Non-canonical Books

I can't say anything bad about them, not because I agree with them, but because certain people believe in including them in the Bible and don't like others offering their opinion about why they shouldn't be in the Bible. I don't think they should be there, myself. If I offer any websites to support that, I'll just get censored. I would be considered intolerant.

As far as the apocryphal books are concerned, don't you think it's interesting that neither Christ nor any of the apostles ever quote from one of them -not once, not ever. In fact the apocryphal books weren't even added to the canon until 1546 I believe. Another interesting thing is that they are supposed to be books of the old testament, yet they aren't written in the same language as any of the other old testament books. This doesn't mean that they don't have good ideas or aren't good books - Aristotle wrote great books with great ideas - but he wasn't inspired by God, and the evidence largely suggests the that whoever wrote the apocryphal books wasn't either.

Stuff about the Second Coming of Christ should be in there. Daniel, Ezikel (the two main books in the OT that talk about the Second Coming) and then there is Revalation in the NT, why shouldnt they be in there? Do we just not want to think about whats to come? I mean we shouldnt dwell about whats to come so much that we totally submerge ourselves into it.
But take into consideration this:
1/4 of the BIble talks about prophecy (whether it is the First or Second Coming)
and a big part of the NT does mention the Second Coming. There are other books in the NT that briefly mention things referred to in Revelation.
Yes, Revelation can be a dangerous book, but then I think it can be a very benefical book. those are just my two cents

In fact the apocryphal books weren't even added to the canon until 1546.


If so, then how could Luther have removed them 20 years earlier if they were not there?
How could Trent have added them if they were already in the Latin Vulgate from 404 A.D? 


If they were never there to begin with, then how do you explain the fact that they are, and always have been, in the Latin Vulgate, which has been in use by the Catholic Church for over 1500 years?
Explain why so many history books are wrong, by saying Luther removed them during the reformation? I must ask also, "By what authority does a Jewish Council, which was convened decades after the dawn of Christianity, have any claim regarding the nature of Christian doctrine?"

This link may be of some interest. It includes quotes from early Church councils and fathers, and the Didachae that include quotations from the deuterocanons (they're all cited for you).

http://www.catholic.com/library/Old_Testament_Canon.asp

Aggie--- As far as the apocryphal books are concerned, don't you think it's interesting that neither Christ nor any of the apostles ever quote from one of them -not once, not ever.                                                                                                                                                                    Jesus Christ did  reference the Deuterocanonical books, so they are canonical.
Well, let us see just which books He did reference...

In...
Matthew 4:4, He referred to Deuteronomy 8:3
Matthew 4:7, He referred to Deuteronomy 6:16
Matthew 4:10, He referenced Deuteronomy 6:13 and 10:20
Matthew 6:10, He referenced 1Maccabees 3:60
Matthew 6:12, He referenced Sirach (Ecclesiasticus) 28:2
Matthew 6:13, He referenced Sirach 33:1
Matthew 7:12, and Luke 6:31, He referenced Tobit 4:16
Matthew 9:13, He quoted Hosea 6:6
Matthew 11:25, He quoted Tobit 7:18
Matthew 12:42, He quoted the Book of Wisdom itself
Matthew 13:43, He quoted Wisdom 3:7
Matthew 16:18, He quoted Wisdom 16:13
Matthew 22:32, He quoted Exodus 3:6
Matthew 22:37, He quoted Deuteronomy 6:5
Matthew 22:39, He quoted Leviticus 19:18
Matthew 22:44, He quoted Psalms 110:1
Matthew 24:16, He quoted 1Maccabees 2:28
Mark 4:5,16-17, He quoted Sirach 40:15
Mark 7:6-8, He quoted Isaiah 29:13
Mark 9:47-48, He quoted Judith 16:17
Luke 13:29, He quoted Baruch 4:37
Luke 21:24, He quoted Sirach 28:18
John 1:3, He quoted Wisdom 9:1
John 3:13, He quoted Baruch 3:29
John 4:48, He quoted Wisdom 8:8
John 5:18, He quoted Wisdom 2:16
John 6:35-59, He quoted Sirach 24:21
John 14:23, He referenced Sirach 2:15-16, (Septuagint) or Sirach 2:18 (Confraternity).
John 15:6, He referenced Wisdom 4:5

He quoted Deuteronomy, Hosea, Exodus, Leviticus, Isaiah, and Psalms, as I have listed here, and there are more, but He did not quote all of the books of the Old Testament.

