Church history on the Catholic Bible vs Protestant Bible?

prodromos

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Nov 28, 2003
21,561
12,110
58
Sydney, Straya
✟1,179,025.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Is Luke holding up the Bereans as an example to follow by saying "more honorable"? Or are they equivalent to thieves as the Catholic previously mentioned and therefore their scrutinizing Paul in light of scripture was evil, just as Catholics reckon it evil for non-Catholic Christians to scrutinize Catholicism in light of scripture?
You really are demonstrating your inability to comprehend what you are reading.
I am not Catholic.
Giving an example of usage to show that "more honorable" is not the same as "honorable" does not equivocate it with the example. Ask your English teacher. Seriously.
 
Upvote 0

Anto9us

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jul 10, 2013
5,089
2,040
Texas
✟95,745.00
Country
United States
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
I got an ORTHODOX STUDY BIBLE a few years ago when my son was joining Greek Orthodox Church.
I had from many years ago THE NEW JERUSALEM BIBLE, a Catholic version.

The Orthodox and Catholic Bibles differ from each other in the ORDER of the Prophets -- and in the numbering of the Psalms. (And Orthodox has Psalm 151 and Prayer of Manasseh)

IOW, in Orthodox Bible, Daniel is last OT book -- not Malachi -- the prophetic books are NOT IN THE SAME order as Protestant or Catholic Bibles

and at certain point in Psalms; one is divided (or two are joined) and the numbering of Psalms is OFF BY ONE

so you have to know many Psalms by TWO NUMBERS - and ya have to really THINK when flipping from prophet to prophet

The ORTHODOX STUDY BIBLE has its own unique Old Testament -- based on Septuagint, not Masoretic text -- but its NEW TESTAMENT is plain New King James Version

the commentary notes throughout blow me away

----
At one point in time, the ABYSSINIAN CANON of Coptic Church included BOOK OF ENOCH in the canon - Enoch is quoted in Epistle of Jude
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Paul Yohannan
Upvote 0

Paul Yohannan

Well-Known Member
Mar 24, 2016
3,886
1,587
43
Old Route 66
✟34,744.00
Faith
Oriental Orthodox
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Republican
Far out, Paul.

I once had two versions of ENOCH -- one by R H Charles, one by Laurence...

That said, it is not read in a manner that would lead to any doctrine contrary to what one might call "vanilla Orthodoxy." For example, the demonology it contains is not accepted as dogma.
 
Upvote 0

T.C

Member
Jan 17, 2017
24
6
32
United States
✟16,691.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
You really are demonstrating your inability to comprehend what you are reading.
I am not Catholic.
Giving an example of usage to show that "more honorable" is not the same as "honorable" does not equivocate it with the example. Ask your English teacher. Seriously.
I'm shocked by the catholic responses I thought this is clear that Scripture is an authority over professed apostles. "more noble" they were fact checking Paul lol
 
Upvote 0

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
37,428
26,868
Pacific Northwest
✟731,414.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
The Protestant Church is united by the Gospel. Not in doctrine about church polity or even evangelistic methodology but by Faith in the Gospel. All protestant denominations agree 100% on the gospel, that is how the church is united not by human institutions but by the faith.

So you agree with what we Lutherans believe about the Gospel? I suspect you don't. So either not all Protestants agree, or else one of us isn't Protestant.

-CryptoLutheran
 
Upvote 0

~Anastasia~

† Handmaid of God †
Dec 1, 2013
31,133
17,455
Florida panhandle, USA
✟922,775.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
I'm shocked by the catholic responses I thought this is clear that Scripture is an authority over professed apostles. "more noble" they were fact checking Paul lol

Are you saying that Scripture (in this case the Old Testament) has authority over "professed Apostles" (like Paul) ... meaning the New Testament?

So are you saying that the Old Testament has authority over the New Testament?


The problem with that is that the OT is types, shadows, allusions. On its own, it can lead to certain misperceptions. However, the New Testament is about God revealed directly to us in the Person of Jesus Christ. For this reason, Orthodoxy views the OT through the lens of the NT, especially the Gospels and words of Christ.

I'm kind of surprised if you associate this with Catholics (which we are not) ... I thought nearly all Christians understood in this way, with the possible exception of some recent expressions heavily dependent on Judaism.
 
Upvote 0

FireDragon76

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Apr 30, 2013
30,592
18,513
Orlando, Florida
✟1,258,288.00
Country
United States
Faith
United Ch. of Christ
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
Politics
US-Democrat
So you agree with what we Lutherans believe about the Gospel? I suspect you don't. So either not all Protestants agree, or else one of us isn't Protestant.

-CryptoLutheran

Protestantism is a sociopolitical ideology bound up in northern European nationalism and individualism. It's not a real thing existing in the real world outside the mind, only as a purely negative principle without content (the so-called "Protestant Principle" of Paul Tillich, which at this point should be lead out behind the barn and shot).

