Would it matter if the Deuterocanonical books were in Protestant Bibles?

  • Thread starter Thread starter BrianH
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
BrianH said:
An Apostolic Father quoting one or two of the DC’s in the 2nd century proves they were in the canon of the Apostles??
Everyone I have quoted on the threads I have participated in state clearly the exact contents of the LXX circa 1st century were in flux…and these are Catholic scholars…I never used a Protestant one.
Click to expand...
Excuse me but in all fairness you have quoted NOTHING, or nothing of scholarly significance, there is a higher standard on a forum as good as this, and wikipedia will simply not do. That said I refer you to a quote I posted on the thread “Another Nail in the coffin for sola scriptura…”
VerumAdInfernos said:
(Cont…)

Protestant and Catholic Bibles differ there is no question about that. Another argument against Sola Scriptura is that most Protestant versions of the Bible are historically inadequate, I shall elaborate.
Code: 
 A Catholic Bible has "more books" than a Protestant Bible. While each NT has the same amount of books the Catholic Old Testament has 46 whereas the Protestant version has 39, why? Many Protestants will claim the CC added seven books to the OT: Wisdom, Sirach, Judith, Baruch, Tobit, and 1 2 Maccabees and parts of Daniel and Esther. Actually a one, Martin Luther departed from 1500 years of Christian tradition and subtracted these books. These missing books are called the Deuterocanonicals or in Protestant circles, "The Apocrypha". Now CAF'ers in Christs day the OT had NOT been determined. Different groups in Palestine honored different canons of Scripture. The Sadducees for example held that only the Pentateuch or the first five books of the Bible (Gen-Deut) were canon. The Samaritans the same with their own versions. The Pharisees had a canonical tradition roughly the same as the Protestant one today though the boundaries were not set. The authors of the Dead Sea Scrolls considered a few more books Scriptural however. Finally you had some Jews who honored a canonical tradition that is best represented today in the Septuagint translation of the OT. This Greek translation was made between 250-125 B.C. and is called Septuagint because of the number of translators that compiled it. Septuagint coming from the Latin word for 70. They compiled it's Pentateuch according to tradition.

 The real question in play here CAF'ers is which canon did Christ and His apostles use? In the time of Jesus, Hebrew as a language was dead, Palestinian Jews spoke Aramaic as many know and Greek was the common tongue. Not suprisingly the NT writers used the Greek Septuagint. According to Protestant authors, Gleason Archer and G.C. Chirichigno, the VAST majority of quotes in the NT are from the Septuagint but only 33 places does it cite the Hebrew canon. SOURCE: Gleason Arhcer and G.C. Chirichigno, Old Testament Quotations in the New Testament: A Complete Survey (Chicago, IL, Moody Press, 1983) xxv-xxxii. 
 Guess what CAF'ers?, that means that OVER 90% of the time by that count, the NT writers quoted the Septuagint, and remember the entire NT was written in Greek.
Now in 1529 Martin Luther proposed to adopt the canon used by rabbinic Judaism of 39 books as OT canon, Luther justified this by citing the concerns of St. Jerome. However UNLIKE St. Jerome who humble submitted his opinon in private and accepted full authority of the Church, Luther arrogantly challanged them and made his opinion public, maybe Luther forgot humility with all the Penance he was so famous for?

Another REAL question fellow CAF’ers is this, Which OT canon would you rather use, the OT used by the apostles and the NT writers, and the early Church, OR, the OT used by the later Jewish peoples who rejected Christ? If your Bible includes the seven books, you follow the apostles amd the other NT writers and the early Church. If your Bible omits them, you follow the NON-CHRISTIAN rabbis and Martin Luther, a man whose view of Sacred Scripture allowed him to deliberately add the word “alone” to his German translation of Romans 3:28. in an attempt to throw out even more books of the Bible, including Esther, Revelation!!!=O and EVEN JAMES??? Which he dismissed as “an epistle of straw”. SOURCE: Stoddard’s Rebuilding a Lost Faith (Rockford, IL: TAN Books, 1990), 137

Glory be to the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. We believe in One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, may God bless her and grant us strength to be great Apologists in her favor. God bless, you all, God bless the Church, and God bless Catholicism,…Verum out.
Click to expand...
 
And guess what I quoted evangelical Protestant sources, not Catholic ones, so touché!!
 
