What, from the papal system of: power, greed, child molestations, priest being active homosexuals, exulted thrones, stupid cone-head lofty hats, expecting to be called "Holy Father", and getting his ring kissed??? Luther condemned such as being an anti-Christ system.
@@historicalowl-n2m He exposed all the wretched abuses, corruptions, and misuse of Biblical teachings that set the German people free to read the bible for themselves - a death sentence beforehand by the Catholic Church!
But he didn’t. He moved seven books in the Old Testament to a new section, the Apocrypha, with the insinuation that they were of lesser authority. It was the Bible Society in the 1820s that deleted the books altogether. Some modern Protestants think the Catholic Church added seven books at the Council of Trent.
This is a common myth. Martin Luther did not remove any books. He critiqued the canon but did not change it. I knew a Lutheran pastor who had a parishioner who claimed that the Deuterocanonical were not part of the Bible. The pastor confounded his parishioner by showing that the official position of the Lutheran church was that they are part of the canon. The books were removed by printers who found out that they were seldom used and that they could leave them out,, charge the same price, and no one would notice. Many parts of the deuterocanonical books are part of Lutheran liturgy.
@@bert-cq3ij - But the fact remains that not even Catholics read their own "deuterocanonical" books. I wish to God that Catholics would read and follow the teaching of the Book of Wisdom (the Wisdom of Solomon). That book contains probably the BEST description of the evolution of idolatry in the whole bible. Their abominable idolatry follows beat-for-beat the progression of idolatry described in the Book of Wisdom.
If you study the Council of Rome in 382AD, (the first time at least some Christians (ie R. Catholic Church) "*officially*" chose a canon for the Bible), you'll find the books the Holy Spirit guided humans to chose then are the 66 Protestants generally accept as well as 7 books they usually don't accept. Christian Orthodox denominations accepted these 73 books but would often add at least a few more books. It's true that those 73 books probably weren't considered official dogma until Council of Trent (probably because there hadn't been many challenges to this canon until then) but those were the books used by non-Protestant Christians from roughly 382AD to this day. I would like people to look up online the Book of Wisdom (generally not accepted by Protestants) verses 2:12-20.
Luther did remove them from the BIble canon. That he kept them in an appendix doesn't change that. More radical Protestants completely removed them way before 1820. "Some modern Protestants think the Catholic Church added seven books at the Council of Trent." Aand some think the moon is made of green cheese. It is an obviously bogus claim, as these seven books had been read and used as part of the bible for centuries.
Luther became his own" Pope" He is the "authority". Of the protestant denominations. This is why we have over 40,000 denominations with their own interpretations.
❤l believe praying for the dead is not found in the Bible. I have high regards to leaders who stood to what is right. Thank 💕 you ❤️.This content us very valuable.
read my long comment re the 7 books - it explains exactly why Luther left them out. By the way ,the jews are strict and to this day they pray for their dead. Also the Orthodox church mainly unchanged since earliest times also prays for the dead.
Jews have always prayed for their dead. We inherited that custom from them, just as we inherited much of Christianity from the Jews. Praying for a sould in need seems quite natural to me. Please be discerning about what other 'experts' say about the Bible and faith. They are often out in right field.
Eastern Orthodox Christians still have all the books in the Septuagint (LXX), a Greek translation of the older Hebrew Old Testament that Jesus, Paul, and the other apostles preached and lived by. What most Protestants today consider the Old Testament is the Masoretic Text which was copied, edited, and edited between the 7th and 10th centuries AD, well after the Bible had been canonized. In the Roman Catholic Church there have been "innovations" for centuries, from the filioque to papal infallibility.
False. Hebrew Old Testament Canon is different from the LXX because there were certain books that caught the fancy of her translators. However the authoritative Canon that Christ and the Apostles used was definitely the Hebrew Canon not the Greek
@hesedagape6122 trying to be accurate, you miss truth. Yes, yeshua used a hebrew text, but the Greek septuagint is far closer to that hebrew document than the masoretic text is. The masoretic was edited with the purpose of making it harder to see yeshua as messiah.
@bobdowney5109 false. The quotations Jesus and the Apostles used was from the Hebrew Canon. The Perushim had approved it and that is why the discrepancy as by the first century AD the Perushim were focused on differentiation between Palestine Judaism and Diaspora Judaism as they believed the Temple was dominated by the Heliophilic Zadokkim (Sadducees). Thus a Pharisee like Yahoshuah and his Rabbis would not be well inclined to the Greek Canon
@hesedagape6122 I said they used the Hebrew. In fact, three second century sources state Matthew was written in Hebrew. Hebrew was obviously what was used. Quite a few NT quotes don't translate well into Greek and are obviously Hebrew idioms. However, the Septuagint is far closer to what they used than the Masoretic. Quotes from the Tanach in the NT are often quite different than listed in the Masoretic
The problem with Luther's idea that each person should read , study ,and interpret the bible is most other people do not have a Phd like he did . Interpretations will be all over the place , just like they are today in America with hundreds of different Protestant churches....all disagreeing with each other.....what a mess
Yes, but only on minor things. Salvation by faith, the most important thing is universal. Most of the “disagreements” are just conclusions on methodology, or church government structure. When it comes to salvation, I choose to believe Christ and the apostles rather than a corrupt organization hell bent on keeping power and lying about their very history.
A PhD isn't necessary to learn who God is and what He requires. Do you think God isn't powerful enough to keep His Word intact? He promised He would. I believe Him.
Agreed! This is the curse of Protestantism! Once the floodgates are opened, chaos reigns. Luther knew this. That's why he did not want to split from Rome.
That is bound to happen were the Bible to be studied using human wisdom. If read with the guidance and interpretation of the Author, the Holy Spirit, He is perfectly capable of leading us into the perfect truth.
One of the criticisms of the Pharisees by Jesus Christ is that they put their traditions ahead of the word of God so I think that is an error that shouldn't be repeated. He also preached servant leadership and told his disciples to use their knowledge to guide his sheep on the path they must go to develop their relationship with the Father not to Lord over them but as brothers in the faith. I think the goal is to make all of God's followers equally knowledgeable of him that can't happen if only the priests are privy to the scriptures. I believe that the renting of the curtain in the temple was meant to show people that after the ultimate sacrifice was completed by the Lamb of God that every man was able to access the gift of salvation directly by accepting that gift for himself and following the path of Jesus.
The question still remains, why were the books removed and why did Luther have authority to do it? If today someone else wanted to drop more books out would that be acceptable?
All we have to do is to remain in faith and in the teachings of Jesus Christ as he is the only way, the truth and the life; no one can come to the Father except thru Him! The carholics themselves do not read bible personally, only dependent to their priest or pope; who are human beings and are not infallible, only God is infallible!
@ I am Catholic and actively read the Bible. Please don’t generalize especially something you cannot know. I believe that the Pastor of your church would read the Bible to the congregation and then follow with an explanation of what that means. The difference between Catholics and nondenominational churches is that each nondenominational church relies on the interpretation of that pastor so there are tens of thousands of “Popes” in Protestantism.
@@nancypanogadia3430 So you have read the bible personally, do you think you have the same interpretation as others do. Now suppose I have read the bible and now understand that Jesus is not the truth because I think he did blasphemy on Jewsh, are you going to come to me and tell I am wrong. Why or why not?
2nd Tess 2:15 St. Paul asking that all tradition that he both wrote and spoke orally be spread suggests he believed his spoken word is equal to his written word, (there really isn't any difference written or oral instructions except a speaking human can actively correct error if they think you don't correctly understand what they're communicating). Saying that his oral teaching should be spread to others suggests that he thought his oral teaching would be generally protected by Holy Spirit as it spread, similar to how his written word would also be generally protected. The Word of God is also not only what St. Paul (a non-Apostle) wrote (or had written for him) but also what he spoke passed on to others who would themselves pass that on to others and so on. Jesus told people to follow the laws of the Pharisees since they had power to discover laws being on the "Seat of Moses" (scripture, even books not considered infalliable, doesn't really explained where the system of giving Pharisees this authority came from, so that appears to be an orally spread tradition). Jesus knew the Pharisees would use the Oral Torah (which wasn't allowed to be written down in Jesus' time), when making these laws. Why did God preserve the Oral Torah enough to where Jesus was ok with the Pharisees using it to make laws but Protestants say that didn't happen with Christians and that much of the oral tradition (many times relatively quickly written by early Christians in their letters and books, ie the writings of the Church Fathers [some of whom were Apostolic Fathers ie Christians that existed at the time of Apostles and often had contact with them]) of the Christian Orthodox and R. Catholics can't be used? Not much if any New Testament at the time of early Christians and in Acts 15 these early Christians "apparently" (from a strictly fundamentalist view) went against Old Testament by saying Gentiles who wanted to follow the God of Jews didn't have to circumcise, avoid pork, etc. If Apostles and other early Christians with authority were expecting Christians to >only< use written scriptures they would've given us a canon of the Bible instead of Christians waiting centuries to get a canon. Maybe the Apostles would've also wrote more.
If you study the Council of Rome in 382AD, (the first time at least some Christians (ie R. Catholic Church) "*officially*" chose a canon for the Bible), you'll find the books the Holy Spirit guided humans to chose then are the 66 Protestants generally accept as well as 7 books they usually don't accept. Christian Orthodox denominations accepted these 73 books but would often add at least a few more books. It's true that those 73 books probably weren't considered official dogma until Council of Trent (probably because there hadn't been many challenges to this canon until then) but those were the books used by non-Protestant Christians from roughly 382AD to this day. I would like people to look up online the Book of Wisdom (generally not accepted by Protestants) verses 2:12-20.
The Ethiopian Bible has 88 books written in Hebrew and yet Jesus and his disciples would have been speaking in Aramaic at the time of the Roman occupation and that would have been translated into the Greek which was later translated into Latin and Paul warned that other books were being brought into the church that weren't the doctrine that he was teaching so it's really hard to say which books should be included and which should be omitted. I think both the Catholics and the Protestants had to face that dilemma when deciding which one's to include. It's also interesting to note that the Eastern Catholic church that started in Constantinople isn't 100% in agreement with the Western Roman Catholic Church which came into power after the Muslims overtook the land's that the original church was in.
@@jerskittyIt is not hard to know. The apostle Paul made it clear that if the apostles themselves didn't teach it, don't even listen to an angel with a contradictory message. That's why we must stick with scripture alone.
According to Wikipedia there are now between 20 to 30 thousand reformed Christian sects. It took 11 years from Luther for the first split with the Swiss. The boy done good. The catholic church is still the one , true , holy and Apostolic church to this day. Founded by Christ at Pentecost.
I'll make it short: Luther did what he did because he was a heretic. When he attempted to debate the representatives of the Church as to why he was doing what he was doing, he was forced to admit that the only reason that he was doing it was "because it is my will, and my will is sufficient." He was motivated by pride.
The main problem with the idea of scripture only is clearly shown in the very last sentence of the Gospel of Saint John. Saint John clearly stated that if the apostles wrote down everything which Jesus talked about, the world would not be big enough to hold all those books. There are many Catholic beliefs and practices which, while not clearly and plainly stated in the Bible, are supported by the Bible. While I agree that there were problems in the Church which needed to be dealt with, the problems do not negate the major theological teachings of the Church.
So in conclusion they Wrote down the most important To things. Which means the non written stuffs aren't important enough to, at this day and age argue about! But Catholicism seems to focus solely on
@paulwoida8249. You have read into John.21:25 and used it as the basis to validate church tradition. Protestants will continue to believe that the scripture alone is sufficient for faith and practice.
@hdsamte The Church learns more about what it knows just like human beings do it's both human and divine and grows in understanding just as Christ grew see St Luke on the finding in the temple when Jesus went home with His Parents
What a con-job lie, Paul. Your Church is beyond loaded with wild assertions that train-wreck with the bible...praying to Mary, worshipping relics, Joseph and Mary not having sexual relations, Mary didn't die, the pope is infallible, the Catholic Church is the only true church even though it is loaded with "termites" that abuse children for sex, sided with Hitler, don't prosecute child-sex priests but instead provide cover for them...
There are so many people who agree or disagree on what books to be included or excluded from the bible. However they forget the whilst men of God wrote the bible, they were guided by the Holy Spirit . Refer 2 Peter 1: 20-21. I believe that the same guidance is accorded to the leaders of the church who finally decided as to the number of books to be included in the bible. This was done at the council of Hippo in 393 AD and later confirmed in 397AD.
I agree to this,, and ofcourse, they won"t recognized the people (Early Church Fathers) behind the bible because it was the Catholic church assembled it and call it bible.
A true account of history, is that it was actually decided way before the times you stated! Might have been confirmed at these councils, maybe, but was already well established way before that! Now please tell, when did the Catholics decided to add the other books? Was that before 393 or was it around AD1545?? Just asking for a friend....
@@DavidTaufa-n6b In my opinion guided doesn’t mean they did , look at what they did since 20 … , it,s all coming out now . Will they ask forgiveness , repent , make amends for their omissions . Was the right spirit guiding them , or was it the deceiver , you know for the greater good , you inject …. If you know fill out the rest .
Taking words, sentences, paragraphs, chapters, and books from the Holy Scriptures always was, was, and still is an evil thing to do. We do not grow where we censor and stifle thought.
There were many incorrect verbal and written comments throughout the presentation. These should be addressed for continuity. Albeit, the presentation was very informative. Hopefully and prayerfully it should open some blind eyes of those following false doctrines.
This only confirms that the bible and all all so-called religious manuscripts are man-made containing myths and legends created from men's fertile imagination.
The Septuagint was translated from Hebrew into Greek by 70 HEBREW scholars, thus the name Septuagint. Luther chose the latter skewed Masoretic text because it fit his narrative. The Masoretic text skewed away from Jesus as the Messiah.
see my long comment above explaining exactly why the 7 books were not canonized by the Jews - in brief - deliberately left out because so many Jews were converted to Jesus through them.
