In the Catholic Bible is different from the Protestant Bible?
The Catholic Bible contains 73 books, while the Protestant Bible has 66 books. I heard that the Orthodox Bible contains 76 (78?) Books.
Why do different Bibles, even if they worship the same God and share the same belief?
And whose Bible is true * * authentic?
While both parties have answers that feel strongly, I would suggest instead of arguing who is right or not, we must take the time to simply live in any Bible version we prefer. God speaks to us when we read his any of his words.
I am a cradle Catholic who was better trained in the Baptist church which was my own faith. However … now I understand the importance of reading the Word of God is that I'm finding God is opening my eyes and my heart to the richness and fullness of Catholicism. The battle lasted all these years. I would rather be next to my brothers in Christ, fighting the war against Satan instead of doing battle on the books are correct. We both have a lot we can learn from each other if only we embraced as both loving and believing that God sent his Son to die for our sins. Lets stop being like the Sadducees and Pharasiees and discussing the minute, when there are many lost souls who need to know the love and mercy of Jesus Christ.
The New Testament canon of the Catholic and Protestant Bible the Bible is the same with 27 books.
The difference in the Old Testament actually dates back to the days before and during the life of Christ. At this point, no official Jewish canon of Scripture.
The Jews in Egypt translated their choices of the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek in the second century BC. This translation of 46 books, called the Septuagint, had wide use in the Roman world because most Jews lived far from Palestine in Greek cities. Many of these Jews spoke only Greek.
The early Christian Church was born in this world. The Church, with its bilingual Jews and more and more Greek-speaking Gentiles, used the books of the Septuagint as their Bible. Remember that the early Christians were just writing the documents what became the New Testament.
After the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem, with increasing persecution from the Romans and competition from the emerging Christian church, Jewish leaders met and declared its official canon of Scripture, eliminating seven books of the Septuagint.
The books were removed Tobit, Judith, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, Wisdom (of Solomon), Ecclesiasticus and Baruch. Parts of existing books were also removed including Psalm 151 (from Psalms), parts of the book of Esther, Susanna (from Daniel as chapter 13), and Bel and the Dragon (from Daniel as chapter 14).
The Christian church filled with the Holy Spirit does not follow suit but kept all the books of the Septuagint. 46 + 27 = 73 Total Books.
1500 years later, Protestants decided to keep the Catholic New Testament but change its Old Testament from the Catholic canon to the Jewish canon.
The books that were removed supported such things as
• prayers for the dead (Tobit 12:12; 2 Maccabees 12:39-45)
• Purgatory (Wisdom 3:1-7)
• The intercession of the saints in heaven (2 Maccabees 15:14)
• Intercession of angels (Tobit 12:12-15)
The books they dropped are sometimes called the Apocrypha.
Here is a Catholic Bible website: http://www.nccbuscc.org/nab/bible/
With love in Christ.
The reason that the Catholic Bible has more books has much to do with the doctrines of the Protestant churches. Since they can not (or not) accept the same biblical doctrine of purgatory, which cut the books as the Maccabees to the Bible appear to contain any reference to prayer for the dead.
In general, Protestants seem unable to cope with all highly mystical or spiritual in nature, so were the books of Judith, Tobit, Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus, too. At one point, Martin Luther, even wanted the canonical book of James eliminated because it points to the need for works of mercy and charity to keep the faith alive.
And to answer your final question, if I were offered a complete edition of Shakespeare, or version of the comic, what do you think is going to be more precise? I can guarantee that it is not the one advertising for X-Ray glasses and Whoopee cushions on the back.
The complete and accurate idem Catholic Bible versus "* Have it our way" mess of a Protestant Bible.
Edit:
Thanks for the laugh, 'Prophet'. The Protestant Church began as an act of rebellion and heresy against the legitimate spiritual authority of the only true Church of Christ on earth, Catholicism.
If Catholics are not Christians, then the Protestants have no chance, and how they continue in their rebellion against Christ and His Church.
No real bible compilation of works available that were thought Scripture long after Christ's death. Early versions could find, which do not have exactly the same as our present Bible texts, but they qualify as versions of it are of the AD-300.
That is when the Catholic belief system was formed through discussion and advice.
