6 ms·

The word "Bible" means different things to different people. Just like the word "Deuterocanon" means different things to Catholics vs Eastern Orthodox. It's no

The word "Bible" means different things to different people. Just like the word "Deuterocanon" means different things to Catholics vs Eastern Orthodox. It's not that this API is "missing the Deuterocanon". This API was likely made by protestants. The two English translations provided by the API are not approved by the Catholic church. When I search Google for "Bible", the top two results, bible.com and biblegateway also don't include those additional books.

skissane 5y ago
> The word "Bible" means different things to different people. Not completely different things, the majority of books all major Christian churches agree on (all of the NT and the majority of the OT). The dispute is really about different views on the boundaries of the same thing - the Christian Bible - as opposed to distinct things > Just like the word "Deuterocanon" means different things to Catholics vs Eastern Orthodox. Again, not two completely different things - Catholics and Eastern Orthodox agree on the majority of the Deuterocanon, there are only a few books which Eastern Orthodox have which Catholics lack (3 Maccabees, Psalm 151, Esdras, Prayer of Manasseh; Georgian Orthodox have 4 Maccabees too). And, the Catholic Church has never condemned the Orthodox for accepting these extra books - the Council of Trent condemned Protestants for accepting less, but (quite intentionally) did not condemn the Orthodox for accepting more. So one might say that their status in Catholicism is ambiguous. > The two English translations provided by the API are not approved by the Catholic church. I’m not sure how significant that is given that there are a number of Bible translations which do include these books yet which haven’t been approved by the Catholic Church; including one of the translations this site does have (the KJV) - this site’s copy of the KJV is incomplete > When I search Google for "Bible", the top two results, bible.com and biblegateway also don't include those additional books. You are mistaken, they both have them: https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Maccabees%201&version=NRSV https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Maccabees%2... https://www.bible.com/bible/69/2MA.2.GNTD https://www.bible.com/bible/69/2MA.2.GNTD
- squabble 5y ago
  The crux of the issue is that the Bible provided by this API is the modern protestant Bible. If you are Catholic or Orthodox or are looking for a historical version, you may see it as incomplete.
  - skissane 5y ago
    You know, if they called it “Protestant Bible API” instead, I would not have complained. Part of the problem here is that many Protestants are ignorant of the fact that the majority of Christians have a bigger Bible than they do. Relatedly, many Protestants are ignorant of the fact that Protestants are a minority of Christians.
    - fastball 5y ago
      > Part of the problem here is that many Protestants are ignorant of the fact that the majority of Christians have a bigger Bible than they do. Relatedly, many Protestants are ignorant of the fact that Protestants are a minority of Christians. Do you have a citation for this claim? Most protestant Christians I've met are aware of the apocrypha, they just do not consider them canonical, in the same way they do not consider the various Islamic additions to the Judeo-Christian tradition to be part of their religion. From my anecdotal experience, I do not think it is any more common for a protestant to be unaware that certain extra books are included in Catholic/Eastern Orthodox Bibles than it is for a catholic/eastern orthodox to be unaware that protestants exclude those same books. Squabble was spot on – "The Bible" is different things to different people. When you buy a bible in a book store and it does not include Deuterocanonical books, it is not usually referred to specifically as "The Protestant Bible" – it is just called "The Bible". So it does not seem necessary for this API to do that either lest it incur your complaints.
      - skissane 5y ago
        > Do you have a citation for this claim? Most protestant Christians I've met are aware of the apocrypha I'm not aware of any formal studies on this question, I can only speak from personal experience. And, of course, different people have different personal experiences. Mine include hearing – on multiple occasions – Protestants say things along the lines of "Catholics aren't Christian". (To be fair, only a minority of Protestants say stuff like that, but in my experience it is a significant minority.) > they just do not consider them canonical, in the same way they do not consider the various Islamic additions to the Judeo-Christian tradition to be part of their religion That's not a good analogy, because prior to the 19th century the vast majority of Protestant Bibles included these books, and some of them still do – by contrast, no Protestant Bible has ever included the Quran. Protestantism originated as a reform movement within the Catholic Church, and one of the aspects of Catholicism which they thought needed reform was the widespread acceptance within it of these books as being equal in authority to the rest of the Bible. So these books play an important role in the history of Protestantism; by contrast, the Quran has no more of a role in the history of Protestantism than the Vedas or the Tripitaka do. > Squabble was spot on – "The Bible" is different things to different people I think, before anyone launches a website called "Free Bible API", they should be aware that different branches of Christianity have different ideas about what belongs in "the Bible", and they should be clear about how they are going to relate to those differences: Are they trying to be ecumenical and inclusive? Or are they building something for one specific branch of Christianity only, such as Protestantism?–in which case, state that limited scope clearly and up-front. This website shows no signs of having thought through any of that.

