www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Scripture and Patristic Writings How we got the Bible

Once again, you are insinuating that I am an anti-Semite.

I never said or inferred that Jews have disease.

Godwin's Law.

I never assumed the like. Evangelicals and Fundamentalists DO believe you adopted pagan rituals. Show me where in my posts I demanded thta you adopt the Shofar, Yom Kippur, and all of that. There is no reason to throw fits of rage when no such demands have been placed on you or your faith. This topic is one of historical dimensions.

Read again, my friend. You will see this time around that I have stuck to the topic (which you started) about how we got the Bible. Your topic was open-ended so i offered a theory thta was different from the boiler plate source criticism. I only mention how the early Christians had precedents in their formerJudaism. Any textbook in the history of worship will attest to the synagogue service as being the foundatio nof the Christian service. I enjoyed reading Dom Gregory Dix's the Shape of the Litrugy, which waS given to me as a gift by an Orthodox priest. he sais that they use it in their theolgical training.

I cannot help but notice that you and mary have taken it upon yourself to insinuate the nature of my Christian faith. I have tried to be patient with both of you even though this discussion has become more of an "us" against "him" debate. In all I forgive you. I understand. Know that I will offer up my prayers to ourLord with you in mind asking him to send you peace and blessings. You and Mary have given much time in dialogue.

Eddie

Two additional texts worth getting:

The Theology of Jewish Christianity by Jean Danielou. (virtually impossible to locate)

and

The Bible and the Liturgy by Jean Danielou. (still published by Notre Dame University Press).

The relationship between the testaments (Old and New) was very much a part of the corpus of patristic writings, especially from the time of the apostles. I for one think that it is one of the most (if not THE MOST) imporant theological issues facing the Church. The first schism was the break with Israel, the Temple and the Synagogue. There developed within the Gentile Christian Churches almost a semi-Marcionism, expressed in part, IMHO, by much of contemporary bi-coventalism.

I pray that we will one day be one with our elder brothers and sisters in the faith through Yeshua the Messiah. Just how that will come about is a mystery, though.

God bless,

Gordo

For those wanting to have a guide to read the second book, check out this website.

http://www.salvationhistory.com/library/scripture/wordofgod/danieloublsg.cfm

Eddie

Your piety has brought tears to my eyes.

Theologos, The topic of discussion is "How we got the Bible", not my piety.
Ed

A question that I've asked elsewhere and which I hope can finally be answered:

How do we account for the fact that the Orthodox and Catholic Bibles have different Canons of the OT, given that both Churches admit the authority of the Septuagint?

What are the differences?

Psalm 151, 3&4 Maccabees, and possibly The Book of Odes.

http://www.geocities.com/trvalentine/orthodox/otbooks.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_apocrypha

Not even the Orthodox can agree on their canon of scripture. Read this->

"Not only are there inconsistencies between the use of the two different Canons, but there are also inconsistencies in the different Traditions of Orthodoxy on which books are to be included in the greater Canon. For example, the Russian Orthodox Tradition or the Slavonic Bible includes 2 Edras, whereas the Greek Orthodox Tradition of the Septuagint does not. This lack of uniform use led P. Bratsiotes to make the following observation (quoted by S. Agourides in his article The Bible in the Greek Orthodox Church, p. 240): "It is for this reason that the fixing of the Canon of the Old Testament is proposed as one of the subjects of a future Great Synod of the Eastern Orthodox Church". So even today, the issue of the Old Testament Canon remains open for discussion." http://home.it.net.au/~jgrapsas/pages/old_testament.html

Further complicating the issue is the fact that the Ethiopians have even more books in their Old Testament Canon.

Ah, yes. The Book of Odes? I am familiar with the rest.

Terry

True, so I have heard. The Ethiopians are very interesting; their language is semitic.

Terry

Are those books which can be found in the Orthodox OT but not in the Catholic OT, also in the Septuagint? I also heard that Psalm 151 is in Codex Vaticanus ... but I could be mistaken.

Those books are in the Septuagint. That is, after all, where the Orthodox church got its OT canon. The Vulgate--the Latin translation of the Septuagint used in the West, when the knowledge of Greek was disappearing, contained all the books. St Jerome, however, placed them (3 Maccabees, 4 Maccabees, 1 Esdras, the Prayer of Manasseh, Psalm 151) at the back of the Vulgate, in an appendix.

The Council of Trent--the most recent council in the West to define the canon--said that "what was in the Vulgate" is the correct canon. It then went on to clarify by naming the books of the OT that form the canon, but only listed those books in the main body of the work. The council left out (forgot?) those books found in the appendix. It is from this point that the OT canon in the West differs officially from the OT canon in the East.

The Prayer of Manasseh was included in the Book of Odes. The Book of Odes was merely a collection of the biblical canticles ('odes' in Greek) used in Orthros. It is rarely printed in modern recensions of the Septuagint as these canticles can be found in the proper places in their respective books.