Of these books, neither Jesus Christ nor the Apostles referenced:
Song of Songs, Ecclesiastes, Esther, Obadiah, Zephaniah, Judges, 1Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Lamentatations, and Nahum.
Does this make these books any less canonical simply because they were not referenced by them?

However, did you notice that I have referenced six of the Deuterocanonical books in my list, Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, Baruch and 1Maccabees? As pointed out above, the Septuagint was referenced by Christ and the Apostles, many more times than they referenced the Hebrew Old Testament, and the Septuagint had all 46 books. These four references lend much credibility to the books removed by Luther, and to the Greek Septuagint.


The Deuteroncanonical book of Wisdom has, however, a stunning prophecy of Jesus Christ, which adds immensely to its canonicity...
"Therefore let us lie in wait for the righteous; because he is not for our turn, and he is clean contrary to our doings: he upbraided us with our offending the law, and objecteth to our infamy the transgressions of our education. He professeth to have the knowledge of GOD: and he calleth himself the child of the Lord. He was made to reprove our thoughts. He is grevious unto us even to behold: for his life is not like other men's, his ways are of another fashion. We are esteemed of him as counterfeits: he abstaineth from our ways as from filthiness: he pronounceth the end of the just to be blessed, and maketh his boast that GOD is his Father. Let us see if his words be true; and let us prove what shall happen in the end of him. For if the just man be the Son of GOD, he will help him, and deliver him from the hand of his enemies. Let us examine him with despitefulness and torture, that we may know his meekness and prove his patience. Let us condemn him with a shameful death: for by his own saying he shall be respected." Wisdom 2:12-20, Septuagint.

1 Enoch 1:9 And behold! He cometh with ten thousands of His holy ones to execute judgment upon all, and to destroy all the ungodly; and to convict all flesh of all the works of their ungodliness which they have ungodly committed, and of all the hard things which ungodly sinners have spoken against Him.

Jude 14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,
Jude 15 To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.


Was Jude quoting the book of enoch hear???

I recon he most definatly was.

Celtic.

This is a great article on the Deuterocanons that was posted by Hoonbaba in the Catholic Forum. It should answer most of your questions:

http://www.ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/DEUTEROS.htm

Aww....Pax beat me to it =)

Anyway, if you want to get a VERY indepth look on the deuterocanonicals, check out this page:

http://matt1618.freeyellow.com/deut.html

Warning: It's ridiculously long LOL!!

By the way, at the end of the article, the author addresses objections raised by Norm Geisler!!

God bless!

-Jason

Hi Trento,

The post on the quotations of the deuterocanonicals are truly fascinating!! Thanks for sharing =)

Anyway, did anyone notice that Paul quoted a nonbiblical writer?

Acts 17:28 - 'For in him we live and move and have our being.' As some of your own poets have said, 'We are his offspring.'

I don't remember who actually said that but it's one of the Greek philosophers. As for why Paul did this, it's because he was proving a point (check out verse 24-29, particularly 29), and he used a statement by a Greek philosopher to reach out to people from Athens....in other words Greeks! =) Clever isn't it?

By the way, Protestants are quick to use this to explain away why the apocrypha isn't biblical. I think it's a weak explanation.

Anyway, I personally believe the deuterocanonicals are inspired. And I'm not Catholic, in fact I'm a protestant!! LOL!! =)

-Jason

Originally posted by aggie03
As far as the apocryphal books are concerned, don't you think it's interesting that neither Christ nor any of the apostles ever quote from one of them -not once, not ever. In fact the apocryphal books weren't even added to the canon until 1546 I believe. Another interesting thing is that they are supposed to be books of the old testament, yet they aren't written in the same language as any of the other old testament books. This doesn't mean that they don't have good ideas or aren't good books - Aristotle wrote great books with great ideas - but he wasn't inspired by God, and the evidence largely suggests the that whoever wrote the apocryphal books wasn't either.

Click to expand...

Aggie the Deuterocanonicals/apocrypha were written in greek, or at least the septuagint (which was a greek translation) contained the deuterocanonicals. Also, the septuagint was likely to be the book that Jesus may've read during his day.

Supposedly, one reason why the Jews took the books out is that it supposedly has tons of messianic statements that point to Christ. Also, based on the shorter article listed above, some of the Jews considered it canonical.

