Why Did the Catholic Church Add to the Bible?

Q. When did Catholics add books to the Bible?

A. They never did. The Jews and the Protestants removed books from the OT.
The Catholic Church simply received the Septuagint version of the Hebrew scriptures, from the Jews, at the time of Christ. This became known as the Old Testament. 70 years later, the Jews removed 7 Old Testament books from the Septuagint. The reason given for this was that they could no longer find those books in Hebrew.

Interestingly some of these books were being used to good advantage to make converts among the Jews. For example:

This passage prophesies and describes the attitude of the enemies of Jesus hundreds of years before His birth:

The Book of Wisdom
2.1a, 12-22

The wicked said among themselves, thinking not aright:

Let us beset the just one, because he is obnoxious to us; he sets himself against our doings, Reproaches us for transgressions of the law and charges us with violations of our training. He professes to have knowledge of God and styles himself as a child of the Lord. To us he is the censure of our thoughts; merely to see him is a hardship for us, Because his life is not like other men’s and different are his ways. He judges us debased; he holds aloof from our paths as from things impure. He calls blest the destiny of the just and boasts that God is his Father. Let us see whether his words be true; let us find out what will happen to him. For if the just one be the son of God he will defend him and deliver him from the hand of his foes. With revilement and torture let us put him to the test that we may have proof of his gentleness and try his patience. Let us condemn him to a shameful death; for according to his own words, God will take care of him. These were their thoughts, but they erred, for their wickedness blinded them, and they knew not the hidden counsels of God neither did they count on a recompense of holiness nor discern the innocent souls’ reward.

Prayers for the dead and support for Purgatory (since people in Heaven don’t need prayers and people in Hell can’t be helped by prayers) are scriptural based on the following passage.

II Maccabees 12:44-45

For if he were not expecting that those who had fallen would rise again, it would have been superfluous and foolish to pray for the dead.
But if he was looking to the splendid reward that is laid up for those who fall asleep in godliness, it was a holy and pious thought. Therefore he made atonement for the dead, that they might be delivered from their sin.

In 1529, Martin Luther removed the same 7 books from the Catholic Old Testament, that the Jews had removed1400 years earlier. Luther also removed 4 New Testament books (Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation) that did not agree with his theology, for his German translation. These books were removed from their original place in the order of the books and placed together at the end of the Bible. In later editions, he was persuaded to return the New Testament books to to their proper position in his translation of the Bible. Today Protestant Bibles don’t contain 7 Old Testament books at all.

Q. What is the Septuagint?

A. In the centuries leading up to the birth of Christ the Jews were living all over the known world. Greek was the language of commerce and scholarship. Over time it became harder and harder to maintain a wide knowledge of Hebrew among the Jews because more and more were speaking only Greek. The Jews in Alexandria set about to make a Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures. This translation was completed between 250-125 BC by 70 Jewish scholars. Septuagint means 70 in Latin.

Scholars are certain that Jesus and the early Christians accepted the Septuagint version of the Old Testament because etymological studies of 300 quotes from the Old Testament made by the New Testament writers can be traced back to the Septuagint version. There are also NT quotes that can be traced back to the Hebrew OT but these are far fewer in number. So, if Jesus had rejected the Septuagint the New Testament writers seemed to know nothing about it since they all used it quite freely.

For More click –> Five Myths About the Seven Books

Technorati Tags: , , ,

7 Responses

  1. Well written, I agree, but then I proceeded on to your first link “5 Myths about 7 Books” and the second sentence revealing that the author is a heretic. He states there are two kinds of Christians, Catholics and Protestants.

    You must have agreed with this reasoning, or you wouldn’t have posted the link to it. Are you sure there are only two and not five, or ten, or a million? One need not proceed to read anything further Mr. Shea wishes to teach.

    The Catholic Church is indefectible because She is intolerant of heresy. When you become a heretic you are not a Christian of any kind and the Church is not corrupted by your false faith; she just gets smaller and smaller and smaller. Heretics are called the gates of hell for they lead the unsuspecting to damnation. These gates will not prevail against the Church. To call a Protestant a Christian is to lead them astray. Can you help save a soul with a lie?

    • Protestants are our brothers by virtue of their baptism. The documents of Vatican II call them separated brethren. The same for the Orthodox. The Catholic Church never approves of heresy but she is certainly not tolerant of it. She seeks to draw all men to herself and name calling is not a good way to do this.

  2. Protestants are our brother, I agree. They are our separated brothers, I agree. The same as the orthodox, I agree. The Catholic Church never approves of heresy, I agree. The Catholic Church is not intolerant of heresy; when public tranquility is a concern the Church is very tolerant, I agree. She seeks to call all to herself, I agree. Name calling is not a good way to do this, I agree.

