KnightofChrist Posted September 10, 2006 Share Posted September 10, 2006 [quote][b]The Seven Missing Books[/b] Did you know that the Catholic Bible contains seven books generally not found in other Bibles? And do you wonder why? The answer is not that something new has been added to the Bible by the Catholic Church; rather something old has been removed from non-Catholic versions of the Bible. The books, conspicuous by their absence in modern non-Catholic Bibles, and which should be found in the Old Testament, are the books of Tobias, Judith, Wisdom, Eccesiasticus, Baruch, and the two books of Machabees—and portions of the books of Esther and Daniel. To understand this matter fully, it must be borne in mind that before the time of Christ, there were two divisions of Jews. Some remained in Palestine and continued to use the Scripture written in Hebrew. Others, scattered throughout foreign lands, particularly in Egypt, were better acquainted with Greek because Greek was then the common language. For the use of the Greek-speaking Jews, who were numerous in Alexandria and other parts of Egypt, the Old Testament was translated into Greek several centuries before the coming of Christ. And it was these Greek-speaking Jews who, even before the time of Christ, regarded the seven books of which we speak as inspired. The Jews in Palestine who spoke Hebrew did not rank these books among the inspired books of the Old Testament, either because they were not written in Hebrew, or because they came too late to be placed in the list of inspired books made by Esdras. After the Babylonian captivity, Esdras collected all the inspired books which could then be found. After his time, the books of Bar-uch, Tobias, Judith and Wisdom, as well as more complete copies of Daniel and Esther, were brought to light. The book of Ec-clesiasticus and the two books of Machabees were not yet written when the collection of inspired books was made. [b]The Apostles used the Scriptures of the Greek-speaking Jews, and it is upon the authority of the Apostles that the Old Testament, with the seven books under consideration, was held to be inspired. To these Apostles, Christ had said: "He who hears you, hears me." And the Apostles used these seven books. The Apostles must have known whether these books were inspired or not, whether they were the word of God or merely the word of man. If they had been only the word of man, the Apostles surely would have eliminated them from the Old Testament. As they did not do so, but on the contrary, retained these books in the Old Testament... and as all the editions of the Bible used by their immediate disciples contained these books ... the Catholic Church must hold them to be inspired Scripture. This is not on the authority of the Jews from whom they were inherited, but on [u]the authority of the Apostles.[/u][/b] From the day when the Catholic Church first published the official list of the inspired books of both the Old and the New Testaments, in 397 A.D., there never has been any interruption in the teaching of the Church concerning their inspired source. These seven books are accepted as inspired Scripture by 300 millions of Catholics spread over the globe. They are called inspired Scripture by the Greek Church, though separated from the Catholic Church. They are held to be inspired Scripture by all the other Oriental Christian sects. At the beginning of the sixteenth century, all editions of the Christian Bible contained these books. Many of the oldest editions of the Protestant Bibles contained them, sometimes listed in the back of the Bible as Apocrypha — not to be considered inspired Scripture. When the King James version of the Bible, which is still used by many English-speaking non-Catholics, first appeared, it contained these books. Later complaints, however, caused publishers to begin to omit them and by the year 1827, Bible Societies had eliminated them from the Bible altogether. When a non-Catholic considers his Bible, it would be well for him to ask ... why were those seven books omitted? It is not justified by the authority of either the Jews or the early Christians. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- from The Bible is a Catholic Book, By The KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS Religious Information Bureau Nihil obstat: William M Drumm, Censor Librorum. Imprimatur: + Joseph E. Ritter, Archbishop of St. Louis St. Louis, March 8, 1948. Printed in 1948[/quote] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PadrePioOfPietrelcino Posted September 10, 2006 Share Posted September 10, 2006 Good article, on a side note that kinda connects. I understand that the Orthodox have a canon that differs from the Catholic Canon does anyone know more about this, because I know relatively litte. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Akalyte Posted September 10, 2006 Share Posted September 10, 2006 I've studied this topic so many times! I'm also writing a song about it!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightofChrist Posted September 10, 2006 Author Share Posted September 10, 2006 Well Budge and Eutychus, is your silence on the Apostles canon, acceptance that the Catholic Church has that very same canon? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