@@jacqueboyce3176 I see I could have a good conversation with you but , as you know we are restrained in what we can,t or can say . I will check out what you said , and yes we do have to research further then just going by what ( leadership ) is saying . After all HE did say search for the truth .
Martin ended in deception, rejecting his early work and trust only on Hebrew writings. Rejected early Christian writings that didn't fit his narrative. In the end lost his faith in the jews.
If Luther could take books out, he didn't like, then why can't any Protestant make up his own canon? Luther actually became the Protestant version of a Pope by assuming he had authority to change the standard canon.
What a bunch of Catholic crap, Randy!!! Luther was not in any way a Protestant "Pope", he exposed all the heresies of the Catholic Church...the truth hurts huh, Randy.
With the exception that there hasn't been a long line of people, acting as a "Protestant Pope" carrying on in Luther's place, as time passed on. If Luther were responsible for removing those books, then I believe He made a "course correction" (for lack of a better term) to rid the church of distracting teaching, and keep her on track, (19:40) Just my opinion...
@@strider4108 Actually, there is a long line of people acting as Protestant super pope. Only, they each found new groups every time and act like it is their job to reboot Christianity again and again and again. Also what a great logic: "If Luther were responsible... then I believe He (!capitals!) made a course correction" - so if Luther did it - which you still doubt - he would be right. Because it's the infallible Luther after all. No, you cannot claim to base yourself on the Bible and then chuck out several Biblical books as "distracting". The whole concept of "distractions" is absurd.
Luther's posting on the door was written in Latin ( a language the common people did not speak ). It requested the other college teacher's for a meeting, to discuss what he wrote down ). This was a common practice of that time period (so request meetings). One of the students saw it , took it down and re-wrote it in the common German language
I, Dominic Fernandes will live as a CATHOLICISM HANDED TO ME BY BY MY PARENTS. AND HONORING THE MOTHER OF JESUS AND THE SAINTS ELECTED BY THE WISDOM FROM THE HOLY SPIRIT.
The Bible is the inspired word of God 1 Timothy 2:5 “For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;” Luke 1:46-47 And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord, 47 And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Savior Romans 3:10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: 1 Corinthians 10:4 “And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.” 1 Samuel 2:2 “There is none holy as the LORD: for there is none beside thee: neither is there any rock like our God. Mark 7:7. “Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.” 2 Timothy 2:15 “Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” John 14:6 “Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.” 1 Timothy 4:3 “Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.” 2 Timothy 3:15 “And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.” Matthew 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. 1 Timothy 4:1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; 2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; 3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth. 1Ti 3:2 - A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; Tit 1:7 - For a bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God; Hosea 6:6 “For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.” Rev 3:16 - So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth. Better to be a born again Christian and find a good home Bible study group.
In fact, the authorship of these “removed” texts could not be verified. LONG before Luther (about 250A.D.), the 27 New Testament books as we have them today were in fact listed together long before the church councils ever gathered. We find references to this in the imaginative and allegorical commentaries of the 3rd-century Christian philosopher, Origen of Alexandria.1 Writing about 250 A.D.
These books were officially promulgated and are therefore Scripture on a par with the other Scriptures. Case closed. This was never a matter for debate until Luther decided he was a greater authority than the Holy Spirit. Authorship of those seven books can be verified as surely as can the other books of the Bible. Luther's 'accepted' books are subject to the same scrutiny as the seven books in question. How can one man have the authority to add or remove books? Absurd! Ridiculous!
@@michaelhoerig5920someone had to decide which “books” to collect in the first place, after gathering the collected writings into one tome. Ever hear of the “Adventures of Paul and Thecla”? But one example of the early church father’s attempt to weed out false writings. I would ask again, is there one single thing written in these books that is necessary for our salvation, and is not found in cannon? No. God Bless.
@@MarkSmith-zs3or I am hardly qualified to tell anybody what is necessary for their salvation! The Scriptures were collected by the CHURCH, their authenticity verified by the CHURCH, they were voted on by the CHURCH in ecumencial councils, and officially promulgated BY THE CHURCH. Every doctinal matter was handled in this manner including determining the canon of Scripture, not by one man, but by the college of bishops/cardinals in consultation with biblical and doctrinal experts/theologians. There is nothing false in those seven books and to dismiss them as unnecessary for salvation on that basis would be as reckless as Martin Luther's actions. We must accept the promise that the Holy Spirit works through the Church and prevents it from erring in doctrinal matters. If you want to get down to it, the Bible is NOT necessary for our salvation! What is necessary is baptism, faith, and good works demonstrating that that faith is real. Answers are to be found in the Bible, but the Bible itself is not necessary. The one 'pillar of truth' is the CHURCH! That's what the Bible tells us!
As a churchgoing man, I appreciate your zealousness for the word. However, I would contend that as a "kingdom of priests" tasked with the great comission, you and every believer is in fact emminently qualified (assuming that the individual has read the word of God - recent polls show that in the United States that number has fallen to about 40% of professing Christians). Now dont misunderstand what I am saying - we are not qualified to judge who meets the criteria; that belongs to our Lord and Savior, but we are specifically tasked with sharing the criteria nrcessary for eternal life. As an evangelist, it would be emminently difficult to articulate the need for salvation to a non-believer if one did not in fact understand the criteria (scripture/word of God). This being said, I often pose the question to my Church bretheren in Sunday school: "would you trust a lawyer who recommends signing a contract/committment that the lawyer did not read or understand?" I would hope not. God bless my friend.
If Luther could take out Books because they were written in Greek and not originated in Hebrew, why is the book of Jude included in the Bible. There is no historical reference by the Hebrew text for this book. This book is plagiarized from an old Greek fictional story. Why would God want a human body preserved?
The book of Jude is absolutely inspired of God and not a work of fiction. If you were to study the Bible, you would know that Jesus Himself was resurrected in his human body form and will continue to bear those scars throughout eternity. The Bible tells us in 1 Thess. 4 among other places that the righteous dead will be resurrected in new, glorified bodies at His second coming and those who remain alive at that time will be caught up in the air and ascend to heaven with them along with Jesus and all the angelic host. Jesus is the resurrection and the life and so only He alone, the archangel which means His position is above the angels, could contend with Satan regarding the body of Moses. Read also about the creation of man in Gen. 2:7 that the Lord God formed man out of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; AND MAN BECAME A LIVING SOUL. Thus, a soul is what a living person is called and it's not some ethereal thing like so many falsely believe.
When it was asked of God, the Christ Jesus, what were the "Greatest Commandments" He Answered thus : "Love the Lord, your God, with all of your heart and all of your soul and with all of your mind.And the second is like it, Love your Neighbor as yourself. All of the law and the prophets hang on these two commandments.!! Do we need more than this.? Did the early Hebrews have the knowledge of what would be written later after their earthly lives had ended.? How much knowledge does one need, to be a believer and follower of The Triune God.?
The way to know how God wants us to obey and serve is to read scripture and grown in faith and knowledge to help younger believers, and our brothers and sisters
Knowing the character of God and all the spiritual blessings that we have through Jesus is pretty important for living up to the law of love. Otherwise, everyone would have their own idea of what love looks like. For instance, some people think that it is loving to not point out sin in another person's life, but the Bible says that is not love. If we love, we would care about the destination of their soul and we would speak the truth, even if they might not like it. The entire Bible reveals God to us. It is all essential.
This is interesting information (if correct) because it shows the pattern of disintergration of the Christian faith in the western world. Luther obviously wasn't interested in Truth, he seems to have been a man of ego. In the Eastern Church, the path of the Christian faith had held a steady course, without all the novelties introduced by the Roman church, which fell from Grace in 1054, when the great schism between the Western and Eastern Churches occurred. Luther would have been well aware of this point, being an Augustinian monk, and the path that he should have alighted on, was to return to the church that was teaching the True and Faithful doctrine of Christ [and I must say here, even though it may appear to many Protestants, that the Eastern Orthodox Church is the same as the Roman church, it is definitely not to which I can attest, having been a Roman Catholic, whom God in His great mercy, led to Orthodoxy] but, he didn't. This man fell into delusion of his own thoughts, which is not uncommon, and appears to be a regular occurrence in the western concept of the Christian faith. Luther didn't like some of the books in the Bible, (possibly because they refuted his teachings) so out they go. How convenient. I think the Apostles referred to this as blasphemy, as it is expressly stated in various writings, that woe to anyone who changes one tittle or iota of the Written Word, which has always been seen as being directed by God. Many in the West do not understand that, the Old Testament was purely about the coming of Christ, so to remove books, gives a distorted understanding of it's true meaning, and a lack of True knowledge. I am so grateful to God, that He showed me, an unworthy sinner, His Church, and the path of salvation, should I wish to continue with my free will. Many times I stumble, and fall off, but He is always there to help me get back on the path, and continue my struggle. It saddens me that the west has taken the path it has, because the Christian faith is so far removed from the Truth, and prevents many genuine people from finding Christ in all His Glory. God bless you all.
It is important to remember that the Tanahk and the Bible were written by different authors, at different times, for different audiences. The writings were originally kept and copied onto scrolls. The scrolls were kept in every synagogue and later church. There wasn't a "book" or "books." No absolute canon and no codex. The contents Tanakh as a whole were not fully cannonized until roughly 200 AD. The Septuagint was collected, translated and finalized around 100 BC. For 300 years the Greek translation of the most prepredominent Inspired Jewish writtings existed while there was some fluidity over what the final contents of the "Jewish Bible." Because the seven writings were were often available for reading in synagogue and and church, both Jews and early Christians were familiar with them to varying degrees. After the destruction of the Jerusalem temple in 40 AD and the diaspora, formalization of written Jewish thought and what consitiuted "revealed Truth" became a much more urgent enterprise. Three hundred years after the Septuagint was completed, the Jewish bible was finalized and Tobit, Judith, Baruch, Ecclesiasticus, Wisdom, First and Second Maccabees didn't make the cut. All the ancient Christian churches retained the writings. Then a little more than 1,500 years later... well you can push the "go" button above and find out what happened next!
They were written by many men, but they had one author. That author is what makes them canon, for that author is God. Thus the canon is the nature of the books, not a decision of men. Those seven were never regarded by the Jews as Scripture. Jerome, who knew Hebrew & had consulted the Jews before making his translation, knew they were not canonical but was told by his superiors to include them.
I think the questions should include 'What is the negative impact of Luther's doctrine on Christianity overall. Because of these Luther's doctrine, denominations have grown into many uncontrollably producing many different theologies and might conflict one another. What can be thought about this for Luther's intention to purify the Church? Has Church been purified now?
Hopefully..believers now will not worship or pray to humans..even God Fearing and God anointed ones...like Mary, or other 'saints' ... We should now Pray as Jesus taught us ..Pray to God the Father. Believe that Christ suffered on the Cross and resurrection from the dead, living a Perfect, sinless life, in this flesh, and God the Father put the sins of the world upon Him, who paid for our sins. Hopefully now believers read their Bibles and Seek after their God..not as just a religion, but as a Relationship with their Creator!
@@anayv11 Actually, my comment is about the negative impact of Luther's doctrine. Why have you just commented this way. I don't think there is a connection of my comment wit yours. Are you just stupid you don't understand what I mean, or is it only typical protestant to be blinded. Ok, you pray like Jesus teaches you to, but tell me how Jesus teaches you to worship God. Does He teach you to sing. How Jesus teaches you to love God. Doesn't He teach you to love God with all your mind? How do you implement this?
The first Christian practices are found in the Books of Acts. If we compare the teachings found in the Roman Catholic, it is contradicting to the teachings by the Apostles. Luther's teachings is similar to the Books of Acts. Watch out for One World Religion that Pope Francis is one of the founder. Here he claims that all religions are the same. Is that correct?
You will find it very helpful to read ESV ~ from older manuscripts than King James Version & in language we understand this day & age ~ recommend RC Sproul's ESV Study Bible for detailed explanations & excellent commentary ~ also any of RC Sproul's books, espec "The Holiness of God" ~ I've read 74 of his books & have grown to know that the more I learn, the more there is still ahead to learn! Knowing God is a life long pursuit ~ I'm almost 80 & on fire to learn more!!!
Where in the Bible does it say paying indulgent can bail you out of a place the Catholic church calls purgatory. The Bible says once you die theirs no second chance, it's a one way trip, heaven or hell!
I do not agree with this assessment of Martin Luther as he was not supportive of Hebrew text, his bios of Augustinian teaching has blinded his understanding of Biblical prophecy. Those of books quoted by the Ante-Nicene Fathers by direct connection to the Apostles have been targeted by Luther because of his bios to the teachings of Augustine that was riddled with Gnostic beliefs. This is one of the reasons many Christians can not justify accepted doctrines that has no historical teachings in the first 300 years of the Church. Gentiles were given a warning by the Apostle Paul in changing the format of understanding of Scripture from a Hebrew perspective to a pagan Gnostic setting that was much more pleasing to Gentile beliefs. Galatians 1:8-9 ESV [8] But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. [9] As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed. Romans 11:17-18 ESV [17] But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, although a wild olive shoot, were grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing root of the olive tree, [18] do not be arrogant toward the branches. If you are, remember it is not you who support the root, but the root that supports you. Gentile Christian theologians have become arrogant to bend Scripture to suit themselves and God’s judgment will fall on the house of first and then on the wicked. 1 Peter 4:17-18 ESV [17] For it is time for judgment to begin at the household of God; and if it begins with us, what will be the outcome for those who do not obey the gospel of God? [18] And "If the righteous is scarcely saved, what will become of the ungodly and the sinner?"
A few loud "theologians" do not represent all when it comes to false doctrines. As a "Gentile" (your word, not mine) theologian/pastor/bible college instructor, such a statement is fool-hardy...lumping all into the FEW.
