BOOKSTORE INCIDENT

by Terry 24 Replies latest jw friends

  • Terry
    Terry

    As you all know by now, I work in a bookstore in the Religion section. (I also shelve the Philosophy and Metaphysics sections.)

    While straightening the bibles I was approached by a lady customer who seemed perplexed. She asked the question:

    "Could you help me sir? Why do some of these bibles have an Apocrypha and others don't?"

    "Sure, ma'am. It is largely a matter of councils of men voting the way they see things best. Originally, before there was a bible canon, or official list of "approved" books, there were hundreds if not thousands of stories purporting to be inspired accounts of this and that. When arguments broke out over orthodoxy, the Church stepped in to settle the matter. Depending on which church and which council the conclusions differed. The Catholic bible, the Jewish bible and the Protestant bible are the result of differing opinions as to what should and should not be included."

    Immediately a well-dressed man standing nearby interrupted us rather brusquely.

    "Sir! I overhead what you just said and I must strongly disagree with every word of it!"

    He then proceded to contradict everything I told the woman. In fact, he kept her listening for a good 15 minutes with his version of the inerrency of the bible!

    As an employee I'm not allowed (nor would it be prudent) to argue with customers. So, I just kept quiet (as difficult as you can imagine this was for me!!)

    A friend of mine happened to be there at the time. He is a brilliant Seminary student who recently got his Master's degree and is now teaching as a professor. He took me aside and apologized ON BEHALF of the garrulous man!

    I asked him, "Did I say anything which you'd call an error?"

    "No, not at all. That man was very rude and very misinformed. Almost every "fact" he recited was so far off it was deeply embarassing! I felt so bad I just had to apologize for his rudeness."

    This was amusing to say the least.

    In this man's view the matter of the bible canon was settled by....ready for this?.....the Nicene Council which, according to him, met around the year 198 C.E.!! The Holy Spirit made quite certain they got it right. It was only the influence of Satan which causes people to try and call into question the authenticity of the council's choices!

    Ha ha ha ha. The Nicene Council, as we all know, was in 325 C.E. and the arguments over the proper canon took place even later with different men arguing the "facts".

    The upshot of this tale is this. It was strangely exciting for me to keep my mouth shut even though the man implied I was an idiot or even tool of the devil!

    There was a time I'd have argued with him until the roosters crowed. But, I no longer have the compulsion to be right. Nor am I the ethics officer of the universe in straightening out those who I deem in error. It was a peculiar satisfaction to just keep my mouth shut!

    Thought I'd share this with you.


    Development of the Old Testament Canon

    1000-50 BC:
    The Old Testament (hereafter "OT") books are written.
    C. 200 BC:
    Rabbis translate the OT from Hebrew to Greek, a translation called the "Septuagint" (abbreviation: "LXX"). The LXX ultimately includes 46 books.
    AD 30-100:
    Christians use the LXX as their scriptures. This upsets the Jews.
    C. AD 100:
    So Jewish rabbis meet at the Council of Jamniah and decide to include in their canon only 39 books, since only these can be found in Hebrew.
    C. AD 400:
    Jerome translates the Bible from Hebrew and Greek into Latin (called the "Vulgate"). He knows that the Jews have only 39 books, and he wants to limit the OT to these; the 7 he would leave out (Tobit, Judith, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach [or "Ecclesiasticus"], and Baruch--he calls "apocrypha," that is, "hidden books." But Pope Damasus wants all 46 traditionally-used books included in the OT, so the Vulgate has 46.
    AD 1536:
    Luther translates the Bible from Hebrew and Greek to German. He assumes that, since Jews wrote the Old Testament, theirs is the correct canon; he puts the extra 7 books in an appendix that he calls the "Apocrypha."
    AD 1546:
    The Catholic Council of Trent reaffirms the canonicity of all 46 books.

    Development of the New Testament Canon

    C. AD 51-125:
    The New Testament books are written, but during this same period other early Christian writings are produced--for example, the Didache (c. AD 70), 1 Clement (c. 96), the Epistle of Barnabas (c. 100), and the 7 letters of Ignatius of Antioch (c. 110).
    C. AD 140:
    Marcion, a businessman in Rome, teaches that there were two Gods: Yahweh, the cruel God of the OT, and Abba, the kind father of the NT. So Marcion eliminates the Old Testament as scriptures and, since he is anti-Semitic, keeps from the NT only 10 letters of Paul and 2/3 of Luke's gospel (he deletes references to Jesus' Jewishness). Marcion's "New Testament"--the first to be compiled--forces the mainstream Church to decide on a core canon: the four gospels and letters of Paul.
    C. AD 200:
    But the periphery of the canon is not yet determined. According to one list, compiled at Rome c. AD 200 (the Muratorian Canon), the NT consists of the 4 gospels; Acts; 13 letters of Paul (Hebrews is not included); 3 of the 7 General Epistles (1-2 John and Jude); and also the Apocalypse of Peter.
    AD 367:
    The earliest extant list of the books of the NT, in exactly the number and order in which we presently have them, is written by Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, in his Easter letter of 367. [Note: this is well after the Constantine's Edict of Toleration in 313 A.D.]
    AD 904:
    Pope Damasus, in a letter to a French bishop, lists the New Testament books in their present number and order.
    AD 1442:
    At the Council of Florence, the entire Church recognizes the 27 books, though does not declare them unalterable.
    AD 1536:
    In his translation of the Bible from Greek into German, Luther removes 4 NT books (Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelations) from their normal order and places them at the end, stating that they are less than canonical.
    AD 1546:
    At the Council of Trent, the Catholic Church reaffirms once and for all the full list of 27 books as traditionally accepted.
    from Prof. Hahn Columbia University
  • MadTiger
    MadTiger

