Question:
Why are there so many different versions of the Bible? And which version is the infallible word of God?
2007-11-08 08:45:55 UTC
Why are there so many different versions of the Bible? And which version is the infallible word of God?
26 answers:
~Niecey~
2007-11-08 09:05:04 UTC
You mean so many different versions like this?



Abbreviated Bible - TAB - 1971, eliminates duplications, includes the Apocrypha

American Standard Version - ASV - 1901, a.k.a. Standard American Edition, Revised Version, the American version of the Holy Bible, Revised Version

American Translation (Beck) - AAT - 1976

American Translation (Smith-Goodspeed) - SGAT - 1931

Amplified Bible - AB - 1965, includes explanation of words within text

Aramaic Bible (Targums) - ABT - 1987, originally translated from the Hebrew into the Aramaic

Aramaic New Covenant - ANCJ - 1996, a translation and transliteration of the New Covenant

Authentic New Testament - ANT - 1958

Barclay New Testament - BNT - 1969

Basic Bible - TBB - 1950, based upon a vocabulary of 850 words

Bible Designed to Be Read as Literature - BDRL - 1930, stresses literary qualities of the Bible, includes the Apocrypha

Bible Reader - TBR - 1969, an interfaith version, includes the Apocrypha

Cassirer New Testament - CNT - 1989

Centenary Translation of the New Testament - CTNT - 1924, one of the few versions translated solely by a woman

Common English New Testament - CENT - 1865

Complete Jewish Bible - CJB - 1989, a Messianic Jewish translation

Concordant Literal New Testament - CLNT - 1926

Confraternity of Christian Doctrine Translation - CCDT - 1953, includes the Apocrypha

Contemporary English Version - CEV - 1992, includes Psalms and Proverbs

Coptic Version of the New Testament - CVNT - 1898, based on translations from northern Egypt

Cotton Patch Version - CPV - 1968, based on American ideas and Southern US culture, only contains Paul's writings

Coverdale Bible - TCB - 1540, includes the Apocrypha

Darby Holy Bible - DHB - 1923

Dartmouth Bible - TDB - 1961, an abridgment of the King James Version, includes the Apocrypha

De Nyew Testament in Gullah - NTG - 2005

Dead Sea Scrolls Bible - DSSB - 1997, translated from Dead Sea Scrolls documents, includes the Apocrypha

Documents of the New Testament - DNT - 1934

Douay-Rheims Bible - DRB - 1899

Emphasized Bible - EBR - 1959, contains signs of emphasis for reading

Emphatic Diaglott - EDW - 1942

English Standard Version - ESV - 2001, a revision of the Revised Standard Version

English Version for the Deaf - EVD - 1989, a.k.a. Easy-to-Read Version, designed to meet the special needs of the deaf

English Version of the Polyglott Bible - EVPB - 1858, the English portion of an early Bible having translations into several languages

Geneva Bible - TGB - 1560, the popular version just prior to the translation of the King James Version, includes the Apocrypha

Godbey Translation of the New Testament - GTNT - 1905

God's Word - GW - 1995, a.k.a Today's Bible Translation

Holy Bible in Modern English - HBME - 1900

Holy Bible, Revised Version - HBRV - 1885, an official revision of the King James Version which was not accepted at the time

Holy Scriptures (Harkavy) - HSH - 1951

Holy Scriptures (Leeser) - HSL - 1905

Holy Scriptures (Menorah) - HSM - 1973, a.k.a. Jewish Family Bible

Inclusive Version - AIV - 1995, stresses equality of the sexes and physically handicapped, includes Psalms

Inspired Version - IV - 1867, a revision of the King James Version

Interlinear Bible (Green) - IB - 1976, side-by-side Hebrew/Greek and English

International Standard Version - ISV - 1998

Jerusalem Bible (Catholic) - TJB - 1966, includes the Apocrypha

Jerusalem Bible (Koren) - JBK - 1962, side-by-side Hebrew and English

Jewish Bible for Family Reading - JBFR - 1957, includes the Apocrypha

John Wesley New Testament - JWNT - 1755, a correction of the King James Version

King James Version - KJV - 1611, a.k.a. Authorized Version, originally included the Apocrypha

Kleist-Lilly New Testament - KLNT - 1956

Knox Translation - KTC - 1956, includes the Apocrypha

Lamsa Bible - LBP - 1957, based on Peshitta manuscripts

Lattimore New Testament - LNT - 1962, a literal translation

Letchworth Version in Modern English - LVME - 1948

Living Bible - LB - 1971, a paraphrase version

McCord's New Testament Translation of the Everlasting Gospel - MCT - 1989

Message - TM - 1993, a.k.a. New Testament in Contemporary English, a translation in the street language of the day, includes Psalms and Proverbs

