Home | Forum | Arcade
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
-theophilus-
Joined: 24 Sep 2006
Posts: 562
|
 Posted: Tue May 01, 2007 6:34 am Post subject: A time they were not? |
 |
|
The book of Tobit, the book of Judith, the 2 books of Maccabees, the book of Wisdom, the book of Sirach, the prophecy of Baruch.
These books were moved from their previous position in the canon of Scriptures and placed in an appendix during the time of Luther. Later, and still today in many Bible translations, the books were removed altogether.
They were removed because they were thought to be not inspired. This being the case, do posters here think there was a time when they were added (wrongly) to the canon of Scripture? Was there ever a time before the reformation that a Bible didn't contain the above 7 books? If so, when do posters believe the books were added and why?
_________________
ICXC NIKA! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
jtheb
Joined: 21 Jun 2006
Posts: 1452
Location: second childhood
|
| Posted: Tue May 01, 2007 6:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
I wonder at the present time when feeling seem to be getting too strong, if this is the ideal thread.
If it causes more disputation I shall suggest locking it.
However. I will investigate and post something in due course.
Theo I am not objecting to the discussion, just wondering this is a good time to bring it up.
 Take the smiley for friendliness not for reality.
_________________
The effectiveness of a posting is inversely proportional to its length.
C.S.Craig |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
maria
Joined: 17 Feb 2007
Posts: 527
|
| Posted: Tue May 01, 2007 11:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Theo,
I got into hot water trying to find things out about this on ROT.They were not happy at what I was posting and this made me wonder why so I began to do some research.
It was a shock to find out how Luther tried to get rid of some books.I intend going into Cardiff to the CTS to purchase some books.One of the reasons i wanted to have a chat with a RC priest was I wanted some info or books from him about the reformation.
I have the NRSV with the APOCRYPHAL/DEUTEROCANONICAL BOOKS
As Jws we were taught there was no clergy/laity distinction among the first-century Christians.
and
Cyprian,Bishop of Carthage,saw the bishops as being a class separate from the presbyters,the deacons,and the laity,
The reformers did not,however,mark a return to true worship and doctrine
Apostasy had penetrated deeply to the very foundation of Christiandom.
Thus, though various protestant groups broke free from papal authority of Rome,they carried over some of the basic flaws of the RCC.
Some of the people who help ex JWS then promoted these reformers so I had to re-think my JW stance,I began to change my mind.......Then I got the info from Jacob Prasch Ministries which seemed to turn it back around again.Confused? yes so was I.
Now I only trust the LORD everything else I cheack out.
http://www.catholicapologetics.net/0002kjv.htm
http://www.geocities.com/alcovey1/docs/Where_We_Got_The_Bible_Henry_Graham.htm
So I am interested in what Theo has to say,
I will make up my own mind then. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jtheb
Joined: 21 Jun 2006
Posts: 1452
Location: second childhood
|
| Posted: Tue May 01, 2007 7:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The OT apocrypha were rejected from the OT canon at Jamnia.
They were incuded in the RC canon by the council of Trent in 16th Century.
_________________
The effectiveness of a posting is inversely proportional to its length.
C.S.Craig |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
-theophilus-
Joined: 24 Sep 2006
Posts: 562
|
| Posted: Wed May 02, 2007 4:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| jtheb wrote: | | The OT apocrypha were rejected from the OT canon at Jamnia. |
I must admit I'd never heard of this council. After looking it up, I realize why. From Wikipedia:
| Quote: | | Heinrich Graetz introduced the notion in 1871; based on Mishnaic and Talmudic sources, he concluded that there had been a Council of Jamnia which had decided the Jewish canon sometime in the late 1st century. This became the prevailing scholarly consensus for much of the 20th century. However, from the 1960s onwards, based on the work of Jack P. Lewis, Sidney Z. Leiman, and others, this view came increasingly into question. In particular, later scholars noted that none of the sources actually mentioned books that had been withdrawn from a canon, and questioned the whole premise that the discussions were about canonicity at all, asserting that they were actually dealing with other concerns entirely. |
So the council is pure speculation. The Early Church Councils at least have documented evidence of their existance.
Besides, even if the council were real (and I admit it may be), why do Jewish sources, after the coming of Christ, have more authority than the early Church? They may have rejected the "apocrypha" but then they also rejected the Messiah!
| jtheb wrote: | | They were incuded in the RC canon by the council of Trent in 16th Century. |
They were affirmed at the Council of Trent, because of Reformist moves to remove them. They certainly weren't included - as in added - at this point otherwise why would the Orthodox Chruch, that had split from the church of Rome 500 years previously, have the same canon?
