The Myth of the Council of Jamnia and the Origin of the Bible

In this video, Dr. Brant Pitre discusses the very widespread idea that there was a "Council of Jamnia" at the end of the first century in which Jewish Rabbis finally settled the discussion on what books were part of the Old Testament and which books were not. While the Council of Jamnia has been used as a reference point in many Catholic and Protestant discussions regarding the canon of Scripture -- where some Protestants have tried to root the origin of their Old Testament Canon in the decision made at the Council of Jamnia -- Dr. Pitre shows not only is there zero evidence for any such Council at Jamnia in 90 AD, but also that even if there were a decision, what authority would Jewish leaders have over Christians since those authorities have rejected Christ as the messiah?
Dr. Pitre will discuss when the theory of the Council of Jamnia was first proposed and read the actual text used as the basis for the theory.
You can find Dr. Pitre's Bible study, The Origin of the Bible: Human Invention or Divine Intervention, where Dr. Pitre covers this topic of the Council of Jamnia, in addition to the canon of the New Testament and what happened as a result of the Protestant Reformation here: store.catholicproductions.com...
You can find all Bible studies by Dr. Brant Pitre at store.catholicproductions.com...

[@ChristianSaintSavior]

Thank you for all your hard work, Dr. Brant Pitre. GOD Bless!

[@g0thamite]

Dr. Jack P. Lewis was my Hebrew Professor at Harding School of Theology. His seminal paper on Jamnia turned the tide against the "Jamnia Canon Council" idea. He was an amazing scholar with two earned doctorates. A very humble man as well.

[@gabrielivansanchezprado4973]

Wow! I´m imprresed, I thought that this concil did take place until now. Thanks so much for educate us Dr.

[@RGTomoenage11]

Me too, many Catholics accept that as truth.

[@danhesko]

I was taught about Jamnia in Bible College, and just accepted it. Thank you so much for presenting the evidence..as a good Biblicist I checked out the proof for Jamnia, and come up blank. Thanks for the Truth

[@adamhovey407]

May I ask which college and how it was presented? Was it presented as a hypothesis or definite fact?

[@wesleysimelane3423]

@dan h Check also the proof of the rosary, scapulars, marian veneration and prayers through statues and say how you come up

[@jackiesindel5278]

@@wesleysimelane3423 check the bible being the sole authority and say how you come up

[@wesleysimelane3423]

@@jackiesindel5278 Where in these scriptures do you see any possibility to adding anything outside of it. Most Relevant Verses Revelation 22:18-19 I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are written in this book; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book. Deuteronomy 4:2 Verse Concepts "You shall not add to the word which I am commanding you, nor take away from it, that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you. Proverbs 30:6 Verse Concepts Do not add to His words Or He will reprove you, and you will be proved a liar. Proverbs 30:5-6 Every word of God is tested; He is a shield to those who take refuge in Him. Do not add to His words Or He will reprove you, and you will be proved a liar. Deuteronomy 12:32 Verse Concepts "Whatever I command you, you shall be careful to do; you shall not add to nor take away from it. Matthew 22:29 Verse Concepts But Jesus answered and said to them, "You are mistaken, not understanding the Scriptures nor the power of God. Mark 7:13 Verse Concepts thus invalidating the word of God by your tradition which you have handed down; and you do many things such as that. Now I have applied these things [that is, the analogies about factions] to myself and Apollos for your benefit, believers, so that you may learn from us not to go beyond what is written [in Scripture], so that none of you will become arrogant and boast in favour of one [minister or teacher] against the other. 1 CORINTHIANS 4:6 1co.4.6.AMP Every man is a liar. Even pope. Let God be found true [as He will be], though every person be found a liar, just as it is written [in Scripture], “That You may be justified in Your words , And prevail when You are judged [by sinful men].” ROMANS 3:4 AMP

[@jackiesindel5278]

@@wesleysimelane3423 absolutely nowhere does it even come close to saying if you understood context your quote would only apply to the apocalypse even if it did present that false doctrine all it would do is give you another problem you can't answer what books constitute Scripture.what right did the founders of your religion in the 1500s have to abridge them?

[@Benedictjp-nv4um]

So nice to see someone that actually does their research and doesn't just repeat stuff. Amazing video.

[@marthaarboleda6779]

thank you so much!! You are very clear. What a wonderful job. We Catholics must know how to give answers about our faith.

[@jrogers9052]

absolutely excellent! well done, Dr. Pitre. you touched on something at the very end of the video that was running through my mind during the whole thing; even if Jamnia took place, that fact that the council was overseen by Jews 30 years after the resurrection - i.e. Jews who denied Christ and His resurrection - would be grounds enough for *not* accepting their version of the O.T. cannon. That said, it's awfully hard to reject books that are quoted in the epistle of Jude and later quoted by the Babylonian Talmud, but accept a cannon by Jewish rabbis who despised what Christianity had become. It doesn't make any sense at all. The departure from the Septuagint was, in my opinion, one of the worst decisions of the Reformers.

[@morelmaster]

Exactly. The Protestants reject the Catholic Church's canon of Scripture, but accept the Hebrew canon even though the Jews rejected Christ. Go figure.

[@g0thamite]

My Hebrew professor at the Harding School of Theology was Jack P. Lewis. His research on the Council of Jamnia was a seminal study showing that no decisions regarding the Jewish canon ever happened there.

[@williamjennings7065]

@@morelmaster clearly does not understand the issue! The Hebrew Bible was treasured by the Jews, who risked their lives for it... even though it repeatedly foretold their rejection of their Messiah. See Isaiah 53 as just one example! It was, therefore the Jews whose Scriptures were and are the most accurate, and we have these through the Masorites, and confirmed by the Dead Sea scrolls. No church, or council, no man... was needed by God to confirm what He, Himself, claimed in Luke 24! Please firstly study, in what you are wishing to show yourself wise!

