Jolie Jentzen
Region: US
Friday 05 December 2025 23:32:14 GMT
11130
564
69
18
Music
Download
Comments
el cadejo :
The idea that “no one disputed the Protestant Bible and Catholics just added extra books” isn’t accurate. For the first 1,500 years of Christianity, the Christian Old Testament included the Deuterocanonical books the books Protestants removed. These books appear in the Septuagint, which is the Old Testament Jesus and the apostles actually used. Early Christians relied on the Septuagint, not the later Jewish canon. Jewish leaders did not have a fixed canon in Jesus’ time. The canon that excluded the Deuterocanon developed in rabbinic Judaism after Christianity had already been using those books for centuries. Christians never based their canon on that later Jewish list. The early Church councils of Hippo (393) and Carthage (397 and 419) listed the Christian Scriptures, and those lists match the Catholic canon, not the Protestant one. Luther didn’t “want to include” the Apocrypha as Scripture he moved them to a separate section, said they were “not equal to Holy Scripture,” and even questioned New Testament books like James, Hebrews, Jude, and Revelation. The Council of Trent didn’t “add” books; it reaffirmed the canon the Church had used continuously since the beginning because Luther was challenging it. And yes, it’s true the Council of Nicea had nothing to do with choosing Bible books thats the only part of this that is correct. I say all that to say there's only two choices catholic or orthodox
2025-12-06 02:18:23
27
Just Joe :
Jesus preached from the Septuagant. It included the Apocrypha. That’s all you need to know
2025-12-08 10:48:43
25
BamaDad2 :
That’s not true exactly. Judaism had no canon of scripture at the time of Christ. But they did use the deuterocanon books, because most of them spoke Greek. Jesus even quoted from them. The Septuagint version wasn’t suppressed in Judaism until rabbinic Judaism one hundred years after Christ.
2025-12-27 15:41:27
14
Ace☦️ :
Luther actually put the apocrypha after the Old Testament in his 1500 edition of the Bible . Yes the reformers agreed it was for “good reading” and not divine scripture. The issue I have is that those books were not taken out until 1885. Luther agreed with 1st century Jewish rabbis but not with early church fathers like clement who quoted the wisdom of Solomon in his letter. There were obviously beliefs during the first century and even before hand that the apocrypha was scripture. As a Protestant I don’t shame Luther because he didn’t do a lot of the things ppl say he did. I think the Apocrypha should be included in bibles as “Good reading” as the reformers originally understood them to be
2025-12-09 13:14:47
2
Arcaous :
You know most Protestants also read these texts? Right?
2026-01-05 16:32:35
0
I see you. :
The Bible shows disputes were solved by Church councils (Acts 15). When Jerome or anyone disputed the inclusion of the Septuagint texts (which included the 7 books Protestants call “apocryphal”), the Church had to finalize what actually was considered to be scripture/God’s Word. You can see the books listed out (the 73-book canon Catholics use to this day) starting in the Council of Hippo, reaffirmed in the Council of Carthage, and in 405 AD, Pope Innocent sent a list of the sacred books of the Bible in a letter to a Gallic bishop, Exsuperius of Toulouse, which was identical to the canonical list put forth by the Council of Rome, Council of Carthage, and Council of Hippo, as well as identical with the Biblical Canon put forth by the Council of Trent 1000 years later. All of these lists included the 7 Deuterocanonical books, such as I and II Maccabees as part of the canon of inspired scripture. This is the list of inspired scripture used by all Christians until Martin Luther decided to raise them into question again (under what authority?). The Church responded to the dispute (through a council of bishops/elders as is seen in Acts 15) by confirming the same previously listed 73-book canon at the Council of Trent to answer the question once and for all. In Acts 15 there was much debate, yet after Peter spoke there was silence; the matter had been settled. As it was here. There is no legitimate reason to use the 66-book canon. There is no council of church elders that can be pointed to that affirmed a 66-book canon of scripture. All 73 books in the Catholic Bible have been considered the Word of God since the Church decided in the 300’s. Arguing that they are not reliable, or only considered as “good to read, but not to take as scripture” has no foundation considering Hebrews 13:17 says you must follow your leaders and submit to them. Once the Church declared the Septuagint as scripture, Jerome submitted to the authority of the Church and professed the 73-book canon from that point on.
