3
3
0
Shepherd of Hermas, Epistle of Barnabas, 1 Clement, 2 Clement, Paul's Epistle to Laodiceans, Apostolic Constitutions all used to be in the Bible as part of the Canon, but now they are not. Why is that?
Truth-Saves | 4:3 Changes & Lost Gospels
Posted from truth-saves.com
Atheism
Religion
Christianity
Ancient History
Posted 4 y ago
Responses: 2
4
4
0
I had this discussion with a very zealous and radical Catholic that held some extraordinarily wild opinions. Apparently the Nicene Council discussion was off limits and I was a heretic for keeping the Protestant Faith. Which ended the discussion.
(4)
(0)
Capt Gregory Prickett
SFC James Cameron - I didn't think that you were the one to refuse to discuss it. I'll point out that the deuterocanonical books were part of the Septuagint, the Greek Old Testament that was written prior to the life of Jesus, and that the Pauline Epistles contain references to the deuterocanonical books, although none are directly cited.
Also, the Orthodox Church uses a different definition of deuterocanonical than the Roman Church. The deuterocanonical books, although part of the scripture, are considered to be of secondary authority, whereas the Roman Church considers them to have been added later, in a second cannon. Martin Luther removed them from the Old Testament in the Sixteenth Century and put them in a separate section called Apocrypha. Most Protestants have subsequently used the Lutheran Canon.
But that's a minor part of the heresy as far as the Orthodox Church is concerned.
Also, the Orthodox Church uses a different definition of deuterocanonical than the Roman Church. The deuterocanonical books, although part of the scripture, are considered to be of secondary authority, whereas the Roman Church considers them to have been added later, in a second cannon. Martin Luther removed them from the Old Testament in the Sixteenth Century and put them in a separate section called Apocrypha. Most Protestants have subsequently used the Lutheran Canon.
But that's a minor part of the heresy as far as the Orthodox Church is concerned.
(1)
(0)
Capt Gregory Prickett
SrA Ronald Moore - The other books were already part of the Old Testament and were removed later. They predate Jesus, and would have been referred to by Jews of the time as part of scripture.
(1)
(0)
Capt Gregory Prickett
Canon of Scripture - Questions & Answers
What is the position of the Orthodox Church regarding the books that the Protestant churches refer to as the Apocrypha? Maccabees, Tobit, Ecclesiasticus, etc.
(1)
(0)
PO1 William "Chip" Nagel
Capt Gregory Prickett - I Love some of the Books from the Old Testament that were Removed. The Rhyme and Reason of Most Theology is Beyond Me.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
By the time Of canonization the books mentioned did not make the cut off, just like The Catholic Version Of the book of sirach
(1)
(0)
Capt Gregory Prickett
That's not correct, the books had been part of canon used by the early church, which is why they are considered part of the Old Testament. It wasn't until Martin Luther in the mid-1500s that the books were removed from the OT and put in a separate section labeled the Apocrypha.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google