English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

They were not actually added until 1516 A. D.! ...."Yet it claims to have given us the Bible in 397 A.D." I found that quite interesting.

I've seen alot of people quoting from verses I've never even heard of, so I decided to find out where this stuff is coming from.

take a gander.

http://www.lavistachurchofchrist.org/LVarticles/ExtraCatholicBooks.htm

Tell me what you think. You can star this Q and come back if you like, that site has a lot of useful information.

2007-06-11 10:01:04 · 34 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

Did any of you read the site? There's some really solid info in there, be sure to check it out.

2007-06-11 10:12:13 · update #1

I never said the Bilbe was compiled on that date. Catholics said they put the Bible together on that date. I posted the site for a reason.

2007-06-11 10:44:58 · update #2

"The church...exercising the authority given her by Christ, fulfilling her duty as custodian and champion of the written word, separated the true from the false, the divine from the human, and gave men the New Testament, as it is today. And this in the year 397 A.D. -- nearly 400 years after Christ. Thus the Bible came from the church!" (Paulist Correspondence Course, No. 2, pp. 55-56).


I will post this from the site.

2007-06-11 10:45:50 · update #3

If you all are going against the Dates you are going against Catholic teachings.

2007-06-11 10:46:47 · update #4

34 answers

http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/apocryph.htm

"Why the Apocrypha Isn't in the Bible.

"Not one of the apocryphal books is written in the Hebrew language, which was alone used by the inspired historians and poets of the Old Testament. All Apocryphal books are in Greek, except one which is extant only in Latin.

"None of the apocryphal writers laid claim to inspiration.
The apocryphal books were never acknowledged as sacred scriptures by the Jews, custodians of the Hebrew scriptures (the apocrypha was written prior to the New Testament). In fact, the Jewish people rejected and destroyed the apocrypha after the overthow of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.

"The apocryphal books were not permitted among the sacred books during the first four centuries of the real Christian church.

"The Apocrypha contains fabulous statements which not only contradict the "canonical" scriptures but themselves. For example, in the two Books of Maccabees, Antiochus Epiphanes is made to die three different deaths in three different places.

"The Apocrypha includes doctrines in variance with the Bible, such as prayers for the dead and sinless perfection."

Mostly I believe that the Catholic Church included the apocrypha because they supported the 'new & improved' practises such as; purgatory, buying the dead out of purgatory by making contributions to the church, praying to dead people [Saints], keeping Mary the mother of Christ a virgin, allowing the worship of icons or the Pope instead of naming it idolatry, etc.

This is in response to everyday Catholic...
My apologies if my website was too biased, I was rushed to find a certain website but had to settle for that one. Also, what difference does it make where in the Bible [OT or NT] that it mentions anything? They NEVER contradict themselves.

"Brothers, we do not want you to be ignorant about those who fall asleep, or to grieve like the rest of men, who have no hope. We believe that Jesus died and rose again and so we believe that God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in him. According to the Lord's own word, we tell you that we who are still alive, who are left till the coming of the Lord, will certainly not precede those who have fallen asleep. For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever. Therefore encourage each other with these words." (1 Thessalonians 4:13-18)

2007-06-11 10:13:31 · answer #1 · answered by Kathy M 3 · 4 11

Here are 10 reasons why The apocrypha was rejected. Philo, Alexandrian philosopher (20 B.C. to 40 A.D. quoted the old testament prolifically and even recognised there three fold divisions but never once quoted from the Apocrypha as inspired. 2. Josephus The Jewish Historian 30-100 A.D. explicitly excludes the Apocrypha. 3. Jesus and the new testament writers never once quote from the Apocrypha although there are hundreds of quotes from the other old testament sources. 4. The Jewish scholars of Jamnia (A.D. 90) did not recognise the Apocrypha. 5. No council or canon recognised the Apocrypha for the first four centuries. 6. Many of the early church fathers spoke out against the Apocrypha including for example,Origen, Cyril of Jerusalem, Athenaseus. 7.Jerome the great scholar and translator of the Vulgate rejected the Apocrypha as part of the canon. He disputed across the Mediterranean with Augustine on this point. he first refused to translate these books into Latin, but later he made a hurried translation of a few of them. After his death and against his dead body were these books brought into his Latin Vulgate. 8. Many of the Catholics scholars during the reformation period rejected the apocrypha.9. Luther and the reformers rejected the canonicity of the Apocrypha. 10. Not until A.D. 1546, in a polemical action at the counter reformation council of Trent did the Apocryphal books receive full canonical status by the Roman Catholic church.