[@michaels4255]

"30 years after the Resurrection" -- At least 57 years after the Resurrection: AD 90 minus AD 33=57 years, and 20 years after the destruction of the Second Temple in AD 70 as prophesied by Christ. If the canon of the OT can be determined by Jews rather than Christians after that date, then it would mean that if Jews today decided to shorten or lengthen their canon, then Christians would be obligated to do the same, which is absurd.

[@michaels4255]

@@williamjennings7065 The Masoretic text is not the most accurate. In numerous passages, the broad LXX (a Jewiish translation which is much older than the Masoretic text) is almost certainly closer to the original.

[@InTheWind_]

Awesome information!! When I became a Christian at age 20 I was very worried about submitting my entire self to what was taught in this Bible book. So I wanted to know WHERE DID IT COME FROM?? Who put it together and when?? How can I trust these folk?? .... I continue to be shocked that almost all of the Protestants that I have known have never asked these questions.

[@a.t.6322]

I'm more and more impressed with the expositions of Dr. Pitre.

[@someonesomewhere6316]

Dr Pitre, You are a divine gift for many of us. I can't thank you enough for this and all your videos I have watched thus far. May God bless you abundantly.

[@omarren]

I can hear Dr. Pitre talking all day

[@denisebraganza]

God bless you Dr. Pitre and the marvelous work you do in teaching us. Thoroughly appreciate it.

[@theclapaolini4322]

You are so brilliant and a great teacher we are blessed to have you to allowing us to understand our Bible deeper.thank you Dr Brant

[@Barbaramamato]

Thank you for your excellent and scholarly approach to this thorny topic. I am edified to my amazement almost every time I get Catholic content from Dr. Brant Pitre and many others. Yet, Especially Dr. Brant Pitre. Thank you for allowing God's Word, the Holy Scripture, to be more clearly opened to all who have ears with which to hear and eyes with which to see.

[@adamhovey407]

I've noticed that a lot of things that modern biblical scholars believe, came from German Protestant liberal Scholars from the 19th century. I'm a little curious, has anyone else noticed that?

[@bernardokrolo2275]

Yes..i notice that

[@janusg8680]

Yes, And many other (bad) things have come out from Germany.

[@nolanmattson4313]

Yes

[@ATLockhart]

Yes, 19th century Germany was a hotbed for biblical scholarship, and they produced things that were both good and bad, but the trajectory they set forth has certainly aided biblical studies in the 20th and 21st centuries.

[@AlejandroGarcia-ek3uy]

And the protestant scholar based himself on a "myth" made up by a Jewish rabbi.

[@summersloth2899]

Your lectures are very sound and backed up by evidences.You have helped me a lot in understanding our faith.May the lord continue to bless u brother..And may our lady's intercession be always there for u..I will remember you in my prayers..

[@Subeffulgent]

This is a great channel , one of my favorites, along with father Spyridon of the Orthodox Christianity also. I believe both versions of the Christian faith have much to offer the world! Keep up the good work. God bless you and your family.👉✝

[@johnopenminded3072]

What an excellent video! Well done! Like I try telling my protestant family and friends... "It's all about authority, who has it?" The first time I heard about this so called council I remember thinking "why would I accept a old testament canon from the guys who put my savior to death?" Awesome beard by the way :-)

[@swtnix]

John OpenMinded because Jesus was raised a Jew and used their version of the OT

[@gideonjudges7]

He did not word it very well, but these are still hypothetical Jews (as the Council of Jamnia did not happen) who rejected Christ. These are not people who believe that Jesus was the Messiah. And this is not because He did not come yet, but because they directly rejected His claims. If you want to follow this made up "Council," then you are accepting the authority of people who directly rejected Christ--at a time when there was a group which accepted Him, which called itself (see Ignatius of Antioch's Letter to the Smyrnaeans, the Martyrdom of Polycarp, et cetera) the Catholic Church.

[@markv1974]

@@swtnix the septuagint was also made by jews. And was used by Christ. Your using a cannon made before Christ died by the same people who rejected him. Why not use the cannon used in the time of Christ?

[@michaels4255]

@@swtnix But their version was not "officially" fixed in Jesus's time. The Church's OT was based on the books that were accepted by the (Jewish) Apostles who brought them the gospel. The Jews who rejected Christ cannot be allowed to shrink or enlarge the Apostolic canon any time they please. We receive our OT only from those Jews who received Christ, not from those who rejected him.

[@mulipolatuuumataafatiufeaa4964]

Thank you for the clear explanation Dr Pitre. I am very thankful for your research and clarification.

[@heathsavage4852]

I heard someone spouting this drivel about the Bible the other day. I may have to show her this video. Thank-you. Beautiful.

[@thatright4985]

Thank you Dr. Pitre for sharing this information. I had heard of this council and that it could not have any authority to determine canonicity of Sacred Scripture but I had never before now heard the council itself is more of a mythical theory than reality.

[@relynloganathan2836]

that right

[@JamesDavis-dn3wo]

This is an awesome video. Dr. Pitre is one of the great theologians of today.

[@ariefprilyandi]

Well done, Dr. Pitre.

[@kimberlytancrede5468]

The video series, The Chosen, does an excellent job showing the split between the two schools of Hilel and Shimmiah.

[@morelmaster]

At 26:23 of the video, the real story is told, that IF a Council of Jamnia occurred in 90AD, and the OT canon was "supposedly" established then, how is it that this Jewish council had ANY influence on what goes into the canon of Scripture, seeing as how the Christian Church was already in existence for "60 YEARS"? Does anyone really think that in 90AD, that what the Jewish authorities had to say about Scripture was even listened to at all by the Christian Church? After all, the non-Christian Jews didn't even accept Jesus as the Messiah, so how can they be relied on for sorting out what is Truth? This shows, as Dr. Pitre said, that there had to be another body of people who determined what the OT canon was, and that came later by the Catholic Church.

[@adelaidawallaert287]

Wow! So much to learn - so intriguing but fascinating, I couldn't get enough. Thanks Dr. Brant Pitre for imparting your knowledge about the holy books.

