Re: El Canon bíblico del AT según Jesucristo
Curiosamente para la iglesia de Roma es peor, porque aunque esta muy demostrado que los escritores del NT utilizaban un texto griego del AT, solo lo utilizaron para citar los libros canonicos del canon Judios ahora la pregunta es ¿Si utilizaban la LXX y solo citaron los libros del canon judios en que se basan en decir que ellos aceptaban los apocrifos en base al uso de la LXX?
Curiosamente los padres de la iglesia utilizaban la LXX, como version autorizada almenos la mayoria, sin embargo rechazaban los libros de Roma:
Cirilo de Jerusalen.
Now these the divinely-inspired Scriptures of both the Old and New Testament teach us...Learn also diligently, and from the Church, what are the books of the Old Testament, and what those of the New...Read the Divine Scriptures, the twenty-two books of the Old Testament, these that have been translated by the Seventy-two interpreters...Of these read the two and twenty books, but have nothing to do with the apocryphal writings. Study earnestly these only which we read openly in the Church. Far wiser and more pious than thyself were the Apostles, and the bishops of old time, the presidents of the Church, who handed down these books. Being therefore a child of the Church, trench thou not upon its statutes. And of the Old Testament, as we have said, study the two and twenty books, which if thou art desirous of learning, strive to remember by name, as I recite them.
For the Law the books of Moses are the first five, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy. And next, Joshua the son of Nave, and the book of Judges, including Ruth, counted as seventh. And of the other historical books, the first and second books of the Kings are among the Hebrews one book; also the third and fourth one book. And in like manner, the first and second of Chronicles are with them one book; and the first and second of Esdras are counted one. Esther is the twelfth book; and these are the historical writings. But those which are written in verses are five, Job, and the book of Psalms, and Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs, which is the seventeenth book. And after these come the five Prophetic books: of the Twelve Prophets one book, of Isaiah one, of Jeremiah one, including Baruch and Lamentations and the Epistle; then Ezekiel, and the book of Daniel, the twenty-second of the Old Testament (NPNF2,, Vol. 7, Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures IV.33-36).
Hay dos hechos importantes que podemos recalcar de lo que dijo Cirilo de Jerusalén:
• El afirma que la lista canónica es AUTORITATIVA y a sido aceptada por la iglesia, y es el canon hebreo.
• El afirma que la lista viene de la LXX pero excluye a todos los apócrifos, a excepción de Baruc, ya di las razones arriba de porque se ponía generalmente a Baruc en tales listas.
Así como Meliton le cayo la boca a #######, ahora Cirilo le dio una bofetada por decir mentiras.
Si Cirilo realmente llamo a algunos libros como “inspirados” no prueba nada ya que los padres no solían hacer mucha diferencia en la hora de citar los libros canónicos y no canónicos, pero en el caso de Cirilo el fue muy claro cuales eran los libros canónicos, cuales eran considerados canónicos por la iglesia y no menciona ninguno de los que puso #######.
Curiosamente para la iglesia de Roma es peor, porque aunque esta muy demostrado que los escritores del NT utilizaban un texto griego del AT, solo lo utilizaron para citar los libros canonicos del canon Judios ahora la pregunta es ¿Si utilizaban la LXX y solo citaron los libros del canon judios en que se basan en decir que ellos aceptaban los apocrifos en base al uso de la LXX?
Curiosamente los padres de la iglesia utilizaban la LXX, como version autorizada almenos la mayoria, sin embargo rechazaban los libros de Roma:
Cirilo de Jerusalen.
Now these the divinely-inspired Scriptures of both the Old and New Testament teach us...Learn also diligently, and from the Church, what are the books of the Old Testament, and what those of the New...Read the Divine Scriptures, the twenty-two books of the Old Testament, these that have been translated by the Seventy-two interpreters...Of these read the two and twenty books, but have nothing to do with the apocryphal writings. Study earnestly these only which we read openly in the Church. Far wiser and more pious than thyself were the Apostles, and the bishops of old time, the presidents of the Church, who handed down these books. Being therefore a child of the Church, trench thou not upon its statutes. And of the Old Testament, as we have said, study the two and twenty books, which if thou art desirous of learning, strive to remember by name, as I recite them.
For the Law the books of Moses are the first five, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy. And next, Joshua the son of Nave, and the book of Judges, including Ruth, counted as seventh. And of the other historical books, the first and second books of the Kings are among the Hebrews one book; also the third and fourth one book. And in like manner, the first and second of Chronicles are with them one book; and the first and second of Esdras are counted one. Esther is the twelfth book; and these are the historical writings. But those which are written in verses are five, Job, and the book of Psalms, and Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs, which is the seventeenth book. And after these come the five Prophetic books: of the Twelve Prophets one book, of Isaiah one, of Jeremiah one, including Baruch and Lamentations and the Epistle; then Ezekiel, and the book of Daniel, the twenty-second of the Old Testament (NPNF2,, Vol. 7, Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures IV.33-36).
Hay dos hechos importantes que podemos recalcar de lo que dijo Cirilo de Jerusalén:
• El afirma que la lista canónica es AUTORITATIVA y a sido aceptada por la iglesia, y es el canon hebreo.
• El afirma que la lista viene de la LXX pero excluye a todos los apócrifos, a excepción de Baruc, ya di las razones arriba de porque se ponía generalmente a Baruc en tales listas.
Así como Meliton le cayo la boca a #######, ahora Cirilo le dio una bofetada por decir mentiras.
Si Cirilo realmente llamo a algunos libros como “inspirados” no prueba nada ya que los padres no solían hacer mucha diferencia en la hora de citar los libros canónicos y no canónicos, pero en el caso de Cirilo el fue muy claro cuales eran los libros canónicos, cuales eran considerados canónicos por la iglesia y no menciona ninguno de los que puso #######.