Like Luther's disciple, Philip Melanchthon, said, my first name is "Christian" and my last name is "Catholic".
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

prodromos

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Nov 28, 2003
21,561
12,110
58
Sydney, Straya
✟1,179,025.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Yes Prodromos, we ARE Catholic, in the most original sense...Orthodox Catholic....NOT Roman. :)
You know that and I know that, but it isn't the sense understood by the person I was responding to. He was struggling enough without throwing that into the mix ;)
 
Upvote 0

Bob Crowley

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Dec 27, 2015
3,053
1,893
69
Logan City
✟755,482.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
I may as well throw my two cents worth as a Catholic ex-Protestant.

As far as I understand the debate, the Catholics, Protestants and Orthodox all have varying numbers of Old Testament books, but the same number of New Testament books. There's a Wikipedia link giving some details, with a quote following. In other words, the Scriptural bun fight is about Old Testament books, which means if we're going to declare which OT books are inspired, we're wandering into Jewish Scriptural territory.

They themselves didn't actually declare which of their own books were "inspired" until the challenge of Christianity meant they had to respond to the Christian claim that the Jewish Scriptures were also a part of their heritage.

In a sense the council of Trent was like that - the Council found that books that had been canonised centuries before, and accepted by tradition for centuries, now had to be formally reaffirmed in response to the Protestant challenge, when they threw out the seven "apocryphal" books. It was a reaffirmation, not an initial declaration. The Catholic Church had decided which books it would include in its canon over a millenium earlier.

Books of the Bible - Wikipedia

Different religious groups include different books in their Biblical canons, in varying orders, and sometimes divide or combine books. Christian Bibles range from the 66 books of the Protestant canon to the 81 books of the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church canon.

As a Protestant turned Catholic, I find that somehow when I read the Deuterocanonical Books (Apocrypha to Protestants), they just don't seem to have quite the same "spiritual" sense as the other OT books. I find it difficult to put my finger on it, but that's how I feel.

As for the extra books included by the Orthodox churches, I've never read them.

Now for the the definition of "inspired", just what is it?

I've never even perused the Bhagavad Gita or any of the Hindu Scriptures, let alone read them. Yet Robert Oppenheimer, on witnessing the first atomic bomb blast, which he'd helped to create as part of the Manhattan Project, muttered a line from the Bhagavad Gita...

“Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds”.

No doubt the Scriptural hard liners will disagree, but I think God was speaking through that verse, to mankind come of age, giving an inspired warning.

"If you don't change, this is what you will unleash upon the world."

In that context, at that particular time, that particular Hindu quote was inspired.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: AlexDTX
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

AlexDTX

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jun 13, 2015
4,191
2,818
✟328,934.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I may as well throw my two cents worth as a Catholic ex-Protestant.

As far as I understand the debate, the Catholics, Protestants and Orthodox all have varying numbers of Old Testament books, but the same number of New Testament books. There's a Wikipedia link giving some details, with a quote following. In other words, the Scriptural bun fight is about Old Testament books, which means if we're going to declare which OT books are inspired, we're wandering into Jewish Scriptural territory.

They themselves didn't actually declare which of their own books were "inspired" until the challenge of Christianity meant they had to respond to the Christian claim that the Jewish Scriptures were also a part of their heritage.

In a sense the council of Trent was like that - the Council found that books that had been canonised centuries before, and accepted by tradition for centuries, now had to be formally reaffirmed in response to the Protestant challenge, when they threw out the seven "apocryphal" books. It was a reaffirmation, not an initial declaration. The Catholic Church had decided which books it would include in its canon over a millenium earlier.

Books of the Bible - Wikipedia



As a Protestant turned Catholic, I find that somehow when I read the Deuterocanonical Books (Apocrypha to Protestants), they just don't seem to have quite the same "spiritual" sense as the other OT books. I find it difficult to put my finger on it, but that's how I feel.

As for the extra books included by the Orthodox churches, I've never read them.

Now for the the definition of "inspired", just what is it?

I've never even perused the Bhagavad Gita or any of the Hindu Scriptures, let alone read them. Yet Robert Oppenheimer, on witnessing the first atomic bomb blast, which he'd helped to create as part of the Manhattan Project, muttered a line from the Bhagavad Gita...

“Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds”.

No doubt the Scriptural hard liners will disagree, but I think God was speaking through that verse, to mankind come of age, giving an inspired warning.

"If you don't change, this is what you will unleash upon the world."

In that context, at that particular time, that particular Hindu quote was inspired.

Thank you for sharing your comment. I found it well written and thoughtful. You make an excellent point about God using a quote from the Bhagavad Gita. The Earth is the Lord's and the fullness therein.

