____________________________________________________ THE GOSPEL OBSERVER ____________________________________________________ "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations...teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age" (Matthew 28:19,20). ____________________________________________________ August 29, 2004 ____________________________________________________ Contents: 1) The Extra Catholic Books (1) (Donald P. Ames) 2) The First Commandment of All (and the Second) (Clarence R. Johnson) 3) News & Notes ____________________________________________________ -1- The Extra Catholic Books (1) by Donald P. Ames Many today are sadly lacking in information as to the extra books found in the Catholic Bible and just exactly how they got there. Many Catholics sincerely wonder why and how we can say we have the Bible and yet do not include these extra books which are obviously to be found in theirs. What do they contain! Why are they there! Are they essential to salvation -- and if not why not? These, and other questions, deserve answers, and we owe it to ourselves and to God and our fellow man to examine them so we might be able to give intelligent answers. Are They Essential? This is really a double question, and must be so answered. If they do belong in the Bible, obviously they must be included and so recognized as thusly belonging. In this respect, one would have to say they would be essential -- if they do belong. If, on the other hand, we mean are they essential to our salvation today, the answer is in the negative. Regardless of which translation of the Bible we may use, one fact still remains: these extra books, when included, are found in the Old Testament, that which was abolished by Jesus Christ on the cross (Col. 2: 14-16; Heb. 8:6-13; 2 Cor. 3; Rom. 7:1-7). We are no longer under the law of Moses, but under law to Christ (Gal. 4:4-5, 3:23-27). This being the case, it matters not to us today as to the teaching therein. They do not affect what one must do to become a Christian. This second question, however, does not eliminate all discussion concerning these extra books. Indeed if they belong in the word of God, man has no right to remove them from it. If they do not, man also has no right to attempt to add them to it. But either way, belonging to the Old Testament, they do not bear on what one must do to become a Christian. This point must certainly be kept in mind. Their History It is the claim of the Roman Catholic Church that it is directly responsible for the Bible we have today. Note the following quotes from their own works: "The church...exercising the authority given her by Christ, fulfilling her duty as custodian and champion of the written word, separated the true from the false, the divine from the human, and gave men the New Testament, as it is today. And this in the year 397 A.D. -- nearly 400 years after Christ. Thus the Bible came from the church!" (Paulist Correspondence Course, No. 2, pp. 55-56). Still further, along the same line, we find: "Now we have seen that the complete divine revelation is transmitted to us from Christ through the Apostles in the divine tradition of the Church. Hence the only certain guide as to the inspiration and canonicity of all the books of Sacred Scripture is the authoritative pronouncement of the Church" (The Teachings of the Catholic Church, Vol. I, p. 30). To emphasize the claims made by the Catholic Church in this matter, we note that they point out that "what the church, therefore teaches as divinely revealed, that most certainly is revealed by God and must be believed on the divine authority" (Ibid., p. 31). This claim is made because of their claim that they are "a visible Church with a living teaching authority, infallible because the Holy Ghost is with her, preserving her from error" (Ibid. p. 28). They even point out that many reject the church, "not knowing her claim to be the infallible guardian of divine truth" (Ibid., p. 27). I believe from these quotes we can readily recognize the position that is held by the Roman Catholic Church on the matter of revelation. We might pause here though and also note that this claim is made in spite of the facts of history, and not because of them. Arvid McGuire, in an article on "The New Testament Canon" (Evidence Quarterly, Vol. II No. 2 -- 1961) pointed out that Justin Martyr (100-165 A. D.) knew the gospels, Acts, Romans, 1 Cor., Gal., Eph., 2 Thess., 1 Pet., Heb. and Revelation. Clement of Alexandria (165-220) attributed Hebrews to Paul, and recognized all but James, 2 Pet. and 3 John in his writings. Origen of Alexandria (185-253) quoted all the New Testament books, and Clement of Rome (30-100, same time as the apostles) quoted Matt., Rom., I Cor., Heb., James, 1 Tim., Titus and Peter. Tertullian of Carthage (150-222) quoted all except Philemon and 1 John. In fact, Wm. Fain noted that Sir David Dalrymple in the 19th century reproduced all but 11 verses from secular writings -- all written before 300 A. D. (Gospel Guardian, 6-9-66). Certainly from this evidence, it is recognized that the New Testament was in circulation and recognized before the Catholic Church ever made any decisions about it. Even the best existing manuscripts of the original language today existed before the date set by the Catholic Church. In reality all the Catholic Church did, as the soldier at the cross (Matt. 27:54), was to recognize what was already established as fact. This had already been preserved and protected by God. (2 Pet. 1:3) But getting back to the point of our study, one might ask why all the emphasis on the claims that the Catholic Church gave us the Bible. We have noted her claims, and certainly based on these claims, one would expect her to have put forth all the truth as "the infallible guardian of divine truth." Yet, it is very interesting to note that these extra Catholic Books were never accepted as divine by the Catholic Church until the year 1546 A. D. (Revelation and the Bible, edited by Carl F. H. Henry, p. 171). This is a fact unknown to many Catholics, who have just naturally assumed these extra books were always there. They were not -- not until 1516 A. D.! Let us think of the consequences of this fact. The Catholic Church claims to be the divine guardian of truth and claims infallibility in its presentation of truth. Yet it claims to have given us the Bible in 397 A.D. and then added to it in 1546 A. D. Which time did it err? It either erred in giving us just part of the Bible in 397 A.D., or it erred in adding the other books to it (note they were added to the Old Testament too ---- not to the New Testament) in 1546 A. D. There is no way out of this dilemma, and either horn they accept means that the Catholic Church claim of being the infallible guardian and giver of truth has been disproved. The truth of the matter is that they never had anything to do with the selection of the books of the Bible. As already noted the Bible was in circulation and accepted long before the Catholic Church ever came into existence or had any ideas of giving a decree on the Bible. As for the extra books that are accepted by the Catholic Church as Divine in 1546 A.D., we might note that the Church itself never accepted them as divine until 1546 A.D. -- a very good argument against their acceptance. If divine, why did they have to wait until 1500 years after Christ to finally accept them? Their Rejection In addition to the rejection of these books as divine by the Catholic Church until 1546 A. D., attention is also called to the fact that much in the New Testament comes to us from the Old Testament. In fact, being the divine Son of God, Christ in his reference to the Old Testament gives us his divine approval of what is composed in the old. Going through the New Testament, we find a total of 295 Old Testament quotes made directly, and allusions to still more, so that a total of 10% of the New Testament comes to us from the Old (Ibid., p. 137). Yet, despite all this quoting and references, not once did either Christ or the apostles quote or refer to the extra Catholic Books -- thus failing to place the divine stamp of approval thereon. If divine, this absence cannot be explained especially because of the nature of some of these extra books. The only alternative explanation is that neither Christ nor the apostles intended to so endorse them. Next, we might look to the Jews themselves (other than Christ and the apostles). Surely if anyone would know whether or not these books were divine, the Jews would -- seeing these books are in the Old Testament given to the Jews and compiled by them under the guidance of God almighty (2 Pet. 1:3). Did they accept them? No! This glaring rejection is even admitted within the Catholic Bible itself, as they point out that each of these books were not contained in the Jewish canon or the Protestant Bibles. Did not God know the Jews were meant to add them? If so, why didn't he so direct? For the fourth rejection, let us next turn to the so called "Church Fathers." As is true of almost any subject, these men can be quoted on both sides of the issue, and in reality prove nothing, as they were merely men, and the rejection by Christ and the apostles is sufficient to settle the issue. Nevertheless they are always of interest since they lived during the first couple of centuries of the early church. Again, in the majority of the cases, they are lined up against these apocryphal books (books of doubtful origin). Although regarded as good reading and literature, the majority did not hold them as being on equality with the rest of the Bible. Jerome, whose translation was later regarded as divine by the Catholic Church, regarded them as being valuable for ecclesiastical values only -- not as canonical. Augustine, another quoted Church Father by the Catholics, is often claimed to have endorsed them, yet he admitted Judith was not in the canon as received and accepted by the Jews, and when reference was made to 2 Maccabees ill an argument, he replied they were hard put to resort to a book not in the same category as those received and accepted by the Jews (Ibid., pp. 176-177). In view of this evidence, one is less concerned as to why we do not have these extra books, and much more concerned about why the Roman Catholic Church ever decided to include them in 1546 A.D. -- nearly 1500 years alter the Bible was given. And why do they contend they are divine when they were never accepted by Christ and the apostles, or the Jews, or even the majority of the Church Fathers, as well as Catholicism itself for many years. But, as in so many cases, they are less concerned about being consistent as they are about keeping their followers ignorant of the true facts of history. Later we will continue this study, noting from these books themselves both their contents and reasons why they have never been accepted in the true canon of God's revealed word. -- Via Truth Magazine XIII: 2, pp. 12-14, Nov. 1968 ____________________________________________________ -2- The First Commandment of All (and the Second) by Clarence R. Johnson Jesus had answered the question of the Pharisees and Herodians about paying taxes to the Roman government. He had answered the question of the Sadducees about the resurrection from the dead. "Then one of the scribes came, and having heard them reasoning together, perceiving that He had answered them well, asked Him, 'Which is the first commandment of all?' And Jesus answered him 'The first of all the commandments is: "Hear, O Israel, The Lord our God is one. And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind, and with all your strength." This is the first commandment. And the second, like it, is this: "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." There is no other commandment greater than these.' So the scribe said to Him, 'Well said, Teacher. You have spoken the truth, for there is one God, and there is no other but He. And to love Him with all the heart, with all the understanding, with all the soul, and with all the strength, and to love one's neighbor as oneself, is more than all the whole burnt offerings and sacrifices.' Now when Jesus saw that he answered wisely, He said to him, 'You are not far from the kingdom of God.' But after that, no one dared question Him" (Mark 12:28-34). Matthew's account tells us that the scribe asked his question to test Jesus as the Pharisees, Herodians, and Sadducees before him had done. And, yet there is something refreshingly different about this exchange. The Pharisees, Sadducees, and Herodians had been put to silence. They could find no fault in Jesus' answers, but they never admitted He was right. This scribe, however, clearly acknowledged that Jesus had answered correctly. He could see, and was willing to admit, that a person who would really put God first in his life, and really put his fellow men and women on an equal with himself would behave in such a way as to be in harmony with the spirit or attitude manifest in all God's commands, and would far surpass the outward forms of sacrifices and burnt offerings. Most of the burnt offerings and sacrifices were directly related to specific sins and trespasses. If one loved God with all his heart, mind, soul, spirit and strength, his sins would be few and he would need relatively few sin offerings. If a man were to love all his neighbors as much as he loved himself, and to seek their rights and their good as fervently as he seeks his own, he would seldom trespass against them, and he would need relatively few trespass offerings. By recognizing these truths, the scribe was not far from God's kingdom. He need but practice them to make the transition. Finally, note that these two commandments are so invariably linked that Jesus could not separate them. He who does not love his neighbor doesn't really love God, James 2:8. -- Via The Susquehanna Sentinel, August 29, 2004 ____________________________________________________ -3- News & Notes Let those of us who are Christians continue praying for the family and friends of Geneva Sexton who passed away August 22. Also, let us be praying for Harold Peal who is seriously ill and hospitalized. He is Eloise Craver's brother. Her son, Neil Craver (of San Diego), is also in need of our prayers. Due to the major surgery he had a couple months ago, he is still experiencing difficulties during the healing process. I also solicit prayers for my mother (Marion Edwards) who has been having inflamed sinuses in back of her eyes, which she will soon have x-rays and other tests for. This problem must be resolved before she can have her cataract surgery. ____________________________________________________ MYRTLE STREET CHURCH OF CHRIST 1022 Myrtle Street Denham Springs, LA 70726 (225) 664-8208 Sunday: 9:15 AM, 10:00 AM, 4:00 PM Wednesday: 7:00 PM evangelist/editor: Tom Edwards (225) 667-4520 e-mail: tedwards@onemain.com web site: http://home.onemain.com/~tedwards/go ____________________________________________________