What year was it when the Catholic book of Esther was added to the Bible?
- Thread starter NathanH83
- Start date
atpollard
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2017
- Messages
- 2,573
- Location
- Florida
- Gender
- Male
- Religious Affiliation
- Baptist
- Political Affiliation
- Conservative
- Marital Status
- Married
- Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
- Yes
It wasn’t.
I just checked the Table of Contents for my Bible and it isn’t in there.
I just checked the Table of Contents for my Bible and it isn’t in there.
bbas 64
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2019
- Messages
- 63
- Age
- 59
- Gender
- Male
- Religious Affiliation
- Calvinist
- Political Affiliation
- Conservative
- Marital Status
- Married
Good Day,
The issue was settled for the Roman Church at Trent:
The issue was settled for the Roman Church at Trent:
Based on a time-honoured tradition, the Councils of Florence in 1442 and Trent in 1564 resolved for Catholics any doubts and uncertainties. Their list comprises 73 books, which were accepted as sacred and canonical because they were inspired by the Holy Spirit, 46 for the Old Testament, 27 for the New.36 In this way the Catholic Church received its definitive canon. To determine this canon, it based itself on the Church's constant usage. In adopting this canon, which is larger than the Hebrew, it has preserved an authentic memory of Christian origins, since, as we have seen, the more restricted Hebrew canon is later than the formation of the New Testament. In Him, Bill |
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2015
- Messages
- 13,927
- Gender
- Male
- Religious Affiliation
- Lutheran
- Political Affiliation
- Conservative
- Marital Status
- Married
- Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
- Yes
AGAIN.... yet again....
The church catholic has never spoken officially and universally on this subject. That may bother you but it's simply an undeniable fact.
A FEW (a very few) individual DENOMINATIONS have officially declared what is regarded by that singular denomination as Scripture (and PERHAPS by exclusion, what is not). This was done by the Roman Catholic Church unofficially at Florence in the 15th Century and officially at Trent in the 16th. But there is not one other denomination on the planet that agrees with it on this, it has a unity of one (self with self) on this subject. The Church of England did this in the 16th Century in its "Thirty-Nine Articles" (actually adopting a two-level acceptance). But there is not one other denomination on the planet that agrees with the Church of England on this matter, it as a unity of one (self with self). The Reformed faith community also did this in the 16th Century accepting just 66 all total. Many modern denominations have followed this CUSTOM but only a few very have actually done this officially and formally. The LDS did this in the 19th Century but no other denomination agrees with it on this matter, it too has a unity of one (self with self). The Greek Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox Churches have never officially/formally declared anything, but they each have solid traditions here, but no other denomination agrees with them on this, they each have a unity of one (self with self).
What "we" (the roughly two billion Christians in the world) have is TRADITION. An informal (NEVER officially declared) consensus around certain books. One largely formed in the First and Second Centuries, without any Ecumenical Church Council (done before the church gained legal states and administrative unity). It's very solid around 39 OT books and 27 NT books. Less so around 20 or so additional OT books (often regarded as DEUTEROcanonical - lesser or secondary canon), and a couple of NT books. Those two dozen or so OTHER books have never been much of an issue (no NEED for any Ecumenical Council - no one considered they matter much) but a handful of denominations embrace SOME of them - usually not on an equal level with the 66.
It may bother some American Evangelical, but sorry that Table of Contents in your Good News Bible is NOT Scripture. It's not the result of any ecumenical decision or declaration. It's NOT universally accepted. It's TRADITION. And not a totally united one. But don't cry, don't despair, the consensus around 66 of those books (probably the Table of Contents book in that Bible you got at your church) is very ancient and very solid - and all doctrine comes from those. Many (including Lutherans and Anglicans - together nearly half of the Protestants in the world) WELCOME you to read about two dozen others if you like (some Lutherans and Anglicans even do so during the Sunday worship service) they just discourage you from forming new dogma or norming present dogma primarily or exclusively from those.
Just how it is. Sorry "Evangelicals"
- Josiah
.
The church catholic has never spoken officially and universally on this subject. That may bother you but it's simply an undeniable fact.
A FEW (a very few) individual DENOMINATIONS have officially declared what is regarded by that singular denomination as Scripture (and PERHAPS by exclusion, what is not). This was done by the Roman Catholic Church unofficially at Florence in the 15th Century and officially at Trent in the 16th. But there is not one other denomination on the planet that agrees with it on this, it has a unity of one (self with self) on this subject. The Church of England did this in the 16th Century in its "Thirty-Nine Articles" (actually adopting a two-level acceptance). But there is not one other denomination on the planet that agrees with the Church of England on this matter, it as a unity of one (self with self). The Reformed faith community also did this in the 16th Century accepting just 66 all total. Many modern denominations have followed this CUSTOM but only a few very have actually done this officially and formally. The LDS did this in the 19th Century but no other denomination agrees with it on this matter, it too has a unity of one (self with self). The Greek Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox Churches have never officially/formally declared anything, but they each have solid traditions here, but no other denomination agrees with them on this, they each have a unity of one (self with self).
What "we" (the roughly two billion Christians in the world) have is TRADITION. An informal (NEVER officially declared) consensus around certain books. One largely formed in the First and Second Centuries, without any Ecumenical Church Council (done before the church gained legal states and administrative unity). It's very solid around 39 OT books and 27 NT books. Less so around 20 or so additional OT books (often regarded as DEUTEROcanonical - lesser or secondary canon), and a couple of NT books. Those two dozen or so OTHER books have never been much of an issue (no NEED for any Ecumenical Council - no one considered they matter much) but a handful of denominations embrace SOME of them - usually not on an equal level with the 66.
It may bother some American Evangelical, but sorry that Table of Contents in your Good News Bible is NOT Scripture. It's not the result of any ecumenical decision or declaration. It's NOT universally accepted. It's TRADITION. And not a totally united one. But don't cry, don't despair, the consensus around 66 of those books (probably the Table of Contents book in that Bible you got at your church) is very ancient and very solid - and all doctrine comes from those. Many (including Lutherans and Anglicans - together nearly half of the Protestants in the world) WELCOME you to read about two dozen others if you like (some Lutherans and Anglicans even do so during the Sunday worship service) they just discourage you from forming new dogma or norming present dogma primarily or exclusively from those.
Just how it is. Sorry "Evangelicals"
- Josiah
.