desertwoman Posted September 10, 2006 Share Posted September 10, 2006 [b]Up until the 1880’s every Protestant Bible (not just Catholic Bibles) had 80 books, not 66! [/b] The inter-testamental books written hundreds of years before Christ called [b]“The Apocrypha” were part of virtually every printing of the Tyndale-Matthews Bible, the Great Bible, the Bishops Bible, the Protestant Geneva Bible, and the King James Bible until their removal in the 1880’s![/b] The original 1611 King James contained the Apocrypha, and King James threatened anyone who dared to print the Bible without the Apocrypha with heavy fines and a year in jail. Only for the last 120 years has the Protestant Church rejected these books, and removed them from their Bibles. [b]This has left most modern-day Christians believing the popular myth that there is something “Roman Catholic” about the Apocrypha. There is, however, no truth in that myth, and no widely-accepted reason for the removal of the Apocrypha in the 1880’s has ever been officially issued by a mainline Protestant denomination.[/b] [url="http://www.greatsite.com/timeline-english-bible-history/index.html"]http://www.greatsite.com/timeline-english-...tory/index.html[/url] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightofChrist Posted September 10, 2006 Author Share Posted September 10, 2006 silence is golden, I assume... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightofChrist Posted September 11, 2006 Author Share Posted September 11, 2006 Wow Budge and Eutychus, I thought you two would have been all over this one. Since you both use the gutted King James Bible as the bases of your fallacious arguments. But then I remebered you only pick on the weak, or what you see as weak. Anytime someone makes a good argument against you two you both do not take it up, nothing but silence from you both. Your like wolves, devouring and picking the innocent, and running from the strong. Cowards... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curtins Posted September 11, 2006 Share Posted September 11, 2006 Excellent point made in the article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homeschoolmom Posted September 11, 2006 Share Posted September 11, 2006 Well, maybe they haven't seen this thread yet. Maybe they headed over to the lame board for awhile... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fulton Sheen Warrior Posted September 11, 2006 Share Posted September 11, 2006 +JMJ+ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Budge Posted September 11, 2006 Share Posted September 11, 2006 Apocrypha doesnt interlock with the rest of the BIble. The Bible is one book, and the verses all interlink with one another. Not true for the Apocrypha. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aalpha1989 Posted September 11, 2006 Share Posted September 11, 2006 You presented no evidence, didn't even mention the arguments mentioned above....is someone a little desperate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Groo the Wanderer Posted September 11, 2006 Share Posted September 11, 2006 [quote name='Budge' post='1060889' date='Sep 11 2006, 04:48 PM'] Apocrypha doesnt interlock with the rest of the BIble. The Bible is one book, and the verses all interlink with one another. Not true for the Apocrypha. [/quote] Explain this nonsensical statement please. While yer at it, explain why Luther wanted to punt James, Reveleation, 2 John, and 3 John as well....please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightofChrist Posted September 11, 2006 Author Share Posted September 11, 2006 [quote name='Budge' post='1060889' date='Sep 11 2006, 03:48 PM'] Apocrypha doesnt interlock with the rest of the BIble. The Bible is one book, and the verses all interlink with one another. Not true for the Apocrypha. [/quote] So then, do you reject the authority of the Apostles? And do you also reject their Canon? If so you reject the fulliness of The Word of God found in Holy Scripture. On what logical grounds do you reject the Apostles Canon, on what authority do you have to do so, and please show proof that their canon does not "interlink." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted September 11, 2006 Share Posted September 11, 2006 [quote name='Budge' post='1060889' date='Sep 11 2006, 05:48 PM'] Apocrypha doesnt interlock with the rest of the BIble. The Bible is one book, and the verses all interlink with one another. Not true for the Apocrypha. [/quote] Have you actually read it? You realize the reformers had it in their books, don't you. Where is your authorization to use a deformed book? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.3578d4578768b8f5be5d7af6172f9b23.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now