A brief analysis of primary source documents and Protestant literature on the subject itself reveals the whole truth of the matter.
Newsroom (03/06/2022 09:00, Gaudium Press) Earlier this year, I received a suggestion from a friend to watch a video of a well-known Protestant archaeologist here in Brazil, which was entitled ‘Catholic or Protestant Bible?’ As I dedicate my time on the Internet almost entirely to reading and viewing content from reliable sources, I hesitated to pay attention to this material; but in view of the importance of the subject and the infinity of doubts that always hang over it, both in Catholic and Protestant circles, I decided to take the risk and watch it.
The archaeologist, who clearly has a Ph.D. in his discipline, begins his exposition dealing with the difference between the number of books in both bibles, speaking with that tone of exemption characteristic of those who wish to please all audiences, but with the clear objective of keeping uninformed Catholics on his channel’s list of subscribers.
Yes, you heard right, there are dozens and dozens of so-called Catholics subscribed to that channel, listening to a Protestant explaining to them all the details on how the Christian Bible evolved since the beginning of the primitive church. In most cases, these same Catholics thank him, sometimes calling him a pastor, sometimes a professor, for having given them such a salutary explanation, despite the fact that, in the course of the video, his attacks on the Papacy and on the Magisterium of the Catholic Church become more and more open and obvious.
The Deuterocanonical Gospels
Unfortunately, although it was expected, right after this brief beginning, where the Deuterocanonical Gospels are presented as the great difference between both Bibles, a flurry of errors and omissions of information begins. This is done with the clear purpose of denigrating the role of the Catholic Church’s Magisterium and of using the figure of Saint Jerome, responsible for the elaboration of the Vulgate, in favour of the Protestant canon.
Then, the archaeologist presents that worn-out statement that only in the Council of Trent was the Catholic Canon really consolidated with the Deuterocanonical Gospels, as if he did not know that 90 years earlier, in 1450, the Gutenberg Bible already contained them.
Further on, our friend continues to issue countless statements that raise serious doubts about his formation, as he is completely unaware of the comprehensiveness and origin of the Greek canon of the Septuagint, which was adopted by the Jews of the Diaspora who spoke this language. For him, the Hebrew canon adopted in Palestine has always been consolidated, practically immutable.
Is he also unaware of the fact that this canon was a product of fear of the mass conversions of Jews to Christianity that were taking place at that time?
About the councils of the first centuries, our Ph.D. states that their minutes are doubtful as to the recognition of these books, yet no minutes are presented. And what about the Muratori Canon or the art in the catacombs of the city of Rome, which only reinforce divine inspiration and the adoption of the Deuterocanonical Gospels by the primitive church? I think so, though he did not even mention them.
Still trying to give some credit to his video, I followed what he said, but the end results were worse. His Ph.D. definitely went down the drain when I sought to confirm in the books his statement that the Jewish Philon of Alexandria had been one of the greatest opponents to the recognition of the Deuterocanonical. To my surprise, the man was one of its greatest defenders.
The Protestant errors
And so the errors continued. And what about the omissions? In fact, one of them was very evident and could not go unnoticed, which was the fact that at no time did the archaeologist deal with the changes, adaptations and removals made by Luther in the biblical texts. Well, perhaps in the view of a Ph.D. in archaeology, these are very tenuous differences that do not deserve much attention.
Once again my friends, we can confirm that Protestantism is the expert in distorting facts and words. It is very clear that the information of interest is presented, but that which may arouse doubts or go against its doctrine is carefully hidden. But a brief analysis of primary source documents and the Protestant literature itself on the subject brings out the whole truth.
Unfortunately, few take the time or make it a priority to seek this information from reliable sources. With that in mind, I have put together a very thorough video refuting each of the Protestant errors concerning the biblical canon. In it are presented numerous documents from councils, historical sources, apostolic letters and writings of numerous authors of Protestantism itself, which attest in an undoubted way, the canonicity of the Deuterocanonical.
May this work serve as a basis for our continued confidence in the Magisterium of the Church and weapon against Protestant errors.
Adriano de Oliveira – Ph.D. in Material Science
Compiled by Sandra Chisholm
