The 73 canonical books of Holy Scripture.

[Josiah]

Catholics have retained each and every canonical book of the holy scriptures.

Correct.


The singular, individual RC Denomination has a UNIQUE Bible that NO OTHER agrees with - and never has, as you noted in the op. The current official list of books dates to the Council of Florance (unofficially) and the Council of Trent in 1551 (Officially). Prior to that, there was no official declaration on this by the individual RC denomination for it itself exclusively (agreeing with none).


Of course, Catholics tended to ignore all that. For some 1000 years, Catholic tomes often contained 28 NT books including the Epistle to the Leodiceans. This continued even after Trent for some time. When some Catholics SCREAM that "Luther removed a book from the Bible!!!" this is the book they mean since when he did his German translations, all Bibles in Germany included the Epistle to the Leodiceans but he did not include it in his translation and Catholics have protested that ever since even though Trent ended up agreeing with Luther on that book (it's just many Catholics didn't). Of course, Luther's translation actually had one MORE book in the OT than most Catholic tomes of his day (and to this day) but one less in the NT (that Epistle to the Leodiceans).


But you are correct, there is a single, individual, solitary denominaton that about 500-600 years ago designated it itself alone to determine what books it itself exclusively would accept - the RCC one. NO OTHER denomination, church, sect or cult agrees with the RCC on this - and NONE ever has. The LDS also is a single denomination with unique Scripture but it didn't mess with the Bible, it simply added books IN ADDITION TO the Bible. And yeah, none agree with the LDS on this either.


I'm not sure what MC's point is in noting that since 1551 the RCC agrees with NONE on this, and NONE have EVER agreed with it or followed it on this. NONE. Not the OOC, not the EOC, none, no one, not now, not ever. NONE have followed it's lead on this, NONE have ever agreed with it on this. Not now, not ever. Like the LDS, it has a UNIQUE canon - formed by itself for it itself. And the point of this is.....?



Thank you.


- Josiah




.

 

[Albion]

There is a lot in that post to contemplate, but to go to one obvious point...

The Roman Catholic Church clearly has not, as was alleged, always kept the right number of books since she dropped some from the Bible in the 16th century.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Sometimes an example is best.

(Wisdom 11:22-27) [22] Though many are strong, you alone always overcome. And who will withstand the strength of your arm? [23] For, like a tiny grain on a scale, just so is the world before you, and like a drop dew before dawn, which descends upon the earth. [24] But you are merciful to all, because you can do all, and you dismiss the sins of man because of repentance. [25] For you love all things that are, and you hate nothing of the things you have made; for you would not have created or established anything that you hated. [26] For how could anything endure, except by your will? Or what, having been called by you not to exist, would be preserved? [27] Yet you spare all things, because they are yours, O Lord, who loves souls.

(Wisdom 1:1-11) [1] Love justice, you who judge the land. Think of the Lord in goodness and seek him in simplicity of heart. [2] For he is found by those who do not test him, yet he reveals himself to those who have faith in him. [3] For perverse thoughts separate from God. But his virtue, when it is tested, corrects the foolish. [4] For wisdom will not enter into a malicious soul, nor dwell in a body subdued by sin. [5] For the holy spirit of instruction will flee from falsehood, and he will withdraw himself from thoughts that are without understanding, and he will not be reached when iniquity overcomes. [6] For the spirit of wisdom is benevolent, and will not release the evil speaker from his talk, because God is a witness of his temperament, and a true examiner of his heart, and an auditor of his words. [7] For the spirit of the Lord has filled the world, and he who contains all things, retains knowledge of every voice. [8] Therefore, he who speaks unjust things cannot escape notice, nor will the chastising judgment pass him by. [9] For inquiry will be made into the thoughts of the impious, his conversation also will reach the hearing of God, to the chastising of his iniquities. [10] For the zealous ear hears all things, and the disturbance of complaining will not be hidden. [11] Therefore, keep yourselves from complaining, which benefits nothing, and refrain your tongue from slander, because secret conversation will not pass into nothingness, and the mouth that deceives kills the soul.

 

[Pedrito]

==============================================================================================

Post #1:

I never liked 66 much, it is too close to 666 I reckon

Only if one is dyslexic or cannot count.

It’s around 600 off (allowing for miscounts).

==============================================================================================

 

[Josiah]

.


For the past 600 years or so, the singular Roman Catholic denomination has officially had a UNIQUE Bible - one no one other on the planet agrees with, not now, not ever; yes, one denomination NOW with 73 books. True, for about 1000 years, most RC denomination Bibles had 74 books (including the Epistle to the Leodiceans in the NT - the often claimed book that Luther "ripped out" of the NT by not including it in his German translation) but it was not included in the Council of Florence or Council of Trent list - it's just that most Catholics didn't care and included it anyway.



The (perhaps shocking) truth is: This has NEVER been a issue. Everyone agreed with the 66 - and the books quoted and used were all in that group - so the others just didn't seem to matter much. Indeed, in my Catholic years, OCCASIONALLY there was a reading from one of them, but there were no sermons from them, no Bible studies from them, no quotes from them, no references to them, no use of them - they were for all practical purpose not in the Bible at all. The RCC never has had a problem with the additional (unofficial) books in the EOC Bible or the even more in the OOC Bibles because they don't seem to matter.


