Is 4 Maccabees considered part of the "Deuterocanonical books" in the Georgian Orthodox Church, or is it considered outside the canon totally like Slavonic 3 Esdras / Vulgate 4 Esdras is?
I am currently listening to lectures about the biblical "Deuterocanonical" books, since I am just familiar with the "canonical" books of the Bible.
Jewish rabbis and Protestants believe that there are 39 books in the Old Testament. That list contains the TaNaKh, and among these books are famous ones like Genesis, Ezekiel, Zechariah, etc.
The Russian, Greek, and other Orthodox Churches, as well as the Catholic Church, consider there to be some "Deuterocanonical" biblical books, such as Tobit, Baruch, and some books of the Maccabees. Technically, "Deuterocanon" is a Catholic Church term for this category of books, and it's potentially alittle confusing, because the Catholic Church considers its "Deuterocanonical" books to be fully canonical, due to a post-Schism Catholic "Ecumenical Council" carefully listing their Church's canonical Biblical books.
Unfortunately, the common term in use in the Russian Tradition for these Deuterocanonical books is even less clear. In normal Russian Church parlance, these books are called "non-canonical". Yet some of them like "Wisdom of Solomon" are in fact part of the "canon" of books read aloud in the "canon" of Russian Orthodox services. Furthermore, the Russian Church considers these "noncanonical" (Deuterocanonical) books to be in a separate category than books that it classifies as "sectarian," "apocryphal," etc.
In addition to the Deuterocanonical books, the Russian physical volumes of the Bible also contain the Slavonic 3 Esdras (A.K.A. the Vulgate 4 Esdras) and IV Maccabees. But my understanding is that the Russian Church neither includes these 2 books in either the “Canon,” nor in the “Deuterocanon”.
Slavonic 3 Esdras (AKA Vulgate 4 Esdras) was included in Russian hardcopy Bibles, but not Greek ones for the following historical reason: Historically, the early medieval Church considered 4 Esdras to be apocryphal, but the Western Church, and its Latin translator St. Jerome, included it in the Vulgate's hard copy so that it would not get lost. That is, despite the medieval Church categorizing it as apocrypha, it was printed in Latin Bibles as a kind of non-canonical/apocryphal accessory text just to have it. Meanwhile, the Greek language copies of 3 Esdras did get lost. Finally, when the Russian Church started translating and printing hard copy Bibles in Slavonic, they took the Latin Vulgate Bibles into consideration. And since the Vulgate Bibles included 4 Esdras, the Russian printers included that book too. However, the Russian Church never made a formal decision to categorize Slavonic 3 Esdras as "Canonical," despite it being found today in Russian Orthodox Bibles under the title of 3 Esdras. (IIRC, the Orthodox Study Bible in English calls it "2 Esdras" like the KJV does, which adds to confusion IMO.)
Meanwhile, the Greek Church printed their hardcopy Bibles using the Greek "Alexandrian Codex." This Codex included 4 Maccabees, so the Greek Church historically printed 4 Maccabees along with the Greek Church's canonical books, even though it did not have a formal decision labeling 4 Maccabees canonical. Russian Wikipedia notes that neither the Greek hardcopy Bibles, nor the Russian ones included formal lists of which books in them were "canon" (eg. Genesis) vs. outside the canon or apocryphal (eg. Slav. 3 Esdras and 4 Maccabees).
Thus, the mere fact that the Russian, Greek, or Georgian hardcopy Bibles physically include Slavonic 3 Esdras and 4 Maccabees does not itself prove that any of these Churches consider either one of those 2 books to be either "canonical" or "noncanonical."
It's true that the Quintsext Ecumenical Council of Trullo, which Eastern Orthodox Churches accept as an authority for themselves, addressed the question of the list of books in the Old Testament. Unfortunately, this Council's solution is not very clear at first glance because the Council's solution was to accept the list of books promulgated by Carthage, Laodicea, and some Greek fathers. The difficulty is that Carthage accepted the Deuterocanical books like Wisdom of Solomon and Tobit as "canonical", whereas Laodicea and Greek fathers cited by the Quintsext Council did not consider those Deuterocanonical books to be canonical (or for that matter as even "Deuterocanonical.")
In any case, none of the sources that the Quintsext Council cited considered either Slavonic 3 Esdras or 4 Maccabees to be "canonical" or "Deuterocanonical." Thus, just going by the Ecumenical Councils, it would not seem that the Georgian Church would be accepted those two books (3 Esdras and 4 Maccabees) as Deuterocanonical.
Wikipedia however puts 3 Esdras in the list of Georgian Church Bible canon books with a question mark next to it and puts 4 Maccabees in that list with no question mark.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_canon
The Wikipedia article on 4 Maccabees says, "It is not in the Bible for most churches, but is an appendix to the Greek Bible, and in the canon of the Georgian Orthodox Church."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4_Maccabees
However, I could not find any source backing this up. I found an online copy of the Georgian Bible, and it did include 3 Esdras and 4 Maccabees. It had those two books, as well as all the books of the Deuterocanon, marked with an * and a footnote saying that they were all , ტექსტი არაკანონიკურია which I think means noncanonical.
(orthodoxy.ge/tserili/biblia/sarchevi.htm)
In Russian Wikipedia's "Biblical Canon" Discussion page ("Обсуждение:Библейский канон"), a few people wrote in that there is no difference between Orthodox Churches on which books are canonical and which ones aren't.
Wlbw68 writes there:
It seems to me that his opinion is correct, unless the Georgian Church is actively teaching something different on this topic. My guess is that the Wikipedia writer got confused about 3 Esdras and 4 Maccabees being in the canon of the Georgian Church because these two books are physically included in the hardcopies of its Bibles.
I am currently listening to lectures about the biblical "Deuterocanonical" books, since I am just familiar with the "canonical" books of the Bible.
Jewish rabbis and Protestants believe that there are 39 books in the Old Testament. That list contains the TaNaKh, and among these books are famous ones like Genesis, Ezekiel, Zechariah, etc.
The Russian, Greek, and other Orthodox Churches, as well as the Catholic Church, consider there to be some "Deuterocanonical" biblical books, such as Tobit, Baruch, and some books of the Maccabees. Technically, "Deuterocanon" is a Catholic Church term for this category of books, and it's potentially alittle confusing, because the Catholic Church considers its "Deuterocanonical" books to be fully canonical, due to a post-Schism Catholic "Ecumenical Council" carefully listing their Church's canonical Biblical books.
Unfortunately, the common term in use in the Russian Tradition for these Deuterocanonical books is even less clear. In normal Russian Church parlance, these books are called "non-canonical". Yet some of them like "Wisdom of Solomon" are in fact part of the "canon" of books read aloud in the "canon" of Russian Orthodox services. Furthermore, the Russian Church considers these "noncanonical" (Deuterocanonical) books to be in a separate category than books that it classifies as "sectarian," "apocryphal," etc.
In addition to the Deuterocanonical books, the Russian physical volumes of the Bible also contain the Slavonic 3 Esdras (A.K.A. the Vulgate 4 Esdras) and IV Maccabees. But my understanding is that the Russian Church neither includes these 2 books in either the “Canon,” nor in the “Deuterocanon”.
Slavonic 3 Esdras (AKA Vulgate 4 Esdras) was included in Russian hardcopy Bibles, but not Greek ones for the following historical reason: Historically, the early medieval Church considered 4 Esdras to be apocryphal, but the Western Church, and its Latin translator St. Jerome, included it in the Vulgate's hard copy so that it would not get lost. That is, despite the medieval Church categorizing it as apocrypha, it was printed in Latin Bibles as a kind of non-canonical/apocryphal accessory text just to have it. Meanwhile, the Greek language copies of 3 Esdras did get lost. Finally, when the Russian Church started translating and printing hard copy Bibles in Slavonic, they took the Latin Vulgate Bibles into consideration. And since the Vulgate Bibles included 4 Esdras, the Russian printers included that book too. However, the Russian Church never made a formal decision to categorize Slavonic 3 Esdras as "Canonical," despite it being found today in Russian Orthodox Bibles under the title of 3 Esdras. (IIRC, the Orthodox Study Bible in English calls it "2 Esdras" like the KJV does, which adds to confusion IMO.)
