bought new catholic bible

Discussion in 'Biblical Advices' started by smellycat, Feb 25, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. bought new catholic bible

    readind daniel,new book to me,bel and the dragon,any ideas why this is.?also i know daniel is told to seal news till the end.what says you.?
  2. It has been awhile since I studied from the Vulgate, I'll need to brush up on my Latin before I can offer you a good response.

    I believe Bel and the Dragon were apocryphal and added to the book of Daniel. Is that your question?

    I think I have an old King James up at the church, one of the King James versions, (1611)??? Contained the Bel and the Dragon chapters. But remember, they were written around the 2nd century, and were not canonical.
  3. Be sure to keep this in mind. Books of the apocrypha are written by men, not inspired by the Holy Spirit like other books of cannon. They're useful for church history between the time of the last prophet and the arrival of Christ, but are NOT authoritative like scripture.
  4. so when daniel is told to keep these books sealed,which books are they.?
  5. The angel was talking about the prophecies of the book of Daniel, not some books added to the bible hundreds of years after the Bible was established.

    Daniel 12
    4 But you, Daniel, close up and seal the words of the scroll until the time of the end. Many will go here and there to increase knowledge." [FONT=&quot][/FONT]
    5 Then I, Daniel, looked, and there before me stood two others, one on this bank of the river and one on the opposite bank. 6 One of them said to the man clothed in linen, who was above the waters of the river, "How long will it be before these astonishing things are fulfilled?"
    7 The man clothed in linen, who was above the waters of the river, lifted his right hand and his left hand toward heaven, and I heard him swear by him who lives forever, saying, "It will be for a time, times and half a time. When the power of the holy people has been finally broken, all these things will be completed."
    8 I heard, but I did not understand. So I asked, "My lord, what will the outcome of all this be?"
    9 He replied, "Go your way, Daniel, because the words are closed up and sealed until the time of the end. 10 Many will be purified, made spotless and refined, but the wicked will continue to be wicked. None of the wicked will understand, but those who are wise will understand.

    It was not the time of the end when the apocryphal books where added. The angel is talking about the meaning of the message he delivered to Daniel that only in the end times would understanding be given to Christians about the true message of the message given to Daniel.

    All Praise The Ancient Of Days
  6. I love the quote by Prof. J. Barton Payne. He says of Daniel that it is "a timeless demonstration of separation from impurity, of courage against compromise, of efficaciousness in prayer, and of dedication to Him whose kingdom is from generation to generation".

    There are additions to the book of Daniel which are clearly, because of their character, not part of the original book. They are "The Song of the Three Holy Children, The History of Susanna and The History of the Destruction of Bel and the Dragon.

    The Song of the Three Holy Children - 68 verses long come between verses 23 and 24 of Daniel 3. The History of Susanna - 64 verses is placed either at the beginning or end of the book. The History of the Destruction of Bel and the Dragon - 42 verses comes at the end of the book.

    These verses are so out of character that all scholars I read never question the fact that they have been excluded from the Caonon.

    I believe it is of great interest that the book of Daniel is now becoming much clearer as prophecy is fulfilled and that we are now at the time of the end. Certainly many are going here and there (just look at the airports) and knowledge is increasing. My grandmother was born in the time of horse and cart and lived to see a moon landing. How's that for increase in man's knowledge?

    God bless us all as we learn together.

  7. Ride4theSon what Bishops made the cannon for tHe King James bible.
  8. The distinction between these spurious and non (or anti) biblical books is easily made. The Jews were the keepers of the Old Testament Canon and they flatly rejected them as scripture. The early church rejected them as well. They were introduced as a corruption primarily from the Latin Vulgate manuscripts and rightly ignored by the King Jimmy translators.

    Rom 3:1 What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?
    Rom 3:2 Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.
  9. There were something like 50 scholars working for King James, they came up with three translations, over a period of about 11 years,... the first authorized version was the 1611, during Henry the 8th's reign of power, but some of the translations came out as early as 1608.

    I'm not sure which Bishops were involved in approving or assisting with the translations. I don't know that I have any books that go into that much detail about its inception. :confused:

    I think it is also significant to note that the scholars who assembled and translated the KJV used what they had. I am not saying that they didn't do a marvelous job, but since the KJV we have discovered a wealth of centuries older manuscripts, including the Dead Sea scroll, just to mention a few.
  10. Not all Jew rejected these books, There are still some Jews to this date that have them in their cannon. I agree that their was and still are some Christian that reject this books, but this books where agreed to be part of the canon in 397 AD by the Council of Carthage and the undivided Church.

    It was not until sometime after the reformation that this book where removed, some 125 years ago. I looked around but I was not able to find any real individual of group that takes this credit that had the authority to do this.


    Ethiopian Jew

    Council of Carthage

    Indeed the Kings James is an eloquent and beautiful version. I inquire because you used the word cannon and I was pondering by what stranded and authority was it compiled by, and who made the decision of what went in and what went of this version.
  11. The early church was indeed an interesting situation. Each of the different churches has different pieces of the pie and even different books they considered cannon.
    It is however an established fact that all but the "fringe groups" in the Jewish religion rejected the apocrypha as spurious.
    That fact that the apocrypha is riddle with error and even contains witchcraft is further proof it does not belong in our bible as we know God does not err nor does His Word. If one insists on placing them into the Word the resulting contradictions create not only serious problems but result in anti- biblical doctrines and practices.