Part 1 (from Scripture Catholic on the Deuterocanon)
scripturecatholic.com/deuterocanon.html
Scripture
Matt. 2:16 - Herod’s decree of slaying innocent children was prophesied in Wis. 11:7 - slaying the holy innocents.

Matt. 6:19-20 - Jesus’ statement about laying up for yourselves treasure in heaven follows Sirach 29:11 - lay up your treasure.

Matt… 7:12 - Jesus’ golden rule “do unto others” is the converse of Tobit 4:15 - what you hate, do not do to others.

Matt. 7:16,20 - Jesus’ statement “you will know them by their fruits” follows Sirach 27:6 - the fruit discloses the cultivation.

Matt. 9:36 - the people were “like sheep without a shepherd” is same as Judith 11:19 - sheep without a shepherd.

Matt. 11:25 - Jesus’ description “Lord of heaven and earth” is the same as Tobit 7:18 - Lord of heaven and earth.

Matt. 12:42 - Jesus refers to the wisdom of Solomon which was recorded and made part of the deuterocanonical books.

Matt. 16:18 - Jesus’ reference to the “power of death” and “gates of Hades” references Wisdom 16:13.

Matt. 22:25; Mark 12:20; Luke 20:29 - Gospel writers refer to the canonicity of Tobit 3:8 and 7:11 regarding the seven brothers.

Matt. 24:15 - the “desolating sacrilege” Jesus refers to is also taken from 1 Macc. 1:54 and 2 Macc. 8:17.

Matt. 24:16 - let those “flee to the mountains” is taken from 1 Macc. 2:28.

Matt. 27:43 - if He is God’s Son, let God deliver him from His adversaries follows Wisdom 2:18.

Mark 4:5,16-17 - Jesus’ description of seeds falling on rocky ground and having no root follows Sirach 40:15.

Mark 9:48 - description of hell where their worm does not die and the fire is not quenched references Judith 16:17.

Luke 1:42 - Elizabeth’s declaration of Mary’s blessedness above all women follows Uzziah’s declaration in Judith 13:18.

Luke 1:52 - Mary’s magnificat addressing the mighty falling from their thrones and replaced by lowly follows Sirach 10:14.

Luke 2:29 - Simeon’s declaration that he is ready to die after seeing the Child Jesus follows Tobit 11:9.

Luke 13:29 - the Lord’s description of men coming from east and west to rejoice in God follows Baruch 4:37.

Luke 21:24 - Jesus’ usage of “fall by the edge of the sword” follows Sirach 28:18.

Luke 24:4 and Acts 1:10 - Luke’s description of the two men in dazzling apparel reminds us of 2 Macc. 3:26.

John 1:3 - all things were made through Him, the Word, follows Wisdom 9:1.

John 3:13 - who has ascended into heaven but He who descended from heaven references Baruch 3:29.

John 4:48; Acts 5:12; 15:12; 2 Cor. 12:12 - Jesus’, Luke’s and Paul’s usage of “signs and wonders” follows Wisdom 8:8.

John 5:18 - Jesus claiming that God is His Father follows Wisdom 2:16.

John 6:35-59 - Jesus’ Eucharistic discourse is foreshadowed in Sirach 24:21.

John 10:22 - the identification of the feast of the dedication is taken from 1 Macc. 4:59.

John 10:36 – Jesus accepts the inspiration of Maccabees as He analogizes the Hanukkah consecration to His own consecration to the Father in 1 Macc. 4:36.

John 15:6 - branches that don’t bear fruit and are cut down follows Wis. 4:5 where branches are broken off.

Acts 1:15 - Luke’s reference to the 120 may be a reference to 1 Macc. 3:55 - leaders of tens / restoration of the twelve.

Acts 10:34; Rom. 2:11; Gal. 2:6 - Peter’s and Paul’s statement that God shows no partiality references Sirach 35:12.

Acts 17:29 - description of false gods as like gold and silver made by men follows Wisdom 13:10.
 
