/lit/ - Literature

which 7

Why did the Catholics remove all the shit they did?

>>15394629
Maccabees - impliedly approves of prayer to saints.

>>15394795
what are you talking about?

>>15394779
Did specify, my bad there.

>>15394795
Huh?

>>15394629
Why do catkikes call the apocrypha inspired?

>>15394629
>removed
Why are you a fucking liar? Pic related

Protestant Bible's originally included Apocrypha, but they were never considered inspired. When they were printing Bibles, they decided to leave those books out in order to save on printing costs.

>>15395253
What determines what is and what is not apocrypha?

>>15395263
What does that picture tell me?

>>15395003
apoc·ry·pha | \ ə-ˈpä-krə-fə \
Definition of apocrypha
1: writings or statements of dubious authenticity

>>15395285
Then, in the end, they removed those.

>>15395312
What dubious authenticity? What are you even implying?

>>15395323
What are you implying, that anyone can write holy scripture?

>>15395338
What? Why and how would I imply such a thing? What does that have to with anything I've said?

>>15395338
Yes.

>>15395323
They were not considered canonical by Jews.

>>15395365
Also there has been doubt about them since the patristic era. It's not just something that Protestants made up.

>>15395365
Judging by the fact they were the ones who killed Jesus, I'm not amused in the slightest.

>>15395373
Christianity is Judaism. Our scripture should line up with whatever theirs was. When Jesus asks them if they knew something from scripture, it's because he knew they had it.

>>15395379
>Christianity is Judaism.
No, it isn't and never has been. Even in the times of the early church, both Romans and Jews teamed up to bring down the Christians who were preaching in Anatolia and East Greece. This show the disconnection between the two, even tho they had a similar origin.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_and_Judaism#Covenant_theology

>>15395351
"According to Rufinus of Aquileia (c. A.D. 400) the book of Tobit and other deuterocanonical books were not called Canonical but Ecclesiastical books."

>catkikes add to canon 400 years later
>"b-but the protestants"..
Corrected your faggot papacy, you're welcome.

>>15395411
Idiot. The criteria for determining what is canon is divided into six principles:

>I. Written by an apostle vs. non-apostles.
>II. What was read aloud in weekly assemblies.
>III. What was consistent and contradiction free.
>IV. What reinforced the consensus of belief.
>V. What was written during the apostolic age.
>VI. What constitutes a balance between "scale of use" between smaller vs. larger, more prominent churches.

Books of the Apocrypha were generally written in the roughly 400 years between the composition of the books in the Old and New Testaments, the so-called intertestamental period. At that time, the Bible was not even fully completed. You fucking smug idiot.

>>15395358
>and so it came to pass that anon posted something pretty basedeth

Bump

>>15395003
It wasn't simply muh worldview, it was that they didnt have the original hebrew for the apocrypha, they only had the later greek translations. Some of the apocrypha was found with the Dead Sea scrolls tho but not all