Why not Apocraphy?

Status
Not open for further replies.

ScottBot

Revolutionary
May 2, 2005
50,456
1,441
56
a state of desperation
✟57,712.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
So what's wrong with the Septuagint?
Even the disciples quoted it.

And why not the Apocraphal books?

Serious questions here.
sunlover




Galatians 5:15-16
15 But if ye bite and devour one another, take heed that ye be not consumed one of another.
16 This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh.
1. Nothing wrong with the Septuagint, it was the prefered translation of the Apostles.

2. By Apocryphal, I assume you mean Deuterocanonical. Apocryphal means "hidden". The books excluded in the Protestant canon have always been included in the official list of canonical books. They were NEVER "hidden".
 
Upvote 0

ScottBot

Revolutionary
May 2, 2005
50,456
1,441
56
a state of desperation
✟57,712.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
The Jews never considered the books of the New Testement, in fact they call them the "forbidden books" so why should we care if they dont consider it scripture?
After the Pentecost, the Church became its own authority and was no longer subject to the rulings of the Sanhedron or the Pharisees.
 
Upvote 0

BBAS 64

Contributor
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
9,865
1,714
59
New England
✟512,371.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Pope Damacus in the Council of Rome 382AD

Seems some EO doesnt beleive me...i quoted this from wikipedia....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Rome

It is likewise decreed: Now, indeed, we must treat of the divine Scriptures: what the universal Catholic Church accepts and what she must shun. The list of the Old Testament begins: Genesis, one book; Exodus, one book: Leviticus, one book; Numbers, one book; Deuteronomy, one book; Jesus Nave, one book; of Judges, one book; Ruth, one book; of Kings, four books; Paralipomenon, two books; One Hundred and Fifty Psalms, one book; of Solomon, three books: Proverbs, one book; Ecclesiastes, one book; Canticle of Canticles, one book; likewise, Wisdom, one book; Ecclesiasticus (Sirach), one book;

Likewise, the list of the Prophets: Isaiah, one book; Jeremias, one book; along with Cinoth, that is, his Lamentations; Ezechiel, one book; Daniel, one book; Osee, one book; Amos, one book; Micheas, one book; Joel, one book; Abdias, one book; Jonas, one book; Nahum, one book; Habacuc, one book; Sophonias, one book; Aggeus, one book; Zacharias, one book; Malachias, one book.

Likewise, the list of histories: Job, one book; Tobias, one book; Esdras, two books; Esther, one book; Judith, one book; of Maccabees, two books.

Likewise, the list of the Scriptures of the New and Eternal Testament, which the holy and Catholic Church receives: of the Gospels, one book according to Matthew, one book according to Mark, one book according to Luke, one book according to John. The Epistles of the Apostle Paul, fourteen in number: one to the Romans, one to the Corinthians [2 Corinthians is not mentioned], one to the Ephesians, two to the Thessalonians, one to the Galatians, one to the Philippians, one to the Colossians, two to Timothy, one to Titus one to Philemon, one to the Hebrews.

Likewise, one book of the Apocalypse of John. And the Acts of the Apostles, one book.

Likewise, the canonical Epistles, seven in number: of the Apostle Peter, two Epistles; of the Apostle James, one Epistle; of the Apostle John, one Epistle; of the other John, a Presbyter, two Epistles; of the Apostle Jude the Zealot, one Epistle. Thus concludes the canon of the New Testament.

Likewise it is decreed: After the announcement of all of these prophetic and evangelic or as well as apostolic writings which we have listed above as Scriptures, on which, by the grace of God, the Catholic Church is founded, we have considered that it ought to be announced that although all the Catholic Churches spread abroad through the world comprise but one bridal chamber of Christ, nevertheless, the holy Roman Church has been placed at the forefront not by the conciliar decisions of other Churches, but has received the primacy by the evangelic voice of our Lord and Savior, who says: "You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it; and I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you shall have bound on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you shall have loosed on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

Common sense tells u, that Luther ripped it off at 1500s.

