How Do We Know What Books Are In The Bible?

This flaky (one of other problems) forum software insists on repeatedly placing a close quote tag at the end of my reply, thus hiding it. So I will try to repost on a new reply.

thecolorsblend said:

The truth of apostolic succession really isn’t related to impeccability of character. Rather, it’s merely a line of succession which can be traced all the way back to Our Lord during His earthly ministry.

Click to expand...

Actually according to the pastoral epistles character does matter. Even in Revelation 2-3 we see God warn He would take lampstands away from the disobedient churches and leaders.

Deadworm said: ↑

Does the LXX matter or do we just ignore it?

redleghunter said:

Actually according to the pastoral epistles character does matter. Even in Revelation 2-3 we see God warn He would take lampstands away from the disobedient churches and leaders.

Click to expand...

Indeed... unless they changed their ways. And while there have been some, shall we say, less than impeccable clergy over the millennia, it would be a bit preposterous to claim that it was mostly only vile, horrible people serving as clergy at any point in time. The Church's track record on this is hardly perfect but the overwhelming majority of Catholic clergy have been good, faithful and obedient men.

thecolorsblend said:

The truth of apostolic succession really isn’t related to impeccability of character. Rather, it’s merely a line of succession which can be traced all the way back to Our Lord during His earthly ministry.

Click to expand...

Actually it must be traced back to the Lord.

PeaceByJesus said:

What?! What universe is that from? You think the Lord and His disciples abundantly invoked Scripture as a superfluous source, as if some itinerant preachers were to be accepted based upon their own claims to authority? Where do even think the place of valid verse invalid supernatural attestation was based upon?

Click to expand...

I know that Jesus never quoted the new testament, he spoke a good number of things that later Christian writers (Luke, Paul, Mark and so forth) wrote into the new testament. What you've missed in your post is the rest of what I wrote in the paragraph from my post that you partially quoted.
Jesus and the apostles quoted from some of the old testament books but they didn't quote from the new testament. That was because the new testament didn't yet exist. They also didn't quote from some old testament books - if you do not already know you can check and find out for yourself what books they did not quote.

The truth is that the new testament is not in any "Jewish canon" predating Jesus life and times. And the truth is that the bibles that Christians use are not "Jewish" but Christian. It is traditions that establish the canonical books that are found in Christian bibles.

Did the writers of the NT accept the Septuagint (LXX) as scripture?

Did Jesus accept the LXX as scripture?

Given that Koine Greek was the lingua franca of the Roman Empire and on the basis of what we read in the NT the conclusion would be yes.

That is why I accept that they be included, however I recognise that there is also stuff there that sits awkwardly - so the caveat that those books may not be used on their own to determine what must be believed makes sense to me. Yes I am aware that that is the Anglican position of the 39 articles, but I do get it. I don't think those works should be just blown away.

Philip_B said:

The 27 books of the NT canon is essentially uncontested.

The 39 books of the OT canon are aldo the subject of broad consensus.

The 14 books, usually described as the deuterocanonicals are accepted broadly by the RCC and the EO which accounts for most of Christendom. Anglicans accept the deuterocanonicals on the condition that they may not be used to determine what must be believed of necessity for salvation. The churches if the reformation discount them.

One of the best arguments for accepting them in some sense is that the witness of the scripitures is that there were known and used by Jesus and the writers of the NT.

So 90% of the church accepts 80 books and 10% of the church accepts 66 books. Broadly speaking it is not much of a debate.

Consensus fidelium.

Click to expand...

Are you including the Catholics who have excommunicated themselves by not adhering to the CCC? We were told on another thread Catholics excommunicated themselves by not following the church teachings. So that number of yours may be off quite a bit.

redleghunter said:

Are you including the Catholics who have excommunicated themselves by not adhering to the CCC? We were told on another thread Catholics excommunicated themselves by not following the church teachings. So that number of yours may be off quite a bit.

Click to expand...

CCC? Not sure that that is, possibly the Creed of the Council of Constantinople?

Philip_B said:

You make the statement very loud, however given that they were almost certainly relied upon by Jesus and the writers of the NT I wonder if the claim is that strong.

Click to expand...

I see this a lot that Jesus quoted the apocryphal books.

Every time someone drops a list it is not very difficult to find out there are no quotes then the argument shifts to allusions. I point out every allusion is to be found in the 39 books of the OT.

There's a reason. Some of the apocryphal books quote or allude to the 39 books mainly from Proverbs, and the Law.

There are no new revelations in the apocryphal books, no prophet speaking nor king speaking. The only thing we learn is dragons were real at some point and if we boil and then burn fish guts we can ward off demons on our wedding night.

Philip_B said:

Please explain!


This reads like a desire to distance yourself from Rome, not a real duscussion of the canon.

As an Anglican I find the middle way position of receivibg the Deuterocanonicals and limiting the authority a meaningful balance. I can't just write them off as there is some stuff of great vakue there. Look ar Wisdom on the serpent in the wilderness.

Click to expand...

The thread is really about how can one know what is the canon meaning authority.

thecolorsblend said:

Precisely that. The Pope's teaching authority and infallibility exist independently of his personal character.

Click to expand...

That's convenient.

I wrote you in my letter not to associate with immoral people; (1 Corinthians 5:9)

I think a few Medici popes fit that description. Therefore at some points in history the laity were not to associate with a pope yet accept their infallible decrees.

Interesting system.

Philip_B said:

CCC? Not sure that that is, possibly the Creed of the Council of Constantinople?

Click to expand...

Catechism of the Catholic Church.

We know that NT references the OT. This is a list of references in the NT that either do or seem to use or allude to passages in the Deuterocanonicals. I didn't do the list, however I suspect that the length of it indicates that there has been substantive use of the LXX in the NT by the writers of the NT. The list may not be absolutely definitive according to the author.

I think I would like to formally withdraw my earlier suggestion that Jesus quoted from the LXX as he almost certainly was speaking in Aramaic rather than Koine Greek. However I will accept that the writers of the NT had a preference to use the LXX over the Masoretic text.

I accept a lot of the argument about the Deuterocanonicals, however I believe they have a place, and whilst we may hold them of a lesser value that the Masoretic Canon, I still believe they have a place.

LXX references/allusions in the NT
Matthew
Matthew 4:4 Wisdom 16:26
Matthew 4:15 1 Maccabees 5:15
Matthew 5:18 Baruch 4:1
Matthew 5:28 Sirach 9:8
Matthew 5:2ss Sirach 25:7-12
Matthew 5:4 Sirach 48:24
Matthew 6:7 Sirach 7:14
Matthew 6:9 Sirach 23:1, 4
Matthew 6:10 1 Maccabees 3:60
Matthew 6:12 Sirach 28:2
Matthew 6:13 Sirach 33:1
Matthew 6:20 Sirach 29:10s
Matthew 6:23 Sirach 14:10
Matthew 6:33 Wisdom 7:11
Matthew 7:12 Tobit 4:15
Matthew 7:12 Sirach 31:15
Matthew 7:16 Sirach 27:6
Matthew 8:11 Baruch 4:37
Matthew 8:21 Tobit 4:3
Matthew 9:36 Judith 11:19
Matthew 9:38 1 Maccabees 12:17
Matthew 10:16 Sirach 13:17
Matthew 11:14 Sirach 48:10
Matthew 11:22 Judith 16:17
Matthew 11:25 Tobit 7:17
Matthew 11:25 Sirach 51:1
Matthew 11:28 Sirach 24:19
Matthew 11:28 Sirach 51:23
Matthew 11:29 Sirach 6:24s
Matthew 11:29 Sirach 6:28s
Matthew 11:29 Sirach 51:26s
Matthew 12:4 2 Maccabees 10:3
Matthew 12:5 Sirach 40:15
Matthew 13:44 Sirach 20:30s
Matthew 16:18 Wisdom 16:13
Matthew 16:22 1 Maccabees 2:21
Matthew 16:27 Sirach 35:22
Matthew 17:11 Sirach 48:10
Matthew 18:10 Tobit 12:15
Matthew 20:2 Tobit 5:15
Matthew 22:13 Wisdom 17:2
Matthew 23:38 Tobit 14:4
Matthew 24:15 1 Maccabees 1:54
Matthew 24:15 2 Maccabees 8:17
Matthew 24:16 1 Maccabees 2:28
Matthew 25:35 Tobit 4:17
Matthew 25:36 Sirach 7:32-35
Matthew 26:38 Sirach 37:2
Matthew 27:24 Daniel 13:46
Matthew 27:43 Wisdom 2:13
Matthew 27:43 Wisdom 2:18-20

Mark
Mark 1:15 Tobit 14:5
Mark 4:5 Sirach 40:15
Mark 4:11 Wisdom 2:22
Mark 5:34 Judith 8:35
Mark 6:49 Wisdom 17:15
Mark 8:37 Sirach 26:14
Mark 9:31 Sirach 2:18
Mark 9:48 Judith 16:17
Mark 10:18 Sirach 4:1
Mark 14:34 Sirach 37:2
Mark 15:29 Wisdom 2:17s

