Why did protestants take books out of the bible?

Question

Not trying to be rude, I just really do not know.

Schneb: we put the bible together, so we added genisis- you took OUR bible and edited it, i really want to know what made protestants do this

Answer 1

Most people know that Martin Luther translated the Holy Bible into German, making it more widely available to the general reader. Luther's Bible was by no means the first German translation. It was, however, enormously successful.

Martin Luther opposed many of the ancient teachings of the Church. But how could he convince people that the historic church was wrong in its beliefs, and that he was right? He needed an authority that he could appeal to, and claim was higher than that of the Universal Church. He seized upon the Bible, introducing a new doctrine, Sola Scriptura, which said that Scripture Alone could be used to define Christian doctrine. The ancient teachings,and Apostolic tradition of the Church could then be discarded as of no value whatsoever.

Although many of his teachings (and those of the other Reformers) could be backed up from certain Bible passages, read in isolation, other Bible Books clearly refuted them.

Luther, however, wanted a bible that agreed totally with his teachings. He disliked books in both the Old and New Testaments that disagreed with his teachings. He particularly disliked the New Testament Book of James, which condemned his teaching on Salvation by Faith Alone, and the Old Testament Book of Maccabees, which advocated Prayer for the Dead, and therefore could be used to justify the doctrine of Purgatory. He called the Book of James the "Epistle of Straw."

Luther therefore took the golden opportunity of his translation of the Bible into German to try to cut certain Books out of the Canon of Scripture. Of James he said, "I will not have him in my Bible in the number of truly principal works." He didn't dare remove books from the Bible entirely - that was too big a step for even him to take. What he did was to take them out of their accepted places in the Bible, and put them in a separate section, which he termed the Apocrypha. These books, he said, were not inspired by God, though they contained "many good sayings." (Luther’s Works, 35, 397)

From the Old Testament he removed the Books of Judith, Tobit, 1 Maccabees 2 Maccabees, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus and Baruch, as well as Esther and part of the Book of Daniel.

From the New Testament he removed the Books of Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation.

In fact his fellow Protestants balked at removing books from the New Testament, particularly since there was no other reason for their removal than that they contradicted Luther's views. The four New Testament Books that Luther had placed in the Apocrypha, were reinserted in future Protestant Bibles, along with most of Esther. But if Luther had had his way, Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation would not be in Protestant Bibles.

Seven Old Testament Books, however, remained excluded from Protestant Bibles. Initially the seven Books continued to be placed in a section called the Apocrypha. But since it was cheaper to print bibles without them, the seven books were slowly dropped altogether. By the 19th Century, the vast majority of Protestant Bibles did not carry the seven Books at all. Protestants began to get used to not seeing these Books in their Bibles, and to imagine that their Bibles were perfectly complete without them.

In this way Catholics came to have a Bible of 73 books, and most Protestants a Bible of 66 books. Perhaps it should cause some misgivings to Protestant readers that the number of books in their Bibles is such an ill-omened one in terms of Biblical Numerology?

The oldest existing versions of the Jewish Old Testament include the Seven Books. It is from these versions that the early Christian Scriptures were made. The best, oldest and most complete version of the Jewish Old Testament we know today is called The Septuagint, and this includes the books that Luther deleted.

Why doesn't everyone accept this? Because the Septuagint is written in Greek, not Hebrew. The Septuagint was translated between 300 and 200 BC for the growing community of Greek speaking Jews who lived in Egypt, Palestine, and around the Mediterranean. Many ancient copies are still in existence, and it formed the Old Testament text of the earliest Christian Bibles. Our names for the Old Testament books, (Genesis, Exodus etc.) come from the Greek Septuagint, not the Hebrew.

The "original" Hebrew text no longer exists. When Bibles claim to be translated from the "Original Hebrew", they are being somewhat misleading, since the oldest existing Hebrew texts of the Old Testament date back only to around 1000 AD. These are the Masoretic texts used by the Jews of the diaspora. It is these relatively late texts that lack the Seven Books.

Close examination of the Masoretic Hebrew texts also revealed a good number of errors and garbled verses that seemed to have crept into the Hebrew texts through constant recopying. Although the Jewish copyists had taken great pains to keep their copies accurate, mistakes had clearly crept in. It was clear that the once-despised Greek Septuagint version was the more accurate text.



Really, Schneb? Such as?????

Answer 2

Officially? It's kind of an ongoing process. Some people attribute that to the Council of Nicea (c. 325 A.D.), but there were previous councils for the Old Testament, and the New Testament canon is almost identical to the one that was espoused by Origen in the second century. I don't remember who exactly made the decision. If I'm not mistaken, it was the people who attended the councils. How many books? I just woke up, haven't even finished my first cup of coffee, and you expect me to remember that off the top of my head? Give me a sec and I'll go to wikipedia or something.

Answer 3

The Bible is a collection of writings by men who were inspired by the Holy Spirit. These writings were originally collected to be read as a part of liturgical services. After several hundred years, a group of writings was selected as authorized for reading in Church. Other writings were omitted. This selection was done over time by meetings of the Church fathers. The result is now know as the Bible. At the time of the Protestant "Reformation," certain writings (that had been accepted for over 1000 years) were rejected as incompatible with the new Protestant tradition.

I am not a historian, so give me some slack on dates. Thanks.

If you are interested, obtain a copy of a Catholic Bible and read the missing Chapters for yourself.

Answer 4

Presumably he was thinking that abuses in the catholic church at the time might come in part from the less canonical works in the Bible. Jewish people as I understand don't regard the extra, deuterocanonical stuff in the Catholic Old Testament on the same level as the Law, Prophets and Writings. You can have a thin-set canon or a fat-set one. With the fat one you can extra and still useful teachings which may also have some errors. So the 'thin one' might seem more preferable at a time when it seemed the established Western Church organisation had badly strayed from the meaning of the gospel.

Answer 5

protestants books bible

Answer 6

Because some of those books contained very straightforward teaching that refuted the new doctrines being introduced by Luther - doctrines that no Christian on earth had ever heard of before - like sola scriptura, sola fide, and rejection of Purgatory. Luther fully intended to trash three New Testament books as well, but fortunately his followers wouldn't hear of throwing out the writings of the Apostles themselves, so the New Testament remained intact. As a result, Protestant Bibles contain only 66 of the original 73 divinely inspired books of the Holy Bible. If their founder had his way they would have only 63 books.

Answer 7

The astrology is almost certainly the better recognized and far more well-liked strategy that people use to manual their lifestyle decisions, but in accordance to Numerologist from here https://tr.im/h8r3k , numerology is easy to understand and much less complicated to recognize.
Numerologist is site that can support men and women find out about the study of numerology, which can give people the information, and skills they need to make lifestyle choices so be the proprietor of your existence with Numerologist.

Answer 8

You need to study the history of the Bible and what was and is canonical and why the other writings were rejected as such.Catholics did not write,translate or patent God's Word.It belongs to all of mankind and God is the author by Divinely inspiring the prophets to scribe for Him.Casting stones at one another is an exercise in futility.As a Christian I've always questioned doctrine and official history.That is something very few[if any] Catholics ever do in life.I was one in the past.I know the unbiblical doctrines of your religion.You say that you're not trying to be rude,and then have the audacity to claim the Bible is yours[Catholics].

Answer 9

Why did Christians add an entire volume to the Hebrew Bible? Unfortunately there were no copywrite laws in those days so they cannot be sued for plagiarism.

Read "The Mythmaker, Paul and the Invention of Christianity" by Hyam Maccoby
.

Answer 10

Everyone with an attitude and a quill pen has taken something or added something to the bible for the last 1700 years.