Why Do Catholics Accept the Deuterocanonical Scriptures?

Jimmy Akin is an internationally known author and speaker. As the senior apologist at Catholic Answers, he has more than twenty years of experiencing defending and explaining the Faith.

Jimmy is a convert to the Faith and has an extensive background in the Bible, theology, the Church Fathers, philosophy, canon law, and liturgy.

[KP-ejgc]

Never realized the word “canon” was applicable to anything other than fandoms.

I definitely need Jesus.

[nathanjohnwade]

God has never been silent, actually, it's us humans refuse to listen.

[EmeraldPixelGamingEPG]

Just read Wisdom 2:12-20. This is too strikingly perfect to not be inspired.

[abc-ebrq]

Our Protestant brothers say no one is infallible, then contradict themselves and claim their humanly devised criteria can infallibly determine what books are God-breathed Canon. But this cannot be true because fallible human opinion has no way of ever infallibly knowing what books are God-breathed. Happily, we can know what books are God-breathed Canon because God gave infallibility in this matter to "The One True Church, " the Roman Catholic Church. This must be true or we can never know the authentic Bible.

[CPATuttle]

I noticed Protestants make a lot of assumptions

[michaelhaywood]

Some Protestant Bibles contain the Duetrocanical Books and lump them together between the OT and the NT under the name of Apocrypha. Also, the Protestant Bible cut out parts of the Books of Esther and Daniel which are also in the Apocrypha. Some copies of the Apocrypha also contain the two Books of Esdras and the short Prayer of Manasseh, which occur in some Eastern Orthodox Bibles.

[Exmuslimcatholic]

Can some one answer for me a question on Baruch. I am a Catholic.

A Lutheran was telling me today that Catholics added Baruch in the 9th century and that Jerome didn’t have. Baruch in the vulgate. I told him it was in the Septuagint and in the canon proposed by athanasius.

Can anyone clarify for me more on this subject. Also we’re j can find sourcing to show him?

[leofelipe]

One of their arguments about God silent is Luke 11:51. What could be think about that?

[OptimusPrime]

I don't think his answer is 100% reliable, especially about the first Counsel of Nicaea list of scriptures.

[HillbillyBlack]

Matthew 5:17
"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

Christ affirms the pentateuch and the Nevi'im.

If the deuterocanonical cannon is “inspired” as scripture in accordance to the council of Trent, which category do these seven books fall into in order for Jesus to fulfill them? As far as I can tell in research there’s no law or prophetic passages in them. The law is sealed after Moses and before the prophets plus there doesn’t seem to be mention of any existing profits during the timeframe of these books.

[iscool]

2:29, God did promise silence in Joel 8:12. You also didn't mention that these books were not canon until 1546, and they were never Jewish canon.

[HollywoodBigBoss]

I used to be a Protestant but after reading the Deuterocannonical Books I could only conclude that those 7 books were Sacred Scripture and the Word of God.

[shaolinshowdown]

[1] True 1:50. But.. Matthew 23:35 Jesus professed this to the wicked pharisees. This passage is very significant because it mentions Able (in Genesis) all the way to Zachariah (Chronicles) which in chronological order is Malachi. Jesus recognized in scripture from Genesis all the way from Malachi. Which ultimately excludes the testaments of the Apocrypha.

Jesus even said in Luke 24:44 (KJV) And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. thoes books cant be of the prophets. No excuse.

[2] and the reference that Jesus and deciples quoting the Apocrypha is same logic as when Paul quoted some pegan philosophers statements here and there. Should we then add all those books to bible aswell?

[3] The idea is not to score points or appeal to authority. A bad argument is an argument with a false premise or a conclusion that doesnt necessarily prove its premise. That which is an, illogical fallacy. Consensus in church doesnt make anything valid. And there were early Catholic church fathers who were skeptical about Apocrypha aswell..

[4] I would LOVE TO HEAR any Catholic try to disprove me on this. All you really have to go on is that you trust the Catholic father by blind faith. LITERALLY your only option tbh.

[stevetucker]

You people are the same as KJV onlyists. You’re view of the Bible is based on research of information that seems to make sense on the surface but has many more details that you’ve overlooked. It’s a more complex issue than you realize, and you haven’t researched it as in depth as you need to. I suggest reading “Why Protestant Bibles Are Smaller” by Steve Christie.