@ unfortunately history does not lie, the infection of the antichrist spirit that John spoke of has produced bad fruit, Matt 13, John 15 and Romans 11. Jesus warned that only a remnant will stand with a pure heart, it is only those who are true to the commandments of Christ that will enter the kingdom of God.
@@russelljones2305 I'm either too old or you are talking in "circular theology" like watching a fly in flight. In plain English, how was Luther "blinded" in biblical prophecy? I see no connection. Here I am, possessing 3 earned theological degrees, and I can't gain insight into what you are saying. I know and fully understand the scriptures listed, even in Koine Greek, but don't understand your reasonings for their use. As Paul taught, and I learned in my studies for the ministry, I forsake "big-words" so that I can communicate to the common person by the power of the Holy Spirit. So, in plain English, what are you talking about? I'm listening, you have my ear.
@@bert-cq3ij unfortunately your theological degrees meaning nothing, unless you understand historical context and that the original language of Scripture is Hebrew not Greek. Gentiles in Church history have replaced Christianity into a Gentile religion. Having read the Early Church writings, it is evident that the arrogance of the Gentiles that Paul spoke of in Romans 11 has come true and fulfilled what Jesus said would happen before his second coming. Jesus said that the weeds and tares in the Church will be removed first and that those who are faithful to his words will enter the kingdom of God. The biggest problem with Theological colleges is that they are built on the opinions of men who have a political agenda to maintain their status quo’s and a rejection of a historical Christian faith. I have dim view of theologians who are wolves that preach another Gospel and think they are progressive and making Christianity into a Socialist power struggle. I have interest only in what is credited as Historical Christianity, anything else is heretical as Paul said Galatians 1:6-9 ESV [6] I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel- [7] not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. [8] But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. [9] As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed.
@ just adding about Luther and this would include Calvin is that they have no understanding to Biblical prophecy, mainly because of their eschatological aligning with Augustine. Augustine had no right to add or take away from any quotation of Scripture. All New Testament quotes are referenced in Old Testament prophets, for Augustine to use external pagan interpretations is heretical. Augustine’s meddling in altering the prophetic language has come from his Gnostic background and the Early Church writings confirm that what Augustine was teaching came from the Gnostics. There were only two eschatological views taught in the early years of the Church, Historic Millennialism (roots in Hebrew prophecy) and the others were deniers of the First resurrection. Augustine’s beliefs are linked to the Gnostics and the Sadducees that Paul spoke of in 2 Timothy 2:18; 2 Thessalonians 2:1-4 and 1 Corinthians 15. All these are traceable throughout the Ante-Nicene Father’s writings. Throughout Church history and secular history A-Millennialism has been an antisemitic ideology that has done much harm to the body of Christ.
He said that everyone should be able to read the bible and decide for themselves, BUT he removed books so that they could not. He could have left notes as to why he believed it was distorted or not by spiritual divination.
What do you mean the 7 books he took out were against his teachings ? He was a Catholic priest. Which means those were his teachings . He remained a priest and as far as anyone knows never denounced the office of the pope . The damage this one man did . His decadent lifestyle and self loathing certainly allowed him to justify his bad behavior. Because of him and others there are now 30,000 + denominations of Christianity. It would have been more beneficial to repair the Catholic Church . Jesus said to Peter " upon this rock i will build my church " not churches . The early church fathers studied and argued to interpret ( many even died ) the books of the Bible over hundreds of years . Yet this one man decided he alone had the answers based on his own guilt and confusion . The arrogance is stunning . Now look at us .
I think, it is important to know, that Jesus never mentioned the name Yahweh or Elohim(s) as the name of God. He called God as the Father, The Love, The Mercy, The Supreme Truth, whom we can reach if we follow what he was teaching. This is the essence of Christianity and all the books in Old Testament are not mentioning this revelation. It das not matter for us how many books are included in Old Testament or Apocryphal, we can read them if it helps us to understand better some topics like the history of the life on Earth or for any comparative study. Also the jealous and cruel God mentioned there is definitely not the God, Jesus was talking about. All the differences between the christian churches are actually of secondary interest in this light. Peter supposed to be the leader of the Christian community in Rome, but not a leader of an institution called church, with all its rules and hierarchy, and also not a leader of all Christians in the whole world. Talk to Coptic Christians in Egypt or to the Syrian Christians, who are the oldest christian communities. They were oppressed by Roman Church as soon as the Christianity of roman type became an official religion in Roman Empire. Is it what Jesus would like to happen (it is his Greek name, the true name was Yoshua) ? Christianity in the beginning was a way of living, which supposed to purify our senses, our emotions, mind and instincts, refine us and elevate our consciousness from the still animalistic and egoistic state to more cholistic awarness of reality and to higher knowledge. Jesus never said, we have only to worship him to reach the Father, but rather to believe in what he teaches, follow his example and practice the teachings in daily life. What it means to reach the Father in the light of his words, is to find Him in us and around us in the creation, to unite us with Him and as the final stage to become one with Him . This is the true purpose of our life on the Earth , to manifest gradually the Divine Will, Light, Love, Wisdom, Harmony, Beauty etc on the Earth and in human race and to establish the Paradise on the Earth and not somewhere in the 7th heaven.
I do not believe Jesus ever intended a new religion be created, but sought to bring the Torah back to be followed and to denounce the corruption in the temple.
Any Sane & logical thinking man, specially from non Christian background would agree that if its not included in the bible it isn't so much important for Christianity to exist.Look at the subject matter removing all pre-existing ideas and youll know where Luther came from, knowing how the RCC is in history.So Christianity= Sourced from the Bible. Another religion highly based from oral traditions is Islam and we all dispise that right?
❤Paul in his epistle to the Galations 1:6-9 says that anyone who teaches a different gospel than that he teaches, let him be accursed. The Roman Catholics preach a different gospel.
The Roman Catholic preach the right gospel and the Protestants preach the gospel they want according to their interests. Removing the seven books is one such example
@frgasparraja5835 the catholics teach nothing of the word. they worship their popes bow to them n kiss their feet they pray to Mary and use the rosery . need I say more forvu to understand that the catholic church is not to b practiced. Yr going against His word. B careful who u trust.
that is not true. the only sin that is unforgiveable is the one for which no forgiveness is requested. Specifically, it is denying the urging of the Holy Spirit to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ. It is also called "blasphemy against the Holy Spirit". All other sins and forms of blasphemy are forgivable as He Himself says.
It definitely says if any one tampers with the knowledge in the Bible they will be dealt with, BY THE PLAGUES WRITTEN IN THIS BOOK and also Bless is he who reads and hears the Book of the Revelations of JESUS CHRIST. WHY IS REVELATIONS MENTION AND NOT THE WHOLE TITLE BY MOST? QUESTION TO EVERYONE WHO NEEDED TO BE FOLLOWED TO ENSLAVE MANY. WHAT BOOK DID THEY USE, DOCTRINE. JUST SAYING.
The book of Revelation is shortened to Revelation just as the Letter of Peter or the Letters of Paul are referred to simply a Corinthians or some other book. But in Church the full title is always read out.
Where do the Epistles fit in your theology? It is there one sees how one "ought to behave in the House of God". Jesus said "I will build My church" but it is in Acts we see the actual building of it and in the Church Epistles how it it all supposed to work. The so called Pastoral Epistles (Timothy, Titus and Philemon) are directed toward those who would be leaders.
They are all equally important. If we just had the gospels we'd be lost. God gave us His Word (singular, not plural). The whole Word of God is equal in importance and authority.
Talk to some ex priests and teachers of Catholicism and you will hear a different story. They were prohibited from teaching from the Bible. Hence the reason they are no longer priests and teachers. They saw the hypocrisy.
I grew up in the catholic school and church..No priest or nun e er told us to read the Bible. I have read the Bible... now I'm not catholic anymore. I'm saved by the blood of CHRIST
Technically, the seven apocryphal books in the Catholic Old Testament were not removed by Martin Luther … but… at his urging, they were separated from the Old Testament canon and placed into an un- numbered appendix. Eventually, the apocrypha were excluded from today’s Protestant bible altogether. This accounts for the different number of books in the Catholic (73), and Protestant (66 ) bibles. Martin Luther also wanted to do this with four New Testament books but was opposed in this , mainly by his friend Melanchthon. Thus both the Catholic and Protestant canon has the same number of books (27).
YES HE DID. Even top-notch Lutheran theologians agree to this. He also added words to the Bible. He also eliminated practices which came to us from early Judaism like "praying for the dead" which has great value. You're following the teachings of "man" which is in error.
Luther did not remove the deuterocanonical books. The books were not part of the Canon until the Council of Trent decided to include them in the Canon ~ and that was after Luther.
Luther had it right about how the Catholic Church prostituted Christianity. I no longer associate myself with the idolatry and demonic rituals of Catholicism! I was raised in the Catholic Church, served as an altarboy for 3yrs. Fast forward a generation, I took a good look at the history and practices of the Catholic Church and decided to disassociate myself from Catholicism before it's too late. I believe we're accountable for our choices and decisions in life.🙏📖🦅 Shalom 🕊️
Luther had very little right. That's why he was excommunicated and labeled a heretic. Removing books from the BIble is outrageous! Done because these seven books 'disagreed' with Luther's personal notion of Christianity, hence the highly personal nature of Lutheranism. As far as looking more Jewish--have you been to a synagogue? The Mass is clearly an organic development based on Jewish worship and Catholic theology and outgrowth of Jewish. Go to a Lutheran church--it looks and sounds NOTHING like Jewish worship. I'm sorry you feel alienated from the true faith. I'll pray for you.
@@TonyB-rv9qd I don't believe you were raised Catholic and I don't believe you were ever an altar boy. I *_was._* The Catholic Church has always been centered on Jesus Christ, at least until the Modernists changed that focus at Vatican II and have endeavored to lead it astray ever since. I challenge you to describe the "demonic practices" you mentioned with tge name(s) of the parish(es), the name(s) of the priest(s) and the year(s) in which these things took place. If you can call the entire Catholic Church "demon worshippers", which you most certainly did, *_I can call you a liar._*
You decided to "disassociate from the Catholic Church" because you NEVER knew the Catholic Church. If you really knew the Catholic Church you would have never left the Catholic Church. The fact that you served as an altarboy does not prove anything. Martin Luther was a Catholic priest and he also "disassociated" from the Catholic Church. And the result of such disassociation lead to to confusion, error and lack of unity. As for "prostitute Christianity", look at what happens today with a multitude and myriads of so called "churches", in which each one of them are preaching a different gospel. And even if there is no unity among them, all of them claim to follow only the bible. This is what means to "prostitute Christianity". And as for idolatry, what do you have to say about confusing blessing with financial prosperity? This is exactly what neoprotestants teach today through long speeches on prosperity theologies within their so-called churches. For them the more money one makes, the more blessed they will become. This is pure idolatry.
It was the other way around. It was the Catholic Church who insisted on retaining those deuterocanonical books, but they never encouraged the catholics to personally read the bible everyday, instead rely on the sermons of their priests. Faith comes from hearing and hearing by the word of God. Read the bible everyday. Read it out loud, that's how you meditate on the Word.
I am surprised that Luther included the Old Testament in his Bible since Jesus disavowed Yahweh and was led by His Father who was loving and more in line with Greek concepts than many of the demands of Yahweh.
Where the Catholic Church went astray from the original church, the Luther and Calvinists just went astray 2.0. Now we have thousands of denominations with thousands of different interpretations which has led to mass heresy and false churches. The original Orthodox Church still exists!
Yes, it was based on the Hebrew Canon; however, the Hebrew Canon is debated to have not been solidified until just before Jesus' time or shortly after. Some argue that the Hebrew Canon was changed after Jesus and Apostles' message about Him was gaining too much popularity; thus, in order to refute this new Christian faith, the leaders within the Jewish faith tradition adjusted the Canon to point out the error of Christianity as one means to stop losing followers to those that were converting to the Christian faith. Regardless, Jesus and the Apostles would have been familiar with these texts regardless of the authors and which language these books used. They were historical and practical, and these book would have likely been in many synagogues where the Rabbis taught and the community learned about God, His prophets, the Messiah, as well as the traditions of the people. If the early Christians and disciples of the church never refuted them, it makes one wonder why would an attempt to remove them 1500 years later make sense outside of someone arguing their own theology or authority.
@ useless. What’s your argument? What story are you trying to say? No way the books are wrong and no way he is right to remove. For your facilitation you argue in vain. You are supposed to repent for accepting Luther and his actions
@@Cholan-s7z He does if they clearly malign what is established through the teachings of the Christ and His Apostles...read Galatians: "Let anyone who presents a different gospel than the one you received from us be cursed" (Apostle Paul). That word "cursed" from the original Koine Greek means "to the lowest part of hell".
One could also ask why the Roman Catholic tradition removed the Book of Enoch and to my knowledge never incorporated the Book of Jubilees. Both are referred to in Scripture, the Book of Enoch being referenced in Jude and the Book of Jubilees in 2Samuel.. Also, I find it ironic that two of the premiere "Church Fathers" being Paul and Timothy either are not mentioned or are under increasing criticism today.
No mention that the books were excluded because they had no source connection to the Hebrew scriptures, though some had some minor historical value. Just because a book is inspiring does not mean that it’s scripture; I have shelves full of inspiring books, with many being fiction. Also Luther’s belief in sola fide is not based on his belief, but in the teaching of Christ and the apostles themselves.
Metropolitan Bishop Athanasius, 350 AD, and the Church at that time period, believed the exact same way about those 7 books that Luther believed. That the Apocrypha was good to read, yet not the Word of God, they state that there are only 66 books they considered the Word of God. Dr. Martin Luther, (Doctor of Theology of the Augustinian Order), includes the Apocrypha books in his “Die Bibel” translation, and they are included in the 1611 version of the KJV. No doctrine should be based on them!
I for one definitely know that the Bible was not presented in its entirety. For people to be lied to for 2000 years they had to have a book of Authority. But one thing even though the most High has different names ,I believe YAWHEY AND YESHUA WAS REPLACED BY GOD AND JESUS. ????
Same names but in Hebrew. No J in Hebrew or Latin so they used Y pronounced Yeh. or yar The anglicization of the Latin is J Jesus is actually Joshua but being translated into Latin, the empire language, it had to be pronounced Yaysus.
He did not remove any books he just didn’t add them, from speaking with some Jews that I know they have said those seven books were more historical than Devine
Luther got it right! The Church of Rome got it wrong! This is how we know this. Luke 24: 44 (Yeshua speaking) "These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, (Torah - the 1st 5 books of the Bible), and in the Prophets, (Josh, Judges, 1-2 Samuel, 1-2Kings, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, The 12 (minor prophets), and in the Psalms (this is the 3rd section of the Tanakh, which is the Jewish SCRIPTURES.) The books in this section include (Psalms, Proverbs, Job, Song of Songs(Solomon), Ruth, Lamentations, Esther, Ecclesiates, Daniel, Ezra-Nehemiah, & 1-2Chronicles.) The Tanakh 'Ta'= Torah 'Na"= Prophets 'Kh"= Psalms Note: every book found in the Tanakh is found in the Protestant Old Testament The Tanakh excludes all of the books found in the Apocrypha. Luke 24: 45 Then opened He (Yeshua) their understanding that they might understand the SCRIPTURES. Here, Yeshua (Jesus), the KING of kings, The LORD of Lords, The Son of God, The Messiah, our Saviour, GOD, closed the Old Testament Canon excluding all the apophrycal books.
It is my understanding that the Septuagint which contained these books predated the creation of the official Jewish Bible, which excluded any books not found to exist in Hebrew, thus the Protestants, who were later translating and publishing the Bible into vernaculars, made their Old Testament conform to the by then official Jewish version. 😮
The 200 year period where popes broke Gods laws by sex mongering and greed and murder. Do your history… apostolic succession ENDED there for sure… that is why Spiritual Succession is real… any other conclusion is satanic inspired
lol. in my opinion, and from the historical view I have experienced, it didn't work. Although an essential doctrine, which I believe, promote and live by, is salvation, not by faith, but through faith. Salvation is a gift offered by God in his only begotten son Jesus Christ. It is received in faith. Faith does not save you, God does, but faith it the extended hands that receive what God offers. That is why we say, believe in the Lord Jesus and you will be saved. If you do not receive the gift offered, you will not have it, nor the benefits of salvation. I have a car that I can no longer effectively maintain. I have offered it several times for free but, so far, no one has taken up the offer and I still have it. This is the way it is with salvation. If you accept the gift, it is yours. If not, you don't have it. I encourage you all, just take it man, it's for your everlasting benefit. It is a shame that so many still take advantage of the poor, even in protestant churches. Perhaps it is not the removal of books from the canon that is essential, but the evil that is in every heart. You can always use the bible to make money, but it was not intended that way.
I thoroughly enjoyed it and got educated. didn't understand the use of the word "she" when talking about Luther. Could you change that as Luther was a he.
Lately I've developed a great interest in the ethopian bible, it has all the books of the bible . I have a deep faith in the holy trinity and no MAN should be allowed to mess with the written scriptures. The full Ethopian bible makes for very interesting reading. It has everything the modern bible has in the written word and than some with deeper explanations. Also A totally different take on Adam and Eve, it even has a book on the life of Adam and Eve's life after their fall from grace. The Qeen of Sheba took the history of the jewish people home with her after she met with Solomon.. I think evetyone who has a deep faith should research this bible and get to read the bible in it''s full context and all the removed books. Our bible is deeply modified. ❤
Well, now there are over 20,000 denominations and even any good Christian does not know what is the true meaning of any text been read...because there are as many interpretations as many readers...so which one is the truth...Should I follow Luther or Calvin or Zwingly or any preacher near my house...who will teach me the truth when I know the truth is only one. Should I follow Jehovah Witness or Mormon, both of them think they got the truth, others are wrong per them. You are stuck.
As much as i appreciate this video and the effort you put into making it, (i don't mean to be a beach) but it's hard to follow through to the end because it's not condensed enough to maximize true put in minimal time, if i may say. I would respectful suggest you will condense this next video so you aren't repeating yourself, and all necessary information could be passed in lesser time, cos honestly i believe you could have summed this up in 15min. I just watched a video about The difference between Islamic ( the Sunni & Shia), and it's so informative despite being a 13 min video. Hope you understand, and sorry if this is offending in any ways. Thanks for the effort.
@@paulakallidukil111 NO! The Bible came from the Mind and Will of God. The traditions came from the Greeks and the Roman Idolatries incorporated by Constantine, a Roman Pagan🤡
This could and should have been a 5 minute video. The excessive repetitions did not prove anything other than that the authors wanted a much longer video than their ideas warranted.
The Catholic Church did a lot of damage by not letting the people to read and know the truth for themselves, since it is God’s word the Holy Spirit helps the individuals to understand, believe and obey God’s word.
The bible is not gods word, it was put together by over 20 different people with the goal to establish a religion. There are over 110 religions on this planet and christianity is just one of them and the only religion that killed millions of innocent people for not converting to their myth's.
The Catholic church places itself as an intercessor between God and mankind, which is wrong according to God's true Word. The Catholic church thought it was alright to charge believers for access to God, and practices idolatry by glorifying and raising Mary above Jesus. Read the King James Bible for God's true Word. You have direct access to Our Lord, just ask him to be saved and believe, and you will be saved.
The christian mission spread across the world in more swiftly because of Martin Luther... some enemies attack his personal life and his choices. Those kind of people who will even judge Jesus and condemn. We need to thank God for Martin Luther reformation.
What is incredible is people hate the catholic church because of The Papacy, believing falsely the decisions of the church solely rely on the Pope. But admire Martin Luther who made all decisions by himself. And btw this video is not accurate.
Yeah Im pretty comfortable with my bible. Ive learned the blessings that come with comparing scripture with scripture. If Someone deletes Deuteronomy 5:6, I'll discover the exact same principle or concept in Exodus 20:2 and a couple of other hidden passages man never even thought of. God word is perfect. He would never trust mortal man with the responsibility of protecting the purity of HIS WORD.
Repeating the same thing over and over doesn't make it true! Simple search of "when did Christians removed the 7 books" gives this: 1.- Martin Luther, a key figure in the Protestant Reformation, moved the 7 books to a second-tier status in the 16th century, but did not completely remove them. 2.- Gradual Process: The actual removal of the 7 books from Protestant Bibles was a gradual process that occurred over time. 3.-Standardization in 1825: The practice of excluding the 7 books from Protestant Bibles was standardized in 1825, when the British and Foreign Bible Society declared that only the 66 books would be included in their publications. 4.- Protestants historically acknowledged those seven books. In fact, if you look at old printed Protestant Bibles, like KJV Bibles from the 1800s, you will almost certainly see them included. 5.- Luther also believed other books were "less authoritative", including the Epistle of James and Revelation. They're included. Please do some actual research before you post "controversial" videos.
I don't know much history about Martin Luther, but I do know that the Catholic Pope/Popes took it upon themselves to change several things in the Bible. The Popes have set themselves in the same position as God Himself. Using the term "father" when God is the only Father. At one point, the Pope wanted to change the Lord's Prayer. Catholics also worship Mary. There's nothing in the Bible about worshipping Mary. They seem to crucifie Jesus at every service showing him on the cross.Jesus isn't on the cross anymore. He's sitting on the right side of God now. The Pope today wants to change the Ten Cammandments now and make going to church on Sunday mandatory. The seventh day is the Lord's Day of Rest, not the first day of the week. There's many other things they want to change, and as far as I know God hasn't authorized them to change anything. God bless all. Amen 🙏 ❤.
@@Dale-v6o You are right. The story starts with the fact that the Christian religion was being forced by the Roman Emperor. The people were reluctant to follow it. The priests themselves were not willing but they saw an opportunity to gain from it. They fooled the people by telling those who worshiped the sun, "Oh see wve are worshiping the sun, Jesus is the light of the world and it is the sun." Those who were worshiping athe mother and child goddess were told see it is the moter,Mary and child, Jesus" Then they did not want the congregation to understand the word of God in the Bible and so kept it hidden by having it in Latin. The interpretation they made was as per the heir convenience. They did not want an average person to read the Bible and the burnt William Tyndle the stake for translating it in English. They even tried it with Martin Luther. They bought all the copies of the translated Bible and burt them but the printing press was invented and they could no longer do that. Poor Pope and his lot they have been defeated but to the good fortune of the RC clergy, there is no dearth of gullible people. God allows those who are not His people to be deceived. So let these RCs worship idols, say their rosery worship Mary, pray for their dead, and follow man made customs and traditions and accept commandments of the Pope and his one world religion.
The New Testament is the culmination and the fulfillment of the Old Testament. It says in the Revelation 22: 18 -19; 18. "As for me, I warn everyone who hears the prophetic words of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will pile on him the plagues described in this book. 19. And if anyone takes away words from this book of prophecy, God will take from him his share in the tree of Life and the holy city described in this book."
The King James Bible in Revelation 22:19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
These are books from the days of the Old Testament but were never included in the Jewish canon. That is, they were not accepted as divinely inspired in the Old Testament.
In reference to faith alone, the Book of James in Chapter 2 is the Biblical account of why faith alone is a fallacy. Faith alone is not a biblically sound thing to teach. Just read James 2.
Luther removed what? The same "removed" books were in the original Geneva and then the KJV bibles. The real question is the removal of said books by later Christian Protestants, and why those books are still kept out of most Protestant bibles. Or better yet- why do Catholic bibles typical remove 3rd and 4th Maccabees? These books are well established historical books.
Understand the full story of Martin Luther: ruclips.net/video/neuJyudVW7o/видео.html
What, from the papal system of: power, greed, child molestations, priest being active homosexuals, exulted thrones, stupid cone-head lofty hats, expecting to be called "Holy Father", and getting his ring kissed??? Luther condemned such as being an anti-Christ system.
How did Luther's actions contribute to the Protestant Reformation and shape modern Christianity?
@@historicalowl-n2m He exposed all the wretched abuses, corruptions, and misuse of Biblical teachings that set the German people free to read the bible for themselves - a death sentence beforehand by the Catholic Church!
But he didn’t. He moved seven books in the Old Testament to a new section, the Apocrypha, with the insinuation that they were of lesser authority. It was the Bible Society in the 1820s that deleted the books altogether. Some modern Protestants think the Catholic Church added seven books at the Council of Trent.
This is a common myth. Martin Luther did not remove any books. He critiqued the canon but did not change it. I knew a Lutheran pastor who had a parishioner who claimed that the Deuterocanonical were not part of the Bible. The pastor confounded his parishioner by showing that the official position of the Lutheran church was that they are part of the canon. The books were removed by printers who found out that they were seldom used and that they could leave them out,, charge the same price, and no one would notice. Many parts of the deuterocanonical books are part of Lutheran liturgy.
@@kencollins1186 I think you wrote that with your tin foil hat on...printers had NOTHING to do with removing books.
@@bert-cq3ij - But the fact remains that not even Catholics read their own "deuterocanonical" books. I wish to God that Catholics would read and follow the teaching of the Book of Wisdom (the Wisdom of Solomon). That book contains probably the BEST description of the evolution of idolatry in the whole bible.
Their abominable idolatry follows beat-for-beat the progression of idolatry described in the Book of Wisdom.
If you study the Council of Rome in 382AD, (the first time at least some Christians (ie R. Catholic Church) "*officially*" chose a canon for the Bible), you'll find the books the Holy Spirit guided humans to chose then are the 66 Protestants generally accept as well as 7 books they usually don't accept. Christian Orthodox denominations accepted these 73 books but would often add at least a few more books. It's true that those 73 books probably weren't considered official dogma until Council of Trent (probably because there hadn't been many challenges to this canon until then) but those were the books used by non-Protestant Christians from roughly 382AD to this day. I would like people to look up online the Book of Wisdom (generally not accepted by Protestants) verses 2:12-20.
Luther did remove them from the BIble canon. That he kept them in an appendix doesn't change that. More radical Protestants completely removed them way before 1820.
"Some modern Protestants think the Catholic Church added seven books at the Council of Trent."
Aand some think the moon is made of green cheese. It is an obviously bogus claim, as these seven books had been read and used as part of the bible for centuries.
Luther became his own" Pope" He is the "authority". Of the protestant denominations. This is why we have over 40,000 denominations with their own interpretations.
I agreed the salvation cannot be bought but I suspect based on what I have read a certain amount of good works maybe necessary.
Luther remove verses from the bible and then protestant accused Catholic of adding verses in the bible 😂😂😂.
❤l believe praying for the dead is not found in the Bible. I have high regards to leaders who stood to what is right. Thank 💕 you ❤️.This content us very valuable.
I guess that's where the Muhammad got the wrong impression that praying for the dead is gonna do them any good😂.
read my long comment re the 7 books - it explains exactly why Luther left them out. By the way ,the jews are strict and to this day they pray for their dead. Also the Orthodox church mainly unchanged since earliest times also prays for the dead.
Jews have always prayed for their dead. We inherited that custom from them, just as we inherited much of Christianity from the Jews. Praying for a sould in need seems quite natural to me. Please be discerning about what other 'experts' say about the Bible and faith. They are often out in right field.
@@michaelhoerig5920 If the soul has left the body, it has no needs...NONE!
Praying for the dead is spuriously wrong! As the bible says, Catholics listen, "It is expected that after death, comes the judgment"..no 2nd chances!
Eastern Orthodox Christians still have all the books in the Septuagint (LXX), a Greek translation of the older Hebrew Old Testament that Jesus, Paul, and the other apostles preached and lived by. What most Protestants today consider the Old Testament is the Masoretic Text which was copied, edited, and edited between the 7th and 10th centuries AD, well after the Bible had been canonized. In the Roman Catholic Church there have been "innovations" for centuries, from the filioque to papal infallibility.
