Did the Catholic Church add Books to the Bible?

So who's telling the truth, the Protestants that accuse or the Catholics that deny? Let's look at some of the history of the Bible for the answer.

Jesus, and the Apostles did not have the New Testament, they were Jews, they had the Jewish texts called the Tanakh which consisted of three parts, the Torah "Teaching" (the Five Books of Moses); Nevi'im "Prophets"; and Ketuvim "Writings".

When Paul, in his second letter to Timothy verse 16 said "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness." Contrary to what some try to say, the scripture Paul was speaking of was not the New Testament since it did not exist, it was the Jewish texts that Jesus taught from and were read in the synagogues.

Jesus never told His Apostles to write a book. He told them to build His Church, (singular) and to preach to all the nations.

For more than 300 years after the Apostles there was still no New Testament, there were only the shared oral traditions, (ooh, tradition, the terrible "T" word) the writings, and the letters of the Apostles and others. But not everyone had access to the writings of the Apostles since they had to be hand-written. All most people had is what was what was handed down from the Apostles by word of mouth and tradition. (there it is again)

OK now let's back up a bit.

In A.D. 70 the temple in Jerusalem was destroyed by the Romans and a lot of the original texts were destroyed. At that time Christians were seen as a threat so around A.D. 100, the Jewish leaders met at the Council of Jamnia. They decided to officially list the books that were to compose their Scriptures. They rejected the seven Deuterocanonical books because they were being used to help spread Christianity. Many of the Jewish leaders originally used the Septuagint (abbreviated LXX, for the 70 men who translated it from Hebrew into Greek). The Septuagint included the seven Deuterocanonical books. They also rejected them because they believed that they had only been written in Greek and not written in Hebrew. (Although in 1947 fragments in Hebrew of Tobit and Sirach were discovered among the Dead Sea Scrolls. Most Scripture scholars believe that 1 Maccabees, Judith, Baruch and parts of Wisdom were also originally written in Hebrew.)

So, the seven books were used during the time of the Apostles. Jesus even taught from them. Not inspired? Really?

What we now know as our modern Bible had not been gathered, combined, and chosen as an official canon of inspired Scripture until it was identified by Pope Damasus and the Synod of Rome in A.D. 382 and reaffirmed at the local Councils of Hippo in A.D. 393 and Carthage in A.D. 397, and by Pope Innocent I in A.D. 405 at the Ecumenical Council of Florence. St. Jerome's Latin Vulgate in A.D. 420 contained the full canon of Scripture including the seven Deuterocanonical books. In 1442, the Catholic list was again restated, against those who wanted to include even more books. In 1570, in response to Martin Luther's revolt, at the Ecumenical Council of Trent it was decreed infallibly that the list of 46 books of the O.T. including the Deuterocanonical books and 26 books of the N.T. was the official canon of books and were approved for reading in the Church.

There it is, over 1,600 years ago the 72 books of the Bible were approved by the Church that Jesus started. But one man decided that he knew better than Jesus' Church and on his own decided that he had the authority to say what books were and were not inspired.

In 1534, Martin Luther, rejecting the Greek, translated the Hebrew text of the Old Testament into German and grouped the 7 Deuterocanonical books, (Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, Baruch, and l & ll Maccabees) under the title, "Apocrypha", declaring, "These books which are not held equal to the Sacred Scriptures, yet are useful and good for reading". Martin Luther also had problems with Hebrews, James, Jude and Revelation and grouped them as non canonical. He wanted to remove Hebrews because it supports the existence of the priesthood, and James because it contradicted his claim of sola fide (faith alone).

The canon of Scripture including the seven Deuterocanonical books was determined back in A.D. 393. However, most Protestant Bibles either place them as having lesser value in an appendix or completely omit them because Martin Luther decided that he did not like them.

So, history show us that Jews and Christians, including the Apostles and Jesus did in fact use the Deuterocanonical books as early as the first century. The Jews used them before the time of Christ. Therefore, the answer is no, the Catholic Church did not add seven extra books to the Bible. The original printings of the Bible had the Deuterocanonical books. It was Protestants that removed them despite the fact that they were used by Jesus and the Apostles, because Martin Luther decided that they were not inspired.

For those that reject these books, do you not understand just how much information in the timeline of salvation history you are missing?

+JMJ+