How Books Of Canon Were Chosen


#1

I ask this question and got this answer from another site,Please help me to understand how much of this answer is true or false.
PLEASE READ ALL OF STATEMENT.

**Canon - How the Books were Chosen
The canon is simply the recognized body of work by a branch of the Church. Which writings should, or should not be included in the Bible as scripture. Because other works were creeping in over time. It became necessary for each group (Jewish and Christian) to meet and state for an historical record, the source of all their books and writings. Therefore, there is an official Hebrew, Protestant, Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Canon.

1… Hebrew Canon - Council of Jamina/Jabneh 90 A.D. To aid in the rebuilding of Jewish religious life after the destruction of the temple in 70 A.D. the Jewish Canon was officially stated at this time although the official canon was considered closed in 400 B.C. Several criteria were used in selecting books:
1… The book must come from a period considered to be inspired. From the time of Moses to Ezra.
2… It must be in harmony with the Torah (the first 5 books).
3… The language of the original book must be written in Hebrew.
4… The book must be written within the geographical area of Palestine.
2… Protestant Canon - Council of Nicea 325 A.D. Since it was a persecuted church for close to three hundred years, a canon was not declared until the church was officially tolerated. The 27 books of the New Testament and the 39 books of the Hebrew Old Testament were recognized by the entire Church at that time to be the only authentic books.
At the time, everyone accepted only those writings as the authentic works of the authors. This is the canon that is used in the Protestant Bible. The Old Testament is similar to the Hebrew canon.
This allowed them to state that the other works were not widely accepted and their origin was suspicious. Several criteria were used in selecting the books:
1… The book must be written by an apostle or a person with very close relationship to the early church
2… The book must give clear evidence that it is divinely inspired.
3… The book must be in harmony with other scripture
4… The book was to be universally accepted by the church. This criteria highlights the fact that the councils did not meet to decide which books should be included. They addressed the problem of a growing body of works of suspicious origin. They met to confirm what they believed and understood and why. Therefore, the other criteria probably reflects their criticism of the other books.
3… Protestant Canon - Council of Carthage 397 A.D. Again officially recognized only the 27 books of the New Testament and also identified the growing body of apocryphal and pseudepigraphal works.
4… Roman Catholic Canon - Council of Trent in 1546 Accepted the Deuterocanonical works in the Catholic Church, against the advice of former church scholars. Therefore, over 1200 years later, the church included books rejected by earlier groups who were much more familiar with what was happening.

The subject that everyone avoids talking about is the Dark Ages when the Catholic Church ruled the world and killed all those who did not agree with them. They wrote many false books to prove their teachings because it could not be proved from Scripture. These books would suddenly be “found” to prove what they were saying although they were forgeries.**


#2

This is so wrong it isn’t even funny. But don’t let yourself be put on the defense. Go back to whoever gave you this and have him/her do the proof. Those ‘statements’ are just statements (the last one especially egregiously wrong and insulting). Where are the PRIMARY SOURCES to prove those allegations? That’s what they are–somebody’s ASSUMPTION of how canon was chosen. And the word “protestant” wasn’t around in 300 AD either, so attempting to coopt it is dishonest as well.

And while they are sputtering around trying to cut-and-paste, you refer to this: catholic.com/library/Old_Testament_Canon.asp

and this:newadvent.org/cathen/03274a.htm


#3

Bwahahaha, that was ridiculous :rotfl:


#4

I’ve been reading the book, ‘Lost Christianities’;
amazon.com/Lost-Christianities-Battles-Scripture-Faiths

It has been very informative and interesting. I read some of the reviews on amazon.com which appear to state that there is issue to the author’s resolution of how the final canon was developed, but I haven’t gotten this far into it. One of the reviewers stated to look into the following authors who apparently have more of an open mind to the subject; Jaroslav Pelikan, N.T. Wright, John Behr and Robert Wilkens.


#5

If you will do a search here, probably in the Sacred Scripture forum, you will find a completely documented history of the New Testament, complete with councils, dates, books considered but not included, etc.


#6

I am not a Catholic: the answer you will see here is not the answer of someone who has a vested interest in defending the position of the Catholic Church; it is the answer of a literature student and a classicist, who becomes really annoyed when people misrepresent history. :mad:

What I shall also give you are non-Catholic sources which a non-Catholic correspondent will not be able to reject simply on the basis of affiliation and bias.