2007-06-12 04:43:37 · answer #2 · answered by Edward J 6 · 1 0

Why would it matter. The catholics added all of the books to the bible. What you need to remember is that the bible was compiled under the auspices of the roman emperor Constantine in an attempt to bring all of the various belief systems of the empire under a common faith. The result was to be the universal or catholic faith. The word Catholic is derived from the Greek adjective καθολικός (katholikos), meaning "universal". There is nothing wrong with this and I do not mean for it to sound derogatory. You just need to realize that it is an amalgamation of the various faiths and the dogma and theology of these belief systems. Even assuming benevolence on the part of Constantine’s people, making this all make sense would have been a monumental task. The bible relied heavily on Jewish scripture and the New Testament was highly modified to support Paul’s teachings, which included such localized ideas as blood sacrifices to wash away sins, virgin births and resurrection of deceased deities. Sadly much of the central part of the Jesus theology was lost in the blended mythology. A mythology was created around a great teacher comparable to the Buddha and he was turned into an amalgam of all of the Mediterranean deities. His teachings on love and non-judgment were all but lost in a maze of judgmental often-vindictive gibberish that he would have never agreed with. Sadly some of the greatest teachings of all time were all but lost in Rome’s effort to be all thing to all people Love and blessings Don

2016-05-17 10:49:13 · answer #3 · answered by josefa 3 · 0 1

The New Testament canon of the Catholic Bible and the Protestant Bible are the same with 27 Books.

The difference in the Old Testaments actually goes back to the time before and during Christ’s life. At this time, there was no official Jewish canon of scripture.

The Jews in Egypt translated their choices of the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek in the second century before Christ. This translation of 46 books, called the Septuagint, had wide use in the Roman world because most Jews lived far from Palestine in Greek cities. Many of these Jews spoke only Greek.

The early Christian Church was born into this world. The Church, with its bilingual Jews and more and more Greek-speaking Gentiles, used the books of the Septuagint as its Bible. Remember the early Christians were just writing the documents what would become the New Testament.

After the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem, with increasing persecution from the Romans and competition from the fledgling Christian Church, the Jewish leaders came together and declared its official canon of Scripture, eliminating seven books from the Septuagint.

The books removed were Tobit, Judith, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, Wisdom (of Solomon), Sirach, and Baruch. Parts of existing books were also removed including Psalm 151 (from Psalms), parts of the Book of Esther, Susanna (from Daniel as chapter 13), and Bel and the Dragon (from Daniel as chapter 14).

The Christian Church did not follow suit but kept all the books in the Septuagint. 46 + 27 = 73 Books total.

1500 years later, Protestants decided to keep the Catholic New Testament but change its Old Testament from the Catholic canon to the Jewish canon. The books they dropped are sometimes called the Apocrypha.

Here is a Catholic Bible website: http://www.nccbuscc.org/nab/bible/

With love in Christ.

2007-06-11 17:30:10 · answer #4 · answered by imacatholic2 7 · 5 1

You need to use a site that is not so biased.

Of the Book of Wisdom, the author state, "This sounds very much like the reading of some science fiction writer’s efforts to produce a monster of some sort."

The author comes across as very sophomoric rather than learned.

Following is from a more independent source:

Augustine (c.397), the bishop of Hippo (in a Roman colony on the northern coast of Africa), is the first major figure in the Church to set forth a list which includes all of the disputed books without making any distinction between the fully canonical Hebrew books and the lesser books derived from the Septuagint.

Kathy, the second book of macabees is the only place in the OT where you will read about the resurrection of the body. It that also a "doctrines in variance with the Bible?"

2007-06-11 10:14:53 · answer #5 · answered by Sldgman 7 · 10 1

If you want the real truth and not just to push your religious doctrine on other people, and to make the ignorant ones convert. The books are called the Septuagint, or look up the Roman Catholic Apocrypha. I really don't know where you get your dates from because every historical text I know dates the beginnings of the new testament earlier than 397, and King James didn't get around to translating the bible until the early 1600's and Gutenburg printed his Latin one in the 1450's. So, the bible was compiled at least before that. And unlike you I looked it up on the history channel website, not one of some biased church.