    The tone of your reply is one of condemnation. Where did I error? Are there two kinds of Christians? Mr. Shea does claim to be Catholic, yes? Did I call a protestant a heretic? Do you believe there are two kinds of Christians? Why would Mr. Shea say that, it was not germane to the theme?

    What does the Church teach about different types of Christians? Pope Leo XIII makes this very clear and other Popes as well. I cannot help myself, bfhu, the Holy Spirit was grieved in my soul when I went to your posted link. When Mr. Shea said there were two types of Christians, Protestants and Catholics, I couldn’t believe it. By what authority does he teach heretical doctrine? The body of Christ is not of two types but is of one only.

    I was only defending Christ from being dissolved. Tell me if you wish me to stop reading this site and posting. I will if you wish it.

    • Dear Joseph,
      I don’t think Shea is a heretic. He did not mean that Protestants are Christians equal to Catholic Christians and neither do I. Because they do not have the fullness fo the FAITH

      I didn’t mean to be condemning.

      I and Mark Shea are converts from Protestantism. I don’t know what effect it would have had on our conversions if we had always been called ‘heretics’ by the Catholic Church. Perhaps none. But the warm and loving invitation to enter the Catholic Church and the fullness of truth without first being called a heretic seems like a good way. This is the lead the Church is taking so I submit to Her. It sounds like you do as well.

  3. Shea is in error. A Christian cannot be a good Christian, a bad Christian, a Baptist Christian or a Methodist Christian, or a Christian in partial or full communion; those terms can only confuse, divide, dissolve, and deceive. Let me explain how these terms came into being.

    Lumen Gentium, the Vatican II dogmatic constitution, declares that the Church of Christ subsists in the Catholic Church. This is a break with tradition. Every Pope’s encyclical I have read up to Vatican II has declared that the Roman Catholic Church is the only Church. When one teaches something that is contrary to Catholic doctrine, that person becomes a heretic.

    If the Church of Christ subsists in, dwells in, or occupies space in the Catholic Church, then it is not the thing that surrounds it, which are Shea and you and me. Then it’s a separate thing from that which it occupies, which is the Catholic Church. Like an island in a lake or water in a glass, they are separate things, so you can not say the entire Catholic Church is the Church of Christ.

    If you can not say the Catholic Church is the Church of Christ but the church of Christ subsists there, then what is the Church of Christ? I thought a Church was people with the same faith. What is this Church of Christ in the Catholic Church? Are the members of the Church of Christ different in some way from the Catholics in the Catholic Church?

    This is a break with tradition, if not a break with reality. Some have speculated this was a deliberate contrivance to break down the vineyard wall, an attempt to extend the boundary and encompass our separated brethren by suggesting the Church of Christ can subsist else where because it is not actually the Roman Catholic Church proper. Then this Church of Christ will actually represent some of the Protestants, Muslims and Hindus; a clever means to achieve unity.

    When Shea joins Catholics and Protestants as two types of Christians he is breaking down the vineyard wall to a neighboring field. The Catholic Church has declared that the faith must be believed in its totality for a soul to become or claim Christianity. That means submitting to the pope and confessing sins to the priest. You can’t cherry pick your faith and be in partial communion. You can’t be a type of Christian – you are or you aren’t, that’s the deal, like it or not.

    Modernism holds all faiths are more or less good, and the modernists in the Vatican are busy breaking down the vineyard walls these past forty years with similar gimmicks. How about this explanation of subsists taken from L’Osservatore Romano;
    From the context and the meaning subsistit in in Lumen Gentium, n. 8, it evident that this subsistence is predicated of the Universal Church. However, at times, the notion of “the Church’s subsistence” has been applied in a different sense — not univocal but analogical — to particular Churches as well.

    Why don’t they just drop this nonsense and get honest: they want Catholics to believe the Church of Christ subsists in every Church in every religion in an infinite degree according to some new modernist theology.

    Guess what; I am not buying their heresy any longer because I know my faith from tradition and that isn’t it.

  4. I am a Protestant. I always say this to all who fight for no reason, “Go to the basics”! It doesn’t matter what you want to believe as truth. The truth is that Yahu’shuha or Jesus the only son of the living GOD, who died on the cross for my/our sins; is the one that quickens in me the truth when i read my bible, when i go to church and when i pray. People get confused and all mixed up because they don’t have a relationship with Jesus. They don’t know him as a personl LORD and Savior! And if this is a description of you who are reading this now invite him in your heart and see how he can change your life!!!

    On the fact that who added or who took out of the bible is irrelevant because if GOD’s WORD is truth, the core of your belief is in the death and resurrection. The fact is that GOD has a PERFECT plan. It wouldn’t be perfect if he didn’t account for all of the mishaps of translation would it!?

  5. I am a Catholic. I believe there is not one religion that can save one’s soul. As what the bible said, only your own FAITH in God through Jesus Christ can save you

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: