books.

IowaJay, I think you’re annoyance is 100% understandable. Similarly, I find it very annoying when I hear Protestants say that the contents of the Bible were undisputed for over 1,000 until the RCC decided to add some stuff.

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

Hmm, that’s an interesting thought, I’ll ponder. Do you think that Lutherans not practicing intercession of saints is opposed to them?

Jon

Not at all. It is not written any where that one must ask for the intercession the saints, Living in this life or the next. We are told to pray for one another and I take that as appling to those in Heaven as well as they are to pray for us. When it is boiled down to brass tax that is what the intercession of the Saint is asking them to pray with us to God and the Lord Jesus. We know from the transfiguration that those in heaven can hear us. Otherwise I see know reason for Jesus to have shown that to the Apostles.

I would say that teaching against intercessory prayer would be, but not practicing and teaching against are two different things.

 

[Peter_J]

JonNC,

**With all due respect, there should not be a Lutheran perspective, **

Yes I know – hence the need for the inquisition.

Why? Because there is only One Church, and it, only holds the keys to bind or loose anything in heaven or on earth. JonNC, one can not make up ones own mind,

One either accept the Church, or one don’t.

I, nor you nor the Baptist, Evangelicals,or the Lutheran leaders, but only the Leaders/successors of the Apostles have that Right have that commission these are the ones that guide us through the Church and the Church has been doing as you very well know for over 2000 years.

Imagine everyone having a perspective, the Lutherans having their perspective, the Baptist having thier perspective, so on and so forth,

My powers of imagination are a bit limited, but I think I can imagine that.

P.S. Is this a great thread, or what? (Just don’t take it too seriously.)

 

[O.S.Luke]

Actually, you should say “the Catholic Canon wasn’t really made official until the Council of Trent.”

The Canon of Scripture was not dogmatically defined before the Council of Trent, during the Council of Trent, or since the Council of Trent. (When you really come down to it, I don’t even think we can dogmatically define the Canon – just like we can’t dogmatically define the statement “The first Ecumenical Council was held in 325 A.D.”)

Thank you Pete, for clarifying that. I get doctrine, dogma, defined, etc all confused.

Blessings.

 

[Peter_J]

Thank you Pete, for clarifying that.

I get doctrine, dogma, defined, etc all confused.

Blessings.

Yes, it can get pretty tricky. (For example, I started a thread recently about the question of whether Mary’s perpetual virginity has been dogmatically defined.)

 

[CAS64]

What are the 7 books that protestants took out of the Bible? ( I think it was 7…not too sure) Why?

Let’s do some clairification here to start. First of all, we Anglicans did not remove these books from our Bibles. We most generally read the same readings as you Catholics do in church on a given Sunday morning because of the way the lectionary works within the Gregorian Kalender. When readings come from Apocryphical books such as Ecclesiasticus, we have those readings in church, same as you do. The difference is that we do not form church doctrine from these books because we do not believe that they have full canonical authenticity. Why? There are many reasons. One important reason is that Jesus never referenced anything from them as he did from other OT Scriptures.

Good subject for discussion.

 

[Chellow]

Let’s do some clairification here to start. First of all, we Anglicans did not remove these books from our Bibles. We most generally read the same readings as you Catholics do in church on a given Sunday morning because of the way the lectionary works within the Gregorian Kalender. When readings come from Apocryphical books such as Ecclesiasticus, we have those readings in church, same as you do. The difference is that we do not form church doctrine from these books because we do not believe that they have full canonical authenticity. Why? There are many reasons. One important reason is that Jesus never referenced anything from them as he did from other OT Scriptures.

Good subject for discussion.

We understand some churches have included the books in the bible, this includes the Anglican Church.
You are mistaken Christ did reference the Deuterocanonical books.

Ref:
Deuterocanonical books in the New Testament

 

[Peter_J]

Good subject for discussion.

Sadly, it often seems to bring out the worse in us, Catholics and Protestants alike.

 

[CAS64]

We understand some churches have included the books in the bible, this includes the Anglican Church.
You are mistaken Christ did reference the Deuterocanonical books.

Ref:
Deuterocanonical books in the New Testament

I don’t think so. They were never quoted or alluded to by Jesus or any of the Apostles for that matter. The sermons in the Acts of the Apostles which do outline Jewish history don’t include any events from the Apocrypha.

 

[firstmode]

The deuterocanonical book have never been disputed by the Church since the Council of Carthage in 397. They may have been disputed somewhat by Jerome, Luther and others but not by the Church.

All canonical decision are made by a council of the Church in communion with the Holy See, not by individuals.

Ref:
Councils of Carthage

The authoritative cannon of Melito in 170AD lists the exact Old testament as used by modern day Protestants with only the book of Esther missing. These are the books in the Old Testament used by Jews and Protestants (Esther is believed to have been left out for political reasons as it shows the Jews killing many of their enemies). It should be noted that Melito claims this was an accurate list. The fact that Melito calls these the books of the Old Testament demonstrates that the Church had to have had a New Testament around or before the time of 170AD.

The Council of Jamnia which happened around 90AD solidified the Hebrew books to be used in the OT. Many of the early church writers do not attribute the Apocrypha as inspired books to be used. Even the esteemed Athanasius listed many of the Apocrypha as books that are not inspired:

“But for the sake of greater accuracy I add, being constrained to write, that there are also other books besides these, which have not indeed been put in the canon, but have been appointed by the Fathers as reading-matter for those who have just come forward and which to be instructed in the doctrine of piety: the Wisdom of Solomon, the Wisdom of Sirach, Esther, Judith, Tobias, the so-called Teaching [Didache] of the Apostles, and the Shepherd.”

In reference to Daniel…I also told the reader that the version read in the Christian churches was not that of the Septuagint translators but that of Theodotion. It is true, I said that the Septuagint version was in this book very different from the original, and that it was condemned by the right judgment of the churches of Christ…I repeat what the Jews say against the Story of Susanna and the Hymn of the Three Children, and the fables of Bel and the Dragon, which are not contained in the Hebrew Bible (Jerome. Apology Against Rufinus, Book II, Chapter 33).

The Hebrew Scriptures are used by apostolic men; they are used, as is evident, by the apostles and evangelists. Our Lord and Saviour himself whenever he refers to the Scriptures, takes his quotations from the Hebrew; as in the instance of the words “He that believes in me, as the Scripture has said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water,” and in the words used on the cross itself, “Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani,” which is by interpretation “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” not, as it is given by the Septuagint, “My God, my God, look upon me, why have you forsaken me?” and many similar cases. I do not say this in order to aim a blow at the seventy translators; but I assert that the Apostles of Christ have an authority superior to theirs. Wherever the Seventy agree with the Hebrew, the apostles took their quotations from that translation; but, where they disagree, they set down in Greek what they had found in the Hebrew (Jerome. Apology Against Rufinus, Book II, Chapter 34).

“7. But for the sake of greater exactness I add this also, writing under obligation, as it were. There are other books besides these, indeed not received as canonical but having been appointed by our fathers to be read to those just approaching and wishing to be instructed in the word of godliness: Wisdom of Solomon, Wisdom of Sirach, Esther, Judith, Tobit, and that which is called the Teaching of the Apostles, and the Shepherd. But the former, my brethren, are included in the Canon, the latter being merely read; nor is there any place a mention of secret writings. But such are the invention of heretics, who indeed write them whenever they wish, bestowing upon them their approval, and assigning to them a date, that so, using them as if they were ancient writings, they find a means by which to lead astray the simple-minded.” Athanasius of Alexandria (A.D. 296-373)

“The books that [Melito of Sardis ( 170 A.D.)] lists follow very closely to the Old Testament in contemporary Protestant Bibles. Today, we would call the “four books of Kings” 1 Samuel, II Samuel, I Kings and II Kings. “The Book of Wisdom” is undoubtedly in this case, the Book of Proverbs, and Esdras was commonly the heading for Nehemiah and Ezra. (not to be confused with the Apocryphal book “Esdras”). Lamentations was considered a part of Jeremiah. The only book missing from Melito’s list is Esther, which was held suspect by many Jews since it did not contain the Divine Name (YHWH). Esther, incidentally, also happens to be missing from the rolls of Qumran, amidst the “Dead Sea Scrolls”. Esther and Song of Solomon were two of the disputed books at the Council of Jamnia. More importantly, it should be noted that the Apocrypha (Tobit, Judith, Esdras, I and II Maccabees, and Sirach) was still not accepted as Scripture”

 

[firstmode]

The fathers agree that the apocrypha is non-canonical and should not be included in the canon. Melito of Sardis, (Eusebius – Lib. IV. Cap. 26.) testifies he knew the OT canon. He took great pains in research, as we are told by Eusebius, and comes to the exact number of books as the protestants and Jews do. Origen (Eus. Lib. VI c. 25) acknowledges the same books as the protestants as canonical., and says that the number of them are two and twenty according to the Hebrew alphabet. (Remembering the combination of 1-2 Samuel, 1-2 Kings, etc.) Athanasius says “Our whole scripture is divinely inspired and hath books not infinite in number, but finite and comprehended in a certain canon.” There was, therefore a certain canon by the late 300’s. He then enumerates this, “The canonical books of the OT are two and twenty. Equal to the number as the Hebrew alphabet.” Then he says, “But besides these, there are also other non canonical books of the OT which are only read to the catechumens.” Then he lists the Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach, the fragments of Esther, Judith, Tobit and the like. “These” he says “are the non-canonical books of the OT.” (Athanas. Opp. Ii. 126. sqq. Ed. Bened.) Hilary, bishop of Poitiers, says, “The law of the OT is considered as divided into twenty-two books, so as to correspond to the number of letters.” Nazianzen fixes the same number. Cyril of Jerusalem, in his 4th catechetical discourse says much, “Do thou learn carefully from the church what are the books of the OT, Read the divine Scriptures, the two and twenty books. (Cyril. Hiersol. Catech. IV. 33. p. 67. ed Tuttei.) Epiphanius counts twenty seven, or by the Hebrew doubling, twenty two, “delivered by God to the Jews.” And he says of the apocryphal books, “They are indeed useful books, but are not included in the canon, and were not deposited in the ark of the covenant.” Ruffinus, in his exposition of the Apostle’s Creed, says “But I should be known that there are other books also, which were called by the ancients not canonical but ecclesiastical, the Wisdom of Solomon and of Sirach, the book of Tobit, Judith, Macabees. These they would have to be read in the churches, but that nothing should be advanced from them for the confirming the authority of faith.” (Symb. Apost. In Appendix ad Cyprian. Ed. Fell. P. 26). (As with any good book.) Jerome plainly rejects all the apocryphal books from the canon. In his Prologus Galeatus he says “As there are twenty and two letters, so there are counted twenty and two books. Therefore the Wisdom of Solomon, and Jesus, and Judith, and Tobit, are not in the canon.” (See the introduction to the Vulgate in his own hand.) Gregory the Great, in his commentaries on Job, (Lib. XIX. Cap. 16.) expressly writes that the books of Macabees is not canonical, as well as the rest. Josephus also agrees. In his first book against Apion the grammaritan “We have not innumerable books, inconsistent and conflicting with each other, but two and twenty books alone, containing the series of our whole history, and justly deemed worthy of our highest credit.” (Contra Apion. L. I. C. 8.)

 

[Chellow]

…

While I may agree and believe with all your statements I’m left bound to only follow an official church council. Remember it’s the bishops of the church that have authority to teach (Luke 10:16) not me not Luther, not Jerome only a council of Bishops (Matthew 18:18).

Books of the Cannon
“The Canon of Christian Scripture, as approved by the Catholic Church at the Council of Rome in A.D. 382 and reaffirmed at the Councils of Hippo in A.D. 393, Carthage in A.D. 397, II Nicæa in A.D. 787, Florence in A.D. 1442, Trent in A.D. 1546, Vatican I in A.D. 1870, and Vatican II in A.D. 1965, contains 46 books in the Old Testament and 27 in the New Testament. The Councils of II Nicæa is recognized by Protestants as ecumenical councils. Protestants accept the New Testament Canon approved by these councils, however they reject inclusion of seven books of the Old Testament, favoring Luther’s opinion of these books over that of the ecumenical councils.”

 

[Chellow]

I don’t think so. They were never quoted or alluded to by Jesus or any of the Apostles for that matter. The sermons in the Acts of the Apostles which do outline Jewish history don’t include any events from the Apocrypha.

Deuterocanonical books in the New Testament

From: ScriptureCatholic.com
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.

Luke 2:29 - Simeon’s declaration that he is ready to die after seeing the Child Jesus follows Tobit 11:9.

Luke 13:29 - the Lord’s description of men coming from east and west to rejoice in God follows Baruch 4:37.

Luke 21:24 - Jesus’ usage of “fall by the edge of the sword” follows Sirach 28:18.

Luke 24:4 and Acts 1:10 - Luke’s description of the two men in dazzling apparel reminds us of 2 Macc. 3:26.

John 1:3 - all things were made through Him, the Word, follows Wisdom 9:1.

John 3:13 - who has ascended into heaven but He who descended from heaven references Baruch 3:29.

John 4:48; Acts 5:12; 15:12; 2 Cor. 12:12 - Jesus’, Luke’s and Paul’s usage of “signs and wonders” follows Wisdom 8:8.

John 5:18 - Jesus claiming that God is His Father follows Wisdom 2:16.

John 6:35-59 - Jesus’ Eucharistic discourse is foreshadowed in Sirach 24:21.

John 10:22 - the identification of the feast of the dedication is taken from 1 Macc. 4:59.

John 10:36 – Jesus accepts the inspiration of Maccabees as He analogizes the Hanukkah consecration to His own consecration to the Father in 1 Macc. 4:36.

John 15:6 - branches that don’t bear fruit and are cut down follows Wis. 4:5 where branches are broken off.

Acts 1:15 - Luke’s reference to the 120 may be a reference to 1 Macc. 3:55 - leaders of tens / restoration of the twelve.

Acts 10:34; Rom. 2:11; Gal. 2:6 - Peter’s and Paul’s statement that God shows no partiality references Sirach 35:12.

Acts 17:29 - description of false gods as like gold and silver made by men follows Wisdom 13:10.

Rom 1:18-25 - Paul’s teaching on the knowledge of the Creator and the ignorance and sin of idolatry follows Wis. 13:1-10.

Rom. 1:20 - specifically, God’s existence being evident in nature follows Wis. 13:1.

Rom. 1:23 - the sin of worshipping mortal man, birds, animals and reptiles follows Wis. 11:15; 12:24-27; 13:10; 14:8.

Rom. 1:24-27 - this idolatry results in all kinds of sexual perversion which follows Wis. 14:12,24-27.

Rom. 4:17 - Abraham is a father of many nations follows Sirach 44:19.

Rom. 5:12 - description of death and sin entering into the world is similar to Wisdom 2:24.

Rom. 9:21 - usage of the potter and the clay, making two kinds of vessels follows Wisdom 15:7.

1 Cor. 2:16 - Paul’s question, “who has known the mind of the Lord?” references Wisdom 9:13.

1 Cor. 6:12-13; 10:23-26 - warning that, while all things are good, beware of gluttony, follows Sirach 36:18 and 37:28-30.

1 Cor. 8:5-6 - Paul acknowledging many “gods” but one Lord follows Wis. 13:3.

1 Cor. 10:1 - Paul’s description of our fathers being under the cloud passing through the sea refers to Wisdom 19:7.

1 Cor. 10:20 - what pagans sacrifice they offer to demons and not to God refers to Baruch 4:7.

See next Post

 

[Chellow]

Follow up of Post #74

…

1 Cor. 15:29 - if no expectation of resurrection, it would be foolish to be baptized on their behalf follows 2 Macc. 12:43-45.

Eph. 1:17 - Paul’s prayer for a “spirit of wisdom” follows the prayer for the spirit of wisdom in Wisdom 7:7.

Eph. 6:14 - Paul describing the breastplate of righteousness is the same as Wis. 5:18. See also Isaiah 59:17 and 1 Thess. 5:8.

Eph. 6:13-17 - in fact, the whole discussion of armor, helmet, breastplate, sword, shield follows Wis. 5:17-20.

1 Tim. 6:15 - Paul’s description of God as Sovereign and King of kings is from 2 Macc. 12:15; 13:4.

2 Tim. 4:8 - Paul’s description of a crown of righteousness is similar to Wisdom 5:16.

Heb. 4:12 - Paul’s description of God’s word as a sword is similar to Wisdom 18:15.

Heb. 11:5 - Enoch being taken up is also referenced in Wis 4:10 and Sir 44:16. See also 2 Kings 2:1-13 & Sir 48:9 regarding Elijah.

Heb 11:35 - Paul teaches about the martyrdom of the mother and her sons described in 2 Macc. 7:1-42.

Heb. 12:12 - the description “drooping hands” and “weak knees” comes from Sirach 25:23.

James 1:19 - let every man be quick to hear and slow to respond follows Sirach 5:11.

James 2:23 - it was reckoned to him as righteousness follows 1 Macc. 2:52 - it was reckoned to him as righteousness.

James 3:13 - James’ instruction to perform works in meekness follows Sirach 3:17.

James 5:3 - describing silver which rusts and laying up treasure follows Sirach 29:10-11.

James 5:6 - condemning and killing the “righteous man” follows Wisdom 2:10-20.

1 Peter 1:6-7 - Peter teaches about testing faith by purgatorial fire as described in Wisdom 3:5-6 and Sirach 2:5.

1 Peter 1:17 - God judging each one according to his deeds refers to Sirach 16:12 - God judges man according to his deeds.

2 Peter 2:7 - God’s rescue of a righteous man (Lot) is also described in Wisdom 10:6.

Rev. 1:4 – the seven spirits who are before his throne is taken from Tobit 12:15 – Raphael is one of the seven holy angels who present the prayers of the saints before the Holy One.

Rev. 1:18; Matt. 16:18 - power of life over death and gates of Hades follows Wis. 16:13.

Rev. 2:12 - reference to the two-edged sword is similar to the description of God’s Word in Wisdom 18:16.

Rev. 5:7 - God is described as seated on His throne, and this is the same description used in Sirach 1:8.

Rev. 8:3-4 - prayers of the saints presented to God by the hand of an angel follows Tobit 12:12,15.

Rev. 8:7 - raining of hail and fire to the earth follows Wisdom 16:22 and Sirach 39:29.

Rev. 9:3 - raining of locusts on the earth follows Wisdom 16:9.

Rev. 11:19 - the vision of the ark of the covenant (Mary) in a cloud of glory was prophesied in 2 Macc. 2:7.

Rev. 17:14 - description of God as King of kings follows 2 Macc. 13:4.

Rev. 19:1 - the cry “Hallelujah” at the coming of the new Jerusalem follows Tobit 13:18.

Rev. 19:11 - the description of the Lord on a white horse in the heavens follows 2 Macc. 3:25; 11:8.

Rev. 19:16 - description of our Lord as King of kings is taken from 2 Macc. 13:4.

Rev. 21:19 - the description of the new Jerusalem with precious stones is prophesied in Tobit 13:17.

Exodus 23:7 - do not slay the innocent and righteous - Dan. 13:53 - do not put to death an innocent and righteous person.

1 Sam. 28:7-20 – the intercessory mediation of deceased Samuel for Saul follows Sirach 46:20.

2 Kings 2:1-13 – Elijah being taken up into heaven follows Sirach 48:9.

2 Tim. 3:16 - the inspired Scripture that Paul was referring to included the deuterocanonical texts that the Protestants removed. The books Baruch, Tobit, Maccabees, Judith, Sirach, Wisdom and parts of Daniel and Esther were all included in the Septuagint that Jesus and the apostles used.

Sirach and 2 Maccabees – some Protestants argue these books are not inspired because the writers express uncertainty about their abilities. But sacred writers are often humble about their divinely inspired writings. See, for example, 1 Cor. 7:40 – Paul says he “thinks” that he has the Spirit of God.

The Protestants attempt to defend their rejection of the deuterocanonicals on the ground that the early Jews rejected them. However, the Jewish councils that rejected them (e.g., School of Javneh (also called “Jamnia” in 90 - 100 A.D.) were the same councils that rejected the entire New Testatment canon. Thus, Protestants who reject the Catholic Bible are following a Jewish council that rejected Christ and the Revelation of the New Testament.

 

[Peter_J]

The authoritative cannon of Melito in 170AD lists the exact Old testament as used by modern day Protestants with only the book of Esther missing. These are the books in the Old Testament used by Jews and Protestants (Esther is believed to have been left out for political reasons as it shows the Jews killing many of their enemies). It should be noted that Melito claims this was an accurate list. The fact that Melito calls these the books of the Old Testament demonstrates that the Church had to have had a New Testament around or before the time of 170AD.

The Council of Jamnia which happened around 90AD solidified the Hebrew books to be used in the OT. Many of the early church writers do not attribute the Apocrypha as inspired books to be used. Even the esteemed Athanasius listed many of the Apocrypha as books that are not inspired:

“But for the sake of greater accuracy I add, being constrained to write, that there are also other books besides these, which have not indeed been put in the canon, but have been appointed by the Fathers as reading-matter for those who have just come forward and which to be instructed in the doctrine of piety: the Wisdom of Solomon, the Wisdom of Sirach, Esther, Judith, Tobias, the so-called Teaching [Didache] of the Apostles, and the Shepherd.”

