Where did the catholics get more books than other christian

Home Forums All Things Catholic Where did the catholics get more books than other christian

This topic contains 11 replies, has 5 voices, and was last updated by  Andres Ortiz 3 years ago.

Viewing 12 posts - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #749

    huntzy
    Member

    More specifically 2 Maccabees 12:44-46

    I am in a debate with a great person who is a christian and believe strictly in the bible. He goes on to say the book of 2 Maccabees 12:44-46 shouldn’t be recognized because not part of original text.

    Here is exact words

    Item 1:
    The Catholic Bible does contain additional books. Here is an overview of what happened;..

    At the end of the first Christian century, the Jewish rabbis, closed the canon of Hebrew books (those books considered authoritative). They did this because;
    The popularity and number of sectarian and apocryphal writings
    The fall of Jerusalem
    The disputes with Christians over their interpretation of the scriptures
    Four criteria were used to by these Jewish rabbis to determine if a book would be part of the Old testament.
    1. Content had to harmonize with the Law
    2. Prophetic inspiration was believed to have started with Moses (1450 BC) and ended with Ezra (about 450BC) the book had to be written in this timeframe
    3. The language of the original manuscript had to be Hebrew
    4. The book had to be written within the geographical boundaries of Palestine

    If the writing failed these tests it was classified as Apocrypha (false writing). Not necessarily implying that it does not contain good things or that it is written by evil men. It simply means they were not believed to be inspired. Eleven of the approximate 14 Apocryphal books were accepted by the Catholics, included in the Roman Catholic Canon and placed in the Douay version of the Bible.

    Four criteria were used for determining the books of the New Testament.
    1. Was the book written by an apostle or someone associated with an apostle? Was the book’s content of spiritual nature?
    2. Was the book widely received by the churches?
    3. Was there evidence in the book of divine inspiration?

    Why were the apocrypha books excluded from a Christian standpoint;.

    1. The books were not part of the Hebrew Canon of Scripture
    2. The Master, The Apostle Paul, nor any other writer of the New Testament ever quoted from these books. They frequently quoted from the books that were in the Hebrew canon of scripture.
    3. Josephus, the Hebrew historian, expressly excluded the Apocrypha.
    4. None of the Apocryphal books claim divine inspiration.
    5. The apocryphal books have historical, geographical, and chronological errors
    6. They teach and uphold doctrines contrary to the scriptures (lying is OK in some cases, magic is advocated and practiced, etc.)
    7. Their spiritual and moral stance is generally far below the old and new testament
    8. Respecting the Old Testament, most of these books were written much later than the books considered to be authoritative and inspired

    So to the Christian believing that the bible is the true and inspired word of God is central and of utmost importance to their faith. Any book or teaching that is not supported by biblical scripture is wrong.

    The Apostle Paul even warned of this in Galatians 1:8,9
    “But if we, or any other angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed.”

    Since I am not as well versed in the bible as him I need outside help. Please advise

    #2562

    Andres Ortiz
    Keymaster

    There’s a lot needing to be said here, but I am in no capacity to address it all right now.

    Later tonight or tomorrow night I will be posting an article on the site regarding this exact topic. You can read it over, send it to your friend, etc… and then we can discuss all of the things you bring up here.

    Maybe your friend should join this website and post his or her concerns.

    I will let you know when I post that article. <img src=” title=”Smile” />

    #2565

    Benedict
    Member

    Not much time but I want to offer a few points (few related to the subject at hand specifically).

    [quote:yu1kny8v]Four criteria were used for determining the books of the New Testament.[/quote:yu1kny8v]
    Does your friend adhere to Sola Scriptura? Because the argument presented disproves it in favor of the Church. None of these four criteria is the Bible or is in the Bible; they were the product of the Church.

    Why does your friend reference Jewish sources for the canon of Scripture when the Christian Church, the pillar and foundation of truth, already existed? This same Church used the Deuterocanonical books and officially affirmed their inspiration in the 4th century.

    #2573

    Andres Ortiz
    Keymaster

    huntzy,

    I posted that article. You can read it here: http://www.aboutcatholics.com/faith_bel … different/ then we can discuss some more. <img src=” title=”Smile” />

    #2653

    Andres Ortiz
    Keymaster

    huntzy,
    Did this help you at all?

    Does your friend have more questions?

    #2790

    mmmerf
    Member

    [quote:18b3bria]2. The Master, The Apostle Paul, nor any other writer of the New Testament ever quoted from these books. They frequently quoted from the books that were in the Hebrew canon of scripture.
    [/quote:18b3bria]

    Buzz, sorry, thankyou for playing, but that’s incorrect and we have some lovely parting gifts for you…

    While Jesus never explicitly quotes from the Apocryphal texts (that I know of) he’s all over the Septuagint (the version containing the Apocrypha), especially in the Gospel of Luke. When the Gospels were written in light of the Old Testament, It was the Septuagint that they drew from. So if he’s quoting the Septuagint, then the Septuagint is what should be used.

    Other points:

    [quote:18b3bria]4. The book had to be written within the geographical boundaries of Palestine [/quote:18b3bria]

    Pardon me, but wasn’t Genesis writted during the babylonian Captivity? I could be wrong on this one, but I thought I remembered hearing that.

