Why do most protestants reject the deuterocanonical books?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Phill
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Why do we say Jesus never quoted from these books when a quick scan through Sirach shows at least two passages that are almost word for word.

“Forgive your neighbor the wrong done to you; then when you pray, your own sins will be forgiven. Does anyone nourish anger against another and expect healing from the LORD? Can one refuse mercy to a sinner like oneself, yet seek pardon for one’s own sins?”
‭‭Ben Sira‬ ‭28:2-4‬ ‭NABRE‬‬

“If you forgive others their transgressions, your heavenly Father will forgive you. But if you do not forgive others, neither will your Father forgive your transgressions.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭6:14-15‬ ‭NABRE‬‬

“Do not babble in the assembly of the elders or repeat the words of your prayer.”
‭‭Ben Sira‬ ‭7:14‬ ‭NABRE‬‬

“In praying, do not babble like the pagans, who think that they will be heard because of their many words.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭6:7‬ ‭NABRE
 
I agree about the first quotation from Sirach, but I’m not so sure about the second. In this translation, the word “babble” is used in Sirach 7:14 and again in Matt 6:7, but in Greek they’re two different words, one (in Matthew) meaning literally to stammer or stutter, and the other one meaning to talk too much, to ramble on and on.
 
ahs said:
That assumes they bother to look into it at all.
Click to expand...
Based on my own life, I suspect that most protestants are not remotely aware of the other texts. And those that are often wonder “why the Catholics added more books to their bible”.
 
CelticWarlord said:
40.png
ahs:
That assumes they bother to look into it at all.
Click to expand...
Based on my own life, I suspect that most protestants are not remotely aware of the other texts. And those that are often wonder “why the Catholics added more books to their bible”.
Click to expand...
Then there are some of us who wonder why our communion stopped using them liturgically as had been the practice all along.
The Lutheran Church Missouri Synod brought the practice of using the DC books in the lectionary from Germany. They gradually stopped when they switched to English language bibles
 
Last edited:
Ironically, the t-word, tradition. You’ll find, that even the Protestant Bibles that included the deuterocanonical books did not consider them scripture. The reason Protestants don’t accept the deuterocanonical books as biblical, as inspired scripture, is because the reformers didn’t, that’s it.
 
Well Yes… He gave me authority just as He did every believer. But who can forget the Our Father prayer, " And forgive us our sins, for we also forgive everyone who is indebted to us…" Luke 11:4.
 
Really so he breathed on you personally and gave YOU authority to forgive or retain sin?

You should probably start penning scripture then as well.
 
adamhovey1988 said:
Ironically, the t-word, tradition. You’ll find, that even the Protestant Bibles that included the deuterocanonical books did not consider them scripture. The reason Protestants don’t accept the deuterocanonical books as biblical, as inspired scripture, is because the reformers didn’t, that’s it.
Click to expand...
In the time of the Reformation, it wasn’t just the reformers who disputed the DC’s.
 
They talked about this,yesterday, on the EWTN radio show, The Good Fight. The guest was Jimmy Akins author of the book The Bible is a Catholic book. Here is a link to the show in it’s entirety: The Good Fight | EWTN
 
JonNC said:
In the time of the Reformation, it wasn’t just the reformers who disputed the DC’s.
Click to expand...
It is sometimes said that Jerome never changed his mind about the seven books. He thought they ought to be left out, but at the Council of Rome in 382 Pope Damasus said he wanted them in and Jerome deferred to his authority. Do you know if that is historically correct?
 
CelticWarlord said:
40.png
ahs:
That assumes they bother to look into it at all.
Click to expand...
Based on my own life, I suspect that most protestants are not remotely aware of the other texts.
Click to expand...
Sadly true. One of the reasons Luther’s translation includes them is so believers would learn from them.
CelticWarlord said:
And those that are often wonder “why the Catholics added more books to their bible”.
Click to expand...
Something I push back against. It is no more true than saying the Orthodox added books or Catholics or Protestants removed books. Communions evaluate these books and determine a canon.
 
BartholomewB said:
40.png
JonNC:
In the time of the Reformation, it wasn’t just the reformers who disputed the DC’s.
Click to expand...
It is sometimes said that Jerome never changed his mind about the seven books. He thought they ought to be left out, but at the Council of Rome in 382 Pope Damasus said he wanted them in and Jerome deferred to his authority. Do you know if that is historically correct?
Click to expand...
I don’t know if he maintained his reported view of them, but the balance is correct, AFAIK.
 
okay,… you’re probably one of those who believe that what we read in the bible today is only for those special people of that time and not for all believers in every generation. This is your first mistake. The Holy Spirit breathes on people every day Lenten_Ashes. The authority of the believer is offered to every believer of every generation and not just the twelve apostles.
 
tgGodsway said:
okay,… you’re probably one of those who believe that what we read in the bible today is only for those special people of that time and not for all believers in every generation.
Click to expand...
No, the text is for everyone…the great promises are for everyone. And thanks be to God for this.

The authority, though, was given to church leadership.
 
So when Jesus gave authority to 70 men to go out two by two, were all of them leaders, or followers? Seems to me they were all in training and none of them had yet graduated, yet they had authority at Jesus command.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top