    Excellent information.


    FACTS > OPINIONS

    (My first name is Terry, as well. Of course, you are right!!!)

  • juni
    juni

    Good morning Terry,

    That was interesting. Isn't is hard sometimes to keep your mouth shut?

    Seems like when you're well into your 50's you just don't feel like arguing anymore. Sometimes you get steamed up and spout off, but I find for the most part (at least for myself) that I just let things go. It's not worth it. You let the blow hards feel good about themselves and just laugh inside at them. You see them for what they are - pompous ass***** who really know very little.

    Take care.

    Juni

  • Kudra
    Kudra

    So is that 198 ce Nicene council the JW partyline on the subject? I think I've heard my mom say the same thing...

    -K

  • slimboyfat
    slimboyfat

    Good fun! Wish I worked in a book store!

    This is a popular myth about the canon being decided as the Council of Nicea - apparently this is one of the "facts" uncovered by The Da Vinci Code.

    I heard a guide at the Chester Beatty museum in Dublin make mention of the same idea about the canon being decided by Constantine at Nicea.

    Meztger has the best book on the development of the canon I have read:

    http://www.amazon.co.uk/Canon-New-Testament-Development-Significance/dp/0198269544/sr=1-1/qid=1165073467/ref=sr_1_1/202-6604334-7553415?ie=UTF8&s=books

  • Satanus
    Satanus

    I agree. Leaving fools in their paradise, where their egos are king can be entertaining. There is no onus on a person to rescue them. If you are in a position to and have the energy to, then it's fine, of course. But, there is no obligation.

    S

  • Clam
    Clam
    But, I no longer have the compulsion to be right. Nor am I the ethics officer of the universe in straightening out those who I deem in error. It was a peculiar satisfaction to just keep my mouth shut!

    Interesting. Although my moods tend to dictate how I would behave in situations like this, I do quickly give up on the boorishly opinionated. I feel that there are many who simply need leaving to their own devices. Going out of my way to win an arguement would certainly give me no more satisfaction than keeping quiet in the safe knowledge that I'm right. Maybe that satisfaction is "peculiar."

  • Backed away
    Backed away

    Seems like when you're well into your 50's you just don't feel like arguing anymore

    Amen to that Juni, however I'm in my late forties and I feel that way already. I've done a lifetime of arguing the Bible already.

    Terry, thanks for the great information and sharing this experience you had, clearly by how you handled yourself, kind, considerate and to the point shows your NOT a witness! apparently the well dressed man who bulldozed his way into the conversation needs to learn this.

  • willyloman
    willyloman

    Thanks for the history lesson; that's than I learned about canonicity in 30 years as a dub (and I studied!). So the canonicity of the books of the Bible in its current form is less than 500 years old! That's mind-altering, for me.

  • Amazing
    Amazing

    Terry,

    Thanks for sharing the incident and additional facts. While New Testament writings were available over the centuries, the Church (Catholic and Orthodox) mostly developed through traditions held on to fairly tightly since the first century. It is interesting to realize that the Bible, as we know it in the West, was not really confirmed until the 16th century, and then not readily available to the general public until the 17th century. The Eastern Orthodox have the same Bible books as the West, but rely upon different manuscripts than Rome to translate thier Bibles.

    The Eastern Orthodox do not hold the Apocrypha to be inspired, but hold them to be important. The East also believe that while the Bible is inspired, it can conbtain errors due to humans not fully responding perfectly to the Holy Spirit. But, they believe these errors are not significant, or unresolvable.

    The Evangelical Protestant view of Biblical inerrancy and the Bible being the only foundation for the Faith simply does not fit with the history of Christianity. The argument of Sola Scriptura is a relatively recent development, and is not how the Church was established in the first place. Unfortunately, we see how this view promotes ignorance, and results in pig-headed and pushy views. Or in the case of the Jehovah's Witnesses, the Watchtower Society uses historical ignorance to poison the minds of the JWs to not only accept the premise of Sola Scriptura, but to accept the New World Translation as the legitimate version of the Bible.

    Jim Whitney

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit