Do these passages prove Sola Scriptura?

DHK - when you say "They said plainly in verse 24 that it was not lawful for them to do this. They would know. They were well trained in the Torah, the law of Moses." - you are clearly saying that you "agree with the Jews" that scripture actually said what they claimed and that their charges against Christ were "correct" -- He was a law breaker according to the "sola scriptura" teaching/doctrine on Christ the Creator's Holy Day.

You claim that Christ's response is based on HIW OWN oral tradition/teaching alone in contrast/contradiction to the accurate positions the Jews held "sola scriptura" as you claim "They said plainly in verse 24 that it was not lawful for them to do this. They would know. They were well trained in the Torah, the law of Moses."

My argument is that They were WRONG! They were not making a "sola scriptura argument" any more in Mark 2 than they made in Mark 7. IN BOTH cases they were "teaching for doctrine the traditions of men" and in BOTH cases Christ upheld scripture and responded with arguments that are sustained by HIW OWN reference to Scripture -- the OT at that time.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Sadly - for those who rely on man-made-tradition instead of scripture - WE ARE NOT called to "compile the Bible again".

The OT ALREADY existed at the time of Christ.

The NT books WERE ALREADY read and accepted by the saints of the NT in the first century!

It is ONLY the "traditions of man" that ever placed ANY NT book "in question".

The Acts 17:11 "sola scriptura" principle WORKED EVEN WITHOUT a COMPLETE NT!

They did NOT have to ask themselves "YES but then I will we know how to compile and update the Bible if we SEARCH the scriptures to SEE IF what Paul says IS SO".

In other words - the entire argument Stan has attempted here - failed in Acts 17:11!

 

When you quote me it makes things quite a bit clearer. I was giving you the context in which Jesus quoted the words that He said about the Sabbath. It is context that you generally ignore. The Pharisees were using their knowledge of the law to question the right of the disciples of Jesus to pluck corn on the Sabbath. They accuse Him saying it is against the law. Correct? Read the Bible if you don't believe me.

That is absolutely ridiculous and misrepresentation of the facts. I did not say that at all. Jesus did not make any appeal to tradition, and never did. He didn't have a reason to make any appeal to tradition. What do you think--that Christ was a Catholic???
No, Christ went right back to the Word of God all the time. He in essence is the Word.
He was teaching the Pharisees that their interpretation of the law was the wrong interpretation. For examples of that read all of Mattthew 23.
Better yet, however, read in Mat.5, Jesus explanation of murder and of adultery. Adultery, he explained was just to look upon a woman with her already in his heart. Murder is to be angry with your brother. This is a far cry from how the Pharisees legalistically interpreted the law with rules and regulations.
On the one hand there was grace--Jesus forgiving the woman caught in the act of adultery. On the other hand he demonstrated the root of sin coming from the heart. We live in a day and age of grace. The SDA's are like the Pharisee's, still legalistically adhering to the Old Testament law. In Col. it plainly tells us that the Sabbath was but a shadow for Christ. A shadow is only an image, a picture of the real thing that was to come, and that is Christ.
You can have your shadow. I have Christ.
DHK

 

The truth of what we refer to as "sola scriptura" is thundered from both the old and new testaments.

To see its importance, all one has to do is look at the heretical, blashphemous, and devilish wreckage that ocurres when it is forsaken...

David Koresh
Mormonism
Jim Jones
Catholicism
Jehovahs Witnesses

etc etc etc.

All of those groups use a "Teaching Majesterium" approach to keep their people in bondage to them, and forbid people the God given responsibility of turning to the scriptures themselves for spiritual food and as a truth standard.

God bless,

Mike

 

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You claim that Christ's response is based on HIW OWN oral tradition/teaching alone in contrast/contradiction to the accurate positions the Jews held "sola scriptura" as you claim "They said plainly in verse 24 that it was not lawful for them to do this. They would know. They were well trained in the Torah, the law of Moses."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You are wrong in several areas.

#1. The Matt 5 EXPANSION of the LAW only DEEPENS and WIDENS the scope - it does not LESSEN it. To expand the scope is to NOT ONLY refrain from REAL adultery but also to refrain from mentail agreement with it! Christ was not arguing (as you seem to suppose) "it is ok to ACTUALLY commit adultery with a woman as long as you are not thinking about it while doing it".

#2. The ENTIRE ARGUMENT here is not that "tradition" and specifically "oral tradition" can only come from pre-existing scripture. QUITE the opposite - the people here argue that oral tradition not only gives rise to scripture it also gives rise to the collection of books we know of as the NT. The "oral teaching" is basically being held "on par with scripture" here.

YOU argue that the Jews were RIGHTLY viewing the Law of Moses in condemning Christ because by the Law (by the scripture - the written text) the WORK he was REALLY doing is REALLY condemned IN the text of scripture!

My argument is that you are wrong. They were in fact abusing the text of scripture and SUBSTITUTING MISHNA level "traditions of man" INTO it so that in fact Christ is breaking the MISHNA not the actual text of the OT!

There is a great difference between those two as we can all clearly see!

In Christ,

Bob

 

Many Protestants claim that Catholics added seven books to the OT: Wisdom, Sirach, Judith, Baruch, Tobit, and 1 and 2 Maccabees (and parts of Daniel and Esther). However, history shows that Martin Luther departed from nearly 1500 years of Christian tradition and subtracted these seven books from the OT. These missing books are called the deuterocanonicals, though in Protestant circles they, together with certain other books, are called “the Apocrypha.”

The Canon of the Old Testament
In Jesus’ day the canon of the Old Testament had not been settled. Different groups in Palestine honored different canons of Scripture. The Sadducees, for example, held that only the Pentateuch or the first five books of the Bible (Genesis through Deuteronomy) were Scripture. The Samaritans held the same regarding their version of the same five books. The Pharisees had a canonical tradition roughly the same as the Protestant one today, though its precise boundaries were not fixed until well after Jesus’ time. The authors of the Dead Sea Scrolls seem to have considered a few more books scriptural. Finally, some Jews honored a canonical tradition that is best represented today in the Septuagint translation of the Old Testament.

This Greek translation, made between 250-125 B.C., is known as the “Septuagint” after the Latin word for 70 (also abbreviated LXX), the number of translators who compiled its Pentateuch according to tradition.

Which canon did Jesus and His apostles use? In Jesus’ time, Hebrew was essentially a dead language; Palestinian Jews usually spoke Aramaic. Greek was the common language of the entire Mediterranean world. Not surprisingly, therefore, the New Testament writers used the Greek Septuagint. The vast majority of OT quotations found in the NT are from the Septuagint. Protestant authors Gleason Archer and G.C. Chirichigno list 340 places where the NT cites the Septuagint but only 33 places where it cites the Hebrew canon. [Gleason Archer and G.C. Chirichigno, Old Testament Quotations in the New Testament: A Complete Survey (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1983), xxv-xxxii.] By this count, the NT writers quote from the Septuagint over 90% of the time. Remember, the entire New Testament was written in Greek.

Sometimes one will hear that in the late first century a group of Jewish sages met in a council in Jamnia (Yavneh) and determined the canon of Jewish Scriptures, excluding in the process both the seven deuterocanonical books and the books of the New Testament. However, the sages who met at Jamnia did not form a council (a group that meets for a time and then disbands) but a more stable institution, which has been variously characterized as a Sanhedrin or rabbinical school.

Further, when one studies the data, one finds that the sages barely dealt with the question of the canon of Scripture. From the evidence available, it appears that they only discussed the canonicity of a few of the books, not deuterocanonical ones but books like Song of Songs and Ecclesiastes. They also did not close the canon of Scripture for rabbinic Judaism, for this continued to be debated into the third century. [Gedaliah Alon, The Jews In Their Land In The Talmudic Age (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1996), 272-276.]

Since the Christian Church had used the Septuagint from the beginning, they simply ignored the decisions of later rabbinic Judaism regarding the canon. So should we. The later rabbis had no authority to bind Christians to reject these seven books. They had rejected Christ, Christianity, and the sacred Christian texts that would become the New Testament. They had no authority over Christians, then or now. Protestants follow a non-Christian decision instead of the constant practice and authoritative judgment of Christ’s Church.

The Christian Church continued to use the Septuagint. The late, great evangelical scholar F.F. Bruce confirms: “So thoroughly, indeed, did Christians appropriate the Septuagint as their version of the Scriptures that the Jews became increasingly disenchanted with it." [The Canon of Scripture (Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 1988), 50.] When the Church listed which books belong to the Bible at the Synod of Rome in 382 A.D. under Pope Damasus (and later at the Councils of Hippo in 393 A.D. and Carthage in 397 A.D.), it approved the 46 books of the Septuagint as the canon for the OT. For sixteen centuries this canon was virtually uncontested. While Jews and Protestants reject these seven books, the early Church Fathers called each of them “Scripture” and “inspired,” quoting from them along with the undisputed books.(I will post these later)

In 1529, Martin Luther proposed to adopt the canon used by rabbinic Judaism of 39 books as the OT canon. The principal reason Luther seems to have opposed the additional books of the Christian OT is that they taught doctrines he did not like, such as prayers for the dead (2 Maccabees 12:42-45).

In response to Martin Luther and the other Reformers, the Council of Trent in 1546 A.D., dogmatically reaffirmed the 73-book canon (including the 46 books of the Septuagint) that had been established by the popes and councils of the early Church. The ecumenical Council of Florence also had approved this same 73-book canon in 1441 A.D. So the Catholic Church did not add seven books to the Bible at the Council of Trent, as some Protestants claim. Martin Luther subtracted seven books to better promote his own novel opinions. Trent merely reaffirmed the same canon the Catholic Church had established almost 1200 years previously, and condemned anyone who sought to tamper with Sacred Scripture.

But here is the real question. Which OT would you rather use—the OT used by Jesus, the apostles and other NT writers and the early Church, or the OT used by the later Jews who rejected Christ and persecuted Christianity?

If your Bible includes the seven books, you follow Christ, the apostles, and the other NT writers and the early Church. If your Bible omits the seven books, you follow the non-Christian rabbis and Martin Luther—a man whose view of Sacred Scripture allowed him to deliberately add the word “alone” to his German translation of Romans 3:28,[Luther’s private judgment was his only justification for adding the word “alone”: “You tell me what a great fuss the Papists are making because the word ‘alone’ is not in the text of Paul. If your Papist makes such an unnecessary row about the word ‘alone,’ say right out to him: ‘Dr. Martin Luther will have it so,’ and say: ‘Papists and asses are one and the same thing.’ I will have it so, and I order it to be so, and my will is reason enough. I know very well the word ‘alone’ is not in the Latin and Greek text, and it was not necessary for the Papists to teach me that.” Quoted in John L. Stoddard’s Rebuilding a Lost Faith (Rockford, IL: TAN books, 1990), 137.] and to attempt to throw out even more books of the Bible, including Esther, Revelation and James (which he dismissed as “an epistle of straw”). [Luther said, “I hate Esther and 2 Maccabees so much that I wish they did not exist; they contain too much Judaism and no little heathen vice.” F.F. Bruce comments: “It is noteworthy that he [Luther] shows his private judgment here by including Esther [an undisputed canonical book] under the same condemnation as 2 Maccabees...” (The Canon of Scripture, 101).]

The Canon of the New Testament
Protestants and Catholics accept the same 27 books of the NT as inspired and canonical. The question is: who determined the NT canon of inspired books?

There was confusion and debate about which books were inspired. Some were of the opinion that certain books later judged to be canonical—Hebrews, Jude, Revelation, 2 Peter—were not inspired. Others held that certain books later judged to be non-canonical—Shepherd of Hermas, the Gospels of Peter and Thomas, the letters of Barnabas and Clement—were inspired.

Around the end of the fourth century, the Church cut through the confusion and settled the canon of the entire Bible with a series of councils and decrees:

In 382 A.D., Pope Damasus, prompted by the Council of Rome, wrote a decree listing the present OT and NT canon of 73 books.

In 393 A.D., the local Council of Hippo (in North Africa) approved the present OT and NT canon of 73 books.

In 397 A.D., the local Council of Carthage (in North Africa) approved the same OT and NT canon. Many Protestants and Evangelicals take this council as the authority for the NT canon of books.

In 405 A.D., Pope St. Innocent I (401-417) wrote a letter to Bishop Exsuperius of Toulouse, confirming the same 73-book list approved by Hippo and Carthage.

In 419 A.D., the Second Council of Carthage (also local) approved the same 73 books.

In 1441 A.D., the ecumenical Council of Florence formally defined the same 73-book list of Scripture.

In 1546 A.D., the ecumenical Council of Trent formally defined the same 73 books as the canon of the Bible.

In 1869 A.D., the ecumenical First Vatican Council reaffirmed Trent’s list.

In the 40-year span from 382 A.D. to 419 A.D., a series of Catholic councils and popes officially ratified the canon of the Bible. By 450 A.D., the 73-book canon was almost universally accepted in the western Church. Before Trent, an ecumenical council (Florence) had confirmed these decisions.

The Catholic Church used her teaching authority to verify which books belonged to the Bible, and to assure us that everything in the Bible is inspired. Without the witness of the Church, we have no way to know either of these truths.

I noted earlier in a post that Martin Luther admits that Christians owe their Bible to the efforts of the Catholic Church. St. Augustine sums it up: “I would put no faith in the Gospels unless the authority of the Catholic Church directed me to do so.” St. Augustine recognizes that the only way to be sure which books are inspired is to accept the authority of the Catholic Church.

The Bible is a Catholic book. The New Testament was written, copied, collected, and preserved by Catholic Christians. Around the fourth century, the Catholic Church officially confirmed the canon of the Bible. Thus it is from the Catholic Church that other Christians have a Bible at all.

The Church with the authority to determine the infallible Word of God must have the infallible guidance of the Holy Spirit. Apart from the declarations of the Catholic Church, we have absolutely no guarantee that what is in the Bible is the genuine Word of God. To trust the Bible is to trust the authority of the Church that guarantees the Bible. It is contradictory for Protestants to accept the Bible and yet reject the authority of the Catholic Church that gave it to them.

Logically, sola scriptura believers should not quote the Bible at all, for they have no way of determining which books are inspired—unless, of course, they accept the teaching authority of the Catholic Church.

