-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
-
We hope the site problems here are now solved, however,
if you still have any issues, please start a ticket in Contact Us
Why catholics Bible are bigger?
- Thread starter Daniels
- Start date
- Status
Zaac
Well-Known Member
Could it be because the folks who set the standard for the Catholic Church care more about personal power than they do about Jesus Christ and people coming to faith in Him?
Could it be that the Catholic Church is more concerned with shaping the Gospel to its tradition instead of its tradition to the Gospel?
Could it be that the Catholic Church is more concerned with shaping the Gospel to its tradition instead of its tradition to the Gospel?
Upvote
0
ToxicReboMan
Always Hungry for Truth
"This is a myth that always comes up but is simple to answer. At the Council of Rome in 382, the Church decided upon a canon of 46 Old Testament books and 27 in the New Testament. This decision was ratified by the councils at Hippo (393), Carthage (397, 419), II Nicea (787), Florence (1442), and Trent (1546).
Further, if Catholics added the deuterocanonical books in 1546, then Martin Luther beat us to the punch: He included them in his first German translation, published the Council of Trent. They can also be found in the first King James Version (1611) and in the first Bible ever printed, the Guttenberg Bible (a century before Trent). In fact, these books were included in almost every Bible until the Edinburgh Committee of the British Foreign Bible Society excised them in 1825. Until then, they had been included at least in an appendix of Protestant Bibles.
Early Christians read the Greek translation of the Old Testament, the Septuagint. It included the seven deuterocanonical books. For this reason, the Protestant historian J.N.D. Kelly writes, "It should be observed that the Old Testament thus admitted as authoritative in the Church was somewhat bulkier and more comprehensive [than the Protestant Bible]. . . . It always included, though with varying degrees of recognition, the so-called apocrypha or deuterocanonical books" (, 53). The authors of the New Testament quoted freely from the Septuagintover 300 times."
http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2000/0009sbs.asp
Further, if Catholics added the deuterocanonical books in 1546, then Martin Luther beat us to the punch: He included them in his first German translation, published the Council of Trent. They can also be found in the first King James Version (1611) and in the first Bible ever printed, the Guttenberg Bible (a century before Trent). In fact, these books were included in almost every Bible until the Edinburgh Committee of the British Foreign Bible Society excised them in 1825. Until then, they had been included at least in an appendix of Protestant Bibles.
Early Christians read the Greek translation of the Old Testament, the Septuagint. It included the seven deuterocanonical books. For this reason, the Protestant historian J.N.D. Kelly writes, "It should be observed that the Old Testament thus admitted as authoritative in the Church was somewhat bulkier and more comprehensive [than the Protestant Bible]. . . . It always included, though with varying degrees of recognition, the so-called apocrypha or deuterocanonical books" (, 53). The authors of the New Testament quoted freely from the Septuagintover 300 times."
http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2000/0009sbs.asp
Upvote
0
Trento
Senior Veteran
- Apr 12, 2002
- 4,387
- 575
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
Becaus they knew truth more!
Martin Luther subtracted from the Bible, the seven Deuterocanonical books which had been in the Bible for over 1100 years, and he wanted to remove others such as the book of James from the New Testament.
"...the epistle of St. James is an epistle full of straw, because it contains nothing evangelical." Luther's "Preface to the New Testament".
He also wrote against the Book of Revelation:
"...to my mind it bears upon it no marks of an apostolic or prophetic character... Everyone may form his own judgment of this book; as for myself, I feel an aversion to it, and to me this is sufficient reason for rejecting it."
Sammtliche Werke, 63, pp. 169-170
The following quote from Martin Luther on page 527, which is taken from Protestant Philip Schaff's History of the Christian Church, p. 363:
"Are they doctors? So am I. Are they learned? So am I. Are they preachers? So am I. Are they righteous? So am I. Are they disputors? So am I. Are they philosophers? So am I. Are they writers of books? So am I. And I shall further boast: I can expound Psalms and Prophets; which they cannot. I can translate; which they cannot....Therefore the word alone shall remain in my New Testament, and though all the pope-donkeys should get furious and foolish, they shall not take it out."
Again, Schaff notes Luther's words on p. 362: "If your Papist makes much useless fuss about the word sola, alone, tell him at once: 'Dr. Martin Luther will have it so,' and says, 'Papist and donkey are one thing....For we do not want to be pupils and followers of the Papist, but their masters and judges."