In reference to Daniel…I also told the reader that the version read in the Christian churches was not that of the Septuagint translators but that of Theodotion. It is true, I said that the Septuagint version was in this book very different from the original, and that it was condemned by the right judgment of the churches of Christ…I repeat what the Jews say against the Story of Susanna and the Hymn of the Three Children, and the fables of Bel and the Dragon, which are not contained in the Hebrew Bible (Jerome. Apology Against Rufinus, Book II, Chapter 33).

The Hebrew Scriptures are used by apostolic men; they are used, as is evident, by the apostles and evangelists. Our Lord and Saviour himself whenever he refers to the Scriptures, takes his quotations from the Hebrew; as in the instance of the words “He that believes in me, as the Scripture has said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water,” and in the words used on the cross itself, “Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani,” which is by interpretation “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” not, as it is given by the Septuagint, “My God, my God, look upon me, why have you forsaken me?” and many similar cases. I do not say this in order to aim a blow at the seventy translators; but I assert that the Apostles of Christ have an authority superior to theirs. Wherever the Seventy agree with the Hebrew, the apostles took their quotations from that translation; but, where they disagree, they set down in Greek what they had found in the Hebrew (Jerome. Apology Against Rufinus, Book II, Chapter 34).

“7. But for the sake of greater exactness I add this also, writing under obligation, as it were. There are other books besides these, indeed not received as canonical but having been appointed by our fathers to be read to those just approaching and wishing to be instructed in the word of godliness: Wisdom of Solomon, Wisdom of Sirach, Esther, Judith, Tobit, and that which is called the Teaching of the Apostles, and the Shepherd. But the former, my brethren, are included in the Canon, the latter being merely read; nor is there any place a mention of secret writings. But such are the invention of heretics, who indeed write them whenever they wish, bestowing upon them their approval, and assigning to them a date, that so, using them as if they were ancient writings, they find a means by which to lead astray the simple-minded.” Athanasius of Alexandria (A.D. 296-373)

“The books that [Melito of Sardis ( 170 A.D.)] lists follow very closely to the Old Testament in contemporary Protestant Bibles. Today, we would call the “four books of Kings” 1 Samuel, II Samuel, I Kings and II Kings. “The Book of Wisdom” is undoubtedly in this case, the Book of Proverbs, and Esdras was commonly the heading for Nehemiah and Ezra. (not to be confused with the Apocryphal book “Esdras”). Lamentations was considered a part of Jeremiah. The only book missing from Melito’s list is Esther, which was held suspect by many Jews since it did not contain the Divine Name (YHWH). Esther, incidentally, also happens to be missing from the rolls of Qumran, amidst the “Dead Sea Scrolls”. Esther and Song of Solomon were two of the disputed books at the Council of Jamnia. More importantly, it should be noted that the Apocrypha (Tobit, Judith, Esdras, I and II Maccabees, and Sirach) was still not accepted as Scripture”

Interesting points, firstmode.

It really kind of blows my mind to consider that with regard to something that’s so incredibly divisive for us today, the early Christians were able to disagree amicably, and in fact remain in full communion with one another. Pretty humbling.

 

[SyCarl]

Interesting points, firstmode.

It really kind of blows my mind to consider that with regard to something that’s so incredibly divisive for us today, the early Christians were able to disagree amicably, and in fact remain in full communion with one another. Pretty humbling.

This is exactly my view on many doctrinal views that divide us. It seems to me that the early church accepted many diverse views on a number of subjects to the extent that, whether the individual church father held the belief themselves, they could speak of views that encompassed most Catholic and Protestant views as perfectly orthodox. Cyprian could disagree with Pope Stephen on the matter of the rebaptism of heretics without being excluded from the Church. Unfortunately as time went by the level of tolerance for divergent views seems to have decreased substantially to the point of insisting that one view must be held to the exclusion of all others. From the point where the Apostles’ Creed was the general rule of faith, it seems to me that we have over defined what must be believed.

 

[Chellow]

This is exactly my view on many doctrinal views that divide us. It seems to me that the early church accepted many diverse views on a number of subjects to the extent that, whether the individual church father held the belief themselves, they could speak of views that encompassed most Catholic and Protestant views as perfectly orthodox. Cyprian could disagree with Pope Stephen on the matter of the rebaptism of heretics without being excluded from the Church. Unfortunately as time went by the level of tolerance for divergent views seems to have decreased substantially to the point of insisting that one view must be held to the exclusion of all others. From the point where the Apostles’ Creed was the general rule of faith, it seems to me that we have over defined what must be believed.