-Jason

Hi guys,

Sorry for all the frequent posts. I didn't want to have one ridiculously long one =P

Anyway, the Book of Enoch has TONS of apocalyptic stuff like Revelation. But first I just wanted to share something: I hold on to the preterist interpretation of Revelation. I believe all end times bible prophecy was fulfilled. Just so you know, it's also known as 'covenant eschatology'. I don't see Revelation depicting the end of time, but rather the end of old covenant and the establishment of the new (Heb 10:9, Heb 8:7-13, Gal 4:21-31). Now, why is this important you ask?

Because if (and this is a BIG if) 1 Enoch is indeed scripture, then we can understand why 1 Enoch was directly quoted by Jude (see 1 Enoch 1:9 and Jude 1:14-15). Also keep in mind that, the Bible also quotes other nonbiblical texts. Anyway, let's consider something:

1 Enoch makes a VERY strange claim:

"And when their sons have slain one another, and they have seen the destruction of their beloved ones, bind them fast for seventy generations in the valleys of the earth, Till the day of their judgement and of their consummation" (1 Enoch 10:11-12)

So basically 1 Enoch is saying that the judgement is seventy generations from Enoch. Again, note that preterists hold that the judgment happened in 70AD (about a jewish-40-year-generation from when Jesus died). Now, Luke claims to have "traced the course of all things accurately from the first" (Luke 1:1-4).

Here's that 'freaky' part:

There are exactly seventy generations from the generation of Enoch to the generation of Jesus Christ (Luke 3:23-37)

Let's check:

01 Jesus
02 Joseph
03 Heli
04 Matthat
05 Levi
06 Melki
07 Jannai
08 Joseph
09 Mattathias
10 Amos
11 Nahum
12 Esli
13 Naggai
14 Maath
15 Mattathias
16 Semein
17 Josech
18 Joda
19 Joanan
20 Rhesa
21 Zerubbabel
22 Shealtiel
23 Neri
24 Melki
25 Addi
26 Cosam
27 Elmadam
28 Er
29 Joshua
30 Eliezer
31 Jorim
32 Matthat
33 Levi
34 Simeon
35 Judah
36 Joseph
37 Jonam
38 Eliakim
39 Melea
40 Menna
41 Mattatha
42 Nathan
43 David
44 Jesse
45 Obed
46 Boaz
47 Salmon
48 Nahshon
49 Amminadab
50 Ram
51 Hezron
52 Perez
53 Judah
54 Jacob
55 Isaac
56 Abraham
57 Terah
58 Nahor
59 Serug
60 Reu
61 Peleg
62 Eber
63 Shelah
64 Cainan
65 Arphaxad
66 Shem
67 Noah
68 Lamech
69 Methuselah
70 Enoch

Weird isn't it!?!? But anyway, this would actually confirm the preterist interpretation. One preterist brother put it this way:

From a preterist perspective, 1 Enoch adds considerable weight to the many passages in the New Testament which clearly indicate that the consummation of the age together with Christ’s second coming took place in A.D. 70 (in the destruction of Jerusalem). This being the case, it should not surprise us to learn that 1 Enoch was banned by Hilary, Jerome, and Augustine and was subsequently lost to Western Christendom for over a thousand years. In short, it was suppressed. Why? Because it could not be made to fit their idea that Christ’s coming had not yet been fulfilled. 1 Enoch’s “seventy generations” was too problematic. It could not be made to stretch beyond the First Century. Copies of 1 Enoch soon disappeared, and were it not for the fact that a number of copies have since been discovered and translated, we would have no knowledge of 1 Enoch outside of the references made to it in the Book of Jubilees, the Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs, and in the writings of the Apostolic Fathers (many of whom regarded 1 Enoch as Scripture: i.e. Barnabas, Athenagoras, Clement of Alexandria, Irenaeus, and Tertullian).

Fascinating isn't it? Also, keep in mind it was supposedly written long before the time of Jesus. I personally don't know what to think about 1 Enoch, even with the 70 generations phenomena fitting my eschatological position. I haven't read it yet =P

By the way, here's a bunch of New testament parallels with 1 Enoch that you might enjoy looking through:

1.9
Quoted by Jude (see above).

10.7
“the healing of the earth” (cf. Rom. 8:18-21).

12.1
“the great glory sat...more brightly than the sun...no flesh could behold him” (cf. 1 Tim. 6:16).

12-14
Enoch preaches to the spirits in prison that waited in the days of Noah (cf. 1 Pet. 3:18-20).

15.7
Angels not marrying or being given in marriage (cf. Lk. 20.35).

16.1-2
Evil spirits permitted to destroy until the consummation of the age (cf. Mat. 8:29).

19.3
“the end of all things” (cf. 1 Pet. 4:7).