The canon is simply the recognized body of work by a branch of the Church. Which writings should, or should not be included in the Bible as scripture. Because other works were creeping in over time.

Their history is as good as their grammar: the above is only one sentence, not three.

It became necessary for each group (Jewish and Christian) to meet and state for an historical record, the source of all their books and writings. Therefore, there is an official Hebrew, Protestant, Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Canon.

This is true, but incomplete: there are other churches with other canons.

1… Hebrew Canon - Council of Jamina/Jabneh 90 A.D.

This is imprecise: we do not know exactly when the council happened. We only have a reference saying that it was ‘at the end of the first century’. A few scholars doubt that there even was any such council, and propose that the ‘decisions’ were the result of gradual accretions of thought. I say this to give you some idea of the accuracy of the rest.

the official canon was considered closed in 400 B.C.

Just read this on the formation of the Hebrew canon, and this on the formation of the NT canon. Then look at this on the Septuagint, which was a series of Greek translations of Hebrew Scriptures and a collection of Hebrew religious writings in Greek, all of which later became the basis for early Christian discussions about the OT canon, and then this about Christian canon formation.

The site from which you quoted is often close to the historical record of the events, but not quite there.

3… Protestant Canon - Council of Carthage 397 A.D. Again officially recognized only the 27 books of the New Testament and also identified the growing body of apocryphal and pseudepigraphal works.

!!?!
“the canonical Scriptures are these: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua the son of Nun, Judges, Ruth, the four books of the Kings, the two books of Chronicles, Job, the Psalms of David, five books of Solomon, the book of the Twelve [minor] Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Tobias, Judith, Esther, the two books of Ezra, and the two books of the Maccabees. The books of the New Testament: the Gospels, four books; the Acts of the Apostles, one book; the epistles of the apostle Paul, thirteen; of the same to the Hebrews, one epistle; of Peter, two; of John the apostle, three; of James, one; of Jude, one; the Revelation of John.” canon 24 of the Council of Carthage"
The Hebrew/Protestant canon includes only three books of Solomon (Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs), no Tobias, no Judith, no Maccabees, and a shorter Jeremiah than was talked about in that council.

4… Roman Catholic Canon - Council of Trent in 1546 Accepted the Deuterocanonical works in the Catholic Church, against the advice of former church scholars. Therefore, over 1200 years later, the church included books rejected by earlier groups who were much more familiar with what was happening.

This refers to the inclusion of the deuterocanonical works in the Vulgate. Jerome, the original translator of the work, was uncertain about the authenticity of some of the texts because he could not find Hebrew originals for them. He included his reservations in his prologues to those sections of the Bible. He did not reject them, per se, but followed the standard, contemporary line of saying that they should be read ‘for the edification of the church, but not used as a foundation for doctrine’. Of course, there was not a perfect consensus upon which books fell into this category.


#7

The subject that everyone avoids talking about is the Dark Ages when the Catholic Church ruled the world and killed all those who did not agree with them. They wrote many false books to prove their teachings because it could not be proved from Scripture. These books would suddenly be “found” to prove what they were saying although they were forgeries.

This is the worst part of all. The Dark Ages were the period following the fall of Rome. European civilisation was decentralised, and plunged quickly into wars between local rival lords. This resulted in massive destruction of population and societal infrastructure, and the replacement of luxuries such as education with necessities such as feeding one’s family. The adjective ‘dark’ refers to the lack of the light of learning.

Meanwhile, it was the monks in the monasteries who kept the light of learning alive. They continued to teach the arcane arts of reading and writing, and they tirelessly copied and recopied texts from Greece, from Rome, from the Bible and from the Church. Without their efforts, thousands of classical texts would have been lost forever, and we might all suffer in the darkness of ignorance yet.

As for the ‘killing all who did not agree’, this is presumably a reference to the actions of the Inquisition, which did not begin until after the Dark Ages.

The site in question contains more errors than I have room to include.


#8

Great stuff Mystophilus. I always enjoy reading your posts :slight_smile:


#9

:tiphat: Thank you; you are very kind (and you also happen to be one of the people who keep me coming back here :smiley: ).


#10

So there!
:wink:


#11

Why thank you. It’s always nice to hear, especially from a non-Catholic. Loved the Chaucer shirt :slight_smile:


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.