Why did Roman Catholics remove books from the Old Testament: Septuagint?

[juliamajor]

well first-unlike our separated brethren we could care less about your ‘extra books’-What we and orthodox get accused of is using the wrong text! LXX vs MT.That’s really the heart of the problem. Is your disdain for Catholicism so great that you trying to make a mountain out of a non-existent molehill?We have much in common-we believe in sacraments and the True Presence(whatever each may call them., it is concepts we share) I don’t know what gets into believers Catholic Orthodox when they berate each other-. We both dwell on the past too much and we are blind to the future. Don’'t you know the barbarians are at the gates? We sit and argue while Islam and atheism make vast inroads because we are too busy spitting in each others eye.Fundamentals with ideas and theology totally foreign to either of us are making headways in traditionally Catholic(east and west )areas- and still we are at each others throats trying to prove which one is right /wrong . So silly. I

 

[Sir_Knight]

Over 30 minutes later no responses. Can’t say that wasn’t unexpected. I will look forward to looking at this tomorrow to see if anyone has come up with an actual answer to this problem which seems to just get swept under the rug.

Sorry, I was in a car accident yesterday and had to stay in bed for most of the day. Doctor’s orders. Had very little computer time but have a bit more today. By next week, I’ll be back to my regular posting self.

The Catholic Apologists are probably hoping that no one will notice this discrepency as they jide Protestants for removing books of Sacred Scripture since the Catholic Church is guilty of exactly the same thing.

As I pointed out above, the bible did not exist prior to the late third century. Nothing was removed from it’s pages AFTER it was produced. And how can you accuse anyone of removing something from it before it was produced when it didn’t even exist before it was produced? You can removed something from something that doesn’t exist.

 

[RobHom]

well first-unlike our separated brethren we could care less about your ‘extra books’-What we and orthodox get accused of is using the wrong text! LXX vs MT.That’s really the heart of the problem. Is your disdain for Catholicism so great that you trying to make a mountain out of a non-existent molehill?We have much in common-we believe in sacraments and the True Presence(whatever each may call them., it is concepts we share) I don’t know what gets into believers Catholic Orthodox when they berate each other-. We both dwell on the past too much and we are blind to the future. Don’'t you know the barbarians are at the gates? We sit and argue while Islam and atheism make vast inroads because we are too busy spitting in each others eye.Fundamentals with ideas and theology totally foreign to either of us are making headways in traditionally Catholic(east and west )areas- and still we are at each others throats trying to prove which one is right /wrong . So silly. I

Well said!!

Also, this is the Bible as it has been for centuries…or at least one of the earliest translations from the Latin Vulgate: drbo.org/ My other Catholic Bible has exactly the same content.

 

[StMarina303ad]

Frankly I dont see the problem. There are dozens of “books” the Church did not put in the offical cannon. it didnt take any out-it just never included many, many books.

You seem to miss the fact that it they were in the Bible before the Church was established by Jesus. So yes, the Orthodox has maintained all the books and the Catholics and Protestants have removed some of them.

 

[StMarina303ad]

well i don’t what your talking about…there is no Psalm 151
and the other that you said…

There is too a Psalm 151…why did the Catholic Church remove it? and why did it remove the other books? That is the question.

 

[StMarina303ad]

Early on it must have been recognize that some books of the Septuagint were not divinely inspired, and thus were never put on the same level as Scripture.

So you’re saying that those books may have been good enough for Jesus, but not good enough for the Catholic Church.

 

[StMarina303ad]

I am following this thread with great interest becuase I still dont see what the problem is. if someone wants to start a thread on how the canon was arrived at that is one thing but to claim the Church threw a book out by the nature of not including it makes no sense to me.

We know for a fact that at some point (when & why are the questions) that the Roman Catholic Church removed books from the Old Testament because they are in the Septuagint (and continue to remain in the Orthodox Church in the Old Testament), but they are not in the official Roman Catholic version of the Bible as found on www.vatican.va.

So the question is again: Why would the Roman Catholic Church remove books of the Bible and then turn around and accuse Protestants of doing the same.

It would seem to me that either the Roman Catholic Church must say that it doesn’t matter if anyone removes books, Psalms, etc. from the Bible since they have done it themselves or they have to stop accusing their babies (the 30,000+ Protestant Churches) from removing books.

 

[StMarina303ad]

yes, i think the bible used by the anglicans even has 2 or 3 more books than the catholic bible. it also has bel and the dragon and suzanna.

psalm 151 is the psalm that is added that i think was taken out of the protestant bibles.

Bel and the Dragon and Suzanna are in both the Orthodox and Catholic Bibles in the book of Daniel.

 

[RobHom]

There is too a Psalm 151…why did the Catholic Church remove it? and why did it remove the other books? That is the question.

Politely he asks a question… , Is it possible that there is just a numbering difference? Or that your Psalm 151 was combined into Psalm 150? On the other books that were “removed”…is it possible that there is just a difference in names via spelling or translation?

I ask because I am not familiar with the Greek Orthodox Bible. Is there a link to an on-line version?

Thanks!

Peace!!

 

[StMarina303ad]

The speaker is Gary Michuta who wrote “Why Catholic Bibles are Bigger”

So here we have again Catholics accusing Protestants of removing books of the Old Testament…WHY DID THE ROMAN CATHOLICS ALSO REMOVE BOOKS FROM THE OLD TESTAMENT (Septuagint)?

I’ll keep reading responses. Hopefully, someone will actually give an answer.

 

[estesbob]

You seem to miss the fact that it they were in the Bible before the Church was established by Jesus. So yes, the Orthodox has maintained all the books and the Catholics and Protestants have removed some of them.

I’m sorry but I really do want to get drawn in another one of these Orthodox versus Catholic debates. To be honest I do not have any idea why there is so much animosity towards Catholics from the Orthodox. Now perhaps their is animosity towards Orthodox from some Catholics but quite frankly I don’t know about the Orthodox to have an opinion.

 

[StMarina303ad]

I would like to see some Early Church Father support for your specific canon. I have not done much research into the issue, but I don’t ever recall any ECF who embraced the Greek Orthodox Canon.

Catholic Dude, your comment makes no sense at all considering the fact that the Septuagint existed before Christ was born into this world. Christ *used & quoted *the Septuagint himself. **The Greek Orthodox Church simply has maintained the use of the Septuagint without removing any of it’s books that were in it **(not in the appendix: such as 4th Macc.). ***As such the Greek Church has nothing to “prove”! ***It’s the Roman Catholic’s who removed the books of Sacred Scripture! The the Roman Catholic Church who must prove - twice in Sacred Scripture it warns people to NOT remove or add to Sacred Scripture. Why are the Roman Catholic in violation of this?

 

[StMarina303ad]

If you believe they should be there did your faith add them back? Why not?

In my Faith: the Greek Orthodox Church never “added” anything back. The Greek Orthodox Church from the time of it’s inception by the Apostle Andrew has maintained the Septuagint in it’s entirety.

If your Faither doesn’t have all the books of the Septuagint in your Old Testament, then you better start asking the leaders of your Church why it “removed” them!

 

[StMarina303ad]

p.s. there is no “official English version” of the Catholic Bible.

p.s.s. in this paragraph you start by saying the Church “removed” certain books, but then proceed to argue that they just re-named or re-ordered them. Which is it? Perhaps if you provided a link to your source it might clear things up.

I wrote as clearly as possible. I apologize if you were not able to understand it.

There is 49 books in the Septuagint. The Orthodox Church maintains all 49 as they were originally ordered in the Septuagint.

The Roman Catholic Church has 46 books in the Old Testament it uses. The vatican’s website shows that.

So by doing the math, it would appear that 3 entire books are missing; however, 1 of the 3 books the Catholics reordered by adding 1 as chapter 6 to Baruch. **The other 2 entire books are missing altogether along with Psalm 151. **

I hope this is more clear to you now.

 

[PerryJ]

So here we have again Catholics accusing Protestants of removing books of the Old Testament…WHY DID THE ROMAN CATHOLICS ALSO REMOVE BOOKS FROM THE OLD TESTAMENT (Septuagint)?

I’ll keep reading responses. Hopefully, someone will actually give an answer.

Please answer my question. If they should be in the Bible did your faith add them back? If not why not?

I will research this area; however, I find your statement has no basis. The DCs were removed because of Luther’s personal fears and his losing a debate to Eck. Nothing more. The Dead Sea Scrolls have proven that the Protestant claim concerning the DC is totally unfounded. One can argue all they want and make up new arguments; however, scientific facts and secular history prove both of my points and show Protestants, with Sola Sciptura as a basis for their belief, is using the incorrect Bible. Your theology is based upon a personal belief proven wrong by facts. If you wish I can provide sources for all of my comments.

 

[StMarina303ad]

p.s. there is no “official English version” of the Catholic Bible.

p.s.s. in this paragraph you start by saying the Church “removed” certain books, but then proceed to argue that they just re-named or re-ordered them. Which is it? Perhaps if you provided a link to your source it might clear things up.

I did include the link to the Roman Catholic Church’s Vatican Website: www.vatican.va

 

[StMarina303ad]

The Catholic Church assembled the Bible in the late third century. Prior to that there was no bible. There were scriptures but no bible. The Catholic Church decided, based on their knowledge of the faith and through the guidance of the Holy Spirit, which Christ promised would guide His Church in all truths, which scripture was to be included in the bible and which scripture was not. They decided, for example, that the Gospel of Mark (even though Mark was not an actual Apostle but a disciple of Peter) SHOULD be included but the Gospel of Thomas should NOT be included. The same applies to the books that you made reference to.

When they were done, they had produced the bible – version 1.0 and to this day, it remains version 1.0 … the Catholic Church has not added or subtracted anything from it’s pages.

The Septuagint was already complied prior to Christ. Man have you missed it HUGE on this one!

 

[Sir_Knight]

You seem to miss the fact that it they were in the Bible before the Church was established by Jesus. So yes, the Orthodox has maintained all the books and the Catholics and Protestants have removed some of them.

Actually, you seem to have missed the fact that there was no bible prior to the Church established by Christ taking on the task of assembling it. As I pointed out earlier, how can you remove something from something that doesn’t exist yet?

 

[ALotLessThumb]

The problem is your question misses the point. The problem Catholics have with Protestants removing the books has to do primarily with the position of the Bible in Christendom and not the actual removal of the books.

Usually, when a Catholic raises the issue of the removal of the Deutrocannonicals, the discussion centers around how one could determine the infallibility of a holy book without some sort of infallible body to make that very determination. I don’t think it’s too much of a generalization to say that the Protestants this argument is really aimed towards are those of the “KJV-only” crowd, who view the Bible in a way analogous to how Muslims view the Qu’ran.

When it comes to the Orthodox and the Catholic Church- I don’t see how one church having less books than the others is that much of a problem. If some disaster happened, and a whole group of people were only left with only, say: Exodus, 1 John, and Matthew- as long as there were bishops and other teachers of the faith, the faith could arguably be passed on with little problem. This is because those bishops would have learned from those who appointed them, and they could confirm the validility of those “remaining books” (in this scenario.) So they could be seen as trustworthy…and that’s the problem with the removal of books, there is no one to say that the ones kept by Protestants are trustworthy.

 

[StMarina303ad]

Sorry, I was in a car accident yesterday and had to stay in bed for most of the day. Doctor’s orders. Had very little computer time but have a bit more today. By next week, I’ll be back to my regular posting self.

As I pointed out above, the bible did not exist prior to the late third century. Nothing was removed from it’s pages AFTER it was produced. And how can you accuse anyone of removing something from it before it was produced when it didn’t even exist before it was produced? You can removed something from something that doesn’t exist.

I certainly wish you a speedy recovery. I will pray for you and light a candle for you tomorrow at Evening Prayers at Church.

You claim that the Bible did not exist until the 3rd Century AD; however, the Septuagint (Old Testament) was compiled in it’s entirety in the 3rd Century BC. Jesus used it and quoted from it as we can see in Scriptures which have been included in the New Testament. I believe what is confusing you is that there were NO New Testament Scriptures yet complied into one volume with the Septuagint. The New Testament began being written and past around from Church to Church starting around the end of the 1st Century AD, but was not yet added to the Septuagint to be called as we know it now as the Bible.