Eastern Orthodox are far worse.
False. Hebrew Old Testament Canon is different from the LXX because there were certain books that caught the fancy of her translators. However the authoritative Canon that Christ and the Apostles used was definitely the Hebrew Canon not the Greek
@hesedagape6122 trying to be accurate, you miss truth. Yes, yeshua used a hebrew text, but the Greek septuagint is far closer to that hebrew document than the masoretic text is. The masoretic was edited with the purpose of making it harder to see yeshua as messiah.
@bobdowney5109 false. The quotations Jesus and the Apostles used was from the Hebrew Canon. The Perushim had approved it and that is why the discrepancy as by the first century AD the Perushim were focused on differentiation between Palestine Judaism and Diaspora Judaism as they believed the Temple was dominated by the Heliophilic Zadokkim (Sadducees). Thus a Pharisee like Yahoshuah and his Rabbis would not be well inclined to the Greek Canon
@hesedagape6122 I said they used the Hebrew. In fact, three second century sources state Matthew was written in Hebrew. Hebrew was obviously what was used. Quite a few NT quotes don't translate well into Greek and are obviously Hebrew idioms. However, the Septuagint is far closer to what they used than the Masoretic. Quotes from the Tanach in the NT are often quite different than listed in the Masoretic
I think another reason why Martin Luther excluded the Apocrypha is because Jesus Christ never quoted from these books.
Neither did the Jews. Never read from the Temple and have biblical errors. Jews considered the history books.
Matthew 23:37 and 2 Esdras 1 verse 30 ... Jesus quotes from the Apocrypha
@@King_Richard_theonlyWRONG. 2Esdras quoted Jesus . Check the timeline.
The rich and Lazarus and 2 Esdras(Apocrypha)Chapter 7:70-140 are very similar.
The problem with Luther's idea that each person should read , study ,and interpret the bible is most other people do not have a Phd like he did . Interpretations will be all over the place , just like they are today in America with hundreds of different Protestant churches....all disagreeing with each other.....what a mess
Yes, but only on minor things. Salvation by faith, the most important thing is universal. Most of the “disagreements” are just conclusions on methodology, or church government structure. When it comes to salvation, I choose to believe Christ and the apostles rather than a corrupt organization hell bent on keeping power and lying about their very history.
A PhD isn't necessary to learn who God is and what He requires. Do you think God isn't powerful enough to keep His Word intact? He promised He would. I believe Him.
Agreed! This is the curse of Protestantism! Once the floodgates are opened, chaos reigns. Luther knew this. That's why he did not want to split from Rome.
That is bound to happen were the Bible to be studied using human wisdom. If read with the guidance and interpretation of the Author, the Holy Spirit, He is perfectly capable of leading us into the perfect truth.
@@RichlandCommunity I will pray that you be purged of your delusion.
One of the criticisms of the Pharisees by Jesus Christ is that they put their traditions ahead of the word of God so I think that is an error that shouldn't be repeated. He also preached servant leadership and told his disciples to use their knowledge to guide his sheep on the path they must go to develop their relationship with the Father not to Lord over them but as brothers in the faith. I think the goal is to make all of God's followers equally knowledgeable of him that can't happen if only the priests are privy to the scriptures. I believe that the renting of the curtain in the temple was meant to show people that after the ultimate sacrifice was completed by the Lamb of God that every man was able to access the gift of salvation directly by accepting that gift for himself and following the path of Jesus.
The question still remains, why were the books removed and why did Luther have authority to do it? If today someone else wanted to drop more books out would that be acceptable?
All we have to do is to remain in faith and in the teachings of Jesus Christ as he is the only way, the truth and the life; no one can come to the Father except thru Him! The carholics themselves do not read bible personally, only dependent to their priest or pope; who are human beings and are not infallible, only God is infallible!
@ I am Catholic and actively read the Bible. Please don’t generalize especially something you cannot know. I believe that the Pastor of your church would read the Bible to the congregation and then follow with an explanation of what that means. The difference between Catholics and nondenominational churches is that each nondenominational church relies on the interpretation of that pastor so there are tens of thousands of “Popes” in Protestantism.
@@nancypanogadia3430 So you have read the bible personally, do you think you have the same interpretation as others do. Now suppose I have read the bible and now understand that Jesus is not the truth because I think he did blasphemy on Jewsh, are you going to come to me and tell I am wrong. Why or why not?
2nd Tess 2:15 St. Paul asking that all tradition that he both wrote and spoke orally be spread suggests he believed his spoken word is equal to his written word, (there really isn't any difference written or oral instructions except a speaking human can actively correct error if they think you don't correctly understand what they're communicating). Saying that his oral teaching should be spread to others suggests that he thought his oral teaching would be generally protected by Holy Spirit as it spread, similar to how his written word would also be generally protected. The Word of God is also not only what St. Paul (a non-Apostle) wrote (or had written for him) but also what he spoke passed on to others who would themselves pass that on to others and so on.
Jesus told people to follow the laws of the Pharisees since they had power to discover laws being on the "Seat of Moses" (scripture, even books not considered infalliable, doesn't really explained where the system of giving Pharisees this authority came from, so that appears to be an orally spread tradition). Jesus knew the Pharisees would use the Oral Torah (which wasn't allowed to be written down in Jesus' time), when making these laws. Why did God preserve the Oral Torah enough to where Jesus was ok with the Pharisees using it to make laws but Protestants say that didn't happen with Christians and that much of the oral tradition (many times relatively quickly written by early Christians in their letters and books, ie the writings of the Church Fathers [some of whom were Apostolic Fathers ie Christians that existed at the time of Apostles and often had contact with them]) of the Christian Orthodox and R. Catholics can't be used?
Not much if any New Testament at the time of early Christians and in Acts 15 these early Christians "apparently" (from a strictly fundamentalist view) went against Old Testament by saying Gentiles who wanted to follow the God of Jews didn't have to circumcise, avoid pork, etc. If Apostles and other early Christians with authority were expecting Christians to >only< use written scriptures they would've given us a canon of the Bible instead of Christians waiting centuries to get a canon. Maybe the Apostles would've also wrote more.
The Bible was canonized centuries before Luther
If you study the Council of Rome in 382AD, (the first time at least some Christians (ie R. Catholic Church) "*officially*" chose a canon for the Bible), you'll find the books the Holy Spirit guided humans to chose then are the 66 Protestants generally accept as well as 7 books they usually don't accept. Christian Orthodox denominations accepted these 73 books but would often add at least a few more books. It's true that those 73 books probably weren't considered official dogma until Council of Trent (probably because there hadn't been many challenges to this canon until then) but those were the books used by non-Protestant Christians from roughly 382AD to this day. I would like people to look up online the Book of Wisdom (generally not accepted by Protestants) verses 2:12-20.
The Ethiopian Bible has 88 books written in Hebrew and yet Jesus and his disciples would have been speaking in Aramaic at the time of the Roman occupation and that would have been translated into the Greek which was later translated into Latin and Paul warned that other books were being brought into the church that weren't the doctrine that he was teaching so it's really hard to say which books should be included and which should be omitted. I think both the Catholics and the Protestants had to face that dilemma when deciding which one's to include. It's also interesting to note that the Eastern Catholic church that started in Constantinople isn't 100% in agreement with the Western Roman Catholic Church which came into power after the Muslims overtook the land's that the original church was in.
@@jerskittyIt is not hard to know. The apostle Paul made it clear that if the apostles themselves didn't teach it, don't even listen to an angel with a contradictory message. That's why we must stick with scripture alone.
According to Wikipedia there are now between 20 to 30 thousand reformed Christian sects. It took 11 years from Luther for the first split with the Swiss. The boy done good. The catholic church is still the one , true , holy and Apostolic church to this day. Founded by Christ at Pentecost.
I'll make it short: Luther did what he did because he was a heretic. When he attempted to debate the representatives of the Church as to why he was doing what he was doing, he was forced to admit that the only reason that he was doing it was "because it is my will, and my will is sufficient." He was motivated by pride.
The main problem with the idea of scripture only is clearly shown in the very last sentence of the Gospel of Saint John. Saint John clearly stated that if the apostles wrote down everything which Jesus talked about, the world would not be big enough to hold all those books. There are many Catholic beliefs and practices which, while not clearly and plainly stated in the Bible, are supported by the Bible. While I agree that there were problems in the Church which needed to be dealt with, the problems do not negate the major theological teachings of the Church.
So in conclusion they Wrote down the most important To things. Which means the non written stuffs aren't important enough to, at this day and age argue about!
But Catholicism seems to focus solely on
@paulwoida8249. You have read into John.21:25 and used it as the basis to validate church tradition. Protestants will continue to believe that the scripture alone is sufficient for faith and practice.
@hdsamte The Church learns more about what it knows just like human beings do it's both human and divine and grows in understanding just as Christ grew see St Luke on the finding in the temple when Jesus went home with His Parents
What a con-job lie, Paul. Your Church is beyond loaded with wild assertions that train-wreck with the bible...praying to Mary, worshipping relics, Joseph and Mary not having sexual relations, Mary didn't die, the pope is infallible, the Catholic Church is the only true church even though it is loaded with "termites" that abuse children for sex, sided with Hitler, don't prosecute child-sex priests but instead provide cover for them...
@@vincentswift7 Clear as mud, circular theology...Satan's language.
There are so many people who agree or disagree on what books to be included or excluded from the bible. However they forget the whilst men of God wrote the bible, they were guided by the Holy Spirit . Refer 2 Peter 1: 20-21. I believe that the same guidance is accorded to the leaders of the church who finally decided as to the number of books to be included in the bible. This was done at the council of Hippo in 393 AD and later confirmed in 397AD.
I agree to this,, and ofcourse, they won"t recognized the people (Early Church Fathers) behind the bible because it was the Catholic church assembled it and call it bible.
A true account of history, is that it was actually decided way before the times you stated! Might have been confirmed at these councils, maybe, but was already well established way before that!
Now please tell, when did the Catholics decided to add the other books? Was that before 393 or was it around AD1545?? Just asking for a friend....
@@DavidTaufa-n6b In my opinion guided doesn’t mean they did , look at what they did since 20 … , it,s all coming out now . Will they ask forgiveness , repent , make amends for their omissions . Was the right spirit guiding them , or was it the deceiver , you know for the greater good , you inject …. If you know fill out the rest .
Taking words, sentences, paragraphs, chapters, and books from the Holy Scriptures always was, was, and still is an evil thing to do. We do not grow where we censor and stifle thought.
There were many incorrect verbal and written comments throughout the presentation. These should be addressed for continuity. Albeit, the presentation was very informative. Hopefully and prayerfully it should open some blind eyes of those following false doctrines.
thank you very much for informing
This only confirms that the bible and all all so-called religious manuscripts are man-made containing myths and legends created from men's fertile imagination.
The Septuagint was translated from Hebrew into Greek by 70 HEBREW scholars, thus the name Septuagint. Luther chose the latter skewed Masoretic text because it fit his narrative. The Masoretic text skewed away from Jesus as the Messiah.
Can I see proven documentation of that?
@ Check out Gary Michuta and his research on Luther, the masoretic text, and the Septuagint as well as any other question you have.
also check out the difference in Isaiah 7:14 between Masoretic and Septuagint
He had no authority to remove the Books from the Bible. Doesn't removing the Books seem shady and sinister?
It was during canonization process that the other non spiritual books were not accepted to meet the standard.
@@jostindais6294 who,s standard ?
see my long comment above explaining exactly why the 7 books were not canonized by the Jews - in brief - deliberately left out because so many Jews were converted to Jesus through them.
@@jacqueboyce3176 I see I could have a good conversation with you but , as you know we are restrained in what we can,t or can say . I will check out what you said , and yes we do have to research further then just going by what ( leadership ) is saying . After all HE did say search for the truth .
Martin ended in deception, rejecting his early work and trust only on Hebrew writings. Rejected early Christian writings that didn't fit his narrative. In the end lost his faith in the jews.
If Luther could take books out, he didn't like, then why can't any Protestant make up his own canon? Luther actually became the Protestant version of a Pope by assuming he had authority to change the standard canon.
Exactly
What a bunch of Catholic crap, Randy!!! Luther was not in any way a Protestant "Pope", he exposed all the heresies of the Catholic Church...the truth hurts huh, Randy.
Only that no pope ever claimed such powers. Luther made himself super pope of his group.
With the exception that there hasn't been a long line of people, acting as a "Protestant Pope" carrying on in Luther's place, as time passed on.
If Luther were responsible for removing those books, then I believe He made a "course correction" (for lack of a better term) to rid the church of distracting teaching, and keep her on track, (19:40)
Just my opinion...
@@strider4108 Actually, there is a long line of people acting as Protestant super pope. Only, they each found new groups every time and act like it is their job to reboot Christianity again and again and again.
Also what a great logic: "If Luther were responsible... then I believe He (!capitals!) made a course correction" - so if Luther did it - which you still doubt - he would be right. Because it's the infallible Luther after all.
No, you cannot claim to base yourself on the Bible and then chuck out several Biblical books as "distracting". The whole concept of "distractions" is absurd.
Luther's posting on the door was written in Latin ( a language the common people did not speak ). It requested the other college teacher's for a meeting, to discuss what he wrote down ). This was a common practice of that time period (so request meetings).
One of the students saw it , took it down and re-wrote it in the common German language
What is written is written nothing changes yesterday today forever Jesus is the same all may change Jesus never Glory to his name 🙏🙏
Was His name really JESUS. Did Mary Christ call her son Jesus Christ or was He called YESHUA Ben Yosef
@@jeffharper5497does it matter if you have faith?