22.7
Souls crying out for judgment (cf. Rev. 6:9-10).

25.3-5
Description of the tree of life restored (cf. Rev. 22:1ff).

38.2
The appearance of “the Righteous One” is linked to the appearance of the “light” (cf. John 1).

38.4
“those that possess the earth shall no longer be powerful and exalted” (cf. 1 Cor. 2:6).

38.4
“For the Lord of Spirits has caused His light to appear on the face of the holy, righteous, and elect” (cf. 2 Cor. 3:18ff).

41.2
“mansions of the elect” (cf. John 14:2).

46.3
“This is the Son of Man...who revealeth all the treasures of that which is hidden” (cf. Col. 2:3; John 4).

48-51
Numerous New Testament echoes:

48.4
“Light of the Gentiles”;

48.3
“those who have fallen asleep in righteousness”;

48.4
“he shall judge the secret things”;

48.5
“All...shall fall down and worship him”;

48.6
“chosen hidden before Him before the creation of the world”;

48.6
“in his name they are saved...according to his good pleasure”;

50.3a
“through his name shall they be saved”;

50.3b
“all the secrets of wisdom and counsel... the Lord of Spirits hath given to him”.

56.5-8
“in those days the angels shall return...shall stir up the kings...shall go up and tread under foot the land of His elect ones...shall be swallowed up” (cf. Rev. 20).

58.5
“And after this it shall be said to the holy in heaven that they should seek out the secrets of righteousness, the heritage of faith. For it has become bright as sun upon earth and darkness is past” (cf. Eph. 3:10; 1 Pet. 1:12; Rom. 13:12).

62.2
“the word of his mouth slays all the sinners” (cf. Rev. 19:15).

62.4
“as on a woman in travail” (cf. Mark 13:8).

62.5
“when they see the Son of Man sitting on the throne of his glory” (Mt. 25:31).

62.5-11
The Lord will execute vengeance upon “those who rule the world” (1 Cor. 2:6).

62.12
“wrath of the Lord of Spirits resteth upon them, and His sword is drunk with their blood” (cf. Revelation).

62.13-16
“The righteous and elect shall be saved on that day...and with that Son of Man shall they eat...shall have risen from the earth...clothed with garments of glory...and...shall not grow old” (cf. Mt. 26:29; 1 Thess. 4:17; 2 Cor. 5:1-2).

71.5
Translated into heaven, Enoch sees “a structure built of crystals and...tongues of living fire” (Rev. 21:11; Acts 2:3-4).

71.15
“the world to come” (cf. Heb. 2:5).

71.16
“they shall not be separated from him forever and ever and ever” (cf. Rom. 8:35ff).

90.26-27
The fate of the sinners: to be thrown into Gehenna — “this abyss was to the right of that house” (cf. Mt. 23:33).

90.29
The Lord of the sheep brings “a new house greater and loftier than the first” (cf. Heb. 3:6; 13:14).

91.3-4
The “double heart” (cf. Jas. 1:8).

91.7
The increase of sin and violence comes prior to the Lord’s coming in judgment (cf. Luke 21:9; 2 Thess. 2:3).

91.10
“And all the righteous shall arise from their sleep” (cf. 1 Thess. 4:15).

93.1-16
The “Apocalypse of Weeks” depicts the rise of “an apostate generation” and its destruction, after which a “new heaven” appears (cf. Mt. 23:36; 2 Pet. 3:13).

94.8-9
“Woe to you ye rich, for ye have trusted in your riches....Ye have committed blasphemy and unrighteousness and have become ready for the day of slaughter and the day of darkness and the day of great judgment” (cf. Jas. 5:1ff).

95.4-7
“Woe to you ...” (cf. Matt. 23).

96:1
“suddenly shall the sinners perish before you” (cf. 1 Thess. 5:1-3)

99.2
“they shall be trodden under foot” (cf. Rom. 16:20).

100.3
“horse shall walk up to the breast in the blood of sinners” (cf. Rev. 14:20).

100.5
“though the righteous sleep a long sleep, they have nought to fear” (cf. 1 Thess. 4:13ff).

100:9
“In blazing flames burning worse than fire shall ye burn” (cf. 2 Thess. 1:7; Heb. 10:27; 12:18, 29; Rev. 18:8; 20:9)

103.8
“the great judgment shall be for all the generations of the world” (cf. Mt. 23:32ff).

104.1
“in heaven the angels remember you for good before the glory of the Great One” (cf. Mt. 18:10); “ye shall shine as the lights of heaven” (cf. Phil. 2:15); “cast not away your hope” (cf. Heb. 10:23ff).