[@josephzammit8483]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/pKGQgYWBgrKSp8k

[@JimCvit]

Thank you so much! I was just watching a debate with Tim Staples & James White and White was calling on Jamnia as proof. I knew there had to be more to it

[@stephenler3850]

Superb evidence of the MYTH of the council jamia. God Bless You Dr Pitre !

[@RayCamachoOMG]

Excellent presentation, thanks!

[@claytonbenignus4688]

Very Good! I still would have liked some discussion of the certification process of the CORRECT Books of the Old Testament, the Compilation of the Septuagint being a good alternative explanation.

[@armmkm]

I usually enjoy these videos by Dr. Brant Petrie. This one left me unsettled. Why? The corpus of the Scriptures in the Greek Septuagint was inclusive of the Deuterocanonical books and the Septuagint dates back to 247 BC during the reign of Ptolemy Philadelphus II. Jesus and the Apostles, quote from the books of the Septuagint or “The Book of Seventy” as it was known. The Early Church Fathers of the Patristic era quote from the Septuagint, including the so-called “hidden” books today known as the Apocrypha. Saint Augustine was a proponent of the Septuagint. In written correspondence he urged Saint Jerome not to abandon the Septuagint. Jerome did so because he mistakenly assumed the Jews had the older Scriptures. This is true of the prior-Masoretic text, which we do not have a copy of. (Proto-Masoretic). The Hebrew Scriptures that existed in the third century were most definitely an established corpus of writings accepted as holy writ. One needs to be aware that it was Jewish translators using an ancient Hebrew Text (proto-Masoretic or proto-Septuagint-that gave us the first Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures. This Book of Seventy was a central Bible for the Hellenized Jews, as well as, for the Greek Gentiles from the third century BC to the first century AD. The subject of Jamnia is an out growth of how the Jews were forced to delineate the books or cannon of Judaism in light of two key factors- 1. The loss of the Temple and the priesthood meant that the religion had to redefine itself. 2. There was competition as the spread of Christianity-the Way-became greater and the threat perceived by the Jews caused a reaction. Later in history, not only were there Christian’s who accused the Jews of changing their own holy writings, this same accusation later surfaced from Islamic religious leaders who made the same claim that the Jews had altered their writings. Eventually, the Jewish canon was set in response to the Christian canon which was intact and based on earlier Hebrew Scriptures translated by Jewish scholars -not Greek or Gentile scholars. While Dr. Pitre did mention the Septuagint in this video, he did not touch upon its canon or it’s contents which describe what most of the Hellenized world read in Greek-both Jewish, and later, first century and later Christians. This is relevant irregardless of whether there was or was not a Jewish Council at Jamnia circa AD 90.

[@tweveldisciples3643]

Holy Family Jesus Mary Joseph Bless them who dislikes this video. Amen!

[@jenex5608]

The truth hurt

[@oramairiza2004]

Tell a lie long enough and it beomes the truth..

[@josephjackson1956]

Tell a lie long enough and you'll convince others it is true.

[@jesusm.burgos1021]

Bravo, love it.

[@ATLockhart]

"Rooted in the council of Jamnia, these books were not" - Yoda/Brant (24:51). :D

[@jerryrobertson4422]

😁

[@mr.molina8008]

Even IF Jamnia happened, by 90 AD Jesus already gave the authority to the Apostles

[@CPATuttle]

Yeah somehow Jews who reject Jesus get to decided what goes in the Christian Bible.

[@paulphelps7809]

Very helpful indeed. Evidently the Essenes also had writings other than the Canon.

[@jerryrobertson4422]

Dr. Bergsma from Franciscan Steubenville, has an excellent, easy to read and edifying book on the Essenes.

[@augustsonseventy42]

The Church Fathers basing themselves on Apostolic Tradition all said that the Church received as Scripture those books that were regularly maintained by the priests in the Temple as Scripture. It was the Church that determined the canon of Scripture from the beginning. Everything else was reactionary. Christ said again and again "it is written..." His audience knew exactly the sort of material He was referring to. We get our canon from the Christ and His Apostles, who were all faithful Jews in the early first century. It is revisionist and reactionary to pretend the Catholic Church does not and always has had the authentic canon of OT and NT scripture.

[@ilonkastille2993]

So interesting!

[@jonatasmachado7217]

Excellent!

[@thatright4985]

I guess my question now is : Who decided to remove books from the Scriptures and what was their reason for doing so?

[@catholicanswers8867]

+that right...I have an indepth explanation in another comment below the video.

[@sarahprather3889]

I read that Constantine hired around 100 rabbi's to choose what went into the bible for his Christian empire, supposedly he was the first Christian emperor. He didn't care what went in the book of books, he just wanted everyone to agree on what would be in it.

[@paulmiller3469]

@@sarahprather3889 Unless the Romans invented time travel, I don't think so. The Septuagint was the Greek translation of Hebrew scripture, funded by the Ptolemaic kingdom in Egypt, in which 70 (actually 72) scholars were brought down to Egypt in the third and second century B.C. Constantine wasn't even born for another four centuries or so.

[@bthongni55]

Thomase Synek This is a possibility. Another reason was that Luther wanted his scripture to be different from the Catholic Bible.

[@MelanCholy2001]

Luther. Satan.

[@jetsonjose]

Hello brother Your videos are really inspiring and true. Can I have the permission to use part of your videos in my channel with link to the original videos in the description box..

[@jetsonjose]

This is my email ID. [e-mail]

[@lettherebemusic6213]

Thank you, beautiful

[@CPATuttle]

Wikipedia: The theory of a council of Jamnia that finalized the canon, first proposed by Heinrich Graetz in 1871, was popular for much of the 20th century. However, it was increasingly questioned from the 1960s onward, and the theory has been largely discredited.

[@bcalvert321]

The Jewish Canon and Torah were written a long time even before Jesus was born. But the Catholic leadership seems to think they know more than the Jews do. They did not have the Catholic Apocrypha in any of the Jewish scrolls that were taught in the Temple. Why because they did not think they were worthy.