@@lisacaldwell3460 the question is faith in what
Luther also removed James in the NT and other verses to fit his faith alone which James calls dead😮
@@frankbarungi hmmmm!!!!! This is food for thought. Now I'm wondering if there is a gospel or book of James, like that of Thomas or Enoch.
He didn't remove James, but he favored doing do.
Spoken like a true brainwashed Catholic.
@michaelhoerig5920 thanks for the clarification
@@bert-cq3ij Most people know TRUTH when they encounter. Sorry you don't.
Those who believe in Jesus must believe that Bible is the living word of God in which not a single word can be added or deleted 😮😮😮
I, Dominic Fernandes will live as a CATHOLICISM HANDED TO ME BY BY MY PARENTS. AND HONORING THE MOTHER OF JESUS AND THE SAINTS ELECTED BY THE WISDOM FROM THE HOLY SPIRIT.
The Bible is the inspired word of God
1 Timothy 2:5 “For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;”
Luke 1:46-47 And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord, 47 And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Savior
Romans 3:10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
1 Corinthians 10:4 “And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.”
1 Samuel 2:2 “There is none holy as the LORD: for there is none beside thee: neither is there any rock like our God.
Mark 7:7. “Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.”
2 Timothy 2:15 “Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.”
John 14:6 “Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.”
1 Timothy 4:3 “Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.”
2 Timothy 3:15 “And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.”
Matthew 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.
1 Timothy 4:1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; 2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; 3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.
1Ti 3:2 - A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;
Tit 1:7 - For a bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God;
Hosea 6:6 “For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.”
Rev 3:16 - So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.
Better to be a born again Christian and find a good home Bible study group.
When you want the truth of an answer, go directly to the source....
In fact, the authorship of these “removed” texts could not be verified. LONG before Luther (about 250A.D.), the 27 New Testament books as we have them today were in fact listed together long before the church councils ever gathered. We find references to this in the imaginative and allegorical commentaries of the 3rd-century Christian philosopher, Origen of Alexandria.1 Writing about 250 A.D.
The big question: is there ANYTHING in the apocryphal books that are necessary for our salvation, and are not found in the canon?.
These books were officially promulgated and are therefore Scripture on a par with the other Scriptures. Case closed. This was never a matter for debate until Luther decided he was a greater authority than the Holy Spirit. Authorship of those seven books can be verified as surely as can the other books of the Bible. Luther's 'accepted' books are subject to the same scrutiny as the seven books in question. How can one man have the authority to add or remove books? Absurd! Ridiculous!
@@michaelhoerig5920someone had to decide which “books” to collect in the first place, after gathering the collected writings into one tome. Ever hear of the “Adventures of Paul and Thecla”? But one example of the early church father’s attempt to weed out false writings. I would ask again, is there one single thing written in these books that is necessary for our salvation, and is not found in cannon? No. God Bless.
@@MarkSmith-zs3or I am hardly qualified to tell anybody what is necessary for their salvation! The Scriptures were collected by the CHURCH, their authenticity verified by the CHURCH, they were voted on by the CHURCH in ecumencial councils, and officially promulgated BY THE CHURCH. Every doctinal matter was handled in this manner including determining the canon of Scripture, not by one man, but by the college of bishops/cardinals in consultation with biblical and doctrinal experts/theologians. There is nothing false in those seven books and to dismiss them as unnecessary for salvation on that basis would be as reckless as Martin Luther's actions. We must accept the promise that the Holy Spirit works through the Church and prevents it from erring in doctrinal matters. If you want to get down to it, the Bible is NOT necessary for our salvation! What is necessary is baptism, faith, and good works demonstrating that that faith is real. Answers are to be found in the Bible, but the Bible itself is not necessary. The one 'pillar of truth' is the CHURCH! That's what the Bible tells us!
As a churchgoing man, I appreciate your zealousness for the word. However, I would contend that as a "kingdom of priests" tasked with the great comission, you and every believer is in fact emminently qualified (assuming that the individual has read the word of God - recent polls show that in the United States that number has fallen to about 40% of professing Christians). Now dont misunderstand what I am saying - we are not qualified to judge who meets the criteria; that belongs to our Lord and Savior, but we are specifically tasked with sharing the criteria nrcessary for eternal life. As an evangelist, it would be emminently difficult to articulate the need for salvation to a non-believer if one did not in fact understand the criteria (scripture/word of God). This being said, I often pose the question to my Church bretheren in Sunday school: "would you trust a lawyer who recommends signing a contract/committment that the lawyer did not read or understand?" I would hope not. God bless my friend.
If Luther could take out Books because they were written in Greek and not originated in Hebrew, why is the book of Jude included in the Bible. There is no historical reference by the Hebrew text for this book. This book is plagiarized from an old Greek fictional story. Why would God want a human body preserved?
The book of Jude is absolutely inspired of God and not a work of fiction. If you were to study the Bible, you would know that Jesus Himself was resurrected in his human body form and will continue to bear those scars throughout eternity. The Bible tells us in 1 Thess. 4 among other places that the righteous dead will be resurrected in new, glorified bodies at His second coming and those who remain alive at that time will be caught up in the air and ascend to heaven with them along with Jesus and all the angelic host. Jesus is the resurrection and the life and so only He alone, the archangel which means His position is above the angels, could contend with Satan regarding the body of Moses. Read also about the creation of man in Gen. 2:7 that the Lord God formed man out of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; AND MAN BECAME A LIVING SOUL. Thus, a soul is what a living person is called and it's not some ethereal thing like so many falsely believe.
Luther want everyone to read bible and self interprete 😮😮
Now what is the fruit of self interprete more than 40 thousand christian sect arise? 😮😮😮
And now all they are under clutches of Satan. Confirmed to go to eternal hell.
When it was asked of God, the Christ Jesus, what were the "Greatest Commandments" He Answered thus :
"Love the Lord, your God, with all of your heart and all of your soul and with all of your mind.And the second is like it, Love your Neighbor as yourself.
All of the law and the prophets hang on these two commandments.!! Do we need more than this.?
Did the early Hebrews have the knowledge of what would be written later after their earthly lives had ended.? How much knowledge does one need, to be a believer and follower of The Triune God.?
The way to know how God wants us to obey and serve is to read scripture and grown in faith and knowledge to help younger believers, and our brothers and sisters
@@lorobogers4198Amen
Knowing the character of God and all the spiritual blessings that we have through Jesus is pretty important for living up to the law of love. Otherwise, everyone would have their own idea of what love looks like. For instance, some people think that it is loving to not point out sin in another person's life, but the Bible says that is not love. If we love, we would care about the destination of their soul and we would speak the truth, even if they might not like it. The entire Bible reveals God to us. It is all essential.
This is interesting information (if correct) because it shows the pattern of disintergration of the Christian faith in the western world.
Luther obviously wasn't interested in Truth, he seems to have been a man of ego.
In the Eastern Church, the path of the Christian faith had held a steady course, without all the novelties introduced by the Roman church, which fell from Grace in 1054, when the great schism between the Western and Eastern Churches occurred.
Luther would have been well aware of this point, being an Augustinian monk, and the path that he should have alighted on, was to return to the church that was teaching the True and Faithful doctrine of Christ [and I must say here, even though it may appear to many Protestants, that the Eastern Orthodox Church is the same as the Roman church, it is definitely not to which I can attest, having been a Roman Catholic, whom God in His great mercy, led to Orthodoxy] but, he didn't.
This man fell into delusion of his own thoughts, which is not uncommon, and appears to be a regular occurrence in the western concept of the Christian faith.
Luther didn't like some of the books in the Bible, (possibly because they refuted his teachings) so out they go. How convenient. I think the Apostles referred to this as blasphemy, as it is expressly stated in various writings, that woe to anyone who changes one tittle or iota of the Written Word, which has always been seen as being directed by God.
Many in the West do not understand that, the Old Testament was purely about the coming of Christ, so to remove books, gives a distorted understanding of it's true meaning, and a lack of True knowledge.
I am so grateful to God, that He showed me, an unworthy sinner, His Church, and the path of salvation, should I wish to continue with my free will. Many times I stumble, and fall off, but He is always there to help me get back on the path, and continue my struggle.
It saddens me that the west has taken the path it has, because the Christian faith is so far removed from the Truth, and prevents many genuine people from finding Christ in all His Glory.
God bless you all.
It is important to remember that the Tanahk and the Bible were written by different authors, at different times, for different audiences. The writings were originally kept and copied onto scrolls. The scrolls were kept in every synagogue and later church. There wasn't a "book" or "books." No absolute canon and no codex.
The contents Tanakh as a whole were not fully cannonized until roughly 200 AD. The Septuagint was collected, translated and finalized around 100 BC. For 300 years the Greek translation of the most prepredominent Inspired Jewish writtings existed while there was some fluidity over what the final contents of the "Jewish Bible."
Because the seven writings were were often available for reading in synagogue and and church, both Jews and early Christians were familiar with them to varying degrees.
After the destruction of the Jerusalem temple in 40 AD and the diaspora, formalization of written Jewish thought and what consitiuted "revealed Truth" became a much more urgent enterprise. Three hundred years after the Septuagint was completed, the Jewish bible was finalized and Tobit, Judith, Baruch, Ecclesiasticus, Wisdom, First and Second Maccabees didn't make the cut.
All the ancient Christian churches retained the writings. Then a little more than 1,500 years later... well you can push the "go" button above and find out what happened next!
They were written by many men, but they had one author. That author is what makes them canon, for that author is God. Thus the canon is the nature of the books, not a decision of men. Those seven were never regarded by the Jews as Scripture. Jerome, who knew Hebrew & had consulted the Jews before making his translation, knew they were not canonical but was told by his superiors to include them.
Thank you for this. Very interesting.
I think the questions should include 'What is the negative impact of Luther's doctrine on Christianity overall. Because of these Luther's doctrine, denominations have grown into many uncontrollably producing many different theologies and might conflict one another. What can be thought about this for Luther's intention to purify the Church? Has Church been purified now?
Hopefully..believers now will not worship or pray to humans..even God Fearing and God anointed ones...like Mary, or other 'saints' ...
We should now Pray as Jesus taught us ..Pray to God the Father.
Believe that Christ suffered on the Cross and resurrection from the dead, living a Perfect, sinless life, in this flesh, and God the Father put the sins of the world upon Him, who paid for our sins.
Hopefully now believers read their Bibles and Seek after their God..not as just a religion, but as a Relationship with their Creator!
@@anayv11 Actually, my comment is about the negative impact of Luther's doctrine. Why have you just commented this way. I don't think there is a connection of my comment wit yours. Are you just stupid you don't understand what I mean, or is it only typical protestant to be blinded.
Ok, you pray like Jesus teaches you to, but tell me how Jesus teaches you to worship God. Does He teach you to sing. How Jesus teaches you to love God. Doesn't He teach you to love God with all your mind? How do you implement this?
Jesus instituted one church not many churches.
The first Christian practices are found in the Books of Acts. If we compare the teachings found in the Roman Catholic, it is contradicting to the teachings by the Apostles. Luther's teachings is similar to the Books of Acts.
Watch out for One World Religion that Pope Francis is one of the founder. Here he claims that all religions are the same. Is that correct?
You will find it very helpful to read ESV ~ from older manuscripts than King James Version & in language we understand this day & age ~ recommend RC Sproul's ESV Study Bible for detailed explanations & excellent commentary ~ also any of RC Sproul's books, espec "The Holiness of God" ~ I've read 74 of his books & have grown to know that the more I learn, the more there is still ahead to learn! Knowing God is a life long pursuit ~ I'm almost 80 & on fire to learn more!!!
Where in the Bible does it say paying indulgent can bail you out of a place the Catholic church calls purgatory. The Bible says once you die theirs no second chance, it's a one way trip, heaven or hell!
I do not agree with this assessment of Martin Luther as he was not supportive of Hebrew text, his bios of Augustinian teaching has blinded his understanding of Biblical prophecy. Those of books quoted by the Ante-Nicene Fathers by direct connection to the Apostles have been targeted by Luther because of his bios to the teachings of Augustine that was riddled with Gnostic beliefs. This is one of the reasons many Christians can not justify accepted doctrines that has no historical teachings in the first 300 years of the Church.
Gentiles were given a warning by the Apostle Paul in changing the format of understanding of Scripture from a Hebrew perspective to a pagan Gnostic setting that was much more pleasing to Gentile beliefs.
Galatians 1:8-9 ESV
[8] But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. [9] As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed.
Romans 11:17-18 ESV
[17] But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, although a wild olive shoot, were grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing root of the olive tree, [18] do not be arrogant toward the branches. If you are, remember it is not you who support the root, but the root that supports you.
Gentile Christian theologians have become arrogant to bend Scripture to suit themselves and God’s judgment will fall on the house of first and then on the wicked.
1 Peter 4:17-18 ESV
[17] For it is time for judgment to begin at the household of God; and if it begins with us, what will be the outcome for those who do not obey the gospel of God? [18] And "If the righteous is scarcely saved, what will become of the ungodly and the sinner?"
A few loud "theologians" do not represent all when it comes to false doctrines. As a "Gentile" (your word, not mine) theologian/pastor/bible college instructor, such a statement is fool-hardy...lumping all into the FEW.
@ unfortunately history does not lie, the infection of the antichrist spirit that John spoke of has produced bad fruit, Matt 13, John 15 and Romans 11. Jesus warned that only a remnant will stand with a pure heart, it is only those who are true to the commandments of Christ that will enter the kingdom of God.
@@russelljones2305 I'm either too old or you are talking in "circular theology" like watching a fly in flight. In plain English, how was Luther "blinded" in biblical prophecy? I see no connection.
Here I am, possessing 3 earned theological degrees, and I can't gain insight into what you are saying. I know and fully understand the scriptures listed, even in Koine Greek, but don't understand your reasonings for their use. As Paul taught, and I learned in my studies for the ministry, I forsake "big-words" so that I can communicate to the common person by the power of the Holy Spirit. So, in plain English, what are you talking about? I'm listening, you have my ear.
@@bert-cq3ij unfortunately your theological degrees meaning nothing, unless you understand historical context and that the original language of Scripture is Hebrew not Greek. Gentiles in Church history have replaced Christianity into a Gentile religion. Having read the Early Church writings, it is evident that the arrogance of the Gentiles that Paul spoke of in Romans 11 has come true and fulfilled what Jesus said would happen before his second coming.
Jesus said that the weeds and tares in the Church will be removed first and that those who are faithful to his words will enter the kingdom of God. The biggest problem with Theological colleges is that they are built on the opinions of men who have a political agenda to maintain their status quo’s and a rejection of a historical Christian faith.
I have dim view of theologians who are wolves that preach another Gospel and think they are progressive and making Christianity into a Socialist power struggle. I have interest only in what is credited as Historical Christianity, anything else is heretical as Paul said Galatians 1:6-9 ESV
[6] I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel- [7] not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. [8] But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. [9] As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed.
@ just adding about Luther and this would include Calvin is that they have no understanding to Biblical prophecy, mainly because of their eschatological aligning with Augustine. Augustine had no right to add or take away from any quotation of Scripture. All New Testament quotes are referenced in Old Testament prophets, for Augustine to use external pagan interpretations is heretical.
Augustine’s meddling in altering the prophetic language has come from his Gnostic background and the Early Church writings confirm that what Augustine was teaching came from the Gnostics. There were only two eschatological views taught in the early years of the Church, Historic Millennialism (roots in Hebrew prophecy) and the others were deniers of the First resurrection. Augustine’s beliefs are linked to the Gnostics and the Sadducees that Paul spoke of in 2 Timothy 2:18; 2 Thessalonians 2:1-4 and 1 Corinthians 15. All these are traceable throughout the Ante-Nicene Father’s writings.
Throughout Church history and secular history A-Millennialism has been an antisemitic ideology that has done much harm to the body of Christ.
He said that everyone should be able to read the bible and decide for themselves, BUT he removed books so that they could not. He could have left notes as to why he believed it was distorted or not by spiritual divination.
There's plenty of explanation out there. Look it up.
I enjoyed this knowledge...Thanks..I studied it years ago...a refresher corse is very much appreciated...
What do you mean the 7 books he took out were against his teachings ? He was a Catholic priest. Which means those were his teachings . He remained a priest and as far as anyone knows never denounced the office of the pope . The damage this one man did . His decadent lifestyle and self loathing certainly allowed him to justify his bad behavior. Because of him and others there are now 30,000 + denominations of Christianity. It would have been more beneficial to repair the Catholic Church . Jesus said to Peter " upon this rock i will build my church " not churches . The early church fathers studied and argued to interpret ( many even died ) the books of the Bible over hundreds of years . Yet this one man decided he alone had the answers based on his own guilt and confusion . The arrogance is stunning . Now look at us .
The LORD GOD ALMIGHTY IS THE ROCK, not Peter.
@@lesliegillmar5235That’s not what Jesus said, in scripture. Don’t get mad at the accurate messenger. Who is correctly quoting the gospel to you.
I think, it is important to know, that Jesus never mentioned the name Yahweh or Elohim(s) as the name of God. He called God as the Father, The Love, The Mercy, The Supreme Truth, whom we can reach if we follow what he was teaching. This is the essence of Christianity and all the books in Old Testament are not mentioning this revelation.
It das not matter for us how many books are included in Old Testament or Apocryphal, we can read them if it helps us to understand better some topics like the history of the life on Earth or for any comparative study. Also the jealous and cruel God mentioned there is definitely not the God, Jesus was talking about. All the differences between the christian churches are actually of secondary interest in this light.
Peter supposed to be the leader of the Christian community in Rome, but not a leader of an institution called church, with all its rules and hierarchy, and also not a leader of all Christians in the whole world.
Talk to Coptic Christians in Egypt or to the Syrian Christians, who are the oldest christian communities. They were oppressed by Roman Church as soon as the Christianity of roman type became an official religion in Roman Empire. Is it what Jesus would like to happen (it is his Greek name, the true name was Yoshua) ? Christianity in the beginning was a way of living, which supposed to purify our senses, our emotions, mind and instincts, refine us and elevate our consciousness from the still animalistic and egoistic state to more cholistic awarness of reality and to higher knowledge.
Jesus never said, we have only to worship him to reach the Father, but rather to believe in what he teaches, follow his example and practice the teachings in daily life. What it means to reach the Father in the light of his words, is to find Him in us and around us in the creation, to unite us with Him and as the final stage to become one with Him . This is the true purpose of our life on the Earth , to manifest gradually the Divine Will, Light, Love, Wisdom, Harmony, Beauty etc on the Earth and in human race and to establish the Paradise on the Earth and not somewhere in the 7th heaven.
I do not believe Jesus ever intended a new religion be created, but sought to bring the Torah back to be followed and to denounce the corruption in the temple.
Any Sane & logical thinking man, specially from non Christian background would agree that if its not included in the bible it isn't so much important for Christianity to exist.Look at the subject matter removing all pre-existing ideas and youll know where Luther came from, knowing how the RCC is in history.So Christianity= Sourced from the Bible.
Another religion highly based from oral traditions is Islam and we all dispise that right?
❤Paul in his epistle to the Galations 1:6-9 says that anyone who teaches a different gospel than that he teaches, let him be accursed.
The Roman Catholics preach a different gospel.
The Roman Catholic preach the right gospel and the Protestants preach the gospel they want according to their interests. Removing the seven books is one such example
Moreover, Jesus was also familiar with these writings and were still considered essential during His and the Apostle's time. Paul knew this also.
@frgasparraja5835 the catholics teach nothing of the word. they worship their popes bow to them n kiss their feet they pray to Mary and use the rosery . need I say more forvu to understand that the catholic church is not to b practiced. Yr going against His word. B careful who u trust.
u cannot buy yrself into heaven.
@@KarenKlein-k9t no one says so why are you troubling yourself
It is a good informative video, but it is too long because you repeated some of the points too many times. Thanks.
It's an AI voice and AI script.
Change even one word and you can never be forgiven, that is scripture
For the book of Revelation
that is not true. the only sin that is unforgiveable is the one for which no forgiveness is requested. Specifically, it is denying the urging of the Holy Spirit to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ. It is also called "blasphemy against the Holy Spirit". All other sins and forms of blasphemy are forgivable as He Himself says.
Please move away from popular "theology" - that verse is strictly for the Book of Revelation.
words cannot be added or subtracted from scripture now that the canon has been closed
Which canon? Catholic, Greek Orthodox, Syriac, Coptic, Ethiopian Orthodox?@@PatriciaSBlackburn-y1s
It definitely says if any one tampers with the knowledge in the Bible they will be dealt with, BY THE PLAGUES WRITTEN IN THIS BOOK and also Bless is he who reads and hears the Book of the Revelations of JESUS CHRIST. WHY IS REVELATIONS MENTION AND NOT THE WHOLE TITLE BY MOST? QUESTION TO EVERYONE WHO NEEDED TO BE FOLLOWED TO ENSLAVE MANY. WHAT BOOK DID THEY USE, DOCTRINE. JUST SAYING.
The book of Revelation is shortened to Revelation just as the Letter of Peter or the Letters of Paul are referred to simply a Corinthians or some other book. But in Church the full title is always read out.
Gospels most important, they are what christ did and said during his ministry.
Absolutely
Where do the Epistles fit in your theology? It is there one sees how one "ought to behave in the House of God". Jesus said "I will build My church" but it is in Acts we see the actual building of it and in the Church Epistles how it it all supposed to work. The so called Pastoral Epistles (Timothy, Titus and Philemon) are directed toward those who would be leaders.
They are all equally important. If we just had the gospels we'd be lost. God gave us His Word (singular, not plural). The whole Word of God is equal in importance and authority.
@jgrahamiii7749 what good are epistles w/out grace given by christ
No Catholicis were ever told no to read the bible
Talk to some ex priests and teachers of Catholicism and you will hear a different story. They were prohibited from teaching from the Bible. Hence the reason they are no longer priests and teachers. They saw the hypocrisy.
I grew up in the catholic school and church..No priest or nun e er told us to read the Bible. I have read the Bible... now I'm not catholic anymore. I'm saved by the blood of CHRIST
Martin Luther critiqued the Canon but did not change it
Lies ,Luther never removed any books from the bible,stop spreading propaganda.
Miranda here.
Technically, the seven apocryphal books in the Catholic Old Testament were not removed by Martin Luther … but… at his urging, they were separated from the Old Testament canon and placed into an un- numbered appendix.
Eventually, the apocrypha were excluded from today’s Protestant bible altogether. This accounts for the different number of books in the Catholic (73), and Protestant (66 ) bibles.
Martin Luther also wanted to do this with four New Testament books but was opposed in this , mainly by his friend Melanchthon. Thus both the Catholic and Protestant canon has the same number of books (27).
YES HE DID. Even top-notch Lutheran theologians agree to this. He also added words to the Bible. He also eliminated practices which came to us from early Judaism like "praying for the dead" which has great value. You're following the teachings of "man" which is in error.
Please send more info on this topic
He did and he also did it to several books of the New Testament. Only, even Lutherans refused to follow him in the latter case.
If Luther never removed any books from the Bible but 100% he removed his self from the Church of Christ.. True or False?😂
Luther did not remove the deuterocanonical books. The books were not part of the Canon until the Council of Trent decided to include them in the Canon ~ and that was after Luther.
He got them out just to validate his umbilical theology
Luther had it right about how the Catholic Church prostituted Christianity. I no longer associate myself with the idolatry and demonic rituals of Catholicism! I was raised in the Catholic Church, served as an altarboy for 3yrs. Fast forward a generation, I took a good look at the history and practices of the Catholic Church and decided to disassociate myself from Catholicism before it's too late. I believe we're accountable for our choices and decisions in life.🙏📖🦅 Shalom 🕊️
@@TonyB-rv9qd Tell me if you have just become an atheist or just converted to protestant.
Luther had very little right. That's why he was excommunicated and labeled a heretic. Removing books from the BIble is outrageous! Done because these seven books 'disagreed' with Luther's personal notion of Christianity, hence the highly personal nature of Lutheranism. As far as looking more Jewish--have you been to a synagogue? The Mass is clearly an organic development based on Jewish worship and Catholic theology and outgrowth of Jewish. Go to a Lutheran church--it looks and sounds NOTHING like Jewish worship. I'm sorry you feel alienated from the true faith. I'll pray for you.
@@TonyB-rv9qd I don't believe you were raised Catholic and I don't believe you were ever an altar boy. I *_was._*
The Catholic Church has always been centered on Jesus Christ, at least until the Modernists changed that focus at Vatican II and have endeavored to lead it astray ever since.
I challenge you to describe the "demonic practices" you mentioned with tge name(s) of the parish(es), the name(s) of the priest(s) and the year(s) in which these things took place.
If you can call the entire Catholic Church "demon worshippers", which you most certainly did, *_I can call you a liar._*
You decided to "disassociate from the Catholic Church" because you NEVER knew the Catholic Church. If you really knew the Catholic Church you would have never left the Catholic Church. The fact that you served as an altarboy does not prove anything. Martin Luther was a Catholic priest and he also "disassociated" from the Catholic Church. And the result of such disassociation lead to to confusion, error and lack of unity.
As for "prostitute Christianity", look at what happens today with a multitude and myriads of so called "churches", in which each one of them are preaching a different gospel. And even if there is no unity among them, all of them claim to follow only the bible. This is what means to "prostitute Christianity".
And as for idolatry, what do you have to say about confusing blessing with financial prosperity? This is exactly what neoprotestants teach today through long speeches on prosperity theologies within their so-called churches. For them the more money one makes, the more blessed they will become. This is pure idolatry.
It took me less than one year to leave the Catholic church. I have no regret
He also wanted to get rid of the book of James and Revaluations
Luther sure did want to delete more books. But his own council prevented him from doing so.
Sir, Luther is not the person who remove the 7 books. Luther, as a theologian and Spirit full, he refused all sorts of untruthful teachings.
It was the other way around. It was the Catholic Church who insisted on retaining those deuterocanonical books, but they never encouraged the catholics to personally read the bible everyday, instead rely on the sermons of their priests. Faith comes from hearing and hearing by the word of God. Read the bible everyday. Read it out loud, that's how you meditate on the Word.
? Something contradicting doesn't mean he can remove it as he pleases. Which is taking precedence matters.... 😊
I am surprised that Luther included the Old Testament in his Bible since Jesus disavowed Yahweh and was led by His Father who was loving and more in line with Greek concepts than many of the demands of Yahweh.
Where the Catholic Church went astray from the original church, the Luther and Calvinists just went astray 2.0. Now we have thousands of denominations with thousands of different interpretations which has led to mass heresy and false churches. The original Orthodox Church still exists!
So, Martin Luther determined what modern Protestants believe to be true.
He has no right to judge Gods words to be wrong
Yes, it was based on the Hebrew Canon; however, the Hebrew Canon is debated to have not been solidified until just before Jesus' time or shortly after. Some argue that the Hebrew Canon was changed after Jesus and Apostles' message about Him was gaining too much popularity; thus, in order to refute this new Christian faith, the leaders within the Jewish faith tradition adjusted the Canon to point out the error of Christianity as one means to stop losing followers to those that were converting to the Christian faith. Regardless, Jesus and the Apostles would have been familiar with these texts regardless of the authors and which language these books used. They were historical and practical, and these book would have likely been in many synagogues where the Rabbis taught and the community learned about God, His prophets, the Messiah, as well as the traditions of the people. If the early Christians and disciples of the church never refuted them, it makes one wonder why would an attempt to remove them 1500 years later make sense outside of someone arguing their own theology or authority.