I keep on seeing this comment: "we are not called to compile the Bible again" Well I am not asking you to do it again, I am asking "How do we know for sure what belongs in the Bible." If you believe in sola scriptura, then you have to rely on the Bible only, no outside influences. But the Bible does not have a list of inspired books. So without an inspired table of contents, “Bible-only” Christians must go outside the Bible to get this information. So it looks like you are trusting in the teaching authority of the Catholic Church for the canon of the Bible.

 

Most Bible-believing Christians accept the Hebrew Old Testament canon that contains the familiar thirty-nine books found in the English Bible. In the Hebrew Old Testament some books are combined, giving twenty-two in number. The Roman Catholic Church and some others believe that more books belong in the Old Canon. These other books are found in the Greek Old Testament translation, i.e. the Septuagint. This name is the Greek word for seventy, and the book is so named because Aristea wrote in a letter that it was made by 72 translators in 72 days. This translation was made at Alexandria about 250 B.C., and at that time it consisted only of the books found in the Hebrew Scriptures. As Alfred Edersheim wrote, "The Canon of the Old Testament was then practically fixed in Palestine. That Canon was accepted by the Alexandrian translators, although the more loose views of the Hellenists on 'inspiration,' and the absence of that close watchfulness exercised over the text in Palestine, led to additions and alterations, and ultimately even to the admission of the Apocrypha into the Greek Bible." (Alfred Edersheim, Life and Times of Jesus the Messiahapocrypha, meaning "hidden."

Protestants in general have rejected these books, while the Roman Catholic Church accepted eleven of them as Scripture since the Council of Trent held in 1546. In the Catholic Douay Old Testament, there are only seven of these books because the others are combined with some of the thirty-nine familiar books.

Why have these aprocryphal books been accepted by some and rejected by others? There are several reasons they are rejected:

1. There is no evidence that either the Lord Jesus Christ or any of the apostles quoted or taught from the Apocrypha. Their lack of use of these books is a strong indication they rejected them as being a part of the canon. If these books had been accepted as part of the Old Testament, surely the New Testament would contain clear quotations from them since it frequently quoted the Old Testament books. Also, if Jesus would have accepted these books, He surely would have spoken out against the Jews' rejection of them. We know that Jesus accepted "the law of Moses and in the prophets and in the Psalms" (The Proverbs are included in the Psalms section) as Scripture (Luke 24:44).

Furthermore, even if Jesus and the apostles had used or made allusions to the Septuagint, this would not prove they accepted the Apocrypha books as Scripture unless they were preceded by the authoritative formula "it is written," "the scripture says," etc.

2. There is no proof that the apocryphal books were a part of the first-century Septuagint used by the Lord and His apostles. The Jews did not accept the Apocrypha as part of the Hebrew canon. Flavius Josephus, the first-century Jewish historian, wrote, "We have not an innumerable multitude of books among us, disagreeing and contradicting one another, but only twenty-two books; which contain the records of all the past times; which are justly believed to be divine; and of them five belong to Moses. . . . From the death of Moses till the reign of Artaxerxes, king of Persia, who reigned after Xerxes, the prophets, who wrote after Moses, wrote down what was done in their times in thirteen books. The remaining four books contain hymns to God, and precepts for the conduct of human life." These twenty-two books are the same as our thirty-nine Old Testament books. The Jewish canon combined several together to give twenty-two, the number of letters in the Hebrew alphabet.

The earliest Septuagint containing the Apocrypha dates from the fourth century. Presumably the first-century Greek translation did not contain these books since most of the apocryphal books were written after the Septuagint translation was made in about 250 B.C. The earliest record of these books being a part of the Septuagint is from the fourth century, some six hundred years after the Septuagint was made.

The apocryphal books were post-Biblical, having been written roughly between 200 B.C. and A.D. 100. The Jews recognized this, as Josephus wrote: "It is true, our history hath been written since Artaxerxes very particularly, but hath not been esteemed of the like authority with the former of our fathers, because there hath not been an exact succession of prophets since that time . . . no one has been so bold as either to add anything to them, to take anything from them, or to make change in them; but it has become natural to all Jews immediately, and from their birth, to esteem these books to contain Divine doctrines, and to persist in them" (Against Apion, 1:8).

Eusebius, by quoting Josephus' view of "only twenty-two books," lends his support to this Jewish view (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1966, p. 97). Eusebius also quotes Origen (185-254), an early Christian scholar, who said that "it should be observed that the collective books, as handed down by the Hebrews, are twenty-two, according to the number of letters in their alphabet" (Ibid, p. 244). Origen, in his commentary on The Song of Songs, comments that "the churches of God have adopted three books from Solomon's pen," and gives them as Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs. Origen does quote from the Book of Wisdom, but this book "is not included among the Solomonic writings--here limited to three--accepted into the Canon" (Origen, The Songs of Songs, Ancient Christian Writers, New York: Newman Press, p. 39, note 65 on p. 317).

3. As Josephus said, there was no "succession of prophets" since Artaxerxes, and the Apocrypha shows this by the absence of "Thus saith the Lord" statements. The apocryphal books also admit this was the case: "There was great distress in Israel, such as had not been since the time that prophets ceased to appear among them" (I Maccabees 9:27; cf. 4:46; 14:41). Malachi was the last prophet of the Old Testament, and he ended his prophecy with the pronouncement, "Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord: And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse" (Malachi 4:5, 6).

4. "Elijah" did come; John the Baptist came to prepare man for the Messiah. Many of the apocryphal books were written just before and after the time when Jesus Christ's ministry of "grace and truth" occurred (John 1:17; cf. Heb. 7:22; 8:1, 7; 9:15; 12:24). It is unlikely that a new Old Covenant revelation would occur at such a time, especially when that period closed with the promise that Elijah would come, and when so much of its message related to Jewish nationalism and patriotism when Jesus was establishing a new "kingdom . . . not of this world" (John 18:36; cf. 6:15; Luke 17:21; 16:16; et al.).

5. The apocryphal books teach erroneous doctrine, such as salvation by works ("For almsgiving delivers from death, and it will purge away every sin," Tobit 12:9; cf. 4:10; 14:10, 11; Sirach 3:30), prayers for the dead ("to pray for the dead. . . . he made atonement for the dead, that they might be delivered from their sins," II Maccabees 12:44, 45), that the dead pray ("hear now the prayer of the dead of Israel," Baruch 3:4), and angel intercession ("I brought a reminder of your prayer before the Holy One," Tobit 12:12).

6. The apocryphal books contain errors. For example, "On the third day thou didst command the waters to be gathered together in the seventh part of the earth; six parts thou didst dry up and keep so that some of them might be planted and cultivated and be of service before thee" (II Esdras 6:42 RSV). The Book of Judith (1:1) states that "the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, who ruled over the Assyrians in the great city of Nineveh." Nebuchadnezzar was not king of Nineveh but of the Neo-Babylonian Empire (Edersheim, op. cit, 1:126). Wisdom of Solomon (11:17) states that God "created the world out of formless matter." Tobit and Judith contain many historical, chronological, and geographical errors.

7. There are some clearly fanciful and immoral stories found in the Apocrypha, such as Judith deceiving King Nebuchadnezzar's general, Holofernes, and murdering him. She claimed God aided her (Judith 9:10-13; 13:8). These books encouraged and inflamed the Jewish people to revolt.

In summary, the apocryphal books are not considered a part of the Old Testament because (1) of Jesus Christ and His apostles' attitude toward them, (2) they were not a part of the Hebrew Old Testament, (3) they contain no claim to being prophetic, and (4) their messages seem foreign to the time when the Messiah was appearing.

Several of the reasons some give for accepting these books are listed below, along with answers to the reasons.

1. The Old Testament Septuagint was the Bible of the New Testament writers, and it contained the Apocrypha.
Answer: As mentioned earlier, there is no clear evidence that either the Lord Jesus Christ or any of the apostles quoted or taught from the Apocrypha, showing they rejected these books as being a part of the canon. Jesus and the apostles' use of the Septuagint does not prove they accepted the apocryphal books.

2. The New Testament contains quotations and allusions from the Apocrypha.
Answer: There are no clear quotations from these books in the New Testament. The alleged quotations may be little more than verbal coincidences. None of the so-called quotations are preceded with an authoritative "it is written" or "the scripture says." Even if there were quotations, they would not prove the apostles treated the books as Scripture. There are quotations from the heathen poets, such as Aratus in Acts 17:28, Menander in I Corinthians 15:33, and Epimenides in Titus 1:12; but their writings were not considered Scripture.

As Eusebius wrote, when New Testament authors made such use of other uninspired writings, their quotations were correct since they selectively quoted from them only to illustrate God's truth. They did not use the quotations to establish truth.

3. Some of the early church leaders used and accepted the Apocrypha.
Answer: Many early church leaders opposed these books. Jerome firmly put them in a class of writings separate from the Scripture.

4. The Catacombs have scenes based on the apocryphal books.
Answer: These scenes in all probability were of a later origin, and they only prove the artists accepted the historical fact of the events and does not indicate they accepted the books as part of the Old Testament.

5. The older Greek manuscripts, Aleph, A, and B, contain these books.
Answer: This does not prove these books were part of the first-century Scriptures. These Alexandrian manuscripts may not be representative of the original Biblical manuscripts, which, of course, originated in Jerusalem.

6. The Syriac church accepted these books in the fourth century.
Answer: The Syrian Peshitta Bible of the second century did not include these books.

7. Augustine and the councils he presided over (Hippo in 393 and Carthage in 397) accepted these books.
Answer: Augustine accepted them only as a "secondary canon." He did not know Hebrew or was not a Hebrew scholar and therefore may not have understood the Jewish position on these books. We can see he shifted in his assessments of the Hebrew Old Testament. At first he opposed Jerome's use of the Hebrew Old Testament for the Latin Vulgate translation, but later he accepted Jerome's Hebrew text as being the best.

8. The Greek Church accepted these books.
Answer: The Greek Church first accepted these books as part of the canon in 1638.

9. The Roman Catholic Church proclaimed these as part of the canon at the Council of Trent in 1547.
Answer: The Roman Catholic Church claimed these books as canonical at the Council of Trent in part because of their support for "salvation by works" (Tobit 12:9) and "prayers for the dead" (II Maccabees 12:44, 45).

10. They were found in some Protestant Bibles up until the nineteenth century.
Answer: The Protestant Bible placed these books in a separate section. The first English Bible to exclude them was the Wycliffe Bible (1382) and the Geneva Bible (1599 publication). The British and Foreign Bible Societies 1827 decision to suspend their circulation was not a new action but was based on earlier similar actions.

11. Some of these books are found among the Dead Sea scrolls.
Answer: Other noncanonical books are found among the Dead Sea scrolls, so finding some of these books proves nothing.

The above show there is no case for acceptance of the apocryphal books because they are inspired, yet these books do have some value. The Westminster confession of faith states: "The Books commonly called Apocrypha, not being of divine inspiration, are not part of the canon of the Scripture; and therefore are of no authority in the Church of God, nor to be any otherwise approved, or made use of, than other human writings" (Elwell, Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible, Grand Rapids: Baker, 1988, 1:129). These books do have value because they help us understand the first-century climate in which Jesus, the apostles, and the early church worked.

Although these books have value, they should not be placed in the Bible. The Bible should contain only the inspired Scriptures. The words of men they should not be placed alongside the inspired Word.
_____________

 

Quoting stan the man,

"I keep on seeing this comment: "we are not called to compile the Bible again" Well I am not asking you to do it again, I am asking "How do we know for sure what belongs in the Bible." If you believe in sola scriptura, then you have to rely on the Bible only, no outside influences. But the Bible does not have a list of inspired books. So without an inspired table of contents, “Bible-only” Christians must go outside the Bible to get this information. So it looks like you are trusting in the teaching authority of the Catholic Church for the canon of the Bible."

You have hit the heart, and drew out a rabbit.
"How do we know for sure what belongs in the Bible." Those who decided, decided exactly by this principle, that what belongs in the Bible is clear from the Bible itself. At least they tried to. And it loos like they succeeded, for it is easy for even a layman to see the non-canonical candidates were fakes - they simply don't pass the test.
Then also believeing the Holy Spirit guided and determined - not so much the men, but their decisions - and one's conviction is strengthened the more one makes the Bible one's own, one has to do with the Word of God.

 

The NT saints - did NOT "wait 200 years to read the letters of the NT" if they HAD done what NATE claims they NEEDED before they could know what "is inspired" they would have died reading nothing but the OT!!

This is the flaw in the little game of "how do we know if something is inspired". They knew BEFORE the RCC came along to compile anything!!

 

Here are some points on the deuterocanonical books or the apocrypha. These seven books are: Tobit, Judith, 1 and 2 Maccabees, Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus (or, Sirach), and Baruch. Also, Catholic Bibles contain an additional six chapters (107 verses) in the book of Esther and another three in the book of Daniel (174 verses). These books and chapters were found in Bible manuscripts in Greek only, and were not part of the Hebrew Canon of the Old Testament, as determined by the Jews.

All of these were dogmatically acknowledged as Scripture at the Council of Trent in 1548 (which means that Catholics were henceforth not allowed to question their canonicity), although the tradition of their inclusion was ancient. At the same time, the Council rejected 1 and 2 Esdras and the Prayer of Manasses as part of Sacred Scripture (these are often included in collections of the "Apocrypha" as a separate unit).

I am able to offer very solid and reasonable arguments in defense of the scriptural status of the deuterocanonical books. These can be summarized as follows:

1) They were included in the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Old Testament from the third century B.C.), which was the "Bible" of the Apostles. They usually quoted the Old Testament scriptures (in the text of the New Testament) from the Septuagint.

2) Almost all of the Church Fathers regarded the Septuagint as the standard form of the Old Testament. The deuterocanonical books were in no way differentiated from the other books in the Septuagint, and were generally regarded as canonical. St. Augustine thought the Septuagint was apostolically-sanctioned and inspired, and this was the consensus in the early Church.

3) Many Church Fathers (such as St. Irenaeus, St. Cyprian, Tertullian) cite these books as Scripture without distinction. Others, mostly from the east (for example, St. Athanasius, St. Cyril of Jerusalem, St. Gregory Nazianzus) recognized some distinction but nevertheless still customarily cited the deuterocanonical books as Scripture. St. Jerome, who translated the Hebrew Bible into Latin (the Vulgate, early fifth century), was an exception to the rule (the Church has never held that individual Fathers are infallible).

4) The Church Councils at Hippo (393) and Carthage (397, 419), influenced heavily by St. Augustine, listed the deuterocanonical books as Scripture, which was simply an endorsement of what had become the general consensus of the Church in the west and most of the east. Thus, the Council of Trent merely reiterated in stronger terms what had already been decided eleven and a half centuries earlier, and which had never been seriously challenged until the onset of Protestantism.

