BIBLE DIFFERENCES

by Martin J. Doe

At my place of employment the issue of Bible differences came up one day and I was taken aback to find out first hand that many of the Protestant stereo-types that I had read about but had yet to experience really do exist and people really do believe that the Catholic Church added extra books to the Scriptures.

The Protestant will ask: Why do Catholics have “extra” books in their Bibles. Why did they add seven books to the already closed canon of the Word God at the Council of Trent in the Sixteenth century in complete defiance of God’s Word that says: “I warn every one who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if any one adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book…” (Revelation 22:18)

Before we take a trip into historical truth I want to point out two cautionary notes about using the above quote as a “proof text”. First, the curse being referred to is specifically dealing with the Book of Revelation not the Bible as a whole since the Bible as a whole had yet to be written. Second, even if it did refer to the Bible as a whole, I would caution the user about the second part of the curse: “…and if any one takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book” (Revelation 22:19). We shall discover that the Protestants forefathers did just this.

Now, let’s answer the objections starting with the “Sixteenth century” argument. There is a misunderstanding among many that when the Catholic Church infallibly defines something through a Council; what ever is being defined was “made up” at said Council. This is a gross misunderstanding and such is the case with the deuterocanonical books, the seven Old Testament books thrown out by the Protestants. The deuterocanonicals books are Tobit, Judith, First and Second Maccabees, Wisdom, Sirach, and Baruch plus additional texts in Esther and Daniel. Now, previous to the Council of Trent the Church had listed the seven books in the official lists of the canon of Sacred Scripture since the fourth century and here are some examples: the Council of Rome (A.D. 382) under Pope Damasus I, Council of Hippo (A.D. 393), Third Council of Carthage (A.D. 397), The Canon of Scripture, including the seven books was approved by Pope Innocent I in A.D. 405, Sixth Council of Carthage explicitly stated the seven book canon (A.D. 419), implicitly approved at the Seventh Ecumenical Council, II Nicea (A.D. 787), the Ecumenical Council of Florence formally stated the canon (February 4, 1442), and emphatically stated by the Ecumenical Council of Trent, A.D. 1546 because the canon was under assault by the Protestant revolt. In addition to these historical facts is the easily verifiable fact that most of the Orthodox Churches have the same seven books, as does the Catholic Church even though the Eastern Orthodox Christians separated from Rome in A.D. 1054, long before the Council of Trent. What reason would the Orthodox Church have to accept a canon from a Catholic Council held five hundred years after they separated from Rome?

The deuterocanonical (Greek for second canon) books are part of the Greek translation of the Old Testament called the Septuagint or the “Seventy”. Protestants do not hold the Septuagint with its seven books to be inspired and there are two predominant reasons for this: some teach that the prophet Ezra closed the canon and others teach that the Rabbis at the Council of Jamnia closed the canon in A.D. 90. Did Ezra close the canon? If he did then why of the 350 New Testament quotes taken from the Old Testament 300 are from the Septuagint, which includes the deuterocanonicals? In addition, the Encyclopedia Judaica states that the Jews of Ethiopia, to this very day, use the same Old Testament Canon as the Catholic Church; Judaism being taken to Ethiopia during the time of the Queen of Sheba. Did the Rabbis close the canon at Jamnia in A.D. 90? Perhaps, if there was even a Jamnia Council, but let’s say for the sake of argument that there was. I ask what authority would a Council of Rabbis have over the Christian Church of A.D. 90? Why would any Christian accept as authoritative a Council held by those who believed the Christian Church to be heretical? Doesn’t make much sense to me.