Changes

Martin Luther and the leaders of the [[Reformation]] cite as authoritative and determinative the canon of the Hebrew Bible as defined by rabbinical authorities who excluded and condemned as false the entire New Testament scriptures and Jesus as the Messiah <ref name=Luther>Luther rejected the seven books of the Old Testament, citing the Palestinian Canon as his authority. Clearly his reasons were doctrinal. However, his decision poses serious difficulties. What authority from God would Jews have in the Christian era to determine which books of the Old Testament were or were not divinely inspired? In 1529, Luther proposed adoption of the 39-book canon of rabbinic Judaism as the Old Testament canon of the Christian Bible. He justified his decision to exclude seven books from the Old Testament canon of 46 books by an appeal to precedent, citing Jerome who, around A.D. 400 had expressed concerns also voiced by his rabbinical sources that these books in Greek had no Hebrew counterparts. Research into the Dead Sea Scrolls found at Qumran has discovered Hebrew copies of some of the disputed books, which makes their rejection on this ground unsupportable. Luther's principal reason for opposing these Old Testament books seems to be that they contain textual support for doctrines he had rejected, such as praying for the dead (2 Maccabees 12:42-45).<br/>See [http://www.totustuus.com/luther Luther and the Canon of the Bible, by Jim Seghers]<br/>[http://www.olswahiawa.org/uploads/2/1/8/4/21845996/session_3.pdf The Canon of the Bible]<br/>[http://catholicdefense.blogspot.com/2011/07/can-protestants-rely-upon-council-of.html Wednesday, July 20, 2011. Can Protestants Rely Upon the "Council of Jamnia" for Their Bible?]</ref> because "''unto them were committed the oracles of God.''" (see [http://biblehub.com/multi/romans/3-2.htm Romans 3:2]). This presents a problem. If the Jews have been so entrusted with the word of God that they had therefore been given the divine authority to determine the ''canon'' of sacred scripture, as Luther and the Reformation Protestants maintain, then the whole New Testament is excluded from the canon of the holy Bible because it does not meet established rabbinical criteria for what is sacred inspired scripture.

Martin Luther and the leaders of the [[Reformation]] cite as authoritative and determinative the canon of the Hebrew Bible as defined by rabbinical authorities who excluded and condemned as false the entire New Testament scriptures and Jesus as the Messiah <ref name=Luther>Luther rejected the seven books of the Old Testament, citing the Palestinian Canon as his authority. Clearly his reasons were doctrinal. However, his decision poses serious difficulties. What authority from God would Jews have in the Christian era to determine which books of the Old Testament were or were not divinely inspired? In 1529, Luther proposed adoption of the 39-book canon of rabbinic Judaism as the Old Testament canon of the Christian Bible. He justified his decision to exclude seven books from the Old Testament canon of 46 books by an appeal to precedent, citing Jerome who, around A.D. 400 had expressed concerns also voiced by his rabbinical sources that these books in Greek had no Hebrew counterparts. Research into the Dead Sea Scrolls found at Qumran has discovered Hebrew copies of some of the disputed books, which makes their rejection on this ground unsupportable. Luther's principal reason for opposing these Old Testament books seems to be that they contain textual support for doctrines he had rejected, such as praying for the dead (2 Maccabees 12:42-45).<br/>See [http://www.totustuus.com/luther Luther and the Canon of the Bible, by Jim Seghers]<br/>[http://www.olswahiawa.org/uploads/2/1/8/4/21845996/session_3.pdf The Canon of the Bible]<br/>[http://catholicdefense.blogspot.com/2011/07/can-protestants-rely-upon-council-of.html Wednesday, July 20, 2011. Can Protestants Rely Upon the "Council of Jamnia" for Their Bible?]</ref> because "''unto them were committed the oracles of God.''" (see [http://biblehub.com/multi/romans/3-2.htm Romans 3:2]). This presents a problem. If the Jews have been so entrusted with the word of God that they had therefore been given the divine authority to determine the ''canon'' of sacred scripture, as Luther and the Reformation Protestants maintain, then the whole New Testament is excluded from the canon of the holy Bible because it does not meet established rabbinical criteria for what is sacred inspired scripture.

The [[Catholic Church|Catholic]] definitive final canon of 73 books was retained "as read by the Church" by the [[Council of Trent]]. This same canon was listed by the [[Third Council of Carthage (397)]], and was the first canon of the books of the Bible to include all 27 books of the New Testament together. [[Jerome]] (''Prologus Galeatus'') listed the books rejected by the Jews as "apocryphal" but himself quoted them as if they were scripture.<ref>Edmon Gallagher on Jerome's ''Prologus'' and the Council of Hippo regarding the Canon (2013)</ref> The Catholic Bible includes the 27 books of the New Testament and 46 Old Testament books "with all their parts" from the ancient [[Septuagint]] as used by the apostles and the early Christian church and included in [[Jerome]]'s [[Vulgate]] translation as part of the [[Old Testament]], and accepts those books as scripture.

