ChristiansUnite Forums

Hey, most of you guys here are protestant, right? Or at least a non-Catholic but still Christian demonination- unless you're non- oh, you know waht I mean. Okay, so I'm Catholic, and have always wondered why Martin Luther took books from the Bible during the Reformation. I mean...for the first 14 hundred years all Christians excepted all the books you now claim aren't a part of the Bible. Was it just that Luther read (for example) 2 Maccabees and saw that 5 verses supported our teaching on purgatory and said, "Well- this has to go! This belief isn't a part of my theological agenda- *rip, crumble, toss*. I mean...what's the deal? My friend's parents taught her that us Catholics added books later on, but- oh, don't even try that. Martin Luther and his Protestant Reformers removed them, and that is the truth.  so..... why? Why do'nt your churches use the version of the Bible that Jesus and the apostles used? Why is it that your church doesn't use the whole Bible?

Sorry about spelling "Protestant" wrong in the title- accident.

Actually Martin Luther didn't remove any books from the bible, he made an attempt to remove the books of Hebrews, James, Jude and Revelation from the canon (partially because they were perceived to go against certain Protestant doctrines, partially because of the early debate over their inclusion), but this was not accepted.

 The canon of the bible was selected through a set of criteria including whether the text was written by an eyewitness to the events, or by someone who got the content through an actual eyewitness. They also considered the authenticity of the authors. There are no serious challenges against the authenticity of the four gospel writers; on the other hand the Gnostic books all have names ascribed to them, which are not the original authors.

Also taken into consideration was whether the text followed along with the known authentic texts, and whether or not Jesus would have made certain comments. Some of the Gnostic texts have outlandish verses in them; one that comes to mind has a gigantic 80 foot tall Jesus storming through the landscape.

Luther did not remove any books from the Bible. He placed any books that were not a part of the Hebrew canonical in a separate portion calling them Apocrypha. He was not the first one to tag them as Apocrypha though. Jerome in 400 AD translated the OT from Hebrew into Greek and called Tobit, Judith, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach [or "Ecclesiasticus"], and Baruch the Apocrypha. So Luther just followed suit after Jerome on the OT.

As Bronze said Luther attempted to remove books four NT from their normal order and place them at the end calling them less than canonical.

 

The original 1611 King James included the Apocrypha.

Because it's too heavy to carry around! ;D ;D ;D

Jesus and His disciples used the Old Testament.  There was no such thing as the New Testament at the time of Christ.

Hey cris!

Are you...

bumping up your

post count???

 ;D
 ;D
 :D

It wasn't intentional.  I guess I must have a split personality.  ;D

                               ;D




             ;D





                                                ;D

Hey JD........................

R U

 8)

O 4 GET IT. :-X

Made bible thumping very laborius! :D

A few facts for the discussion.  The books in question(deuterocanononicals) were accepted by the Jews as part of the OT at the time of Christ.  Christ quoted from them several times, and so did the apostles.  He never once said anything negative about  them.  Jerome later in his life declared that he was incorrect to have doubted their authenticity and inspiration in his younger years.