2025-12-31 20:40:48
0
L C :
You know Luther was Catholic right? He very much chose to take those out for his idea of a reformation
2026-01-02 00:17:07
0
CJ📝 :
Im at the point where I read the apocrypha as context & history 🤷🏾♂️Especially since they support the writings in the Bible, give context & expand on a lot of stories/books that were reduced into summaries in the Bible.
2025-12-06 16:39:00
1
Oriona 🧡 :
You seem very knowledgeable 🔥
2025-12-07 16:09:03
0
Em :
Loving your vids!
2025-12-09 07:41:25
1
Just Joe :
The original King James 1611 actually included 81 books
2025-12-08 10:49:37
2
Brettpollack :
Catholics don’t use the Protestant Bible , you use our Bible minus books that the reformers decided they knew more than church fathers to remove.
2025-12-08 13:28:52
12
Gabrielle ✝️📚🤍 :
💯
2025-12-06 00:33:38
1
Nonc ☧ :
There's a lot of misinformation in this video. The Jewish ppl didn't have a set Canon of books that were considered scripture. Some used those 7 books and some didn't. Jesus gave us a system to determine things like this guided by the holy spirit and that system says those books are scripture. It doesn't matter what Luther said 1,500 years later on his own authority.
2025-12-11 21:36:17
6
user815157004122 :
Catholics use the Protestant Bible w/ added books? Thats like saying a first edition book is just the abridged version with extra chapters.
2025-12-11 22:00:10
3
John Thomas Foran :
The Jews also rejected Christ. If your Bible doesn’t have 73 books, you’re not reading the Bible
2025-12-07 03:25:22
10
Tabitha Gilbert :
i would encourage you to look up what the septuagint, it is the original works translated into Greek and Latin before Christ bc the jewish people were loosing their native tongue and needed to be able to keep their religion. The apocrypha works was used during the time of the apostles and is quoted and alluded to all over the NT. Luther started with payment for indulgences and then began doubling down, he is an interesting and very conflicted figure. But he actually removed the works and changed Romans 3:28 in the german bible adding “alone”. He also wanted to remove James, Hebrews and other works. Catholics today still use the apocrypha as a 2nd canon.
2025-12-06 19:47:04
5
Meag :
I love learning about my religion, well said. For me, when it comes down to it I want accurate readings. Many things from the Apocrypha have been proven to not align with what’s said in the trustworthy sources in the agreed upon 66 books (personally, I want to follow what we know for sure God wants us to know and live). That and the additional texts are also not included due to some issues with later dates (so they might just be someone adding their own thoughts on the scripture or basically fan fiction) and lies about being connected to the apostles or being one themselves. This is not to say these books aren’t useful, many people have read them throughout history for their usefulness. But there’s nothing wrong with people who decide not to be bound to God through them if there isn’t certainty in them.
2025-12-06 04:12:58
2
uchenna109 :
1 chronicles 29:29, Jude 1:14, Joshua 10:13, numbers 21:14. Jesus quoted Enoch. It was prophesied that in the end days we would have access to the extra books but it would only be for the wise. There is a reason they don’t want you reading them. There is a common theme of these books the enemy doesn’t want you to know.
2025-12-09 00:09:53
1
Mystical Redneck :
Even the KJV included the Apocrypha (or deuterocanon) at first. Later, these books were left out because of publishing costs. But people have disagreed on these texts for a long time. St. Gerome had reservations about including them in the Latin translation long before there were any protestants.
2025-12-08 03:40:39
1
pr0tectedangel :
Of course they never “questioned” the Protestant Bible….its directly taken from the Catholic Bible lol. It’s part of scripture. Taking out the books is a tradition started by Luther that Protestants have stuck with since the 1500’s. Luther was just a Catholic monk at the end of the day who started his own tradition. Modern Protestants stuck with it bc the removal of the apocrypha makes it easier to use Christians politically. Which is why Protestant countries get dragged into every war…they took out the very books that warn them that violence can never be sacred lol
2025-12-31 03:36:56
0
Addy Mitchell :
There’s not a claim that the Protestant Bible is wrong, there are only 7 books in the Apocrypha, not 14. During the reformation, they took 7 books and deemed them not “inspired by God” when they were deemed as inspired for 1500 years prior. The Protestant Bible isn’t wrong, it’s just missing 7 books. It’s the truth, but there are 7 more books of truth to read
2026-01-28 03:38:38
0
To see more videos from user @jolie.jentzen, please go to the Tikwm
homepage.