Meanwhile, the Greek Church printed their hardcopy Bibles using the Greek "Alexandrian Codex." This Codex included 4 Maccabees, so the Greek Church historically printed 4 Maccabees along with the Greek Church's canonical books, even though it did not have a formal decision labeling 4 Maccabees canonical. Russian Wikipedia notes that neither the Greek hardcopy Bibles, nor the Russian ones included formal lists of which books in them were "canon" (eg. Genesis) vs. outside the canon or apocryphal (eg. Slav. 3 Esdras and 4 Maccabees).
Thus, the mere fact that the Russian, Greek, or Georgian hardcopy Bibles physically include Slavonic 3 Esdras and 4 Maccabees does not itself prove that any of these Churches consider either one of those 2 books to be either "canonical" or "noncanonical."
It's true that the Quintsext Ecumenical Council of Trullo, which Eastern Orthodox Churches accept as an authority for themselves, addressed the question of the list of books in the Old Testament. Unfortunately, this Council's solution is not very clear at first glance because the Council's solution was to accept the list of books promulgated by Carthage, Laodicea, and some Greek fathers. The difficulty is that Carthage accepted the Deuterocanical books like Wisdom of Solomon and Tobit as "canonical", whereas Laodicea and Greek fathers cited by the Quintsext Council did not consider those Deuterocanonical books to be canonical (or for that matter as even "Deuterocanonical.")
In any case, none of the sources that the Quintsext Council cited considered either Slavonic 3 Esdras or 4 Maccabees to be "canonical" or "Deuterocanonical." Thus, just going by the Ecumenical Councils, it would not seem that the Georgian Church would be accepted those two books (3 Esdras and 4 Maccabees) as Deuterocanonical.
Wikipedia however puts 3 Esdras in the list of Georgian Church Bible canon books with a question mark next to it and puts 4 Maccabees in that list with no question mark.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_canon
The Wikipedia article on 4 Maccabees says, "It is not in the Bible for most churches, but is an appendix to the Greek Bible, and in the canon of the Georgian Orthodox Church."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4_Maccabees
However, I could not find any source backing this up. I found an online copy of the Georgian Bible, and it did include 3 Esdras and 4 Maccabees. It had those two books, as well as all the books of the Deuterocanon, marked with an * and a footnote saying that they were all , ტექსტი არაკანონიკურია which I think means noncanonical.
(orthodoxy.ge/tserili/biblia/sarchevi.htm)
In Russian Wikipedia's "Biblical Canon" Discussion page ("Обсуждение:Библейский канон"), a few people wrote in that there is no difference between Orthodox Churches on which books are canonical and which ones aren't.
Wlbw68 writes there:
Canon is a rule. In Orthodoxy, there is no special rule for the Greek, Slavic and Georgian local Churches, just as there is no special composition of the books of the Bible. The composition of the canonical books of the Bible is determined by the totality of the rules in the Orthodox Church: 85th Apostolic Canon (IV century), 60th Canon of the Laodicean Council (364) [2], 39th Epistle of Athanasius the Great about holidays (IV century) [3], Poems of Saint Gregory the Theologian (IV century) [4], Verses of Saint Amphilochius of Iconium (IV century) [5], 33th rule of the Council of Carthage [6].
Catholics also have conciliar definitions, with the help of which they determine which books go in the composition of the Bible (they have the so-called Deuterocanonical books). With this one needs to carefully deal with it and look for links. It's the same with the Oriental Churches. ... - Wlbw68 15:30, 23 May 2014
It seems to me that his opinion is correct, unless the Georgian Church is actively teaching something different on this topic. My guess is that the Wikipedia writer got confused about 3 Esdras and 4 Maccabees being in the canon of the Georgian Church because these two books are physically included in the hardcopies of its Bibles.