5) Since these Councils also finalized the 66 canonical books which all Christians accept, it is quite arbitrary for Protestants to selectively delete seven books from this authoritative Canon. This is all the more curious when the complicated, controversial history of the New Testament Canon is understood.

6) Pope Innocent I concurred with and sanctioned the canonical ruling of the above Councils (Letter to Exsuperius, Bishop of Toulouse) in 405.

7) The earliest Greek manuscripts of the Old Testament, such as Codex Sinaiticus (fourth century), and Codex Alexandrinus (c.450) include all of the deuterocanonical books mixed in with the others and not separated.

8) The practice of collecting these books into a separate unit dates back no further than 1520 (in other words, it was a novel innovation of Protestantism). This is admitted by, for example, the Protestant New English Bible (Oxford University Press, 1976), in its "Introduction to the Apocrypha," (p.iii).

9) Protestantism, following Martin Luther, removed the deuterocanonical books from their Bibles due to their clear teaching of doctrines which had been recently repudiated by Protestants, such as prayers for the dead (Tobit 12:12, 2 Maccabees 12:39-45 ff.; cf. 1 Corinthians 15:29), intercession of dead saints (2 Maccabees 15:14; cf. Revelation 6:9-10), and intermediary intercession of angels (Tobit 12:12,15; cf. Revelation 5:8, 8:3-4). I know this from plain statements of Luther and other Reformers.

10) Luther was not content even to let the matter rest there, and proceeded to cast doubt on many other books of the Bible which are accepted as canonical by all Protestants. He considered Job and Jonah mere fables, and Ecclesiastes incoherent and incomplete. He wished that Esther (along with 2 Maccabees) "did not exist," and wanted to "toss it into the Elbe" river.

11) The New Testament fared scarcely better under Luther's gaze. He rejected from the New Testament Canon ("chief books") Hebrews, James ("epistle of straw"), Jude and Revelation, and placed them at the end of his translation, as a New Testament "Apocrypha." He regarded them as non-apostolic. Of the book of Revelation he said, "Christ is not taught or known in it." These opinions are found in Luther's Prefaces to biblical books, in his German translation of 1522.

12) Although the New Testament does not quote any of these books directly, it does closely reflect the thought of the deuterocanonical books in many passages. For example, Revelation 1:4 and 8:3-4 appear to make reference to Tobit 12:15:

Revelation 1:4 Grace to you . . . from the seven spirits who are before his throne. {see also 3:1, 4:5, 5:6}

Revelation 8:3-4 And another angel came and stood at the altar with a golden censer; and he was given much incense to mingle with the prayers of all the saints upon the golden altar before the throne; and the smoke of the incense rose with the prayers of the saints from the hand of the angel before God. {see also Revelation 5:8}

Tobit 12:15 I am Raphael, one of the seven holy angels who present the prayers of the saints and enter into the presence of the glory of the Holy One.

St. Paul, in 1 Corinthians 15:29, seems to have 2 Maccabees 12:44 in mind. This saying of Paul is one of the most difficult in the New Testament for Protestants to interpret, given their theology:

1 Corinthians 15:29 Otherwise, what do people mean by being baptized on behalf of the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized on their behalf?

2 Maccabees 12:44 For if he were not expecting that those who had fallen would rise again, it would have been superfluous and foolish to pray for the dead.

This passage of St. Paul shows that it was the custom of the early Church to watch, pray and fast for the souls of the deceased. In Scripture, to be baptized is often a metaphor for affliction or (in the Catholic understanding) penance (for example, Matthew 3:11, Mark 10:38-39, Luke 3:16, 12:50). Since those in heaven have no need of prayer, and those in hell can't benefit from it, these practices, sanctioned by St. Paul, must be directed towards those in purgatory. Otherwise, prayers and penances for the dead make no sense, and this seems to be largely what Paul is trying to bring out. The "penance interpretation" is contextually supported by the next three verses, where St. Paul speaks of Why am I in peril every hour? . . . I die every day, and so forth.(Please don't start posting your views on purgatory here on this thread)

As a third example, Hebrews 11:35 mirrors the thought of 2 Maccabees 7:29:

Hebrews 11:35 Women received their dead by resurrection. Some were tortured, refusing to accept release, that they might rise again to a better life.

2 Maccabees 7:29 Do not fear this butcher, but prove worthy of your brothers. Accept death, so that in God's mercy I may get you back again with your brothers.
{a mother speaking to her son: see 7:25-26}

13) Ironically, in some of the same verses where the New Testament is virtually quoting the "Apocrypha," doctrines are taught which are rejected by Protestantism, and which were a major reason why the deuterocanonical books were "demoted" by them. Therefore, it was not as easy to eliminate these disputed doctrines from the Bible as it was (and is) supposed, and Protestants still must grapple with much New Testament data which does not comport with their beliefs.

14) Despite this lowering of the status of the deuterocanonical books by Protestantism, they were still widely retained separately in Protestant Bibles for a long period of time (unlike the prevailing practice today). John Wycliffe, considered a forerunner of Protestantism, included them in his English translation. Luther himself kept them separately in his Bible, describing them generally as (although sub-scriptural) "useful and good to read." Zwingli and the Swiss Protestants, and the Anglicans maintained them in this secondary sense also. The English Geneva Bible (1560) and Bishop's Bible (1568) both included them as a unit. Even the Authorized, or King James Version of 1611 contained the "Apocrypha" as a matter of course. And up to the present time many Protestant Bibles continue this practice. The revision of the King James Bible (completed in 1895) included these books, as did the Revised Standard Version (1957), the New English Bible (1970), and the Goodspeed Bible (1939), among others.

15) The deuterocanonical books are read regularly in public worship in Anglicanism, and also among the Eastern Orthodox, and most Protestants and Jews fully accept their value as historical and religious documents, useful for teaching, even though they deny them full canonical status.

 

That doesn't sound like it was a "custom of the early Church", which would have included Paul himself as doing it. Rather, he speaks of them as "they". Apparently the same "they" who were denying the resurrection! If they don't believe the dead rise, why are they baptized for the dead? It was apparently a group of Christians with some aberrant views, and Paul was showing that the views were not even consistent with each other.

 

When Catholics and Protestants talk about "the Bible," the two groups actually have two different books in mind. In the sixteenth century, the Protestant Reformers removed a large section of the Old Testament that was not compatible with their theology. They charged that these writings were not inspired Scripture and branded them with the pejorative title "Apocrypha."

Catholics refer to them as the
"deuterocanonical" books (since they were disputed by a few early authors and their canonicity was established later than the rest), while the rest are known as the "protocanonical" books (since their canonicity was established first).

Following the Protestant attack on the integrity of the Bible, the Catholic Church infallibly reaffirmed the divine inspiration of the deuterocanonical books at the Council of Trent in 1546. In doing this, it reaffirmed what had been believed since the time of Christ.

Who Compiled the Old Testament?
The Church does not deny that there are ancient writings which are "apocryphal." During the early Christian era, there were scores of manuscripts which purported to be Holy Scripture but were not. Many have survived to the present day, like the Apocalypse of Peter and the Gospel of Thomas, which all Christian churches regard as spurious writings that don't belong in Scripture.

During the first century, the Jews disagreed as to what constituted the canon of Scripture. In fact, there were a large number of different canons in use, including the growing canon used by Christians. In order to combat the spreading Christian cult, rabbis met at the city of Jamnia or Javneh in A.D. 90 to determine which books were truly the Word of God. They pronounced many books, including the Gospels, to be unfit as scriptures. This canon also excluded seven books (Baruch, Sirach, 1 and 2 Maccabees, Tobit, Judith, and the Wisdom of Solomon, plus portions of Esther and Daniel) that Christians considered part of the Old Testament.

The group of Jews which met at Javneh became the dominant group for later Jewish history, and today most Jews accept the canon of Javneh. However, some Jews, such as those from Ethiopia, follow a different canon which is identical to the Catholic Old Testament and includes the seven deuterocanonical books (cf. Encyclopedia Judaica, vol. 6, p. 1147).

Needless to say, the Church disregarded the results of Javneh. First, a Jewish council after the time of Christ is not binding on the followers of Christ. Second, Javneh rejected precisely those documents which are foundational for the Christian Church — the Gospels and the other documents of the New Testament. Third, by rejecting the deuterocanonicals, Javneh rejected books which had been used by Jesus and the apostles and which were in the edition of the Bible that the apostles used in everyday life — the Septuagint.

The Apostles & the Deuteros
The Christian acceptance of the deuterocanonical books was logical because the deuterocanonicals were also included in the Septuagint, the Greek edition of the Old Testament which the apostles used to evangelize the world. Two thirds of the Old Testament quotations in the New are from the Septuagint. Yet the apostles nowhere told their converts to avoid seven books of it. Like the Jews all over the world who used the Septuagint, the early Christians accepted the books they found in it. They knew that the apostles would not mislead them and endanger their souls by putting false scriptures in their hands — especially without warning them against them.

But the apostles did not merely place the deuterocanonicals in the hands of their converts as part of the Septuagint. They regularly referred to the deuterocanonicals in their writings. For example, Hebrews 11 encourages us to emulate the heroes of the Old Testament and in the Old Testament "Women received their dead by resurrection. Some were tortured, refusing to accept release, that they might rise again to a better life" (Heb. 11:35).

There are a couple of examples of women receiving back their dead by resurrection in the Protestant Old Testament. You can find Elijah raising the son of the widow of Zarepheth in 1 Kings 17, and you can find his successor Elisha raising the son of the Shunammite woman in 2 Kings 4, but one thing you can never find — anywhere in the Protestant Old Testament, from front to back, from Genesis to Malachi — is someone being tortured and refusing to accept release for the sake of a better resurrection. If you want to find that, you have to look in the Catholic Old Testament — in the deuterocanonical books Martin Luther cut out of his Bible.

The story is found in 2 Maccabees 7, where we read that during the Maccabean persecution, "It happened also that seven brothers and their mother were arrested and were being compelled by the king, under torture with whips and cords, to partake of unlawful swine's flesh. . . . ut the brothers and their mother encouraged one another to die nobly, saying, 'The Lord God is watching over us and in truth has compassion on us . . . ' After the first brother had died . . . they brought forward the second for their sport. . . . he in turn underwent tortures as the first brother had done. And when he was at his last breath, he said, 'You accursed wretch, you dismiss us from this present life, but the King of the universe will raise us up to an everlasting renewal of life'" (2 Macc. 7:1, 5-9).

One by one the sons die, proclaiming that they will be vindicated in the resurrection. "The mother was especially admirable and worthy of honorable memory. Though she saw her seven sons perish within a single day, she bore it with good courage because of her hope in the Lord. She encouraged each of them . . . [saying], 'I do not know how you came into being in my womb. It was not I who gave you life and breath, nor I who set in order the elements within each of you. Therefore the Creator of the world, who shaped the beginning of man and devised the origin of all things, will in his mercy give life and breath back to you again, since you now forget yourselves for the sake of his laws,'" telling the last one, "Do not fear this butcher, but prove worthy of your brothers. Accept death, so that in God's mercy I may get you back again with your brothers" (2 Macc. 7:20-23, 29).

This is but one example of the New Testaments' references to the deuterocanonicals. The early Christians were thus fully justified in recognizing these books as Scripture, for the apostles not only set them in their hands as part of the Bible they used to evangelize the world, but also referred to them in the New Testament itself, citing the things they record as examples to be emulated.

The Fathers Speak
The early acceptance of the deuterocanonicals was carried down through Church history. The Protestant patristics scholar J. N. D. Kelly writes: "It should be observed that the Old Testament thus admitted as authoritative in the Church was somewhat bulkier and more comprehensive than the [Protestant Old Testament] . . . It always included, though with varying degrees of recognition, the so-called Apocrypha or deutero-canonical books. The reason for this is that the Old Testament which passed in the first instance into the hands of Christians was . . . the Greek translation known as the Septuagint. . . . most of the Scriptural quotations found in the New Testament are based upon it rather than the Hebrew.. . . In the first two centuries . . . the Church seems to have accept all, or most of, these additional books as inspired and to have treated them without question as Scripture. Quotations from Wisdom, for example, occur in 1 Clement and Barnabas. . . Polycarp cites Tobit, and the Didache [cites] Ecclesiasticus. Irenaeus refers to Wisdom, the History of Susannah, Bel and the Dragon [i.e., the deuterocanonical portions of Daniel], and Baruch. The use made of the Apocrypha by Tertullian, Hippolytus, Cyprian and Clement of Alexandria is too frequent for detailed references to be necessary" (Early Christian Doctrines, 53-54).

The recognition of the deuterocanonicals as part of the Bible that was given by individual Fathers was also given by the Fathers as a whole, when they met in Church councils. The results of councils are especially useful because they do not represent the views of only one person, but what was accepted by the Church leaders of whole regions.

The canon of Scripture, Old and New Testament, was finally settled at the Council of Rome in 382, under the authority of Pope Damasus I. It was soon reaffirmed on numerous occasions. The same canon was affirmed at the Council of Hippo in 393 and at the Council of Carthage in 397. In 405 Pope Innocent I reaffirmed the canon in a letter to Bishop Exuperius of Toulouse. Another council at Carthage, this one in the year 419, reaffirmed the canon of its predecessors and asked Pope Boniface to "confirm this canon, for these are the things which we have received from our fathers to be read in church." All of these canons were identical to the modern Catholic Bible, and all of them included the deuterocanonicals.

This exact same canon was implicitly affirmed at the seventh ecumenical council, II Nicaea (787), which approved the results of the 419 Council of Carthage, and explicitly reaffirmed at the ecumenical councils of Florence (1442), Trent (1546), Vatican I (1870), and Vatican II (1965).

The Reformation Attack on the Bible
The deuterocanonicals teach Catholic doctrine, and for this reason they were taken out of the Old Testament by Martin Luther and placed in an appendix without page numbers. Luther also took out four New Testament books — Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation — and put them in an appendix without page numbers as well. These were later put back into the New Testament by other Protestants, but the seven books of the Old Testament were left out. Following Luther they had been left in an appendix to the Old Testament, and eventually the appendix itself was dropped (in 1827 by the British and Foreign Bible Society), which is why these books are not found at all in most contemporary Protestant Bibles, though they were appendicized in classic Protestant translations such as the King James Version.

The reason they were dropped is that they teach Catholic doctrines that the Protestant Reformers chose to reject. Earlier I cited an example where the book of Hebrews holds up to us an Old Testament example from 2 Maccabees 7, an incident not to be found anywhere in the Protestant Bible, but easily discoverable in the Catholic Bible. Why would Martin Luther cut out this book when it is so clearly held up as an example to us by the New Testament? Simple: A few chapters later it endorses the practice of praying for the dead so that they may be freed from the consequences of their sins (2 Macc. 12:41-45); in other words, the Catholic doctrine of purgatory. Since Luther chose to reject the historic Christian teaching of purgatory (which dates from before the time of Christ, as 2 Maccabees shows), he had to remove that book from the Bible and appendicize it. (Notice that he also removed Hebrews, the book which cites 2 Maccabees, to an appendix as well.)

To justify this rejection of books that had been in the Bible since before the days of the apostles (for the Septuagint was written before the apostles), the early Protestants cited as their chief reason the fact that the Jews of their day did not honor these books, going back to the council of Javneh in A.D. 90. But the Reformers were aware of only European Jews; they were unaware of African Jews, such as the Ethiopian Jews who accept the deuterocanonicals as part of their Bible. They glossed over the references to the deuterocanonicals in the New Testament, as well as its use of the Septuagint. They ignored the fact that there were multiple canons of the Jewish Scriptures circulating in first century, appealing to a post-Christian Jewish council which has no authority over Christians as evidence that "The Jews don't except these books." In short, they went to enormous lengths to rationalize their rejection of these books of the Bible.

Rewriting Church History
In later years they even began to propagate the myth that the Catholic Church "added" these seven books to the Bible at the Council of Trent!

Protestants also try to distort the patristic evidence in favor of the deuterocanonicals. Some flatly state that the early Church Fathers did not accept them, while others make the more moderate claim that certain important Fathers, such as Jerome, did not accept them.

It is true that Jerome, and a few other isolated writers, did not accept most of the deuterocanonicals as Scripture. However, Jerome was persuaded, against his original inclination, to include the deuterocanonicals in his Vulgate edition of the Scriptures-testimony to the fact that the books were commonly accepted and were expected to be included in any edition of the Scriptures.

Furthermore, it can be documented that in his later years Jerome did accept certain deuterocanonical parts of the Bible. In his reply to Rufinus, he stoutly defended the deuterocanonical portions of Daniel even though the Jews of his day did not.

He wrote, "What sin have I committed if I followed the judgment of the churches? But he who brings charges against me for relating the objections that the Hebrews are wont to raise against the story of Susanna, the Son of the Three Children, and the story of Bel and the Dragon, which are not found in the Hebrew volume, proves that he is just a foolish sycophant. For I was not relating my own personal views, but rather the remarks that they [the Jews] are wont to make against us" (Against Rufinus 11:33 [A.D. 402]). Thus Jerome acknowledged the principle by which the canon was settled -- the judgment of the Church, not of later Jews.

Other writers Protestants cite as objecting to the deuterocanonicals, such as Athanasius and Origen, also accepted some or all of them as canonical. For example, Athanasius, accepted the book of Baruch as part of his Old Testament (Festal Letter 39), and Origen accepted all of the deuterocanonicals, he simply recommended not using them in disputations with Jews.

However, despite the misgivings and hesitancies of a few individual writers such as Jerome, the Church remained firm in its historic affirmation of the deuterocanonicals as Scripture handed down from the apostles. Protestant patristics scholar J. N. D. Kelly remarks that in spite of Jerome's doubt, "For the great majority, however, the deutero-canonical writings ranked as Scripture in the fullest sense. Augustine, for example, whose influence in the West was decisive, made no distinction between them and the rest of the Old Testament . . . The same inclusive attitude to the Apocrypha was authoritatively displayed at the synods of Hippo and Carthage in 393 and 397 respectively, and also in the famous letter which Pope Innocent I dispatched to Exuperius, bishop of Toulouse, in 405" (Early Christian Doctrines, 55-56).

It is thus a complete myth that, as Protestants often charge, the Catholic Church "added" the deuterocanonicals to the Bible at the Council of Trent. These books had been in the Bible from before the time canon was initially settled in the 380s. All the Council of Trent did was reaffirm, in the face of the new Protestant attack on Scripture, what had been the historic Bible of the Church — the standard edition of which was Jerome's own Vulgate, including the seven deuterocanonicals!

The New Testament Deuteros
It is ironic that Protestants reject the inclusion of the deuterocanonicals at councils such as Hippo (393) and Carthage (397), because these are the very same early Church councils that Protestants appeal to for the canon of the New Testament. Prior to the councils of the late 300s, there was a wide range of disagreement over exactly what books belonged in the New Testament. Certain books, such as the gospels, acts, and most of the epistles of Paul had long been agreed upon. However a number of the books of the New Testament, most notably Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, 2 & 3 John, and Revelation remained hotly disputed until the canon was settled. They are, in effect, "New Testament deuterocanonicals."

While Protestants are willing to accept the testimony of Hippo and Carthage (the councils they most commonly cite) for the canonicity of the New Testament deuterocanonicals, they are unwilling to accept the testimony of Hippo and Carthage for the canonicity of the Old Testament deuterocanonicals. Ironic indeed!

 

Luke states that the Bereans were praiseworthy in that they eagerly checked the oral teachings of Paul and Silas to see whether or not they spoke truth.
Notice that if Scriptures did not contain concepts communicated by Paul and Silas, the Bereans would have concluded that the concepts themselves were
dispensable (although not necessarily untrue). Now if Catholics claim that tradition differs in substance from the Holy Writ, and Paul and Silas were communicating
these traditions, then the Bereans would have been lauded by Luke for dispensing with these traditions. Or, if Luke had believed that there are oral traditions which
are on par with, but not necessarily equivalent in substance to Scripture, Luke would have withheld his praise from the Bereans for their actions.
Or, if Paul and Silas believed the Catholic concept of authority, then they should have chastened the Bereans for not recognizing that outside of the written text,
there is an oral tradition which is equal in authority and different in substance. In this case, Paul might have responded to their efforts by saying,
“you may or may not find what we are talking about in the text. But that’s irrelevant because Scripture is not the only authority.” But we find no such things. "
http://www.monergism.com/thethresho...isedbyWhat.html

I do think the Bereans are a good argument for Sola Scripture. Perfect? No,
Good? Yes.

 

You are wrong in several areas.

#1. The Matt 5 EXPANSION of the LAW only DEEPENS and WIDENS the scope - it does not LESSEN it. To expand the scope is to NOT ONLY refrain from REAL adultery but also to refrain from mentail agreement with it! Christ was not arguing (as you seem to suppose) "it is ok to ACTUALLY commit adultery with a woman as long as you are not thinking about it while doing it".

#2. The ENTIRE ARGUMENT here is not that "tradition" and specifically "oral tradition" can only come from pre-existing scripture. QUITE the opposite - the people here argue that oral tradition not only gives rise to scripture it also gives rise to the collection of books we know of as the NT. The "oral teaching" is basically being held "on par with scripture" here.
</font>[/QUOTE]You either deliberately misrepresent what I say or do not understand English. Which is it?

 

stan the man...

The above post you made was from a RCC site. Here is the full text from this RCC site with the link below..

http://www.ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/DEUTEROS.HTM

BTW...this can be found there too..Papal Infallibility

http://www.ewtn.com/faith/teachings/papac2.htm

also...Mary's Queenship

http://www.ewtn.com/faith/teachings/marya6.htm

This is the same old thing that the reformers fought over with the church years ago. Need we post reformers side of the debate?

 

You are wrong in several areas.

#1. The Matt 5 EXPANSION of the LAW only DEEPENS and WIDENS the scope - it does not LESSEN it. To expand the scope is to NOT ONLY refrain from REAL adultery but also to refrain from mentail agreement with it! Christ was not arguing (as you seem to suppose) "it is ok to ACTUALLY commit adultery with a woman as long as you are not thinking about it while doing it".

#2. The ENTIRE ARGUMENT here is not that "tradition" and specifically "oral tradition" can only come from pre-existing scripture. QUITE the opposite - the people here argue that oral tradition not only gives rise to scripture it also gives rise to the collection of books we know of as the NT. The "oral teaching" is basically being held "on par with scripture" here.
</font>[/QUOTE]You either deliberately misrepresent what I say or do not understand English. Which is it? </font>[/QUOTE]

 

Luke states that the Bereans were praiseworthy in that they eagerly checked the oral teachings of Paul and Silas to see whether or not they spoke truth.
Notice that if Scriptures did not contain concepts communicated by Paul and Silas, the Bereans would have concluded that the concepts themselves were
dispensable (although not necessarily untrue). Now if Catholics claim that tradition differs in substance from the Holy Writ, and Paul and Silas were communicating
these traditions, then the Bereans would have been lauded by Luke for dispensing with these traditions. Or, if Luke had believed that there are oral traditions which
are on par with, but not necessarily equivalent in substance to Scripture, Luke would have withheld his praise from the Bereans for their actions.
Or, if Paul and Silas believed the Catholic concept of authority, then they should have chastened the Bereans for not recognizing that outside of the written text,
there is an oral tradition which is equal in authority and different in substance. In this case, Paul might have responded to their efforts by saying,
“you may or may not find what we are talking about in the text. But that’s irrelevant because Scripture is not the only authority.” But we find no such things. "
http://www.monergism.com/thethresho...isedbyWhat.html

I do think the Bereans are a good argument for Sola Scripture. Perfect? No,
Good? Yes. </font>[/QUOTE]

 

Jarthur001 I just wanted to match your copy and paste post with another copy and paste post. (I really didn't want to spend time talking about the deuterocanonical books.) Here are some quotes from the Early Church Fathers.(they are quoting the deuterocanonical books)

"Having then this hope, let our souls be bound to Him who is faithful in His promises, and just in His judgments. He who has commanded us not to lie, shall much more Himself not lie; for nothing is impossible with God, except to lie. Let His faith therefore be stirred up again within us, and let us consider that all things are nigh unto Him. By the word of His might He established all things, and by His word He can overthrow them. 'Who shall say unto Him, What hast thou done ? or, Who shall resist the power of His strength?'[Wisdom 12:12,ll:22] When and as He pleases He will do all things, and none of the things determined by Him shall pass away? All things are open before Him, and nothing can be hidden from His counsel. 'The heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament showeth His handy-work. Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night showeth knowledge. And there are no words or speeches of which the voices are not heard.'[Ps. 19:1-3]"
Clement of Rome,To the Corinthians, 27:5(c A.D. 80),in ANF,I:12

"Stand fast, therefore, in these things, and follow the example of the Lord, being firm and unchangeable in the faith, loving the brotherhood, and being attached to one another, joined together in the truth, exhibiting the meekness of the Lord in your intercourse with one another, and despising no one. When you can do good, defer it not, because 'alms delivers from death.'[Tobit 4:10,12:9] Be all of you subject one to another?[1 Pt 5:5] having your conduct blameless among the Gentiles,'[1 Pt 2:12] that ye may both receive praise for your good works, and the Lord may not be blasphemed through you. But woe to him by whom the name of the Lord is blasphemed![Isa 52:5] Teach, therefore, sobriety to all, and manifest it also in your own conduct.
Polycarp,To the Phillipians,10(A.D. 135),in ANF,I:35

" 'Be just in your judgement':[Deut 1:16,17 Prov 31:9] make no distinction between man and man when correcting transgressions. Do not waver in your decision. 'Do not be one that opens his hands to receive, but shuts them when it comes to giving'[Sirach 4:31]"
Didache,4:3-5(A.D. 140),in ACW,VI:17

"Melito to his brother Onesimus, greeting: Since thou hast often, in thy zeal for the word, expressed a wish to have extracts made from the Law and the Prophets concerning the Saviour and concerning our entire faith, and hast also desired to have an accurate statement of the ancient book, as regards their number and their order, I have endeavored to perform the task, knowing thy zeal for the faith, and thy desire to gain information in regard to the word, and knowing that thou, in thy yearning after God, esteemest these things above all else, struggling to attain eternal salvation. Accordingly when I went East and came to the place where these things were preached and done, I learned accurately the books of the Old Testament, and send them to thee as written below. Their names are as follows: Of Moses, five books: Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, Leviticus, Deuteronomy; Jesus Nave, Judges, Ruth; of Kings, four books; of Chronicles, two; the Psalms of David, the Proverbs of Solomon, Wisdom also, Ecclesiastes, Song off Songs, Job; of Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah; of the twelve prophets, one book; Daniel, Ezekiel, Esdras. From which also I have made the extracts, dividing them into six books."
Melito of Sardes,Fragment in Eusebius' Ecclesiatical History,4:26(A.D. 177),in NPNF2,I:206

"[New Testament books...] The Epistle of Jude, indeed, and two belonging to the above-named John--or bearing the name of John--are reckoned among the Catholic epistles. And the book of Wisdom, written by the friends of Solomon in his honour."
Muratorian Fragment(A.D. 200),in ANF,V:603-604

"What, then, again says the prophet? 'The assembly of the wicked surrounded me; they encompassed me as bees do a honeycomb,'[Ps. 22:17,118:12] and 'upon my garment they cast lots.'[Ps. 22:19] Since, therefore, He was about to be manifested and to suffer in the flesh, His suffering was foreshown. For the prophet speaks against Israel, 'Woe to their soul, because they have counselted an evil counsel against themselves,[Isa. 3:9] saying, Let us bind the just one, because he is displeasing to us.'[Wisdom 2:12] And Moses also says to them, 'Behold these things, saith the Lord God: Enter into the good land which the Lord sware [to give] to Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and inherit ye it, a land flowing with milk and honey.'[Ex. 33:1, Lev. 20:24]"
Epistle of Barnabas,6(A.D. 74),in ANF,I:140

"And when these things are done, he says, 'God will remove men far away, and those that are left shall multiply in the earth.'[Isa. 6:12] 'And they shall build houses, and shall inhabit them themselves: and plant vineyards, and eat of them themselves.'[Isa. 65:21] For all these and other words were unquestionably spoken in reference to the resurrection of the just, which takes place after the coming of Antichrist, and the destruction of all nations under his rule; in [the times of] which [resurrection] the righteous shall reign in the earth, waxing stronger by the sight of the Lord: and through Him they shall become accustomed to partake in the glory of God the Father, and shall enjoy in the kingdom intercourse and communion with the holy angels, and union with spiritual beings; and [with respect to] those whom the Lord shall find in the flesh, awaiting Him from heaven, and who have suffered tribulation, as well as escaped the hands of the Wicked one. For it is in reference to them that the prophet says: 'And those that are left shall multiply upon the earth,' And Jeremiah the prophet has pointed out, that as many believers as God has prepared for this purpose, to multiply those left upon earth, should both be under the rule of the saints to minister to this Jerusalem, and that [His] kingdom shall be in it, saying, "Look around Jerusalem towards the east, and behold the joy which comes to thee from God Himself. Behold, thy sons shall come whom thou hast sent forth: they shall come in a band from the east even unto the west, by the word of that Holy One, rejoicing in that splendour which is from thy God. O Jerusalem, put off thy robe of mourning and of affliction, and put on that beauty of eternal splendour from thy God. Gird thyself with the double garment of that righteousness proceeding from thy God; place the mitre of eternal glory upon thine head. For God will show thy glory to the whole earth under heaven. For thy name shall for ever be called by God Himself, the peace of righteousness and glory to him that worships God. Arise, Jerusalem, stand on high, and look towards the east, and behold thy sons from the rising of the sun, even to the west, by the Word of that Holy One, rejoicing in the very remembrance of God. For the footmen have gone forth from thee, while they were drawn away by the enemy. God shall bring them in to thee, being borne with glory as the throne of a kingdom. For God has decreed that every high mountain shall be brought low, and the eternal hills, and that the valleys be filled, so that the surface of the earth be rendered smooth, that Israel, the glory of God, may walk in safety. The woods, too, shall make shady places, and every sweet-smelling tree shall be for Israel itself by the command of God. For God shall go before with joy in the light of His splendour, with the pity and righteousness which proceeds from Him.'[Baruch(reckoned as part of Jeremiah) 4:36-5:9]"
Irenaeus,Against Heresies,V:35:1(A.D. 180),in ANF,I:565

"Those, however, who are believed to be presbyters by many, but serve their own lusts, and, do not place the fear of God supreme in their hearts, but conduct themselves with contempt towards others, and are puffed up with the pride of holding the chief seat, and work evil deeds in secret, saying, 'No man sees us,' shall be convicted by the Word, who does not judge after outward appearance (secundum gloriam), nor looks upon the countenance, but the heart; and they shall hear those words, to be found in Daniel the prophet: 'O thou seed of Canaan, and not of Judah, beauty hath deceived thee, and lust perverted thy heart.'[Daniel 13:56-Susanna] Thou that art waxen old in wicked days, now thy sins which thou hast committed aforetime are come to light; for thou hast pronounced false judgments, and hast been accustomed to condemn the innocent, and to let the guilty go free, albeit the Lord saith, The innocent and the righteous shalt thou not slay.'[Daniel 13:52-53-Susanna] Of whom also did the Lord say: "But if the evil servant shall say in his heart, My lord delayeth his coming, and shall begin to smite the man-servants and maidens, and to eat and drink and be drunken; the lord of that servant shall come in a day that he looketh not for him, and in an hour that he is not aware of, and shall cut him asunder, and appoint him his portion with the unbelievers.' [Matt 24:48] "
Irenaeus,Against Heresies,IV:26:3(A.D. 180),in ANF,I:497

"For, when one reads of God as being 'the searcher and witness of the heart;'[Wisdom 1:6] when His prophet is reproved by His discovering to him the secrets of the heart; when God Himself anticipates in His people the thoughts of their heart, 'Why think ye evil in your hearts?'[Matt 9:4] when David prays 'Create in me a clean heart, O God,'[Ps 51:12] and Paul declares, 'With the heart man believeth unto righteousness,'[Romans 10:10] and John says, 'By his own heart is each man condemned;'[1 John 3:20] when, lastly, 'he who looketh on a woman so as to lust after her, hath already committed adultery with her in his heart,'[Matt 5:28]--then both points are cleared fully up, that there is a directing faculty of the soul..."
Tertullian,On the Soul,15(A.D. 197),in ANF,III:194

"Our instruction comes from 'the porch of Solomon,' who had himself taught that 'the Lord should be sought in simplicity of heart.'[Wisdom 1:1]"
Tertullian,Prescription Against the Heretics,7(A.D. 200),in ANF,III:246

"For they remembered also the words of Jeremias writing to those over whom that captivity was impending: 'And now ye shall see borne upon (men's) shoulders the gods of the Babylonians, of gold and silver and wood, causing fear to the Gentiles. Beware, therefore, that ye also do not be altogether like the foreigners, and be seized with fear while ye behold crowds worshipping those gods before and behind, but say in your mind, Our duty is to worship Thee, O Lord.'[Baruch 6:3] Therefore, having got confidence from God, they said, when with strength of mind they set at defiance the king' s threats against the disobedient: 'There is no necessity for our making answer to this command of yours. For our God whom we worship is able to deliver us from the furnace of fire and from your hands; and then it will be made plain to you that we shall neither serve your idol, nor worship your golden image which you have set up.'[Daniel 3:16]"
Tertullian,Scorpiace,8(A.D. 205),in ANF,III:246

"At this stage some rise up, saying that the Lord, by reason of the rod, and threatening, and fear, is not good; misapprehending, as appears, the Scripture which says, 'And he that feareth the Lord will turn to his heart;'[Sirach 21:6] and most of all, oblivious of His love, in that for us He became man. For more suitably to Him, the prophet prays in these words: 'Remember us, for we are dust;'[Ps 103:14] that: is, Sympathize with us; for Thou knowest from personal experience of suffering the weakness of the flesh. In this respect, therefore, the Lord the Instructor is most good and unimpeachable, sympathizing as He does from the exceeding greatness of His love with the nature of each man. 'For there is nothing which the Lord hates.'[Wisdom 11:24] For assuredly He does not hate anything, and yet wish that which He hates to exist Nor does He wish anything not to exist, and yet become the cause of existence to that which He wishes not to exist. Nor does He wish anything not to exist which yet exists. If, then, the Word hates anything, He does not wish it to exist. But nothing exists, the cause of whose existence is not supplied by God. Nothing, then, is hated by God, nor yet by the Word. For both are one--that is, God. For He has said, 'In the beginning the Word was in God, and the Word was God.'[John 1:1]"
Clement of Alexandria,The Instructor,I:8(A.D. 202),in ANF,II:225

"And again He says, 'Come all to Me, who labour, and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest;'[Matt 11:28] and that which is added the Lord speaks in His own person. And very clearly He calls to goodness by Solomon, when He says, 'Blessed is the man who hath found wisdom, and the mortal who hath found understanding.'[Prov 3:13] 'For the good is found by him who seeks it, and is wont to be seen by him who has found it.'[Prov 2:4,5;3:15] By Jeremiah, too, He sets forth prudence, when he says, 'Blessed are we, Israel; for what is pleasing to God is known by us'[Baruch 4:4]--and it is known by the Word, by whom we are blessed and wise. For wisdom and knowledge are mentioned by the same prophet, when he says, 'Hear, O Israel, the commandments of life, and give ear to know understanding.'[Baruch 3:9] By Moses, too, by reason of the love He has to man, He promises a gift to those who hasten to salvation. For He says, 'And I will bring you into the good land, which the Lord sware to your fathers.' [Deut 31:20]"
Clement of Alexandria,The Instructor,I:8(A.D. 202),in ANF,II:232-233

"[H]aving heard the Scripture which says, 'Fasting with prayer is a good thing.'[Tobit 12:8]"
Clement of Alexandria,The Stromata,6:12(A.D. 202),in ANF,II:503

"But they said, 'We will not come forth: neither will we do the king's commandment; we will die in our innocency: and he slew of them a thousand souls.'[1 Macc 2:33] The things, therefore, which were spoken to the blessed Daniel are fulfilled: 'And my servants shall be afflicted, and shall fall by famine, and by sword, and by captivity.'[Dan. 11:33] Daniel, however, adds: 'And they shall be holpen with a little help.' For at that time Matthias arose, and Judas Maccabaeus, and helped them, and delivered them from the hand of the Greeks."
Hippolytus,Commentary on Daniel,2:32(A.D. 204),in ANF,V:183

"What is narrated here, happened at a later time, although it is placed before the first book (at the beginning of the book[of Daniel]. For it was a custom with the writers to narrate many things in an inverted order in their writings....To all these things, therefore, we ought to give heed, beloved, fearing lest any one be overtaken in any transgression, and risk the loss of his soul, knowing as we do that God is the Judge of all; and the Word Himself is the Eye which nothing that is done in the world escapes. Therefore, always watchful in heart and pure in life, let us imitate Susannah."
Hippolytus,Commentary on Daniel,6:1,61(A.D. 204),in ANF,V:191,194

" 'For even now the angel of God.' He shows also, that when Susannah prayed to God, and was heard, the angel was sent then to help her, just as was the case in the instance of Tobias[Tobit 3:17] and Sara. For when they prayed, the supplication of both of them was heard in the same day and the same hour, and the angel Raphael was sent to heal them both."
Hippolytus,Commentary on Daniel,6:55(A.D. 204),in ANF,V:193

" '[T]he prophet says, "The ungodly said, reasoning with themselves, but not aright," that is, about Christ, "Let us lie in wait for the righteous, because he is not for our turn, and he is clean contrary to our doings and words, and upbraideth us with our offending the law, and professeth to have knowledge of God; and he calleth himself the Child of God.'[Wisdom 2:1,12,13] And then he says, 'He is grievous to us even to behold; for his life is not like other men's, and his ways are of another fashion. We are esteemed of him as counterfeits, and he abstaineth from our ways as from filthiness, and pronounceth the end of the just to be blessed.[Wisdom 2:15,16]"
Hippolytus,Against the Jews,65(ante A.D. 235),in ANF,V:218-9

"But the case stands not thus; for the Scriptures do not set forth the matter in this manner. But they make use also of other testimonies, and say, Thus it is written: 'This is our God, and there shall none other be accounted of in comparison of Him. He hath found out all the way of knowledge, and hath given it unto Jacob His servant (son), and to Israel His beloved. Afterward did He show Himself upon earth, and conversed with men.'[Baruch 3:25-37]"
Hippolytus,Against the Noetus,2(A.D. 210),in ANF,V:224

" 'It should be stated that the canonical books, as the Hebrews have handed them down, are twenty-two; corresponding with the number of their letters.' Farther on he says: 'The twenty-two books of the Hebrews are the following: That which is called by us Genesis, but by the Hebrews, from the beginning of the book, Bresith, which means, 'In the beginning'; Exodus, Welesmoth, that is, 'These are the names'; Leviticus, Wikra, 'And he called'; Numbers, Ammesphekodeim; Deuteronomy, Eleaddebareim, ' These are the words'; Jesus, the son of Nave, Josoue ben Noun; Judges and Ruth, among them in one book, Saphateim; the First and Second of Kings, among them one, Samouel, that is, 'The called of God'; the Third and Fourth of Kings in one, Wammelch David, that is, 'The kingdom of David'; of the Chronicles, the First and Second in one, Dabreiamein, that is, 'Records of days'; Esdras, First and Second in one, Ezra, that is, 'An assistant'; the book of Psalms, Spharthelleim; the Proverbs of Solomon, Me-loth; Ecclesiastes, Koelth; the Song of Songs (not, as some suppose, Songs of Songs), Sir Hassirim; Isaiah, Jessia; Jeremiah, with Lamentations and the epistle in one, Jeremia[Baruch 6]; Daniel, Daniel; Ezekiel, Jezekiel; Job, Job; Esther, Esther. And besides these there are the Maccabees, which are entitled Sarbeth Sabanaiel."
Origen,Canon of the Hebrews,Fragment in Eusebius' Church History,6:25[A.D. 244],in NPNF2,I:272

"In all these cases consider whether it would not be well to remember the words, 'Thou shalt not remove the ancient landmarks which thy fathers have set.' Nor do I say this because I shun the labour of investigating the Jewish Scriptures, and comparing them with ours, and noticing their various readings. This, if it be not arrogant to say it, I have already to a great extent done to the best of my ability, labouring hard to get at the meaning in all the editions and various readings; while I paid particular attention to the interpretation of the Seventy, lest I might to be found to accredit any forgery to the Churches which are under heaven, and give an occasion to those who seek such a starting-point for gratifying their desire to slander the common brethren, and to bring some accusation against those who shine forth in our community."
Origen,To Africanus,5(ante A.D. 254),in ANF,IV:387
In Origen's epistle to Julius Africanus he defends the canonicity of Susanna [Daniel 13], Bel and the Dragon[Daniel 14], the prayers of Azarias[Daniel 3], and the hymn of praise of the three youths in the fiery furnace[Daniel 3].

"And I make it my endeavour not to be ignorant of their various readings, lest in my controversies with the Jews I should quote to them what is not found in their copies, and that I may make some use of what is found there, even although it should not be in our Scriptures. For if we are so prepared for them in our discussions, they will not, as is their manner, scornfully laugh at Gentile believers for their ignorance of the true reading as they have them."
Origen,To Africanus,5(ante A.D. 254),in ANF,IV:387

"[A]s is written in the book of Tobit: 'It is good to keep close the secret of a king, but honourable to reveal the works of God,'[Tobit 12:7]--in a way consistent with truth and God's glory, and so as to be to the advantage of the multitude."
Origen,Against Celsus,5:19(A.D. 248),in ANF,IV:551

"But he ought tp know that those who wish to live according to the teaching of Sacred Scripture understand the saying, 'The knowledge of the unwise is as talk without sense,'[Sirach 21:18] and have learnt 'to be ready always to give an answer to everyone that asketh us a reason for the hope that is in us.'[1 Pt 3:15] "
Origen,Against Celsus,7:12(A.D. 248),in ANF,IV:615

"But that we may believe on the authority of holy Scripture that such is the case, hear how in the book of Maccabees, where the mother of seven martyrs exhorts her son to endure torture, this truth is confirmed; for she says, ' ask of thee, my son, to look at the heaven and the earth, and at all things which are in them, and beholding these, to know that God made all these things when they did not exist.'[2 Maccabees 7:28]"
Origen,Fundamental Principles,2:2(A.D. 230),in ANF,IV:270

"[T]he Wisdom of Solomon, a work which is certainly not esteemed authoritative by all. In that book, however, we find written as follows: "For thy almighty hand, that made the world out of shapeless matter, wanted not means to send among them a multitude of bears and fierce lions.'[Wisdom 11:17]"
Origen,Fundamental Principles,2:2(A.D. 230),in ANF,IV:270

"And, forsooth, when we notice such things, we are forthwith to reject as spurious the copies in use in our Churches, and enjoin the brotherhood to put away the sacred books current among them, and to coax the Jews, and persuade them to give us copies which shall be untampered with, and free from forgery! Are we to suppose that that Providence which in the sacred Scriptures has ministered to the edification of all the Churches of Christ, had no thought for those bought with a price, for whom Christ died."
Origen,To Africanus,4(ante A.D. 254),in ANF,IV:387

"For since it is written, 'God did not make death, neither hath He pleasure in the destruction of the living,'[Wisdom 1:13]"
Cyprian,Epistle 51/55:22(A.D. 252),in ANF,V:333

"[T]his the faith of the sacred Scripture assures us, and in telling us how such as these prayed, gives an example which we ought to follow in our prayers, in order that we may be such as they were: 'Then these three,' it says, 'as if from one mouth sang an hymn, and blessed the Lord.'[3 Youths-Daniel 3:51]"
Cyprian,Treatise 4,8(A.D. 252),in ANF,V:449

"And thus Holy Scripture instructs us, saying, 'Prayer is good with fasting and almsgiving.'[Tobit 12:8]
Cyprian,Treatise 4,32(A.D. 252),in ANF,V:456

"Holy Scripture teaches and forewarns, saying, 'My son, when thou comest to the service of God, stand in righteousness and fear, and prepare thy soul for temptation.'[Sirach 2:1,4] And again: 'In pain endure, and in thy humility have patience; for gold and silver is tried in the fire, but acceptable men in the furnace of humiliation.'[Sirach 2:5]"
Cyprian,Treatise 7,9(A.D. 252),in ANF,V:471

"Also in Daniel: 'There was a man dwelling in Babylon whose name was Joachim; and he took a wife by name Susanna, the daughter of Helchias, a very beautiful woman, and one that feared the Lord. And her parents were righteous, and taught their daughter according to the law of Moses.'[Susanna-Daniel 13:1-3]. Moreover, in Daniel: 'And we are lowly this day in all the earth because of our sins, and there is not at this time any prince, or prophet, or leader, or burnt-offering, or oblation, or sacrifice, or incense, or place to sacrifice before Thee, and to find mercy from Thee. And yet in the soul and spirit of lowliness let us be accepted as the burnt-offerings of rams and bulls, and as it were many thousands of lambs which are fattest. If our offering may be made in Thy presence this day, their power shall be consumed, for they shall not be ashamed who put their trust in Thee. And now we follow with our whole heart, and we fear and seek Thy face. Give us not over unto reproach, but do with us according to Thy tranquillity, and according to the multitude of Thy mercy deliver us.'[3 Youths-Daniel 3:37-43]"
Cyprian,Testimonies,20(ante A.D. 258),in ANF,V:540

"In the Gospel according to John: 'No one can receive anything, except it were given him from heaven.'[John 3:27] Also in the first Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians: 'For what hast thou that thou hast not received? But if thou hast received it, why boastest thou, as if thou hadst not received it?'[1 Cor 4:7] Also in the first of Kings: 'Boast not, neither speak lofty things, and let not great speeches proceed out of your mouth, for the Lord is a God of knowledge.'[1 Sam 2:4] Also in the same place: 'The bow of the mighty men has been made weak, and the weak are girt about with strength.'[1 Sam 2:5] Of this same thing in the Maccabees: 'It is just to be subjected to God, and that a mortal should not think things equal to God.'[2 Macc 9:12] Also in the same place: 'And fear not the words of a man that is a sinner, because his glory shall be filth and worms. Today he shall be lifted up, and to-morrow he shall not be found; because he is turned into his earth, and his thought has perished.'[1 Macc 2:62,63] "
Cyprian,Treatises,12:3:4(A.D. 248),in ANF,V:533

"In Genesis: 'And God, tempted Abraham, and said to him, Take thy only son whom thou lovest, Isaac, and go into the high land, and offer him there as a burnt-offering on one of the mountains of which I will tell thee.'[Gen 22:1,2] Of this same thing in Deuteronomy: 'The Lord your God proveth you, that He may know if ye love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul.'[Deut 13:3] Of this same thing in the Wisdom of Solomon: 'Although in the sight of men they suffered torments, their hope is full of immortality; and having been in few things distressed, yet in many things they shall be happily ordered, because God tried them, and found them worthy of Himself. As gold in the furnace He proved them, and as a burnt-offering He received them. And in their time there shall be respect of them; they shall judge the nations, and shall rule over the people; and their Lord shall reign for ever.'[Wisdom 3:4-8] Of this same thing in the Maccabees: 'Was not Abraham found faithful in temptation, and it was accounted unto him for righteousness?'[1 Macc 2:52]"
Cyprian,Treatises,12:3:15(A.D. 248),in ANF,V:537

"[T]hat they worship Him alone, saying: 'O king Nebuchodonosor, there is no need for us to answer thee in this matter. For the God whom we serve is able to deliver us out of the furnace of burning fire; and He will deliver us from thy hands, O king. And if not, be it known unto thee, that we do not serve thy gods, and we do not adore the golden image which thou hast set up.'[Dan 3:16-18] And Daniel, devoted to God, and filled with the Holy Spirit, exclaims and says: 'I worship nothing but the Lord my God, who founded the heaven and the earth.'[Dan 14:5 Bel & Dragon] Tobias also, although under a royal and tyrannical slavery, yet in feeling and spirit free, maintains his confession to God, and sublimely announces both the divine power and majesty, saying: 'In the land of my captivity I confess to Him, and I show forth His power in a sinful nation.'[Tobit 13:6]"
Cyprian,Treatises,11:11(A.D. 257),in ANF,V:503

"But listen to the divine oracles: 'The works of the Lord are in judgment; from the beginning, and from His making of them, He disposed the parts thereof. He garnished His works for ever, and their principles unto their generations.'[Sirach 16:24-25]"
Dionysius the Great,On Nature,3(ante A.D. 265),in ANF,VI:86

"He is a Spirit--for says He, 'God is a Spirit'[John 4:24]--fittingly again is Christ called Breath; for 'He,' saith He, 'is the breath of God's power.'[Wisdom 7:25]"
Dionysius the Great,To Dionsyius of Rome,4(ante A.D. 265),in ANF,VI:92

"Solomon also shows that it is the Word of God, and no other, by whose hands these works of the world were made. 'I,' He says, 'came forth out of the mouth of the Most High before all creatures: I caused the light that faileth not to arise in the heavens, and covered the whole earth with a cloud. I have dwelt in the height, and my throne is in the pillar of the cloud.'[Sirach 24:3-5]"
Lactanius,Institutions,4:8(A.D. 310),in ANF,VII:107

"Therefore, I do not think men ought to be considered pious who presume to investigate this subject, in disobedience to the injunction, 'Seek not what is too difficult for thee, neither enquire into what is too high for thee.'[Sirach 3:21] For if the knowledge of many other things incomparably inferior is beyond the capacity of the human mind, and cannot therefore be attained, as has been said by Paul, 'Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared far them that lave Him'[1 Cor 2:9], and as God also said to Abraham, that the stars could not be numbered by him; and it is likewise said,' Who shall number the grains of sand by the sea-shore, or the drops of rain?'[Sirach 1:2]"
Alexander of Alexandria,To brother Alexander, fragment in Theodoret of Cyrus' Ecclesiastical History,1:3(A.D. 324),in NPNF2,III:37

"For this was accomplished at that time, when the venerable and aged Eleazar was slain, and the sons of the blessed Samuna, seven in number,[ref 2 Maccabees 6:18-31] and when Judas (Maccabeus) and his brethren were struggling on behalf of their people[ref 2 Maccabees 5:27]"
Aphraates the Persian Sage,Demonstrations,5:19(A.D. 345),in NPNF2,XIII:359

"He leads away to himself the wealthy, the sons of luxury; And 'they leave their possessions as the waves of the sea.'[Sirach 29:17]"
Aphraates the Persian Sage,Demonstrations,22:7(A.D. 345),in NPNF2,XIII:404

"Of these read the two and twenty books, but have nothing to do with the apocryphal writings. Study earnestly these only which we read openly in the Church. Far wiser and more pious than thyself were the Apostles, and the bishops of old time, the presidents of the Church who handed down these books. Being therefore a child of the Church, trench thou not upon its statutes. And of the Old Testament, as we have said, study the two and twenty books, which, if thou art desirous of learning, strive to remember by name, as I recite them. For of the Law the books of Moses are the first five, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy. And next, Joshua the son of Nave, and the book of Judges, including Ruth, counted as seventh. And of the other historical books, the first and second books of the Kings are among the Hebrews one book; also the third and fourth one book. And in like manner, the first and second of Chronicles are with them one book; and the first and second of Esdras are counted one. Esther is the twelfth book; and these are the Historical writings. But those which are written in verses are five, Job, and the book of Psalms, and Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs, which is the seventeenth book. And after these come the five Prophetic books: of the Twelve Prophets one book, of Isaiah one, of Jeremiah one, including Baruch[1-5] and Lamentations and the Epistle[of Jeremiah-Baruch 6]; then Ezekiel, and the Book of Daniel, the twenty-second of the Old Testament."
Cyril of Jerusalem,Catechetical Lectures,4:33(A.D. 350),in NPNF2,VII:27

"The Divine Nature then it is impossible to see with eyes of flesh: but from the works, which are Divine, it is possible to attain to some conception of His power, according to Solomon, who says, 'For by the greatness and beauty of the creatures proportionably the Maker of them is seen'[Wisdom 13:5]. He said not that from the creatures the Maker is seen, but added proportionably. For God appears the greater to every man in proportion as he has grasped a larger survey of the creatures: and when his heart is uplifted by that larger survey, he gains withal a greater conception of God. Wouldest thou learn that to comprehend the nature of God is impossible? The Three Children in the furnace of fire, as they hymn the praises of God, say 'Blessed art thou that beholdest the depths, and sittest upon the Cherubim'[Daniel 3:55-Three Youths]."
Cyril of Jerusalem,Catechetical Lectures,9:2,3(A.D. 350),in NPNF2,VII:51

"[L]earn from this instance the mightiness of God: for 'He hath numbered the drops of rain'[Job 26:27], which have been poured down on all the earth, not only now but in all time. The sun is a work of God, which, great though it be, is but a spot in comparison with the whole heaven; first gaze stedfastly upon the sun, and then curiously scan the Lord of the sun. 'Seek not the things that are too deep for thee, neither search out the things that are above thy strength: what is commanded thee, think thereupon'[Sirach 3:20,21]."
Cyril of Jerusalem,Catechetical Lectures,6:4(A.D. 350),in NPNF2,VII:34

"Hear the Prophet saying, 'This is our God, none other shall be accounted of in comparison with Him. He hath found out every way of knowledge, and given it to Jacob His servant, and to Israel His beloved. Afterwards He[she] was seen on earth, and conversed among men'[Baruch 3:36-37]."
Cyril of Jerusalem,Catechetical Lectures,9:15(A.D. 350),in NPNF2,VII:68

"He says to Daniel; young though thou be, convict old men infected with the sins of youth; for it is written, 'God raised up the Holy Spirit upon a young stripling'[Daniel 13:45-Susanna]"
Cyril of Jerusalem,Catechetical Lectures,16:31(A.D. 350),in NPNF2,VII:123

"For when they speak against the ascension of the Saviour, as being impossible, remember the account of the carrying away of Habakkuk: for if Habakkuk was transported by an Angel, being carried by the hair of his head[Daniel 14-Bel & the Dragon], much rather was the Lord of both Prophets and Angels, able by His own power to make His ascent into the Heavens on a cloud from the Mount of Olives."
Cyril of Jerusalem,Catechetical Lectures,14:25(A.D. 350),in NPNF2,VII:101

"[T]he Old Testament is reckoned as consisting of twenty-two books...so that of Moses there be five books...with the Lamentations and the Letter[Baruch 6-Epistle of Jeremiah], and Daniel...bringing the number of the books to twenty-two. It is to be noted also that by adding to these Tobias and Judith, there are twenty-four books, corresponding to the number of letters used by the Greeks."
Hilary of Poitiers,Prologue to the Psalms,15(A.D. 365),in JUR, 1:383

"They say that the Father has prescience of all things, as the blessed Susanna says, 'O eternal God, that knowest secrets, and knowest all things before they be'[Daniel 13:42-Susanna]"
Hilary of Poitiers,On the Trinity,4:8(A.D. 359),in NPNF2,IX:73

"As you have listened already to Moses and Isaiah, so listen now to Jeremiah inculcating the same truth as they:--'This is our God, and there shall be none other likened unto Him, Who hath found out all the way of knowledge, and hath given it unto Jacob His servant and to Israel His beloved. Afterward did He shew Himself upon earth and dwelt among men.'[Baruch 3:36-37]
Hilary of Poitiers,On the Trinity,4:42(A.D. 359),in NPNF2,IX:84

"Such suggestions are inconsistent with the clear sense of Scripture. For all things, as the Prophet says[ref 2 Maccabees 7:28], were made out of nothing; it was no transformation of existing things, but the creation into a perfect form of the non-existent."
Hilary of Poitiers,On the Trinity,4:16(A.D. 359),in NPNF2,IX:76

"Then, while the devout soul was baffled and astray through its own feebleness, it caught from the prophet's voice this scale of comparison for God, admirably expressed, 'By the greatness of His works and the beauty of the things that He hath made the Creator of worlds is rightly discerned'[Wisdom 13:5]."
Hilary of Poitiers,On the Trinity,1:7(A.D. 359),in NPNF2,IX:42

