Who Picked What Books Went In the Old Testament?

[@nicholasshaler7442]

The Ten Minute Bible Hour is slowly becoming The Sixty Minute Bible Hour. I really like the long from content.

[@justchilling704]

ZanySoul Archives Hahaha

[@jasonnickel384]

This Hour Has 34 Minutes

[@angelr9096]

Me too! The longer the better :)

[@michaelreed649]

Agreed! Matt, keep it up!

[@EmethMatthew]

I think Matt might have overestimated the clarity of the Star Wars canon... 🤔🙃😆

[@alexcasetta6653]

Watching this for the first time. Had literally the same thought... 😂

[@narrowwaytolife4525]

Happy Sabbath! Friday sundown to Saturday sundown. God's 4th Holy Seventh Day Sabbath commandment. Genesis 2:2-3, Exodus 20:8-11, Isaiah 58:13, Matthew 12:8, John 14:15 If you love me keep my commandments.

[@navagatingthroughthebeasts2908]

: )

[@anyaharper2860]

Part of what makes the prequel series so strange is that half of the characters are fan made.

[@joecastillo8798]

Matt, The seven "extra books" deleted by protestants in 1825, have been part of the Christian Bible since 382AD simply because they are part of the Septuagint. Such Canon is where the greatest number of OT quotes are cited from, in the NT. God bless.

[@angelvalentinmojica6967]

this evidence alone is enough for me to take the 7 books as scripture. jesus himself quoted from the septuagint.

[@RudyCarrera]

@@angelvalentinmojica6967 precisely. Both the Orthodox and Catholics use it (since we were the Church who put the canon together), and the only reason Luther and others wanted to get rid of many of these books was that it would wreck their claims against the Church.

[@someguysopinion3692]

This is better than some of my theology classes that I’m doing now. Keep doing what you do brother. God bless

[@jonathanpresson777]

Matt, I want to thank you for what you're doing here. I studied a lot of this in Christian Highschool and College, but have . . . lost track . . . of a lot of the details over the years. Furthermore, my wife's family is not Christian (she is, but not her parents and sister) and she has a lot of questions that you've helped answer. You've also helped me to direct my own study and given me names and details to use to begin studying. Thank you so much.

[@MattWhitmanTMBH]

All of that stuff makes me really happy to hear. Thanks for taking the time to say that.

[@jonathanpresson777]

@@MattWhitmanTMBH least I could do. Thank you. God bless you.

[@LaFedelaIglesia]

30:44 "In terms of direct quotation"?? If we use this argument we would have to leave outside of the Bible these books as well: Judges Ruth Ezra Esther Ecclesiastes Song of Solomon Lamentations Obadiah Jonah Zephaniah 16:12 You also mentioned Jesus "fixing" the OT canon by virtue of mentioning the Martyrdom of Zachariah which took place place around 540 B.C. (implying that he was the last OT inspired prophet, thus rejecting the Deuterocanonical books ). Jesus himself tells us that the period of the OT prophets reaches until John the Baptist around 30 A.D. "The law and the prophets were UNTIL John" (Lk. 16: 16). Notice how Jesus applies the term "Law and Prophets" not until Zachariah (540 B.C.) but until John the Baptist (30 A.D.). **NOTE: Deuterocanonical wouldn't be an extra 4th category (as displayed on screen) because they were part of the Wisdom, Poetic, and Historical literature which in turn is part of the traditional tripartite (sometimes bipartite i.e. Lk 16: 16) Jewish term** I think your analysis reflects more than the Old Testament (for Christians), the Hebrew Bible (for Jews), the TANAKH (Masoretic Text) which came into light around the IX century. Keep in mind that the "Hebrew Bible" (39 books) utilized by Rabbinic Judaism is not what the Jews in Jesus' times utilized but the Masoretic Text (around the 900's A.D.) . The 7 books rejected by Protestantism always were part of the Christian Bible, even St. Jerome who after spending some time with the Rabbinic school leaders in Palestine expressed doubts about them, nevertheless accepted the final decision of the Church (as opposed to the Rabbinical views). Finally, even in the Talmud the book of Wisdom is quoted as Scripture.

[@Nomen_Latinum]

As far as Luke 16:16 goes, I'd say Jesus is talking more about the spiritual status quo up to John the Baptist's public appearance. Until then, the Law and the Prophets of the Old Testament were the primary extension of Gods plan for mankind. John came as the voice in the desert that Isaiah prophesied about, announcing a change in the way Gods kingdom manifests itself on Earth. Until John there was the Law and the Prophets; after John there was Jesus.

[@donaldsmith6814]

The point is that these were Prophets killed; Jesus says, because the Hebrew/ Jewish people didn't like the message! John is killed by someone who was in the eyes of the Jews of that time, an outsider!

[@themiddlecase]

Every time you say "Old Testament canon" all I can think of is a cannon firing slushies off the wall of Jericho.

[@trishahamrick7062]

...I have slushy in my ear.

[@judgedredd31]

There’s never ever ever ever ever been a show like...

[@toddbonin6926]

Ha! I thought I was the only one picturing canons all through this.

[@misseli1]

@@judgedredd31 veggietales

[@jammin60psd]

Im just here for the tractor mounted wood chipper

[@magiccitymelkite6161]

I have more recent translations for comparison, but as a Catholic, I really enjoy reading the Douay-Rheims Bible even though it is from the Latin Vulgate, so a translation of a translation, but I love how it comes from the work of St Jerome who would have had access to records we no longer have and would have had a more practical knowledge of ancient Hebrew and ancient Greek than we do today. I also think it is cool because Latin translates into English much more easily and clearly than Greek or Hebrew does. So, in many cases where the Greek or Hebrew can be translated into English in multiple ways, the Latin to English translation can be less ambiguous. So, if we trust that St Jerome had access to native speakers and contemporary sources that eliminated the ambiguity of certain Greek and Hebrew words and phrases then it can give us some insight into how those phrases were actually understood and which way they were meant to be translated. Just my personal opinion, keep in mind that I am a Catholic and at the Council of Trent I believe my Church declared that the Vulgate, in particular, had been protected from error. So, if I wasn't Catholic and didn't believe that the Church was guided by the Holy Spirit I might be a lot more critical and have a different set of assumptions. However, I think in this case reason, regarding St Jerome's unique time in history much closer to the time and place that Christ lived in than us, and the way languages work regarding Latin being a disambiguating filter between ancient Greek/Hebrew and English, combined with my own faith in the what I believe happened at the Council of Trent, really helps me feel at eas about reading what some might call "the Catholic King James Version"(although I read the 1899 edition which is more like "the Catholic NKJV"). That being said I do read multiple translations of the Bible. My next two favorites include the Orthodox Study Bible and the Revised Standard Version-Catholic Edition. As an Eastern Catholic, I use the OSB because the footnotes have a lot of theology from the Eastern Church Fathers. The OSB uses the NKJV for the New Testament and has a translation of the Greek Septuagint for the Old Testament. The Revised Standard Version I use is actually the Second Catholic Edition and is known as the Ignatius Bible, it comes from a more modern translation of the original Greek and Hebrew, and was the first English Bible translation in history to utilize the Dead Sea Scrolls. In addition to the three I've mentioned, I have also heard and read the Catholic New American Bible(translated from Greek and Hebrew sources around 1970) my whole life as this is the standard version authorized for readings during services at the majority of Catholic churches in the United States, and although it is not my favorite translation I still read it occasionally for balance. Since my family was historically Southern Baptist, Methodist, and Seventh-Day Adventist, I even have some old King James family Bibles that I read some times that are pretty cool.

