In writing my next post I realized that it would not make sense because when Catholics and Protestants talk about “the Bible” they have two completely different books in mind. Catholics refer to the books that Reformers removed as the deuterocanonical books and some are known as protocanonical books.
First of all, from what I can find, the Catholic Church does not deny that there are writings which are “apocryphal.” There were tons of manuscripts that claimed to be inspired by the Holy Spirit but were not… The Canon of Scripture, Old and New Testaments was settled on at the Council of Rome in 382. It was reaffirmed on numerous occasions. I won’t get into the whole Luther thing again, but if it didn’t fit with his theology, he wanted it removed. The entire idea that the Catholic Church somehow added the deuterocanonicals to the Bible at the Council of Trent is wrong. The books had been in the Bible from before the time the canon was settled on in the 380’s.
Something just doesn’t seem right to me when the same people who are willing to accept the testimony of Hippo and Carthage, the councils that are most commonly cited for the canonicity of the New Testament deuterocanonicals, are unwilling to accept the testimony of Hippo and Carthage for the canonicity of the Old Testament deuterocanonicals. It’s there… just need to study it out.
I also have a hard time saying books were not inspired by God that were in the Word for 400+ years, until some men got involved, how did it all of a sudden become uninspired? … the next few posts will be written with these things in mind.