answersLogoWhite

0


Best Answer

The Council of Carthage decided which books would be in the Bible.

Later, when Protestants broke from Catholicism, 7 books were taken out (what Protestants call the Apocrypha). The Catholic Bible still contains these 7 books while Protestant Bibles do not.

Roman Catholic AnswerNo one added books to the Bible, the men who broke with the Catholic Church in the sixteenth century removed books. The reason given is that the Hebrew Bible did not contain them, but this does not hold up to the facts. Even the so called Council of Jamnia can not be historically proven. The main reasons are 1) they contain clear support for Catholic doctrines that have been rejected by the "reformers", and they are supported by the Catholic Church. For an exhaustive, scholarly, completely documented coverage of the whole story, read Why Catholic Bibles are Bigger, The Untold Story of the Lost Books of the Protestant Bible, by Gary G. Michuta

from A Catholic Dictionary, edited by Donald Attwater, Second edition, revised 1957

Apocrypha

Books erroneously held to be inspired and to be included in the canon of Scripture, but rejected as such by the Church, such as III and IV Esdras, III and IV Maccabees, Prayer of Manasses, 3rd Epistle to the Corinthians, and the Gospel of James. Books style "apocrypha" in Protestant editions of the Bible are not necessarily such in the eyes of the Catholic Church.

Deutero-Canonical books

Those books of the O.T. whose place in the canon was not admitted till after that of the other books. They are Tobias, Judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, 1 and 2 Machabees, ver. 4 of chapt. X to the end of Esther, and Daniel, ver. 24 of chap. Iii to ver 3 of chap 8v and chaps. Xiii and xiv. Their authority is equal with that of the other books of the bible and is so admitted by all the Eastern dissident churches, except that Greek and Russian Orthodox theologians have now for some time been questioning it. Protestants have always rejected them because they are not included in the Hebrew Bible of the Jews.

 

Canon of Scripture

Is the list of inspire books of the Old and New Testaments. Inclusion in the canon does not confer anything to the internal character of a book, but is only the Church's teaching of the fact of its antecedent inspiration. The N.T. canon is the same as that at present commonly received among non-Catholic Christians; the O.T. canon contains in addition the deutero-canonical books (see above). These books and fragments are usually called Deuterocanoica, or of the second canon, not because their inspiration is in any way different from that of the others, but because the inspiration of the books at present in the Jewish Bible was definitely proclaimed by the Jewish authorities previous to Christ, whereas the inspiration of the Deuterocanonica, tentatively held but later rejected by the Jews, was definitely proclaimed in the Christian dispensation. The Protestant reformers, denying the infallibility of The Church, returned to the Jewish canon; the Council of Trent reaffirmed acceptance of the Christian one. Doubts expressed by individuals in certain places and periods about the canonical status of Hebrews, Apocalypse (Revelation) and some canonical epistles in the N.T. and the Deuterocanonica in the O.T., were thus declared incompatible with Catholic faith.

from Catholicism and Fundamentalism - The Attack on "Romanism" by "Bible Christians" by Karl Keating, Ignatius Press, 1988

William G. Most discussing comments made in 1910 by Gerald Birney Smith, professor at the University of Chicago and speaker at that year's Baptist Congress...

Most notes that "what Professor Smith demonstrates is that for a Protestant there simply is no way to know which books are inspired. That means, in practice, that a Protestant, if he is logical should not appeal to Scripture to prove anything; he ha no sure mans of knowing which books are part of Scripture (William G. Most, Free from All Error, Libertyville, Ill.: Franciscan Marytown Press, 1985, 9-11)

One consequence of this inability to ascertain the canon has been that the Protestant Bible is an incomplete Bible, Missing are the books of Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, and the two books of Maccabees, as well as sections of Ester and Daniel. These are known to Catholics as the deutero-canonical works. They are just as much a part of the Bible as the rest of the Old Testament, the proto-canonical books. ...

However easy it may have been for the Reformers to say that some books are inspired and thus in the canon, while others are not, they in fact had no solid grounds for making such determinations. Ultimately, an infallible authority is needed if we are to know what belongs in the Bible and what does not. Without such an authority, we are left to our own prejudices, and we cannot tell if our prejudices lead us in the right direction.

The advantages of the Catholic approach to proving inspiration are two. First, the inspiration is really proved, not just "felt". Second, the main fact behind the proof - the fact of an infallible, teaching Church - leads one naturally to an answer to the problem that troubled the Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 8:31): How is one to know what interpretations are right? The same Church that authenticates the Bible, that establishes its inspiration, is the authority set up by Christ to interpret his word.

from A Biblical Defense of Catholicism by Dave Armstrong; Sophia Institute Press, 2003

They were included in the Septuagint, which was the "Bible" of the Apostles. They usually quoted the Old Testament Scriptures (in the text of the New Testament) from the Septuagint.

Almost all of the Church Fathers regarded the Septuagint as the standard form of the Old Testament. The deuterocanonical books were in no way differentiated from the other books in the Septuagint, and were generally regarded as canonical. St. Augustine thought the Septuagint was apostolically sanctioned and inspired, and this was the consensus in the early Church.