[@Jondoe_04]

You got to remember Jerome knew the apocrypha wasn't canon. Jerome talked to those in Israel, and he learned they didn't keep them in the temple. Additionally, it's clear the OT of the NT is the tanhnak, which Jesus called the canon atleaet twice in the NT, and that doesn't have the apocryphal text.

[@josephmckinney8802]

Your kids should do more crafts for your videos. As always, it’s great learning from your tubes.

[@PeterNerlich]

Love this, too. Huge respect for your time, effort and competence presenting this is a really clear and neutral, but most of all super accessible and authentic way. Be blessed!

[@MotherShrimp]

Hi! My adult son turned me on to your videos. They are a GREAT help in understanding the Bible. ADD moment : in the clip of you and the ancient rock drawing, I noticed the creature above the "centipede " looking thing. Possibly a swardfish? Hmmm a dinosaur? 😃 You have a wonderful day, many blessings .

[@ConvincingPeople]

Have you done a discussion of the contents of books like Sirach and Enoch yet? Because some of those Apocryphal texts are honestly fascinating.

[@jmjaquinas7298]

Big difference between Sirach and Enoch. Sirach was accepted by the Early Church Fathers and by all Christians from the Synod of Rome in 381 until the Protestant Revolt in the 1500s. Enoch is not widely accepted and is only really accepted by the Ethiopians, who are a small group of worldwide Christianity.

[@Salsmachev]

@@jmjaquinas7298 Does that matter? If it's food for thought that helps you develop your thinking about religion, I'd call that a good tree bearing good fruit.

[@ConvincingPeople]

Jesse Campbell The reason I mention both in the same breath is that both stem from incredibly old traditions with rich histories which I would love to see explored in more depth here. Furthermore, you'd be surprised at the strength of the connections between the Tewahedo Church and early Protestantism despite their opposite approaches to breadth of canon, and it would be really interesting to see that discussed here.

[@billphillips8348]

When you what to dumb people down you take away knowledge .

[@thenowchurch6419]

@@ConvincingPeople Plus, 1 Enoch is making a tremendous comeback in popularity and study among Western Christians with, the apocalyptic times, and all. Most of Christianity is sleeping on the Tewahedo much to their own loss.

[@brienmcchesney3548]

Thanks for the video! I've been working on this for an undergraduate Honors Thesis on this for 9 months and I STILL feel like there are a million more things to learn about! Very enriching things for the believer to understand!

[@gideonjudges7]

Thanks for being pretty fair with the history/the differences. I would point out three important things: 1. While the Threefold Structure of the Hebrew Canon was talked about around when you had mentioned (earliest reference comes from the intro attached to Sirach [written by the author, Yeshua ben Sira's grandson--who called them the Law, the Prophets, and "the Others"]), it was fuzzy as to which books belonged to the different collections. As you mentioned, the Samaritans only accepted the Law, but then you also have groups like the Saducees who regarded only the Law as Scripture (and then disputing with other groups about doctrines seeming to be only found in the Prophets/Writings--like the Resurrection. In the scene where Jesus is confronted by the Saducees about the situation from the Book of Tobit [one woman, married to seven husbands who died before children], He argues for the Resurrection only with the books that they actually held, the Law, rather than something like Daniel [or just straight defending Tobit], Matt. 22) Or the Essenes/the Qumran Community--more than just the current Hebrew Canon, but with Tobit, Sirach, the LXX Jeremiah [shorter Hebrew version which in Greek is combined with Lamentations, Baruch, and the Letter of Jeremiah], and apparently not accepting Esther. Or looking at the debates about the canon in the Mishnah and the Talmud--there were questions about Esther, Song of Songs, and Sirach all the way into the 300s/400s AD among the Jews (with Sirach being quoted as Scripture several times in the Talmud). The way Jesus described it was telling "The Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms"--it was not yet a set in stone collection of writings (more than just Psalms, but it still wasn't "We know exactly which XYZ books 'the Writings' refer to") 2. The Council of Jamnia was posited by a scholar in the 1870s, but scholars since the 1960s looking at the evidence say that it's almost impossible for it to have actually happened. The Jewish Canon was actually finalized around the same time as the Church was finalizing its OT--late 300s early 400s (specifically Pope St. Innocent I's letter in answer to the Bishop of Toulouse asking a question about St. Jerome's rejection of the deuteros, in 411) 3. It is a little unclear which Zechariah Jesus is referring to in the Abel to Zechariah reference. In Matthew, he is called "Zechariah son of Barachiah" (23.35) The Zechariah in 2 Chronicles 24 is called "Zechariah son of Yehodiah." The Zachariah Jesus mentioned may have been the author of the Book of Zechariah (son of Berechiah son of Iddo) or (as one late first century tradition had it) Zechariah the Father of John the Baptist--but He specifically cannot be referencing the Zechariah in 2 Chronicles.

[@ernestrobinson8441]

"but He specifically cannot be referencing the Zechariah in 2 Chronicles." Is there any reason why Jesus could not be referencing this Zechariah?

[@gideonjudges7]

@@ernestrobinson8441 Matthew 23.35 (RSV): from the blood of innocent Abel to the blood of Zechariah the son of Barachiah, whom you murdered between the sanctuary and the altar. 2 Chronicles 24:20-22 (RSV): Then the Spirit of God took possession of Zechariah the son of Jehoiada the priest; and he stood above the people, and said to them, “Thus says God, ‘Why do you transgress the commandments of the Lord, so that you cannot prosper? Because you have forsaken the Lord, he has forsaken you.’ ” But they conspired against him, and by command of the king they stoned him with stones in the court of the house of the Lord. Thus Joash the king did not remember the kindness which Jehoiada, Zechariah’s father, had shown him, but killed his son. And when he was dying, he said, “May the Lord see and avenge!” The Zechariah Jesus mentions is the son of Barachiah. The Zechariah in Chronicles is the son of Yehodiah. In order to say that they are referring to the same person, you have to also be saying either: 1. Jesus, the Incarnate God, and Author of the Scriptures made a mistake when referencing the story, 2. Matthew, inspired by the Holy Spirit made a mistake by adding an incorrect clarifying identification to Zechariah's name, or 3. That the inspired author of Chronicles identified Zechariah incorrectly. If you really need this figure to be the same as the one in Chronicles, then either Jesus/Matthew is wrong or Chronicles is wrong. I personally would rather follow the simpler option (two different names for two different people), which doesn't make the Bible contradict itself.

[@maligjokica]

@@gideonjudges7 i though that Zaharia is actually the father of saint john the baptist. At least orthodox think that way. According to our holy (oral) tradition he was killed after he refused to tell where his son is hiding after herod the great send soldiers for baby Christ to be killed.

[@gideonjudges7]

@@maligjokica right, that is one of the ancient traditions (I know it is recorded both in the Protoevangelium of James and by Origen [who rejected the Protoevangelium, so the places where he agreed with it, like the identity of Zechariah or the names of Mary's parents, are likely from an earlier tradition than either of them]) But whether it was Zechariah father of John the Baptist, Zechariah the Prophet, or even just another contemporary Zechariah with whom the audience of Jesus would have been familiar, we know for certain that it is not the Zechariah in Chronicles.

[@pichuboy8868]

Anthony Fisher Is it possible that both Jesus and Chronicles could be talking about the same Zachariah; but, using different names he had? Was it ever Jewish tradition that someone would be called the son of his father and/or grandfather? Or that one might have been the name of his biological father and the other his adopted father? I'm not trying to perform mental gymnastics; I'm just curious.

[@followersofyeshuahamashiac462]

Thanks for another very informative video! Personally I have only read 1st Book of Enoch and The Book of Maccabees (mainly because there is so much content in both that I feel I have to re-read passages again and again to really absorb all of it) but both helps you to thoroughly appreciate what's going on in the mind of an ancient Hebrew. Anyone who has really dug into the Bible can definitely grasp both books. The more I read and understand what the Holy Spirit is showing me the more amazed I am of the Bible. Part of that is understanding the Ancient Far East Hebrew. Definitely feel like your videos and content deserve more than 10 mins!

