Comments on: Tradition & Theology - Part III http://zealfortruth.org/2008/04/tradition-theology/ Thu, 08 Jan 2009 17:05:30 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.1.3 By: Bryan http://zealfortruth.org/2008/04/tradition-theology/#comment-6209 Bryan Wed, 16 Apr 2008 16:56:33 +0000 http://zealfortruth.org/2008/04/tradition-theology/#comment-6209 I believe your assertion that Luther excluded certain books from the canon is false. There is no doubt that he took issues with the books you mentioned, but from what I have read he never went as far as excluding them. See: http://www.ntrmin.org/Luther and the canon 2.htm Also, the Council of Carthage may have been the first council to create the canon of 66 plus the deuterocanonical books, but was it not only a local council, and thus not binding on the whole of the church? I believe your assertion that Luther excluded certain books from the canon is false. There is no doubt that he took issues with the books you mentioned, but from what I have read he never went as far as excluding them. See: http://www.ntrmin.org/Luther and the canon 2.htm

Also, the Council of Carthage may have been the first council to create the canon of 66 plus the deuterocanonical books, but was it not only a local council, and thus not binding on the whole of the church?

]]> By: Bryan http://zealfortruth.org/2008/04/tradition-theology/#comment-6210 Bryan Wed, 16 Apr 2008 16:57:28 +0000 http://zealfortruth.org/2008/04/tradition-theology/#comment-6210 <a href="http://www.ntrmin.org/Luther%20and%20the%20canon%202.htm" rel="nofollow">Luther link that works</a> Luther link that works

]]> By: Bryan http://zealfortruth.org/2008/04/tradition-theology/#comment-6211 Bryan Wed, 16 Apr 2008 17:00:24 +0000 http://zealfortruth.org/2008/04/tradition-theology/#comment-6211 Okay, it won't let me post the link correctly. Do a search in Google for "10 Frequent Mistakes in Understanding Luther’s View of the Canon" and it will be the first link that shows up. Okay, it won’t let me post the link correctly. Do a search in Google for “10 Frequent Mistakes in Understanding Luther’s View of the Canon” and it will be the first link that shows up.

]]> By: Colin http://zealfortruth.org/2008/04/tradition-theology/#comment-6212 Colin Wed, 16 Apr 2008 17:10:43 +0000 http://zealfortruth.org/2008/04/tradition-theology/#comment-6212 I tried to fix it for you Bryan - is that right? I tried to fix it for you Bryan - is that right?

]]> By: Bryan http://zealfortruth.org/2008/04/tradition-theology/#comment-6213 Bryan Wed, 16 Apr 2008 17:15:37 +0000 http://zealfortruth.org/2008/04/tradition-theology/#comment-6213 Yes, thanks Colin. It doesn't like the percent symbol does it? Yes, thanks Colin. It doesn’t like the percent symbol does it?

]]> By: Colin http://zealfortruth.org/2008/04/tradition-theology/#comment-6214 Colin Wed, 16 Apr 2008 17:35:08 +0000 http://zealfortruth.org/2008/04/tradition-theology/#comment-6214 It does sometimes. It depends on its mood. It does sometimes. It depends on its mood.

]]> By: cchrisr http://zealfortruth.org/2008/04/tradition-theology/#comment-6215 cchrisr Wed, 16 Apr 2008 18:34:46 +0000 http://zealfortruth.org/2008/04/tradition-theology/#comment-6215 Bryan, even your link says that Luther removed the books from the set of "divinely inspired texts" (to put it as pointed as possible). These texts, the "Apocrypha," were not to be held in the same regard as the other books. Secondly, while Carthage may have been a local council, there are several councils that echo this sentiment, as well as Athanasius's festal letter 30 years earlier, and common usage by church fathers of that Nicene era that all suggest that the majority of Christianity saw these texts as "canonical." In fact, when Jerome excluded them from his Latin Vulgate (because he was attempting to follow the Jewish "canon" that came about well <b>after</b> Christianity had split from it*), the pope made him include those texts because they were "scriptures." Furthermore, much of this takes place <b>before</b> there is a single codex of "scriptures" in Hebrew. The only single codex around at this time is the Septuagint, which includes these books; that version of Jewish scriptures is what is used by Christianity to form the Old Testament. *At the very earliest, it can be argued that the Council at Jamnia at the close of the first century was when Jewish leaders closed their "canon." However, it should also be noted that this is generally considered a "local" council and the debate still continued well into the third century, as evidenced in both the Jerusalem Talmud (2nd Century) and the Babylonian Talmud (5th century). Bryan, even your link says that Luther removed the books from the set of “divinely inspired texts” (to put it as pointed as possible). These texts, the “Apocrypha,” were not to be held in the same regard as the other books.
Secondly, while Carthage may have been a local council, there are several councils that echo this sentiment, as well as Athanasius’s festal letter 30 years earlier, and common usage by church fathers of that Nicene era that all suggest that the majority of Christianity saw these texts as “canonical.” In fact, when Jerome excluded them from his Latin Vulgate (because he was attempting to follow the Jewish “canon” that came about well after Christianity had split from it*), the pope made him include those texts because they were “scriptures.” Furthermore, much of this takes place before there is a single codex of “scriptures” in Hebrew. The only single codex around at this time is the Septuagint, which includes these books; that version of Jewish scriptures is what is used by Christianity to form the Old Testament.

*At the very earliest, it can be argued that the Council at Jamnia at the close of the first century was when Jewish leaders closed their “canon.” However, it should also be noted that this is generally considered a “local” council and the debate still continued well into the third century, as evidenced in both the Jerusalem Talmud (2nd Century) and the Babylonian Talmud (5th century).

]]>