Why are there books missing?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Catholic_Dude
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Catholic_Dude

Guest
I know that 7 books (and parts of others) were removed/downplayed by some of the “reformers”, but I am not sure why.

I have read that they go against what people like Luther wanted to believe/teach. And I know that they werent fully thrown out until the mid 1800’s, but why were they even downgraded? Could someone give me some specific passages or something where they contradict Protestant teaching?

Here are the full books (there are parts of others too),
-Tobias
-Judith
-Wisdom
-Ecclesiasticus
-Baruch
-1&2Machabees

The only one I know for sure is 2Mac12:46 talking about praying for the dead, other than that Im not sure of the specifics on why the rest were removed.
When I look through the books (especially Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus), I see a big loss in removing them.
 
The Maccabees verses are all I know about too, although there is a passage in Wisdoms that speaks of drinking wine, maybe they object to that too?

I think the reason for the discepancy in numbers of books is that the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church and maybe the Anglicans take their Old Testaments from the Septuagint a greek translation.

While the Protestants take thier OT from the Hebrew canon.
 
Hi C.D.,

What this is about is about two different canons of scripture. The first scriptures were written in Hebrew by Palestinian Jews. As Jews spread throughout the Mediterranean area, they adopted the Greek language, and about 200 years before Christ, in Alexandria, a translation into Greek was done from the Hebrew. Additionally to this, some books were later written in Greek and incorporated into the Scriptures. Also some Hebrew texts from which the Greek texts were translated eventually disappeared.

By the time Christ was born, the Greek bible (called Septuagint) was the bible used by Jews outside of Palestine and by Greek-speaking Jews inside Palestine. It was not being challenged.

This is the Bible that the Christians inherited and used. We find many traces of it in the New Testament. It is the Christian Bible.

After the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD, there was a profound re-thinking within the Jewish religion. Part of this reflection resulted in rejecting the Greek scriptures in favor of the Scriptures extent in Hebrew.
.

The Greek Canon was unchallenged until the Reformation. The reformers going to the Jewish Canon was not doctrinally motivated. It was just a choice that probably appealed to them for being “different”. It probably looked more “reformed”.

Verbum
 
40.png
Verbum:
The reformers going to the Jewish Canon was not doctrinally motivated. It was just a choice that probably appealed to them for being “different”. It probably looked more “reformed”. Verbum
I believe if you recheck the writings of Martin Luther you’ll see that at least his rejection was doctrinally motivated. He also disagreed with writings in the New Testament.
 
40.png
Tom:
I believe if you recheck the writings of Martin Luther you’ll see that at least his rejection was doctrinally motivated. He also disagreed with writings in the New Testament.
.
Do you know where I can find a source for this on specific books he didnt like?
 
40.png
boppysbud:
The Maccabees verses are all I know about too, although there is a passage in Wisdoms that speaks of drinking wine, maybe they object to that too?
I think the reason for the discepancy in numbers of books is that the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church and maybe the Anglicans take their Old Testaments from the Septuagint a greek translation.
While the Protestants take thier OT from the Hebrew canon.
This is correct!! If you look at a Jewish Bible (Tanakh), the books are the same as those in Protestant Bibles.(They aren’t in the same order, however).
There were 2 Jewish canons, Greek (longer, from which the Vulgate came), & Hebrew(shorter, which is the one used by most Protestants).This has turned into 2 Christian canons.
I have no idea about Luther…There may be (??)something on Lutheran sites.
 
One of my favorite links on this subject is defending the deuterocanonicals: cin.org/users/james/files/deuteros.htm

It is the source of information I used for the first defense I made for the Catholic Church, a few years ago, and so it has a sweet spot in my heart. I found it to be clear, concise, and damning evidence supporting the inclusion of the deuterocanonicals as sacred scripture. Only the stubbornist of protestants have continued on in futility after I presented them with this info.

Enjoy!
 
40.png
Verbum:
The Greek Canon was unchallenged until the Reformation. The reformers going to the Jewish Canon was not doctrinally motivated. It was just a choice that probably appealed to them for being “different”. It probably looked more “reformed”.

Verbum
This is not exactly true–there was a great deal of debate about the deuterocanonical books in the fourth and fifth centuries. In fact, Jerome himself, when translating the bible into the Vulgate, came to doubt that the deuterocanonical books were inspired. The reformers picked up on this tradition and on the fact that many Jews doubted the Greek scriptures. The reformers’ rejection of these texts makes sense in the context of their desire to “get back to the original church” and eliminate what they saw as late ancient and medieval accretions. There were in fact doctrinal issues as well–Luther rejected the notion of purgatory, and when challenged by scriptural evidence from Maccabees, he denied that the deuterocanonical books were part of the the Canon and so could not be cited as evidence. Whether Luther decided first that the deuterocanonical texts were outside of the canon and his theology followed, or whether he only decided to reject the texts for expediency once he was confronted with opposing scriptural evidence, only Luther’s conscience will know.