Part 2 (If you want to see more check out: scripturecatholic.com/deuterocanon.html )

Tradition / Church Fathers
“What, then, again says the prophet? ‘The assembly of the wicked surrounded me; they encompassed me as bees do a honeycomb,’[Ps. 22:17,118:12] and ‘upon my garment they cast lots’[Ps. 22:19]. Since, therefore, He was about to be manifested and to suffer in the flesh, His suffering was foreshown. For the prophet speaks against Israel, ‘Woe to their soul, because they have counselted an evil counsel against themselves[Isa. 3:9,] saying, Let us bind the just one, because he is displeasing to us’[Wisdom 2:12]. And Moses also says to them, ‘Behold these things, saith the Lord God: Enter into the good land which the Lord sware tto give to Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and inherit ye it, a land flowing with milk and honey’[Ex. 33:1, Lev. 20:24].” Epistle of Barnabas, 6 (A.D. 74).

“Having then this hope, let our souls be bound to Him who is faithful in His promises, and just in His judgments. He who has commanded us not to lie, shall much more Himself not lie; for nothing is impossible with God, except to lie. Let His faith therefore be stirred up again within us, and let us consider that all things are nigh unto Him. By the word of His might He established all things, and by His word He can overthrow them. ‘Who shall say unto Him, What hast thou done ? Or, who shall resist the power of His strength?’[Wisdom 12:12,ll:22] When and as He pleases He will do all things, and none of the things determined by Him shall pass away? All things are open before Him, and nothing can be hidden from His counsel. ‘The heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament showeth His handy-work. Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night showeth knowledge. And there are no words or speeches of which the voices are not heard.’[Ps. 19:1-3].” Clement of Rome,To the Corinthians, 27:5 (c. A.D. 80).

“‘Be just in your judgement’ [Deut 1:16,17 Prov 31:9] make no distinction between man and man when correcting transgressions. Do not waver in your decision. ‘Do not be one that opens his hands to receive, but shuts them when it comes to giving’ [Sirach 4:31].” Didache, 4:3-5 (A.D. 90).

"Stand fast, therefore, in these things, and follow the example of the Lord, being firm and unchangeable in the faith, loving the brotherhood, and being attached to one another, joined together in the truth, exhibiting the meekness of the Lord in your intercourse with one another, and despising no one. When you can do good, defer it not, because ‘alms delivers from death’[Tobit 4:10,12:9]. Be all of you subject one to another? [1 Pt 5:5] having your conduct blameless among the Gentiles,’ [1 Pt 2:12] that ye may both receive praise for your good works, and the Lord may not be blasphemed through you. But woe to him by whom the name of the Lord is blasphemed! [Isa 52:5] Teach, therefore, sobriety to all, and manifest it also in your own conduct.” Polycarp, To the Phillipians, 10 (A.D. 135).
 
As someone who was raised in various Protestant churches, Baptist, Methodist, Church of God, Church of Chrit, etc. I never knew that there were other books. My KJV Bible did not have the Deuteros in it. They were not between the OT and NT. SO, those of you who claim that they are need to go to a Christian bookstore and check the table of contents on the Bibles on the shelf. I will bet that the majority of them do not have them.

BTW, Wisdom and Sirach are my favorites. And, Tobit is the only book of the Bible that has the Archangel Raphael in it. 😃
 
VerumAdInfernos said:
Excuse me but in all fairness you have quoted NOTHING, or nothing of scholarly significance, there is a higher standard on a forum as good as this, and wikipedia will simply not do. That said I refer you to a quote I posted on the thread “Another Nail in the coffin for sola scriptura…”
Click to expand...
Threads plural. Thus indicating other threads. The issue I took exception to is the statement that the LXX of the Apostles contained the DC’s. It may have. It may not have. I am not stating something unusal here people. I am only going off what I have read in books and in some research. There are no lists of the LXX contents in 60 AD. Furthermore, the earliest copies of the LXX have different books; not to mention the numerous textual variants!

I have quoted Why Catholics Bible’s are Bigger.
I quoted Daniel Harrington in The Canon Debate as well.
I only used OrthodoxWiki to reference the divergence in opinion on purgatory among the Orthodox in reference to Randy’s statement that acceptance of the DC would equal a belief in purgatory and then consequently indulgences. Granted, I am not an expert on Orthodox belief in this area and that is why I referenced that particular source.