Many Church Fathers (such as St. Irenaeus, St. Cyprian, and Tertullian) cite these books as Scripture without distinction. Others, mostly from the East (for example, St. Athanasius, St. Cyril of Jerusalem, and St. Gregory Nazianzen) recognized some distinction, but nevertheless still customarily cited the deuterocanonical books as Scripture. St. Jerome, who translated the Hebrew Bible into Latin (the Vulgate, early fifth century), was an exception to the rule (the Church has never held that individual Fathers are infallible).

The Church councils at Hippo (393) and Carthage (397, 419), influenced heavily by St. Augustine, listed the deuterocanonical books as Scripture, which was simply an endorsement of what had become the general consensus of the Church in the West and most of the East. Thus, the Council of Trent merely reiterated in stronger terms what had already been decided eleven and a half centuries earlier, and which had never been seriously challenged until the onset of Protestantism.

Since these councils also finalized the sixty-six canonical books that all Christians accept, it is quit arbitrary for Protestants selectively to delete seven books from this authoritative Canon. This is all the more curious when the complicated, controversial history of the New Testament is understood.

Pope Innocent I concurred with and sanctioned the canonical ruling of the above councils (Letter to Exsuperius, Bishop of Toulouse) in 405.

The earliest Greek manuscripts of the Old Testament, such as Codex Sinaiticus (fourth century) and Codex Alexandrinus ©. 450) include all of the deuterocanonical books mixed in with the others and not separated.

The practice of collecting the deuterocanonical books into a separate unit dates back no further than 1520 (in other words, it was a novel innovation of Protestantism). This is admitted by, for example, the Protestant New English Bible in its "Introduction to the Apocrypha".

Protestants, following Martin Luther, removed the deuterocanonical books from their Bibles, due to their clear teaching of doctrines that had been recently repudiated by Protestants, such as prayers for the dead (Tob. 12:12; 2 Mac. 12:39-45; cf. 1 Cor. 15:29), the intercession of dead saints (2 Mac. 15:14; cf. Rev. 6:9-10), and the intermediary intercession of angels (Tob. 12:12, 15; cf. Rev. 5: 8, 8:3-4). We know this from plain statements of Luther and other reformers.

User Avatar

Wiki User

13y ago
This answer is:
User Avatar
More answers
User Avatar

Wiki User

10y ago

Martin Luther removed the Deuterocanonical books from the Old Testament. The Deuterocanonical books had been in the Old Testament Bible for centuries, and had been translated into Greek in the fourth century before Christ, the version of The Bible referred to as the Septuagint. This was the Bible that Our Blessed Lord, Jesus Christ used, and those books are referred to throughout the New Testament. The Jews in the second century after Christ - the Jews that had not accepted Jesus as the Messiah removed the Deuterocanonical books as they supported specific Christian teachings. Martin Luther in the 16th century followed their lead in removing those same books.

This answer is:
User Avatar

Add your answer:

Earn +20 pts
Q: Who added books to the bible?
Write your answer...
Submit
Still have questions?
magnify glass
imp
Related questions

Added books to the Bible are called?

The Apocrypha. See lists below:


How did the New Testament get added to the bible?

It didn't get "added" - the Bible is made up of the old Jewish books (what we call the Old Testament) and the books which concern Christ and the works and writings of his apostles. (what we call the New Testament). So there was no "Bible" before the New Testament.


If there are two different Bibles namely the Catholic and the Protestant Bible which one is accuratly the true and correct Bible?

The catholic bible has about seven books added to he bible.


Are all meanings the same in the King James and Catholic bibles?

No, the King James Bible and Catholic Bible are not identical in terms of meanings. There are differences in translation choices, interpretation of certain passages, and inclusion of certain books. These variations can lead to differences in understanding and emphasis on certain theological beliefs.


Why weren't the accrophyl books not added to bible?

Because a group of holy men of the church decided about 1700 years ago that they were not inspired by the Holy Spirit as were the present 66 books of the Bible.


How many bible books have 33 or more chapters?

10 books. Bear in mind that the books of the Bible weren't originally written with chapters and verses, these were added later.


What part of the Bible was added to the original Hebrew Bible by the Christians?

The Bible as is commonly held today had as its originating manuscripts languages of Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. The original Hebrew "Bible" was the Pentateuch, or what we refer to as the first five books of the Bible written by Moses, I.e., Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. Later Christian scholars added all of the Old Testament books, from Joshua through Malachi, and the New Testament books, from Matthew through Revelation.


What is the number od books in the Bible?

73 books in the Bible There are 67 books in the Protestant Bible.


Are there 3000 books in the Bible?

No. In Christian Bible there is 73 books - but Protestant Bible have 66 books.


How is the Bible split up into books chapters and verses?

The books of the Bible are just that: books or letters written independently of one another that were accumulated together over time. The chapters and verses, aside from selected books, were subdivisions added later by monks, if I remember correctly. The main exception to this was Psalms, where each chapter was originally written as a separate song and therefore only the verse divisions were added later.


How many books of the Bible are there?

There are 66 books of the bible.


Does the Bible consists of 27 books?

no there is 66 books of the bible