For the history of the Greek canon and the widespread controversy surrounding it in antiquity, check out the artice of the Canon of the Old Testament in the Catholic Encyclopedia online: newadvent.org/cathen/03267a.htm
 
Catholic Dude:
.
Do you know where I can find a source for this on specific books he didnt like?
Dude,

I can’t remember my source for this, but I recently read somewhere that Luther debated taking the book of James out of the NT, because of James’s stand that “Faith without works is dead.” That seems to negate the Protestant belief in being saved by grace only.

Ruthie
 
40.png
Zooey:
This is correct!! If you look at a Jewish Bible (Tanakh), the books are the same as those in Protestant Bibles.(They aren’t in the same order, however).
There were 2 Jewish canons, Greek (longer, from which the Vulgate came), & Hebrew(shorter, which is the one used by most Protestants).This has turned into 2 Christian canons.
I have no idea about Luther…There may be (??)something on Lutheran sites.
As I always like to point out, the Ethiopian Jews still use the LXX canon today. Actually their canon is bigger then the LXX. For some reason Sirach is not in it, but all of the other books that we accept are in there. They also have The book of Jubilees and Enoch in their canon, which the Eastern Orthodox do not accept.
 
It sometimes seems that catholiec priests try to forget about theese books because it is more comfortable to use free protestant Bibles for distributing in church than remind to catholics that theese books are incomplete and that they should find catholic version. 😦
 
Vox Borealis:
This is not exactly true–there was a great deal of debate about the deuterocanonical books in the fourth and fifth centuries. In fact, Jerome himself, when translating the bible into the Vulgate, came to doubt that the deuterocanonical books were inspired. The reformers picked up on this tradition and on the fact that many Jews doubted the Greek scriptures. The reformers’ rejection of these texts makes sense in the context of their desire to “get back to the original church” and eliminate what they saw as late ancient and medieval accretions. There were in fact doctrinal issues as well–Luther rejected the notion of purgatory, and when challenged by scriptural evidence from Maccabees, he denied that the deuterocanonical books were part of the the Canon and so could not be cited as evidence. Whether Luther decided first that the deuterocanonical texts were outside of the canon and his theology followed, or whether he only decided to reject the texts for expediency once he was confronted with opposing scriptural evidence, only Luther’s conscience will know.

For the history of the Greek canon and the widespread controversy surrounding it in antiquity, check out the artice of the Canon of the Old Testament in the Catholic Encyclopedia online: newadvent.org/cathen/03267a.htm
St. Jerome later in life came to accept the doubted books as inspired. He was influenced by the early Councils of Hippo and Carthage and changed his mind. He came to accept the same list as Catholics accept today. He was a Hebrew and was probably influenced by a lifetime of Hebrew studies but came to accept Authority in favour of the longer list.
Luther did not.
 
40.png
kindlylight:
St. Jerome later in life came to accept the doubted books as inspired. He was influenced by the early Councils of Hippo and Carthage and changed his mind. He came to accept the same list as Catholics accept today. He was a Hebrew and was probably influenced by a lifetime of Hebrew studies but came to accept Authority in favour of the longer list.
Luther did not.
Be that as it may, it is inaccurate to say that there was no debate about the deuterorcanonical texts until the Reformation. There was debate in the Jewish community, and among Christian scholars in late antiquity–heck, if there weren’t debate about the corpus of the Canon, there would not have been the need for councils to define the Canon.

As Catholics, we should not downplay these debates. If the Canon of scripture is self-explanatory, then the Protestant position is strengthened (“the Church did not establish the Canon since everyone knew what the Canon was”); the existence of a limited number of debates about about the Canon, resolved by the Magisterium, justifies the authoriy of the Magisterium.
 
