|
Saved_byChrist
|
 |
« on: June 09, 2005, 07:39:36 PM » |
|
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?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Terrorists have killed 3000 Americans since 1990.....Abortionists have killed 4000 Americans since yesturday.
God gave us 86,400 seconds a day. Have you taken one to say 'thank you'?
|
|
|
|
Saved_byChrist
|
|
« Reply #1 on: June 09, 2005, 07:41:09 PM » |
|
Sorry about spelling "Protestant" wrong in the title- accident.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Terrorists have killed 3000 Americans since 1990.....Abortionists have killed 4000 Americans since yesturday.
God gave us 86,400 seconds a day. Have you taken one to say 'thank you'?
|
|
|
|
Bronzesnake
Guest
|
|
« Reply #2 on: June 10, 2005, 02:00:11 AM » |
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Soldier4Christ
|
|
« Reply #3 on: June 10, 2005, 02:43:12 AM » |
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Joh 9:4 I must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work.
|
|
|
|
cris
|
|
« Reply #4 on: June 10, 2005, 04:03:12 PM » |
|
The original 1611 King James included the Apocrypha.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
cris
|
|
« Reply #5 on: June 10, 2005, 04:07:50 PM » |
|
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?
Because it's too heavy to carry around!  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
cris
|
|
« Reply #6 on: June 10, 2005, 04:10:09 PM » |
|
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?
Jesus and His disciples used the Old Testament. There was no such thing as the New Testament at the time of Christ. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
JudgeNot
|
|
« Reply #7 on: June 10, 2005, 04:16:33 PM » |
|
Hey cris!
Are you...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Covering your tracks is futile; God knows where you're going and where you've been. JPD |
|
|
|
JudgeNot
|
|
« Reply #8 on: June 10, 2005, 04:17:02 PM » |
|
bumping up your
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Covering your tracks is futile; God knows where you're going and where you've been. JPD |
|
|
|
JudgeNot
|
|
« Reply #9 on: June 10, 2005, 04:17:28 PM » |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Covering your tracks is futile; God knows where you're going and where you've been. JPD |
|
|
|
cris
|
|
« Reply #10 on: June 10, 2005, 04:28:52 PM » |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
cris
|
|
« Reply #11 on: June 10, 2005, 04:42:51 PM » |
|
Hey JD........................
R U
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
JudgeNot
|
|
« Reply #12 on: June 10, 2005, 04:46:51 PM » |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Covering your tracks is futile; God knows where you're going and where you've been. JPD |
|
|
|
cris
|
|
« Reply #13 on: June 10, 2005, 04:48:25 PM » |
|
O 4 GET IT.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Bronzesnake
Guest
|
|
« Reply #14 on: June 10, 2005, 05:37:46 PM » |
|
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?
Because it's too heavy to carry around! Made bible thumping very laborius!  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
