Who was the first ECF to reject the deutero's?

[sterryfamily]

Did his canon include the deutero’s?

Well, that’s a dumb question.

 

[sterryfamily]

Did his canon include the deutero’s?

Does his proposed canon say, “I reject the Deuteros”?

 

[Rbt_Southwell]

So according to you, does the Cathlic Encyclopedia state that Melito accepted the deutero’s or does it say that he rejected them?

Which is it?

What you want is some weird victory about the Catholic Tradition and canon.

What you want is for someone to say, “oops! That dang Melito! Why did he go and tip his hand to that 21st century [sorry, don’t know what denomination you claim!]”

The fact of the matter is that the “Alexandrian canon” is another phrase for those books translated into koine Greek. We Catholics call it “the Septuagint.” And it was the one which Jesus (if you believe the biblical manuscripts extant, and they DO vary) quoted from. He also quoted from those nasty “deuteros” which seems to have animated you so of late.

The Catholic Encyclopedia article (which you of course have not read but have used a secondary source for your argument here) goes to explain how the canon developed.

Many Bishops (like Melito) had many ‘ideas’ on what it should be. This is NOT tantamount to or equal to a REJECTION of the “deuteros.”

If it is, then as you being a non-Catholic I pity you, for *your *interpretation of what constitutes Scripture must (following your reasoning) find that *one *Christian who put it together for you with instructions (in the Bible? I doubt it!) on how to interpret it and apply it to worshiping God.

And of course, that boy better be moved by the Holy Spirit!

A tall order for someone unfamiliar with the Greek of the Septuagint, the Latin of the Vulgate and the Aramaic and Hebrew of the Dead Sea Scrolls (which verify the Vulgate and Septuagint, by the way: see your non-C scholars for verification of this in the Oxford Companion).

But good luck, after all, if you think it’s ‘sola scriptura’ then I am sure you will have no problem opening your own church and gaining adherents.

Good luck and God bless.

Robert

 

[Rbt_Southwell]

Robert,

You know as well as I do the pope simply approving something doesn’t make it dogma. Do you really want to press this issue?

Do you really want to state that everything the pope approves is dogma?

Powerlifter:

If the Pope declares something to be binding upon the Universal Church, it is binding. (psst, it’s in the Bible)

If the Pope declares the canon to be binding, then it is dogma.

This is a matter of Faith and Morals.

It is NOT a matter of discipline (like a celibate priesthood or no meat on Fridays or saying the Rosary).

Robert

 

[Rbt_Southwell]

Robert,

You apparently don’t know your faith, pity.

 

[Rbt_Southwell]

So according to you, does the Cathlic Encyclopedia state that Melito accepted the deutero’s or does it say that he rejected them?

Which is it?

Here is your request for clarification.

Notice how the snippet DOES NOT address the issue you think it does?

In fact, the quotation DOES NOT use the language of “accept or reject,” it merely states what was in it.

And that interesting tidbit about “Esther” implies Esther to be considered “protocanonical.”

Robert

 

[Pwrlftr]

Here is your request for clarification.

Notice how the snippet DOES NOT address the issue you think it does?

In fact, the quotation DOES NOT use the language of “accept or reject,” it merely states what was in it.

And that interesting tidbit about “Esther” implies Esther to be considered “protocanonical.”

Robert

From newadvent.org (it defines protocanonical)

***The protocanonical books of the Old Testament correspond with those of the Bible of the Hebrews, and the Old Testament as received by Protestants. ***

Esther is in the Hebrew/Protestant bible which goes along with what newadvent.org says. What is interesting?

 

[sterryfamily]

Dude, if you’re just going to be antagonistic, you’re not going to get anywhere here.

Would you like to rephrase your question?

 

[Pwrlftr]

Notice how the snippet DOES NOT address the issue you think it does?

In fact, the quotation DOES NOT use the language of “accept or reject,” it merely states what was in it.
Robert

Robert,

Again…
St. Melito, Bishop of Sardis (c. 170), first drew up a list of the canonical books of the Old Testament While maintaining the familiar arrangement of the Septuagint, he says that he verified his catalogue by inquiry among Jews; Jewry by that time had everywhere discarded the Alexandrian books, and Melito’s Canon consists exclusively of the protocanonicals minus Esther. It should be noticed, however, that the document to which this catalogue was prefixed is capable of being understood as having an anti-Jewish polemical purpose, in which case Melito’s restricted canon is explicable on another ground.

a.) He verified his catalogue from the Jews who the article says by that time discarded the so-called Alexandrian books which included the deutero’s.

b.) His (Melito’s) canon consisted exclusively of the protocanonicals minus Esther. If it consisted exclusively of the protocanonicals that means it DID NOT include the deutero’s.

c.) It says he had a restricted canon. In light of the context of the article I have no idea how you could not see that he did not include the deutero’s in his canon.

It takes a tremendous leap in logic to assume that he didn’t include the deutero’s in his canon while maintaining that he thought they were canonical.

 

[Pwrlftr]

Powerlifter:

If the Pope declares something to be binding upon the Universal Church, it is binding. (psst, it’s in the Bible)

If the Pope declares the canon to be binding, then it is dogma.

This is a matter of Faith and Morals.

It is NOT a matter of discipline (like a celibate priesthood or no meat on Fridays or saying the Rosary).

Robert

Robert,

If the canon was binding why would the church send out the vulgate complete with Jerome’s derogatory comments about the canonocity of the deutero’s?

Why would the council of Trent hold a vote to decide the canon and have only 44% of the bishiops/cardinals present at the council vote to include the deutero’s in the canon?

“The Council of Trent on April 8, 1546, by vote (24 yea, 15 nay, 16 abstain) approved the present Roman Catholic Bible Canon including the Deuterocanonical Books.”
-Wiki, Metzger (pg. 246)

In fact, why hold a vote at all if this all was decided at Carthage and or Hippo?

Why would a prominent catholic theologian such as Cardinal Cajetan reject the deutero’s? He interviewed Luther at the Diet of Worms.

Why would the pope give his approval to the publication of Cardinal Ximenes bible which clearly rejected the deutero’s and Ximenes lived around the time of the reformation.

Why would the major study bible of the middle ages, the glossa ordinaire, rejecte the canonocity of the deutero’s if in fact either Hippo or Carthage settled the issue?

 

[sterryfamily]

Robert,

Again…
St. Melito, Bishop of Sardis (c. 170), first drew up a list of the canonical books of the Old Testament While maintaining the familiar arrangement of the Septuagint, he says that he verified his catalogue by inquiry among Jews; Jewry by that time had everywhere discarded the Alexandrian books, and Melito’s Canon consists exclusively of the protocanonicals minus Esther. It should be noticed, however, that the document to which this catalogue was prefixed is capable of being understood as having an anti-Jewish polemical purpose, in which case Melito’s restricted canon is explicable on another ground.

a.) He verified his catalogue from the Jews who the article says by that time discarded the so-called Alexandrian books which included the deutero’s.

b.) His (Melito’s) canon consisted exclusively of the protocanonicals minus Esther. If it consisted exclusively of the protocanonicals that means it DID NOT include the deutero’s.

c.) It says he had a restricted canon. In light of the context of the article I have no idea how you could not see that he did not include the deutero’s in his canon.

It takes a tremendous leap in logic to assume that he didn’t include the deutero’s in his canon while maintaining that he thought they were canonical.

But your intitial question (and your repeated assertions) did not ask if Melito “included” the deuteros in his proposed canon. You specifically read into these statements that he “rejected” the deuteros. This is inaccurate.

Would you like to rephrase your question?

 

[Pwrlftr]

Dude, if you’re just going to be antagonistic, you’re not going to get anywhere here.

Would you like to rephrase your question?

You called my question dumb and I’m the one being antagonistic?

I asked you “So according to you, does the Cathlic Encyclopedia state that Melito accepted the deutero’s or does it say that he rejected them?
Which is it?”

And you say:
IT SAYS NEITHER.

It says he had his own idea for the canon.

His own idea for the canon did not include the deutero’s did it? This is kind of a yes or no question.

 

[Pwrlftr]

But your intitial question (and your repeated assertions) did not ask if Melito “included” the deuteros in his proposed canon. You specifically read into these statements that he “rejected” the deuteros. This is inaccurate.

Would you like to rephrase your question?

No, I don’t want to rephrase my original question.

It seems to me that if he did not accept the deutero’s in his canon and accepted the protocanonicals at the exclusion of the deutero’s one could logically assume that he did in fact reject the deutero’s.