[@fighterxaos1]

I'm glad you made this. This is a way to respectfully show on what we Protestants, Catholics and Orthodox agree on and don't agree on. Especially to my friends who aren't as knowledgeable on the Bible as they'd like to be.

[@ChaplainDaveSparks]

I agree, for the same reason I respect Wayne Grudem's _"Systematic Theology"._ I may not agree with his final conclusions, but he seems to lay out the alternatives in a *FAIR* manner.

[@Shevytruck6]

I have never heard a good argument for taking the “Apocrypha“ out of the cannon. Growing up I sounded ignorant telling people The Catholics added books to the Bible. Thank God I grew up and learned how to study.

[@kauffner]

The Apocrypha are books written in Greek that were considered scripture in New Testament times. In the Middle Ages, the rabbis decided that Hebrew was the divine language and Greek language material was purged from the cannon.

[@origamitraveler7425]

@@kauffner A principle which we as Christians do not abide by, with the New Testament and all.

[@Kitiwake]

Lol. The Catholics brought you the Bible.. And now you imply fraud. Nice going.

[@origamitraveler7425]

@@Kitiwake he's defending the deuterocanon bud

[@narrowwaytolife4525]

Happy Sabbath! Friday sundown to Saturday sundown. God's 4th Holy Seventh Day Sabbath commandment. Genesis 2:2-3, Exodus 20:8-11, Isaiah 58:13, Matthew 12:8, John 14:15 If you love me keep my commandments.

[@michaeldickens3357]

Your videos are very, very informative - to the point, with just enough of references. Thank you!

[@CarsonWeber]

I recommend "Why Catholic Bibles Are Bigger: The Untold Story of the Lost Books of the Protestant Bible" by Gary Michuta.

[@edwardlucas3575]

Also, "The Case for the Deuterocanon: Evidence and Arguments" by the same author.

[@larrym.johnson9219]

Just what I was thinking about this book.

[@narrowwaytolife4525]

Happy Sabbath! Friday sundown to Saturday sundown. God's 4th Holy Seventh Day Sabbath commandment. Genesis 2:2-3, Exodus 20:8-11, Isaiah 58:13, Matthew 12:8, John 14:15 If you love me keep my commandments.

[@OtherTheDave]

“Canonical” has always struck me as a word that should be said louder, more forcefully, and with greater impact.

[@pinoychristianpilgrim]

3 ten minute scholarly work... Thank you for the illustrations...

[@DrewShrock]

These videos are such a blessing. I was raised in a Christian home and went to Christian school and even Christian college so I already know (or have known at one point) most of this information but the reminder and the format is so interesting and entertaining. Thanks so much for your hard work. It’s almost like taking a college class again! =]

[@RudyCarrera]

This is because what is taught in most of America is Protestantism, not authentic Christianity, as it's known in Europe, Africa and the Middle East. There's a wealth of knowledge that the so-called Reformers threw out. Now, with people like Matt, who comes with the spirit of humility and wanting to learn, he is helping is fellow co-religionists discover things that were lost in the West, but which we in Orthodoxy (Eastern, Oriental and Assyrian) never quite lost.

[@AndreyKarlovich]

So the protestants basically took the Masoretic texts as canon thinking it's canon... but failed to understand that this version was the one the Jews decided to change after the coming of Christ. Whereas the Septuagint was what the Jews originally used BEFORE the coming of Christ. From a Former protestant.

[@AndreyKarlovich]

@@progmanmike So you prefer to use a copy of which the Jews revised after Christ's first coming? Okay LOL It's Deuterocanonical* not apocryphal. Oh guess what, protestants never existed when the Church was compiling the Scriptures. LOL

[@Daniel_Abraham1099]

@@progmanmike sir I think you should read wisdom chapter 2 Let us therefore lie in wait for the just, because he is not for our turn, and he is contrary to our doings, and upbraideth us with transgressions of the law, and divulgeth against us the sins of our way of life. He boasteth that he hath the knowledge of God, and calleth himself the son of God. He is become a censurer of our thoughts. He is grievous unto us, even to behold: for his life is not like other men's, and his ways are very different. We are esteemed by him as triflers, and he abstaineth from our ways as from filthiness, and he preferreth the latter end of the just, and glorieth that he hath God for his father. Let us see then if his words be true, and let us prove what shall happen to him, and we shall know what his end shall be. For if he be the true son of God, he will defend him, and will deliver him from the hands of his enemies. Let us examine him by outrages and tortures, that we may know his meekness and try his patience. Let us condemn him to a most shameful death: for there shall be respect had unto him by his words. Wisdom 2:12‭-‬20 Sounds like a prophesy to me. Would you agree?

[@noahwilhelm9201]

Андрей Карлович on a different note, your username is interesting me. Are you a Russian who types perfect American English or an American who has a cool looking Russian username?

[@AndreyKarlovich]

@@noahwilhelm9201 I am not American and I do not type American English or speak American English, I type English (British). I'm from Singapore, and this is my actual name. Karlovich is my patronymic. St Andreas the First Called is my Patron Saint, hence "Andrey". I speak English, Russian and Mandarin Chinese.

[@noahwilhelm9201]

Андрей Карлович cool! I assumed it was American English due to the LOLs, which I didn’t know it was a thing beyond the US. But that’s awesome that you speak all of those languages!

[@s19wong]

Clear and compassionate. I'm glad you aren't dismissive of other traditions. As a semi-evangelical right now this makes me want to study up on apocrypha

[@layithen]

Also the Council of Jamnia is widely regarded as a myth, even most Protestant historical scholars will agree now that people were trying to use it as an anchor to give credibility to a Protestant OT. But even if Jamnia did happen a Christian has to ask themselves an important question: What authority do Jewish Scholars living in the 1st century, who are not believers in Christ, have over Christian Churches? The answer of course is none.

[@sheldonsawyer4782]

Tell that to my Messianic Rabbi

[@layithen]

​@@sheldonsawyer4782I'm not sure what your point is. There's a difference between Messianic Jews of the modern era and Jews of the 1st century who didn't believe in Christ.

[@AndrewEtmus]

Love these videos! Thanks for taking the time to do all of this research. It's so cool to see how you honor Christ in this way.

[@TheJelanii]

Sadducees be like. No prophets or writings. Only Torah. Protestants be like jews had the canon figured out lol

[@Kitiwake]

Laughable.

[@logiboy123]

I don’t know many people who were swayed by a position, because they were mocked and/or insulted.

[@misseli1]

"And then I died, now I may rest in peace"

[@digitalnomad9985]

at the castle of Aghhhhhh.......

[@sagemorrison360]

If only the zombies in Pet Sematary worked that way

[@matthewbateman6487]

Loads of fun! Always love watching your content!!! One thing I think you did not mention: Jerome conceded that the *Church* regarded the deuterocanon (the blue ones) as legitimate/authentic/authoritative scripture, despite having his own personal doubts. That one man (a Catholic saint) should feel uncertain about some of the books he was translating, does render them spiritually invalid -- and he, the saint-to-be, knew this already. He is quoted somewhere as saying (essentially) 'If they are good enough for the Church, then they are good enough for me.'

[@traviswales]

Matt, great video sir!

[@Paldasan]

Really good video, very clear. Love the editing, your use of images and overlays are always helpful. Please thank your kids from us (because I know you would have already thanked them from you) for a stellar job with their books and scrolls.

[@MattWhitmanTMBH]

Thank you very much. I will show them your comment and they will smile.