Modern Reader's Bible - MRB - 1923, stresses literary qualities, includes the Apocrypha

Modern Speech New Testament - MSNT - 1902, an attempt to present the Bible in effective, intelligible English

Moffatt New Translation - MNT - 1922

New American Bible - NAB - 1987, includes the Apocrypha

New American Standard Version - NAS - 1977

New Berkeley Version in Modern English - NBV - 1967

New Century Version - NCV - 1987

New English Bible - NEB - 1970, includes the Apocrypha

New Evangelical Translation - NET - 1992, a translation aimed at missionary activity

New International Version - NIV - 1978

New Jerusalem Bible - NJB - 1985, includes the Apocrypha

New JPS Version - NJPS - 1988

New King James Version - NKJ - 1990

New Life Version - NLV - 1969, a translation designed to be useful wherever English is used as a second language

New Living Translation - NLT - 1996, a dynamic-equivalence translation

New Millenium Bible - NMB - 1999, a contemporary English translation

New Revised Standard Version - NRS - 1989, the authorized revision of the Revised Standard Version

New Testament in Plain English - WPE - 1963, a version using common words only

New Testament: An Understandable Version - NTUV - 1995, a limited edition version

New Translation (Jewish) - NTJ - 1917

New World Translation - NWT - 1984

Noli New Testament - NNT - 1961, the first and only book of its kind by an Eastern Orthodox translator at the time of its publication

Norlie's Simplified New Testament - NSNT - 1961, includes Psalms

Original New Testament - ONT - 1985, described by publisher as a radical translation and reinterpretation

Orthodox Jewish Brit Chadasha - OJBC - 1996, an Orthodox version containing Rabbinic Hebrew terms

People's New Covenant - PNC - 1925, a version translated from the meta-physical standpoint

Phillips Revised Student Edition - PRS - 1972

Recovery Version - RcV - 1991, a reference version containing extensive notes

Reese Chronological Bible - RCB - 1980, an arrangement of the King James Version in chronological order

Restoration of Original Sacred Name Bible - SNB - 1976, a version whose concern is the true name and titles of the creator and his son

Restored New Testament - PRNT - 1914, a version giving an interpretation according to ancient philosophy and psychology

Revised English Bible - REB - 1989, a revision of the New English Bible

Revised Standard Version - RSV - 1952, a revision of the American Standard Version

Riverside New Testament - RNT - 1923, written in the living English language of the time of the translation

Sacred Scriptures, Bethel Edition - SSBE - 1981, the sacred name and the sacred titles and the name of Yahshua restored to the text of the Bible

Scholars Version - SV - 1993, a.k.a. Five Gospels; contains evaluations of academics of what are, might be, and are not, the words of Jesus; contains the four gospels and the Gospel of Thomas

Scriptures (ISR) - SISR - 1998, traditional names replaced by Hebraic ones and words with pagan sources replaced

Septuagint - LXX - c. 200 BCE, the earliest version of the Old Testament scriptures, includes the Apocrypha

Shorter Bible - SBK - 1925, eliminates duplications

Spencer New Testament - SCM - 1941

Stone Edition of the Tanach - SET - 1996, side-by-side Hebrew and English

Swann New Testament - SNT - 1947, no chapters, only paragraphs, with verses numbered consecutively from Matthew to Revelation

Today's English New Testament - TENT - 1972

Today's English Version - TEV - 1976, a.k.a. Good News Bible

Twentieth Century New Testament - TCNT - 1904

Unvarnished New Testament - UNT - 1991, the principal sentence elements kept in the original order of the Greek

Versified Rendering of the Complete Gospel Story - VRGS - 1980, the gospel books written in poetic form, contains the four gospels

Westminster Version of the Sacred Scriptures - WVSS - 1929

Wiclif Translation - TWT - 1380, a very early version translated into English

William Tindale Newe Testament - WTNT - 1989, an early version with spelling and punctuation modernized

William Tyndale Translation - WTT - 1530, early English version, includes the Pentateuch

Williams New Testament - WNT - 1937, a translation of the thoughts of the writers with a reproduction of their diction and style

Word Made Fresh - WMF - 1988, a paraphrase with humour and familiar names and places for those who have no desire to read the Bible

Worrell New Testament - WAS - 1904

Wuest Expanded Translation - WET - 1961, intended as a comparison to, or commentary on, the standard translations

Young's Literal Translation, Revised Edition - YLR - 1898, a strictly literal translation



There is over 100+ versions of the Bible, and then each version may be translated into 100's of different languages.



God's message is infallible, and we see it repeated several times throughout the Bible.



But men are fallible, and men wrote the Bible. As inspired as it may be, and no matter how correct the "Orignial" text was it has been changed so many times, that I myself wonder....HOW CORRECT IS THE BIBLE.
2007-11-08 17:39:57 UTC
As correctly noted by *some* answers, there is not really any "infallible" version available to us. The only text that might generally be considered "infallible" is the autographs - the original texts written by the original (inspired) authors. All that we have today are copies of copies of copies - all done by hand, and presumably (often verifiably) done by *un*inspired copyists. Thus, we have a plethora of original language versions of most books of the bible (a very few we do not have in the original languages).



As also noted correctly by some answers, translation is not an exact science - not even today, between two modern and widely-spoken languages. For example, I have 3 versions of Jules Verne's "Around the World in 80 Days". All 3 are translations from the French original (only about 120 years old). The wording varies *significantly* between the 3. The *thoughts* and *ideas* are very similar. Translating languages that are thousands of years old (ancient written Hebrew, for example, did not have vowels) is *far* more uncertain than the uncertainties common with modern language translation.



Thus, we can state with a great deal of confidence that neither our translations, nor the original language manuscripts which we possess, are infallible. There are (at least minor) mistakes present in *every* text to which we have access.



This should help to explain why there are so many versions. However, there are other reasons. Here is *my* list of reasons:

1) Passing time

2) Translation uncertainties (partially addressed above)

3) $



1) Passing time - with respect to bible translation, 3 things change over time

a) Ancient language scholarship improves (I.e. translation becomes more accurate)

b) Archaeology discovers new, more ancient and more "authoritative" manuscripts

c) The English language itself changes

Most new translations attempt to take advances in all 3 of these areas into account. However, this only explains why there is a new version every 50 years or so.



2) Translation (revisited)

a) Uncertainties of translation (addressed above)

b) Translation *style* ("word-for-word literal", "dynamic equivalence", and a world of strategies in between)

c) Doctrinal translation agenda



Addressed:

b) Many new versions are produced for the purpose of creating a modern translation with a particular translation "style." There are advantages and disadvantages (trade-offs) to different styles, and so different styles appeal to different readers (just as different engines in vehicles - more power, or more fuel efficiency?)



c) Many versions address a specific doctrinal agenda. Thus, many versions exclude the so-called "apocrypha" while others include it. There are also frequently doctrinal biases in the translation itself. This does not necessarily produce an *inaccurate* translation. However, it does make the scholarship level of the translation suspect. Examples: New World Translation (which I find useful, BTW) and the Amplified Bible (which I do not).



3) $

This, I believe, is the *primary* reason that there are so many versions available. Not surprisingly, most of these version are available in English - which tends to be the wealthiest majority Christian linguistic group in the world. If publishers of bibles *expected* to lose $ in the creation of a bible translation, only large Christian sects and coalitions would be able to procure the $ to produce a new version. In such a scenario (it costs $ to make a new bible), it seems likely that we would see no more than about 6 new versions every century. As it is, any new scholarly translation is *likely* to be profitable, and so the funding of a new scholarly translation that offers the slightest perceived benefit over existing versions is likely to get the "go ahead".



Conclusion:

Reasons for different versions:

1) Passing time

2) Translation uncertainties

3) $



Which version is infallible?

There is none. However, I would like to say that *I* believe that the versions which are available to us are sufficient to lead us to salvation - and that's what's *really* important when it comes to the accuracy of bibles.



Jim, http://www.jimpettis.com/wheel/
Gershon b
2007-11-08 09:01:26 UTC
The Torah was written in mostly Hebrew and some Aramaic. One characteristic of both languages is that each word has many meanings and when a word is used, all the meanings are meant. Therefore a single translation in English cannot be adequate.



Unlike English, the letters used to form a word in Hebrew are also important as each letter has a specific meaning.



When the text was originally written in Hebrew, there was no spaces between the letters. So the divisions used now to fit a particular translation. For instance, the first word, Bereshieis means in the beginning.



But dividing it differently, to Bara sheis means "created six" in Aramaic. Someone started writing a book on the Torah and 76 volumes later he was still on the meanings of the first word. So it gets real complex.



Vowels are not printed in Hebrew. Consider the following word without vowels - rd - it can be red, rid, rode, road, raid, read, rod and other things. It's up to the reader to determine which word is appropriate.



To connect with G-d, most of the translations are adequate. To understand the deep spiritual meanings of the Torah, you have to learn Hebrew and Aramaic.



In every translation I've read, there are glaring errors in translations. Some are to push a particular doctrine. Others are just differences of opinion. Many change the singular and plurals which gives a whole different meaning to the passage. This is true even in the "Jewish translations" as many things are hidden so the christians don't kill us.



As for the KJV, it is a pretty good translation. But it has some glaring errors. For instance, Hebrew has no word for virgin. And Lucifer is latin, not Hebrew. The passage simply refers to the time when the sun rises which is a time of prayer. The morning star is simply the light from the rising sun. IS 14 is clearly a parable to Nebudchaneezer.
2007-11-08 10:16:53 UTC
The translators of the King James Version said any translation is the infalible word of God. The JW and Mormon versions would not be infalible as man is clearly trying to twist them but other bibles are trying to be close to the original are still the word of God. The debae is what translton is the best and unless you can read Greek Hebrew and Aramiac I would sugest using the maindtream translation you feal is the easist to read.
Johnny Sane
2007-11-08 09:10:07 UTC
The 'best' version is the original Greek & Hebrew texts.



I see some people here are KJV-only advocates. I suppose they don't know how many glaring differences there are between the KJV and the originals, or between the current KJV and the original KJV (which included the Apocrypha).

I suppose they also don't know that there are entire verses in KJV that don't even exist in the original manuscripts.



There's also the fact that the KJV is in a dialect of English that hasn't been in use for 300 years, that it's poorly translated in the first place. Example: "help meet" is not a noun; it means "helper suitable," as in "a help[er] meet[suitable] for him." This sort of archaic language causes no end of confusion as to the meaning of various verses.

Also, the word for "homosexual" appears nowhere in the original texts. The actual word translates badly, but is always preceded by a word used for male prostitutes (who slept with both male and female clients). In context, the originals seem to admonish men who put themselves in the position of female prostitutes (which were considered property, as opposed to men).



The reason there are so many Bibles is because the Catholic church commissioned new translations as needed, and so did the various kings of England. The newer versions are the result of independent translators trying to make the Bible easy to understand without having a preacher interpret them for the masses. (Some people don't like this idea.)
Cat
2007-11-08 08:54:21 UTC
They are different translations. And FYI - the King James Version is one of the most edited versions out there. A number of things were just flat out changed in that version. The NSRV is closest to original (at least the "originals" we have found). None is the infallible word of God - all were touched by man, and many were written hundreds of years (if not more) after events happened.
Paul Hxyz
2007-11-08 09:04:54 UTC
Why are there so many different versions of the Bible?



Because the Bible was written thousands of years ago by Bronze Age tribesman - in Hebrew (the OT), and in Aramaic (the NT) - a form of Greek language. When the Bible was translated it was copied by monks, who sometimes made mistakes in the transcription, AND the translation. As paper was absurdly expensive back then (once only kings could afford it!), they oftened chalked this up to "God's will", so the errors remained. Also, it is not always possible to get 100% accuracy in a translation from one language to another, so sometimes the translation does not reflect the original meaning of the words in the original language. The King James Bible was actually written to appease protestants and catholics in England - so much so that it may have prevented a civil war!



As to which Bible is the "infallible word of God" - NONE of them, as it was written by MEN inspired by God, and the later errors in transcription and translation. And as there are 3,000 different beliefs in deities on Earth, that means that at least 2,999 of them must be wrong, so with odds like that its very possible that ALL of them are wrong. People of religion often believe that it is THEY that have the correct answers, but as I think it is the epitome of human arrogance to state that "we know what God thinks" I will not be telling God what to do or how to work - I will just enjoy being in this amazing universe of ours.
2007-11-08 08:54:26 UTC
you know, you can't really translate completely one language to another. my wife speaks spanish, and I speak english. there are many words that do not translate at all. I would give some examples, but would probably get a violation. i don't think you could translate ancient greek, hebrew and latin into modern english with any degree of accuracy whatsoever. especially when it comes to punctuation, which in english is mandatory to be able to understand it at all , and was never used in the above stated languages. to answer your question, i don't think any version would be accurate. I am sure you know what I think about the infallibility of this book.
caspersen
2016-09-28 18:23:30 UTC
howdy at the start we could be responsive to that us human beings are imperfect, we elect to arrogantly think of that we are maximum appropriate and others do not. so as that they maintain on with their very very own ideals of ways the Bible is written. Secondly, Bibles are made in many diverse variations to simplify and make the reader have greater be responsive to-the thank you to the Bible. Or because of the fact the form of languange of a definite section is diverse so it somewhat is going to be suitable with the human beings. third, Bibles are made suitable for various faith communities yet serving the comparable God (Catholic, Christians, Orthodox, and so on.) diverse faith diverse Bible. And by potential of how, God gave us loose will so we could do in spite of we like not compelled. If God made the Bible in one version, He may be forcing us to persist with Him, yet he's the main Loving God, so He enable us to elect whom we could consistently persist with. yet somewhat Jesus is the certainty, the way, and The life.
LadyMagick
2007-11-08 08:57:03 UTC
They are all based on ancient manuscripts or scrolls that have been found and written by many different men. Then the church went through and decided which stories to put in the Bible (their manual, so to speak). There are so many versions because they were all translated differently. I guess you have to read all and choose for yourself. Heck, you and one other person can read the same version, and still get something different from it. So, good luck!
2007-11-08 08:51:08 UTC
Because a lot of different people decided to make a translation. I would consider the originals the infallible word of God, but then I wouldn't be able to read it.
2007-11-08 08:53:26 UTC
LMAO, the post that the King James version is the bible is one of the most laughable things I've seen on here. The closest thing to the bible are the copies of manuscripts that exist in the original language. For example--generations of men refused to go to war for the King James thou shalt not kill. The linguists of King James era chose the single english word "kill" for the KJB. The problem is, it can not be translated from the original language with just one word-there is no English equivalent single word. The closest approximation to the original language would be "thou shalt not commit premeditated murder not in a time of war or self defense". This is clearly true--the armies of Israel routinely laid waste to other armys--King David killed Goliath. All of this would have been in violation of the unqualified "thou shalt not kill". The King James bible is not something to use to study what the original writing actually meant.
†Lawrence R†
2007-11-08 08:57:59 UTC
The Bible is the same. You are talking about different translations, based on the audience. The message within is never changed. The verbiage is adapted for the target reader.



I happen to use The Complete Jewish Bible, translated by David H. Stern. I use this because it restores the "Hebrewness" of the Scriptures.



Off the top of my head, I can only think of 3 versions that are not reliable, and they are not part of the accepted body of work:



1. The Jeffersonian bible, which deleted all the miracles that could not be "logically" explained.



2. The bible used by the Jehovah's Witnesses, which makes subtle, yet dramatic, changes which alter the whole aim of the texts.



3. The Mormon which, in their cult, must be aided, or completed, by the Book of Mormon.



Since the JWs & Mormons are not Christian denominations, I'm not clear as to whether theirs would be some of the versions you refer to.



The Catholic Bible has the same texts as the Protestant Bible. However, they have added books to it (called the Apochrypha), which are not Canonical.



I hope this clears up some of your confusion.
da hoob
2007-11-08 08:54:41 UTC
there's so many different versions cause god was created by humans and so was the bible. therefore, no religion is the infallible word of god cause it's all a myth.
2007-11-08 08:52:20 UTC
Different translations. The original is in Hebrew, and there is only one version. It's a difficult language to translate because of the layers of meaning that are an organic part of it.
۞ JønaŦhan ۞
2007-11-08 08:51:46 UTC
KJV almost all of the other versions originated from the Alexandrian manuscripts which are corrupt. The NIV for instance omitts these passages: Mat. 17:21 ... Mat. 18:11 ... Mat 23:14 ... Mark 7:16 Mark 9:46 ... Mark 9:44 ... Mark 11:26 ... Mark 15:28 Luke 17:36 ... Luke 23:17 ... John 5:4 ... Acts 8:37

Acts 15:34 ... Acts 24:7 ... Acts 28:29... Romans 16:24

I John 5:7



It also tries to take out the diety of Jesus Christ.
2007-11-08 08:58:11 UTC
The original text which all the translations are taken from.



You were not aware of this?
irish1
2007-11-08 08:50:58 UTC
Because it has been translated so many times. And none of the translations are the infallible word of God, as it was written by fallible men.
2007-11-08 09:07:03 UTC
Salam



All 27 version of the Bible have been tampered by mankind so you don't go to the Lord. It was done everytime by those who carry all the money for you not to believe and then they blame every single religious organization for their own failure they always have failure and spend over 10 million dollars each time they want to shake each others filthy hands. When are you going to wake up when its all gone and you sit int he mud like those in africa?
Hatir Ba Loon
2007-11-08 08:54:02 UTC
All of them, and none of them.



to Johnl - If you're gonna cut and paste from a website, the least you can do is list your source, you're just copying from someone else, give them credit.
preacherswife
2007-11-08 08:51:04 UTC
KJV, Become a Christian read it and you will see the world today unfolding right before your eyes in the Blessed Book.
2007-11-08 08:52:25 UTC
None. They were all written by men who aspired to be gods.
2007-11-08 08:49:54 UTC
The one with the picture of Snoopy on the cover.

: )

xoxox

: )
Chris
2007-11-08 08:48:31 UTC
KJV is the Bible.
2007-11-08 08:51:04 UTC
As you probably know, Catholic Bibles have 73 books, 46 in the Old Testament, and 27 in the New Testament. Protestant Bibles have 66 books with only 39 in the Old Testament. The books missing from Protestant Bibles are: Tobit, Judith, Baruch, Wisdom, Sirach, 1 and 2 Maccabees, and parts of Esther and Daniel. They are called the 'Deuterocanonicals' by Catholics and 'Apocrypha' by Protestants. Martin Luther, without any authority whatsoever, removed those seven books and placed them in an appendix during the reformation. They remained in the appendix of Protestant Bibles until about 1826, and then they were removed altogether.

Please be mindful of the fact that those seven books had been in Bibles used by all Christians from the very foundation of Christianity.



Hellenistic Greek was the language of the day during the time of Christ. This was due to the fact that Alexander the Great had conquered the region several hundred years before. The Hebrew language was on its way out, and there was a critical need for a translation of the Hebrew Old Testament for dispersed Greek speaking Jews. This translation, called the Septuagint, or LXX, was completed by Jewish scholars in about 148 B.C. and it had all of the books, including the seven removed by Martin Luther over 1650 years later. The New Testament has about 350 references to Old Testament verses. By careful examination, scholars have determined that 300 of these are from the Septuagint and the rest are from the Hebrew Old Testament*. They have shown that Jesus Christ Himself, quoted from the Septuagint. Early Christians used the Septuagint to support Christian teachings.



For the first 300 years of Christianity, there was no Bible as we know it today. Christians had the Old Testament Septuagint, and literally hundreds of other books from which to choose. The Catholic Church realized early on that she had to decide which of these books were inspired and which ones weren't. The debates raged between theologians, Bishops, and Church Fathers, for several centuries as to which books were inspired and which ones weren't. In the meantime, several Church Councils or Synods, were convened to deal with the matter, notably, Rome in 382, Hippo in 393, and Carthage in 397 and 419. The debates sometimes became bitter on both sides. One of the most famous was between St. Jerome, who felt the seven books were not canonical, and St. Augustine who said they were. Protestants who write about this will invariably mention St. Jerome and his opposition, and conveniently omit the support of St. Augustine. I must point out here that Church Father's writings are not infallible statements, and their arguments are merely reflections of their own private opinions. When some say St. Jerome was against the inclusion of the seven books, they are merely showing his personal opinion of them. Everyone is entitled to his own opinion. However, A PERSONS PRIVATE OPINION DOES NOT CHANGE THE TRUTH AT ALL. There are always three sides to every story, this side, that side, and the side of truth. Whether Jerome's position, or Augustine's position was the correct position, had to be settled by a third party, and that third party was the Catholic Church.



Now the story had a dramatic change, as the Pope stepped in to settle the matter. In concurrence with the opinion of St. Augustine, and being prompted by the Holy Spirit, Pope St. Damasus I, at the Council of Rome in 382, issued a decree appropriately called, "The Decree of Damasus", in which he listed the canonical books of both the Old and New Testaments. He then asked St. Jerome to use this canon and to write a new Bible translation which included an Old Testament of 46 books, which were all in the Septuagint, and a New Testament of 27 books.

ROME HAD SPOKEN, THE ISSUE WAS SETTLED.



"THE CHURCH RECOGNIZED ITS IMAGE IN THE INSPIRED BOOKS OF THE BIBLE. THAT IS HOW IT DETERMINED THE CANON OF SCRIPTURE.







St. Jerome acquiesced under obedience (Hebrews 13:17) and began the translation, and completed it in 404 A.D.. In 405, his new Latin Vulgate* was published for the first time.



*The word "vulgate" means, "The common language of the people, or the vernacular".



The Decree of Pope St. Damasus I, Council of Rome. 382 A.D....



ST. DAMASUS 1, POPE, THE DECREE OF DAMASUS:



It is likewise decreed: Now, indeed, we must treat of the divine Scriptures: what the universal Catholic Church accepts and what she must shun.

The list of the Old Testament begins: Genesis, one book; Exodus, one book: Leviticus, one book; Numbers, one book; Deuteronomy, one book; Jesus Nave, one book; of Judges, one book; Ruth, one book; of Kings, four books; Paralipomenon, two books; One Hundred and Fifty Psalms, one book; of Solomon, three books: Proverbs, one book; Ecclesiastes, one book; Canticle of Canticles, one book; likewise, Wisdom, one book; Ecclesiasticus (Sirach), one book; Likewise, the list of the Prophets: Isaiah, one book; Jeremias, one book; along with Cinoth, that is, his Lamentations; Ezechiel, one book; Daniel, one book; Osee, one book; Amos, one book; Micheas, one book; Joel, one book; Abdias, one book; Jonas, one book; Nahum, one book; Habacuc, one book; Sophonias, one book; Aggeus, one book; Zacharias, one book; Malachias, one book. Likewise, the list of histories: Job, one book; Tobias, one book; Esdras, two books; Esther, one book; Judith, one book; of Maccabees, two books.

Likewise, the list of the Scriptures of the New and Eternal Testament, which the holy and Catholic Church receives: of the Gospels, one book according to Matthew, one book according to Mark, one book according to Luke, one book according to John. The Epistles of the Apostle Paul, fourteen in number: one to the Romans, two to the Corinthians, one to the Ephesians, two to the Thessalonians, one to the Galatians, one to the Philippians, one to the Colossians, two to Timothy, one to Titus one to Philemon, one to the Hebrews. Likewise, one book of the Apocalypse of John. And the Acts of the Apostles, one book. Likewise, the canonical Epistles, seven in number: of the Apostle Peter, two Epistles; of the Apostle James, one Epistle; of the Apostle John, one Epistle; of the other John, a Presbyter, two Epistles; of the Apostle Jude the Zealot, one Epistle. Thus concludes the canon of the New Testament.

Likewise it is decreed: After the announcement of all of these prophetic and evangelic or as well as apostolic writings which we have listed above as Scriptures, on which, by the grace of God, the Catholic Church is founded, we have considered that it ought to be announced that although all the Catholic Churches spread abroad through the world comprise but one bridal chamber of Christ, nevertheless, the holy Roman Church has been placed at the forefront not by the conciliar decisions of other Churches, but has received the primacy by the evangelic voice of our Lord and Savior, who says: "You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it; and I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you shall have bound on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you shall have loosed on earth shall be loosed in heaven."



his list of 46 Old Testament and 27 New Testament books was reconfirmed in the Council of Carthage in 397 A.D.. St. Jerome's translation, "The Latin Vulgate"*, is to this day, the official Bible of the Catholic Church. The Bibles which Catholics use today, have the same 46 books in the Old Testament as they have had since before the beginning of Christianity.



I have not seen a Protestant writing giving recognition to Pope St. Damasus I, or of even the barest mention of his decree, or of the Council of Rome. This is more than half of the truth which is "conveniently" left out of Protestant arguments.



The Council of Hippo in 393 reaffirmed the canon put forth by Pope Damasus I...



AD 393:

Council of Hippo. "It has been decided that besides the canonical Scriptures nothing be read in church under the name of divine Scripture.

But the canonical Scriptures are as follows: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua the Son of Nun, Judges, Ruth, the Kings, four books, the Chronicles, two books, Job, the Psalter, the five books of Solomon (included Wisdom and Ecclesiastes (Sirach)), the twelve books of the Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Ezekiel, Tobit, Judith, Esther, Ezra, two books, Maccabees, two books."

(canon 36 A.D. 393). At about this time St. Jerome started using the Hebrew text as a source for his translation of the Old Testament into the Latin Vulgate.





The Third Council of Carthage reaffirmed anew, the Canon put forth by Pope Damasus I...



AD 397:

Council of Carthage III. "It has been decided that nothing except the canonical Scriptures should be read in the Church under the name of the divine Scriptures. But the canonical Scriptures are: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, Paralipomenon, two books, Job, the Psalter of David, five books of Solomon (Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Wisdom, Sirach), twelve books of the Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Ezekiel, Tobit, Judith, Esther, two books of Esdras, two books of the Maccabees."

(canon 47 A.D. 397).



It is to be noted that the book of Baruch was considered by some Church Fathers to be a part of the book of Jeremiah and as such was not listed separately by them.





The Fourth Council of Carthage in 419 again reaffirmed the Canons as defined in previous councils...



CANON XXIV. (Greek xxvii.)

"That nothing be read in church besides the Canonical Scripture.

ITEM, that besides the Canonical Scriptures nothing be read in church under the name of divine Scripture. But the Canonical Scriptures are as follows: Genesis Exodus Leviticus Numbers Deuteronomy Joshua the Son of Nun The Judges Ruth * The Kings (4 books) * The Chronicles (2 books) Job The Psalter * The Five books of Solomon (includes Wisdom and Sirach) The Twelve Books of the Prophets Isaiah Jeremiah Ezechiel Daniel Tobit Judith Esther * Ezra (2 books) * Maccabees (2books).

The New Testament: * The Gospels (4 books) * The Acts of the Apostles (1 book) * The Epistles of Paul (14) * The Epistles of Peter, the Apostle (2) * The Epistles of John the Apostle (3) * The Epistles of James the Apostle (1) * The Epistle of Jude the Apostle (1) * The Revelation of John (1 book).

Let this be sent to our brother and fellow bishop, [Pope] Boniface, and to the other bishops of those parts, that they may confirm this canon, for these are the things which we have received from our fathers to be read in church."

[This is Canon xxxvj. of Hippo., 393. The last phrase allowing the reading of the "passions of the Martyrs" on their Anniversaries is omitted from the African code.]





The Council of Florence, also called Basel, 1431-1445, was yet another Council which confirmed the Canons of both testaments of the Bible...



SESSION 11 4 February 1442:

"We, therefore, to whom the Lord gave the task of feeding Christ's sheep', had abbot Andrew carefully examined by some outstanding men of this sacred council on the articles of the faith, the sacraments of the church and certain other matters pertaining to salvation. At length, after an exposition of the catholic faith to the abbot, as far as this seemed to be necessary, and his humble acceptance of it, we have delivered in the name of the Lord in this solemn session, with the approval of this sacred ecumenical council of Florence, the following true and necessary doctrine. Most firmly it believes, professes and preaches that the one true God, Father, Son and holy Spirit, is the creator of all things that are, visible and invisible, who, when he willed it, made from his own goodness all creatures, both spiritual and corporeal, good indeed because they are made by the supreme good, but mutable because they are made from nothing, and it asserts that there is no nature of evil because every nature, in so far as it is a nature, is good. It professes that one and the same God is the author of the old and the new Testament -- that is, the law and the prophets, and the gospel -- since the saints of both testaments spoke under the inspiration of the same Spirit.

It accepts and venerates their books, whose titles are as follows. Five books of Moses, namely Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy; Joshua, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, two of Paralipomenon, Esdras, Nehemiah, Tobit, Judith, Esther, Job, Psalms of David, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Baruch, Ezechiel, Daniel; the twelve minor prophets, namely Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi; two books of the Maccabees; the four gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John; fourteen letters of Paul, to the Romans, two to the Corinthians, to the Galatians, to the Ephesians, to the Philippians, two to the Thessalonians, to the Colossians, two to Timothy, to Titus, to Philemon, to the Hebrews; two letters of Peter, three of John, one of James, one of Jude; Acts of the Apostles; Apocalypse of John."



The Council of Florence was held over 100 years before the Council of Trent, and about 80 years before the start of the reformation.



The Council of Trent 1546-1565, the longest lasting Council in Church history.



AD 1546:

The Catholic Council of Trent, called to counter changes made by Martin Luther, again reaffirmed the canonicity of all 46 books of the Old Testament. Some Protestant reformers who attended, tried to get the Church to accept the list of books which the Jewish rabbis had chosen at Jamnia.

The Church refused and upheld her teaching from Pope Damasus I, and the Council of Florence. As a result, Protestants have the same New Testament books as Catholics, but their Old Testament differs because it does not contain the books rejected by the rabbis at Jamnia, and much later, rejected by Martin Luther.

It is interesting that for 1500 years all Christians accepted the same canon for the Old Testament. Only in the last 480 years, since the reformation, has there been disagreement from Protestants
rikirailrd
2007-11-08 08:48:53 UTC
KJV


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...