If he accepted the deutero’s, why didn’t he put them in his canon?

 

[Pwrlftr]

To put forth ones own idea of something is not equal to rejecting some other idea. Your terminology is innacurate.

Besides, any can have any idea they want about Church issues until the magisterium defines it. Are you suggesting Melito would not have accepted the Church’s canon?

I am free today, for instance, to believe that the “bretheren of the Lord” referred to in the Bible are step brothers from a previous marriage of St Joseph’s, or I am free to believe they were extended male members of the family - perhaps cousins. But, I also know (as would have St Melito as to the issue of the canon - or any other) that when the Church defines the matter, she is guided by the Holy Spirit as promised by Christ and the Holy Spirit cannot err, so that would settle the matter. But to say, in choosing one over the other before the Church defines it, that I have rejected the other, would simply demonstrate a lack of understanding of the English language.

I only asked who was the first ECF to reject the deutero’s. I have no idea what he would have done if he lived at the time of Trent… I assume he would have accepted the canon dogmatically declared at Trent but that is not what my question deals with.

 

[sterryfamily]

I only asked who was the first ECF to reject the deutero’s. I have no idea what he would have done if he lived at the time of Trent… I assume he would have accepted the canon dogmatically declared at Trent but that is not what my question deals with.

And it appears no ECF ever rejected the Deuteros. You certainly haven’t demonstrated that any have.

Would you like to rephrase your question?

…if not, there is nothing to discuss.

 

[SyCarl]

I think that the question is essentially, by listing the books he did, does Melito implicitly exclude the books that he does not name?

I think that is reasonable to answer yes.

If I say these are the works of Shakespeare and then give a list, does that mean that I might think Shakespeare wrote Tom Sawyer because I did not explicitly say he didn’t? If it is necessary when listing the contents of something to explicitly exclude everything not in it, you are requiring the unreasonable.

 

[Pwrlftr]

What you want is some weird victory about the Catholic Tradition and canon.

What you want is for someone to say, “oops! That dang Melito! Why did he go and tip his hand to that 21st century [sorry, don’t know what denomination you claim!]”

No, I only asked a question that is apparently very bothersome to a few of you. The rejection of a book or a complete set of books shouldn’t upset you although it apparently does.

The fact of the matter is that the “Alexandrian canon” is another phrase for those books translated into koine Greek. We Catholics call it “the Septuagint.” And it was the one which Jesus (if you believe the biblical manuscripts extant, and they DO vary) quoted from. He also quoted from those nasty “deuteros” which seems to have animated you so of late.

The Alexandrian canon is a myth.

Can you please tell me the names of the manuscripts we have from the Alexandrian canon? Or, how about someone like Josephus or a Philo who lists the contents of the Alexandrian canon for me?

The Catholic Encyclopedia article (which you of course have not read but have used a secondary source for your argument here) goes to explain how the canon developed.

Many Bishops (like Melito) had many ‘ideas’ on what it should be. This is NOT tantamount to or equal to a REJECTION of the “deuteros.”

That’s more than a little illogical isn’t it? He put a collection of books in his canon but didn’t include the deutero’s but that means that he didn’t reject them? They weren’t included but they weren’t rejected either…

 

[Pwrlftr]

And it appears no ECF ever rejected the Deuteros. You certainly haven’t demonstrated that any have.

Would you like to rephrase your question?

…if not, there is nothing to discuss.

What of Jerome? I assume you believe he accepted the deutero’s also? Even though he flat out rejected them in his preface to each of the deutero’s in the vulgate.

 

[Pwrlftr]

…if not, there is nothing to discuss.

Well we have determined the catholics here believe that by not listing the deutero’s in his canon he actually accepted the deutero’s.

We have discussed though Jerome flat out rejected the deutero’s he actually accepted them.

 

[Milliardo]

I think we should be very careful about assigning motive. You’re asking about a rejection of canonicity of various books by a person or persons. Not listing them or even disputing their authenticity does not equate to rejecting them.

I agree with this (forgive me if I have not read the subsequent exchanges regarding this, if any), but reading the quote from Eusebius, there is no indication that St. Melito rejected the deuterocanonicals. He did not mention them; it does not follow he rejected them. Same way that I would not mention in my listing of Presidents, say, Bush, that I do not consider him to be have become President. Again, it does not follow.