Luke
Luke 1:17 Sirach 48:10
Luke 1:19 Tobit 12:15
Luke 1:42 Judith 13:18
Luke 1:52 Sirach 10:14
Luke 2:29 Tobit 11:9
Luke 2:37 Judith 8:6
Luke 6:35 Wisdom 15:1
Luke 7:22 Sirach 48:5
Luke 9:8 Sirach 48:10
Luke 10:17 Tobit 7:17
Luke 10:19 Sirach 11:19
Luke 10:21 Sirach 51:1
Luke 12:19 Tobit 7:10
Luke 12:20 Wisdom 15:8
Luke 13:25 Tobit 14:4
Luke 13:27 1 Maccabees 3:6
Luke 13:29 Baruch 4:37
Luke 14:13 Tobit 2:2
Luke 15:12 1 Maccabees 10:29 [30]
Luke 15:12 Tobit 3:17
Luke 18:7 Sirach 35:22
Luke 19:44 Wisdom 3:7
Luke 21:24 Tobit 14:5
Luke 21:24 Sirach 28:18
Luke 21:25 Wisdom 5:22
Luke 24:4 2 Maccabees 3:26
Luke 24:31 2 Maccabees 3:34
Luke 24:50 Sirach 50:20s
Luke 24:53 Sirach 50:22

John
John 1:3 Wisdom 9:1
John 3:8 Sirach 16:21
John 3:12 Wisdom 9:16
John 3:12 Wisdom 18:15s
John 3:13 Baruch 3:29
John 3:28 1 Maccabees 9:39
John 3:32 Tobit 4:6
John 4:9 Sirach 50:25s
John 4:48 Wisdom 8:8
John 5:18 Wisdom 2:16
John 6:35 Sirach 24:21
John 7:38 Sirach 24:40, 43[30s]
John 8:44 Wisdom 2:24
John 8:53 Sirach 44:19
John 10:20 Wisdom 5:4
John 10:22 1 Maccabees 4:59
John 14:15 Wisdom 6:18
John 15:9s Wisdom 3:9
John 17:3 Wisdom 15:3
John 20:22 Wisdom 15:11

Acts
Acts 1:10 2 Maccabees 3:26
Acts 1:18 Wisdom 4:19
Acts 2:4 Sirach 48:12
Acts 2:11 Sirach 36:7
Acts 2:39 Sirach 24:32
Acts 4:24 Judith 9:12
Acts 5:2 2 Maccabees 4:32
Acts 5:12 1 Maccabees 12:6
Acts 5:21 2 Maccabees 1:10
Acts 5:39 2 Maccabees 7:19
Acts 9:1-29 2 Maccabees 3:24-40
Acts 9:2 1 Maccabees 15:21
Acts 9:7 Wisdom 18:1
Acts 10:2 Tobit 12:8
Acts 10:22 1 Maccabees 10:25
Acts 10:22 1 Maccabees 11:30, 33 etc.
Acts 10:26 Wisdom 7:1
Acts 10:30 2 Maccabees 11:8
Acts 10:34 Sirach 35:12s
Acts 10:36 Wisdom 6:7
Acts 10:36 Wisdom 8:3 etc.
Acts 11:18 Wisdom 12:19
Acts 12:5 Judith 4:9
Acts 12:10 Sirach 19:26
Acts 12:23 Judith 16:17
Acts 12:23 Sirach 48:21
Acts 12:23 1 Maccabees 7:41
Acts 12:23 2 Maccabees 9:9
Acts 13:10 Sirach 1:30
Acts 13:17 Wisdom 19:10
Acts 14:14 Judith 14:16s
Acts 14:15 Wisdom 7:3
Acts 15:4 Judith 8:26
Acts 16:14 2 Maccabees 1:4
Acts 17:23 Wisdom 14:20
Acts 17:23 Wisdom 15:17
Acts 17:24, 25 Wisdom 9:1
Acts 17:24 Tobit 7:17
Acts 17:24 Wisdom 9:9
Acts 17:26 Wisdom 7:18
Acts 17:27 Wisdom 13:6
Acts 17:29 Wisdom 13:10
Acts 17:30 Sirach 28:7
Acts 19:27 Wisdom 3:17
Acts 19:28 Daniel 14:18, 41
Acts 20:26 Daniel 13:46
Acts 20:32 Wisdom 5:5
Acts 20:35 Sirach 4:31
Acts 21:26 1 Maccabees 3:49
Acts 22.9 Wisdom 18.1
Acts 24:2 2 Maccabees 4:6
Acts 26:18 Wisdom 5:5
Acts 26:25 Judith 10:13