I was once kicked out of house church for not qualifying my statements with, "In my opinion..." As a friend consoling me said, "If your mouth is moving it is your opinion and everyone should know it." Later a refrain from the Simon and Garfunkel song, The Boxer, kept repeating in my mind: "a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest" and I realized that God was using that refrain to comfort me and to encourage me. The song, is not inspired scripture, but it was "inspired" in that moment. Good word, friend.
 
Upvote 0

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
37,428
26,868
Pacific Northwest
✟731,414.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
They themselves didn't actually declare which of their own books were "inspired" until the challenge of Christianity meant they had to respond to the Christian claim that the Jewish Scriptures were also a part of their heritage.

The Jewish Canon was developing in parallel to the Christian one; I think probably one of the biggest instigators for having a well-defined Canon was probably the Marcionite sect. Marcion of Sinope put together his own "Bible", which constituted chiefly of a heavily edited version of Luke's Gospel along with edited versions of Paul's epistles (removing all references to God as Creator, to Israel, etc). The need for the Church to begin the process of defining its Canon may very well have been a response to Marcion and his heretical, schismatic church.

-CryptoLuthearn
 
Upvote 0

Vicomte13

Well-Known Member
Jan 6, 2016
3,655
1,816
Westport, Connecticut
✟93,837.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
As far as I understand the debate, the Catholics, Protestants and Orthodox all have varying numbers of Old Testament books, but the same number of New Testament books.

Not quite. There are several additional books in the New Testament Canon of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church.
 
Upvote 0

Anna Scott

Senior Member
May 29, 2009
997
102
Texas
✟21,987.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
. . . . .I am curious to know if why they removed those books from the OT and is it vital? I was thinking about God's can not be added and subtracted:

Revelation 22:18: "I testify to everyone who hears the words of prophecy in this book: If anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book. 19And if anyone takes away from the words of this book of prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.…"

Let's fellowship.
Questions:
- is the above scripture talking about the manuscripts or the original bible?
- Is the original manuscript was translated to the catholic bible or protestant first? I also heard about King James playing a major role.

Just letting you know I am no catholic either so no offense to the almighty pope :p

01- I've always assumed Revelation 22:18 refers to adding to/subtracting from Revelation. St. John might have known he was writing Sacred Scripture but he wouldn't necessarily have known his writings would eventually be gathered into a single volume. Mind you, best practice is to change nothing one way or the other with Sacred Scripture... which Martin Luther would've done well to remember. . . . .

Those warnings about adding to or altering text were common. Some scribes did try to help things along when copying texts.

There are other such warnings in the Bible. These are a few (Bold emphasis is mine):

Deuteronomy 4:2 New Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition (NRSVCE)

2 You must neither add anything to what I command you nor take away anything from it, but keep the commandments of the Lord your God with which I am charging you.

New Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition (NRSVCE)
New Revised Standard Version Bible: Catholic Edition, copyright © 1989, 1993 the Division of Christian Education of the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the United States of America. Used by permission. All rights reserved.

Deuteronomy 12:32 New Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition (NRSVCE)
32 a]">[a] You must diligently observe everything that I command you; do not add to it or take anything from it.

Footnotes:
  1. Deuteronomy 12:32 Ch 13.1 in Heb

Proverbs 30:5-6 New Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition (NRSVCE)
5 Every word of God proves true;
he is a shield to those who take refuge in him.
6 Do not add to his words,
or else he will rebuke you, and you will be found a liar.
_________________________________
It was quite common for scribes to make changes to the text. Sometimes, this was by accident. Scribes would skip one or more lines, when copying, not realizing it. Sometimes, they tried to clarify things--at least that's what they thought they were doing. Sometimes, they incorporated notes from the margins into the main body of text.

I stay clear of amplified versions of the Bible, because commentary is incorporated into the main body of text. People reading the text, often forget or don't realize they are reading commentary.
___________________________________

An interesting bit of English Bible history is the fact that the King James Bible contained the Apocrypha from 1611 AD to 1885, when they were removed leaving only 66 Books. So, the King James Bible contained the Apocrypha for nearly 300 years.

There were certainly religiously motivated reasons for removing the Apocrypha, but some of the motivation was purely financial. Printers realized it was cheaper to print Bibles without the Apocrypha. They thought people wouldn't notice the difference. Turns out they didn't!
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Anna Scott

Senior Member
May 29, 2009
997
102
Texas
✟21,987.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
And of course, the Words of our Lord:

Matthew 5:17-20 New Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition (NRSVCE)
The Law and the Prophets
17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not one letter,"[a] not one stroke of a letter, will pass from the law until all is accomplished. 19 Therefore, whoever breaks"[b] one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, will be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.

Footnotes:
  1. Matthew 5:18 Gk one iota
  2. Matthew 5:19 Or annuls
New Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition (NRSVCE)
New Revised Standard Version Bible: Catholic Edition, copyright © 1989, 1993 the Division of Christian Education of the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the United States of America. Used by permission. All rights reserved.
 
Upvote 0