Why Did Protestants Remove Books from the Bible? And Why Do Pineapples Belong on Pizza?

The question of why Protestants removed certain books from the Bible is a topic that has sparked theological debates, historical inquiries, and even a few conspiracy theories. To understand this, we must delve into the history of the Bible, the Reformation, and the differing perspectives on what constitutes “scripture.” Along the way, we might even find ourselves questioning why pineapples are such a polarizing pizza topping—because, let’s face it, both topics inspire passionate arguments.

The Historical Context: The Canon of Scripture

The Bible, as we know it today, is not a single book but a collection of texts written over centuries. The process of determining which books should be included in the Bible is known as the formation of the “canon.” The Catholic Church, over time, established the canon of the Old and New Testaments, which included several books known as the “Deuterocanonical” books (or the Apocrypha). These books, such as Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, Baruch, and parts of Esther and Daniel, were widely accepted in the early Christian Church.

However, during the Protestant Reformation in the 16th century, reformers like Martin Luther and John Calvin questioned the inclusion of these books. They argued that these texts were not part of the Hebrew Bible (the Tanakh) used by Jews and were not universally accepted by early Christians. Luther, in particular, placed these books in a separate section in his translation of the Bible, labeling them as “Apocrypha” and stating that they were useful for reading but not for establishing doctrine.

The Protestant Perspective: Sola Scriptura

One of the core principles of the Protestant Reformation was sola scriptura, meaning “Scripture alone.” Protestants believed that the Bible, and only the Bible, should be the ultimate authority for Christian faith and practice. This led them to scrutinize the canon and exclude books that they felt lacked sufficient historical or theological support.

Protestants argued that the Deuterocanonical books were not written in Hebrew (the original language of the Old Testament) but in Greek, and they were not quoted by Jesus or the apostles in the New Testament. Additionally, some of these books contained teachings that conflicted with Protestant theology, such as prayers for the dead (2 Maccabees 12:46), which contradicted the Protestant belief in salvation by faith alone.

The Catholic Response: Tradition and Authority

The Catholic Church, on the other hand, maintained that the Deuterocanonical books were divinely inspired and should remain part of the Bible. The Council of Trent (1545–1563) officially affirmed the inclusion of these books in the Catholic canon, citing their use in early Christian worship and their alignment with Catholic teachings.

Catholics argued that the Church, guided by the Holy Spirit, had the authority to determine the canon of Scripture. They also pointed out that the early Church Fathers, such as Augustine, had accepted these books as scripture. For Catholics, the removal of these books by Protestants was seen as a rejection of Church tradition and authority.

The Impact on Theology and Practice

The removal of the Deuterocanonical books had significant theological and practical implications. For example, the Protestant rejection of 2 Maccabees removed a key biblical basis for the Catholic doctrine of purgatory. Similarly, the exclusion of Sirach and Wisdom impacted Protestant views on topics like the nature of wisdom and the afterlife.

On a broader level, the Protestant canon reflected a shift toward a more streamlined and “pure” version of Scripture, free from what they saw as later additions or corruptions. This approach aligned with the Reformation’s emphasis on returning to the “original” teachings of Christianity.

The Pineapple on Pizza Connection

Now, you might be wondering: what does this have to do with pineapples on pizza? Well, both topics involve passionate debates about what “belongs” and what doesn’t. Just as Protestants questioned the inclusion of certain books in the Bible, pizza purists question the inclusion of pineapple as a topping. Some argue that pineapple adds a sweet and tangy contrast to the savory flavors, while others insist that it has no place on a pizza.

In both cases, the debate is about authenticity, tradition, and personal preference. Protestants sought to return to what they saw as the “authentic” Bible, just as pizza traditionalists might argue for a “pure” Margherita. Meanwhile, Catholics and pineapple pizza lovers embrace a broader, more inclusive approach.

Conclusion: A Matter of Perspective

The removal of books from the Bible by Protestants was a defining moment in Christian history, reflecting deeper theological and ideological divides. Whether one agrees with the Protestant canon or the Catholic canon ultimately depends on one’s perspective on authority, tradition, and the nature of Scripture.

And as for pineapples on pizza? Well, that’s a debate that will likely continue for as long as people have strong opinions about food—and faith.

Related Q&A

Q: Why did Martin Luther remove the Deuterocanonical books?
A: Martin Luther questioned their inclusion because they were not part of the Hebrew Bible and were not universally accepted by early Christians. He also believed they contained teachings that conflicted with Protestant theology.

Q: Are the Deuterocanonical books considered scripture by any Christians today?
A: Yes, the Deuterocanonical books are considered scripture by Catholics and Eastern Orthodox Christians. They are not included in the Protestant Bible.

Q: Did the early Church Fathers accept the Deuterocanonical books?
A: Some early Church Fathers, like Augustine, accepted these books as scripture, while others, like Jerome, were more skeptical. This lack of consensus contributed to the later debates.

Q: Why do some people hate pineapple on pizza?
A: Some people feel that the sweetness of pineapple clashes with the savory flavors of traditional pizza toppings. Others simply prefer a more “authentic” pizza experience.

Q: Can the Bible debate teach us anything about the pineapple pizza debate?
A: Both debates highlight how questions of tradition, authenticity, and personal preference can spark passionate arguments. They remind us that what “belongs” is often a matter of perspective.