[@kwall1464]

Thanks for sharing this!

[@applehole448]

How do you not have a millions subscribers. You're content is at such a high standard and is so educational. God Bless

[@nasugbubatangas]

As a Catholic, I really enjoy watching your videos. Very informative and very scientific. I mean, when we are talking like this, we show the facts as facts and we consider that some people may not agree with us because they come from different backgrount. Thanks, Mat. I hope to see more videos like this one.

[@hunterdavis7504]

I love the long form content. I recognize that most people probably would prefer it to be shorter but all of the information you presented is invaluable and incredibly helpful. I've never taken the time to understand the origins or history of the Bible itself and this type of content makes it seem very approachable. Thank you, Matt!

[@angelr9096]

I like the longer videos. I spend most of my 8-hour work day listening to KZbin content like this, it's helpful when I don't have to pull my phone out very often

[@marcoromero1355]

It would have been a lot easier if you’d just said: “the Roman Catholic Bishops under the guidance of the Holy Spirit met at the council of Carthage and discussed the cannon. The Bible was then rolled out as an official cannon on August 28, 397 AD. The Catholic Bishops then reaffirmed the Bible and its original and it’s 73 ORIGINAL books that were tampered with by Martin Luther (and his followers) after the reformation. Today Protestants are missing 7 Old Testament books due to Martin Luther’s heretical beliefs of sacred scriptures.” See easy!

[@MattWhitmanTMBH]

It would have been easier, but it would have been inaccurate and incomplete, so that's why I didn't say it.

[@ThePainkiller9995]

Aww was expecting a burning bush at the start of the vid lol

[@wilts43]

As a loyal Catholic, St Jerome accepted the "Judgement of the Church" _(not his own scholarly opinion)_ as the last word. (See * at foot) Jesus promised the Holy Spirit would guide _His Shepherds_ (not his Scholars) "into all truth". (And the Shepherds paid homage to Jesus before The Wise Men) All the scholarly opinions are in the end an endless fudge. An _infallible selection_ (Canon) requires an _infallible authority_ which Protestants dodge. Endless Scholar-Opinions can never discern what is "God-Breathed". It is the voice of the Catholic & Apostolic Church "the pillar & ground of truth" (1 Tim3:15) that wrote, discerned & authorised what was "God-breathed". It is a question of _Authority._ The Protestant scholar RC Sproule admits the Protestant problem. But, so as not to acknowledge the Apostolic authority of The Catholic Church, he admits Protestants have a _"fallible list of infallible books"_ in the Bible! But in that case _you don't know if you have any, or all, of the right books in... or out!!!_ You have _nothing_ for certain. This renders "Biblical innerancy" void! Calvin said the right books were "self-authenticating". But this is what Mormons or Muslims say of The Book of Mormon or The Koran. The Bible is NOT a "Book"; it is a "Library". _And Libraries cannot select their own contents._ The very idea of "A Canon" of scripture came from the Catholic Church _selecting, compiling and authorising a SELECTION of writings (including certain new additions to scripture) as "God-Breathed on _*_their Apostolic Authority_* They had been preaching the Gospel for 350 years without any "Bible" as such. The Heretic Marcion had promoted the first "Canon" idea (Short, anti-semitical, promoting 2 Gods!). Then different cities permitted different books to be read from at Mass. It needed authoritative settlement by the Catholic Church. So in 367 AD St. Athanasius drew up a list of 73 books that he believed to be divinely inspired. This list was formally approved by Pope Damasus I in 382 AD, It was formally approved by the Church Council of Rome 382 AD. (Catholic Bishops) This was the start of The Universal Canon. What we today call "The Bible" Exactly the same Canon was ratified again at the Councils at Hippo (393 AD) and Carthage (397 AD) In 405 AD, Pope Innocent I wrote to the Bishop of Toulouse confirming this same Canon. In 419 AD, another Council of Carthage reaffirmed this list, which Pope Boniface agreed to. These 73 books were "The Bible" until Luther removed the Deuterocanonicals. In reaction the formal list was made dogmatic at Trent. *Questions.* (1)On what *_Authority_* did Luther remove the 7 OT Books that had been there for 1250 years? (2)Was Luther infallible in this de-selection? (3)If he was infallible......He also wanted to remove, James, Hebrews, Revelations, Jude & the Letter of John.....should these then remain? (4)Luther appeared to rely on the Jews to reject these 7 books. But they also reject Jesus _and ALL the New Testament_ How can they be the determining authority? The Protestant problem is that in accepting an _infallibly-selected_ Bible (New Testament at least) they are relying on the inherited Apostolic Authority of Catholic bishops & Popes in Councils around 400 AD. This is the very same authority that defined the Trinity, the Hypostatic Union, and much else. The problem is that if this _Apostolic Authority_ is just that, we can't pick & choose from it like a smorgasbord? *Jerome... _"Yet, though your greatness terrifies me, your kindness attracts me. From the priest I demand the safe-keeping of the victim, from the shepherd the protection due to the sheep. Away with all that is overweening; let the state of Roman majesty withdraw. My words are spoken to the successor of the fisherman, to the disciple of the cross. As I follow no leader save Christ, so I communicate with none but your blessedness, that is with the chair of Peter. For this, I know, is the rock on which the church is built! This is the house where alone the paschal lamb can be rightly eaten. This is the ark of Noah, and he who is not found in it shall perish when the flood prevails. But since by reason of my sins I have betaken myself to this desert which lies between Syria and the uncivilized waste, I cannot, owing to the great distance between us, always ask of your sanctity the holy thing of the Lord. Consequently I here follow the Egyptian confessors who share your faith, and anchor my frail craft under the shadow of their great argosies. I know nothing of Vitalis; I reject Meletius; I have nothing to do with Paulinus. He that gathers not with you scatters; he that is not of Christ is of Antichrist."_ Letter of Jerome to Pope Damasus, 376 A.D., 2

[@brandonberryhill5527]

Another great video. Everytime I was thinking you were about to glaze over a historical fact you spoke on it and it's a great point how all Christians share a large majority in common when it comes to the Bible and why. I would offer 1 missing connection, the word "authority". I tie this to St Jerome who disagreed with the 7 books of the "apocrypha/deuterocannocical". You stated on several occasions on how Jewish leaders (authority) came together to sort things out historically and Cannon prevailed through consensus. Then you state the same thing happened in the Christian tradition which St Jerome himself later submitted to, despite his personal opinion. Biblically speaking Jesus also establishes this authority as David did in (Matt 16:18/Isiah 22:22). Once we establish who that authority is in these modern times, since Jesus promised nothing would prevail against it, we quickly see a more clear picture of why 1 Christian understanding has more books verses another. In the end it is a minor detail, since the most important thing we share is the Gospels and New testament, but in pursuing One universal Christian family as Jesus calls us to be, I'm drawn back to its original Greek term by Ignatius of Antioch (107AD) katholikos.......we are told by this disciple of John we are to be 1 universal body, and to follow that authority, same as Jesus' hope in the garden of Gethsemane. May his intercession be with us all as his feast day approaches Oct 17.

[@TheGospelAccordingToMarkyD]

Hey Matt, I'd like to pitch a video topic at you for you to do. There are tons and tons and tons of videos and websites explaining HOW the New Testament came to be. I think even the unlearned have a basic understanding that a bunch of men came together and decided what books belong into the New Testament. However, there seems to be no interest to find out WHY a bunch of men came together in the first place to make that determination. What was going on in the 4th century that prompted these men to come together to finally take a stand after so many centuries and decide the rule (canon) that everyone should follow? And who gave them that authority to make such a declaration? I'm sure you'll find that answer very interesting. Take care! Love the show! Marky D. "In the house"

[@narrowwaytolife4525]

Happy Sabbath! Friday sundown to Saturday sundown. God's 4th Holy Seventh Day Sabbath commandment. Genesis 2:2-3, Exodus 20:8-11, Isaiah 58:13, Matthew 12:8, John 14:15 If you love me keep my commandments.