105.2
“For I and My Son will be united with them forever” (cf. John 14:23).

107.1
“generation upon generation shall transgress till a generation of righteousness arises” (cf. Acts 2).

108.2
“in the last days” (cf. 1 Tim. 4:1; 2 Tim. 3:1; Heb. 1:2).

108.7
“written...that the angels may read them” (cf. Eph. 3:10; 1 Pet. 1:12).

108.11-13
“I will transform those who were born in darkness....And I will bring forth in shining light those who have loved my holy name, and I will seat each on the throne of my honor” (cf. 1 Cor. 15:51; Eph. 2:6; Col. 1:13; Mt. 19:28).

God bless!

-Jason

Why didn't Josephus include them {apocryphal books} in his listing of the books of the Old Testament?

Why didn't Josephus include them {apocryphal books} in his listing of the books of the Old Testament?

Click to expand...

Statements that the Catholic Church cannot justify including the Deutro-Canonical books of the OT will be laid to rest as we shall see here. Claimes that the Alexandrian Jews who interpreted the Septuagint did so in rebellion against the Aaronic priesthood who you might claim have the sole authority to determine what Scripture is concerning the OT and since the Catholic Church added these books to the Canon it is to be rejected. Once you can provide a list of books that the Aaronic priesthood had authored that defined the books of Scripture of the OT. and evidence that the canon was closed outside of your opinion you may have some argument.
In the book The Works of Josephus Complete and Unabridged New Updated Version translated by William Whiston. Josephus was a Jewish historian who was born approximately 37 a.d. The book sat on my shelves for a long time until I had the interest to do some reading in it. Here is what I found in that it relevant to our discussion concerning the Alexandrian Canon (Septuagint) and the so-called rebellious Jews at Alexandria . We can also recall that we have been told that quotation does not equal canonicity in regard to NT quotes of the OT and that the Council of Jamnia in which Jews set the canon was irrelevant because they did not have the authority to determine the OT canon after the temple curtain was ripped in two. In Josephus Antiquities of the Jews Book 12 Chapter 2 We find the title “How Ptolmey Philadelphus procured the laws of the Jews to be translated into the Greek tongue, and set many captives free; and dedicated many gifts to God.” This begins on page 309. First of all we find out that the “rebellious” Jews at Alexandria were actually there because they were held captive. It says that:“Philedelphus then took the kingdom of Egypt, and held it forty years within one. He procured the law to be interpreted, and set free those that were come from Jerusalem into Egypt, and where in slavery there, who were a hundred and twenty thousand.” Ptolmey had Demetrius Phalerius, the library keeper wrote a letter to the Jewish high priest Eleazar in Jerusalem that he should act accordingly.Ptolmey sent some gifts to Jerusalem I quote: “On which account I have subjoined a copy of these epistles, and set down a multitude of the vessels sent as gifts ”A suggestion than comes from Hecateus of Abdera to the king: “O king, thou mayest write to high priest of the Jews, to send six of the elders out of every tribe, and those such as are more skillful of the laws, that by their means we may learn the clear and agreeing sense of these books, and may obtain an accurate interpretation of their contents, so that we may have such a collection of these as may be suitable to they desire. When this epistle was sent to the king, he commanded that an epistle should be drawn up for Eleazar, the Jewish high priest, concerning these matters.”…We can see here that all of this Septuagint project is done with the co-operation and facilitation of the Aaronic priesthood in Jerusalem and not apart from it at all.Ptolmey than writes a letter (epistle) to Eleazar the high priest of Jerusalem and the pertinent part for our discussion I will quote here “I have determined to procure an interpretation of your law, and to have it translated out of Hebrew into Greek, and to have it deposited in my library.”Eleazar the high priest of Jerusalem responds with his letter back to Ptolmey and I will quote the parts that are germane to our issue at hand: “When we received thy epistle, we greatly rejoiced at thy intentions; and when the multitude were gathered together, we read it to them, and thereby made them sensible of the piety thou hast towards God.”And the confirming part from the Jerusalem high priest of the Aaronic priesthood: “…and that the translation of our law may come to the conclusion thou desirest, and be fore thy advantage. We have also chosen six elders out of every tribe, whom we have sent and the law with them. It will be they part, out of thy piety and justice to send back the law when it hath been translated; and to return those to us that bring it in safety.-Farewell.”
Then the account of Josephus moves on :“And these were what gifts were send by Ptolmey to Jerusalem and dedicated to God there. But when Eleazar the high priest had devoted them to God and had paid the due respect to those who had brought them,”…
Josephus continues “He then made haste to meet the elders that came from Jerusalem for the interpretation of the laws; “….Was the job done correctly? Josephus tells us “Accordingly, they made an accurate interpretation, with great zeal and great pains”:
All the quotes are from Josephus Antiquities of the Jews Book 12 Chapter 2 between the pages of 309-315 of the Works of Josephus.
Now the question is what did Josephus list as Scripture for the OT and why? I haven’t been able to locate a list in Josephus except a reference to there being 22 letters in the Hebrew alphabet and their being a book to correspond to each letter. If that is the case the 39 books of the current Jewish OT are appropriated more than one book per letter to mean the books accepted by the current Protestant canon. This inicates that the canon may not be that rigid as generally accepted by Josephus as more books could be appropriated to each letter. I have two theories as to why Josephus mentions only the canon accepted by the current Jews. If we knew the date in which Jamnia set the canon that could answer much of the speculation. The dates given for the Council of Jamnia can vary from about 75-96 a.d. If it was towards the earlier date than Josephus would be acting like a faithful Jew of his time and accept the limited canon which he listed in his book which was probably written after 80 a.d.. If it was later the canon which he listed was according to the Scriptures that were in the possesion of Titus at Rome in which Josephus was an interpreter for the Romans of Jewish practices. These Scriptures where probably taken from Jerusalem during the sack of Jerusalem in 70 a.d. There is a theory possibility that these Scriptures are those that where from Nehemiah. Dissertation 4 by the interpreter of Josephus postulates the following:“Proving that the copy of the books of the old testament laid up in Herods temple, and thence used by Josephus, the Jewish historian, in his antiquities, was not other than that most ancient collection or library made by Nehemiah, in the days of Artaxerxes, the son of Xerxes and was free from several additions and alterations made afterwards in the other copies which are not extant-this appears by the arguments following-Jimraboin has several problems with this. (1) The book of Malachi is missing and (2) so is the Song of Songs and (3) Nehemiah is not a member of the Aaronic priesthood. If that is so then that would indicate that the canon was not closed with the addition of the above books, Malachi and Song of Songs and also it would not be authoritative because Nehemiah was not a member of the Aaronic priesthood.Evidence for the still open canon is concluded from the evidence of the high priest of the Aaronic priesthood in Jerusalem Eleazar approving and assisting in the translations of the Hebrew Scripture into the Septuagint which included the deutero-canonical books. .And finally when Ptolmey received the Septuagint translation:“And when the king had received these books from Demetrius, as we have said already, he adored them; and gave order that they might remain uncorropted. He also desired that the interpreters would come to him often out of Judea, “……The translators with the approval of the Aaronic priesthood kept in touch with the king Ptolmey to help instruct him on the contents.





Protestants claimed that the church added the deutero-canonicals at the Councils of Hippo and Carthage in 393 and 397 a.d. Justin Martyr who wrote about 150 a.d. made mention that the Christians used a different set of Divine Writings than the Jews used. Since the apostle John died about 100-110 a.d. this is evidence that the Apostolic Church used the deutero-canonicals in Apostolic times. The Council of Jamnia was approx. 96 a.d. The Jews most likely rejected the deutero-canonicals as a reaction to the Apostles using them. Peace.

The term non-canonical as used by the Early Church Fathers can trip people up sometimes, Aggie. Some Early Church Fathers are reported not to have listed certain books in their Canon. This is true. Take the Eastern Orthodox Church as a whole, for instance. In one sense they will refer to the Apocalypse as being non-canonical, while still affirming its inspiration. Why? Simple. It is because they do not read from it in their Liturgy. Ever. It is not a part of their Liturgical canon, so they refer to it as non-canonical, even though it is a part of their canon of Scriptures.

Many times when the Early Fathers listed the books of their canon, they were refering to the to the books read during the Liturgy, not necessarily those they believed to be inspired, which could and did include books not included in their Liturgy.

Neal

*edited due to a violation of CF rule #6.

God bless,

Reformationist

The original Canon of Scripture was closed in 405 A.D. by the Bishop of Rome, and it included the seven books the Protestants believe are non-Canonical. It remained unaltered until the 1530's when Martin Luther removed the seven Canonical books from his Canon of Scriptures. Thus the difference between the Catholic and Orthodox Church's Canon, and the Protestant Canon of Scriptures.

God Bless,

Neal