I
Irish_Polock
Guest
scripturecatholic.com/deuterocanon.html
Above is the reference asked for, although the author is in question. It has been all over the web for years it seems.
- Status
Above is the reference asked for, although the author is in question. It has been all over the web for years it seems.
G
graceandglory
Guest
Thanks! scripturecatholic is already open in another tab on my pc.
W
WestonGrant
Guest
Didn’t Jimmy Akin write a good article about this?
I think this is the one. Gotta love google.
ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/DEUTEROS.htm
I think this is the one. Gotta love google.
ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/DEUTEROS.htm
I
inkaneer
Guest
Are you saying that the three instances you mention were done as an act of love for God ? If so, then kindly show us the scripture verses that state it. Your interpretation of these events as an act of love is not evidentiary proof.
N
NotWorthy
Guest
Being that the Jews were told, first and foremost, that “… You shall love the Lord your God, with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your strength”. With this emblazed on the Israelites mind (they wore tassles with these verses on their foreheads!), I would think the pressure is on you to prove that their fear of God overruled their Love of God.
P
peary
Guest
**The Septuagint was used exclusively by Greek-speaking Jews who lived in the Mediterranean area. It is the translation of the Hebrew Bible into the Greek language. The name “Septuagint” comes from the Latin word for seventy. The tradition is that 70 (or 72) Jewish scholars were the translators behind the Septuagint. The Septuagint was translated in the third and second centuries B.C. in Alexandria, Egypt. As Israel was under the authority of Greece for several centuries, the Greek language became more and more common. By the 2nd and 1st centuries B.C., most people in Israel spoke Greek as their primary language. That is why the effort was made to translate the Hebrew Bible into Greek – so that those who did not understand Hebrew could have the Scriptures in a language they could understand. The Septuagint represents the first major effort at translating a significant religious text from one language into another.
By the late 1st century B.C., and especially the 1st century A.D. – the Septuagint had “replaced” the Hebrew Bible as the Scriptures most people used. Since most people spoke and read Greek as their primary language, and the Greek authorities strongly encouraged the use of Greek, the Septuagint became much more common than the Hebrew Old Testament. The fact that the Apostles and New Testament authors felt comfortable, under the direction of the Holy Spirit, in using the Septuagint should give us assurance that a translation of the original languages of the Bible is still the authoritative Word of God.
The Jews did not define a canon of their Scriptures until 90 AD. The Septuagint contained more books than are currently found in Protestant version of the Old Testament today. They include 1, 2, & 3 Maccabees, Tobit, Judith, Sirach, Baruch, Wisdom, Esdras, and longer versions of Daniel and Esther. Some scholars believed these to be unique to the Alexandrian Greek-Jewish community, but fragments of all of them have been found in Hebrew and/or Aramaic among the Dead Sea Scrolls, so they had wide, multi-lingual circulation.
Most Protestant-version Bibles use the Septuagint quotes in the New Testament, but if you cross-reference back to the Old Testament, they use the Hebrew rendering.Go figure.
Your scholarly protestant friend is smart, but not smart enough.**
B
BrianH
Guest
You are not saying the Jewish canon was decided at Jamnia? I certainly hope not.**The Septuagint was used exclusively by Greek-speaking Jews who lived in the Mediterranean area. It is the translation of the Hebrew Bible into the Greek language. The name “Septuagint” comes from the Latin word for seventy. The tradition is that 70 (or 72) Jewish scholars were the translators behind the Septuagint. The Septuagint was translated in the third and second centuries B.C. in Alexandria, Egypt. As Israel was under the authority of Greece for several centuries, the Greek language became more and more common. By the 2nd and 1st centuries B.C., most people in Israel spoke Greek as their primary language. That is why the effort was made to translate the Hebrew Bible into Greek – so that those who did not understand Hebrew could have the Scriptures in a language they could understand. The Septuagint represents the first major effort at translating a significant religious text from one language into another.
By the late 1st century B.C., and especially the 1st century A.D. – the Septuagint had “replaced” the Hebrew Bible as the Scriptures most people used. Since most people spoke and read Greek as their primary language, and the Greek authorities strongly encouraged the use of Greek, the Septuagint became much more common than the Hebrew Old Testament. The fact that the Apostles and New Testament authors felt comfortable, under the direction of the Holy Spirit, in using the Septuagint should give us assurance that a translation of the original languages of the Bible is still the authoritative Word of God.