Schaff goes on to say that Luther claimed to add alone to Romans 3:28 for the sake of clarity, but he did not do so for Gal 2:16. Schaff then cites Meyer and Weiss whom he references among 19th century Protestant exegetes who affirm that alone has "no business in the text [of Rm 3:28] as a translation."
Upvote
0
The Deuterocanonical books were also included in the 1611 KJV AV but, per above, they were labeled Apocrypha.
Upvote
0
- May 19, 2015
- 125,549
- 28,532
- 75
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Libertarian
But of course!!!!! But I "suffer" as much for being a Christ-ian as I would being a catholic too, as do other religions for their Faiths and Beliefs.Becaus they knew truth more!
http://www.christianforums.com/t5712091-belief-o-matic.html
[Young LT] 1 Peter 4:14 if ye be reproached in the Name of Christ--happy [are ye], because the Spirit of glory and of God upon you doth rest; in regard, indeed, to them, he is evil-spoken of, and in regard to you, he is glorified; 15 for let none of you suffer as a murderer, or thief, or evil-doer, or as an inspector into other men's matters; 16 and if as a Christ-ian, let him not be ashamed; and let him glorify God in this respect; 17 because it is the time of the beginning of the judgment from the house of God, and if first from us, what the end of those disobedient to the good news of God?
Matt 24:8 and all these [are] the beginning of sorrows; 9 then they shall deliver you up to tribulation, and shall kill you, and ye shall be hated by all the nations because of My Name; 10 and then shall many be stumbled, and they shall deliver up one another, and shall hate one another.
Upvote
0
Yekcidmij
Presbyterian, Polymath
- Feb 18, 2002
- 10,469
- 1,453
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Presbyterian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
Whichever way you want to look at it and wordplay with it, and additional 7 books in the catholic bibles that are not in the protestant bibles is probably the reason for a size difference.
Upvote
0
Actually, I've usually noticed that Protestant Bibles tend to be bigger than Catholic ones. They contain all sorts of footnotes, commentaries, devotionals, discussion questions...
In looking at Bibles for a friend of mine, I'm overwhelmed. Used to be, you'd choose a Bible based on translation (KJV, NRSV, NIV or the "Living" Bible were pretty much your only options), and then you'd decide if you wanted a "study Bible" (with notes). If you wanted a study Bible, you then had to determine whther you wanted notes based on translation (like the NIV study bible) or from a specific viewpoint. Scofield's study Bible, for instance, scattered dispensational thought far and wide, because for a time it was the most commonly found study Bible out there.. if you wanted doctrinal notes, you pretty much were stuck with Scofield's notes. (unless you had a specialty Christian store near you, where you might possibly find other traditions)
As to the apocryphal (deuterocannonical) books, they have been part of Christian thought and tradition for centuries, even though there have always been some questions about their authority and scope.
Yes, Luther's Bible had them... he was one of the first to separate the books into their own section, which habit was later adopted by other Bible publishers.
In looking at Bibles for a friend of mine, I'm overwhelmed. Used to be, you'd choose a Bible based on translation (KJV, NRSV, NIV or the "Living" Bible were pretty much your only options), and then you'd decide if you wanted a "study Bible" (with notes). If you wanted a study Bible, you then had to determine whther you wanted notes based on translation (like the NIV study bible) or from a specific viewpoint. Scofield's study Bible, for instance, scattered dispensational thought far and wide, because for a time it was the most commonly found study Bible out there.. if you wanted doctrinal notes, you pretty much were stuck with Scofield's notes. (unless you had a specialty Christian store near you, where you might possibly find other traditions)
As to the apocryphal (deuterocannonical) books, they have been part of Christian thought and tradition for centuries, even though there have always been some questions about their authority and scope.
Yes, Luther's Bible had them... he was one of the first to separate the books into their own section, which habit was later adopted by other Bible publishers.
Upvote
0
cyberlizard
the electric lizard returns
- Jul 5, 2007
- 6,268
- 569
- 57
- Faith
- Messianic
- Marital Status
- Married
i just thought it was cos the catholick faith had more old people they had to have bigger print, hence bigger bibles.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
