Why Protestant Bibles Are Smaller

  • Thread starter Thread starter RaisedCatholic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
po18guy said:
You want to read a book, you say?
How about one of the few books truly pertinent to the conversation?

Where We Got The Bible by Rev. Henry Graham.
Click to expand...
Looks interesting, & I do like the design on the cover. However, isn’t this written by a Catholic Reverend? I’m not saying it’s not a good resource & the things he says isn’t true, but isn’t using a Catholic author to prove a Catholic Biblical canon a little too…well…biased? I mean wouldn’t this be like a Protestant author brought up Protestant trying to prove the Protestant canon using Protestant resources equally biased? This other book was written by a guy who says he was brought up Catholic, graduated from a Catholic college, & the majority of his resources are from Catholic sources. This does seems a bit more objective than the other two scenarios. Just sayin’. 🙂
 
po18guy said:
So, do you stick with one rebellious Augstinian monk in Germany, or with one of the Apostolic Churches? The Catholic Apocrypha are not in the canon because they most likely contain moral or doctrinal error.

You can choose one of the various Orthodox Churches, but which one? This many councils or that many? This nationality or that? This geography or that? They reject original sin, for good grief!

It is not as simple as it seems
Click to expand...
Again, he doesn’t seem to lean much on Luther, except for a section here & there. Most of his book seems to address the early church father, early councils, the Septuagint, the Vulgate, the Douay-Rheims, the Eastern Orthodox Bible, and even what Popes, Cardinals, and other prominent early & medieval Catholics. And, again, he does have in one of the appendixes about errors in each one of the Deuterocanonical books, including the additions to Esther & Daniel.
 
steve-b said:
True, there was no bible till the canon was finalized in 382 at the council of Rome and the decree of Pope Damasus I .

The canon went through development.
Click to expand...
This is true about the New Testament, but didn’t Jesus know what the Old Testament parameter were, since He continuously referenced it by saying things like “As it is written,” “Have you not read?,” “Scripture says,” “The Law & the Prophets,” etc? BTW, there is a section in his book about the Council of Rome, as well as the other 4th century church councils. I can imagine he goes more into the canon there.
 
JohnR77 said:
As for the difficulty in accepting the Catholic Canon consider that it is an insult to God if we use the things of man To measure the things of God, To determine the goodness of what God has revealed.
Click to expand...
But don’t we get the concept of the truth being the bulwark & shield of the truth from Scripture, particularly the NT? Otherwise, if we have the Church before we have the Scripture, then how do we know which “church” (Eastern Orthodox, Catholic, Protestant, etc), is the “true church”? Aren’t we simply taking the word of a particular ecclesiastical body’s authority? Even if that authority is authentic & true, how can we be certain if we don’t have something that is self-authenticating that has the attributes of God, like inspired Scripture to define it?
 
Thomasbradley312 said:
I actually believe the Catholic canon should consist of the entire Septuagint which the Orthodox have always accepted for their Old Testament. Has nothing to do with Protestantism.
Click to expand...
Do we know what was in the Septuagint during the time of Jesus & before? Wouldn’t that be the version we should use?
 
JohnR77 said:
I apologize for my mistake.
As far as the early church there was no defined set of books for the “Septuagint.”
Click to expand...
What do you mean by “early church”? Was the Septuagint’s books “defined” at the time of Christ? I’m REALLY curious what he has to say about the Septuagint now, since there are multiple subsections in it.
 
meltzerboy2 said:
compared to those of Catholics?
Click to expand...
I can almost be certain that’s not a defense in his book, and I don’t even have to read the TOC to figure that one out. BTW, I know some Protestants with some pretty large hands. 🙂
 
RaisedCatholic said:
40.png
adf417:
No worse than changing the meaning of the original words to fit a particular theology.

Peace!!!
Click to expand...
Not sure what this has to do with what books belong in the Bible?
Click to expand...
Out of context, it has nothing to do with it.

Peace!!!
 
Pattylt said:
Ha! I didn’t check the page numbers. Either way it seems to be quite a large portion of it. When I read it, if the missing pages seem to skip vital information and I want to know what’s said, then I’ll buy it. I forgot to check if there is a kindle version. My bookshelves can’t handle any more physical books and I’ve already whittled them down quite a bit!
Click to expand...
Yes, on Amazon I did see it is in eBook format as well. (What did we do before Kindle???)
 
From what I’ve read the Septuagint contains all of the Catholic deuterocanonical books and many times also 3, 4 Maccabees, 1(3) Esdras , Prayer of Manasseh, Psalm 151, and some say the Psalms of Solomon were also included sometime but no modern community includes it in their canon as far as I know.
 
adf417 said:
Isn’t it the case that Protestant bibles have to be smaller to fit into the smaller hands of Protestants compared to those of Catholics?
Click to expand...
I think it’s some sort of jab towards Protestants, like having smaller brains or something to that effect.
Click to expand...
 
Thomasbradley312 said:
From what I’ve read the Septuagint contains all of the Catholic deuterocanonical books and many times also 3, 4 Maccabees, 1(3) Esdras , Prayer of Manasseh, Psalm 151, and some say the Psalms of Solomon were also included sometime but no modern community includes it in their canon as far as I know.
Click to expand...
So, if they were in early versions of the Septuagint, and since Jesus & the disciples used the Septuagint, as did the NT writers, like St. Paul, then shouldn’t we be using “that” version?
 
That’s what I’ve been saying.
Especially when we use the Septuagint to justify the books we have not in Protestant Bibles. Like what we cherry pick them? You know what i mean? I feel like we should use the entire thing if you’re going to use it as a base for your canon.
 
Thomasbradley312 said:
That’s what I’ve been saying.
Especially when we use the Septuagint to justify the books we have not in Protestant Bibles. Like what we cherry pick them? You know what i mean? I feel like we should use the entire thing if you’re going to use it as a base for your canon.
Click to expand...
Its NOT the base for the canon. The church is. The Septuagint is a historical reference for those books.

Peace!!!
 
adf417 said:
Its NOT the base for the canon. The church is. The Septuagint is a historical reference for those books.

Peace!!!
Click to expand...
But don’t we get the concept of the Church from the Bible? How would we know what it even is if we didn’t get it from the Bible? Wouldn’t we be just taking the word of a particular religious authority - even if that authority is genuine & true - without something that can self-authenticate itself as being inspired like the Bible, which we all agree is God-breathed?

And what version of the Septuagint did Jesus & NT writers, like St. Paul used, since they do reference them? And if it’s just a “historical reference for those books,” what collection of books did Jesus, etc. believe in, since Jesus held the Jews accountable for knowing what they were?
 
No, it is not meant to be so profound.
 
Last edited:
Thomasbradley312 said:
That’s what I’ve been saying.
Especially when we use the Septuagint to justify the books we have not in Protestant Bibles. Like what we cherry pick them? You know what i mean? I feel like we should use the entire thing if you’re going to use it as a base for your canon.
Click to expand...
Do we know for certain what was in the Septuagint in Jesus’ day, as well as what the NT writers, like St. Paul, used? What was it limited to, since the Septuagint does seem to be “larger” than it was in the distant past? Based on what I’ve read up to where the free section ends on Amazon (which isn’t much), the author seems to use the words of Jesus & St. Paul that it was limited to the books in Protestant OTs, but again, that’s just a guess on my part, since the chapter on the Septuagint is not in the free section online.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top