Response to Canon Comments

I would like to do some posts on Sola Scriptura and the canon as Catholic e-pologists promote false statements about these things, but don’t have the time right now to give it the proper attention.

For now I will just refute a few of the comments made here regarding these topics:

The Church was founded in 33 AD. While the apostles and disciples were spreading the faith throughout the world, they began to write. The Church finished writing the bible in about 100 AD, and the Church finally decided which books belonged in about 397AD. jswranch

Long before Jerome assembled the first Bible, timothy

When I look at Church history I find councils of Bishops at Hippo and Ephesus deciding these matters. timothy


Wrong. The Roman Catholic canon was not decided until the Council of Trent in 1546.

“The idea of a complete and clear-cut canon of the New Testament existing from the beginning, that is from Apostolic times, has no foundation in history. The Canon of the New Testament, like that of the Old, is the result of a development, of a process at once stimulated by disputes with doubters, both within and without the Church, and retarded by certain obscurities and natural hesitations, and which did not reach its final term until the dogmatic definition of the Tridentine Council.” Catholic Encyclopedia

The fact is, the canon of the old testament remained in dispute through the years before Trent made its decision. Jerome was strongly against the idea of the deuterocanonicals as inspired scripture (those 7 books Luther supposedly through out of Protestant bibles) as were other members of the early church such as Origen, Athanasius, Cyril, and Epiphanius and others.

The doubts about the OT canon continued through the middle ages.

“In the Latin Church, all through the Middle Ages we find evidence of hesitation about the character of the deuterocanonicals. There is a current friendly to them, another one distinctly unfavourable to their authority and sacredness, while wavering between the two are a number of writers whose veneration for these books is tempered by some perplexity as to their exact standing, and among those we note St. Thomas Aquinas. Few are found to unequivocally acknowledge their canonicity. The prevailing attitude of Western medieval authors is substantially that of the Greek Fathers. The chief cause of this phenomenon in the West is to be sought in the influence, direct and indirect, of St. Jerome's depreciating Prologus. The compilatory "Glossa Ordinaria" was widely read and highly esteemed as a treasury of sacred learning during the Middle Ages; it embodied the prefaces in which the Doctor of Bethlehem had written in terms derogatory to the deuteros, and thus perpetuated and diffused his unfriendly opinion.” Catholic Encyclopedia

The Roman Catholic canon was not ratified until 1546 at Trent, the time of the Reformation (not at Hippo or Ephesus as Timothy and jswranch tried to claim). The Protestant Bible is compatible with Jerome’s (and others) view of the OT canon, while the Catholic Bible is not.

We can debate over who currently has the correct canon, but the fact remains that the Catholic Church did not give the world the Bible back in 397AD.