When the Holy Bible Was First Assembled, in 382 A.D., by the Inspiration of God,

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Nov 16, 2016
1
0
0
#1
How many books did God originally include in the Holy Bible?

Ecclesiastes 3:14

I have learned that all the works which God hath made, continue for ever: we cannot add any thing, nor take away from those things which God hath made that he may be feared.

Deuteronomy 4:2
You shall not add to the word that I speak to you, neither shall you take away from it: keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
57,143
26,845
113
#3
The Apocrypha

"The Jewish canon, or the Hebrew Bible, was universally received, while the Apocrypha added to the Greek version of the Septuagint were only in a general way accounted as books suitable for church reading, and thus as a middle class between canonical and strictly apocryphal (pseudonymous) writings. And justly; for those books, while they have great historical value, and fill the gap between the Old Testament and the New, all originated after the cessation of prophecy, and they cannot therefore be regarded as inspired, nor are they ever cited by Christ or the apostles" (Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church, book 3, chapter 9)
The Roman Catholic Church did not officially canonize the Apocrypha until the Council of Trent (1546 AD).

This was in part because the Apocrypha contained material which supported certain Catholic doctrines, such as purgatory, praying for the dead, and the treasury of merit. Not one of them is in the Hebrew language, which was alone used by the inspired historians and poets of the Old Testament.

Not one of the writers lays any claim to inspiration.

These books were never acknowledged as sacred Scriptures by the Jewish Church, and therefore were never sanctioned by our Lord.

They were not allowed a place among the sacred books, during the first four centuries of the Christian Church.

They contain fabulous statements, and statements which contradict not only the canonical Scriptures, but themselves; as when, in the two Books of Maccabees, Antiochus Epiphanes is made to die three different deaths in as many different places.

The Apocrypha inculcates doctrines at variance with the Bible, such as prayers for the dead and sinless perfection.

The apocrypha contains offensive materials unbecoming of God's authorship.

It teaches immoral practices, such as lying, suicide, assassination and magical incantation.

The apocryphal books themselves make reference to what we call the Silent 400 years, where there was no prophets of God to write inspired materials.

Josephus rejected the apocryphal books as inspired and this reflected Jewish thought at the time of Jesus.

The Manual of Discipline in the Dead Sea Scrolls rejected the apocrypha as inspired.

The Council of Jamnia held the same view rejected the apocrypha as inspired. (They debated the canonicity of a few books (e.g., Ecclesiastes), but they changed nothing and never proclaimed themselves to be authoritative determiners of the Old Testament canon. "The books which they decided to acknowledge as canonical were already generally accepted, although questions had been raised about them. Those which they refused to admit had never been included. They did not expel from the canon any book which had previously been admitted. 'The Council of Jamnia was the confirming of public opinion, not the forming of it.'" (F. F. Bruce, The Books and Parchments [Old Tappan, NJ.: Fleming H. Revell, 1963], p. 98]))

Although it was occasionally quoted in early church writings, it was nowhere accepted in a canon. Melito (AD 170) and Origen rejected the Apocrypha, (Eccl. Hist. VI. 25, Eusebius) as does the Muratorian Canon.

Jerome vigorously resisted including the Apocrypha in his Latin Vulgate Version (400 AD), but was overruled. As a result, the standard Roman Catholic Bible throughout the medieval period contained it. Thus, it gradually came to be revered by the average clergyman. Still, many medieval Catholic scholars realized that it was not inspired.

The terms "protocanonical" and "deuterocanonical" are used by Catholics to signify respectively those books of Scripture that were received by the entire Church from the beginning as inspired, and those whose inspiration came to be recognized later, after the matter had been disputed by certain Fathers and local churches.

Pope Damasus (366-384) authorized Jerome to translate the Latin Vulgate. The Council of Carthage declared this translation as "the infallible and authentic Bible." Jerome was the first to describe the extra 7 Old Testament books as the "Apocrypha" (doubtful authenticity). Needless to say, Jerome's Latin Vulgate did not include the Apocrypha.

Cyril (born about A.D. 315) - "Read the divine Scriptures - namely, the 22 books of the Old Testament which the 72 interpreters translated" (the Septuagint).

The apocrypha wasn't included at first in the Septuagint, but was appended by the Alexandrian Jews, and was not listed in any of the catalogues of the inspired books till the 4th century.

Hilary (bishop of Poictiers, 350 A.D.) rejected the apocrypha (Prologue to the Psalms, Sec. 15)

Epiphanius (the great opposer of heresy, 360 A.D.) rejected them all. Referring to Wisdom of Solomon & book of Jesus Sirach, he said "These indeed are useful books & profitable, but they are not placed in the number of the canonical."
http://www.bible.ca/catholic-apocrypha.htm


 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
57,143
26,845
113
#4
Is the Apocrypha Inspired? Does it really belong in the Bible?

Let us consider while we are at this point, the subject of the Catholic apocrypha, for which they make such great claims; and because of which they deny the Bible in common use by most brethren. 2 Macc 12:38-46 seems to be the principal reason they cling to the apocrypha. There is no other doctrine that depends so heavily upon support in the apocrypha. If I were not afraid of absolute statements, I would say that their defense of the apocrypha is only because of the passage and their claims about its teachings.

The Catholics have 46 Old Testament books rather than the 39 found in our Bibles. However, they have added much more material to other books which does not appear under separate titles. That material follows: The Rest of Esther added to Esther; The Song of the Three Holy Children, The History of Susanna, Bel and the Dragon added to Daniel; Baruch; 1 and 2 Maccabees; Tobias; Judith; Ecclesiasticus; and the Wisdom of Sirach.

The only powerful support for these books is that they appear in the Septuagint version. However, in many of our Bibles there is much material that is uninspired, including history, poetry, maps, dictionaries, and other information. This may be the reason for the appearance of this material in the Septuagint. The apocrypha was not in the Hebrew canon.

There are reputed to be 263 quotations and 370 allusions to the Old Testament in the New Testament and not one of them refers to the Apocryphal.

The usual division of the Old Testament by the Jews was a total of 24 books: The Books of Moses (51, The Early prophets 14; Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings ~, The Late Prophets (4; Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, the 12 Minor Prophets), and the Hagiagrapha (11; Psalms, Proverbs, Job, Song of Solomon. Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, Esther, Daniel, Ezra-Nehemiah, and Chronicles i. These 24 books contain all the material in our numbering of 39.

Josephus spoke concerning the canon, but his book division combined Ruth-Judges and Lamentation-Jeremiah for a total of 22 books rather than 24:

"For we have not an innumerable multitude of books among us, ... only 22 books. which contain the records of ail the past times; which are justly believed to be divine;...It is true, our history hath been written since Artaxerxes very particularly, but hath not been esteemed of the like authority with the former by our forefathers;...and how firmly we have given credit to these books of our own nation is evident by what we do; for during so many ages as have already passed, no one has been so bold as either to add anything to them, or to make any change in them." (Flavius Josephus Against Apion Book 1, Section 8).

Plainly Josephus distinguishes between those books written before and after Artaxerxes. This eliminates most of the apocrypha, especially the Maccabees.

The apocrypha itself denies all notion of inspiration. Referring to the events in the Maccabees the author makes these statements:

"...all such things as have been comprised in 5 books by Jason of Cyrene, we have at-tempted to abridge in one book. For considering the difficulty that they find that desire to undertake the narrations of histories, because of the multitude of the matter, we have taken care for those indeed that are willing to read,...And as to ourselves indeed, in undertaking this work of abridging, we have taken in hand no easy task, yea. rather a business full of watching and sweat. .. Leaving to the authors the exact handling of every particular, and as for ourselves. according to the plan proposed, studying to brief... For to collect all that is known, to put the discourse in order, and curiously to discuss every particular point, is the duty of the author of a history. But to pursue brevity of speech and to avoid nice declarations of things, is to be granted to him that maketh an abridgement." (2 Maccabees 2: 24-32).

"...I will also here make an end of my narration. Which if I have done well, and as it becometh the history, it is what I desired; but if not so perfectly, it must be pardoned me. For as it is hurtful to drink always wine, or always water, but pleasant to use sometimes the one, and sometimes the other, so if the speech be always nicely framed, it will not be grateful to the readers..." 12 Maccabees 15: 39-40).

This forms a bizarre contrast with passages in the New Testament:

"Take no thought how or what ye shall speak: for it shall be given you in that same hour what ye shall speak. For it is not ye that speak. but the spirit of your Father which speaketh in you" (Matthew 10: 19-20).

"Now we have received. not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God: that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. Which things also we speak, not in words which man s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth" (1 Corinthians 2: 12-131.
Catholic arguments:

[TABLE="width: 638"]
[TR]
[TD="width: 50%"]Catholics argue:[/TD]
[TD="width: 50%"]This is refuted because:[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="width: 50%"]Early Christians quote from the apocrypha proves it belongs in the Bible[/TD]
[TD="width: 50%"]Early Christians quoted from all kinds of uninspired writings other than the apocrypha. Why do Catholics not include these in their Bible's[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="width: 50%"]They were included in the Septuagint.[/TD]
[TD="width: 50%"]The Jews Never accepted the apocrypha as part of the Old testament canon.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="width: 50%"]The Church Councils at Hippo (393) and Carthage (397, 419), listed the apocrypha as Scripture. Since these same councils also finalized the 66 canonical books which all Christians accept, they must accept them all.[/TD]
[TD="width: 50%"]False. The canon of the New Testament was set from the first century. It is Catholic myth that Catholics gave the world the Bible![/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

The New Testament never quotes from the any of the apocryphal books written between 400 - 200 BC. What is significant here is that NONE of the books within the "apocryphal collection" are every quoted. So the Catholic argument that "the apocryphal books cannot be rejected as uninspired on the basis that they are never quoted from in the New Testament because Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon are also never quoted in the New Testament, and we all accept them as inspired." The rebuttal to this Catholic argument is that "Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther" were always included in the "history collection" of Jewish books and "Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon" were always included in the "poetry collection". By quoting one book from the collection, it verifies the entire collection. None of the apocryphal books were ever quoted in the New Testament. Not even once! This proves the Catholic and Orthodox apologists wrong when they try to defend the apocrypha in the Bible.

The apocrypha does not belong in the Bible because It IS not inspired.
Steve Rudd @ http://www.bible.ca/catholic-apocrypha.htm


 
T

Tintin

Guest
#8
66 books were inspired by Holy Spirit.
 
J

jaybird88

Guest
#9
why were the apocrypha books included in the Septuagint?
why did neither Jesus nor the 12 speak against these books?
why does Jesus and Jude use teachings that can be found nowhere but in these books?
why was it 200 years after Jesus ascended, after Christianity was thriving that the books were thrown out of the Jewish canon? voted out at the council of jamnia, a pharisee council.

i have never been found of these councils telling me which books are true and which ones are not. i thought thats what the spirit of truth was for.
 
T

Tintin

Guest
#10
why were the apocrypha books included in the Septuagint?
why did neither Jesus nor the 12 speak against these books?
why does Jesus and Jude use teachings that can be found nowhere but in these books?
why was it 200 years after Jesus ascended, after Christianity was thriving that the books were thrown out of the Jewish canon? voted out at the council of jamnia, a pharisee council.

i have never been found of these councils telling me which books are true and which ones are not. i thought thats what the spirit of truth was for.
Just do some research into basic early church history. It's all there.
 
J

jaybird88

Guest
#11
Just do some research into basic early church history. It's all there.
i have and i have learned not to trust pharisees, rome and councils with political agendas.
 

mailmandan

Senior Member
Apr 7, 2014
25,142
13,149
113
58
#12
i have and i have learned not to trust pharisees, rome and councils with political agendas.
The problem is who's "version" of early church history should we believe? I grew up in the RCC and they had their "version" of early church history that they used to support "their" agenda.
 
J

jaybird88

Guest
#13
The problem is who's "version" of early church history should we believe? I grew up in the RCC and they had their "version" of early church history that they used to support "their" agenda.
the seinfield pic always makes me laugh.

i dont get why we have to be so concerned with which groups version is the correct one. right after Jesus ascended you had different groups. we even see disagreements among the 12 when Jesus is teaching them, what we dont see is Jesus taking a shovel to their head when they disagree. it was not until rome took over that we see the oprichniki death squads sent out to anyone who had a different opinion.
 
Nov 23, 2013
13,684
1,212
113
#14
How many books did God originally include in the Holy Bible?

Ecclesiastes 3:14

I have learned that all the works which God hath made, continue for ever: we cannot add any thing, nor take away from those things which God hath made that he may be feared.

Deuteronomy 4:2
You shall not add to the word that I speak to you, neither shall you take away from it: keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.
The number of books that should be in the bible is found in the bible. Read Exodus 25 and count the number of decorations, there are 66. the candlestick is a foreshadow of the written word of God.

Exodus 25:31 KJV
And thou shalt make a candlestick of pure gold: of beaten work shall the candlestick be made: his shaft, and his branches, his bowls, his knops, and his flowers, shall be of the same.
 

mailmandan

Senior Member
Apr 7, 2014
25,142
13,149
113
58
#15
the seinfield pic always makes me laugh.

i dont get why we have to be so concerned with which groups version is the correct one. right after Jesus ascended you had different groups. we even see disagreements among the 12 when Jesus is teaching them, what we dont see is Jesus taking a shovel to their head when they disagree. it was not until rome took over that we see the oprichniki death squads sent out to anyone who had a different opinion.
I love that Seinfeld avatar! lol With different versions of early church history, I'm convinced that history can be manipulated by certain groups who have their agenda. I just stick with what God's Word says and don't worry about various fallible writings of early church history written by fallible men.
 
J

jaybird88

Guest
#17
Woah. Slow down there. I'm not Catholic.
nothing directed at you tin, i was just making a statement to explain how i got to my own conclusion.