[@CPATuttle]

@@bcalvert321 Ben, the Torah is only the first 5 books of the Old Testament authored by Moses. The proceeding writings were later added books by the Jews and formed the Hebrew Bible. The Hebrew Bible is 24 books. Then the Jews wrote more books called the deuterocanonical books, which means second cannon in English. The Jews then made the Septuagint which was the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible and added the deuterocanonical books. Greek was the most popular language in the Middle East so more people could understand. This was all done hundreds of years before Jesus. When Jesus came he and his apostles used the Septuagint. After Jesus. The modern Jews that openly rejected Jesus choose to use the Hebrew Bible to use for their scripture. Do you believe Jews that openly reject Jesus Christ as the messiah should choose which Jewish books should be in the Christian Bible? Or Christians should choose what Jewish Old Testament books belong in the Christian Bible?

[@bcalvert321]

@@CPATuttle They were added centuries before Jesus came along and He quoted from them. They were not poetry or history of the Jews. They had prophecy, or words for us from God, unlike the books the Catholics added. They were never in the Christian Bible. Greek is not Christian in itself, and Neither is Latin. What makes a book Christian or not is whether it is about Jesus. The Books of the Prophets were never considered to be Christian. They were Jews prophesying about the Messiah to come.

[@CPATuttle]

@@bcalvert321 No you are believing the common Protestant myth passed around that Catholics added 7 books to the bible in the Council of Trent in 1545. You'd also have to say when the Orthodox added those books if that was true. If this was true then all the Christian bibles before the Council of Trent would have matched the 66 book Protestant bible. But the reality is that all the Christian bibles had the 73 books before the council of Trent. Protestants removed these 7 books. Codex Vaticanus, Codex Sinaiticus, the latin vulgates all the ancient manuscripts had the 7 deuterocanonical books in the bibles. You couldnt name me a bible before Martin Luther that didnt have these books in the old testament. Very simple. Find a bible before Martin Luther that matches the 66 book Protestant bible. if you can't do it. Then you have the truth.

[@bcalvert321]

@@CPATuttle You are believing the myth of the Catholic church. Most of the Old Testament was written while the Jews were captive under Babylon. They wrote more than the laws of Moses and the first books. Many of the books about the prophets were written at this time. All of the books were written at least 300 years before Christ. They were not written after he lived. The 7 books were also before Christ but they were not considered worthy to be called canon. I really don't care when you added those books but they should never have been added because they were not worthy to be in any Bible.

[@WimWorldWide]

Great analysis, dr.Pitre! Now, what about the catholic apocryphal books?

[@shaunaugustine8761]

Thank you.

[@dibaiavina1206]

Praise be to God

[@fr.hannakaram5840]

Josephus made the number of books in the Old Testament 22 books, according to the number of letters in the Hebrew alphabet, by merging some books together. Because he considers the Hebrew language sacred and the number of its letters is also sacred.

[@michaels4255]

Who was that 19th century German Jewish scholar who proposed the Jamnia theory? OK, I found it, Heinrich GRAETZ. The English subtitles rendered it as "grates" and I knew that was wrong. Wikipedia, which is not authoritative mind you, says the year was 1871.

[@jerryrobertson4422]

Question: Did the Rabbis from time to time hold Councils to make decisions on their religion? Where would they meet, if they did? Is there any written record of those rabbis mentioned, participating in Councils elsewhere? I love this stuff! Thanks Dr. Pitre for sharing your knowledge with the world! God bless you and your family!

[@mike67mj]

could you please do a video on how the cannon of the Tanakh

[@lithium8820]

*catholic productions* Hi, can I take parts of this video? to translate it into Spanish

[@gloriarangott8803]

Dear Dr Pitre, As this year is,the year dedicated to St Joseph, I was wondering if you have books, DVDs. and CDs...so we can learn more about St Joseph

[@lonelyberg1316]

He recently made a video about it named "Joseph the hidden king" or something.

[@Travis1365]

Great video, great teacher.

[@lonniestoute8762]

So It wasn't until the medieval times that the Jews finally agreed on what would be there "cannon" ? Excellent information, thanks .

[@almostsk8terjamie]

2nd Esdras also know as 4th Ezra 14:44, 204 Holy Spirit inspired scrolls were written in 40 days by Ezra and 5 other scribes. Where are they now? I know we have some but where are the rest? I'm neither catholic nor protestant nor any other denomination for that matter. I just want all the books. I'm not referring to the gnostic books either. Anyone know ???

[@timbaines3562]

Very interesting. I enjoyed it. I agree - no council of Jamnia. However, I did read in F.F. Bruce's book The Canon of Scripture in a footnote in a section about "Discussions at Jamnia" that there are many references in the Mishna and later rabbinical compilations to the discussions of the sages in the vineyard of Jabneh' in the generation following AD 70. I would like to know about those many references. I know you did quote the Mishnah here. But are you aware of such references actually mentioning discussions at Jabneh?

[@uncatila]

But I read about the council of Jamnia in a 17th century book "the Catholic Controversy" by St Francis DeSales. However DeSales asserts that only the Catholic Church had any canonic say so.

[@DenisOhAichir]

I never found Ecclesiastes despairing, quite the contrary.

[@MelanCholy2001]

ITA. Though I guess I am not quite mature enough (even a married woman now!) to get through Canticle of Canticles. I just ...I'm not there yet. I keep trying. But if they want to talk about despair: hello, LAMENTATIONS!* The end is pretty good, but as a whole, it's hardly dinner-time talk material. (Just plowed through that one. See it next year Deo volente.)

[@qaqqclifdunbar5154]

Believe on the Lord and trust Him . God be praised

[@SpiritualJones]

No one reacts so viscerally to something he thinks is “not real”. You believe in God, on an intuitive level, and so you react with sheer irrationality when your intellect, so darkened by sin, is confronted with the obvious fact of the existence of God. This, of course, is a threat to the fantasy life of existence without the constraints of the moral law that you’ve labored to construct for yourself. And, thus, you come to the internet to anonymously broadcast blasphemy in a feeble attempt to assuage your guilt and bury your conscience. It won’t work-I will pray for you.

[@MrWhoevr]

Obviously they wouldn’t have debated the scripture issue if it had previously been officially determined.

[@ThanksStJoseph]

Does anyone know where I can find a list of quotes from the early Church fathers showing that the canon of Scripture was not defined until 4th century?

[@joecastillo8798]

Look for: The Faith of the Early Fathers www.christianbook.com/faith-of-the-early-fathers-volumes/william-jurgens/9780814610251/pd/10250 Excellent compendium. It has the quotes, names, history, etc.

[@YardenJZ]

This is one of the things I've been looking into lately. Between Josephus saying there are 22 books (which could just be a re-arrangement), Melito's list and the fact that the most ancient Christian cannons do not agree on which deuterocanonical books are scripture (neither do the apostolic fathers, it seems), I don't really see a place to accept them as scripture. I would love to receive a different perspective or resources.

[@YardenJZ]

Indeed. But when I look at all these ancient documents (both Jewish and Christian), it seems to me that there was consensus only on the "protestant" canon of the OT. So to me, it seems like there was no universal acceptance of these books until they were decided upon as canon. Again, I would be more than happy to read more about it, if you have a recommendation.

[@markv1974]

@@YardenJZ catholic use the septuagint OT which was translated by 72 rabbis in alexandria around 200 BC. The modern jews used the maserotic texts. Protestants adopted the modern OT of the jews and dropped the older septuagint. Also take not that the sedducees, essenes, and pharisees have a different cannon. Modern judaism developed from pharisee, christianity while having pharisee influences ( such as paul, nicodemus, abibas ben gamaliel, etc), Christianity was also influenced by the essenes. The septuagint was the cannon in use by the common first century jew.

[@francisgruber3638]

In the formation of their scriptural canon, as well as in the development of synagogue worship services, legal tradition, religious calendar calculation and community political organization, post Temple Jewry acted with a consistent concern on differentiating themselves from the emerging Church. By the end of that process, it became possible to postulate a form of Christianity that emerged from Greek philosophies and Roman mystery cults rather that the Covenant of Moses. Even earlier than that, a Church too intent on differentiating itself from Judaism could endure a heresy in which the God of Moses was regarded as an imposter. Institutional amnesia must be a form of temporal mass hypnosis.

[@TorahUnleashed]

…but Ben Sira in the forward mentions the tri-part canon and does not include itself…

[@michaelogrady232]

Even if Jamnia happened, what of it? By AD 90 the Rabbis were stripped of all authority. See the parable of the wicked tenants.

[@florencemaria1410]

As per the New testament Jesus opened one of the SCROLL (ISAIAH) in the synagogue and read... right??? My question: can we find these scrolls and get the original version so future confusions can be avoided... I believe most religions have passed down the important scrolls through centuries... some i have seen in videos of stone engravings of the some scriptures or books... As much as I understand it's not as easy as i think... Is it possible to have these scrolls (all religion) to be preserved in a centralized area for research... with signed authorization (of each religion's submission to this centre) so future wars can be avoided?? ... like the fights for the ARC between many tribes and kings in the past...

[@marthaarboleda6779]

Correction: Formation.

[@tomdooley3887]

Thank you very much , I was told that what the Jews done was toss out all writing not written in Hebrew at this Council held in 90 AD. explaining the different in Catholic and protestant Bible's.

[@juandediosjosesaavedra6094]

As far as I know, in the second and third century some Church writers (Origen, Methodius) gave a canon of the OT which excluded the Deuterocanonical books, on the basis of the Jewish Canon, though it seems that it excluded yet some books of the present Jewish Canon. St. Jerome did not consider either the Deuterocanonical Scripture on the basis of the Haebraica Veritas. Origen seems nevertheless to have quoted some Deuterocanonical writings as Scripture. St.Jerome actually knew the Book of Sirach in Hebrew, but he did not translate it. It seems therefore that the present "Jewish Canon" was already widespread at least in the IV Century. I do not mean by that that the Deuterocanonical are not inspired, only that there were doubts and even rejection towards their inspiration between several Church early writers on the basis of a supposed Jewish Canon, widespread among the Jews after their expulsion from Holy Land, even if the so called Synod of jamnia actually never took place.

[@CPATuttle]

Clement of Rome cited the Septuagint. But the answer is Pope Damasus decided and Pope has authority established by Jesus. You can’t get a closed cannon with authority. Further, the eastern churches decided to use the same books in the OT Bible for the same reason. So the consensus is the Septuagint should be scripture by the majority. Eastern churches were among many

[@greesemonkeyarmy]

Dr. Brant Pitre forgets that the Septuagint was translated about 200 BC. That canon has not changed, the texts are the same as what Jews and Protestants use now.

[@markv1974]

The septuagint is the catholic OT. The protestants use the maserotic text

[@greesemonkeyarmy]

@@markv1974 One of the reasons was that Jesus never quoted from the seven books in the Catholic Bible - Baruch, Judith, 1 and 2 Maccabees, Sirach, Tobit and Wisdom - . These books are referred to as the deuterocanonical books.The septuagint was a translation made in Egypt by order of Ptolemy from Hebrew into Greek about 200 BC.

[@markv1974]

@@greesemonkeyarmy thats incorrect as jesus quoted re: yoke from baruch i think. Also between the one allegedly cannonized at yavneh 60 years after christ died and the septuagint made 200 years before Christ was born, its logical to conclude that Jesus never encountered the yavneh version in use by protestants. 🙂

[@michaels4255]

My sources say that Protestants only reduced their OT to 39 books in the 19th century, but do not explain why.