Lutherans take no official stance on these additional (pretty much unused) books. The Lutheran Confessions (ON PURPOSE) are silent on the issue of what books are and are not canonical.... although generally Lutherans follow Luther's personal advise to only use the historic 66 for the norming and formation of doctrine (permitting the others for inspirational, informational and historic use - but not as the source or norm for theology). The Lutheran confessions quote from them (more than the Catholic Catechism does) and Luther including MORE of them in his German translation than Catholics have in their post-Trent tome (Lutherans actually using MORE of them and MORE often than Catholics generally), but no Lutheran denomination has appointed it itself individually and exclusively to determine what should be excluded from the Bible (although the RCC, LDS, Anglican and Reformed churches have). The 66 are embraced ... the 28 or so deuterocanonical ones simply left "undetermined" in status. Luther regarded this as a matter for an Ecumenical Council (although the last one ended a bit before 800 AD so functionally he realized that's not going to happen).


- Josiah




.

 

[MoreCoffee]

==============================================================================================

Post #1:


Only if one is dyslexic or cannot count.

It’s around 600 off (allowing for miscounts).

==============================================================================================

It's one little 6 away from 666.

 

[Pedrito]

==============================================================================================

Post #9 (Lämmchen):

I was born in 66 (1966) so it was a pretty good year

Could one call it a vintage year?

==============================================================================================

 

[Pedrito]

==============================================================================================

Seeing that there are apparently versions of the Bible other than the 66-book (Protestant) and 73-book (Roman Catholic) versions (the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church version is said to contain 81 books, for instance), by what authority does the Roman Catholic Church (RCC) claim that its version is the correct one?

(Seeing that the RCC has chosen to make an identifiaby invalid statement in recent years in support of a doctrine labelled the Filioque clause*, then what confidence can be placed in anything the RCC claims with respect to having authority from the God of Truth?)

==============================================================================================

I suggest once again that the touchstone that needs to be applied to Bible versions is internal consistency. I further suggest that the 66-book Bible possesses that internal consistency, and that it agrees agrees 100% with the Original Apostolic Gospel. (The 73-book version at least, lacks that internal cohesion.)

Identifying that Original Apostolic Gospel is all that is required to validate what is often termed the “Protestant Bible”.

And as a byproduct of that identification, the basis for denominationalism in its various forms, crumbles to powder.

==============================================================================================

* Detail can be tabled if people are unaware of that important point.

==============================================================================================

 

[MoreCoffee]

==============================================================================================

Seeing that there are apparently versions of the Bible other than the 66-book (Protestant) and 73-book (Roman Catholic) versions (the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church version is said to contain 81 books, for instance), by what authority does the Roman Catholic Church (RCC) claim that its version is the correct one?

By the authority of Christ given to the Church. The precedent is from the councils in the early centuries of the church. The decision about 73 books is not entirely exclusive; other books may be read in the churches of other communions and Catholic Christians are always free to use the versions available in their languages if they are deemed suitable. It is, I believe, the practise of Russian speaking Catholics to use Russian bibles prepared by Orthodox scholars. I may be mistaken on that but it is something I read in a document, possibly a church document about canon law directly relevant to Russian speaking Catholic Christians.

(Seeing that the RCC has chosen to make an identifiaby invalid statement in recent years in support of a doctrine labelled the Filioque clause*, then what confidence can be placed in anything the RCC claims with respect to having authority from the God of Truth?)

==============================================================================================

I suggest once again that the touchstone that needs to be applied to Bible versions is internal consistency. I further suggest that the 66-book Bible possesses that internal consistency, and that it agrees agrees 100% with the Original Apostolic Gospel. (The 73-book version at least, lacks that internal cohesion.)

Identifying that Original Apostolic Gospel is all that is required to validate what is often termed the “Protestant Bible”.

And as a byproduct of that identification, the basis for denominationalism in its various forms, crumbles to powder.

==============================================================================================

* Detail can be tabled if people are unaware of that important point.

==============================================================================================

 

[Josiah]

By the authority of Christ given to the Church.

WHICH denomination?
Any of the Oriental Orthodox Churches? Because NONE of them have a 73-Book-Bible.
Any of the Eastern Orthodox Churches? Because NONE of them have a 73-Book-Bible.
The RCC for some 1,000 years? When often their Bible had 74 books in it?

the councils in the early church. The decision about 73 books

NO Ecumenical Council said ANYTHING about a 73-Book-Bible which is why there is only one, singular, individual, exclusive denomination with a 73-Book-Bible, the RC one. NO OTHER does. NO OTHER ever has. And of course, the RCC didn't universally until about 400 years ago, even after Trent it was common to find the Epistle to the Leodiceans in RC denomination tomes. IF the "73-Book" Bible is "ecumenical" then how come JUST ONE SINGULAR, INDIVIDUAL, UNIQUE denomination has that? Sounds as contrary to "ecumenical" as is possible.




.

 

[Pedrito]

==============================================================================================

Post #1: I never liked 66 much, it is too close to 666 I reckon

Post #64:Only if one is dyslexic or cannot count.

It’s around 600 off (allowing for miscounts).

Post #66 (#66? spooky!): It's one little 6 away from 666.

It depends on which end you place it.

Does the end justify the means?

==============================================================================================

 

[MoreCoffee]

==============================================================================================

Post #66 (#66? spooky!): It's one little 6 away from 666.

It depends on which end you place it.

Does the end justify the means?[/color]

==============================================================================================

If the digit 6 is pre-appended to 66 the result is 666 and if the digit 6 is post-appended to 66 the result is 666.

 

[Pedrito]

==============================================================================================

Post #38 (Albion), replying to “Pilgrims Progress is more read than any of the apocryphal books.”:

So is the phone book. That's not much of an argument.

I don’t read the phone book much.

The extended cast of characters makes it interesting, but I’m still coming to grips with the plot.

==============================================================================================