40.png
Axion:
This page has some of Luthers views on James, Jude and Revelation,…

bible-researcher.com/antilegomena.html
Axion,

Luther says about James:
…I praise it and consider it a good book, because it sets up no doctrines of men but vigorously promulgates the law of God. However, to state my own opinion about it, though without prejudice to anyone, I do not regard it as the writing of an apostle; and my reasons follow.
In the first place it is flatly against St. Paul and all the rest of Scripture in ascribing justification to works. It says that Abraham was justified by his works when he offered his son Isaac…
In the second place its purpose is to teach Christians, but in all this long teaching it does not once mention the Passion, the resurrection, or the Spirit of Christ. He names Christ several times; however he teaches nothing about him, but only speaks of general faith in God. …
… And that is the true test by which to judge all books, when we see whether or not they inculcate Christ. …
…Again, whatever preaches Christ would be apostolic, even if Judas, Annas, Pilate, and Herod were doing it.
But this James does nothing more than drive to the law and to its works. Besides, he throws things together so chaotically that it seems to me he must have been some good, pious man, who took a few sayings from the disciples of the apostles and thus tossed them off on paper. Or it may perhaps have been written by someone on the basis of his preaching…
In a word, he wanted to guard against those who relied on faith without works, but was unequal to the task in spirit, thought, and words. He mangles the Scriptures and thereby opposes Paul and all Scripture. 5 He tries to accomplish by harping on the law what the apostles accomplish by stimulating people to love. Therefore, I will not have him in my Bible to be numbered among the true chief books, though I would not thereby prevent anyone from including or extolling him as he pleases, for there are otherwise many good sayings in him. One man is no man in worldly things; how, then, should this single man alone avail against Paul and all the rest of Scripture? 6
Here is what he says about Jude:
Concerning the epistle of St. Jude, no one can deny that it is an extract or copy of St. Peter’s second epistle, so very like it are all the words. He also speaks of the apostles like a disciple who comes long after them and cites sayings and incidents that are found nowhere else in the Scriptures. This moved the ancient fathers to exclude this epistle from the main body of the Scriptures. Moreover the Apostle Jude did not go to Greek-speaking lands, but to Persia, as it is said, so that he did not write Greek. Therefore, although I value this book, it is an epistle that need not be counted among the chief books which are supposed to lay the foundations of falth.
Here is what he says about Revelation of St John:
First and foremost, the apostles do not deal with visions, but prophesy in clear and plain words, as do Peter and Paul, and Christ in the gospel. For it befits the apostolic office to speak clearly of Christ and his deeds, without images and visions. …
… For myself, I think it approximates the Fourth Book of Esdras; 8** I can in no way detect that the Holy Spirit produced it**.
Moreover he seems to me to be going much too far when he commends his own book so highly – indeed, more than any of the other sacred books do, though they are much more important – and threatens that if anyone takes away anything from it, God will take away from him, etc. Again, they are supposed to be blessed who keep what is written in this book; and yet no one knows what that is, to say nothing of keeping it. This is just the same as if we did not have the book at all. And there are many far better books available for us to keep.
Finally, let everyone think of it as his own spirit leads him. My spirit cannot accommodate itself to this book. For me this is reason enough not to think highly of it: Christ is neither taught nor known in it. But to teach Christ, this is the thing which an apostle is bound above all else to do; as Christ says in Acts 1, “You shall be my witnesses.” Therefore I stick to the books which present Christ to me clearly and purely.
Axion this was great I cant thank you enough, I dont know how a protestant can wiggle out of those quotes. How can they praise a guy who threw out books they use?
 
40.png
boppysbud:
…I think the reason for the discepancy in numbers of books is that the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church and maybe the Anglicans take their Old Testaments from the Septuagint a greek translation.

While the Protestants take thier OT from the Hebrew canon.
Actually Protestants take their OT from some Jewish post 90 A.D cannon which deleted several scrolls to combat the spread of Christianity which they objected to. (The Christians used the same 46 Scrolls as we know them today in the OT, at least Catholics and a few protestants) Some Jews still use the the same cannon with the complete 46 books

So, Protestants use a cannon arranged by non-Christians instead of the cannon used by Christians from Christ through Luther and still used by most Christians today. By the way, Luther deleted Scripture from the OT AFTER he was booted out of Christs Church.
 
Luther did not think much of St. Jerome who is often called upon by those in favour of the shorter Palestinian canon:
I quote from his Table Talk:

" Jerome should not be numbered among the teachers of the church, for he was a heretic; yet I believe that he is saved through faith in Christ. He speaks not of Christ, but merely carries his name in his mouth."
 
Luther’s translation was missing no books. He translated them all (and did a superior job by the way). This claim simply false. Popular, but false.
 
40.png
CommonMan:
Luther’s translation was missing no books. He translated them all (and did a superior job by the way). This claim simply false. Popular, but false.
My words were that the books were downgraded. I have more info on another thread. Here
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top