The Jews did not define a canon of their Scriptures until 90 AD. The Septuagint contained more books than are currently found in Protestant version of the Old Testament today. They include 1, 2, & 3 Maccabees, Tobit, Judith, Sirach, Baruch, Wisdom, Esdras, and longer versions of Daniel and Esther. Some scholars believed these to be unique to the Alexandrian Greek-Jewish community, but fragments of all of them have been found in Hebrew and/or Aramaic among the Dead Sea Scrolls, so they had wide, multi-lingual circulation.
Most Protestant-version Bibles use the Septuagint quotes in the New Testament, but if you cross-reference back to the Old Testament, they use the Hebrew rendering.Go figure.
Your scholarly protestant friend is smart, but not smart enough.**
N
NotWorthy
Guest
You are correct. It was not decided at Jamnia. The Jamnian Council may have refuted several books, but they didn’t decide on a Canon.
I don’t believe our Jewish Brothers officially declared a Canon until the 14th century or so.
But even that is not complete. I think the Ethiopian Jewish community used an OT Canon that is identical to her Catholic brothers.
I
inkaneer
Guest
You might think that but you would be wrong, AGAIN. Your answer indicates you can not prove your allegation. If you could you would post the scripture verses to prove it. As for me I don’t have to prove anything. Because if the scriptures do not say they did it as an act of love then no one, including you, has the authority to say that was their motivation.
N
NotWorthy
Guest
Wait a second. Is this a one-way street or a two-way street?
Why do I have to prove that they did it out of Love and yet, you don’t have to prove that they did it out of fear? “Fear of the Lord”, in my opinion, wasn’t a prevailing theme in Scripture until you get to Sirach. It was mentioned here or there, but it certainly doesn’t come close to the command to love the Lord.
Hence, one can assume, and in my opinion they can “safely assume”, that most works done by the average Israelite was done first and foremost out of Love of Yahweh and a desire to please Yahwey, but only secondarily out of Fear of the Lord.
The difference is, my brother, I’m allowing you room to be right, but you seem to think that yours is the one and only right answer, and yet you haven’t provided the very same thing that you’ve demanded of me - Scriptural proof that my examples were done out of fear of the Lord.
I
inkaneer
Guest
Because you stated they did it out of love. I never stated they did it out of fear. That reference was in regard to another post about Abraham and Isaac where the scripture states Abraham feared God. But I never stated that in the examples you cited that the Israelites were motivated by fear. And the reason I never stated it is because the scripturees do not tell us what their motivation was. Unlike you I don’t try to read into the scriptures what isn’t there in the first place.
No, the difference is you want to impose your opinion on the scriptures instead of allowing the scriptures to say only what they say. In doing so you are no different than Martin Luther. Now I can’t make it any clearer than that. Therefore, I am ending this discussion. You can have the last word.
N
NotWorthy
Guest
I’m not sure that everyone is guilty of it, nor that this is a problem, as long as it doesn’t disagree with Catholic Doctrine.
For instance, do you act this way when a priest put his own spin on the actions of the woman at the well in John 4? I’ve heard many good explanations on her actions, and they all differ. Do you chastise your priest during the homily if he says the woman was degraded in her community and had to go to the well during the noon hour because she couldn’t go with the other women and hear their gossip about her?
I’m not going out on a limb by declaring that these Isrealites did what they did out of Love of God, for it was the very most important commandment that they had… one that they always kept in their minds… those things they placed on their foreheads were there for a reason, you know.
No, the difference is I am reading Scripture through my own lenses, just as everyone else does (including you, btw), but I am open to clarifications when I’m wrong. You haven’t shown me that I’m wrong in any way, except to declare that I’m as low as Martin Luther.
If my Scriptural interpretations were against Church doctrine and I failed to let the Church correct my reasonings, then your statement would be “spot on”. If not, then your statement is simply a slur made against me out of spite.
With that, I say God Bless and Happy New Year, my brother!
- Status