Why did the vatican remove 14 books from bible?

[Godistruth1]

Why did the Vatican remove the below books from bible?

• 1 Esdras
• 2 Esdras
• Tobit
• Judith
• The rest of Esther
• The Wisdom of Solomon
• Ecclesiasticus
• Baruch with the epistle Jeremiah
• The Songs of the 3 Holy children
• The history of Susana
• bel and the dragon
• The prayer for Manasses
• 1 Maccabees
• 2 Maccabees

 

[FenderTL5]

Why did the Vatican remove the below books from bible..

the Vatican is Roman Catholic and did not remove those books.

It was publishers selling books to Protestants (who didn't agree with those books being included for the most part) who removed those books.
It was a marketing/capitalistic decision not a theological one.

 

[ananda]

Why did the Vatican remove the below books from bible?

• 1 Esdras
• 2 Esdras
• Tobit
• Judith
• The rest of Esther
• The Wisdom of Solomon
• Ecclesiasticus
• Baruch with the epistle Jeremiah
• The Songs of the 3 Holy children
• The history of Susana
• bel and the dragon
• The prayer for Manasses
• 1 Maccabees
• 2 Maccabees

Many of those books are in the Roman Catholic canon.

 

[Godistruth1]

the Vatican is Roman Catholic and did not remove those books.

It was publishers selling books to Protestants (who didn't agree with those books being included for the most part) who removed those books.
It was a marketing/capitalistic decision not a theological one.

If they are word of God why is it not included in RSV which is most used bible. Surely it was not excluded because of extra paperwork cost although its the word of God?

 

[Godistruth1]

Many of those books are in the Roman Catholic canon.

How can it be removed from newer versions although being word of God?

 

[ananda]

How can it be removed from newer versions although being word of God?

Different people have different ideas on what the "word of god" is.

 

[Godistruth1]

Different people have different ideas on what the "word of god" is.

What is your definition?

 

[ananda]

What is your definition?

Well, since I do not believe "god" is the highest ideal, the "word of (a) god" is ultimately irrelevant to me.

 

[FenderTL5]

If they are word of God why is it not included in RSV which is most used bible. Surely it was not excluded because of extra paperwork cost although its the word of God?

RSV with those books.

 

[Godistruth1]

Well, since I do not believe "god" is the highest ideal, the "word of (a) god" is ultimately irrelevant to me.

I am not sure if I get your point. Care to elaborate?

 

[ananda]

I am not sure if I get your point. Care to elaborate?

I do not believe that any "god" is the supreme state in or out of the Universe. I believe Nibbana is the supreme state instead. So, since "god" is not supreme in my world-view, I see little use for the "word of (a) god".

 

[Godistruth1]

I do not believe that any "god" is the supreme state in or out of the Universe. I believe Nibbana is the supreme state instead. So, since "god" is not supreme in my world-view, I see little use for the "word of (a) god".

I want to know more. I'll pm u

 

[dreadnought]

the Vatican is Roman Catholic and did not remove those books.

It was publishers selling books to Protestants (who didn't agree with those books being included for the most part) who removed those books.
It was a marketing/capitalistic decision not a theological one.

If Protestants don't believe those books belong in the Bible, then Protestants don't believe those books belong in the Bible. That's not really a marketing/capitalistic decision, is it?

 

[FenderTL5]

If Protestants don't believe those books belong in the Bible, then Protestants don't believe those books belong in the Bible. That's not really a marketing/capitalistic decision, is it?

It is when it was the publishers who made the move to remove them outright, then marketing the new product to the Protestants (who weren't using the Apocrypha anyway).

Even some of the new English translations exist (see NIV & NKJV as examples) because publisher's wanted to control the publishing rights.

 

[dreadnought]

It is when it was the publishers who made the move to remove them outright, then marketing the new product to the Protestants (who weren't using them anyway).

Even some of the new English translations exist (see NIV & NKJV as examples) because publisher's wanted to control the publishing rights.

I don't think you meant any harm, but I am a Protestant and I use my Bible.

 

[FenderTL5]

I don't think you meant any harm, but I am a Protestant and I use my Bible.

I meant not using those books labeled Apocrypha, not the Bibles in general.
I edited the post to clarify.

 

[dreadnought]

I meant not using those books labeled Apocrypha, not the Bibles in general.
I edited the post to clarify.

Thank you.

 

[PloverWing]

Why did the Vatican remove the below books from bible?

Different groups of Christians disagree on which books belong in the Bible. There is wide agreement about the New Testament, but some disagreement about the Old Testament. A reasonable overview can be found here: Biblical canon - Wikipedia

The Catholic canon includes all the books you list except I & II Esdras and The Prayer of Manasseh, so it is incorrect to say that the Vatican removed these books from the Bible.

I suspect that you are looking at a version of the Bible that follows the Protestant canon, which is smaller than the Catholic and Orthodox canons.

 

[Zoness]

Why did the Vatican remove the below books from bible?

• 1 Esdras
• 2 Esdras
• Tobit
• Judith
• The rest of Esther
• The Wisdom of Solomon
• Ecclesiasticus
• Baruch with the epistle Jeremiah
• The Songs of the 3 Holy children
• The history of Susana
• bel and the dragon
• The prayer for Manasses
• 1 Maccabees
• 2 Maccabees

Early Protestants (Lutherans and Calvinists) did this. Though I think several of these aren't even in Roman Catholic canon but rather Oriental Orthodox.

 

[Zoness]

Also I have to say that Bel and the Dragon is a pretty baller title for a book of the Bible. The Oriental Orthodox are onto something.