why did Martin Luther take away some of the books from the Bible?

Question

is it because he doesn't want the Bible to be bulky? if so, he succeeded because the edited versions of the Bible is not that thick compared to the original compilation.

Answer 1

Luther did not personally take away books of the Bible; using the Hebrew canon was a consensus of the reformers. Luther wanted to go even further, but fortunately, cooler heads prevailed.

Answer 2

yet in a various thank you to ascertain the area would be to state that Rome crammed some spurious books (the Apocrypha) interior the Bible that have been in no way interior the unique Bible interior the 1st place. Luther and the reformers bumped off them for sturdy reason. Jesus quoted the prophets yet no longer the Apocrypha. Paul favored to cite a Cretan extremely than the Apocrypha (Titus a million:12). The prophets do no longer quote the Apocrypha. Orthodox Jews in basic terms know the regulation, the Psalms and the Prophets: 39 books. No apocrypha for them. Open up Isaiah and count selection the chapters. Sixty-six, like a King James Bible. examine financial disaster 39. Now examine financial disaster 40 and observe the abrupt exchange in tone. Thirty-9 books interior the previous testomony, twenty-seven interior the recent. The Bible itself defines its contents in Isaiah. Luther and the reformers have been placing issues without delay. Rev. 22:18, Prov 30:6

Answer 3

Martin Luther did not remove books From the Bible. It is a simple historical fact that Luther’s translation of the Bible contained all of its books. Some Protestants might be surprised to learn that Luther also translated the Apocrypha.

Up until the time of the Reformation there was more than one opinion regarding the books to be included in the Bible. St. Augustine, for example, while revering some books, considered them to be "deutero-canonical", that is, having secondary authority not on a par with the fully canonical books.

The Protestant churches (not just Martin Luther) considered the canon of Old Testament Scripture in use by the Jews of Palestine and recognized by Christ and his apostles to be the divinely given canon of OT Scripture. The other books (referred to by Protestants as "The Apocrypha") were never part of the Jewish canon and circulated in communities outside Palestine. There was actually a much larger library of such books, written in Aramaic or in Greek, some of which are still extant. The Reformers did not originate their view of the canon (i.e., take books out of the Bible, as if all the church before them had accepted all the books found in the Catholic Bible).

The "Catholic" books were not officially declared to be part of the Bible until the Council of Trent, an action in reaction to the Protestant Reformers, and not a council of the whole church.

The books that were removed supported such things as: Prayers for the dead (Tobit 12:12; 2 Maccabees 12:39-45); Purgatory (Wisdom 3:1-7); Intercession of saints in heaven (2 Maccabees 15:14); Intercession of angels (Tobit 12:12-15)

Answer 4

Well the 7 were official removed by the council that translated the bible, but Luther was the first to question them.

They also went after the Book of James and the Evangelicals favorite book to specualte from (*Gasp*) Revelation.

Why the books prove Orthodox and Catholic beliefs and directly contradict the 5 solas.

Also what has never made sense was they supposedly go rid of them because wanted to adopt the "Hebrew canon" only well the Hebrew canon of the old Testament only had 24 books so how did the protestants end up with 39?

Answer 5

He took them out a sign of his rejection of the catholic Church. There was a canon of scripture adopted by the jewish religious teachers of Jesus' time, so he adopted that canon.

The ironic thing is that the Jewish religious leaders rejected the Septauint as a sign of their rejection of Jesus Christ as the Messiah because Jesus and His Apostles used the Septaguint.

Martin Luther and Protestants use a canon of scripture adopted by the Jewish religious leaders that rejected Jesus as the Messiah.

Answer 6

Actually the 7 books were part of the Jewish canon. In short some Rabbi's decided to remove them. The Catholic church preserved them and kept them as part of their canon. They did not add to the bible.

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).

Answer 7

Luther wouldn't have cared about the bulk.

He was trying to pick out the works that were, in his judgment, the most appropriate to be included in the Scriptural canon.

Answer 8

Because he was following the tradition set in the 300s by the men who canonized the bible.

Christians should really spend time reading up on their lives to see what types of men determined which books were inspired and which weren't it is quite eye opening.

Answer 9

The Catholic Church added some how-to guides like "how to perform an exorcism." They simply weren't necessary.

Answer 10

No !!! Who ever did it did the right thing !!!
The New Testament said that the Jews were given the oracles of God and the OT as they had them were without the additional 5 books and 2 additional chapters !!! Hooray to whomever !!!