[@CPATuttle]

1660 the English Parliament decided to take those books Martin Luther moved to Apocrypha section, totally out the Bible

[@uncatila]

But St Francis DeSales decried the Councel of Jamnia in his "Catholic Contravercy"

[@jerryrobertson4422]

nobody is perfect. What was his evidence? we need to look into this. I love St. Francis DeSales and his "Devout Life", also on you tube complete.

[@erikcarlson1562]

If it didn’t happen at the so called council of Jammie, then when did the Hebrew Masoretic text drop the extra 7 books from the Septuagint?

[@wjm5972]

sometime in the 2nd century it is believed

[@watchful38]

At this point Dr. Pitre does not convince me of the 'Myth of Jamnia'. IMO Dr Pitre's explanation is just another theory. The Jamnia theory is at least clear cut, and I do not concede Dr. Petre's version. More study is needed. Cheers! From Canada.

[@elreyhats16]

Keep searching for the truth and you will find it.

[@martinnyirenda2525]

I am listening to your argument over the canon of the OT. Your basic premise is that there was no closed canon of the OT during the time of Jesus. You give examples from Matthew and Luke to justify your position. Between 3:00-3:30, your argument is that there was no definitive decision on which book comprise the Tanakh by the time of Jesus and that there were many writings "floating around" but nothing settled as yet. I am confused. From history, we know that the Jews were under various foreign rulerships from the time of Nebuchadnezzar when they were taken into captivity to Babylon. Later they returned to the land during the reign of the Medo-Persians. The Medo-Persians were conquered by Alexander the Great and the land of Israel fell under Hellenistic rule. In fact, the story of the Maccabean revolt occurred during the Hellenistic period before the Romans became the super power. During the Hellenistic rule, the Greeks "imposed" Greek language and culture in the lands they conquered. They introduced Gymnasiums were athletes competed totally nude. Greek cities were also built. A classic reference would be Mark 5:20 where the man of the tombs, after failing to go with Jesus in the boat, departed and proclaimed his testimony in the DECAPOLIS (Deca - Ten; Polis-City). So he went and proclaimed in ten cities which were Greek Cities built after the Greeks took control. During Greek rule, Greek became the De facto language in the Land. While there were still Hebrew speakers, there were many who could only speak Greek. Many Jews who had "immigrated" to Egypt also spoke Greek and were not conversant with the Hebrew Language. This said, a translation of the scripture was made during the time of the Greek Rule called the SEPTUAGINT to cater for the spiritual needs of these Jewish "Greek speakers" in Egypt and eventually in the land of Israel. This was a translation of the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek intentionally made for the Greek speaking populace, both Jews and Greeks, who were not conversant with the Hebrew Language. If one looks at the composition of the books in the Septuagint, it was the same 24 books in the Hebrew Scriptures, the Tanakh. This was composed during the time of the Greeks and that was way before the birth of Jesus of Nazareth. MY QUESTION: How do you reconcile your view that there was no decisive authoritative books in place and that there were many Canons "floating" around during the time? How was the selection of the Books for the Septuagint translation determined if there were no decisive books in place for the Hebrew Bible?

[@richreader1132]

So given that Graetz popularized the Council of Jamnia and the myth of a defined collection of books, how is it that the Protestants adopted these books hundreds of years earlier?

[@joeoberr1864]

Basically because a Catholic priest (Martin Luther) protested against the Church, the pillar and foundation of truth (1 Tim 3:15), and started his own personal branch of Christianity without any authority from God. So naturally practically everything, i.e., theology, scripture, doctrine and practice, which he and his later theological progeny (other Protesting denominations) concocted will be of flawed human thinking. Put another way, he initiated the concept of man-made traditions being of divine origin.

[@CPATuttle]

Because it’s a recent Protestant myth

[@bcalvert321]

@@joeoberr1864 Luther never started anything. He stood up to the Church and stated the lies and heresies of the Catholic church. Protestantism did not come along for years later. Your church added books that were never in the OT and Apocrypha that had nothing to do with Jesus or God.

[@joeamper3232]

@@bcalvert321you are totally wrong. Please refrain from posting anything about your hero, Martin Luther, a disgruntled fallen-away Catholic, that does believe in rosary. Stay with your own Protestant brethren and keep hugging and affirming each other about your misguided beliefs.

[@bcalvert321]

@@joeamper3232 Luther is no hero of mine. Too much racist in him. When I see lies and falsehoods I will always reply. The truth needs to be said. Catholics can't even agree on things. Yes, the pope is great others hate him. Some want Latin services, even though they cannot read or understand it. Others like it the way it is. I will get different replies from Catholics on the same subject. I guess Catholics can't agree just as much as protestants

[@ChristiDea]

I dove into that question when I came back to the church and quickly found Jewish scholars that debunked the entire idea of Jamnia as being a real event. The thing I found most compelling when reading about it, is that the book of Maccabees is the single source for how a Jewish person is to celebrate Chanukah. Obviously Jews are celebrating Chanukah to this day, so if Maccabees is not legit, then how on earth are they learning about it and why would the continue to mark this feast?

[@charleswalsh9895]

Interesting how a myth(lie) becomes the way certain groups ie protestants pick and choose scriptures

[@nolanmattson4313]

Do evangelicals believe in the council of jamnaia?

[@marthaarboleda6779]

I have a question: Is the book "DIDAJE" Which was not include in the Catholic Bible an apocryphal book or it can be used for fornation? Thank you.

[@CatholicProductions]

Hi Martha! The Didache is most certainly worthy of reading even though it is not inspired. It gives insight into the doctrine and liturgy of the early Church. The Catechism of the Catholic Church quotes/references the Didache a few times and it was esteemed by some early Church Fathers.

[@mdechristi]

Did you ever hear the saying, “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence”? If so, do you an alternate explanation for the fact that St. Jerome attested that the Jews did not consider the deuterocanonicals inspired already, in his lifetime?

