Why Do Orthodox Have More Old Testament Books in Their Bibles?

[ruralsquirrel]

Luther mistakenly believed that the oldest translation of the Bible was Hebrew, so he used the Masoretic text as his source, which was a huge mistake and shockingly unscholarly (in my opinion). Luther removed a bunch of books from the Protestant Bible also in part because they didn't support his interpretation of Scripture and his perception of the problems in Christianity as he experienced them in his time and place. He wanted to remove James, Hebrews, and a few others, because they don't support his 3 Solas dogma, but that didn't happen fortunately.

[santamanone]

Actually Luther left them in and Lutherans continued to use them until WWI. Even then most European Lutherans continued to use them. The only reason American Lutherans stopped is because when the US entered the war American Lutherans stopped having their services in German and needed to find English language Bibles. The most commonly available in the US was the American version of the King James Bible which had had the apocryphal books removed in the 1800s. (The original 1611 translation still had it)

[Cryptic_Llama]

Why should I trust the Masoretic Text over Septuagint in the first place when the Septuagint is pre Christ. Because it was made before Christ, like the Dead Sea Scrolls, we can trust that there isn't the bias of Jews who were against Christ applied to it. I think that is correct.

[Joanna-rfcr]

Great topic to make a clip about! Would love a longer, in-depth deep dive on it, but for a short clip this was awesome!

[christopherbautista]

both catholic and orthodox churches does include those apocryphal books

[michaelramsis]

Not only the Orthodox
Also the catholic
Coptic Orthodox here

[HollywoodBigBoss]

Actually they were removed in the 1880s because they wanted to print the King James Bible cheaper. They were originally in the King James in 1611. Martin Luther did not remove them and I believed that lie for over 2 decades.

[darrellmartin]

Im glad i came across this thread. Im on a personal journey right now that i feel the lord wants me on. He doesnt want me to fight or argue about what scripture is right or wrong. He does t even want me to read just one book. I feel he wants me to read them all. Going backwards in time through the books to see where they were first altered or had things either added or removed. I noticed in the greek orthodox bible inorder to ask from go a you must pray as does the king james but however the james bible does t tell you to fast as well after you pray and ask for whateve it is you are wanting. Why was that pulled out?
Just the smallest thing that gets added or removed could alter the way we are supposed to be in the lords eyes. Non of the books we read today came from before jesus. But the roman empire did become the catholic church who started to right the new bibles of today. Well i for one dont trust the ones who wanted to kill jesus. So me journey has started me to learn hebrew and to read sanskrit. Since this was the writing and language of jesuses time and before. So lets not argue with each other lets learn. The way the lord wants us too.

[Jesusisnumberone]

Martin Luther kept them but put them at the end. It was in the 1800's that they were removed

[P-elzd]

I am enjoying your channel. As a confessional Lutheran who is exploring Orthodoxy, the claim Luther removed the Apocrypha is a common misconceptions. No Luther did not remove the Apocrypha/Deuterocanonical what he did was place them in between the Old and New Testament. It was the “Puritans” that removed Apocrypha/Deuterocanonical not Luther and the Lutherans.

The Lutheran confessions do not have official cannon list. The Lutheran German Bible translation established the boundaries of which books should and can be used. This would include all 66 books that Protestant use, plus the Apocrypha/Deuterocanonical books. These are the same books the Catholics use, which would include books such as 1 and 2 Maccabees, Tobit, Sirach, etc. Lutherans use the Apocrypha/Deuterocanonical books in our confessions, the liturgy, hymnody, etc. I read these books on a weekly basis.

[JP-rfrr]

Luther never removed the deuterocanonicals. His translation still had them. He just didn't associate them with the rest of scripture and followed in the tradition of St. Cyril of Jerusalem.

[InfinitelyManic]

Luther didn't remove them, but relocated them to the place between the testaments.

[Jesuslovemethisiknow]

Those extra books do not conflict or change the theme of the Bible,
so it doesn’t invalidate Protestants. But I would like to know why were those books not included though.

[andrewgeissinger]

Luther's translation contains the deuterocanonical books, so where do you get the idea that he removed those books?

[haroldgamarra]

Why do Orthodox Christians have more old testament books than roman catholics?

[Coconutdoggy]

So are we not going to acknowledge the Dead Sea Scrolls’ biblical materials match almost exactly with the Masoretic Texts?

[onlylove]

🚨🚨🚨 Martin Luther did not remove the deuterocanon books, please my Brother and Sisters, do it homework. This video could have been so much better. Protestants didn't start taking them out till the 19th century, so those 66 books they say r cannon is not even 150 yrs old. Cuz when the KJV was written it had the deuterocanon books, but it had a total of 80 books, nowhere near 66 as of 2day, but protestants dnt study this info, well my friends u need to.

[krishnasaikia]

Text is infallible only if they support me.

[mkbr]

Unscholarly. As if all the Reformers followed Martin Luther's every definition.

It's important to note that many of the Church Fathers did not consider the apocrypha canon even though the apocrypha was contained in the septuagint.

[blazers]

Isn’t the protestant Old Testament the same content wise as the Hebrew Bible, just some books in different order, and the books are more broken up in the OT like 12 books for minor prophets rather the 1 book for the 12 in the Hebrew Bible