The bible canon was dogmatised in the Council of Trent because Luther challenged it.

Good Day, DarkLord

Your use of common sence runs at odds with the historical record.

Because Luther challeged it.... really:scratch:

That is not what your denominations says;

Based on a time-honoured tradition, the Councils of Florence in 1442 and Trent in 1564 resolved for Catholics any doubts and uncertainties. Their list comprises 73 books, which were accepted as sacred and canonical because they were inspired by the Holy Spirit, 46 for the Old Testament, 27 for the New.36 In this way the Catholic Church received its definitive canon. To determine this canon, it based itself on the Church's constant usage. In adopting this canon, which is larger than the Hebrew, it has preserved an authentic memory of Christian origins, since, as we have seen, the more restricted Hebrew canon is later than the formation of the New Testament.

Luther ripped it out in the 1500's :scratch:

What year?

The view of the Church at the time of Luther is historically known by the writting of those with in your denomination:
Cardinal Cajetan, the cardinal who opposed Martin Luther at the Diet of Worms and who was one of the most ardent supporters of the absolutist form of papal authority that had developed by the 16th century and that is still argued for today by Roman Catholics. (In other words, no Protestant sympathizer, he.)


Here we close our commentaries on the historical books of the Old Testament. For the rest (that is, Judith, Tobit, and the books of Maccabees) are counted by St Jerome out of the canonical books, and are placed amongst the Apocrypha, along with Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus, as is plain from the Prologus Galeatus. Nor be thou disturbed, like a raw scholar, if thou shouldest find anywhere, either in the sacred councils or the sacred doctors, these books reckoned as canonical. For the words as well of councils as of doctors are to be reduced to the correction of Jerome. Now, according to his judgment, in the epistle to the bishops Chromatius and Heliodorus, these books (and any other like books in the canon of the bible) are not canonical, that is, not in the nature of a rule for confirming matters of faith. Yet, they may be called canonical, that is, in the nature of a rule for the edification of the faithful, as being received and authorised in the canon of the bible for that purpose. By the help of this distinction thou mayest see thy way clearly through that which Augustine says, and what is written in the provincial council of Carthage.

Be consistant in how you classify the view of people in the historical record.

The good Cardinal and Luther agreed on this issue, as did many around this time frame.

Peace to u,

Bill
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zeena
Upvote 0

albertmc

Regular Member
Dec 22, 2005
301
37
67
Visit site
✟15,629.00
Faith
Anglican
Since everyone seems to be putting in their two cents for when various churches declared the canon, I might as well too!

The Canon as used in the RC and EO churches was first reached in the Western Councils of Carthage and Hippo and I believe in at least one Eastern local Council (the name escapes me at the moment) by the end of the fourth century A.D. This verified the Septuagint version of the Old Testament Scriptures. The canons of the Councils of Hippo and Carthage were then accepted by the Seventh Ecumenical Council (Nicea II) in 787 A.D.

By the way, the Book of Revelation was far more controversial in the early Church than the Apocryphal/Deutero-canonical books.
 
Upvote 0

plmarquette

Veteran
Oct 5, 2004
3,254
192
72
Auburn , IL.
✟4,379.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Politics
US-Republican
confusion ...
1. deuterocanoconical texts : the 7 books included in the canon of the RCC bible [ refered to as "aprocrypha" by protestants

2. apocrypha : part of 15 texts translated from the original Latin Vulgate , 7 of which the RCC used for historical , doctrinal , or dogmatic purposes and 8 of which were rejected as spurious ( flawed )

3. Pseudopegrapha ... several gnostic texts , and other quasi-christian documents , none of which is considered canoconical
 
Upvote 0

sunlover1

Beloved, Let us love one another
Nov 10, 2006
26,146
5,348
Under the Shadow of the Almighty
✟94,511.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Since everyone seems to be putting in their two cents for when various churches declared the canon, I might as well too!