From Gary Michuta’s book I quoted the following in regards to the “canon” during the time of the Apostles;
" Bibles were not bound between covers in NT times; they existed as loose collections varied from place to place. Secondly, Judaism was compromised of as many as twenty-four distinct paties or denominations as it were, in the first century AD and each of these parties seems to have had its own distinctive theology and its own preferences in matters of canonicity. Most students of the NT already know that the party of the Sadducees had the narrowest views in this regard, accepting only the Pentateuch as indisputably sacred. The borders were equally indistinct on the other end of the spectrum, with some Jewish groups willing to use a canon larger than that received by today’s Catholics"
Click to expand...
Page 13

Daniel Harrington states the edges of the OT “canon” were still fluid" Page 199 in The Canon Debate.
 
Cathh(name removed by moderator) said:
Part 1 (from Scripture Catholic on the Deuterocanon)
scripturecatholic.com/deuterocanon.html
Scripture
Matt. 2:16 - Herod’s decree of slaying innocent children was prophesied in Wis. 11:7 - slaying the holy innocents.

Matt. 6:19-20 - Jesus’ statement about laying up for yourselves treasure in heaven follows Sirach 29:11 - lay up your treasure.

Matt… 7:12 - Jesus’ golden rule “do unto others” is the converse of Tobit 4:15 - what you hate, do not do to others.

Matt. 7:16,20 - Jesus’ statement “you will know them by their fruits” follows Sirach 27:6 - the fruit discloses the cultivation.

Matt. 9:36 - the people were “like sheep without a shepherd” is same as Judith 11:19 - sheep without a shepherd.

Matt. 11:25 - Jesus’ description “Lord of heaven and earth” is the same as Tobit 7:18 - Lord of heaven and earth.

Matt. 12:42 - Jesus refers to the wisdom of Solomon which was recorded and made part of the deuterocanonical books.

Matt. 16:18 - Jesus’ reference to the “power of death” and “gates of Hades” references Wisdom 16:13.

Matt. 22:25; Mark 12:20; Luke 20:29 - Gospel writers refer to the canonicity of Tobit 3:8 and 7:11 regarding the seven brothers.

Matt. 24:15 - the “desolating sacrilege” Jesus refers to is also taken from 1 Macc. 1:54 and 2 Macc. 8:17.

Matt. 24:16 - let those “flee to the mountains” is taken from 1 Macc. 2:28.

Matt. 27:43 - if He is God’s Son, let God deliver him from His adversaries follows Wisdom 2:18.

Mark 4:5,16-17 - Jesus’ description of seeds falling on rocky ground and having no root follows Sirach 40:15.

Mark 9:48 - description of hell where their worm does not die and the fire is not quenched references Judith 16:17.

Luke 1:42 - Elizabeth’s declaration of Mary’s blessedness above all women follows Uzziah’s declaration in Judith 13:18.

Luke 1:52 - Mary’s magnificat addressing the mighty falling from their thrones and replaced by lowly follows Sirach 10:14.

Luke 2:29 - Simeon’s declaration that he is ready to die after seeing the Child Jesus follows Tobit 11:9.

Luke 13:29 - the Lord’s description of men coming from east and west to rejoice in God follows Baruch 4:37.

Luke 21:24 - Jesus’ usage of “fall by the edge of the sword” follows Sirach 28:18.

Luke 24:4 and Acts 1:10 - Luke’s description of the two men in dazzling apparel reminds us of 2 Macc. 3:26.

John 1:3 - all things were made through Him, the Word, follows Wisdom 9:1.

John 3:13 - who has ascended into heaven but He who descended from heaven references Baruch 3:29.

John 4:48; Acts 5:12; 15:12; 2 Cor. 12:12 - Jesus’, Luke’s and Paul’s usage of “signs and wonders” follows Wisdom 8:8.

John 5:18 - Jesus claiming that God is His Father follows Wisdom 2:16.

John 6:35-59 - Jesus’ Eucharistic discourse is foreshadowed in Sirach 24:21.

John 10:22 - the identification of the feast of the dedication is taken from 1 Macc. 4:59.

John 10:36 – Jesus accepts the inspiration of Maccabees as He analogizes the Hanukkah consecration to His own consecration to the Father in 1 Macc. 4:36.

John 15:6 - branches that don’t bear fruit and are cut down follows Wis. 4:5 where branches are broken off.

Acts 1:15 - Luke’s reference to the 120 may be a reference to 1 Macc. 3:55 - leaders of tens / restoration of the twelve.

Acts 10:34; Rom. 2:11; Gal. 2:6 - Peter’s and Paul’s statement that God shows no partiality references Sirach 35:12.

Acts 17:29 - description of false gods as like gold and silver made by men follows Wisdom 13:10.
Click to expand...
Are you prepared to defend this discredited list?
 
BrianH said:
Threads plural. Thus indicating other threads. The issue I took exception to is the statement that the LXX of the Apostles contained the DC’s. It may have. It may not have. I am not stating something unusal here people. I am only going off what I have read in books and in some research. There are no lists of the LXX contents in 60 AD. Furthermore, the earliest copies of the LXX have different books; not to mention the numerous textual variants!

I have quoted Why Catholics Bible’s are Bigger.
I quoted Daniel Harrington in The Canon Debate as well.
I only used OrthodoxWiki to reference the divergence in opinion on purgatory among the Orthodox in reference to Randy’s statement that acceptance of the DC would equal a belief in purgatory and then consequently indulgences. Granted, I am not an expert on Orthodox belief in this area and that is why I referenced that particular source.

From Gary Michuta’s book I quoted the following in regards to the “canon” during the time of the Apostles;

Page 13

Daniel Harrington states the edges of the OT “canon” were still fluid" Page 199 in The Canon Debate.
Click to expand...
The thing that I think needs to be kept in mind, and was a clincher for me, is the fact that it was The Church in council in ca 390-410 AD that determined the canon of the Bible. This canon, agreed upon and promulgated throughout Christendom.
Now - If we accept God (and the Trinity) at his promises to be with us, to lead us into all truth, and to give authority to bind and loose, we must accept that these Church councils were protected by the Holy Spirit. Thus the Canon as established and promulgated at that time must be correct.
If we say that the canons was not correct, then the councils were not protected and the WHOLE of the canon is sustpect, not just the deuteros’.

Peace
James
 
JRKH said:
The thing that I think needs to be kept in mind, and was a clincher for me, is the fact that it was The Church in council in ca 390-410 AD that determined the canon of the Bible. This canon, agreed upon and promulgated throughout Christendom.
Now - If we accept God (and the Trinity) at his promises to be with us, to lead us into all truth, and to give authority to bind and loose, we must accept that these Church councils were protected by the Holy Spirit. Thus the Canon as established and promulgated at that time must be correct.
If we say that the canons was not correct, then the councils were not protected and the WHOLE of the canon is sustpect, not just the deuteros’.

Peace
James
Click to expand...
Different topic I believe than what I was writing about. On the other hand, you state this canon was “promulgated throughout Christendom”. Wouldn’t that mean that the Oriental Orthodox and other Orthodox groups would have the same canon as you guys?

But please also understand, your position stated IS the strongest reason to support the inclusion of the DCs. Absolutely.
 
BrianH said:
Different topic I believe than what I was writing about. On the other hand, you state this canon was “promulgated throughout Christendom”. Wouldn’t that mean that the Oriental Orthodox and other Orthodox groups would have the same canon as you guys?

But please also understand, your position stated IS the strongest reason to support the inclusion of the DCs. Absolutely.
Click to expand...
You are right in that I have mistated by using the term throughout christendom.

I do that sometimes. 🤷

Yes, I cannot fathom anyone thinking God wojuld permit a false canon to be promulgated for 1000 years before “correcting it”.

Peace
James
 
BrianH said:
An Apostolic Father quoting one or two of the DC’s in the 2nd century proves they were in the canon of the Apostles??
Everyone I have quoted on the threads I have participated in state clearly the exact contents of the LXX circa 1st century were in flux…and these are Catholic scholars…I never used a Protestant one.
Click to expand...
The Apostles didn’t have a “canon”, at least for the NT. The criteria for identifying Scripture, however, was that a book be of “apostolic origin.” There are a number of ECFs in the first centuries who quote lots of the Deuterocanon as the Word of God, using the NT Biblical phrase for the OT of “as it is written,” calling the books “holy writ,” etc… You are correct that there was no clearly known canon in the first centuries. From my research, I would venture to say most all of the ECFs in the first 4 centuries cited the Deuterocanon as Scripture. I also think there are some very strong NT-Deuterocanon connections even if you say that has been debunked.

To answer the OP, I think some of the more traditional Protestant groups already consider the Deuterocanon worthy of reading and of great historical value. Regarding doctrine, however, I think the modern Protestant would explain away the “trouble-passages” the same way I would see them doing with the NT (which everybody agrees on).