Romans
Romans 1:19-32 Wisdom 13-15
Romans 1:21 Wisdom 13:1
Romans 1:23 Wisdom 11:15
Romans 1:23 Wisdom 12:24
Romans 1:28 2 Maccabees 6:4
Romans 2:4 Wisdom 11:23
Romans 2:11 Sirach 35:12s
Romans 2:15 Wisdom 17:11
Romans 4:13 Sirach 44:21
Romans 4:17 Sirach 44:19
Romans 5:5 Sirach 18:11
Romans 5:12 Wisdom 2:24
Romans 9:4 Sirach 44:12
Romans 9:4 2 Maccabees 6:23
Romans 9:19 Wisdom 12:12
Romans 9:21 Wisdom 15:7
Romans 9:31 Sirach 27:8
Romans 9:31 Wisdom 2:11
Romans 10.7 Wisdom 16.13
Romans 10:6 Baruch 3:29
Romans 11:4 2 Maccabees 2:4
Romans 11:15 Sirach 10:20s
Romans 11:33 Wisdom 17:1
Romans 12:15 Sirach 7:34
Romans 13:1 Sirach 4:27
Romans 13:1 Wisdom 6:3s
Romans 13.10 Wisdom 6.18
Romans 15:4 1 Maccabees 12:9
Romans 15:8 Sirach 36:20

1 Corinthians
1 Corinthians 1:24 Wisdom 7:24s
1 Corinthians 2:16 Wisdom 9:13
1 Corinthians 2:9 Sirach 1:10
1 Corinthians 4:13 Tobit 5:19
1 Corinthians 4:14 Wisdom 11:10
1 Corinthians 6:2 Wisdom 3:8
1 Corinthians 6:12 Sirach 37:28
1 Corinthians 6:13 Sirach 36:18
1 Corinthians 6:18 Sirach 23:17
1 Corinthians 7:19 Sirach 32:23
1 Corinthians 9:19 Sirach 6:19
1 Corinthians 9:25 Wisdom 4:2
1 Corinthians 10:1 Wisdom 19:7s
1 Corinthians 10:20 Baruch 4:7
1 Corinthians 10:23 Sirach 37:28
1 Corinthians 11:7 Sirach 17:3
1 Corinthians 11:7 Wisdom 2:23
1 Corinthians 11:24 Wisdom 16:6
1 Corinthians 15:29 2 Maccabees 12:43s
1 Corinthians 15:32 Wisdom 2:5s
1 Corinthians 15:34 Wisdom 13:1

2 Corinthians
2 Corinthians 5:1, 4 Wisdom 9:15
2 Corinthians 12:12 Wisdom 10:16

Galatians
Galatians 2:6 Sirach 35:13
Galatians 4:4 Tobit 14:5
Galatians 6:1 Wisdom 17:17

Ephesians
Ephesians 1:6 Sirach 45:1
Ephesians 1:6 Sirach 46:13
Ephesians 1:17 Wisdom 7:7
Ephesians 4:14 Sirach 5:9
Ephesians 4:24 Wisdom 9:3
Ephesians 6:12 Wisdom 5:17
Ephesians 6:14 Wisdom 5:18
Ephesians 6:16 Wisdom 5:19, 21

Philippians
Philippians 4:5 Wisdom 2:19
Philippians 4:13 Wisdom 7:23
Philippians 4:18 Sirach 35:6

Colossians
Colossians 2:3 Sirach 1:24s

1 Thessalonians
1 Thessalonians 3:11 Judith 12:8
1 Thessalonians 4:6 Sirach 5:3
1 Thessalonians 4:13 Wisdom 3:18
1 Thessalonians 5:1 Wisdom 8:8
1 Thessalonians 5:2 Wisdom 18:14s
1 Thessalonians 5:3 Wisdom 17:14
1 Thessalonians 5:8 Wisdom 5:18

2 Thessalonians
2 Thessalonians 2:1 2 Maccabees 2:7

1 Timothy
1 Timothy 1:17 Tobit 13:7, 11
1 Timothy 2:2 2 Maccabees 3:11
1 Timothy 2:2 Baruch 1:11s
1 Timothy 6:15 Sirach 46:5
1 Timothy 6:15 2 Maccabees 12:15
1 Timothy 6:15 2 Maccabees 13:4

2 Timothy
2 Timothy 2:19 Sirach 17:26
2 Timothy 2:19 Sirach 23:10v1
2 Timothy 2:19 Sirach 35:3
2 Timothy 4:8 Wisdom 5:16
2 Timothy 4:17 1 Maccabees 2:60