The Canon as used in the RC and EO churches was first reached in the Western Councils of Carthage and Hippo and I believe in at least one Eastern local Council (the name escapes me at the moment) by the end of the fourth century A.D. This verified the Septuagint version of the Old Testament Scriptures. The canons of the Councils of Hippo and Carthage were then accepted by the Seventh Ecumenical Council (Nicea II) in 787 A.D.

By the way, the Book of Revelation was far more controversial in the early Church than the Apocryphal/Deutero-canonical books.
Why?
 
Upvote 0

albertmc

Regular Member
Dec 22, 2005
301
37
67
Visit site
✟15,629.00
Faith
Anglican

There was a large dispute among the early Christians as to whether Revelation was written by the Apostle John or was pseudopigraphical. Also controversial were II John, III John, II Peter, and Jude. These five book only gradually gained acceptance with Revelation being the most disputed. In general, the further East you went, the less support you got. In fact, the Church that was East of the Roman Empire, known as the Church of the East (not to be confused with either Eastern or Oriental Orthdox), did not accept these five books into their New Testament Canon.

The problems were that many believed these books were not written by the authors attached to them. Late dates of appearance were often cited as reasons. For example, you see no mention of II Peter in the early Church until long after he died. There were a lot of spurious manuscripts going around at the time and the heretical nature of some (such as the pseudopigraphical Gospel of Peter) were subtle and easily overlooked. Thus many early Christian leaders were probably taking an extra-critical approach to texts with which they were not familiar.
 
Upvote 0

DarkLord

Regular Member
Dec 1, 2006
456
9
34
✟8,141.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Btw christ quoted DC

Matthew 6:12, 14-15---"Forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors; if you forgive others their transgressions, your heavenly Father will forgive you. But if you do not forgive others, neither will your heavenly father forgive your transgressions."
Sirach 28:2---"Forgive your neighbor's injustice; then when you pray, your own sins will be forgiven."

Luke 1:17 (describing John the Baptist)---"He will go before him in the spirit and power of Elijah to turn the hearts of fathers towards children and the disobediant to the understanding of the righteous, to prepare a people fit for the Lord."
Sirach 48:10---"You are destined, it is written, in time to come, to put an end to wrath before the day of the Lord, to turn back the hearts of fathers towards their sons, and to re-establish the tribes of Jacob."

Luke 1:28, 1:42---"And coming to her, he said, 'Hail, favored one! The Lord is with you!'.....Most blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb."
Judith 13:18---"Then Uzziah said to her: 'Blessed are you, daughter, by the Most High God, above all the women of the earth; and blessed be the Lord God, the Creator of heaven and earth.

Luke 1:52---"He has thrown down the rulers from their thrones, but lifted up the lowly."
Sirach 10:14---"The thrones of the arrogant God overturns, and establishes the lowly in their stead."

Luke 12:19-20---"I shall say to myself, 'Now as for you, you have so many good things stored up for many years, rest, eat, drink, be merry!' But God said to him, 'You fool, this night your life will be demanded of you; and the things you have prepared, to whom will they belong?'"
Sirach 11:19---"When he says: 'I have found rest, now I will feast on my possessions,' he does not know how long it will be till he dies and leaves them to others."

Luke 18:22---"When Jesus heard this, he said to him, 'There is still one thing left for you: sell all that you have and distribute it to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven.'"
Sirach 29:11---"Dispose of your treasure as the Most High commands, for that will profit you more than the gold."

John 3:12---"If I tell you about earthly things and you do not believe, how will you believe if I tell you about heavenly things?"
Wisdom 9:16---"Scarce do we guess the things on earth, and what is within our grasp we find with difficulty; but when things are in heaven, who can search them out?"

