How were the books of The Bible decided? A Catholic Critique of Protestant Claims @bible.animations

Who decided which books belong in the Bible? How many books did they decide? Do we today as Christians have the right ones? Joe Heschmeyer covers these questions and more in today's episode.

Get more Shameless Popery on Patreon!

Timestamps:
00:00 Questions on Bible's origins explored.
00:36 Defense of 66-book Protestant Bible critiqued.
02:26 Discrepancies in 7 books highlighted; Esther, Daniel variations.
03:02 Debate on Bible's authority and compilation process.
03:27 Catholic view on Bible's inspiration clarified.
04:49 Focus on New Testament's historical context.
05:51 Caution against ahistorical approach to canon formation.
06:38 Reliability of early Christian consensus questioned.
08:24 Debate on historical accuracy of New Testament canon.
09:52 Comparison of early criteria for canonization.
10:13 Challenge to reliability of early Christian criteria.
12:55 Historical debate on New Testament canon formation.
13:15 Jewish canon's development differences discussed.
14:11 Debate on Jewish canon's historical development.
15:18 Evidence against fixed 24-book Hebrew Bible.
16:56 Early Christian views and disputes on Old Testament.
17:55 Synod of Hippo establishes New Testament canon (393 AD).
18:16 Debate over inclusion of Old Testament books.
18:57 Historical context and theological implications of Septuagint.
22:21 Septuagint's importance in New Testament context.
23:15 Hebrews 10 and Psalm 40 versions contrasted.
24:10 Preference for Septuagint over Hebrew texts.
25:31 Deuteronomy 18:15 misinterpretation in canonical context.
26:44 Jewish Bible included disputed books; early Christian quotes.
27:07 Old Testament contradictions with sola fide; James 2:24.
28:51 Historical uncertainty; Hanukkah in Maccabees.
30:32 New Testament quotes don't universally define scripture.
32:33 Christian consensus on 73 books' authority.
33:24 Trust Catholic Bible or face uncertainty.
34:12 Acknowledgements for community and content improvements.

[allthingsweb]

I'm a simple guy I see a new Shameless video, I shamelessly click

[RomingAroundTown]

First thing that dropped when I was Protestant. I was so furious and disturbed by the historical truth that it propelled me into researching almost every doctrine throughout Christendom. Now I’m no longer Protestant.

[consecratedsoul]

Archbishop Fulton Sheen: “The Church did not come out of the Gospels, the Gospels came out of the Church."

Ora pro nobis. +JMJ+

[rexfordtugwelljr]

Joe Heschmeyer, you are quickly becoming my favorite apologist. I always learn a ton of facts with every podcast.

[canibezeroun]

Protestants trusting Jews like they don't have a dog in the fight is insane.

[jonatasmachado]

As a former Baptist, I stick to the Canon of the Catholic Church

[heygloria]

This topic is what brought me to Catholicism. I’m no longer Protestant.

[XavierPuig-dowe]

Don’t ever stop clearing out the lies in Christendom. Former Protestant here, gonna do confession soon and have been attending mass because of Catholic Answers work

[josh]

This was a huge one for me. Growing up protestant I had no idea what the Septuagint was. Once I found out that the early church used it and most of Christianity did as well, I refused to say "The early church got these books wrong and we didn't catch it till Luther but got complex doctrines like the Trinity correct". I couldn't reconcile that

[jmisssjb]

Who are these people that are only watching Shameless Popery videos for half an hour? That was really shocking and disappointing to find out. During Lent I gave up online streaming, with two exceptions. The first was Fr Mike Schmitz’s homilies, and the last, but certainly not least, Shameless Popery. And for the same reason did I permit them, for being edifying. If you manage to do two a week at 30 minutes each, then I guess that’ll hold me over. But man I’m really going to miss the hour long episodes. They’re TOO GOOD. Seriously, those of you who give up halfway, shame! Lol

[henrytucker]

This subject is a major argument for the need for a magisterium and sacred tradition. We are 2, 000 years into this religion and still having arguments among adherents on the sacred texts of the faith. While this is not a big deal with orthodox, Copts and Catholics because we don’t subscribe to sola scriptura, it’s a huge deal for Protestants, because their position is the clear historical interloper and severely weakens the reliability of the canon.

[enderwiggen]

For protestants … it was decided by an excommunicated priest (not even a bishop).

[alexd]

Your channel makes me feel like I’m earning my doctorate, God bless my man keep up the incredible work!

[TheHumbleConvert]

Thanks Joe so much for the last 2 videos!!! I’m the one who suggested this and I really appreciate it!

[CamiloSoares]

I love the deep-dive long format episodes that you usually make

[harley]

I did a Sunday school class in my Protestant church on textual criticism and briefly touched canonicity- although I gave arguments from Kruger and James White I was nervous and thought the arguments were shaky and cut that section short. An honest look at the canon is wont to dispel Sola Scriptura.

[xbaker_x]

Noooo, this can't be... GOD IS GOOD! I was struggling with protestant objections on the canon and the apocryphta. I literally have been watching videos for 4 hours. Now I got recommended this video.

[johnjames]

Joe, if your videos were 4 hrs long I'd watch the whole thing. Best apologetics out there

[killianmiller]

Another canon argument that I’ve become interested in is how undecided it was all the way up to its solemn dogmatizing at Trent. While yes we have many regional councils and even ecumenical councils prior to Trent that corroborate the Catholic canon, we can still see disputes over certain books through history even with cardinal Cajetan in the 16th century. This indicates that the canon was not so big an issue for most Christians that the church had to define it, because they had the church to teach sound doctrine. If Sola Scriptura was the paradigm, we should expect to see the canonizing of scripture far earlier in history and far more solemnly, but we don’t.

[ozoz]

I think it begs the question, why were these 7 books accepted at all if the Protestant position is correct. And where is the pushback from church fathers arguing that these 7 books are to be left out, unless I missed that point. It just seems strange that 1100 hundred years later, give or take, Martin Luther with his superior knowledge of everything says “Oh I see the problem, these 7 books need to be removed.” And no one else east or west came to the same conclusion?