Now if the Deuterocanon had been retained at the time of the Reformation, you’d have a different story. I say that because those books would have always been in their tradition, and they would be much closer to the theology of the Reformers than the much-changed form of Protestantism common in the U.S. today.
 
JRKH said:
You are right in that I have mistated by using the term throughout christendom.

I do that sometimes. 🤷

Yes, I cannot fathom anyone thinking God wojuld permit a false canon to be promulgated for 1000 years before “correcting it”.
Peace
James
Click to expand...
Very powerful statement. Some canons were broader but not smaller accept possibly very small groups and I cannot verify them yet.
 
BrianH said:
An Apostolic Father quoting one or two of the DC’s in the 2nd century proves they were in the canon of the Apostles??
Everyone I have quoted on the threads I have participated in state clearly the exact contents of the LXX circa 1st century were in flux…and these are Catholic scholars…I never used a Protestant one.
Click to expand...
There are lots more than “an Apostolic Father,” there is quite a bit of citations, I have them bookmarked and will give you links to view them and read them.

Wisdom
The Apostolic Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus
2:12 2:24 9:13 9:17 11:22 12:12
litteralchristianlibrary.wetpaint.com/page/Wisdom+Patristic+Citations

Sirach
The Apostolic Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus
4:31 19:4
litteralchristianlibrary.wetpaint.com/page/Sirach+Patristic+Citations

Tobit
The Apostolic Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus
4:10 12:9

Judith
The Apostolic Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus
8:19 8:30
litteralchristianlibrary.wetpaint.com/page/Judith+Patristic+Citations

Baruch
The Apostolic Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus
Baruch 4:36 5
litteralchristianlibrary.wetpaint.com/page/Lamentations-Baruch+Patristic+Citations

Susanna
The Apostolic Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus
Susanna 1:52 1:56
litteralchristianlibrary.wetpaint.com/page/Susanna+and+Bel+and+the+Dragon+Patristic+Citations
 
BrianH, does the Apostolic Fathers use of the Deuters as Scripture prove to me that the Apostles also viewed them that way? I think it is evidence that very much supports it, and I would be willing to go as far as saying that it would be quite unbelievable to think that their use of them would prove against it. But as far as the canon of the Apostles, there was not a canon established, and if there was then that would have been specifically defined by them or one of the NT authors. But the use of them by the Apostolic Fathers as Scripture is solid evidence that they were echoing the men who taught them. The Dead Sea Scrolls also contain some of the Deuters which shows that there were Jews using them around that time. But as far as a definition layed down, that was something that the Apostles left for their successors to work out. The Pharisees soon established a canon that the Jews still use today, while the Church defined our canon that we have today. I think I will trust the Church that worhships the Messiah than the canon established by those who rejected the Messiah.
 
=COPLAND 3;5976757]There are lots more than “an Apostolic Father,” there is quite a bit of citations, I have them bookmarked and will give you links to view them and read them.
Click to expand...
Wisdom
The Apostolic Fathers with Justin Martyr and Irenaeus
2:12 2:24 9:13 9:17 11:22 12:12
litteralchristianlibrary.wetpaint.com/page/Wisdom+Patristic+Citations
Click to expand...
Your first quote is Widsom 2:12? I am just trying to be sure here
12 Therefore let us lie in wait for the righteous; because he is not for our turn, and he is clean contrary to our doings: he upbraideth us with our offending the law, and objecteth to our infamy the transgressings of our education.
Click to expand...
And the verse cited is from Barnabas and it says" Let us bind the just one, because he is displeasing to us.”1504"

Do you have an easier to read format or am I missing something here??
I will go through all of them but am I reading the first one right??
 
Roy5 said:
Three quick observations.
More and more Protestants and Catholics, as they become better educated, realize that much in the Bible certainly was not written by God but by very fallible human beings, many of them ardent nationalists who warped history. What worries me is that when certain people reach that conclusion they are inclined to feel betrayed and ‘toss out the baby with the bath water’. We need to build our faith around Christ and his message of love and push aside all the distracting additives that distort this message.
Click to expand...
Marcion would have been a big fan of yours. Plus, you have to face the inconvenient fact that Jesus of Nazareth doesn’t seem to have regarded the OT as obsolete.
 
Would it matter?

All I can say is that, having read some of the deutero-canonical books, I don’t think we are missing much.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top