[@designedtoworship]

Great video Matt. I learned a ton, and I have a minor in Bible. Thanks for putting this together brother!

[@OneCatholicSpeaks]

I am speaking as a Catholic. One thing which I have heard discussed about the New Testament is the claim that NT authors used the Septuagint as their reference source when discussing OT prophesy. One thing I would also like to give you congrats on. Clearly you have your own opinions about the Deuteron-Canon/ Apocrypha. Your level of disagreement, yet respecting Catholic beliefs, is great appreciated. This just increases my respect for you. I look forward to your further videos.

[@jokermann100]

One thing I never understood is why us Christians fight so much when all we disagree on doesn't really matter in the long run. We know from biblical teaching that Jesus asks us one question "who do you say I AM?" if we agree on that one answer everything we don't agree on shouldn't matter.

[@OneCatholicSpeaks]

@@jokermann100 We must be able to discern between true fighting and debating/ discussing. Fighting is about one aggressively tearing anther down in order to feel superior. Debating/ discussing is about challenging each other. A certain amount of adversarial behavior is good. It challenges us to refine our thoughts in order to seek the truth. The problem is when it leads to pride. In pride we are blinded to our own faults and the possibility that the other may have (at the very least in part) a valid point.

[@sfca1849]

Research the Septuagint and its Apocrypha. These are the Scriptures which Jesus, his Apostles, and pre Nicene churches were familiar with.

[@methuselah7777]

I've heard more truth in less than an hour than in decades of distorted teaching... thanks indeed...

[@MrKneeV]

There were at least three canons among the Jews. The "Hebrew Canon" that you are teaching in this video is only one. When Christ talks to the Pharisees, He speaks to them in the context of their canon, which is what you are calling the "Hebrew Canon". When he talks to the Saducees, He talks to them in the context of the Pentateuch. The Jews in the Diaspora had the largest canon, but Jesus wasn't among the Diaspora Jews. The fact that Jesus mentions the prophets being killed from Abel to Zechariah only shows that He spoke to the Pharisees according to their own Scriptures.

[@carlafoss9248]

Great content! Thanks for your easy to follow lessons. I’ve been binge watching your channel since I discovered it. I loved the craft time too. Your children are precious!

[@CJChesspnp]

St Jerome translated the books from Hebrew & Greek into Latin, the language of the aRoman Church. Then carefully copied by educated monks & other clergy

[@filip1880]

I know this is an old joke but... 10 minute bible hour? More like 30 minutes bible hour :D ok ill stop

[@stevenwolf2647]

I'm so very happy to have found this channel! Ahhhhh snap! I'm digging into some research and I'm so happy with my findings :) Towards the end of the video, you said that Jude mentions "the book of Enoch". Would you mind explaining which verse that is and what version of the book of Enoch might it have been?

[@SylvEdu]

The Catholic Church has the authority to determine canon, and they decided what it would be. From whence do Protestant heretics and Talmudic Jews derive the authority to throw out the canon decided by the earliest Christian institution and councils of Bishops?

[@AndreyKarlovich]

It was the Councils that determined the canon, under the direction of the Holy Spirit with the 5 churches, Rome, Constantinople, Jerusalem, Antioch and Alexandria) However please do not claim to have "catholicity" after all what happened in 1054 oh and of course Vatican 2. LOL Both Rome and Constantinople had EQUAL ecclesiastical authority. The whole papal universal authority something only later thought of due to the greed of power.

[@SylvEdu]

@@AndreyKarlovich As a Catholic, I acknowledge the ecclesiastic authority of the other Sees despite the schism. And the Eastern Church as well as the Western Church believe that the Deuterocanonical books belong in sacred scripture. East has a few more than West, but those that exist in the official Catholic canon of scripture are agreed upon by all Sees. My point is that the canon should not be subject to the scrutiny of Protestants or Jews.

[@AndreyKarlovich]

@@SylvEdu That's pretty rare acknowledging ecclesiastical authority from the East. But wouldn't you agree that the Western church has eroded badly? Don't mind what happened between us Moscow and Constantinople, but both us and Constantinople aren't practicing liturgical abuse than compared to what is seen in the West.

[@SylvEdu]

@@AndreyKarlovich Oh, yes. I acknowledge it. But history is cyclical. Biblical history especially. When I look at the Catholic Church, I see the historical equivalent to the Pharisees. The Catholic Church will be to Christ at His second Advent what the Pharisees were to Christ at His first Advent. His antagonists. However, I still believe in the sound dogma of the Catholic Church, even if the leadership is corrupt. Peter denied Christ. Thomas doubted. Judas was apostate. All but John scattered. They were still chosen by Christ to be His representation on Earth. My attention goes to one very particular verse: _"The scribes and the Pharisees have seated themselves in the chair of Moses; therefore all that they tell you, do and observe, but do not do according to their deeds; for they say things and do not do them."_ Matt 23:2-3 I would say of the Catholic Church: "The priests and the Bishops have seated themselves in the chair of Peter; therefore all they tell you, do and observe, but do not do according to their deeds; for they say things and do not do them." In other words, the _ex cathedra_ and ecumenical pronouncements of the Church are sound, but the leadership is corrupt. And there are many Catholic Saints and martyrs who believed this very thing -- that the Catholic Church, despite being the one, holy, apostolic Church of Christ, would turn against Him and support anti-Christ. But just as many of the Pharisees repented due to Christ (Saul of Tarsus, Nicodemus, Joseph of Arimathea, etc.), so, too, will many of the Catholic Clergy also be saved.

[@stansbruv3169]

Excellent work. Thank you!

[@charleslewis9038]

Jerome's Vulgate includes the deuterocanonical books. I am not sure about the assertion that the Old Testament canon was "set" by the the first century. Reading the Dead Sea scrolls gives a very different picture. The Saducees, who had most of the control of Temple worship, held the Pentatuch only, as canon. The Pharisee party held otherwise, including the prophets the writings. The Escenes (sp?) also held a different cannon than the Pharisees or Saducees, and expressed quite a bit of anger about it in some of the fragments found at Qumran.

[@Raymondstyles]

Matt, would you be open to doing a video on books that are referenced in canonical books that are not considered Canon.

[@TylerButh]

Hey man, just wanted to say that the visuals and stories help a lot. The visuals in this video as well as another video I watched where your kids went to visit the fruity pebbles village. Those really helped understand the points you were making. Also, I really appreciate your attempt to look into things. As a Christian I often find myself discouraged by seeing how quickly other Christians (even leaders) are willing to accept a story or "fact" without checking it at all. We need more Christians to stop when they hear facts they agree with and think to themselves "but is that really true?" We certainly do that we things we don't agree with. I love the references, the explanations of where information is from so people can look it up, it's very nice.

[@gershomgale1981]

Regarding Deuteronomy 34. As Jews we have two possible explanations as to who wrote it. Both hold that the entire Pentateuch was dictated to Moses, by G-d, from beginning to end. One explanation was that Gd dictates the last chapter to Moses, who in turn dictated as Joshua wrote. The second is that Gd dictated that chapter to Moses and commanded him to write it down.

[@thepunkrockchristian]

I really love how respectful you are with regards to Catholic and Protestant differences. I feel too often there is too much disrespect on both sides, even to the extant that some people don’t consider the opposite side to be Christian! I found this channel a couple months ago and it’s really helped me. God bless, and keep doing such great work!

