Apocrypha

[Qyöt27]

I think it is a little more simple
the books that the Catholics accept and the Jews do not, deuterocanon, were written in greek
after Christianity came and had many greek converts the Christian faith was looked at as being "too greek" so the jews wanted to get rid of books they thought were corrupted
but what the jews decide to do after the creation of the Christian Church does not really matter to me
they do not accept the Gospels either

Ah, I knew that those were written later, but I didn't know they were written in Greek, vis-a-vis Hellenistic Judaism. The Hebraic purity angle instituting a purge does make quite a bit of sense in that regard, especially if what constituted Hellenistic Judaism was largely absorbed into and helped form Early Christianity.

 

[Dark_Lite]

The deuterocanon and apocrypha are two different things. The deuterocanonical books are incorrectly called "apocrypha" by many Protestants, but the actual apocrypha are the gnostic gospels and various other works. I have read some of the deuterocanon, particularly Wisdom. I have read several gnostic works as well.

 

[NoBama2012]

Anyone read the apocryphal books of the Bible? Anyone interested in reading them? I just realized I've only read Tobit and a few portions of Wisdom and would like to read the apocryphal books of the Bible sometime soon.

Those are not "apocryphal books". That is a misnomer. They are the Deuterocanonicals. The vast mojority of Christians have them in their Bibles. Only protestants reject them: A small minority of Christians.


QUOTE:

In the sixteenth century, the Protestant Reformers removed a large section of the Old Testament that was not compatible with their theology. They charged that these writings were not inspired Scripture and branded them with the pejorative title "Apocrypha."

Catholics refer to them as the "deuterocanonical" books (since they were disputed by a few early authors and their canonicity was established later than the rest), while the rest are known as the "protocanonical" books (since their canonicity was established first).

Following the Protestant attack on the integrity of the Bible, the Catholic Church infallibly reaffirmed the divine inspiration of the deuterocanonical books at the Council of Trent in 1546. In doing this, it reaffirmed what had been believed since the time of Christ.

Who Compiled the Old Testament?

The Church does not deny that there are ancient writings which are "apocryphal." During the early Christian era, there were scores of manuscripts which purported to be Holy Scripture but were not. Many have survived to the present day, like the Apocalypse of Peter and the Gospel of Thomas, which all Christian churches regard as spurious writings that don't belong in Scripture.

During the first century, the Jews disagreed as to what constituted the canon of Scripture. In fact, there were a large number of different canons in use, including the growing canon used by Christians. In order to combat the spreading Christian cult, rabbis met at the city of Jamnia or Javneh in A.D. 90 to determine which books were truly the Word of God. They pronounced many books, including the Gospels, to be unfit as scriptures. This canon also excluded seven books (Baruch, Sirach, 1 and 2 Maccabees, Tobit, Judith, and the Wisdom of Solomon, plus portions of Esther and Daniel) that Christians considered part of the Old Testament.

The group of Jews which met at Javneh became the dominant group for later Jewish history, and today most Jews accept the canon of Javneh. However, some Jews, such as those from Ethiopia, follow a different canon which is identical to the Catholic Old Testament and includes the seven deuterocanonical books (cf. Encyclopedia Judaica, vol. 6, p. 1147).

Needless to say, the Church disregarded the results of Javneh. First, a Jewish council after the time of Christ is not binding on the followers of Christ. Second, Javneh rejected precisely those documents which are foundational for the Christian Church -- the Gospels and the other documents of the New Testament. Third, by rejecting the deuterocanonicals, Javneh rejected books which had been used by Jesus and the apostles and which were in the edition of the Bible that the apostles used in everyday life -- the Septuagint.

The Apostles & the Deuteros

The Christian acceptance of the deuterocanonical books was logical because the deuterocanonicals were also included in the Septuagint, the Greek edition of the Old Testament which the apostles used to evangelize the world. Two thirds of the Old Testament quotations in the New are from the Septuagint. Yet the apostles nowhere told their converts to avoid seven books of it. Like the Jews all over the world who used the Septuagint, the early Christians accepted the books they found in it. They knew that the apostles would not mislead them and endanger their souls by putting false scriptures in their hands -- especially without warning them against them.

But the apostles did not merely place the deuterocanonicals in the hands of their converts as part of the Septuagint. They regularly referred to the deuterocanonicals in their writings. For example, Hebrews 11 encourages us to emulate the heroes of the Old Testament and in the Old Testament "Women received their dead by resurrection. Some were tortured, refusing to accept release, that they might rise again to a better life" (Heb. 11:35). <SNIP>


Read the whole thing here:
DEFENDING THE DEUTEROCANONICALS
by James Akin
source: link



.

 

[Rhamiel]

Ah, I knew that those were written later, but I didn't know they were written in Greek, vis-a-vis Hellenistic Judaism. The Hebraic purity angle instituting a purge does make quite a bit of sense in that regard, especially if what constituted Hellenistic Judaism was largely absorbed into and helped form Early Christianity.

i think they were written durring the babylonian exile? not sure

 

[NoBama2012]

Around the 2nd or 3rd century B.C. , I think

 

[Obzocky]

Can I just say how much I love the Deuterocanonical books? I've been reading Tobit and Sirach quite a bit recently, should probably put them down at some point and refresh my Judith knowledge at some point.

As far as the apocrypha, I have read a few. The Infancy Gospel of Thomas and the Gospel of St. Bartholomew were interesting, really need to read a few more. I just find the thoughts being voiced in them interesting.


edit: Interesting seems to be word of the day. Hurrah.

 

[Stravinsk]

I've read Bel and the Dragon, and parts of 1st/2nd Maccabees, Wisdom and Tobit.

 

[NoBama2012]

Can I just say how much I love the Deuterocanonical books? I've been reading Tobit and Sirach quite a bit recently, should probably put them down at some point and refresh my Judith knowledge at some point........

I like Sirach too.