Phil 2:2 - be of** same mind**, united in heart thinking one thing
Eph 4:3-6 - one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father
Rom 16:17 - I urge that there be no divisions among you
Rom 15:5 - God grant you to** think in harmony** with one another
Jn 17:17-23 - I pray that they** may be one**, as we are one

 

[Peter_J]

Well said, SyCarl and Chellow. Our divisions are really very sad.

Conversely, it’s pretty exciting to see Christians of different stripes taking seriously the Lord’s instructions to “be one”, and working hard to try to reconcile with one another.

 

[CAS64]

Deuterocanonical books in the New Testament

From: ScriptureCatholic.com
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.

Luke 2:29 - Simeon’s declaration that he is ready to die after seeing the Child Jesus follows Tobit 11:9.

Luke 13:29 - the Lord’s description of men coming from east and west to rejoice in God follows Baruch 4:37.

Luke 21:24 - Jesus’ usage of “fall by the edge of the sword” follows Sirach 28:18.

Luke 24:4 and Acts 1:10 - Luke’s description of the two men in dazzling apparel reminds us of 2 Macc. 3:26.

John 1:3 - all things were made through Him, the Word, follows Wisdom 9:1.

John 3:13 - who has ascended into heaven but He who descended from heaven references Baruch 3:29.

John 4:48; Acts 5:12; 15:12; 2 Cor. 12:12 - Jesus’, Luke’s and Paul’s usage of “signs and wonders” follows Wisdom 8:8.

John 5:18 - Jesus claiming that God is His Father follows Wisdom 2:16.

John 6:35-59 - Jesus’ Eucharistic discourse is foreshadowed in Sirach 24:21.

John 10:22 - the identification of the feast of the dedication is taken from 1 Macc. 4:59.

John 10:36 – Jesus accepts the inspiration of Maccabees as He analogizes the Hanukkah consecration to His own consecration to the Father in 1 Macc. 4:36.

John 15:6 - branches that don’t bear fruit and are cut down follows Wis. 4:5 where branches are broken off.

Acts 1:15 - Luke’s reference to the 120 may be a reference to 1 Macc. 3:55 - leaders of tens / restoration of the twelve.

Acts 10:34; Rom. 2:11; Gal. 2:6 - Peter’s and Paul’s statement that God shows no partiality references Sirach 35:12.

Acts 17:29 - description of false gods as like gold and silver made by men follows Wisdom 13:10.

Rom 1:18-25 - Paul’s teaching on the knowledge of the Creator and the ignorance and sin of idolatry follows Wis. 13:1-10.

Rom. 1:20 - specifically, God’s existence being evident in nature follows Wis. 13:1.

Rom. 1:23 - the sin of worshipping mortal man, birds, animals and reptiles follows Wis. 11:15; 12:24-27; 13:10; 14:8.

Rom. 1:24-27 - this idolatry results in all kinds of sexual perversion which follows Wis. 14:12,24-27.

Rom. 4:17 - Abraham is a father of many nations follows Sirach 44:19.

Rom. 5:12 - description of death and sin entering into the world is similar to Wisdom 2:24.

Rom. 9:21 - usage of the potter and the clay, making two kinds of vessels follows Wisdom 15:7.

1 Cor. 2:16 - Paul’s question, “who has known the mind of the Lord?” references Wisdom 9:13.

1 Cor. 6:12-13; 10:23-26 - warning that, while all things are good, beware of gluttony, follows Sirach 36:18 and 37:28-30.

1 Cor. 8:5-6 - Paul acknowledging many “gods” but one Lord follows Wis. 13:3.

1 Cor. 10:1 - Paul’s description of our fathers being under the cloud passing through the sea refers to Wisdom 19:7.

1 Cor. 10:20 - what pagans sacrifice they offer to demons and not to God refers to Baruch 4:7.

See next Post

Lots of grabbing at straws it looks like to me. You seem to insert words and ideas where the actual text does not depict. Catholics speak of Mary in Revelation for instance but the Scriptures never once say Mary in Revelation. Seems like quite a leap to me. As for the Apocrypha, it also contains several proven errors and contradicts inspired Scripture.