I was told by a Protestant to read an argument that proves some books in the Catholic Bible is not inspired by God. He called it apocalypse or something close. How do I respond?
You mean apocrypha?
I’m actually studying Biblical inspiration right now, but I don’t know too much about these books. From my understanding, the apocryphal books are not part of the original Hebrew Bible, but were declared canonical and divinely inspired by the Council of Trent.
What is his argument against the authority of these books?
Is he talking about why Protestants have 66 books and Catholics have 73 books?
It looks like your friend does not know the history of the Bible.
Read this and refute your friend…catholicapologetics.info/apologetics/protestantism/wbible.htm
If your friend also cites the Hebrew canon…then read this article…catholicdefense.blogspot.com/2011/07/can-protestants-rely-upon-council-of.html
Ask him why he follows an anti-Christian decision?
The books known as the Deuterocanon were in use by the Church from the first days. Since each of those books is part of the Old Testament, they existed before the Church. Notice that those 7 books had to be preserved by the Jews some 200-odd years in order for the Christian Church to have them. They were preserved for a reason. Every writing in the Catholic bible was used, somewhere in the early Church, since day 1. Remember that the Jews also had no canon of OT scripture at the time. They endeavored to determine one in response to the rise of Christianity - and so those efforts must be viewed as tainted, since there clearly was motive to suppress messianic books that alluded to Christian practices and teachings.
One more thing: Here is a protestant time-line of the bible. Scroll to the right from genesis and you will find a gap of about 200 years - just before Jesus’ birth. Notice that the common 66 book protestant bible has zero scripture to cover the very historic two centuries immediately before Jesus. Don’t you find that odd? Would God remain silent about the approaching new coveenant? Consider that several books of the Deuterocanon were written during that exact time frame. In particular, 1 & 2 Maccabees mentions prayer for the dead, and the resurrection (which was a disputed concept even later, in Jesus’ time).
Protestants refer to this scriptural gap as the “intertestamental period.” - a time in which God did not apparently speak. Really? Jesus Himself said (Luke 16:16) that the law and the prophets were proclaimed until the coming of John the Baptist. The protestant bible has no record of this happening for two centuries. Does that make any sense?
No books were added to the Catholic bible - early Lutheran bibles had as many as 81 books and letters! What happened to them? Ask the friend to explain that!
1 Maccabees names a place called Emmaus three times. 2 Maccabees mentions the resurrection three times. On the day of his resurrection, Jesus appeared to two disciples on the road to…Emmaus. Coincidence?
The friend has a lot of explaining to do.
Yea I meant the Apocrypha. He says they are not divinely inspired and not part of the original Bible. But didn’t the council of trent include them? If so that would be the early church fathers he is going against.
Look the Council of Carthage 397AD. THAT IS WHEN THEY WERE INCLUDED IN THE CANON OF SCRIPTURE! The Council of Trent just reaffirmed what was said in 397
And let’s make sure that we are very clear about something: Carthage didn’t just pull this out of thin air, either! They didn’t come up with the idea of these books being within the canon of Scripture; they simply ratified it and affirmed that it was something to be held by the Church!
Here is a thread on this topic (Sacred Scripture forum) that you’ll find informative and helpful.
Thanks ever so much! Very informative