Canon

[Guest astralis]

As you can see, this is a very difficult topic with many opposing views.

Would you rather use a Bible that the Apostles and Jesus used or do you prefer to use a Bible that was authorized by a Jewish council 60 years after the death of our Lord?  If this is the case, if the Jews decided to update the canon would you follow it?  Do you think God was leading the Jews and inspired them to create a canon 60 years after the death of Jesus?

Racer,  look up Council of Jamnia A.D. 90.  You're right about the Church not determining canon; it recognized the canon.

[Guest racer]

Chazn,

Here's a little bit more information if you're interested:

Has the Bible Been Changed?

http://www.mediahistory.umn.edu/indextext/Bible.html

The discipline of textual criticism as developed over the last two centuries has become one of the pillars of modern Bible research and interpretation. In the field of scientific Bible study it is commonly accepted that one of the first questions to be addressed before real interpretation can be undertaken is the nature of the text itself and what changes it has undergone during the long course of its transmission. The assumption underlying this approach is, on the face of it, seemingly simple: the Scriptural text is an entity that has been handed down over the centuries and is therefore subject to the same sort of errors as any other transmitted text. To what extent the received text has been preserved in its original form is a question that can be examined by critical-philological means, as developed in general textual criticism.

But, due to the sanctity of the Holy Scriptures, the text-critical approach was shunned by religious students of the Bible, and its use as a tool of interpretation summarily dismissed. Even those scholars who were willing to adopt some aspects and conclusions of scientific Bible study stopped short of textual clarification in the scientific manner.

The oldest textual witnesses currently available are documents from the Second Temple period. The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls has given researchers and students their first look at a variety of Scriptural texts which serve as direct witnesses to the textual reality in Eretz-Israel at the close of this period.

Even before the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, however, theories about the Biblical text in the Second Temple period abounded. These theories drew inspiration from two texts whose roots lie in the same period: the Septuagint and the Samaritan version of the Bible. The Septuagint Vorlage (the presumed underlying Hebrew text) differs from the Masoretic Text [the received Hebrew text, the Authorized Text, the Jewish Bible, abbreviated MT] in many aspects, several of them of great significance. We cannot determine the exact Vorlage of the Septuagint, but it appears to have contained thousands of differences from the received text, some minor (conjunctions, prepositions, etc.) and some quite significant, including words, sentences, and even whole sections. An outstanding example is The Book of Jeremiah, which in the Septuagint is almost one eighth shorter than in the Masoretic Text.

The Samaritan text shows similar differences; in addition, since the text is in Hebrew, several thousand differences in spelling are apparent to the eye in the Five Books of the Pentateuch. The Samaritan text has distinctive features, and even though it holds almost two thousand differences in common with the Septuagint, it is in no way identical to the Septuagint; many of its changes are unique and in many places it differs from the Septuagint and agrees with the Masoretic Text.

Since the Septuagint is not a Hebrew text and the Samaritan version reached us through a breakaway sect, their value to reflect the early stages of the Biblical text was debatable. This battle was first waged between Catholic and Protestant scholars on theological grounds, and in the 19th and 20th centuries amongst Bible scholars against a scientific background. Some maintained that extreme caution must be exercised when using the Septuagint as a text-witness for an ancient Hebrew text-type fundamentally different from the Masoretic version; one must take into account the changes that were made in the course of translation for linguistic, exegetical, and interpretative reasons. There were also similar claims that the Samaritan text could not be taken as representing the general transmission of the Biblical text outside of the specific Samaritan recension; its variants do not reflect the earlier text-form which the community had adopted, but are changes that were made within the closed frame of the Samaritan community.

- Excerpts from an essay by Menachem Cohen, Professor of Bible, Bar-Ilan University

[Guest racer]

astralis,

Would you rather use a Bible that the Apostles and Jesus used or do you prefer to use a Bible that was authorized by a Jewish council 60 years after the death of our Lord?

Well, generally, I stick to the NT.  I use the OT for confirmation of things prophesied to happen in the NT and for good historical background on the life of people who were bound to live under the Law, which we are no longer bound by.

You are the first on two accounts: 1) first RC to say I was right about anything, however, I must point out that it was the author of the post I made who was right.  2)  you are the first RC to admit that the RCC did not determine the canon!

[Guest racer]

One more post in response to astralis' recommendation to check out the Council of Jamnia AD 90.

[Chazn]

Some good stuff has been posted, thus far.  I haven't had the time to read through all of it but that is my intent.

The notion of purgatory, it seems, flies in the face of Jesus' account of the Rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16).  There are probably other canonical NT texts that would refute this notion wouldn't you say?

re: praying to the saints... I have a hard time with that one, however, is there any canonical NT text that would either support or refute such a practice? Would such inconsistencies or lack, thereof serve as an argument for or against canonicity?

Someone mentioned that the NT supports the notion of a pre-resurrection purgatory.  If you can, I'd like to know what those texts are.

Thanks

[Chazn]

Some maintained that extreme caution must be exercised when using the Septuagint as a text-witness for an ancient Hebrew text-type fundamentally different from the Masoretic version; one must take into account the changes that were made in the course of translation for linguistic, exegetical, and interpretative reasons.

This was a rather interesting quote from Menachem Cohen.  At least one very critical quote from the Septuagent (LXX) from Isa. 7:14, 'though it cuts against the grain of any predictable exegetical and interprative motives the rabbis who translated into the LXX might have had, would seem to support the veracity of the LXX simply on the basis that it defies predetermined bias.

[Guest Xan]

Racer, purgatory is supported in the NT when Yeshua speaks of Abraham's Bosom, but when the curtain was rent in the Holy of Holies on earth in the temple, it was also rent in heaven, nulifying Abraham's Bosom, and now Christians can go boldly before G-d, even in death.

As to Yeshua reading from the book of Maccabbees, I think I got a little ahead of myself.  Kinnear pointed out to me in another post under Issues For Debate, that Yeshua was present in the temple at the time of Hanakkah (Feast of Dedication), but does not say if He celebrated the holiday or not. :lightbulb:

[Guest racer]

Xan,

See my point to others in the past has been, (I'm not sure that I've attempted to make this point on this MB :???:)that perhaps Purgatory was a means of those not worthy being cleansed for Heaven during OT times.  But, the NT clearly tells us that the New Covenant nullifies the Old Covenant, and it's been my thought that if Purgatory, cleansing by fire, had been necessary during OT times, it is no longer relevant due to Christ's ultimate sacrifice.

[Guest racer]

Xan,

Racer, purgatory is supported in the NT when Yeshua speaks of Abraham's Bosom, but when the curtain was rent in the Holy of Holies on earth in the temple, it was also rent in heaven, nulifying Abraham's Bosom, and now Christians can go boldly before G-d, even in death.

I'd like to do some reading on this, could you tell me which book and chapter I can find it in?  :inlove:

[Guest Xan]

That was my point, too, Racer.  But you said it better