How do you decide between Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Bible Canon?
Both Roman Catholic and Greek Orthodox Church leaders make the identical claim that they gave the world the Bible.
If both the Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches make the same claim they gave the world the Bible, why do they have different books in each of their Bibles?
Who should we believe?
All one needs to do is see what was part of the official canon before the 11Th century schism.
The Catholic church continues to maintain the original canon, first established in the 4Th century and reaffirmed again at the Council of Trent, in the 16Th century.
The Latin and Eastern church were of one accord on the matter until some time after the 11 Th century schism.
Any changes ... by any one or any group ... Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant, or other ... subsequent to that time would constitute either heresy, apostasy, or both.
It's never good to be a heretic, an apostate ... or a troll.
The Roman Catholic Church use the Latin Vulgate and the Eastern Orthodox use the Septuagint, which includes some books that are not in the Hebrew Bible. Those books, translated from the Septuagint, are designated deuterocanonical in the Latin Vulgate Bible. Protestant Bibles follow the Jewish scheme and exclude these books.
The Vulgate is an early 5th century version of the Bible in Latin which is largely the result of the labors of Jerome, who was commissioned by Pope Damasus I in 382 to make a revision of the old Latin translations. Its Old Testament is the first Latin version translated directly from the Hebrew Tanakh
(Torah) rather than from the Greek Septuagint.
The Septuagint is a collection of Jewish scriptures in Koine Greek, translated in stages between the 3rd and 1st centuries BC in Alexandria. It is the oldest of several ancient translations of the Hebrew Bible into Greek.
Who should you believe? Both... it is just that one is a Latin and the other a Greek translation. There are some good English translations available today, besides the King James Version. I prefer the New American Standard Bible myself, which adheres as closely as possible to the original languages according to current English usage.
You might want to try to appeal to Prue-Schism councils (e.g. Carthage). Those seem to, for the most part, support the Roman Catholic canon (e.g. the absence of 3rd and 4Th Maccabees).
A great book covering the history of the Biblical canon (though mostly from the perspective of Catholics and Protestants, with very little focus on Orthodoxy) is Gary Michuta's "Why Catholic Bibles are Bigger". This work covers the different councils, as well as the positions of several Church Fathers. You also might find his bibliography particularly helpful in this matter.
...also lists the canons employed by different Church Fathers or codices.
Another issue that might make this even more difficult is the fact that the Orthodox canon is not exactly uniform. For example, the Russian Orthodox Church still employs 4 Ezra (also called 2 Esdras or the Ezra Apocalypse), as it appeared in the origin cal Slavonic Bible. The Greek Orthodox church, however, does not include 4 Ezra (as it was never part of the Septuagint).
I had just asked a similar question in the past few days, and got no satisfactory answer. It is a tough subject for me. Please keep us informed as to what you find!
First the council of Cathrage was not an ecumenical council so differences are a result of the regional decisions.
The Greek canon of the old testament is from the Septuagent the differing are history books so the Roman difference is due to latter choices the Old testament is not read much in parish life- but Monroe often in monasteries
and so using either aproach is valid.
How do you decide between Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Bible Canon?
