Why did protestants delete books of the bible?

  • Thread starter Thread starter LovelyLadybug
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
SteveLy said:
Maybe I should re-state.
Martin Luther had mental illness. Mixed with the hurt from being excommunicated he raged at the Church. Due to this he took out anything he thought supported Catholic theology.

It is why the other leaders of the Protestant Reformation added back several of the books he removed.
Click to expand...
For some clarification,

Luther demoted 7 OT books from scripture status to aprocryphal status. Ergo he did remove 7 books from scripture.

Because

apocrypha ≠ scripture

However

Lutherans leave those books in their bibles but under apocryphal status, as in NOT scripture.

AND

Protestants in general, literally removed those 7 books from their bibles, because why put books in their view, that are not scripture in with scripture? It’s a waste of paper.

Luther spread this and all his other errors, far and wide.
 
Last edited:
SteveLy said:
So the underlying question which is often lost in the discussion of the deuterocanonical books has to do with authority.

It doesn’t really matter when they were written or in what language. They were available to the early church leaders who, after prayer and consultation, were guided by the Holy Spirit to include them in the Canon.
Click to expand...
This is the most accurate answer I read here so far. It was by the authority Jesus gave to the Apostles and the early church that would decide what books of the OT were to be included, not the authority of a non Church leader who would come along later and be outside the Church.
RaisedCatholic said:
The problem is that we don’t have an officially “defined” Biblical canon until 1546 at Trent. The ECFs in the first few centuries, including Doctors of the Church, did not universally agree on the Biblical canon.
Click to expand...
In all charity, even if the Catholic church didn’t officially define the Canon until 1999, it is still over all these years that the Church alone would be divinely inspired through time, Tradition, what books belong in the OT and the NT.

The Catholic church is constantly guided by the Holy Spirit even if takes time for something to be affirmed doctrinely. It follows the Traditions set down by Christ and the apostles.
RaisedCatholic said:
Jimmy Akin from Catholic Answers stated contained the same books that are in Protestant OTs today.
Click to expand...
Jimmy Akins is a very good Catholic apologist, not the only Catholic apologist though very good. Also his video about the OT canon is very good. He clearly states that during Jesus and the apostles time, the books belonging to the OT was fuzzy and so it was Jesus and the apostles who confirm what books should be in the OT, the Septuagint, which contains the deuterocananical books.

 
Last edited:
I thought there were only three books he didn’t want included (but faced too much opposition). Books he thought contradicted his “Faith Alone” teaching. Like in James, “not saved by faith alone”, etc. what was his problem with the other three? Is there a good source - do we even know or are there just differing theories?
 
@JonNC is a Lutheran. He always takes care to give precise answers to questions about the Lutheran Church. I’m sure he’ll be able to help you if he sees this.
 
jofa said:
I thought there were only three books he didn’t want included (but faced too much opposition). Books he thought contradicted his “Faith Alone” teaching. Like in James, “not saved by faith alone”, etc. what was his problem with the other three? Is there a good source - do we even know or are there just differing theories?
Click to expand...
If interested, a short read, 5 Myths about 7 Books
 
Last edited:
jofa said:
I thought there were only three books he didn’t want included (but faced too much opposition).
Click to expand...
The “faced opposition to” claim I have heard often, but never a source of evidence (from whom, etc.).
jofa said:
Books he thought contradicted his “Faith Alone” teaching.
Click to expand...
This would amount to one, James, but never suggested it be removed because of his view of It. He refers to “ the ancients” and their rejection of James. He also makes very clear that his is a personal opinion.
Though this epistle of St. James was rejected by the ancients, 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.
Click to expand...
The other books of the antilegomena are similarly referenced as far as authorship.
One should read his commentaries about the books in order to understand his views.
 
Last edited:
Up until the late 2nd century, no one acknowledged the canonicity of Hebrews, Acts, James, Jude, Revelation, John (1, 2, 3) and 1 and 2 Peter. At the Councils of Rome, Hippo and Carthage, the NT canon was finalized.