[@mdechristi]

Shameless Papist You basically proved my point. St. Jerome famously says he followed the example of the Jews in originally rejecting the deuts. That strongly suggests that the Jews he consulted, had a canon. When and where they decided upon this, is unknown. Ipso facto that doesn’t mean it didn’t happen at Jamnia as some have said.

[@mdechristi]

@Shameless Papist I disagree. They would have no reason to reject the deuterocanonicals if they did not have a canon. How do you define a "canon"? I understand it to mean, "rule". That means, that the Jews whom St. Jerome consulted, could not have rejected the "deuterocanonicals", unless they had some criteria or canon they were following. Here's this quote from a blog which shares your name: "....St. Jerome translated the Vulgate for the pope, at his request. And Jerome submitted to the pope’s authority, including the entire Deuterocanon along with the rest of Scripture. But in his prefaces for some of the books, he noted criticisms that either he, or Jewish friends of his, had against the Greek versions (since by this time the Jews exclusively used the Hebrew version, and rejected the Deuterocanon)...." shamelesspopery.com/st-jerome-on-the-deuterocanon/

[@danielleeper8719]

Jews seem to use a lot of the same books as Catholics though. This is just my experience and from Jews that I know.

[@roboparks]

Well the Dead Sea Scrolls actually prove that statement wrong. Is the Catholic Church refuting the archaeological Discovery of Dead Sea Scrolls now? WHich were written in Aramaic and Hebrew NOT LATIN or Greek

[@willx9352]

@@roboparks What is your point? The Catholic Church has always known that the Old Testament was not written in Latin. After all, one of its early saints, Saint Jerome, is celebrated for his translation of the Bible into Latin from the Hebrew and Greek. All the books accepted by the Jews as canonical are also accepted by the Catholic Church. The Dead Sea scrolls actually show that books once only known through Greek translations, actually were composed in Hebrew - the book of Sirach is one of them.

[@markv1974]

@@roboparks some of them were written in greek buddy. And the books in the catholic bible were found to be in the dead sea scrolls. :)

[@kmk.c4917]

Do you have any of your books 📚 on Spanish

[@CPATuttle]

Padre Luis Toro is great. You’ve seen him? Search for him

[@peteshoults5301]

For what reason do you leave out the Septuagint in your discussion of an authoritative Hebrew canon? If it's what Jesus and the disciples quoted from, that's more than authoritative enough for me.

[@gareginasatryan6761]

So where did they get Jamnia into this. Did he just pick a city name at random

[@hobbywright8495]

They are grasping at straws. Next they might claim the Council of the Sanhedrin at Jerusalem in 33AD. The questions of who has the authority are what led me back to the Church.

[@bcalvert321]

Who is grasping? The man lying above or the Jews who made the Canon and the Torah. This man is paid by the church to do as they say. Now the church thinks it knows more about the Jewish Torah and Canon than the Jews themselves do.

[@daiqingyuan8451]

The speaker failed to harmonize Jesus calling the Scripture "Torah, Prophets and Psalms (Writings)", and Josephus saying that the holy books of the Jews are 22, of 3 different categories, which agree with the Masoretic Text (MT), counting Ruth as an appendix of Judges, and Lamentation as an appendix of Jeremiah. 22 was the length of the Hebrew alphabet, so the collection was regarded as perfect and closed. It appears that Hebrew OT was compiled by Ezra, Nehemiah and the Great Sanhedrin they set up, finished by c. 350 BC. The Greek OT LXX formed during 200 BC - AD 200 added the Apocrypha, and the rabbis who got the original Bible in the temple out ot it before the destruction in AD70 debated about whether to keep all the books, at about AD 90 because of the age of the characters involved, and probably at the rabbinical school at Jamnia. The theory is not proven, but is plausible and likely close to reality.

[@burebista11]

What about decision regarding gentiles acceptance ?

[@tichintors8908]

If anything Jamnia sounds exactly how the Gentile Catholic Church claims it’s Authority to create a Canon..

[@hotwax9376]

22:02 We don't necessarily now that Sirach was in the original Septuagint or if it was added in later copies of it. And I believe that Catholics primarily use the Vulgate rather than the Seputagint. The Septuagint is used mostly by Orthodox denominations.

[@catholicanswers8867]

Plus, according to the EWTN Web site, Sirach was questioned well after the Council of Florence in 1441. It wasn't until the Council of Trent (1546) that the finalization of the canonization of Sirach was decided.

[@jred7]

HotWax93 The Latin Vulgate is a translation of the Hebrew scriptures, not the Septuagint. However, the deuterocanonical books may not have been available in Hebrew during the time of St. Jerome. Likely the most available copy of it would have been associated with the Septuagint. Take it with a grain of salt. I'm not a Biblical Antiquities scholar. I just read a lot of other people's work.

[@chdwck493]

The Vulgate edition of the Bible was made because Latin had become the common language in the West. The Septuigant was the standard text used by Jews in the 1st century, and was later translated into other languages as Christianity spread and civilization progressed.

[@TheMountAndBladerX10]

Is josephus naming 2 less books because of summarizing the books of samuel and kings?

[@asamanthinketh5944]

Obviously look for James white how we got our canons

[@silveriorebelo8045]

@@asamanthinketh5944 James White is a bigoted anti-Catholic manipulator, not a honest historian nor theologian

[@asamanthinketh5944]

@@silveriorebelo8045 you may think that I would really recommend you to check his debate with bart ehrman Also weak people attack character, strong people attack arguments

[@thepalegalilean]

@@asamanthinketh5944 You're not attacking character if it's true. At that point you're just stating fact.

[@joannadavignon3166]

What about the Jewish aspects of Catholicism? You began with comparing it to protestism which makes me wonder about your sources

[@ondacross5253]

The first source is a Protestant as mentioned in the video. Scholars actually agree with this video that this council never happened as the 19th-century guy said it did. He made the whole thing up.

[@tweveldisciples3643]

GOD BLESS pls who dislikes this video . AMEN!

[@haroldhughes1338]

but there was a school of yamnia that existed in 90.

[@sterry1962]

Harold Hughes 1) What is your evidence? 2) So, what?

[@josef.r.5345]

Why are there four gospels only?

[@CPATuttle]

Ireneaus wrote why

[@stephenrodenbough1395]

When and how was the Jewish canon established?

[@roboparks]

It was done in Stages . Torah was canonized c. 400 BC (Exile in Babylon), the Prophets c. 200- 180BC (Daniel is excluded) , and the WRitings Much Later The Rabbis in this Council the name of The Council name is unimportant . They finalized the Mishnah. I believe the Name was added A Lot Later. The Septuagint (LXX) is a Koine Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures, translated in stages between the 3rd to 2nd century BC . Obviously Jesus and his disciples and followers had some access to this. The Hebrew Bible, also called the Tanakh, has three parts: the Torah (law), the Nevi'im (prophets), and the Ketuvim (writings). The Septuagint has four: law, history, poetry, and prophets. The books of the Apocrypha were inserted at appropriate locations Codex Sinaiticus (Kornie Greek) Its Complete Old and New Testaments and with The Deuterocanonical in there right locations NOT Separate. . is ALmost 100 years Older than the Latin approved. . www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/3259-bible-canon

[@CPATuttle]

Jewish never had a closed cannon at the time of Jesus. Dead Sea scrolls discovery further prove that. The Jews after Jesus that rejected Jesus, choose the Hebrew Bible because the prophesies of Jesus in the deuterocanonical (means second cannon). Jews that reject Jesus after Jesus came, have no say what goes in the Christian Bible.

[@CPATuttle]

@@roboparks sorry but Martin Luther doesn’t get to decided what’s apocrypha or scriptural. He never should have removed those books

[@roboparks]

@@CPATuttle Were did I mention Luther??? That's what you get for thinking. Some of the apocrypha was written by Hellenistic Jews . Luther and the Catholic Church had nothing to do with it.

[@roboparks]

@@CPATuttle Did you follow the Link? That's from a Jewish perspective. So Catholics have no say the matter.

[@liepa7768]

When I begin to go deeper into the bible analysis, you figured that there was no full scrolls found, but just peaces of it, thus half of the old testament was just mafe up by someone. Also, there's a subtuigin translation, which is direct translation of the texts and bible talks about many gods. Yahve was just one of many gods who was rouling over israelites. And when I went into mythology, it gets even worse

[@alexchristopher221]

Jesus said to them, “Have you never read in the scriptures: ‘The very stone which the builders rejected has become the head of the corner; this was the Lord’s doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes’? Therefore I tell you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a nation producing the fruits of it.” - Matthew 21:43. Even if there had been such a council, the rabbis wouldn't have had the power to "bind and loose" (Mt 16:16-19). This power lies with the magisterial ruling and teaching authority of the Catholic Church.

[@roboparks]

What is the Stone that was rejected?

[@roboparks]

Hey Man 100 AD . The Roman Empire was still Roman-Hellenic They were Still Worshiping Jupiter and doing nasty things in the Temple of Bacchus. NOT Christian Yet. Christianity isn't even legal till the Edict of Milan 313ad. But even then Hellenic is still the State Religion. The Christian Priest legally dont have the Authority to do anything Till Constantine gives the Power to the Church 337AD . So this is how I see it neither side has real proof . So Catholics to keep grinding this axe really shows the weakness of the Roman Catholic Religion.

[@alexchristopher221]

@@roboparks I suggest you study the early Church Fathers to see for yourself that the Catholic Church existed since apostolic time. You can begin with Clement of Rome (3rd successor of St. Peter) in the first century. The priestly authority is conferred by Christ. Priests were already ministering the sacraments of Reconciliation and Holy Eucharist in the first century: "But every Lord's day gather yourselves together, and break bread, and give thanksgiving after having confessed your transgressions, that your sacrifice may be pure. But let no one that is at variance with his fellow come together with you, until they be reconciled, that your sacrifice may not be profaned. For this is that which was spoken by the Lord: In every place and time offer to me a pure sacrifice; for I am a great King, says the Lord, and my name is wonderful among the nations. [ Didache: Chapter 14. Christian Assembly on the Lord's Day]. The Edict of Milan granted the Catholic Christians in the Roman Empire religious freedom, nothing more.

[@alexchristopher221]

@@roboparks The gospel parable is about God’s own son, Jesus Christ. The tenants that God left in charge of the vineyard is the Jewish people. He entrusted His kingdom to them. The first groups of servants that the landowner sent to the vineyard to retrieve his produce, are actually the prophets. God’s own people killed His prophets. Finally, after the people killed His prophets, God sent his only son to them. Jesus knew he would be killed by his own people. He is explaining this to the crowd, but especially to the chief priests and Pharisees in the crowd. They served themselves, instead of God. Jesus is telling them that the Kingdom of God would be taken away from them and given to a people who would produce it’s fruit, and that is exactly what happened. The Gentiles became Christians and they now serve the Lord Jesus Christ and produce the fruit for God’s Kingdom. Thus, God first entrusted His kingdom to the Jews and then took it away from them for having rejected the Messiah.

[@roboparks]

@@alexchristopher221 But he wasn't killed by the Jews or Jewish Authority in that time . They wouldn't had the Authority to do a public execution . He died at the hands of Romans on a Roman Cross or have you never read the story? And why Was he executed ? Because he claimed to be a King and only the Empire could make you a King, You got to remember The Romans were religious also, and to deny the authority or Challenge the Empire or the Law (Jupiter) was to be put to death.

[@mdechristi]

It's all well and good to deny that something happened. But, there's an old saying, "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." Could someone please answer this question. If the Jews did not get together in Jamnia to decide on their canon, when did they get together to make this decision? It is common knowledge, I think, that by the time of St. Jerome, he first left the Deuterocanon out of his Vulgate, because he was following the example of the Jews. So, if not at Jamnia, when did the Jews decide to hold to the Hebrew canon and jettison the Aramaic/Greek books?