Why Catholic Bibles are smaller

  • Thread starter Thread starter Thomasbradley312
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

Thomasbradley312

Guest
Why are Catholic Bibles smaller than the Orthodox churches?
 
Because Holy Mother Church, responding to Protestant heresies, definitively affirmed the Canon of scriptures provided at ancient Church synods/councils in Hippo and Carthage.
 
Last edited:
Because Holy Mother Church, responding to Protestant heresies, definitively affirmed the Canon of scriptures provided at ancient Church synods/councils in Hippo and Carthage.
But that doesn’t answer the question in the OP.
 
Don’t we use the Septuagint? Shouldn’t our Old Testament look like this then?(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Will no one read Where We Got The Bible by Rev. Henry Graham?

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
Last edited:
Don’t we use the Septuagint? Shouldn’t our Old Testament look like this then?(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
The Septuagint was a collection of books in Greek not the canon of scripture in itself.
 
Its just easier hide from history.

Peace!!!
I note a pattern of posters staring at the ditch rather than the road. “Well, so and so says the Catholic Church is wrong on this or that…”

So, what? The Pharisees claimed that Christ had a demon. Should that have been investigated?

We are such a media-driven culture that we are easily distracted by the surrounding noise.

Being time-tested, Catholic doctrine is spiritual ear muffs.
 
I think posters are missing the point. This has nothing to do with the Protestant canon. The OP is asking why the Catholic canon doesn’t match the Orthodox canon.
In actuality, there isn’t a single Orthodox canon- I believe the Slavs and the Greeks vary a little. Then the various Oriental Orthodox Churches have various canons, the Ethiopian canon being the largest by far (over 80 books I understand).

The early Church didn’t have a single definitive canon, so different local Churches went different ways. In fact, it wasn’t until the Council of Trent in the 16th century that the Catholic Church definitively settles the matter, using the canon that had been accepted in Rome as the baseline.
 
The early Church didn’t have a single definitive canon, so different local Churches went different ways. In fact, it wasn’t until the Council of Trent in the 16th century that the Catholic Church definitively settles the matter, using the canon that had been accepted in Rome as the baseline.
This is true that Trent “defined” the canon. Even after Florence some of the Deuteros were questioned like Sirach. If anything, the Reformers pushed the Catholic Church to officially define it definitely. Where Protestantism plays in this discussion is that the OT had been defined before Jesus, because He held the Jews - specifically the Pharisees - accountable for knowing what the OT canon was, which was the same canon as later Protestants:

Why Protestant Bible Are Smaller
 
Last edited:
Because our canon is the canon that was accepted by the universal Church in the late fourth-early fifth centuries (then reaffirmed at the Council of Trent in response to the Protestant Revolt).
 
Because our canon is the canon that was accepted by the universal Church in the late fourth-early fifth centuries (then reaffirmed at the Council of Trent in response to the Protestant Revolt).
This is not entirely true. Baruch and the epistle of Jeremiah were NOT in the fourth and fifth century church councils. Neither were they in Jeromes’s Vulgate. They got added four hundred years later. 1 and 2 Esdras were not the same as Ezra and Nehemiah. They were more like Ezra-Nehemiah as one book, and 3 Esdras was the other, which is not the same as what we find at Trent, which were Ezra as one book and Nehemiah as another.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top