Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Mr Rogers
The so-called deuterocanonical books were part of the Bible in the Middle Ages. I think all of the Eastern churches (Greek Orthodox and others) accept them as part of the Bible. The Council of Trent reaffirmed the Catholic position but that wasn't a new departure.

I think most Protestant Bibles had the extra books in them, in a separate section between the Old Testament and the New Testament, as books that were good to read even if they weren't regarded as part of the Bible, until the early 19th century.

14 posted on 11/07/2009 9:49:46 AM PST by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]


To: Verginius Rufus

That is pretty accurate. There was some discrepancies between Orthodox and Catholic on exactly which books, but they are very minor differences. There was also discussion about the canon status of the Apocrypha...a majority of votes cast at Trent made it official, but it was acceptable before then to echo Jerome’s concerns.

Most Protestant edition Bibles don’t have them, but I have several that do. Interesting reading, but it doesn’t strike me as ‘feeling’ the same as scripture.

FWIW - deuterocanonical is a term that was coined after Trent. Some Catholics think Protestants are trying to pull a fast one by calling them the Apocrypha, but that is the name they were known by until the 1500s. The Apocrypha found in the KJV and subsequent Protestant Bibles is very close, but contains 3 books or fragments not listed by Trent, although found in some editions of the Old Vulgate.


18 posted on 11/07/2009 11:02:08 AM PST by Mr Rogers (I loathe the ground he slithers on!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson