Most people are quite aware that there are different "versions" (i.e. translations) of the Bible. This is NOT my concern. The problem of VALID translation is a serious one, but there is a far more basic issue. And this is: WHAT should be or should not be in the Bible. In other words, why are there different Bibles with different contents. The Protestant "Bible" has had removed from it several books which are (and always have been) in the Catholic Bible.
Logic tells us that BOTH versions CANNOT be the "real Bible." Either 1st Maccabees, etc. ARE part of the Bible, or they are NOT. The issue is really this simple, and, if one wishes to take the Bible seriously, the issue is quite important.
Here is why it is important: If the Catholic Church truly and faithfully preserves the Word of God as contained in the Holy Scriptures, then IT IS, what its members claim that it is: the ONE TRUE Church of Christ. If, however, the Protestant version is the correct one, then the claim cannot be true. If this second alternative is correct, it would NOT establish which Protestant cult is "the" correct one, but it would establish that the Catholic Church is NOT the true Church.
In order to examine the issue, let’s first examine the necessary nature of ANY book - for although the Bible has many aspects, it is always a book. The key question is WHO, or WHAT determined the contents of a book. Every book must have an author (or authors), and a publisher. It must be written, and then produced. If it is not produced (i.e. Published) then it remains only a manuscript, NOT a book. The actual form of the final edition is determined by the publisher and NOT by the author. For example, the final version of Tom Sawyer may not have been exactly as Mark Twain wrote. It was what the publisher agreed to publish as the book.
Of course, the author may not agree with this decision and seek another publisher, or he may even publish it himself. But even then it is the publisher (or the author as publisher) who ultimately decides what goes into the book.
This same principle holds true with the Bible. The Bible’s publisher is the Church of Rome. No Protestant sect ever "produced" the Bible. They simply accepted it from the Roman Church which passed it on to them. Then these various sects removed whatever parts offended their opinions.
The fact that the Protestants could NOT have been the publishers of the Bible (and therefore had no authority to abridge it), is easily proven. The Protestant Revolt did not take place until c. 1517 A.D. Therefore, the Bible MUST have been produced, preserved, etc. before any Protestant system came into existence. Now if the Bible is a "good fruit," then according to Jesus, it must have been produced by a "good tree" (Mt 7:16). This good tree must have been the Church of Rome!
This leads to an important related point. Pentecost (the "birth" of the Church) took place c. 33 A.D. Martin Luther rebelled c. 1520. The difference is about 1500 years. This leads to a dilemma for the Protestant. EITHER Christianity existed in this intervening period OR it did not. If it did NOT exist, then Jesus did not establish a Church which was to teach true Christianity, but rather Luther or Calvin, etc. Then the Protestant follows mere men in religious matters. But IF the true Church did exist, then it cannot be any Protestant sect. It could have only been a different Church which pre-existed the Protestant cults. And this is, of course, the Church of Rome.
Now if we hold that the Bible is a book written by inspired Christians, then true Christians existed before the Protestant Revolt. But, more than this: it means that Christianity existed BEFORE the Bible was written. The Bible was written by members of the true Church (for this is one of the meanings of the word "Christian"). Therefore, as it did not precede the existence of the Church, and as the Church came into existence c. 33 A.D. , then the Bible MUST have come into existence between this time and 1517. And as this is definitely in the time of recorded history, then there should be historical records dealing with this.
Are there?
YES. The Bible, remember, is not really one "book," but rather a collection of "books." If you wish, you could think of it as a library. Any collection (or library) can come into existence ONLY when all its parts are "collected" in one place AND some formal declaration is made that the collection is not more than merely a group of things in one place. All of the books of the Bible existed BEFORE they were collected into one volume. Each was written by a man inspired by God.
But until the books were put together as ONE unit, the Bible (as the BIBLE) did not properly exist. So the "birth" of the Bible occurred when it was formalized as THE book of Christianity. This process is called "canonization." And as all parts of the Bible existed before this process took place, canonization simply meant what was in the Bible and what was not in the Bible.
This happened at two ROMAN CATHOLIC Church councils which took place around 400 A.D. in Africa under the Roman Catholic Bishop St. Augustine. The proceedings (the decision) was confirmed by the Pope in Rome, and then became accepted by ALL the Church.
In other words, God’s Church decided the contents of God’s book. And (unless God didn’t care enough to get involved!) this decision MUST have been infallibly correct.
So the ONLY true Bible MUST be the Catholic one which was fixed forever by God’s Church over a thousand years before the Protestants decided to abridge it.
Now you know not only which version of the Bible is correct, you also know that if you reject the correct version you reject the authority of his church to speak for HIM…and this means rejecting Jesus Himself (Jn 12:48; Lk 10:16).
And this is why this is an important issue. For if you are not accepting the Catholic Bible, you are rejecting Jesus.
---------------------------------------------------------
We are dedicated to Our Lady & Saint Luke…we welcome your comments, questions, and financial support.