Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The orthodox Bible has 80 books in it. The non canonical books were not taken out of the Bible but were added to it, Old Testament books written after Jesus and the 12 disciples were alive.
The books in the Catholic Bible that are not found in Protestant Bibles are Jewish works that the Jews did not consider to be canonical and are not found in the Hebrew Bible but are found in the Greek Septuagint. Those books are Baruch, Judith, 1 and 2 Maccabees, Sirach, Tobit, Wisdom. I suppose that the Roman Catholic Church included those books in their Bible because they were in the Septuagint. I don't know why else they would have included them and I don't know why they chose to include Jewish books that the Jews themselves didn't consider to be canonical.
Now, quite apart from that, there never was ''The Bible.'' There were different versions of the Hebrew Bible in existence, versions which are no longer extant but we know that they existed because sometimes the Septuagint agrees with the Masoretic Text against the Dead Sea Scrolls, at other times the Septuagint agrees with the Dead Sea Scrolls against the Masoretic Text, and at other times the Septuagint doesn't agree with either of them suggesting that some other version was used in the Septuagint. Also, the book of Jeremiah in the Septuagint is shorter than the version found in the Masoretic Text. Both the shorter and longer versions were found in the Dead Sea Scrolls at Qumran meaning that both versions existed at the same time.
So . . .
To add to this, the NT canon also changed over the first number of centuries, each with different books included.
Tatian around 150 AD.
Clement of Alexandria around 200 AD.
Muratorian Canon, date unknown.
Origen, around 250 AD.
Cyprian around the same time.
Eusebius, shortly after 300 AD.
Codex Sinaitacus (which you can see online) and Codex Vaticanus.
Cyril of Jerusalem around 350 AD.
Athanasius in 367 AD declared our canon we have today to be official.
To add to this, the NT canon also changed over the first number of centuries, each with different books included.
Tatian around 150 AD.
Clement of Alexandria around 200 AD.
Muratorian Canon, date unknown.
Origen, around 250 AD.
Cyprian around the same time.
Eusebius, shortly after 300 AD.
Codex Sinaitacus (which you can see online) and Codex Vaticanus.
Cyril of Jerusalem around 350 AD.
Athanasius in 367 AD declared our canon we have today to be official.
Marcion is often admitted from this list but he produced the first NT Canon around I believe 145 AD. It consisted of those writings attributed to Paul, and a somewhat condensed version of the Gospel of Luke.
I think he's overlooked because he was subsequently deemed heretical (and was, per modern orthodoxy, in several ways). Still, he has the first-mover advantage.
After reading this forum for a few years, I've read many a time, when someone quotes from "the Bible." Now," I put "Bible" in quotes and capitalize the "B" because of what I was taught..."
But I read about people talking about "THE" bible, as if the one in their possession is the ONLY one. The one with 66 books...
I've seen people debate back and forth about how something they're debating about "isn't in the bible".
Yet I think, WHOSE bible? I mean, I'm Catholic, so I have a Catholic Bible...which includes the other books that are often left out of the KJV...and then some.
And yet, the very things they argue about are THERE, in the Catholic books.
I don't get it.
Actually, the first versions of the 1611 KJV bible did contain all 73 books;
as did the Gutenburg bibles of 1455 (first 'mass-produced' machine-printed bibles).
Marcion is often admitted from this list but he produced the first NT Canon around I believe 145 AD. It consisted of those writings attributed to Paul, and a somewhat condensed version of the Gospel of Luke.
I think he's overlooked because he was subsequently deemed heretical (and was, per modern orthodoxy, in several ways). Still, he has the first-mover advantage.
Correct, and thank you for reminding me. I was referring to the canons of the orthodox church, which were probably at first produced to combat Marcion's canon.
Jesus never intended for people to be carrying around books (or scrolls). If the messages and teachings aren't figuratively "written" on your heart and mind, then you're just nurse-feeding on text printed on paper / papyrus.
Read it yes, as an "infant", and learn, but then go forward as an 'adult' as the disciples did. Too many are stuck in the toddler stage, and don't want to progress any further. The modern churches certainly encourage the former more than the latter, as we should pacifier-carry our Bibles, and remain behind the safe walls of the church with the yes-crowd. Compared to Jesus' teachings and directions, it's a fraud and scam.
Correct, and thank you for reminding me. I was referring to the canons of the orthodox church, which were probably at first produced to combat Marcion's canon.
Yep -- I think Marcion was the first to think this thought: "We can decide that some of the stuff in circulation is legit, and some is not". It probably would have occurred to someone at some point, but he gets big creds from me for being first.
Marcion's basic problem was his complete rejection of both the OT and the OT god and all with a rather anti-semitic flavor to it. To him Jesus was a much superior god to the degenerate Jewish war god. He must have been a quite charismatic personality because he managed to start a number of churches throughout the Empire and built quite a following. It just didn't outlive him. In part because the ancients commonly thought "nothing new can be true or we'd already know it". The genius of the porto-orthodox was in part that they styled themselves as the fulfillment and perfection of the ancient religion of Judaism, thus escaping the stigma of being the new kid on the block. That is why sects like the Mormons and JWs style themselves as reformist Christians despite not subscribing to the historic creeds; some of this suspicion of newness / openness to oldness still survives in the modern world.
Jesus never intended for people to be carrying around books (or scrolls). If the messages and teachings aren't figuratively "written" on your heart and mind, then you're just nurse-feeding on text printed on paper / papyrus.
Read it yes, as an "infant", and learn, but then go forward as an 'adult' as the disciples did. Too many are stuck in the toddler stage, and don't want to progress any further. The modern churches certainly encourage the former more than the latter, as we should pacifier-carry our Bibles, and remain behind the safe walls of the church with the yes-crowd. Compared to Jesus' teachings and directions, it's a fraud and scam.
Status:
"Without God, life is tragic and absurd."
(set 23 days ago)
Location: Free State of Texas
20,360 posts, read 12,637,956 times
Reputation: 2469
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thoreau424
Jesus never intended for people to be carrying around books (or scrolls). If the messages and teachings aren't figuratively "written" on your heart and mind, then you're just nurse-feeding on text printed on paper / papyrus.
Read it yes, as an "infant", and learn, but then go forward as an 'adult' as the disciples did. Too many are stuck in the toddler stage, and don't want to progress any further. The modern churches certainly encourage the former more than the latter, as we should pacifier-carry our Bibles, and remain behind the safe walls of the church with the yes-crowd. Compared to Jesus' teachings and directions, it's a fraud and scam.
It is possible to carry a well-used Bible AND follow the teachings of Christ.
It is possible to carry a well-used Bible AND follow the teachings of Christ.
Sure it's possible, but the well-used Bible is carried as .... a prop? None of the disciples needed that. Just makes one look like a salesman. This actually matters. If you can't speak from the heart of what your beliefs mean to you and can be advantageous, but have to rely on it to point to, it's rather incriminating. And it just leads to an abundance of frauds roaming around.
Last edited by Thoreau424; 10-21-2022 at 04:47 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.