    [quote:18b3bria]Four criteria were used for determining the books of the New Testament.
    1. Was the book written by an apostle or someone associated with an apostle? Was the book’s content of spiritual nature?
    2. Was the book widely received by the churches?
    3. Was there evidence in the book of divine inspiration? [/quote:18b3bria]

    Two, no, three problems with this:

    A. By the above, the Didache (the Teachings of the Twelve) should have been included. Would have saved us all kinds of trouble – passages like “If someone asks for money to preach to you the Gospel, he is from the devil.” Whoo! Anyways. Tell me why the Didache, or the Gospel according to Peter, ain’t included by that rationale.

    B. Using two different sets of criteria for the OT and the NT is dangerous, and can lead to things like marcionism (am I getting that right? Marcion was the guy who thought the OT God was a different God than the NT God, right) where one sees the OT as a ‘lower class’ of scripture than the NT.

    C. He’s disagreeing with The Most Holy Catholic and Apostolic church of Rome, and is therefore, obviously, in grevious error. Let us beg the intercession of the Blessed Virgin that he be pulled safe from the tempest of heresy in which he will otherwise surely drown. Amen. Deo Gratias.

    (Okay, maybe I’m a little overboard on point C. But who doesn’t enjoy a good ecclesial smackdown every now and again? Apologetics means never having to say you’re sorry.)

    Dave <img src=” title=”Smile” />

    #2793

    Andres Ortiz
    Keymaster

    [quote:12cwapul]Okay, maybe I’m a little overboard on point C. But who doesn’t enjoy a good ecclesial smackdown every now and again? Apologetics means never having to say you’re sorry.[/quote:12cwapul]

    Hmmm…yes, I will have to agree with you on that one (going overboard). <img src=” title=”Wink” />

    “Ecclesial smackdown” :lol:

    And yeah, Marcionism is “A Christian heresy of the second and third centuries A.D. that rejected the Old Testament and denied the incarnation of God in Jesus as a human.” (from dictionary.com[/url:12cwapul]).

    And like you, I wish the Didache was in Scripture because Catholics would certainly have a better case in terms of explaining the Eucharist and all that.

    #2822

    huntzy
    Member

    Did our bible come from Hebrew, Greek or Latin decent. I am still having issues on why there are so many different books in the bible. I certainly see why there are different factions when we have many bibles to read from.

    I would think Hebrew would be the correct one.

    #2823

    mmmerf
    Member

    [quote:e4fv0yhp]Did our bible come from Hebrew, Greek or Latin decent. I am still having issues on why there are so many different books in the bible. I certainly see why there are different factions when we have many bibles to read from. [/quote:e4fv0yhp]

    The Correct answer is: Yes. I think. :lol:

    My Understanding:

    The copy of the Old testament that is used by Catholics comes from a Greek version of the Aramaic (Aincient Hebrew) scriptures, which was translated from the original Aramaic in about 400 BC.

    The new testament is from the original Greek manuscripts, as Greek was the language of commerce and general written discourse in first century Palestine. Aramaic was spoken, Greek was (usually) written.

    Around 400 AD, Jerome translates the bible into latin; The Vulgate. This is the version that made its way around the churches of the middle ages, because Latin was a language that everybody was on equal footing with.

    Everything is more or less fine until the Reformation, when you’ve got two things:

    1. Luther wanting to change the bible somewhat to get rid of purgatory and build up the doctrine of ‘Sola Fides’

    2. The invention of the printing press. As a result of this, all of a sudden everybody and their dog learns to read, whereas before the printing press, your average joe in the pew couldn’t read a word.

    So over the next hundred years, everybody starts making (and reading) copies of different bibles; the Douay-Rheims, The King James, The Gutenberg, etc, each of which are based on a different set of source criteria – Original Aramaic? Original Greek? Hmm?

    What came out with the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in, err, 1947? was that the Vulgate (remember Jerome?) was the most correct version, and most later translations have reflected that.

    Also, many translations will bring to light the small differences between the various ancient manuscripts.

    An important thing to remember is that Scripture is one of the Traditions of the Catholic Church. There is Scripture because of the Church – NOT the other way around.

    “I would not have believed the Gospel, but for the Church professing it.” -St. Augustine.

    There. That’s what I think.

    Cheers,

    Dave <img src=” title=”Smile” />

    #2824

    Andres Ortiz
    Keymaster

    Our Bible, and all other Bibles, came from both Hebrew and Greek. <img src=” title=”Smile” />

    The Old Testament was Hebrew and the New Testament was written in Greek.

    At one point, before the canon of the Bible was finalized, it was all translated into Greek and called the Septuagint which means 70 (even though there were 72 books).

    Edited to note that Dave beat me to it. I guess I just typed slow this morning.

    #10400

    Why can’t I open links posted in replies…whenever I click on the link it gives me an error..gone…

    #10414

    Andres Ortiz
    Keymaster
    "houseofsaul":67dpkvt1 wrote:
    Why can’t I open links posted in replies…whenever I click on the link it gives me an error..gone…[/quote:67dpkvt1]
    Sorry about that. These are some old posts with old links. I’ve updated it for you and will check the other posts too.
Viewing 12 posts - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.