[@judgedredd31]

Connor Taylor I agree with your comment mostly except when you seem to imply there’s more than one way to salvation... But yeah, the disrespect is a totally downer

[@thepunkrockchristian]

Thomas Pop I personally believe that the Protestant churches, Catholic Church and Orthodox Church are all “Christian”, but the three branches practice their faith in different ways. I can’t say who’s views are the most true (I’ve got my own biases), but I believe that all who have true faith in Christ Jesus will be saved. I’ll let him decide who’s the wheat and who’s the chaff Lol!

[@angelr9096]

@@thepunkrockchristian I mostly agree :-) I definitely believe there are people who call themselves Catholic that are saved, and people who call themselves Christian that are not saved. I think what it comes down to are the core doctrines and teachings, and I have to say that I don't believe that Catholicism teaches the true gospel. They add all kinds of extra things to Salvation, all kinds of extra weird rituals that scripture does not tell us to do. There are saved Catholics, but Catholicism itself teaches a false gospel in my opinion.

[@gobokinje9183]

Short or long, this was AMAZINGLY helpful. Thank you for making it.

[@murattanyel1029]

It's interesting that I knew exactly what you were doing @ 5:58. I have recently gone over 2 Kings and remember that the king tore his clothes upon hearing the book read.

[@saturdayschild376]

If you have good content the length of the video does not matter. I think this subject rated a longer video like the one you provided. Thanks for what you are doing.

[@spencerhargadon7672]

Thanks for putting this together. I like your little buckets. If you haven't already, I would check out Gary Michuta's books "Why Catholic Bible's are Bigger" and "The Case for the Deuterocanon" if you want a thorough treatment of the Catholic perspective. It is incredibly well researched. His shorter book, "15 Myths, Mistakes, and Misrepresentations about the Deuterocanon" might be a tempting start as it is shorter but really it is a supplement for the other two.

[@precision4life756]

The modern “Christian” believes in those because it’s what been taught for so long. Never encouraged to truly find the truth. You left out the Ethiopian Bible which has many more books and you didn’t mention Dead Sea scrolls. This is part of the problem.

[@JamesRichardWiley]

Man decides which scripture is god's and which is not. I had no idea this was going on. Thank You for warning me.

[@gmac8586]

Hi Matt, love your series. I've requested this on another video's comment section, but can you do a video on the Messianic Jews? In a way they're really "new" to the Christian faith, but very ancient at the same time. Thanks for your work here and God bless!

[@Markusctfldl]

While the early Christians disagreed on which books of the 'apocrypha' were canon, they pretty much all included some of those books. The variations could just be due to these being more obscure writings of which fewer copies existed.

[@murrismiller2312]

Keep it up !!!! ....but study EASTERN ORTHODOXY ....1st .... start @ 33 AD

[@CPATuttle]

No one had the God given authority to close a cannon before a Jesus. The Dead Sea scrolls had deuterocanonical scrolls. And had them in Hebrew. The New Testament writers used the Greek Septuagint which have the deuterocanonical scrolls, and wrote the New Testament in Greek. Not Hebrew. The early Christian’s close to the apostles used the Septuagint explicitly to convert Jews. The deuterocanonical scrolls have prophesies that support Jesus as the messiah. All the oldest bibles we have Codex Vaticanus, Sanitacitus, Alexandrinus all have the deuterocanonical scrolls. The Rabbinic Jews that reject Jesus closed their cannon after Christianity started. The oldest 24 Jewish Bible list that matches the current Jewish Bible is from 2 Esdras 90-218 AD

[@davidfigueroa8188]

As a Catholic, I really enjoy your show. Keep up the good work, and God bless you!

[@prater6513]

Luke 24:44 doesn't affirm what you think it affirms. It affirms the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms, not the Writings. He doesn't say the writings, He says the Psalms, and the Writings include more than hymns and prayers. How do you explain all the imagery and the references that Christ makes to the "apocrypha"? Look at Josephus' quotation. The remaining four books. He is giving 4 books to the section of the Writings, not the 11 that you claim. In places away from the Temple, the authoritative canon of scripture was the Lxx. You see Jesus quite often quoting from it directly. You see him referencing the apocrypha, which the Lxx contains. You are mistaken when you claim it did not include the apocrypha... You find many of the apocryphal books in the Dead Sea Scrolls, even the ones that not too long ago were theorized to have originated in the Greek, are now known to have originated in Hebrew because of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Philo of Alexandria used the Lxx, that is what he quotes from. Alexandria, the birthplace of the Lxx. Luke 11:50-51 also does not speak of what you think. Your bible is organized that way by later Christians for this very purpose. Christ's scriptures were not organized that way. No early Christian scripture was. What is your answer to the Sadducees on your claim on the Jewish scriptures being set in place? Jerome is one person, one person doesn't have the say on the canon. The canon was not very in place by Jesus....that can not be said enough.

[@luisoncpp]

I don't think it's correct to regard the deuterocanonical books as simply apocrypha, it's not the same the Enoch book as the Wisdom of Solomon, for example. Being part of the Septuagint is a very important difference, I don't think I need to explain why.

[@SemiProFilmShow]

I actually prefer the longer videos its neat to be able to work through stuff in a longer one part video.

[@narrowwaytolife4525]

Happy Sabbath! God's 4th Holy Seventh Day Sabbath commandment. Friday sundown to Saturday sundown. Genesis 2:2-3, Exodus 20:8-11, Isaiah 58:13, Matthew 12:8, John 14:15 If you love me keep my commandments.

[@sjappiyah4071]

I would rather believe that moses’s hand rose from his grave and finished the book as that is just too epic thank you very much

[@magiccitymelkite6161]

Syriac is actually a dialect of Aramaic, not a cousin language. In fact, 90% of existing Aramaic literature is written in Syriac. The name Syriac comes from Syrian which comes from Assyrian, and it is called this because it was written in a script invented by Assyrians.

[@slft47]

So, the 3 fold is 100% divine, and the new testament has 2 possible exceptions of the apocrypha but is strictly limited to the 3 fold?

[@ChaplainDaveSparks]

The _"Ten Minute Bible Hour"_ seems to be the _"Grape Nuts"_ 🍇 🥜 of KZbin channels -- containing *NEITHER* grapes nor nuts. _TMBH_ seems to be neither 10 minutes nor an hour. (I borrowed the _"Grape Nuts"_ metaphor from the late Dr. Walter Martin who used it to describe _"Christian" "Science".)_ That said, the _"Bible"_ part is correct and I enjoy your content! 😀

[@manuelfaelnar4794]

“[i]t Is this Greek translation of of the Old Testament called the Septuagint that is the official Old Testament of the Orthodox Church... In the New King James Version, or any of the currently available English translations, the Old Testament is translated from the Hebrew text (I.e. Masoretic text) that was preserved by the rabbis and the Hebrew scribes. The Septuagint was actually based on an older set of manuscripts in Hebrew that are not available anymore. This Septuagint translation was made before Christ, yet the prophecies of the coming of the Saviour to Israel are far more intense in it than in the later texts.” (The Orthodox Study Bible, Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nasville, Tennessee, 1997). The Masoretic Text[note 1] (MT or 𝕸) is the authoritative Hebrew and Aramaic text of the 24 books of Tanakh for Rabbinic Judaism. It is not the original text (Urtext) of the Hebrew Bible: Urtext has never been found.[1] It was primarily copied, edited and distributed by a group of Jewsknown as the Masoretes between the 7th and 10th centuries of the Common Era (CE). The oldest extant manuscripts date from around the 9th century.[note 2]The Aleppo Codex (once the oldest-known complete copy but since 1947 missing the Torah) dates from the 10th century. The Masoretic Text defines the Jewish canon and its precise letter-text, with its vocalization and accentuation known as the Masorah. (Wikipedia) In short, the Septuagint is older than the Masoretic text.

[@martinflaskamp2398]

Came here from No Dumb Questions, i strongly agree with Destin that you are really good with words. I like to listen to your Voice/sentences. Interesting videos! Keep on, i am excited for history nuggets, when will it come out? :D

[@MountainFisher]

I remember the first time I read Chronicles I thought, Why are they repeating Kings? LOL It came to me later like reading the four Gospels. I thought the same thing about the Gospels until I got to Luke. I was new to it all and NO ONE DISCIPLED ME!!! Think about it, 50 years later it hasn't changed much. The old Puritan pastor would go and disciple his flock, especially new converts. Who does that now?

[@maxcap60]

This is crazy! you won't believe the part where he forgets the Septugint. I mean .... a MUST watch!

[@tzadiko]

From Wikipedia: "According to the Talmud, much of the Tanakh [Old Testament] was compiled by the men of the Great Assembly (Anshei K'nesset HaGedolah), a task completed in 450 BCE, and it has remained unchanged ever since."... There is a footnote that cites Talmud tractate Bava Batra 14b-15a I don't understand why Christians look to Josephus and Philo for questions like this but they almost never look at Jewish sources such as the Talmud or Rashi. It seems that many Christian scholars are simply unaware that there are Jewish sources

[@isaakleillhikar8311]

What’s Philos aknowlegemét of the three fowld canon ? What does he say ? Also, there’s one in the Dead Sea scrolls. « And I urge you to read and I send you the books of the Law, the Prophets, David and the Events. » David is the Psalms, first book on the list, the Events is Chronicles, (today it’s called the Book of the Matters of the Times.) the last one. I don’t see what else it could mean than first and last of the writings.

[@gerro0238]

Roman Catholics got their OT from the Septuagint translated by Jews which was commissioned by King Ptolemy of Egypt 300 years before Christ, while protestants got their OT from the Hebrew lists (official) of books compiled many years after Christ by Jews after the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem. St. Jerome was mistaken to consider the Hebrew canon as more original than the septuagint, because he thought that the Hebrew canon was the more original simply because it was the Hebrew canon. This is according to google: "Is the Septuagint older than the Dead Sea Scrolls? These include early Greek (Septuagint) and Syriac (Peshitta) translations, the Samaritan Pentateuch, the Dead Sea Scrolls and quotations from rabbinic manuscripts. Most of these are older than the oldest surviving Masoretic text (e.g. Hebrew canon) often contradict it."

[@TroyLFullerton]

Hey, Matt--- Fantastic job on this edition of the 35-min. Bible hour. 😊 I wanted to thank you for clearing up a question I've always had about Jesus referring to Zechariah. I was not aware that by the time of Jesus, Chronicles were written last-- that really explains a lot. Appreciate you man! Bless you!

[@RonJohn63]

10:34 Because that's what the Jews call it? 27:32 The root of Vulgate is "vulgus". Vulgate thus means "for the common people". (The world "vulgar" meant "used by common people", which should tell you how commoners spoke way back when.)

[@joedatuknow]

Thats great way of thinking about this book also showing saport from the MARFOOGLE FAMILY love your videos

[@matthewbateman6487]

at 29:55 'Jesus only quotes from *these [red yellow green] writings'. Yes but Jesus also from unknown sources.. Paul quotes from pagan poets.. Jude quotes from the Book of Enoch... So quoting from something is not the litmus for whether that work is canon. Also, I believe there are minor prophets, Song of Songs, maybe some others, that Jesus does not quote from as well... In addition to this, the apostles who requote the OT in the NT are almost always quoting from the Septuagint, not the Hebrew. I cannot see why they would have done this if they regarded the Septuagint as spiritually invalid. Lastly, you mentioned some vague allusions to the deuterocanon.. But see how Matthew 27:43, "He trusts in God. Let God rescue him now if he wants him, for he said, 'I am the Son of God.'"" is eerily similar to the deuterocanonical passage from Wisdom 2:18, "For if the righteous one is the son of God, God will help him and deliver him from the hand of his foes." This is not a coincidence. It seems prophetic to me (like Psalm 22) and makes it clear that the apostle Matthew was *very familiar with this passage from Wisdom.

[@MaiaGothmog]

Those who say that the OT canon wasn't established until the 1st century are ignoring Sirach, written in the 160's BC, which makes reference to the three-fold complete canon of the OT several times: "the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings". Plus, Jesus and the Sanhedrin had many disagreements, but one thing they were never divided over was the canon of scripture.

[@Pandaemoni]

I am less sure that Moses himself authored the Torah (which neatly explains how it talks about his own death). The Paleo-Hebrew alphabet supposedly developed after the Bronze Age Collapse (and seemingly in the Levant), which seems to be too late and in the wrong place for Moses. The versions we have of the Torah are generally thought to be from the post-Exilic period (c. 5th century BC), although they may be copies of older works, those would have used the Paleo-Hebrew alphabet as the more modern "square" Hebrew alphabet would take a couple more centuries to develop. Surely the (spoken) language evolved in the centuries between the Exodus and the Babylonian Exile which iis its own interesting question: how easy was for people from the Exilic period era to even understand the language of their ancient ancestors.

[@livingpicture]

Note that most places where the New Testament quotes the OT, and possibly ALL places where Jesus does so, they quote from the Septuagint, as indicated by the fact that these quotes match the Greek Septuagint word for word. Thus, it can be verified that the Septuagint was readily available to the writers of the NT. One other thing: no mention of "the" Talmud, but I think technically, there is more than one. That's ok as far as Christians go, because if I'm correct, Jesus rejects it as little more than a bunch of rules that the Jews saddled themselves with.

[@dr.sergiom3865]

As I've seen it, the writers of the Apochrypha had the opportunity of having already the true canon of books, so they did references to those books, Jesus Christ and his true Apostles did it to the true canon as well. But, since the writers of the Apochrypha were not considered prophets those books have some sort of historic writings, but, we all can go and read how in Tobit for example an angel is not clearly from God. The whole story let us know this is not from God. Anyhow, Plato invented purgatory, Catholic Church supports this pagan tradition with the book of Macabees. Non of the writings in new testament show to us the disciples of Christ Jesus believed in a purgatory. But Jesus Christ's story about the rich and Lazarus let us know there is no purgatory. Besides that, some say Codex Sinaiticus is a fake. a translation made by Constantine Simonides to his uncle an Orthodox monk named Benedict for a present to a friend, Sar Nicholas I, for getting more money. Found by a lier, Konstantin Tischendorf who presented it as one of most ancient texts found. Now, based on this bible (Codex Sinaiticus) used to a deffense of the Septuagint, created by Filo of Alexandria in junction with its Septuagint Propaganda book the Letter of Aristeas, and an attack to the King James Bible, so that nowadays, all new catholic and protestant bibles look a lot alike, even diminishing our Lord Jesus Christ, so that is not that offensive to every one. opening the door to what the Pope has been working on since John Paul II and on. And, great video. Thanks and blessings to you and your family.

[@harroldhenderson]

Completely ignore the science and your opinion is just that. An unsupported opinion. The Torah was compiled using Egyptian mythology, Canaanite mythology, and plagiarized the Epic of Gilgamesh. The bottom line is that the Torah is mythology.

[@tzadiko]

I don't follow your reasoning of why the Septuagint is so significant... The Jews have persevered the original Hebrew version of all the Old Testament books throughout history until the present day... Why is a Greek translation done much later of any significance?

[@smurf_nfo2030]

A good friend of mine in the Navy was a Protestant Minister/Navy Chaplain. He told me that the Apocrypha was left out of the Protestant Bible since the only remaining translations at the time were Greek and the Jews at the time didn't recognize Greek translations. The military used to be a very ecumenical place as the chaplains job was to support each person's religious beliefs even if they were of a different faith. They really took effort to understand other theology. The Orthodox Church actually has a few more Apocrypha books than the Catholic Bible. They are very important, especially Maccabees as their revolt was a key event. Old Testament scripture is ancient and that is probably the real reason for the uncertainty of which books to use. This is a good video. The Apocrypha is good to read and acknowledge the points in this video.

[@tomlawhon6515]

According to Jewish tradition, there were 120 leaders including 11 prophets who are named in the Bible plus the person who would be the rightful King of Israel from the line of David if Israel was politically free who all had returned to the land of Israel during the time of Ezra and Nehemiah and these prophets by the word of the LORD were capable of authoritatively saying which books were to be canonical and which were not to be so regarded. The closest the Greek language scriptures come to this is the writings and sayings of the so-called early Church Fathers who had lived contemporaneously with the first apostles and we have some writing of these Church Fathers and presumably the second or third generation of church leaders after the generation contemporaneous with the apostles had writings and oral traditions in addition to what survives today. We know that the earliest Church Fathers quoted from various books of the Bible, and even if the earliest Church Fathers did not quote every scripture, as far as we know, from the Canon, the early Church had a good idea of what the Apostles regarded as scriptures. Greek language Scripture writing began again after the Day of Pentecost. On the Day of Pentecost was present about 120 names, including the 12 Apostles, and the eldest half brother of Jesus. Since Jesus while in earth was the rightful King of Israel, therefore James the eldest half brother of Jesus was on the day of Pentecost the rightful King of Israel, which is significant because the members of the Great Assembly who had determined the Canon, and some of whom were present had said that true prophecy would cease, declared that the Canon was closed. To overrule a decision of such an assembly would require an assembly greater in number and in wisdom than the assembly that closed the Canon. On the Day of Pentecost a group was present that was about 120, therefore presumably greater in number than the 120 men who decided the Hebrew Scripture Canon and said the Canon was closed to new additions. What is more, there was one more Apostle that is named in the Greek language scripture than there had been number of prophets who are named in the Hebrew Canon that tradition says we're present at the Great Assembly. This may be why it was so important for a replacement for Judas to be named before the Day of Pentecost. Also present together with the Apostles and others was the rightful King of Israel, James the half brother of Jesus. The names present on the Day of Pentecost included women as well as men and all were greater in wisdom than the earlier assembly because they had all heard Christ himself. Therefore, prophecy was fully restored and Scripture could be written once more with full authority. As for the Codices you referenced, only Alexandrinus is worthy of consideration. The claims of the man who said that in the 1800s he hand wrote the Codex Sinaiticus in an old style intended as a gift from his uncle, a Bishop in an orthodox monastery, to the Czar of Russia, the monastery's patron, because his uncle was hoping the Czar would give him a printing press to promote his Jesus God's Son by adoption at his baptism because that theological view better meshed with his uncle's desire for Greek Orthodox Christians to rebel against the Muslim Ottoman Turks. The uncle collected manuscripts from everywhere including gnostic Christian graveyards. His uncle's only concern was promoting his politically convenient theology. The bulk of the church decided this man was a liar because his involved story seemed far fetched and believed another man whose story has obvious discrepancies on its face, such as saying monks were saying parchments to burn for heat. But parchment does not burn. It just smolders and stinks. He also took pages to the Czar. But the first pages he took of Codex Sinaiticus were snowy white, but later he took the rest of the same Codex to the Czar, and these pages looked old. A monk said he saw this man putting lemon juice on the manuscript to make it look old. A man named David Daniels checked out the story that the Codex Sinaiticus had been produced in the 19th century, and found that with modern internet research that the story that had been regarded as too convoluted could be proved in every detail. He concluded that Codex Sinaiticus was produced in the 19th century as claimed on the basis that liars lie and truth tellers tell the truth. On man's story checks out, the others falls flat. He has screen shots from when Codex Sinaiticus was online, and the first pages taken to the Czar are still white and the rest of the pages look dark and old, which is consistent with using fakery to make the pages look older than they are. When David Daniels published that information and people started noticing the differences, the Vatican authorities took down the images of the pages of the Codex Sinaiticus from the internet. Codex Vaticanus also has problems in that it is supposed to be a copy from the 4th Century but has an obvious mistake that is not copied by any other manuscript until the 9th Century, which makes it more likely that someone much later copied from the 9th Century copy or copied from a later copy based on the 9th Century copy. That leaves Codex Alexandrinus all by itself as the earliest relatively complete copy of the Greek Scriptures.

[@shaolinshowdown1123]

Simply put phrase to explain the Canonization of the Bible... "A book is not inspired because man made it canonical. A book is canonical because God inspired it."

[@ABird971]

You speak of Christian and Hebrew, I think you mean to say Christian and Jewish. Would I be correct in saying that the reason the reformed Church regards only those 39 books as canon is because they went with the Masoretic text of the Jews, assuming it to be closer to the Urtext. If this is the case one would have to give the Masoretic text a proper look and if you do, you might discover that it was in fact, contrary to what the reformers thought, NOT closer to the Urtext than the Latin or the Greek. Where did the Masoretic text come from?

[@MattWhitmanTMBH]

The reason I use the term Hebrew at times in the video and Jewish at times in the video is because the time span covered in this canonization process is so great that the identity of the people and the name used to describe them changed during that time. Throughout the video I tried to use the accepted language for the time in question.

[@IamGrimalkin]

Oh cool, I can see you are adding further layers of nuance to what you were saying in your previous apocrypha video. Also, I very much like your review of mentions the Old Testament canon structure/formation in the bible and other historical sources, it's very well set out. A few bits of further nuance you might want to include if you feel like doing another video (you don't need to though, what you've done so far is plenty): -I'd be interested hearing your take on the possible Messianic prophecy in the Wisdom of Solomon which I'm sure you've heard lots of Catholics telling you about by now. -Personally, I don't think we should lump the Daniel and Esther additions to the issue of canonicity. That question is about what's in the books, not what books are authoritative. -I don't know when the sub-sections of the three buckets appeared (former and latter major prophets+minor prophets for The Prophets; poetry + the five megillot + other writings for The Writings) but I think it might be worth exploring those sub-sections; and in particular why the five megillot are also not quoted directly in the New Testament, except Ruth as part of genealogies.

[@dantallman5345]

Nice visuals! The jars of scrolls right in the forefront undergirds a very clear explanation of the topic.

[@KethenGoesHam]

So if everyone finds them valuable why is it such a point of controversy? Maybe Catholics were just like, "Hey, these are clearly valuable, if we don't add them they will get lost". How is that not valid enough? It's not like they are going to force you to change your religion?

[@gerro0238]

The Septuagint makes more sense or is really a better choice because in 1947 the dead sea Scrolls were discovered and copies of the books in the septuagint are in the dead sea scrolls except for the Book of Esther. This could mean that the Jews in Jerusalem during the time of Jesus were aware of these writings and considered them to be of importance, sacred probably. Modern scholars are divided as to the Hebrew canon; the Sadducees during the time of Jesus recognized only the five Books of Moses. So what is the oldest date for the Masoretic text? Most probably after the destruction of the second Temple in Jerusalem in 70 AD.

[@JoeHTX]

I don't understand why near the end of the video you stated that "God purports to be". Look up the word purport and you will see that it means "to appear or claim to be or do something, especially falsely; profess." I'm hoping that was just a poor choice of words on your part because God doesn't 'purport', or, claim falsely anything. That's what the word purport has always meant to me and everyone I know, and it's used when you want to cast doubt on someone's statement or claim.