John 5:18---"For this reason the Jews tried all the more to kill him, because he not only broke the Sabbath, but he also called God his own Father, making himself equal to God."
Wisdom 2:16---"He judges us debased; he holds aloof from our paths as from things impure. He calls blest the destiny of the just and boasts that God is his Father."

John 10:29---"My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one can take them out of the Father's hand."
Wisdom 3:1---"But the souls of the just are in the hand of God, and no torment shall touch them."

Paul and James allude to them as well:

Romans 2:11---"There is no partiality with God."
Sirach 35:12---"For he is a God of justice, who knows no favorites."

Romans 9:21---"Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for a noble purpose andanother fo an ignoble one?"
Wisdom 15:7---"For truly the potter, laboriously working the soft earth, molds for our service each several article: both the vessels that serve for clean purposes, and their opposites, all alike; as to what shall be the use of each vessel of eiother class, the worker in clay is the judge."

Romans 11:24---"For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who has been his counsellor?"
Wisdom 9:13---"For what man knows God's counsel, or who can conceive what the Lord intends?"

1 Thessalonians 2:16---"(The enemies of Christ persecute us), trying to prevent us from speaking to the Gentiles that they may be saved, thus constantly filling up the measure of their sins. But the wrath of God has finally begun to come upon them."
2 Maccabees 6:14---"Thus, in dealing with other nations, the Lord patiently waits until they reach the full measure of their sins before he punishes them; but with us he has decided to deal differently"

James 1:13---"No one experiencing temptation should say, 'I am being tempted by God'; for God is not subject to temptation to evil, and he himself tempts no one."
Sirach 15:11-12---"Say not: 'It was God's doing that I fell away'; for what he hates he does not do. Say not: 'It was he who set me astray'; for he has no need of wicked man."

James 5:2-3---"Your wealth has rotted away, your clothes have become moth-eaten, your gold and silver hav corroded, and that corrosion will be a testimony against you; it will devour your flesh like a fire."
Judith 16:17---'The Lord Almighty will requite them; in the day of judgement he will punish them: he will send fire and worms into their flesh, and they shall burn and suffer forever."

Now, of course, you may say that these don't sound like exact quotes, and you'd be right; but there are thousands of allusions in the New Testament from the Old, both Deuterocanon and not, which are not exact quotes. Romans 11:34, for example, also has an allusion to Job 15:8, but ironically the allusion to Wisdom 9:13 is closer in actual wording to it than Job is. And, of course, if you want to get into loose allusions, we could expand the above list to ten times the size it is. Then there are also the cases of outright error in some New Testament quotes, such as Matthew 27:9, in which Matthew quotes "the prophet Jeremiah", when the allusion is actually found nowhere in Jeremiah but rather in Zecheriah 11:12-13.

There is also the case of some Old Testament books not being quoted by Jesus in the New Testament: He didn't quote from Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Ecclesiastes, or the Song of Solomon. And yet they are still considered to be canonical Scripture even though He did not reference them.
:)

http://www.christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=558419&postcount=10
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

BereanTodd

Missionary Heart
Nov 26, 2006
2,448
281
48
Houston, Tx
✟11,542.00
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Btw christ quoted DC

When Christ quoted the OT He would always qualify it "It is written ..." and other such things. You are merely finding similar sayings and saying that Jesus quoted it. I could similarly find similar teachings of Jesus and the Scripture in any number of ANE religions, and budhism and elsewhere. Similarity does not equal quoting. When Jesus quoted Scripture, He made sure that we knew He was quoting Scripture. Your entire post is a bunch of hopeful nonsense.
 
Upvote 0

DarkLord

Regular Member
Dec 1, 2006
456
9
34
✟8,141.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
When Christ quoted the OT He would always qualify it "It is written ..." and other such things. You are merely finding similar sayings and saying that Jesus quoted it. I could similarly find similar teachings of Jesus and the Scripture in any number of ANE religions, and budhism and elsewhere. Similarity does not equal quoting. When Jesus quoted Scripture, He made sure that we knew He was quoting Scripture. Your entire post is a bunch of hopeful nonsense.
Wait wait.....the Holy Spirit is guiding me now....Im right

But seriously, did christ told u that or it what ur pastor tell u? He knew how Christ spoke?

Ohh and yea....i suppose when Christ changed Simon (grain of sand) to Peter (pebble)....christ must have amde a big joke as well haha.
 
Upvote 0

ShammahBenJudah

Son of Zion
Oct 31, 2006
11,188
10,845
USA
✟73,073.00
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Wait wait.....the Holy Spirit is guiding me now....Im right

But seriously, did christ told u that or it what ur pastor tell u? He knew how Christ spoke?

Ohh and yea....i suppose when Christ changed Simon (grain of sand) to Peter (pebble)....christ must have amde a big joke as well haha.

CAREFUL.....that's not a safe playground!

"Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men." Matthew 12:31
 
  • Like
Reactions: Somerset
Upvote 0

DarkLord

Regular Member
Dec 1, 2006
456
9
34
✟8,141.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
1) I was being sacrastic but saying wad most prots will say regarding private intepreation.

2) U quoted a verse in support of purgatory

31 Therefore, I say to you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven people, but blasphemy against the Spirit 22 will not be forgiven. 32 And whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven; but whoever speaks against the holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.
Jesus thus clearly provides that there is forgiveness after death. The phrase “in the next” (from the Greek “en to mellonti”) generally refers to the afterlife (see, for example, Mark 10.30; Luke 18.30; 20.34-35; Eph. 1.21 for similar language). Forgiveness is not necessary in heaven, and there is no forgiveness in hell. This proves that there is another state after death, and the Church for 2,000 years has called this state purgatory.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

ScottBot

Revolutionary
May 2, 2005
50,456
1,441
56
a state of desperation
✟57,712.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
Regardless of the other hoorah, using God's name sarcastically is vanity. Have you no more respect for Him than that?
Catholics have much more respect for the Holy Spirit than you are giving credit for. We say "The Holy Spirit guides the Church to all truth." Protestants, using the policy of Sola Scriptura and norma normans normancia nomanos (whatever then heck it is) in effect say, "The Holy Spirit guides ME into all truth." The protestant position is much more "arrogant".
 
Upvote 0

ShammahBenJudah

Son of Zion
Oct 31, 2006
11,188
10,845
USA
✟73,073.00
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Catholics have much more respect for the Holy Spirit than you are giving credit for.

With all due respect, I was addressing a specific post mocking the work of the Holy Spirit. It was vain and unnecessary. The point could've just as easily have been expressed without disrespecting the Holy Spirit...

Wait wait.....the Holy Spirit is guiding me now....Im right

But seriously, did christ told u that or it what ur pastor tell u? He knew how Christ spoke?

Ohh and yea....i suppose when Christ changed Simon (grain of sand) to Peter (pebble)....christ must have amde a big joke as well haha.

We say "The Holy Spirit guides the Church to all truth." Protestants, using the policy of Sola Scriptura and norma normans normancia nomanos (whatever then heck it is) in effect say, "The Holy Spirit guides ME into all truth." The protestant position is much more "arrogant".

Errr...why stab at those who don't walk as you do...what spirit is that the fruit of?

"But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness." 2 Timothy 2:16
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

DarkLord

Regular Member
Dec 1, 2006
456
9
34
✟8,141.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
With all due respect, I was addressing a specific post mocking the work of the Holy Spirit. It was vain and unnecessary. The point could've just as easily have been expressed without disrespecting the Holy Spirit...





Errr...why stab at those who don't walk as you do...what spirit is that the fruit of?

"But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness." 2 Timothy 2:16
The more reason for u to be silent then....u critise our protestant brethen and thier basis of private intepretation...have u no heart?
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.