Titus
Titus 2:11 2 Maccabees 3:30
Titus 3:4 Wisdom 1:6

Hebrews
Hebrews 1:3 Wisdom 7:25s
Hebrews 2:5 Sirach 17:17
Hebrews 4.12 Wisdom 18.15s
Hebrews 4:12 Wisdom 7:22-30
Hebrews 5:6 1 Maccabees 14:41
Hebrews 7:22 Sirach 29:14ss
Hebrews 11:5 Sirach 44:16
Hebrews 11:5 Wisdom 4:10
Hebrews 11:6 Wisdom 10:17
Hebrews 11.10 Wisdom 13.1
Hebrews 11:10 2 Maccabees 4:1
Hebrews 11:17 1 Maccabees 2:52
Hebrews 11:17 Sirach 44:20
Hebrews 11:27 Sirach 2:2
Hebrews 11:28 Wisdom 18:25
Hebrews 11:35 2 Maccabees 6:18-7:42
Hebrews 12:4 2 Maccabees 13:14
Hebrews 12:9 2 Maccabees 3:24
Hebrews 12:12 Sirach 25:23
Hebrews 12:17 Wisdom 12:10
Hebrews 12:21 1 Maccabees 13:2
Hebrews 13:7 Sirach 33:19
Hebrews 13:7 Wisdom 2:17

James
James 1:1 2 Maccabees 1:27
James 1:13 Sirach 15:11-20
James 1:19 Sirach 5:11
James 1:2 Sirach 2:1
James 1:2 Wisdom 3:4s
James 1:21 Sirach 3:17
James 2:13 Tobit 4:10
James 2:23 Wisdom 7:27
James 3:2 Sirach 14:1
James 3:6 Sirach 5:13
James 3:9 Sirach 23:1, 4
James 3:10 Sirach 5:13
James 3:10 Sirach 28:12
James 3:13 Sirach 3:17
James 4:2 1 Maccabees 8:16
James 4:11 Wisdom 1:11
James 5:3 Judith 16:17
James 5:3 Sirach 29:10
James 5:4 Tobit 4:14
James 5:6 Wisdom 2:10
James 5:6 Wisdom 2:12
James 5:6 Wisdom 2:19

1 Peter
1 Peter 1:3 Sirach 16:12
1 Peter 1:7 Sirach 2:5
1 Peter 2:25 Wisdom 1:6
1 Peter 4:19 2 Maccabees 1:24 etc.
1 Peter 5:7 Wisdom 12:13

2 Peter
2 Peter 2:2 Wisdom 5:6
2 Peter 2:7 Wisdom 10:6
2 Peter 3:9 Sirach 35:19
2 Peter 3:18 Sirach 18:10

1 John
1 John 5:21 Baruch 5:72

Jude
Jude 13 Wisdom 14:1

Revelation
Revelation 1:18 Sirach 18:1
Revelation 2:10 2 Maccabees 13:14
Revelation 2:12 Wisdom 18:16 [15]
Revelation 2:17 2 Maccabees 2:4-8
Revelation 4:11 Sirach 18:1
Revelation 4:11 Wisdom 1:14
Revelation 5:7 Sirach 1:8
Revelation 7:9 2 Maccabees 10:7
Revelation 8:1 Wisdom 18:14
Revelation 8:2 Tobit 12:15
Revelation 8:3 Tobit 12:12
Revelation 8:7 Sirach 39:29
Revelation 8:7 Wisdom 16:22
Revelation 9:3 Wisdom 16:9
Revelation 9:4 Sirach 44:18 etc.
Revelation 11:19 2 Maccabees 2:4-8
Revelation 17:14 2 Maccabees 13:4
Revelation 18:2 Baruch 4:35
Revelation 19:1 Tobit 13:18
Revelation 19:11 2 Maccabees 3:25
Revelation 19:11 2 Maccabees 11:8
Revelation 19:16 2 Maccabees 13:4
Revelation 20:12s Sirach 16:12
Revelation 21:19s Tobit 13:17


Source: Deuterocanonical References in the New Testament

thecolorsblend said:

What you describe sounds a bit similar to "prima scriptura", which holds that sacred scripture is of primary authority (hence the name, I guess) but other sources of authority exist as well.

Click to expand...

HEBREWS.1: = 1 God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, 2 has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds; ...

.... 2:1 Therefore we must give the more earnest heed to the things we have heard, lest we drift away. 2 For if the word spoken through angels proved steadfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just reward, 3 how shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation, which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed to us by those who heard Him, 4 God also bearing witness both with signs and wonders, with various miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit, according to His own will?

.
JOHN.20: = 28 And Thomas answered and said to Him, “My Lord and my God!”

29 Jesus said to him, “Thomas, because you have seen Me, you have believed. Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”

That You May Believe
30 And truly Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book; 31 but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name.

.
LUKE.16: = 27 “Then he said, ‘I beg you therefore, father, that you would send him to my father’s house, 28 for I have five brothers, that he may testify to them, lest they also come to this place of torment.’
29 Abraham said to him, ‘They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.’ 30 And he said, ‘No, father Abraham; but if one goes to them from the dead, they will repent.’
31 But he said to him, ‘If they do not hear Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rise from the dead.’”