The [[Catholic Church|Catholic]] definitive final canon of 73 books was retained "as read by the Church" by the [[Council of Trent]]. When Constantine first made Christianity a legal religion in the Roman Empire in the early 300s, he called together leading Christians from the East and West parts of the empire to iron out the principles of Christianity, including cementing the canon. The entire canonical text was identified by Pope [[Damasus I]] and the [[Synod of Rome (382)]].<ref>[http://www.catholicapologetics.org/ap031100.htm Major Church Pronouncements on the Bible]<br/>[http://taylormarshall.com/2008/08/decree-of-council-of-rome-ad-382-on.html Decree of Council of Rome (AD 382) on the Biblical Canon, by Dr Taylor Marshall]<br/>[http://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/2006/12/pope-damasus-and-canon-of-scripture.html BlogSpot. Beggars All: Reformation & Apologetics. Pope Damasus and the Canon of Scripture (Part One)] (beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com)  See also [http://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/2006/12/pope-damasus-and-canon-of-scripture_31.html (Part Two)] ''Both offer clear explanations and clarifications by one Protestant apologist of the rationale for the firm Protestant position that the decision by Pope Damasus and the Synod of Rome in 382 on the canon of the books of the Bible is invalid (includes discussions)''.</ref> Subsequent councils such as the Council of Hippo (393) and the [[Third Council of Carthage (397)]], dealt with minor questions of authenticity, affirming the canon of Damasus and the Synod of Rome, and set forth the first-ever listing of all 27 books of the New Testament together, with 46 books of the Old Testament, a canon of 73 books of the Bible, which quickly gained acceptance and remained unchanged for 1200 years. [[Jerome]] (''Prologus Galeatus'' c. 420) listed the books rejected by the Jews as "apocryphal" but himself quoted them as if they were scripture.<ref>Edmon Gallagher on Jerome's ''Prologus'' and the Council of Hippo regarding the Canon (2013)</ref> The Catholic Bible includes the 27 books of the New Testament and 46 Old Testament books "with all their parts" from the ancient [[Septuagint]] as used by the apostles and the early Christian church and included in [[Jerome]]'s [[Vulgate]] translation as part of the [[Old Testament]], and accepts those books as scripture.

Protestant doctrine constantly affirms that the apocryphal books were ''added'' to the Bible in the 4th century by the Catholic Church because they contain texts which support Catholic teaching and practice, such as the intercession of saints and prayers for the dead, and the performance of good works and almsgiving as a means of deliverance from death and purging of every sin (''see External links below'' [[Apocrypha#External links|'''The Great Heresies''']]). Since the Apocrypha were already in the Septuagint Old Testament from before the time of the apostles, and have been an integral part of the Greek Bible as read in the ancient Church and preserved by Eastern Orthodoxy from the 1st century to this day, it is difficult to see how they had been "added". Eastern Church leaders rejected the proposed Protestant canon of 66 books in the Bible.  

Protestant doctrine constantly affirms that the apocryphal books were ''added'' to the Bible in the 4th century by the Catholic Church because they contain texts which support Catholic teaching and practice, such as the intercession of saints and prayers for the dead, and the performance of good works and almsgiving as a means of deliverance from death and purging of every sin (''see External links below'' [[Apocrypha#External links|'''The Great Heresies''']]). Since the Apocrypha were already in the Septuagint Old Testament from before the time of the apostles, and have been an integral part of the Greek Bible as read in the ancient Church and preserved by Eastern Orthodoxy from the 1st century to this day, it is difficult to see how they had been "added". Eastern Church leaders rejected the proposed Protestant canon of 66 books in the Bible.  

For some time the [[King James Bible]] contained those books which [[Protestant Reformation|Protestant Reformers]] deemed apocryphal in a separate section, "Apocrypha", between the Old Testament and the New Testament. The [[Episcopal Church]] includes the books of the Apocrypha in the cycle of scripture readings in its services, but holds that the apocryphal books are useful for study and [[edification]], but not for doctrine.  Most Protestant churches do not use the Apocrypha as scripture at all.

For some time the [[King James Bible]] contained those books which [[Protestant Reformation|Protestant Reformers]] deemed apocryphal in a separate section, "Apocrypha", between the Old Testament and the New Testament. The [[Episcopal Church]] includes the books of the Apocrypha in the cycle of scripture readings in its services, but holds that the apocryphal books are useful for study and [[edification]], but not for doctrine.  Most Protestant churches do not use the Apocrypha as scripture at all, and they are not included in standard published editions of Protestant Bibles.

Most Protestant Christians are unaware that numerous quotations from the Apocrypha are in the New Testament.<ref>See the following four sources:

Most Protestant Christians are unaware that numerous quotations from the Apocrypha are in the New Testament.<ref>See the following four sources: