Quote:
Originally Posted by Tajin898
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
The Catholic church didn't remove any books, rather they added apocryhpal books at the Council of Trent largely in response to the Protestant Reformation.
|
That's a matter of semantics... the Catholic Church only canonized the parts they wanted in response to the Protestant Reformation. At one time, the bible contained several more books that are not part of the standard bible today. The Catholic church only officially sanctioned the parts of the bible they deemed worthy, starting with the Council of Hippo around 390 AD. Thus, they in essence edited the bible to suit their theology.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tajin898
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Also, the Dead Sea Scrolls weren't ignored as much as they were seen as tools, mainly translational tools. The Dead Sea Scrolls contained a majority amount of Apocryphal writings, and the biblical manuscripts they did contain gave scholars a great resource by extended the Bible's manuscript history back by a millennium (which made it possible to even more accurately determine the Bible's integrity of preservation and transmission).
|
So if you agree that they were relevant to the bible, why did the authorities deem it appropriate to paraphrase them and not just include them as more of the 'word of god'? Kinda negates the validity of being from his mouth if it's paraphrased by man.