.
Cf; Deuterocanonical books - Wikipedia

The deuterocanonical books (from the Greek meaning "belonging to the second canon") is a term adopted in 16th century by the Roman Catholic Church to denote those books and passages of the Christian Old Testament, as defined in 1546 by the Council of Trent, that were not found in the Hebrew Bible.

Click to expand...

GingerBeer said:

I know that Jesus never quoted the new testament, he spoke a good number of things that later Christian writers (Luke, Paul, Mark and so forth) wrote into the new testament. What you've missed in your post is the rest of what I wrote in the paragraph from my post that you partially quoted.
The authority to decide what is and what is not "scripture" was given by Jesus to the church. That authority predates the completion of the new testament. The church never needed bible verses to prove its credentials. But since the church created the new testament it also included the words that Jesus spoke authorising the church to teach the gospel and to write scripture.[

Click to expand...

Once again you falsely accuse me of leaving out portions while it is you who ignore things I said which require a response pertinent to your argument.
In the post you are referring to I quoted you saying,
The authority to decide what is and what is not "scripture" was given by Jesus to the church. That authority predates the completion of the new testament. The church never needed bible verses to prove its credentials.

And then,
But since the church created the new testament it also included the words that Jesus spoke authorising the church to teach the gospel and to write scripture.

And now you try to deal with the reproof of your absurd statement, "The church never needed bible verses to prove its credentials" by saying,

Jesus and the apostles quoted from some of the old testament books but they didn't quote from the new testament. That was because the new testament didn't yet exist. They also didn't quote from some old testament books - if you do not already know you can check and find out for yourself what books they did not quote.

Click to expand...

Which response itself is absurd, for Scripture texts did not begin with the NT, while the fact is that the NT church and its writers abundantly invoked the OT in support of its claims:
Mat. 1:22; 2:5,15,17,18; 3:3; 4:4,6,7,10,14,15; 5:17,18,33,38,43; 8:4,17; 9:13; 11:10; 12:3,5,17-21,40,41; 13:14,15,35; 14:3,4,7-9;19:4,5,17-19; 21:4,5,13,16,42; 22:24,29,31,32,37,39,43,44; 23:35;24:15; 26:24,31,54,56; 27:9,10,35; Mark 1:2,44; 7:3,10; 9:12,13; 10:4,5; 11:17; 12:10,19,24,26 13:14; 14:21,47,49; 15:28; Lk. 2:22,23.24; 3:4,5,6; 4:4,6-8,10,12,16,17,18,20,25-27; 5:14; 7:27; 8:10; 10:26,27; 16:29,31; 18:20,31; 19:46; 20:17,18, 28,37,42,43; 22:37; 23:30; 24:25.27,32,44,45,46; Jn. 1:45; 2:17,22; 3:14; 5:39,45-47; 6:31,45; 7:19,22,23,38,42,51,52; 8:5,17; 9:26; 10:34,35; 12:14,15,38-41; 15:25; 17:12; 19:24,28,36,37; 20:9,31; 21:24; Acts 1:20; 2:16-21,25-28,34,35; 3:22,23,25; 4:11,25,26; 7:3,7,27,28,32,33,37,40,42,43,49,50,53; 8:28,30,32,33; 10:43;13:15,27,29,33,39; 15:5,15-17,21; 17:2,11; 18:13.24,28; 21:20,24; 22:12; 23:3,5; 24:14; 26:22; 28:23,26,27; Rom 1:2,17; 2:10-21,31; 4:3,7,17,18,23,24; 5:13; 7:1-3,7,12,14,16; 8:4,36; 9:4,9,12,13,15,17,25-29,33; 10:11,15,19; 11:2-4,8,9,26,27; 12:19,20; 13:8-10; 14:11; 15:3,4,9-12,21; 16:16,26,27; 1Cor. 1:19,31; 2:9; 3:19,20; 4:6; 6:16; 7:39; 9:9,10; 10:7,11,26,28; 14:21,34; 15:3,4,32,45,54,55; 2Cor. 1:13; 2:3,4; 3:7,15; 4:13; 6:2;16; 7:12; 8:15; 9:9; 10:17; 13:1; Gal. 3:6,8,10-13; 4:22,27,30; 5:14; Eph. 3:3,4; (cf. 2Pt. 3:16); Eph. 4:8; 5:31; 6:2,3; (cf. Dt. 5:16); Col. 4:16; 1Thes. 5:27; 1Tim. 5:18; 2Tim. 3:14,16,17; Heb. 1:5,7-13; 2:5-8,12,13; 3:7-11,15; 4:3,4,7; 5:5,6; 6:14; 7:17,21,28; 8:5,8-13; 9:20; 10:5-916,17,28,30,37; 11:18; 12:5,6,12,26,29; 13:5,6,22; James 2:8,23; 4:5; 1Pet. 1:16,24,25; 2:6,7,22; 3:10-12; 5:5,12; 2Pet. 1:20,21; 2:22; 3:1,15,16; 1Jn. 1:4; 2:1,7,8,12,13,21; 5:13; Rev. 1:3,11,19; 2:1,8,12,18; 3:1,7,12,14; 14:13; 19:9;

The fact that no every book is cited from is irrelevant to the fact that the NT church appealed to and treated Scripture as the supreme substantive established standard, which doctrinal and prophetic foundation the church was built upon, even its very gospel:

Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God, (Which he had promised afore by his prophets in the holy scriptures,) (Romans 1:1-2)
But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith: (Romans 16:25)

Thus contrary to Cath imagination, the church did indeed need Scripture texts to prove its credentials, both in word and in power.

The truth is that the new testament is not in any "Jewish canon" predating Jesus life and times. .

Click to expand...

Which is also irrelevant as meaning the actual writings, but that the NT flows from the Old, upon which it is based and fulfills, is the reality. Without which you have some itinerant preachers preaching a novel religion to a people who were admonished, "To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them." (Isaiah 8:20)

Thus,

• And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures, (Luke 24:44-45)
• And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures, (Acts 17:2)
• These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so. (Acts 17:11)
• For he mightily convinced the Jews, and that publickly, shewing by the scriptures that Jesus was Christ. (Acts 18:28)

Meanwhile the role of valid supernatural attestation (by which Gentiles could be persuaded) flowed from the OT and was subject to testing by it also.

And the truth is that the bibles that Christians use are not "Jewish" but Christian

Click to expand...

Actually most of even your own Bible is from the Jews, including the LXX, if not as the 1 century containing the LXX, while to be a Christian is to be a true Jew. (Rm. 2:28,29)

It is traditions that establish the canonical books that are found in Christian bibles.

Click to expand...

As meaning NT writings being recognized and progressively established as the body of OT writings were which were held as authoritative, yes, and which valid councils are to recognize and affirm. But such are not assuredly infallible, nor the essential basis for the establishment of such writings, which instead, as with the prophets, is essentially due their under Divine qualities and attestation, including their conflative and complementary nature with that which was prior established. I do not need the FDA to tell me grape juice is good.

Afra said:

The Catholic Church does not make Sacred Scripture the inspired word of God, of course. God inspired the books of Sacred Scripture, not the Church..

Click to expand...

Correct, though some Catholics argue otherwise.

Your problem is that you cannot recognized God's word when you see it. Your Bible lacks 7 books that are the inspired word of God. If you were a Catholic Christian, you would know which books are inspired, and which books are not inspired.

Click to expand...

Meaning that so many of your saints were not Catholic.

● Athanasius of Alexandria (c. 367), excluded the Book of Esther (which never actually mentions God and its canonicity was disputed among Jews for some time) among the "7 books not in the canon but to be read" along with the Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach (Ecclesiasticus), Judith, Tobit, the Didache, and the Shepherd of Hermas. (Athanasius of Alexandria - Wikipedia)

Gregory of Nazianzus (330 – 390) concurred with the canon of Anastasius.

● The list of O.T. books by the Council of Laodicea (363) may have been added later, and is that of Athanasius but with Esther included. It also contains the standard canon of the N.T. except that it omits Revelation, as does Cyril, thought to be due to excessive use of it by the Montanist cults

● John of Damascus, eminent theologian of the Eastern Church in the 8th century, and Nicephorus, patriarch of Constantinople in the 9th century also rejected the apocrypha, as did others, in part or in whole.

● The fourth century historian Euesibius also provides an early Christian list of both Old and New Testament books. In his Ecclesiastical History (written about A.D. 324), in three places quoting from Josephus, Melito and Origen, lists of the books (slightly differing) according to the Hebrew Canon. These he calls in the first place 'the Canonical Scriptures of the Old Testament, undisputed among the Hebrews;' and again,'the acknowledged Scriptures of the Old Testament;' and, lastly, 'the Holy Scriptures of the Old Testament.' In his Chronicle he distinctly separates the Books of Maccabees from the 'Divine Scriptures;' and elsewhere mentions Ecclesiasticus and Wisdom as 'controverted' books. (Eusebius on the Canon of Scripture)

● Cyril of Jerusalem (d. circa. 385 AD) exhorts his readers “Of these read the two and twenty books, but have nothing to do with the apocryphal writings. Study earnestly these only which we read openly in the Church. Far wiser and more pious than thyself were the Apostles, and the bishops of old time, the presidents of the Church who handed down these books. Being therefore a child of the Church, trench thou not upon its statutes. And of the Old Testament, as we have said, study the two and twenty books, which, if thou art desirous of learning, strive to remember by name, as I recite them.” (Cyril of Jerusalem on the Canon of Scripture)

His lists supports the canon adopted by the Protestants, combining books after the Hebrew canon and excludes the apocrypha, though he sometimes used them, as per the standard practice by which the apocrypha was printed in Protestant Bibles, and includes Baruch as part of Jeremiah.