    From Christian Apologetics + Research Ministry:

    Problems in the Apocrypha

    When we look into the apocrypha itself, we find numerous problems. For example, we see it advocating magic where the smoke of a fish heart on a fire drives away devils.
    Tobias 6:5-7, "Then the angel said to him: Take out the entrails of this fish, and lay up his heart, and his gall, and his liver for thee: for these are necessary for useful medicines. 6 And when he had done so, he roasted the flesh thereof, and they took it with them in the way: the rest they salted as much as might serve them, till they came to Rages the city of the Medes. 7 Then Tobias asked the angel, and said to him: I beseech thee, brother Azarias, tell me what remedies are these things good for, which thou hast bid me keep of the fish? 8 And the angel, answering, said to him: If thou put a little piece of its heart upon coals, the smoke thereof driveth away all kind of devils, either from man or from woman, so that they come no more to them."

    Is it true that the smoke from a fish's heart, when burned, drives away evil spirits? Of course not. Such a superstitious teaching has no place in the word of God.
    The Apocrypha also teaches that forgiveness of sins is by human effort.

    Salvation by works:
    Tobias 4:11, "For alms deliver from all sin, and from death, and will not suffer the soul to go into darkness."
    Tobias 12:9, "For alms delivereth from death, and the same is that which purgeth away sins, and maketh to find mercy and life everlasting."

    We know from Scripture that alms (money or food, given to the poor or needy as charity) does not purge our sins. The blood of Christ is what cleanses us, not money or food given to poor people. "but if we walk in the light as He Himself is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus His Son cleanses us from all sin," (1 John 1:7).
    Money as an offering for the sins of the dead:
    2 Macabees 12:43, "And making a gathering, he sent twelve thousand drachms of silver to Jerusalem for sacrifice to be offered for the sins of the dead, thinking well and religiously concerning the resurrection."

    Can anyone truly except that money isn't offering for the sins of dead people? Such a superstitious and unbiblical concept has no place in Scripture.
    Wrong historical facts:
    Judith 1:5, "Now in the twelfth year of his reign, Nabuchodonosor, king of the Assyrians, who reigned in Ninive the great city, fought against Arphaxad and overcame him."

    Baruch 6:2, "And when you are come into Babylon, you shall be there many years, and for a long time, even to seven generations: and after that I will bring you away from thence with peace."
    The book of Judith incorrectly says that Nebuchadnezzar was the king of the Assyrians when he was the king of the Babylonians.1
    Baruch 6:2 says the Jews would serve in Babylon for seven generations where Jer. 25:11 says it was for 70 years. "And this whole land shall be a desolation and a horror, and these nations shall serve the king of Babylon seventy years."

    Obviously the apocrypha has serious problems. From magic, to salvation by works, to money as an offering for the sins of the dead, and blatant incorrect historical facts, it is full of false and unbiblical teachings. It isn't inspired of God.
  12. I don’t know any early Church intside of the undivided church that in a Council rejected these books. The Canon of Christian Scripture, as approved by the Church at the Council of Rome in A.D. 382 and reaffirmed at the Councils of Hippo in A.D. 393, Carthage in A.D. 397, II Nicæa in A.D. 787, Florence in A.D. 1442, Trent in A.D. 1546, contains 46 books in the Old Testament and 27 in the New Testament. I haven’t found one reference anywhere that have these books removed from the cannon.

    Jesus and the disciples used the Septuagint which was the Canon of the Diaspora/Essenes. We know this because it is quoted in the New Testament. This Canon continued to be the Canon of Christians until after the Reformation and, in fact until about 125 years ago.
  13. Your information is incomplete as well as inaccurate.

    First, The Catholic Church which uses the Apocrypha and considers them inspired acknowledges they did not set a canon until after the Reformation.

    Second, The Catholic Encyclopedia says: The "Protocanonical (are) those sacred writings which have been always received by Christendom without dispute. The protocanonical books of the Old Testament correspond with those of the Bible of the Hebrews, and the Old Testament as received by Protestants."
    "[The deuterocanonical (deuteros, "second") are those whose Scriptural character was contested in some quarters,"
    The Catholic Church admits the Apocrypha were not always universally accepted.

    Third, Even Jerome who was asked by the Pope to translate the Scriptures into Latin did not consider the Apocrypha inspired. Jerome included a disclaimer on the seven extra books:

    Jerome stated, "As the Church reads the books of Judith and Tobit and Maccabees but does not receive them among the canonical Scriptures, so also it reads Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus for the edification of the people, not for the authoritative confirmation of doctrine." Jerome(340-420) - Jerome's preface to the books of Solomon.

    Forth, There is no evidence Jesus or the Apostle's ever quoted the Apocrypha

    Finally, the seven extra books remained in the Bible even after the Reformation. Martin Luther appended them the same as Jerome had done, separating them from the inspired Scriptures and included his own disclaimer:

    Luther said, "These books are not held equal to the Scriptures, but are useful and good to read.”

    The seven Apocrypha books were eventually removed from Protestant Bibles due to high printing costs. If costs needed to be cut, it made sense to cut non-inspired books and keep the divinely inspired writings intact.


    This thread has been well discussed. Everyone has stated their views and no one is changing their minds.

    With that in mind, it is the opinion of the Moderators, nothing further is to be gained and the thread will be closed.

    If anyone wishes to add something to this thread that is of a differing viewpoint and has not already been covered, please let anyone on the Moderator Team know, and reopening of this thread will be considered.

    We thank all who participated.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page