@ useless. What’s your argument? What story are you trying to say? No way the books are wrong and no way he is right to remove. For your facilitation you argue in vain. You are supposed to repent for accepting Luther and his actions
Martin is an insult to the author of the holy bible...
@@Cholan-s7z He does if they clearly malign what is established through the teachings of the Christ and His Apostles...read Galatians: "Let anyone who presents a different gospel than the one you received from us be cursed" (Apostle Paul). That word "cursed" from the original Koine Greek means "to the lowest part of hell".
One could also ask why the Roman Catholic tradition removed the Book of Enoch and to my knowledge never incorporated the Book of Jubilees. Both are referred to in Scripture, the Book of Enoch being referenced in Jude and the Book of Jubilees in 2Samuel.. Also, I find it ironic that two of the premiere "Church Fathers" being Paul and Timothy either are not mentioned or are under increasing criticism today.
One might note that the RC church has retained only 7 of the 95 theses that Luther challenged, so much for their eternal truth
Goodness maybe know history. This is false. The 7 were not part of the cannon.
But it was part of God
No mention that the books were excluded because they had no source connection to the Hebrew scriptures, though some had some minor historical value. Just because a book is inspiring does not mean that it’s scripture; I have shelves full of inspiring books, with many being fiction. Also Luther’s belief in sola fide is not based on his belief, but in the teaching of Christ and the apostles themselves.
Excellent work. Wish you could give something more on the history of the canonisation of Scriptures
Now there are thousands of Christian groups that all claim salvation through membership. Did Martin Luther anticipate this?
All believers should have and read the Appocrypha. Focus on the traditional scriptureal books but do not exclude the others.
Metropolitan Bishop Athanasius, 350 AD, and the Church at that time period, believed the exact same way about those 7 books that Luther believed. That the Apocrypha was good to read, yet not the Word of God, they state that there are only 66 books they considered the Word of God. Dr. Martin Luther, (Doctor of Theology of the Augustinian Order), includes the Apocrypha books in his “Die Bibel” translation, and they are included in the 1611 version of the KJV. No doctrine should be based on them!
This video repeats alot of it's content throughout the video. Seems like it's only to make the video longer.
I for one definitely know that the Bible was not presented in its entirety. For people to be lied to for 2000 years they had to have a book of Authority. But one thing even though the most High has different names ,I believe YAWHEY AND YESHUA WAS REPLACED BY GOD AND JESUS. ????
Same names but in Hebrew. No J in Hebrew or Latin so they used Y pronounced Yeh. or yar The anglicization of the Latin is J Jesus is actually Joshua but being translated into Latin, the empire language, it had to be pronounced Yaysus.
He did not remove any books he just didn’t add them, from speaking with some Jews that I know they have said those seven books were more historical than Devine
Luther proclaimed himself as Pope of the Protestants without a conclave nor invoking the authority of Jesus Christ. Just him.
And who gave the authority to Luther to change the Bible?
Luther got it right! The Church of Rome got it wrong! This is how we know this.
Luke 24: 44 (Yeshua speaking) "These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, (Torah - the 1st 5 books of the Bible), and in the Prophets, (Josh, Judges, 1-2 Samuel, 1-2Kings, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, The 12 (minor prophets), and in the Psalms (this is the 3rd section of the Tanakh, which is the Jewish SCRIPTURES.) The books in this section include
(Psalms, Proverbs, Job, Song of Songs(Solomon), Ruth, Lamentations, Esther, Ecclesiates, Daniel, Ezra-Nehemiah, & 1-2Chronicles.)
The Tanakh 'Ta'= Torah
'Na"= Prophets
'Kh"= Psalms
Note: every book found in the Tanakh is found in the Protestant Old Testament
The Tanakh excludes all of the books found in the Apocrypha.
Luke 24: 45 Then opened He (Yeshua) their understanding that they might understand the SCRIPTURES. Here, Yeshua (Jesus), the KING of kings, The LORD of Lords, The Son of God, The Messiah, our Saviour, GOD, closed the Old Testament Canon excluding all the apophrycal books.
It is my understanding that the Septuagint which contained these books predated the creation of the official Jewish Bible, which excluded any books not found to exist in Hebrew, thus the Protestants, who were later translating and publishing the Bible into vernaculars, made their Old Testament conform to the by then official Jewish version.
😮
Why would anybody want to believe an excommunicated monk who thought the church got it wrong for a millennium and half until he showed up
The RCC did get it wrong!
1 Peter 1:23
@@bugfeet73 Read the bible in context Peter is writing to Catholics
The 200 year period where popes broke Gods laws by sex mongering and greed and murder. Do your history… apostolic succession ENDED there for sure… that is why Spiritual Succession is real… any other conclusion is satanic inspired
lol. in my opinion, and from the historical view I have experienced, it didn't work.
Although an essential doctrine, which I believe, promote and live by, is salvation, not by faith, but through faith.
Salvation is a gift offered by God in his only begotten son Jesus Christ. It is received in faith.
Faith does not save you, God does, but faith it the extended hands that receive what God offers. That is why we say, believe in the Lord Jesus and you will be saved.
If you do not receive the gift offered, you will not have it, nor the benefits of salvation.
I have a car that I can no longer effectively maintain. I have offered it several times for free but, so far, no one has taken up the offer and I still have it. This is the way it is with salvation.
If you accept the gift, it is yours. If not, you don't have it.
I encourage you all, just take it man, it's for your everlasting benefit.
It is a shame that so many still take advantage of the poor, even in protestant churches.
Perhaps it is not the removal of books from the canon that is essential, but the evil that is in every heart.
You can always use the bible to make money, but it was not intended that way.
I thoroughly enjoyed it and got educated. didn't understand the use of the word "she" when talking about Luther. Could you change that as Luther was a he.
Thanks for letting me know, it was a typo in the script.
It's a repetition. The same thing over and over
Oh my days. After 8 minutes, the video is repeating itself
I suspect because they used German text translated to English. The word Sie can be translated as She or They or a respectful form of He/She.
@@olaniyijoshua5493 there are benefits from RUclips for the length of the video, so many are doing it.
Lately I've developed a great interest in the ethopian bible, it has all the books of the bible . I have a deep faith in the holy trinity and no MAN should be allowed to mess with the written scriptures. The full Ethopian bible makes for very interesting reading. It has everything the modern bible has in the written word and than some with deeper explanations. Also A totally different take on Adam and Eve, it even has a book on the life of Adam and Eve's life after their fall from grace. The Qeen of Sheba took the history of the jewish people home with her after she met with Solomon.. I think evetyone who has a deep faith should research this bible and get to read the bible in it''s full context and all the removed books. Our bible is deeply modified. ❤
Well, now there are over 20,000 denominations and even any good Christian does not know what is the true meaning of any text been read...because there are as many interpretations as many readers...so which one is the truth...Should I follow Luther or Calvin or Zwingly or any preacher near my house...who will teach me the truth when I know the truth is only one. Should I follow Jehovah Witness or Mormon, both of them think they got the truth, others are wrong per them. You are stuck.
As much as i appreciate this video and the effort you put into making it, (i don't mean to be a beach) but it's hard to follow through to the end because it's not condensed enough to maximize true put in minimal time, if i may say. I would respectful suggest you will condense this next video so you aren't repeating yourself, and all necessary information could be passed in lesser time, cos honestly i believe you could have summed this up in 15min. I just watched a video about The difference between Islamic ( the Sunni & Shia), and it's so informative despite being a 13 min video. Hope you understand, and sorry if this is offending in any ways. Thanks for the effort.
I don't mind if there is missing books.As far the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ is in it , is what we need for salvation.❤
The Bible came from traditions.
Traditions and inspiration from the Holy Spirit. The Bible is clear, nobody is to add or remove from the Bible. Only false prophets do such a thing.
@@paulakallidukil111 NO! The Bible came from the Mind and Will of God. The traditions came from the Greeks and the Roman Idolatries incorporated by Constantine, a Roman Pagan🤡
@@nickt6595 yes you're Correct 💯, It was a Roman Pagan named Constantine who installed the Demonic traditions.👹
This could and should have been a 5 minute video. The excessive repetitions did not prove anything other than that the authors wanted a much longer video than their ideas warranted.
The Catholic Church did a lot of damage by not letting the people to read and know the truth for themselves, since it is God’s word the Holy Spirit helps the individuals to understand, believe and obey God’s word.
The bible is not gods word, it was put together by over 20 different people with the goal to establish a religion. There are over 110 religions on this planet and christianity is just one of them and the only religion that killed millions of innocent people for not converting to their myth's.
This statements comes from ignorance.
Martin started the Lutheran Church and removed 7 books.
The Catholic church places itself as an intercessor between God and mankind, which is wrong according to God's true Word. The Catholic church thought it was alright to charge believers for access to God, and practices idolatry by glorifying and raising Mary above Jesus.
Read the King James Bible for God's true Word. You have direct access to Our Lord, just ask him to be saved and believe, and you will be saved.
@@alembess9129please explain yourself at what point was the Roman Catholic Church teachings have ever lined up with Jesus teaching
The christian mission spread across the world in more swiftly because of Martin Luther... some enemies attack his personal life and his choices. Those kind of people who will even judge Jesus and condemn. We need to thank God for Martin Luther reformation.
What is incredible is people hate the catholic church because of The Papacy, believing falsely the decisions of the church solely rely on the Pope. But admire Martin Luther who made all decisions by himself. And btw this video is not accurate.
Why did Martin Luther decide to remove the seven deuterocanonical books from the Bible?
Yeah Im pretty comfortable with my bible.
Ive learned the blessings that come with comparing scripture with scripture. If Someone deletes Deuteronomy 5:6, I'll discover the exact same principle or concept in Exodus 20:2 and a couple of other hidden passages man never even thought of. God word is perfect. He would never trust mortal man with the responsibility of protecting the purity of HIS WORD.
Repeating the same thing over and over doesn't make it true!
Simple search of "when did Christians removed the 7 books" gives this:
1.- Martin Luther, a key figure in the Protestant Reformation, moved the 7 books to a second-tier status in the 16th century, but did not completely remove them.
2.- Gradual Process: The actual removal of the 7 books from Protestant Bibles was a gradual process that occurred over time.
3.-Standardization in 1825: The practice of excluding the 7 books from Protestant Bibles was standardized in 1825, when the British and Foreign Bible Society declared that only the 66 books would be included in their publications.
4.- Protestants historically acknowledged those seven books. In fact, if you look at old printed Protestant Bibles, like KJV Bibles from the 1800s, you will almost certainly see them included.
5.- Luther also believed other books were "less authoritative", including the Epistle of James and Revelation. They're included.
Please do some actual research before you post "controversial" videos.
Want to understand the BIBLE?
Ask GOD for UNDERSTANDING!
Ask and you will receive!
I don't know much history about Martin Luther, but I do know that the Catholic Pope/Popes took it upon themselves to change several things in the Bible. The Popes have set themselves in the same position as God Himself. Using the term "father" when God is the only Father. At one point, the Pope wanted to change the Lord's Prayer. Catholics also worship Mary. There's nothing in the Bible about worshipping Mary. They seem to crucifie Jesus at every service showing him on the cross.Jesus isn't on the cross anymore. He's sitting on the right side of God now. The Pope today wants to change the Ten Cammandments now and make going to church on Sunday mandatory. The seventh day is the Lord's Day of Rest, not the first day of the week. There's many other things they want to change, and as far as I know God hasn't authorized them to change anything.
God bless all. Amen 🙏 ❤.
Yup you are right. You don't know much about History.
@RodRiveraJr
I know about the Bible enough to know what I'm talking about.
Agree with u
Do you worship your mother because you have a picture of her?
@@Dale-v6o You are right. The story starts with the fact that the Christian religion was being forced by the Roman Emperor. The people were reluctant to follow it.
The priests themselves were not willing but they saw an opportunity to gain from it. They fooled the people by telling those who worshiped the sun, "Oh see wve are worshiping the sun, Jesus is the light of the world and it is the sun."
Those who were worshiping athe mother and child goddess were told see it is the moter,Mary and child, Jesus"
Then they did not want the congregation to understand the word of God in the Bible and so kept it hidden by having it in Latin. The interpretation they made was as per the heir convenience.
They did not want an average person to read the Bible and the burnt William Tyndle the stake for translating it in English. They even tried it with Martin Luther. They bought all the copies of the translated Bible and burt them but the printing press was invented and they could no longer do that.
Poor Pope and his lot they have been defeated but to the good fortune of the RC clergy, there is no dearth of gullible people. God allows those who are not His people to be deceived.
So let these RCs worship idols, say their rosery worship Mary, pray for their dead, and follow man made customs and traditions and accept commandments of the Pope and his one world religion.
The New Testament is the culmination and the fulfillment of the Old Testament. It says in the Revelation 22: 18 -19; 18. "As for me, I warn everyone who hears the prophetic words of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will pile on him the plagues described in this book. 19. And if anyone takes away words from this book of prophecy, God will take from him his share in the tree of Life and the holy city described in this book."
The King James Bible in Revelation 22:19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
These are books from the days of the Old Testament but were never included in the Jewish canon. That is, they were not accepted as divinely inspired in the Old Testament.
In reference to faith alone, the Book of James in Chapter 2 is the Biblical account of why faith alone is a fallacy. Faith alone is not a biblically sound thing to teach. Just read James 2.
Yes this as per GODs plan to understand HIS Church the truth. All glory to our LORD JESUS CHRIST
Luther removed what? The same "removed" books were in the original Geneva and then the KJV bibles. The real question is the removal of said books by later Christian Protestants, and why those books are still kept out of most Protestant bibles.
Or better yet- why do Catholic bibles typical remove 3rd and 4th Maccabees? These books are well established historical books.
As an Eastern Orthodox, my Bible has both 3rd and 4th Maccabees.
The Lutheran world "Yes" not the Christian world because the books are still in the Catholic/Orthodox Bible