● Likewise Rufinus:

38.But it should also be known that there are other books which are called not "canonical" but "ecclesiastical" by the ancients: 5 that is, the Wisdom attributed to Solomon, and another Wisdom attributed to the son of Sirach, which the Latins called by the title Ecclesiasticus, designating not the author of the book but its character. To the same class belong the book of Tobit and the book of Judith, and the books of Maccabees.

With the New Testament there is the book which is called the Shepherd of Hermas, and that which is called The Two Ways 6 and the Judgment of Peter.7 They were willing to have all these read in the churches but not brought forward for the confirmation of doctrine. The other writings they named "apocrypha,"8 which they would not have read in the churches.

These are what the fathers have handed down to us, which, as I said, I have thought it opportune to set forth in this place, for the instruction of those who are being taught the first elements of the Church and of the Faith, that they may know from what fountains of the Word of God they should draw for drinking. (Rufinus of Aquileia on the Canon of Scripture)

●Summing up most of the above, the Catholic Encyclopedia states,

At Jerusalem there was a renascence, perhaps a survival, of Jewish ideas, the tendency there being distinctly unfavourable to the deuteros. St. Cyril of that see, while vindicating for the Church the right to fix the Canon, places them among the apocrypha and forbids all books to be read privately which are not read in the churches. In Antioch and Syria the attitude was more favourable. St. Epiphanius shows hesitation about the rank of the deuteros; he esteemed them, but they had not the same place as the Hebrew books in his regard. The historian Eusebius attests the widespread doubts in his time; he classes them as antilegomena, or disputed writings, and, like Athanasius, places them in a class intermediate between the books received by all and the apocrypha. The 59th (or 60th) canon of the provincial Council of Laodicea (the authenticity of which however is contested) gives a catalogue of the Scriptures entirely in accord with the ideas of St. Cyril of Jerusalem. On the other hand, the Oriental versions and Greek manuscripts of the period are more liberal; the extant ones have all the deuterocanonicals and, in some cases, certain apocrypha.

The influence of Origen's and Athanasius's restricted canon naturally spread to the West. St. Hilary of Poitiers and Rufinus followed their footsteps, excluding the deuteros from canonical rank in theory, but admitting them in practice. The latter styles them "ecclesiastical" books, but in authority unequal to the other Scriptures. St. Jerome cast his weighty suffrage on the side unfavourable to the disputed books... (Catholic Encyclopedia, Canon of the Old Testament, eph. mine)

● The Catholic Encyclopedia also states as regards the Middle Ages,

In the Latin Church, all through the Middle Ages [5th century to the 15th century] we find evidence of hesitation about the character of the deuterocanonicals. There is a current friendly to them, another one distinctly unfavourable to their authority and sacredness, while wavering between the two are a number of writers whose veneration for these books is tempered by some perplexity as to their exact standing, and among those we note St. Thomas Aquinas. Few are found to unequivocally acknowledge their canonicity. The prevailing attitude of Western medieval authors is substantially that of the Greek Fathers. The chief cause of this phenomenon in the West is to be sought in the influence, direct and indirect, of St. Jerome's depreciating Prologus (CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Canon of the Old Testament) [/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]

The Holy Spirit guides the Catholic Church in a way that he does not guide you personally. I hope that is not too much of a tough pill for you to digest.

Click to expand...

So souls cannot ascertain what writings are of God but they can ascertain your church is of God?

I think that a bigger problem for you is that you do not recognize the inspired word of God

Click to expand...

I think that is the problem with Catholics, and instead they must place implicit faith in a self-proclaimed church.

For Rome has presumed to infallibly declare she is and will be perpetually infallible whenever she speaks in accordance with her infallibly defined (scope and subject-based) formula, which renders her declaration that she is infallible, to be infallible, as well as all else she accordingly declares.

I think that is too much of a tough pill for many to digest.

PeaceByJesus said:

.

Click to expand...

Something went wrong with your post. None of what you had to say was shown except as part of the quote you made of my post. Perhaps you will fix the problem?

Philip_B said:

Did the writers of the NT accept the Septuagint (LXX) as scripture?

Click to expand...

The LXX was a corrupted Greek translation of the OT with the apocryphal books added. The Palestinian Jews had the Hebrew Tanakh. While many of the OT quotes in the Greek NT resemble the LXX, that does not automatically mean that the LXX was the source.