"There are, then, of the Old Testament, twenty-two books in number; for, as I have heard, it is handed down that this is the number of the letters among the Hebrews; their respective order and names being as follows. The first is Genesis, then Exodus, next Leviticus, after that Numbers, and then Deuteronomy. Following these there is Joshua, the son of Nun, then Judges, then Ruth. And again, after these four books of Kings, the first and second being reckoned as one book, and so likewise the third and fourth as one book. And again, the first and second of the Chronicles are reckoned as one book. Again Ezra, the first and second are similarly one book. After these there is the book of Psalms, then the Proverbs, next Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs. Job follows, then the Prophets, the twelve being reckoned as one book. Then Isaiah, one book, then Jeremiah with Baruch, Lamentations, and the epistle, one book; afterwards, Ezekiel and Daniel, each one book. Thus far constitutes the Old Testament...But for greater exactness I add this also, writing of necessity; that there are other books besides these not indeed included in the Canon, but appointed by the Fathers to be read by those who newly join us, and who wish for instruction in the word of godliness. The Wisdom of Solomon, and the Wisdom of Sirach, and Esther, and Judith, and Tobit, and that which is called the Teaching of the Apostles, and the Shepherd. But the former, my brethren, are included in the Canon, the latter being [merely] read; nor is there in any place a mention of apocryphal writings. But they are an invention of heretics, who write them when they choose, bestowing upon them their approbation, and assigning to them a date, that so, using them as ancient writings, they may find occasion to lead astray the simple.
Athanasius,Festal Letters,39:4,7(A.D. 367),in NPNF2,IV:552

"[T]he sacred writers to whom the Son has revealed Him, have given us a certain image from things visible, saying, 'Who is the brightness of His glory, and the Expression of His Person;'[Heb 1:3] and again, 'For with Thee is the well of life, and in Thy light shall we see lights;'[Ps 36:9] and when the Word chides lsrael, He says, 'Thou hast forsaken the Fountain of wisdom;'[Baruch 3:12] and this Fountain it is which says, 'They have forsaken Me the Fountain of living waters'[Jer 2:13]"
Athanasius,Defense of the Nicene Faith,2:12(A.D. 351),in NPNF2,IV:158

" And where the sacred writers say, Who exists before the ages,' and 'By whom He made the ages,'[Heb 1:2] they thereby as clearly preach the eternal and everlasting being of the Son, even while they are designating God Himself. Thus, if Isaiah says, 'The Everlasting God, the Creator of the ends of the earth[2];'[Is 40:28] and Susanna said, 'O Everlasting God[3];'[Daniel 13:42-Susanna] and Baruch wrote, 'I will cry unto the Everlasting in my days,' and shortly after, 'My hope is in the Everlasting, that He will save you, and joy is come unto me from the Holy One;'[Baruch 4:20,22]"
Athanasius,Discourses Against the Arians,1:4(A.D. 362),in NPNF2,IV:313

"t is written that 'all things were made through the Word,' and 'without Him was not made one thing,'[John 1:3] and again, 'One Lord Jesus, through whom are all things,'[1 Cor 8:9] and 'in Him all things consist,'[Col 1:17] it is very plain that the Son cannot be a work, but He is the Hand of God and the Wisdom. This knowing, the martyrs in Babylon, Ananias, Azarias, and Misael, arraign the Arian irreligion. For when they say, 'O all ye works of the Lord, bless ye the Lord,'[Daniel 3:57-Three Youths]"
Athanasius,Discourses Against the Arians,2:71(A.D. 362),in NPNF2,IV:387

"Daniel said to Astyages, 'I do not worship idols made with hands, but the Living God, who hath created the heaven and the earth, and hath sovereignty over all flesh;'[Daniel 14:5-Bel & the Dragon]"
Athanasius,Discourses Against the Arians,3:30(A.D. 362),in NPNF2,IV:410

"But if this too fails to persuade them, let them tell us themselves, whether there is any wisdom in the creatures or not? If not how is it that the Apostle complains, 'For after that in the Wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God?'[1 Cor 1:21] or how is it if there is no wisdom, that a 'multitude of wise men'[Wisdom 6:24] are found in Scripture? for 'a wise man feareth and departeth from evil;'[Prov 14:16] and 'through wisdom is a house builded;'[Prov 24] and the Preacher says, 'A man's wisdom maketh his face to shine;' and he blames those who are headstrong thus, 'Say not thou, what is the cause that the former days were better than these? for thou dost not inquire in wisdom concerning this.'[Eccl 8:1,7:10] But if, as the Son of Sirach says, 'He poured her out upon all His works; she is with all flesh according to His gift, and He hath given her to them that love Him,'[Sirach 1:8,9]"
Athanasius,Discourses Against the Arians,2:79(A.D. 362),in NPNF2,IV:391

"[F]or it is written of the other, 'The foolish person will speak foolishness;' [Is 32:6 LXX] but of these, 'Ask counsel of all that are wise.'[Tobit 4:18]"
Athanasius,Defense before Constantius,17(A.D. 357),in NPNF2,IV:244

"So as Judith says, 'Thou hast thought, and what things thou didst determine were ready at hand.'[Judith 9:5,6]"
Basil,On the Holy Spirit,8:19(A.D. 375),in NPNF2,VIII:13

"The Lord ordereth 'all things in measure and weight,'[Wisdom 11:20]"
Basil,To Clergy of Samosata,Epistle 219:1(A.D. 375),in NPNF2,VIII:260

"What Scripture says is very true, 'As for a fool he changeth as the moon.'[Sirach 27:11]
Basil,Hexaemeron,6:10(A.D. 370),in NPNF2,VIII:88

"Standing and sitting, I apprehend, indicate the fixity and entire stability of the nature, as Baruch, when he wishes to exhibit the immutability and immobility of the Divine mode of existence, says, 'For thou sittest for ever and we perish utterly.'[Baruch 3:3]"
Basil,On the Holy Spirit,6:15(A.D. 375),in NPNF2,VIII:10

"But the Spirit is believed to have been operating at the saint time in Habakkuk and in Daniel at Babylon,[ref Daniel 14:35-Bel & the Dragon] and to have been at the prison with Jeremiah,[ref Jer 20:2] and with Ezekiel at the Chebar.[ref Ez 1:1]"
Basil,On the Holy Spirit,23:54(A.D. 375),in NPNF2,VIII:35

"The Lord is now making trial of your love for Him. Now there is an opportunity for you, through your patience, to take the martyr's lot. The mother of the Maccabees[ref 2 Maccabees 7] saw the death of seven sons without a sigh, without even shedding one unworthy tear."
Basil,To the Wife of Nectarius,Epistle 6:2(A.D. 358),in NPNF2,VIII:115

"[T]he Scripture tells us, 'into the malicious soul Wisdom cannot come.'[Wisdom 1:4]"
Gregory of Nyssa,On Virginity,15(A.D. 371),in NPNF2,V:361

"[T]he prophetical writing says, 'knoweth all things before they be,'[Daniel 3:42-Susanna]"
Gregory of Nyssa,Against Making of Man,16(A.D. 379),in NPNF2,V:406

"[T]he prophet says, 'was seen upon earth and conversed with men,'[Baruch 3:38]"
Gregory of Nyssa,Against Eunomius,6:4(A.D. 384),in NPNF2,V:189

"n the Scripture the 'Seed of the Chaldeans'[Judith 5:6] removed, and the children of Babylon dashed against the Rocks and destroyed."
Gregory of Nazianzen,Oration 45,2nd Oration on Easter 15(A.D. 383),in NPNF2,VII:428

"And how shall we preserve the truth that God pervades all things and fills all, as it is written 'Do not I fill heaven and earth? saith the Lord,'[Jer 23:24] and 'The Spirit of the Lord filleth the world,'[Wisdom 1:7] if God partly contains and partly is contained?"
Gregory of Nazianzen,Oration 28,2nd Theological 8(A.D. 380),in NPNF2,VII:291

"Passing by the elders in the book of Daniel;[Ref Daniel 13:5-Susanna] for it is better to pass them by, together with the Lord's righteous sentence and declaration concerning them..."
Gregory of Nazianzen,Oration 2,Flight to Pontus 64(A.D. 362),in NPNF2,VII:218

"Not by raining down manna, as for Israel of old[ref Ex 16:14] or opening the rock, in order to give drink to His thirsting people,[ref Ps 78:24] or feasting her by means of ravens, as Elijah,[ref 1 Kings 17:6] or feeding her by a prophet carried through the air, as He did to Daniel when a-hungered in the den.[ref Daniel 14:33,34-Bel & Dragon]"
Gregory of Nazianzen,Oration 18,On the Death of his Father 30(A.D. 374),in NPNF2,VII:264

"[T]he just man in the den, restraining the lions' rage,[ref Daniel 6:22] and the struggle of the seven Maccabees,[ref 2 Maccabees 7:1] who were perfected with their father and mother in blood, and in all kinds of tortures.
Gregory of Nazianzen,Oration 43,Panegyric on Basil 74(A.D. 381),in NPNF2,VII:420

"The order of the Old Testament begins here: Genesis, one book; Exodus, one book; Leviticus, one book; Numbers, one book; Deuteronomy, one book; Joshua [Son of] Nave, one book; Judges, one book; Ruth, one book; Kings, four books [ie., 1 and 2 Samuel and 1 and 2 Kings];Paralipomenon [Chronicles], two books; Psalms, one book; Solomon, three books: Proverbs, one book; Ecclesiastes, one book; Canticle of Canticles, one book; likewise Wisdom, one book; Ecclesiasticus [Sirach], one book. Likewise the order of the Prophets. Isaias one book, Jeremias one book,...lamentations, Ezechiel one book, Daniel one book, Osee ... Nahum ... Habacuc ... Sophonias ... Aggeus ... Zacharias ... Malachias ... Likewise the order of the historical [books]: Job, one book; Tobit, one book; Esdras, two books [Ezra and Nehemiah]; Esther, one book; Judith, one book; Maccabees, two books."
Council of Rome,Decree of Pope Damasus(A.D. 382),in DEN,34

"Of the Old Covenant: the five books of Moses--Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy; one of Joshua the son of Nun, one of the Judges, one of Ruth, four of the Kings, two of the Chronicles, two of Ezra, one of Esther, one of Judith, three of the Maccabees, one of Job, one hundred and fifty psalms; three books of Solomon--Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs; sixteen prophets. And besides these, take care that your young persons learn the Wisdom of the very learned Sirach."
Apostolic Constitutions,47:85(A.D. 400),in ANF,VII:505

"And again; 'Do not to another what thou hatest'[Tobit 4:15]"
John Chrysostom,Concerning Statues,7(A.D. 387),in NPNF1,IX:428

"Wherefore we must cast out all wickedness from our souls, and never more contrive any deceit; for, saith one, 'To the perverse God sendeth crooked paths [Prov 21:8 LXX]; and, 'The holy spirit of discipline will flee deceit, and remove from thoughts that are without understanding.'[Wisd. 1:5]"
John Chrysostom,Homilies on John,41(A.D. 391),in NPNF1,XIV:150

"Let us then repeat to ourselves soothing charms drawn from the holy Scripture, and say, 'Thou art earth and ashes.' 'Why is earth and ashes proud?' [Sirach 10:9], and, 'The sway of his fury shall be his destruction'[Sirach 1:19] and, 'The wrathful man is not comely'[Prov. 11:25 LXX]"
John Chrysostom,Homilies on John,48(A.D. 391),in NPNF1,XIV:175

"Elsewhere the Scripture takes the term "old" in the sense of blame; for seeing that the things are of various aspect as being composed of many parts, it uses the same words both in a good and an evil import, not according to the same shade of meaning. Of which you may see an instance in the blame cast elsewhere on the old: [Ps. 17:46 LXX] 'They waxed old, and they halted from their paths.' And again, [Ps. 6:7 LXX] 'I have become old in the midst of all mine enemies.' And again, [Daniel 13:52-Susanna] 'O thou that art become old in evil days.' So also the 'Leaven' is often taken for the kingdom of Heaven, although here found fault with. But in that place it is used with one aspect, and in this with another."
John Chrysostom,Homilies on 1st Corinthians,15(A.D. 392),in NPNF1,XII:87

"And to prove that I say not this upon conjecture; when they fell into the furnace, they bewailed themselves after this sort, saying, [Daniel 3:29,33-Three Youths] 'We have sinned, we have done iniquity, we cannot open our mouth.'
John Chrysostom,Homilies on 1st Corinthians,18(A.D. 392),in NPNF1,XII:104

"And Baruch in the book of Jeremiah says 'this is our God: no other shall be reckoned by the side of Him: He found out every path of knowledge and gave it to Jacob His servant, and lsrael his beloved. After these things also He appeared upon the earth, and held converse with men.'[Baruch 3:35-37] And David signifying His incarnate presence said 'He shall come down like the rain into a fleece of wool, and like the drop which distills upon the earth'[Ps 72:6] because He noiselessly and gently entered into the Virgin's womb.
John Chrysostom,Against Marcionist & Manicheans(ante A.D. 403),in NPNF1,XI:205

"That nothing be read in church besides the Canonical Scripture. Item, that besides the Canonical Scriptures nothing be read in church under the name of divine Scripture. But the Canonical Scriptures are as follows: Genesis. Exodus. Leviticus. Numbers. Deuteronomy. Joshua the Son of Nun. The Judges. Ruth. The Kings, four books. The Chronicles, two books. Job. The Psalter. The Five books of Solomon. The Twelve Books of the Prophets. Isaiah. Jeremiah. Ezechiel. Daniel. Tobit. Judith. Esther. Ezra, two books. Macchabees, two books."
Council of Hippo,Canon 36(A.D. 393),in NPNF2,XIV:453-454

"[It has been decided] that nothing except the canonical Scriptures should be read in the Church under the name of the divine Scriptures. But the canonical Scriptures are: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus,Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, Paralipomenon, two books, Job, the Psalter of David, five books of Solomon [Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Wisdom, Sirach], twelve books of the Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Ezekiel, Tobit, Judith, Esther, two books of Esdras, two books of the Maccabees."
Council of Carthage III,Canon 397(A.D. 397),in DEN,39-40

"Nor do I allege any opinion of my own, but I repeat that which the Holy Spirit spake by the prophet: 'Blessed is the barren that is undefiled.'[Wisdom 3:13]"
Ambrose,Concerning Virginity,7:35(A.D. 378),in NPNF2,X:369

"So then, holy Judith,[Judith 10:3ff] strengthened by lengthened mourning and by daily fasting, sought not the enjoyments of the world regardless of danger, and strong in her contempt for death."
Ambrose,Concerning Widows,7:38(A.D. 378),in NPNF2,X:397

"Daniel also, unless he had received the Spirit of God, would never have been able to discover that lustful adultery, that fraudulent lie. For when Susanna, assailed by the conspiracy of the elders, saw that the mind of the people was moved by consideration for the old men, and destitute of all help, alone amongst men, conscious of her chastity she prayed God to judge; it is written: 'The Lord heard her voice, when she was being led to be put to death, and the Lord raised up the Holy Spirit of a young youth, whose name was Daniel.'[Daniel 13:44,45-Susanna]"
Ambrose,On the Holy Spirit,3:6:39(A.D. 381),in NPNF2,X:140

"And the Lord bids them lay aside the garments of mourning, and to cease the groanings of repentance, saying: 'Put off, O Jerusalem, the garment of thy mourning and affliction. and clothe thyself in beauty, the glory which God hath given thee for ever.'[Baruch 5:1]"
Ambrose,Concerning Repentance,I:9:43(A.D. 384),in NPNF2,X:336

"Wherefore the Scripture says well: 'A wise man will keep silence until there is opportunity.'[Sirach 20:6]"
Ambrose,Duties of the Clergy,I:2:5(A.D. 391),in NPNF2,X:2

"When Jeremiah understood what they wanted he said: 'The spot will remain unknown until God shall gather His people together and be gracious to them. Then God shall reveal these things and the majesty of the Lord shall appear.'[2 Maccabees 2:7]"
Ambrose,Duties of the Clergy,III:17:101(A.D. 391),in NPNF2,X:84

"And what safety can there be for us unless we wash away our sins by fasting, since Scripture says that fasting and alms do away sin? [Tobit 12:8,9]"
Ambrose,Epistle 63:16(A.D. 396),in NPNF2,X:459

"This preface to the Scriptures may serve as a 'helmeted' introduction to all the books which we now turn from Hebrew into Latin, so that we may be assured that what is not found in our list must be placed amongst the Apocryphal writings. Wisdom ... the book of ... Sirach, and Judith, and Tobias, and the Shepherd are not in the canon. The first book of Maccabees I have found to be in Hebrew, the second in Greek, as can be proved from the very style."
Jerome,Preface to Samuel and Kings[Prologus Galeatus](A.D. 391),in NPNF2,VI:490

"We have the authentic book of Jesus son of Sirach, and annother pseudepigraphic work, entitled the Wisdom of Solomon. I found the first in Hebrew, with the title, 'Parables', not Ecclesiasticus, as in Latin versions...The second finds no place in Hebrew texts, and its style is redolent of Greek eloquence: a number of ancient writers assert that it is a work of Philo Judaeus. Therefore, just as the Church reads Judith, Tobit, and the books of Maccabees, but does not admit them to the canon of Scripture; so let the Church read these two volumes, for the edification of the people, but not to support the authority of ecclesiastical doctrines."
Jerome,Preface to Proverbs,(A.D. 398),in LCF,187

"What sin have I committed in following the judgment of the churches? But when I repeat what the Jews say against the Story of Susanna and the Hymn of the Three Children, and the fables of Bel and the Dragon, which are not contained in the Hebrew Bible, the man who makes this a charge against me proves himself to be a fool and a slanderer; for I explained not what I thought but what they commonly say against us."
Jerome,Against Rufinus,11:33(A.D. 402),in NPNF2,III:517

"At least that is what Solomon says: "wisdom is the gray hair unto men.'[Wisdom 4:9]"
Jerome,To Paulinus, Epistle 58(A.D. 395),in VI:119

"[D]oes not the scripture say: 'Burden not thyself above thy power'[Sirach 13:2]?"
Jerome,To Eustochium,Epistle 108(A.D. 404),in NPNF2,VI:207

"I would cite the words of the psalmist: 'the sacrifices of God are a broken spirit,'[Ps 51:17] and those of Ezekiel 'I prefer the repentance of a sinner rather than his death,'[Ez 18:23] and those of Baruch, 'Arise, arise, O Jerusalem,'[Baruch 5:5] and many other proclamations made by the trumpets of the prophets."
Jerome,To Oceanus,Epistle 77:4(A.D. 399),in NPNF2,VI:159

"The words of 2 Maccabees v. 17, which say that Antiochus Epiphanes had power to overthrow the Temple, 'because of the multitude of sins,'[2 Macc 5:17] are quoted in connection with the confessions of Daniel."
Jerome,Against the Pelagians,II:30(A.D. 415),in NPNF2,VI:471

"Of the Old Testament, therefore, first of all there have been handed down five books of Moses, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy; Then Jesus Nave, (Joshua the son of Nun), The Book of Judges together with Ruth; then four books of Kings (Reigns), which the Hebrews reckon two; the Book of Omissions, which is entitled the Book of Days (Chronicles), and two books of Ezra (Ezra and Nehemiah), which the Hebrews reckon one, and Esther; of the Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel; moreover of the twelve (minor) Prophets, one book; Job also and the Psalms of David, each one book. Solomon gave three books to the Churches, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Canticles. These comprise the books of the Old Testament...But it should be known that there are also other books which our fathers call not 'Canonical' but 'Ecclesiastical:' that is to say, Wisdom, called the Wisdom of Solomon, and another Wisdom, called the Wisdom of the Son of Syrach, which last-mentioned the Latins called by the general title Ecclesiasticus, designating not the author of the book, but the character of the writing. To the same class belong the Book of Tobit, and the Book of Judith, and the Books of the Maccabees. In the New Testament the little book which is called the Book of the Pastor of Hermas, [and that] which is called The Two Ways,[ie. Didache] or the Judgment of Peter; all of which they would have read in the churches, but not appealed to for the confirmation of doctrine. The other writings they have named 'Apocrypha.' These they would not have read in the Churches. These are the traditions which the Fathers have handed down to us, which, as I said, I have thought it opportune to set forth in this place, for the instruction of those who are being taught the first elements of the Church and of the Faith, that they may know from what fountains of the Word of God their draughts must be taken."
Rufinus of Aquileia,The Apostles Creed,37-38(A.D. 404),in NPNF2,III:557-558

"Which also the Prophet fore told when he said, 'This is our God: no other shall be accounted of in comparison of Him. He hath found out all the way of knowledge, and hath given it unto Jacob His servant and to Israel His beloved. Afterward He shewed Himself upon the earth, and conversed with men.'[Baruch 3:36-37]"
Rufinus of Aquileia,The Apostles Creed,37-38(A.D. 404),in NPNF2,III:557-558

"A brief addition shows what books really are received in the canon. These are...of Moses five books...and Josue, of Judges one book, of Kings four books, and also Ruth, of the Prophets sixteen books, of Solomon five books, the Psalms. Likewise of the histories, Job one book, of Tobias one book, Esther one, Judith one, of the Machabees two, of Esdra two, Paralipomenon two books..."
Pope Innocent[regn. A.D. 401-417],To Exsuperius,Epistle 6(A.D. 405),in DEN,42

"Now the whole canon of Scripture on which we say this judgment is to be exercised, is contained in the following books:--Five books of Moses, that is, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy; one book of Joshua the son of Nun; one of Judges; one short book called Ruth, which seems rather to belong to the beginning of Kings; next, four books of Kings, and two of Chronicles --these last not following one another, but running parallel, so to speak, and going over the same ground. The books now mentioned are history, which contains a connected narrative of the times, and follows the order of the events. There are other books which seem to follow no regular order, and are connected neither with the order of the preceding books nor with one another, such as Job, and Tobias, and Esther, and Judith, and the two books of Maccabees, and the two of Ezra,(ie. Ezra & Nehemiah) which last look more like a sequel to the continuous regular history which terminates with the books of Kings and Chronicles. Next are the Prophets, in which there is one book of the Psalms of David; and three books of Solomon, viz., Proverbs, Song of Songs, and Ecclesiastes. For two books, one called Wisdom and the other Ecclesiasticus, are ascribed to Solomon from a certain resemblance of style, but the most likely opinion is that they were written by Jesus the son of Sirach. Still they are to be reckoned among the prophetical books, since they have attained recognition as being authoritative. The remainder are the books which are strictly called the Prophets: twelve separate books of the prophets which are connected with one another, and having never been disjoined, are reckoned as one book; the names of these prophets are as follows:--Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi; then there are the four greater prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Ezekiel. The authority of the Old Testament is contained within the limits of these forty-four books."
Augustine,On Christian Doctrine,II:8(A.D. 426),in NPNF1,II:53-539

"Wherefore, as Scripture says, 'when you go forth to serve the Lord stand in the fear of the Lord, and prepare your mind'[Sirach 2:1]"
John Cassian,The Institutes,4:37(A.D. 426),in NPNF2,XI:231

"[A]s Scripture itself testifies: 'For God made not death, neither rejoiceth in the destruction of the living.'[Wisdom 1:13]"
John Cassian,Third Conference of Abbot Chaermon,7(A.D. 428),in NPNF2,XI:425

"[T]he Prophet says, 'the Lord Himself is God, who found out all the way of knowledge; who was seen upon earth and conversed with men.'[Baruch 3:37,38]"
John Cassian,The Incarnation of Christ,4:13(A.D. 430),in NPNF2,XI:580

"[T]he divine Oracles cry aloud, 'Remove not the landmarks, which thy fathers have set,'[Prov 22:28] and 'Go not to law with a Judge,'[Sirach 8:14] and 'Whoso breaketh through a fence a serpent shall bite him,'[Eccles 10:8]"
Vincent of Lerins,Commonitory,21:51(A.D. 434),in NPNF2,XI:146

"Two officers in the army, who were shield bearers in the imperial suite, at a certain banquet lamented in somewhat warm language the abomination of what was being done, and employed the admirable language of the glorious youths at Babylon, 'Thou hast given us over to an impious Prince an apostate beyond all the nations on the earth.'[Daniel 3:32-Three Youths]"
Theodoret of Cyrus,Ecclesiastical History,3:11(A.D. 440),in NPNF2,III:101

"A wise man who knew all this full well reasons about deaths of this kind and says, 'Yea; speedily was he taken away, lest that wickedness should alter his understanding.'[Wisdom 4:11]"
Theodoret of Cyrus,To Cyrus Magistrianus,Epistle 136(ante A.D. 466),in NPNF2,III:306

"And hence Tobias also, while instructing his son in the precepts of godliness, says, 'Give alms of thy substance, and turn not thy face from any poor man: so shall it come to pass that the face of GOD shall not be turned from thee'[Tobit 4:7]"
Pope Leo the Great[regn A.D. 440-461],Sermon 10:4(ante A.D. 461),in NPNF2,XII:121

"[T]he sins which are washed away either by the waters of baptism, or the tears of repentance, may be also blotted out by alms-giving; for the Scripture says, 'As water extinguisheth fire, so alms extinguisheth sin.'[Sirach 3:29] Through our Lord Jesus Christ."
Pope Leo the Great[regn A.D. 440-461],Sermon 49:6(ante A.D. 461),in NPNF2,XII:162

"But O ungodliest of men[ie Judas Iscariot], "thou seed of Chanaan and not of Juda,'[Daniel 13:56-Susanna]"
Pope Leo the Great[regn A.D. 440-461],Sermon 67(ante A.D. 461),in NPNF2,XII:179

"Who[ie the Son] is equal with God the Father, have assumed the form of a slave and the likeness of sinful flesh. But because 'by the devil's malice death entered into the world'[Wisdom 2:24]"
Pope Leo the Great[regn A.D. 440-461],Sermon 78:2(ante A.D. 461),in NPNF2,XII:192

"The canonical books of the Old Testament are therefore twenty-one in number...Besides these there are other books of the same Old Testament, which are not canonical, and which are read only to the catechumens. These are the Wisdom of Solomon...the Wisdom of Jesus, Son of Sirach,... Esther,... Judith,... Tobias... These are not canonical."
Synopsys of Sacred Scripture,2(A.D. 500),in JUR,III:255

"For of him it is written, But by envy of the devil death entered into the world'[Wisdom 2:24]"
Pope Gregory the Great[regn A.D. 590-604],Pastoral Care,10(ante A.D. 604),in NPNF2,XII:32

"[L]et them hear what is written, 'Give to every man that asketh of thee'[Luke 6:30]. Lest they should give something, however little to those on whom they ought to bestow nothing at all, let them hear what is written. 'Give to the good man, and receive not a sinner: do well to him that is lowly, and give not to the ungodly'[Sirach 12:4]. And again, 'Set out thy bread and wine on the burial of the just, but eat and drink not thereof with sinners' [Tobit 4:17]."
Pope Gregory the Great[regn A.D. 590-604],Pastoral Care,20(ante A.D. 604),in NPNF2,XII:45

"The divine Scripture likewise saith that 'the souls of the just are in God's hand'[Wisdom 3:1] and death cannot lay hold of them."
John Damascene,Orthodox Faith,4:15(A.D. 743),in NPNF2,IX:87

"But others, though future, are put in the past tense, as, for instance, This is our God: 'Therefore He[she] was seen upon the earth and dwell among men'[Baruch 3:38]."
John Damascene,Orthodox Faith,4:18(A.D. 743),in NPNF2,IX:90

"o that in them was fufilled that which is written, 'The service of God is abominable to the sinner.'[Sirach 1:22]"
7th Ecumenical Council,Nicea II,Canon 6,in NPNF2,XIV:566

 

Good points. But this is far more devastating to the RC position since we KNOW that the "traditions" of the Bereans - the Jews and Jewish converts of Acts 17:1-6 WERE in fact "at odds with what Paul was teaching!" - so ALSO were the directives of their "magesterium".

That means they had to IGNORE the magesterium, IGNORE their own traditions - listen to Paul AND approve/test him sola scriptura to "get this right"!!

A more devastating case AGAINST the RC model could hardly be imagined!

In Christ,

Bob

 

And here lies precisely the problem. We see the magisterium does change things, and once the new "clarification" becomes established, then, the later generation of leasders cannot change it, but they can still build on top of it, adding new clarifications. 1900 years of that, and you're going to end up with something vastly different than what you started with. This has been precisely my point all along. Doctrines like real presence were attempts to "clarify" apostolic teaching, and since they became 'established' and widespread early on, you assume they were the original "apostolic tradition".

This is one of the reasons for the split between East and West. Leaders like Augustine came and tried to clarify everything to the point that half of the Church could not agree with is. Filioque was another clarification that the East could not swallow. And the West would continue to add new "clarifications" until the rift with the East became final.

The ongoing mistake is to insist a secularized organization of professional executive men is the pillar and ground of truth. God's Word is the pillar and it has not changed. The "reboots" you speak of came about because of all the 'clarification' the magisterium piled up, until you had a completely different faith.

The "reboot" may not be ideal, but then if you find that a virus has infected your system and is in the process of executing damge; you had better reboot to stop it! The system then may still be damaged (as the unity of Christendom is), but farworse damage was prevented. We don't go and look at the damage and conclude that the virus was good (because it was already there before the reboot), and we would have an undamged unit if we had just 'let it do its work'.