skissane 5y ago

> The word "Bible" means different things to different people. Not completely different things, the majority of books all major Christian churches agree on (all of the NT and the majority of the OT). The dispute is really about different views on the boundaries of the same thing - the Christian Bible - as opposed to distinct things > Just like the word "Deuterocanon" means different things to Catholics vs Eastern Orthodox. Again, not two completely different things - Catholics and Eastern Orthodox agree on the majority of the Deuterocanon, there are only a few books which Eastern Orthodox have which Catholics lack (3 Maccabees, Psalm 151, Esdras, Prayer of Manasseh; Georgian Orthodox have 4 Maccabees too). And, the Catholic Church has never condemned the Orthodox for accepting these extra books - the Council of Trent condemned Protestants for accepting less, but (quite intentionally) did not condemn the Orthodox for accepting more. So one might say that their status in Catholicism is ambiguous. > The two English translations provided by the API are not approved by the Catholic church. I’m not sure how significant that is given that there are a number of Bible translations which do include these books yet which haven’t been approved by the Catholic Church; including one of the translations this site does have (the KJV) - this site’s copy of the KJV is incomplete > When I search Google for "Bible", the top two results, bible.com and biblegateway also don't include those additional books. You are mistaken, they both have them: https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Maccabees%201&version=NRSV https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Maccabees%2... https://www.bible.com/bible/69/2MA.2.GNTD https://www.bible.com/bible/69/2MA.2.GNTD

squabble 5y ago
The crux of the issue is that the Bible provided by this API is the modern protestant Bible. If you are Catholic or Orthodox or are looking for a historical version, you may see it as incomplete.
- skissane 5y ago
  You know, if they called it “Protestant Bible API” instead, I would not have complained. Part of the problem here is that many Protestants are ignorant of the fact that the majority of Christians have a bigger Bible than they do. Relatedly, many Protestants are ignorant of the fact that Protestants are a minority of Christians.
  - fastball 5y ago
    > Part of the problem here is that many Protestants are ignorant of the fact that the majority of Christians have a bigger Bible than they do. Relatedly, many Protestants are ignorant of the fact that Protestants are a minority of Christians. Do you have a citation for this claim? Most protestant Christians I've met are aware of the apocrypha, they just do not consider them canonical, in the same way they do not consider the various Islamic additions to the Judeo-Christian tradition to be part of their religion. From my anecdotal experience, I do not think it is any more common for a protestant to be unaware that certain extra books are included in Catholic/Eastern Orthodox Bibles than it is for a catholic/eastern orthodox to be unaware that protestants exclude those same books. Squabble was spot on – "The Bible" is different things to different people. When you buy a bible in a book store and it does not include Deuterocanonical books, it is not usually referred to specifically as "The Protestant Bible" – it is just called "The Bible". So it does not seem necessary for this API to do that either lest it incur your complaints.
    - skissane 5y ago
      > Do you have a citation for this claim? Most protestant Christians I've met are aware of the apocrypha I'm not aware of any formal studies on this question, I can only speak from personal experience. And, of course, different people have different personal experiences. Mine include hearing – on multiple occasions – Protestants say things along the lines of "Catholics aren't Christian". (To be fair, only a minority of Protestants say stuff like that, but in my experience it is a significant minority.) > they just do not consider them canonical, in the same way they do not consider the various Islamic additions to the Judeo-Christian tradition to be part of their religion That's not a good analogy, because prior to the 19th century the vast majority of Protestant Bibles included these books, and some of them still do – by contrast, no Protestant Bible has ever included the Quran. Protestantism originated as a reform movement within the Catholic Church, and one of the aspects of Catholicism which they thought needed reform was the widespread acceptance within it of these books as being equal in authority to the rest of the Bible. So these books play an important role in the history of Protestantism; by contrast, the Quran has no more of a role in the history of Protestantism than the Vedas or the Tripitaka do. > Squabble was spot on – "The Bible" is different things to different people I think, before anyone launches a website called "Free Bible API", they should be aware that different branches of Christianity have different ideas about what belongs in "the Bible", and they should be clear about how they are going to relate to those differences: Are they trying to be ecumenical and inclusive? Or are they building something for one specific branch of Christianity only, such as Protestantism?–in which case, state that limited scope clearly and up-front. This website shows no signs of having thought through any of that.