_________________
ICXC NIKA! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
maria
Joined: 17 Feb 2007
Posts: 527
|
| Posted: Wed May 02, 2007 10:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
Interesting,will look up more info.
In the TO THE READER SECTION in my NRSV,it says the KJV came to be regarded as the AV With good reason it has been termed ;the noblest monument of English Prose'
Yet the KJV has serious defects,By the middle of the 19th century the development of biblical studies and the discovery of many biblical manuscripts more ancient than those on which the KJV was based made it apparent that these defects were so many as to call for revision.
The council appointed a committee of scholars .
a translation of the Apocrypphal/Deuterocanonical Books of the OT followed in 1957.In 1977 this collection was issued in an expanded edition,containing three additional texts received by Estern Orthodox communions (3and 4 Machabees and Psalm 151)Thereafter the RSV gained the distinction of being officially authorized for use by all major Christian Churches:Protestant,Anglican, RC and Eastern Orthodox.
The RSV Bible Comittee is a continuing body,comprising about 30 members,both men and women.Ecumenical in representation.It includes scholars affiliated with various Protestant denominations ,as well as several RC members and eastern Orthodox member, and a Jewish member who serves in the OT section. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
maria
Joined: 17 Feb 2007
Posts: 527
|
| Posted: Wed May 02, 2007 10:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| interesting also that it says the name Jehovah does not accurately represent any form of the Name ever used in Hebrew |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Paul
Joined: 26 Jun 2006
Posts: 50
|
| Posted: Thu May 03, 2007 7:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Theo is incorrect. Those books were never part of the canon. Luther merely affirmed what the canon already was. It was the RCC that added the books. The earliest manuscripts of the LXX did not contain the apocryphal books - it contained the 39 books we now have - though some were combined - e.g. Chronicles as one book, and also Ezra-Nehemiah.
It is a classic RCC lie that protestants removed books from the canon. The books were never there, nor authenticated by the early fathers. The RCC added the books, because it is only in such books that they can find support for so many of their heretical doctrines. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nancy
Joined: 22 Jun 2006
Posts: 1097
Location: Illinois, U.S.A.
|
| Posted: Fri May 04, 2007 12:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
Paul, could you please explain your post, but g-e-n-t-l-y, this time?
Thank you.
_________________
You O Lord are the potter, I am the clay,the work of Your hands. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
-theophilus-
Joined: 24 Sep 2006
Posts: 562
|
| Posted: Fri May 04, 2007 5:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
Gently or not, I think evidence is probably more important. I'd like some of that please Paul. Also one of the original questions from the first post hasn't been answered: if the 7 books mentioned were added later by the RCC (as you claim) then when were they added?
_________________
ICXC NIKA! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
keepingthefaith
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri May 04, 2007 7:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'm sure Paul will answer in due time he is a very busy man.
| Quote: | | Gently or not, I think evidence is probably more important. I'd like some of that please Paul. |
I'm sure he will but as I said give him a bit of time  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
-theophilus-
Joined: 24 Sep 2006
Posts: 562
|
| Posted: Fri May 04, 2007 7:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
Feel free to help him out KtF, or any other posters, if you also have the evidence. After all, claiming that the 7 books I listed were actually added to the canon of Scriptures is something that should be positively proven (if true).
By the way, this:
| Paul wrote: | | The earliest manuscripts of the LXX did not contain the apocryphal books |
is just plain wrong. The LXX, which the NT quotes, contains not only the books I mention in my first post, but also 3 Maccabees, 4 Maccabees, 1 Esdras, Odes, and Psalm 151.
_________________
ICXC NIKA! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
keepingthefaith
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri May 04, 2007 7:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I am as eager to see Pauls reply as you are Theo I don't think I have the expertease in that department to answer, I'm just happy to read the Bible and try to apply it daily in my life (which is not easy) but it is made easier with Christ by my side, maybe by my side is not the correct phrase ''in me'' yes that's it 'Christ in me' |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
-theophilus-
Joined: 24 Sep 2006
Posts: 562
|
| Posted: Fri May 04, 2007 7:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
I agree, and would claim that same experience for myself.
The subject of this thread is what books the Bible is actually made up of.
_________________
ICXC NIKA! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
maria
Joined: 17 Feb 2007
Posts: 527
|
| Posted: Fri May 04, 2007 10:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I am very,very,very,interested in this being an ex Cath. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
