-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
On whose authority did Luther remove the Apocrypha?
- Thread starter Matt Black
- Start date
My comment was limited to the issue of the apocrypha and the Old Testament and was not intended to include any other area of consideration. You seem almost to suggest that the Jews cannot determine for themselves what are the books that are Hebrew Scripture, but I know that you could not mean that. Your Protestant heritage is stronger than you may think. It is Catholicism that has added things that do not belong, such as purgatory.
So aside from "Jerome didn't like them" and the (anti-Christian) Jewish Council of Jamnia removed them, what authority is there to remove the DCs?
Yours in Christ
Matt
Yours in Christ
Matt
The main authority is that the Jews do not consider them sacred and the Jews do not consider them part of the Hebrew Scripture, Matt. This is where the Catholic Church went out on a limb, as usual. Catholicism, as you know, is what is called a merit theology. You have to perform specified works in order to be saved. Catholicism in the minds of theologians such as R.C. Sproul is anti-Christian.
Sproul is a Catholic?!
Yours in Christ
Matt
Yours in Christ
Matt
Where did I go wrong? I forgot that I was talking to a lawyer--LOL. Sproul is a Presbyterian, isn't he?
Yes, a 'nice' Calvinist, IMNSVHO!
Yours in Christ
Matt
Yours in Christ
Matt
Luther went into the same trap as Jerome, namely to equate the Judaism of his present day with the judaism of Jesus' time. Rabbinic judaism post-Jamnia is not the same as the second temple judaism of Jesus' time. And rabbinic judaism does not recognise the DCs. Luther thought they must have got the OT canon right. This is a problem because for example . John's gospel clothes Jesus in the language of sophiology, which is understood the best only in the light of DCs such as the Wisdom of Solomon and Sirach.
Yours in Christ
Matt
Your points do not hold water. We have already established that the Catholics did not take those books until 1546, after Luther was already condemned to death by the Pope I think. So Luther did not remove anything.
Secondly, the Jews do not today recognize the books that you mention nor did they at Jamnia, which you have already discussed. The Jewish canon was closed before Christ.
You are reaching into the cults and the higher critics for points that are not involved in the Jewish canon. As has been pointed out, Paul says in Romans that the Jews were given what is now called the Hebrew Scripture or Old Testament. If you believe the Catholics, fine, but you are not going to persuade me to join the Catholics on this issue.
Secondly, the Jews do not today recognize the books that you mention nor did they at Jamnia, which you have already discussed. The Jewish canon was closed before Christ.
You are reaching into the cults and the higher critics for points that are not involved in the Jewish canon. As has been pointed out, Paul says in Romans that the Jews were given what is now called the Hebrew Scripture or Old Testament. If you believe the Catholics, fine, but you are not going to persuade me to join the Catholics on this issue.
I have already said that post-Jamnia and contemporary Judaism reject the DCs - that was one of the points of Jamnia. But pre-Jamnia Judaism of Jesus' day did accept them
Yours in Christ
Matt
Yours in Christ
Matt
manchester
New Member
The Jews don't believe in the "Old Testament." They believe in the Bible. True, they dispute the Apocrypha, but they also dispute the New Testament. If we are to go with the views of the Jews, we much reject everything but the Old Testament.
manchester
New Member
Some Orthodox do use a couple extra books more than the Roman Catholics. But both the Orthodox and Catholics agree that Christians have always considered the Apocrypha to be scripture from the time of the apostles. This refutes the claim that it was added by the Roman Catholics in the 1500s.
The Jews don't believe in the "Old Testament." They believe in the Bible. True, they dispute the Apocrypha, but they also dispute the New Testament. If we are to go with the views of the Jews, we much reject everything but the Old Testament. </font>[/QUOTE]Thank you for your information on the Orthodox churches!
Wasn't it Hank who pointed out that Paul says in Romans that the Jews were entrusted with the Oracles of God? Therefore, they alone can determine the Hebrew Scripture, or the Old Testament. That fact that the Jews deny the New Testament is beside the point. What is correct is that the Jews establish what books belong in the Old Testament. The Pope can hardly say in 1546 that books are now going to be added to the Old Testament. The Pope never had that authority over the Hebrew Scripture. The Catholic Church is in error as well as the Orthodox Church on this question.
And you know this and have authority to say it how?
Yours in Christ
Matt
Yours in Christ
Matt
Don't be silly. Look at the case against you. Hank first posted it:
Romans 3:1 (KJV) What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit [is there] of circumcision?
2 Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.
Therefore, the Pope and the Eastern Orthodox never had any authority to amend the Hebrew Scriptures!
Romans 3:1 (KJV) What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit [is there] of circumcision?
2 Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.
Therefore, the Pope and the Eastern Orthodox never had any authority to amend the Hebrew Scriptures!
manchester
New Member
The Mormons and JWs have stronger and more compelling scriptural analysis than that. You have no scriptural basis, stated or implied, for your belief that the Jews decide what is canon but only for the OT. Your view is of the flesh ONLY.
Why quote the cults--the Mormons and Jehovah's False Witnesses? You have the burden of proof. Long ago I quoted several lines of reasoning based upon ancient history. You have given no Scripture whatsoever. If the Jews cannot decide what books are sacred and what are not, how can the Pope in 1546 and some of the Eastern Orthodox and Matt decide today?
Romans 3:1 (KJV) What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit [is there] of circumcision?
2 Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.
Romans 3:1 (KJV) What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit [is there] of circumcision?
2 Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.
But the Jews prior to Jamnia did accept the DCs...so the question is: at which point in the Jewish timeline does one 'dip in' and treat their rulings as authoritative on the OT canon - pre-Jamnia or post-?
Yours in Christ
Matt
Yours in Christ
Matt
It has already been established that the Jewish canon was closed at least 150 years before the birth of Jesus and maybe 400 years before the birth of Jesus. It also has been established that the meeting of Jamnia did not do anything one way or another about the Jewish canon. In fact, scholars say that Jamnia did not deal with the question of acceptance of new books.
Also, the Jews themselves noted that "the voice of God had ceased to speak directly" from the 4th century BC onward.
The books that you mention, Matt, were never part of the Jewish canon.
Also, the Jews themselves noted that "the voice of God had ceased to speak directly" from the 4th century BC onward.
The books that you mention, Matt, were never part of the Jewish canon.
Where has "it already been established"? Jamnia did not deal in 'new books', it removed existing ones which were adhered to by the minim from whom the post-Temple Jews wished to distance themselves
Yours in Christ
Matt
Yours in Christ
Matt