Protestant fundamentalists would cite Rev 22:18 to denounce the Catholic Bible for Catholics ", he added" Deuterocanonical books. Indeed, it was Luther who took in the Reformation and violated Rev 22:19. As a result, all Protestants are heretics Bibles and incomplete. You must remember that the Bible was a gift of Catholic principles. The one, holy, apostolic actually predates the Bible.
Paul was the main contributor to the NT and the Church before his conversion dates. See Acts 1:5, Acts 2:38-41, Acts 4:4 and Acts 5:11 of the one Church that Jesus created in action before Paul (Saul) was a member and wrote about the Church.
Jesus spoke of a church, 30,000 churches no different. Protestants as to create a "different" to the church every day met the wrong philosophy of what the local minister, "" believe in. Most of the sects do not have the training and the theology of those who have a higher religious education should ignore the clear contraindications that points out its errors. Remember, there is nothing in the Bible that are wrong with Catholic doctrine.
The Catholic Bible is completely true.
The Catholic Bible is the complete Bible and the true Bible, the Catholic Church compiled the Bible. When Martin Luther was removed 7 books (the deutrocanonical) and remove and add words to the Bible.
Catholic Christian
There are minor differences. They like to use the King James version, which is in old English. Not only is obsolete, many of the meanings of words have changed.
†
The main difference is that Protestants seem obsessed with the cult of Mary, while the Catholics worship only God.
Because the Protestants took books out of the Bible
The Catholic Bible is the original
In the first century Jerusalem there was at least four canons OT in use by different Jewish groups. It was the Canon of the Pharisees, the Sadducees, the Jews of Ethiopia and the / Essene Jewish diaspora. Jesus and the disciples used the Septuagint which was the Canon of the Diaspora / Essenes. We know this because it is cited in the New Testament. This Canon is still the canon of the Christians, until after the Reformation, and indeed until about 200 years ago, when the Protestants adopted a condensed version of the Canon Deuterocanonicals elimination of their Bibles. Even the AKJ originally contained the complete Christian Canon. It has been said by critics of the Church of Christ that never Deuterocanonicals believed to be inspired and the opposite is true. The decision taken by Christians as to which books are inspired and useful for teaching was decided at the African Synods in the late fourth and early fifth century. There was never any question about their inspiration.
The Old Testament canon chosen by the Protestants is actually a Jewish canon by the Jews not chosen until after the establishment of Christianity as a result of the spread of Christianity to slow the growth of the group in Jerusalem after the fall of the Temple in 70 AD. Until then, as I said there were not many in use fees. The adoption of the offense, the Canon Deuterocanonicals joined the Jews against the Christians was decided at the Jewish Council for Jamnia because too hard Deuterocanonicals mentioned the Messiah fulfilled in Christ.
Some Protestants who claim that only Jews have the authority to choose Canon but the Church that the decision to defer to Christ and his disciples, and it is clear through biblical research, the Septuagint is the Bible used by the first century Church and quoted in the NT Scriptures. The fact that Protestants choose to adopt the Canon, which was approved by the same Jews that accused our Lord that led to his crucifixion suggests the origin of this confusion from the father of lies that led the Pharisees to Christ and accused at the request of his punishment. It's another way that Satan is divided and separates the body of Christ to the faithful refuse the prayer of Christ that we are all one in Christ for his Church. The Christian church has always used the Septuagint as Canon and never the truncated version of modernist Protestants.
Some Protestants believe that Catholics mistakenly added to the Bible with Deuterocanonicals but this shows an ignorance of their own history and the history of Christianity as evidenced by the Church of Christ. The facts are that the Protestants removed Deuterocanonicals and even strongly considered eliminating some of the NT books currently in use by Protestants and Catholics. Fr Martin Luther was in favor of removing the book of James because it conflicted with his heretical man made doctrines of the "Solas", Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide. The heretic Ulrich Zwingli wanted to remove the Gospel of John, for his teaching of the commandment of the Body of Christ Food and drink his blood, which contradicts your point of view of a real absence of Christ instead of a real presence in the Eucharist. Even FR. Martin Luther could not support a departure from Scripture and deny that Christ is truly and really present in the Eucharist, the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity.
In Christ
Fr Joseph
The assumption that the Protestant Bible was distributed by the Catholic Church in America to keep an exclusive class, is the ignorance of the fact that Latin was the language of all educated people in Europe, English is a language again at the end of the 14th century.
Why the name itself, "the Vulgate" or "popular version, in view of the famous St. Jerome translated into Latin in the 4th century, highlights the fact that the Catholic Church gave the Scriptures to population.
A Christian Bible should be composed of books in the Old Testament and New Testament books. Therefore the Council of Carthage included the Septuagint version of the 46 books of the Old Testament as a canon of Scripture. Protestants have, like all Protestant ministers, that 7 of these 46 books are "spurious".
The translation of the Septuagint was done during the third century before the Christian era, "a time when the Jews were no longer able to understand the Aramaic, or, indeed, read Hebrew. That is why the Hebrew Bible had to be translated into Greek the Septuagint version of the well known ", as stated in The Illustrated History of the Jewish people."
The Septuagint version of Scripture, that the Jewish Encyclopedia states that "the most important of all the versions made by Jews", was conducted by 72 official translators, "six learned, wise and holy scribes each of the twelve tribes of Israel, "selected by the High Priest Eleazar of Jerusalem, the supreme religious authority in the world of his time. Eleazar furnished translators with their most precious manuscripts of the 46 books of the Jewish holy scripture for translation. This translation includes 7 books rejects Protestantism, the translation of knowledge Vallentine Jewish Encyclopedia says "was received with enthusiasm by the Jews everywhere about her looks."
Protestants established the Protestant canon of 39 books used, contrary to the Catholic Church uses Septuagint canon of 46 books, which states that the Septuagint was rejected by the Jews of Palestine, without specifying which of Palestinian Jews. Surely it was rejected by the Jews who were under the religious jurisdiction of the high priests during the years when he worked Judaism as a religion of God Almighty, when the Jews had a priesthood, and a temple with the altar divinely permitted to supply of the sacrifices of Moses.
It was the Jews in Jabneh, the port city of Palestine, who rejected the Septuagint in the days after the temple veil was torn, when the Mosaic law were divinely thing of the past history, after full Judaism blossomed into Christianity. Vallentine Jewish Encyclopedia of Knowledge, said that the establishment of the canon 39 books "was held at the Synod of Jabneh, in 90 AD, shortly after the destruction of the Temple, at the urging of Rabbi Akiva"
Of course, Protestants do not know Rabbi Akiva who instigated the canon of 39 books which the Protestants, and all other Protestant ministers, have embraced.
First, Rabbi Akiva did not have the legal authority to form a canon of Scripture, as the Jews had during the days of the high priest Eleazar, and Catholics in the Council of Carthage had during the days of Pope Silicon. Secondly, Rabbi Akiva was a deadly enemy of our Lord messianic. St. Justin (100-165 AD) said that Akiba "Christians persecuted Jews, and gave orders that if not deny Jesus and hating his name, which could be tortured." Akiba proclaimed a bold, individual striving, named Simeon, the Messiah, giving the name of Bar Kochba, "Son of the Star". He led the revolt against forces useless Adriano for the reconquest of Jerusalem, at the cost of the lives of more than half a million Jews deceived.
Protestants do not realize that was the anti-Jewish Christianity that caused the rejection of the Septuagint and the realization of Akiba instigated by the canon of Scripture, who embraced Protestantism. Vallentine Jewish Encyclopedia of Knowledge, says that "the emergence of the Septuagint was received with enthusiasm by the Jews everywhere, but with the increase of the Christian sect and the adoption of this version of the Bible, the Jews began to report vehemently, accusing Christians of falsifying the Greek text here and there. " The rejection of the Septuagint was in part because it had been accepted as sacred by other faiths.
"Jesus was a Palestinian Jew. He recognized the authority of the Palestinians (Akiba) Scriptures. " The facts are:
First, that spurious accepted Protestant Old Testament canon of Scripture did not exist during the years spent by our Lord in Palestine;
Secondly, some 270 citations in the New Testament are from the Septuagint version of the Scriptures of the Old Testament that. was used by Jesus and the Apostles:
Third, the Peloubet (Protestant) Bible Dictionary attests to the fact that the Seventy, was the chief storehouse of Christ and the Apostles, took their tests and prescriptions.
Peace to you mate
First, we must understand that the books contained in the Bible are elected by the Church.
The Protestants took the Catholic canon of Scripture and remove the books that the Jews of his time did not accept. Martin Luther also wanted to remove James and some other parts, but his followers resisted such actions.
The Orthodox Church wrote the Bible and choose the books in the canon of Scripture.
Roman Catholics were part of the Orthodox Church when he defined the canon of the New Testament.
However, even this charge is still considered open by the Orthodox Church. The Ethiopian Orthodox Church has several more books in his New Testament Canon including a very useful on how to conduct a service in the Church (ie, how to conduct the liturgy).
In regard to the Orthodox Church, the canon of Scripture is fluid FIXED. It has never been defined. Therefore, Russia's Canon of Scripture contains books not recognized by the Greeks and Serbs. The Ethiopian Orthodox Canon is the longest and still has a "narrow" and a "comprehensive" Canon.
Without getting into issues too complex for this setting, basically stems from the question of what is considered inspired by God.
We all agree in the Holy Scriptures are inspired by God, as St. Paul told St. Timothy. However, St. Paul quoted a pagan in his Epistle to Titus. That was the pagan inspired by God, or is that St. Paul was inspired by God, to quote the heathen? But then why did God inspire the apostle to quote a pagan? Then there is the question of what if part of a book was inspired but another part was not?
For example, as I know, the books contained in the so-called Second Esdras RV is considered only canonical Orthodox churches in Russia and Ethiopia. However, he says that Ezra (ie, Ezra) wrote it and you know this is false. So how could ideas? Well, if you read some other parts of the same, one wonders how anyone can doubt that inspired it. So what do we do with these books, which are partly inspired? One solution is to include in the canon and budget of only part of them. This is one reason why they are called the Deuterocanonical books, ie. they are a secondary charge that is not equal to the primary charge.
In general, all the books contained in the Greek Septuagint (LXX) are accepted as Christian Scripture for Jewish scholars who translated the considered part of Scripture. Those who are left are those that were not among these books. That said, Mace 3 and 4 have been translated and yet several Orthodox churches (including the Coptic Church of Egypt, where they were translated) are not considered canonical.
In short, whatever the canonical bishop says it is part of Scared Scripture is part of the Holy Bible. Now know as St. Ignatius, the disciple of St. John the Beloved, cautioned against anyone not following the rule of its bishop.
I hope this helped his companion.
~ ~ ~
P.S. The Coptic Church include Psalm 151, from the Psalms.
What is the Catholic position on this Psalm please?
"The Apocrypha refers to 14 or 15 books of doubtful authenticity and authority decided to Roman Catholics belonged to the Bible sometime after the Protestant Reformation. The Catholic Council of Trent (1545-1563) canonized these books. This canonization took place largely as a result of the Protestant Reformation. Indeed, Luther had criticized Catholics to avoid skin support biblical doctrines such as prayer for the dead. Al canonize the Apocrypha (which offers support to pray for the dead in 2 Macabese 23:45-46), Catholics suddenly had "the Scriptures" to support this and other Catholic doctrines clearly.
Catholics argue that the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Old Testament in Hebrew) contained the Apocrypha. In addition, church fathers, as Iranians, tortellini, and Clement of Alexandria used the Apocrypha in public worship and accepted them as Scripture. Furthermore, it is argued, St. Augustine saw these books as inspired.
Protestants respond by noting that although some of the Apocrypha may have been mentioned in the New Testament, New Testament writer EVER appointment of any of these books as Scripture, nor gave the slightest authority, such as books inspired. Jesus and the disciples virtually ignored these books, something that had not been the case had been considered to be inspired.
Moreover, although some church fathers spoke of approval of the Apocrypha, there were other church fathers - Source remarkable and Jerome - who denied his inspiration. Furthermore, although the principles of Augustine recognized the Apocrypha, in her years later, rejected these books as outside the canon and considered inferior to the Hebrew Scriptures.
Jamie The Jewish Council, which met in the year 90, rejected the Apocrypha as Scripture. Combine this with the fact that there are clear historical errors in the Apocrypha (especially those concerning Obit) and the fact that it contains the biblical doctrines (such as praying for the dead), and it is clear that these books do not belong to the Bible. Moreover, unlike many of the biblical books, there is no claim APOCRYPHA IN ANY BOOK IN CONNECTION to divine inspiration.
Catholics and Christians are 2 different faiths.
There is no idol worship [as Mary] in Christianity.
All roads do not lead to the same place.
QUANTITY, not the answer ……….. is quality.