2007-06-11 10:43:11 · answer #6 · answered by jadeaaustin 4 · 6 1

When did the Protestants drop those books from the Bible? In the 16th cent. Why? Because the Books of Maccabees contradict Protestant dogma by advocating praying for the dead and intercession of the saints and the Protestants just opted for the Pharasee Jamnian Palestinian Canon(which even more strongly rejected the New Testament)since they could not have anything in their Bible that contradicted their rival and opposing Teaching Offices.
If Protestants reject the Lxx and Catholic OT canon why do they accept the Catholic NT Canon?

2007-06-12 11:27:16 · answer #7 · answered by James O 7 · 0 1

Wisdom of Solomon 30 B.C. Didactic
Ecclesiasticus 32 B.C. Didactic
Tobit c. 200 B.C. Religious Novel
I Esdras c. 150 B.C. Historic & Legendary
I Maccabees c. 110 B.C. Historic
II Maccabees c. 100 B.C. Historic & Legendary
Judith c. 150 A.D. Romantic Novel
Baruch c. 100 A.D. Prophetic
Letter of Jeremiah c. 200 B.C. Prophetic
II Esdras c. 100 A.D. Prophetic
Additions to Esther c. 130 B.C. Legendary
Prayer of Azariah* c. 100. B.C. Legendary
Suzanna (Daniel 13) c. 100 B.C. Legendary
Bel & the Dragon (Daniel 14) c. 100 B.C. Legendary
Prayer of Manasseh c. 150 B.C. Legendary
*The "Prayer of Azariah" is also called the "Song of the Three Hebrew Children," and follows after Daniel 3:23.
3. THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE APOCRYPHA

As a general summary:

The Jews do not accept the Apocrypha as part of their Scriptures.
Protestants do not accept the Apocrypha as Scripture, though some ascribe to them value as "good and useful reading" and "for example of life and instruction of manners."
The Roman Catholic 'Church' in effect accepts 12 of the apocryphal books as canonical (omitting I & II Esdras and the Prayer of Manassah from the above list.) Because of this the Roman Catholic 'Church' speaks of the Apocrypha as "deutero-canonical" books, and in turn labels as apocrypha what we may term "pseudoepigraphical" books."
4. THE INCLUSION OF THE APOCRYPHA
The Apocrypha are contained in the following:
a. The Septuagint (LXX) - Except II Esdras.
b. Codex Alexandrinus (A) - Also contains III & IV Maccabees
c. Codex Vaticanus (B) - Except I & II Maccabees and The Prayer of Manassah
d. Codex Sinaiticus (Aleph)
e. Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus (C) - Includes Wisdom of Solomon and Ecclesiasticus
f. Chester Beatty Papyri - Fragments of Ecclesiasticus
g. The Dead Sea Scrolls - Some apocryphal writing was found among the Dead Sea Scrolls - interestingly written in Greek.
h. The Writings of Church Fathers

In general, the Apocrypha were more favoured by the Western (Latin) Church Fathers. For example, Irenaeus (115-200 A.D.) quoted from the Book of Wisdom.
However, in the East, Clement of Alexandria (150-217 A.D.) recognized II Esdras. Origen (185-254 A.D.) inserted II Esdras, the Maccabees, and the Letter of Jeremiah to his canonical list.

BTW - The Septuagint (LXX) is the name commonly given in the West to the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament) produced from the third to first century BC.

2007-06-11 12:03:20 · answer #8 · answered by Marysia 7 · 2 0

Actually there were left out from the canon of the Old testament in 90 AD by a Jewish council in Jamnia. The Christians have always used them as part of scripture but the Protestants chose to believe the Jews rather than the Apostles.

Jesus Himself quotes from these Scriptures.

2007-06-11 10:08:30 · answer #9 · answered by carl 4 · 11 1

please try and use catholic sources, like the bible says "test the spirits" we must also test the sources. the catholic church did not add the books. from the books, sometimes called the apocrypha are quoted by jesus atleast 300 times. interesting how jesus thought these books were useful enough to quote from. here are catholic sources that may help you, i haven't checked out your site but i will, please try the ones i provide whenever you get the chance.

www.scripturecatholic.com
www.catholiceducation.org
www.fisheaters.com
www.ewtn.com

try specificly the second one, has a good deal of articles from catholic experts such as scott hahn, karl keating amongst others incorporating a wide range of topics including the one you are questioning here.

2007-06-11 21:57:10 · answer #10 · answered by fenian1916 5 · 1 1

You are misinformed. The Canon of Scripture was finalized once and for all time in 397 AD, and not a word of the Bible was changed by the Catholic Church at any time after that date.

2007-06-11 10:12:11 · answer #11 · answered by PaulCyp 7 · 10 2

fedest.com, questions and answers