At the latter two councils, which Augustine attended, the deuterocanonical books were listed as Scripture. You can even find them listed in the Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Alexandrinus. They were not separated from the other books. Almost all of the Church Fathers regarded the Septuagint as the standard form for the OT. They saw no difference between the deuterocanonical books and the other books within the OT. Irenaeus, Cyprian of Carthage, Tertullian, Gregory Nazianzus, Athanasius and Cyril of Jerusalem, for instance, cited from them as being Scripture. Jerome was the only exception to the rule and he submitted to the authority of the Catholic Church. Over 1,000 years later, Martin Luther would try and remove books that clashed with his own personal belief system.

Final Note: The Council of Jamnia is a myth.

__


 
Last edited:
MagdalenaRita said:
In all charity, even if the Catholic church didn’t officially define the Canon until 1999, it is still over all these years that the Church alone would be divinely inspired through time, Tradition, what books belong in the OT and the NT.
Click to expand...
So what are you saying, that the church did not know what the Canon was until 1546? I’m just trying to understand what you’re trying to get across. I guess what I’m asking is when was the 73 books of the biblical canon recognized as being inspired scripture prior to the ecumenical Council of Trent defining it? Regarding your video you posted from Jimmy Akin on how the old testament Canon developed, this is where I discovered that Jimmy Akin stated that the Pharisees and later protestants espoused to the same books in the Old Testament. But not that the Deuterocanon was necessarily in the Septuagint in early first century.

BTW, you might be interested in this. It’s a YouTube Catholic apologetic ministry:

Deuterocanon Round Table Discussion “Reason and Theology”
 
Last edited:
RaisedCatholic said:
So what are you saying, that the church did not know what the Canon was until 1546? I’m just trying to understand what you’re trying to get across
Click to expand...
No, I am just saying that the Catholic church did know the Canon because it was handed down to them by Jesus and the apostles. The reason they needed to define the NT was because there were those that wanted different books in and different books out, so the Church had to make a definitive statement. The same for the OT but the Church always followed what the apostles handed down.
RaisedCatholic said:
Regarding your video you posted from Jimmy Akin on how the old testament Canon developed, this is where I discovered that Jimmy Akin stated that the Pharisees and later protestants espoused to the same books in the Old Testament.
Click to expand...
Right he does say that in the video. I had heard a priest mention that before. Mr. Akin does also say as I mentioned above that Jesus and the apostles chose a different Canon than the Pharisees.
RaisedCatholic said:
BTW, you might be interested in this. It’s a YouTube Catholic apologetic ministry:

Deuterocanon Round Table Discussion “Reason and Theology”
Click to expand...
Reason and Theology is very good. I have listened to them before. I will keep this episode in mind.
 
Last edited:
MagdalenaRita said:
I am just saying that the Catholic church did know the Canon because it was handed down to them by Jesus and the apostles.
Click to expand...
OK, then prior to the ecumenical councils of Florence and Trent, where do you see an exact listing of old testament books that equate with these two later councils? Can you give a list or a counsel prior to this that lists these exact same books?
MagdalenaRita said:
Mr. Akin does also say as I mentioned above that Jesus and the apostles chose a different Canon than the Pharisees.
Click to expand...
He stated in the video that Jesus and the disciples accepted the Septuagint, but how do we know that the Septuagint back then included the Deuterocanon too? Is there any evidence from the first or even the second century that the version of the Deuterocanon they used included all of these books? Or is Jimmy Akin simply assuming that this early version of the Septuagint included them? Because Trent Horn also from Catholic Answers stated that the Septuagint was originally limited to the books in the Hebrew Bible. In the Letter of Aristeaus written around 250 BC and cited by Philo of Alexandria around 34 AD stated that the Septuagint originally translated only the five books of Moses, not the rest of the old testament.
MagdalenaRita said:
Reason and Theology is very good. I have listened to them before. I will keep this episode in mind.
Click to expand...
I am looking forward to it as well. I hope you get a chance to tune in to it.
 
Malka said:
Deuterocanonical References in the New Testament
Click to expand...
But does it also include the non-deuterocanonical references in the NT as well, such as pseudepigraphical & apocrypha works? Many of these were also in early versions of the LXX, such as the Prayer of Manasseh, 3 & 4 Maccabees, 3 & 4 Esdras, 1 Enoch, the Assumption of Moses, & others. And many of these are cited more frequently in the NT than the DCs.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top