B
bbbbbbb
Guest
You are correct. I do not accept the canonicity of the Deuterocanonical books.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I think that that is exactly bbbbbbb's point. The list is so full of errors and imaginary "references" that it proves absolutely nothing.
You two are in agreement on that, obviously.
However, I don't think bbbbbbb accepts the canonicity of the Deuterocanonical books. I certainly don't.
7b's,
I get the feeling that you are doing this for the exegetical work and not so much as an apologetics track, so I will go ahead and post this. I looked up this list; because I was wondering who came up with it. It appears that a poster on Fisheaters.com called CatholicDad compiled it in 2008.
defend deutro-canonical books
He was reminded in the responses of the errors that people found in it. Some of the items on the list, I have seen before and responded to you about. Many of them are rather nebulous and probably not suited to use in apologetics. It's one of those things where if you are looking for parallels they seem obvious; but hard to defend against someone who does not share your perspective.
You are correct. I do not accept the canonicity of the Deuterocanonical books.
Because supporters of the Deuterocanon always seem to list these somewhat dubious "references" as evidence for canonicity.
My point is that lack of citation of the OT in the NT doesn't mean that the OT book is not canonical, so why does it matter if (or if not) the Deuterocanoical books are cited in the NT?
The canonicity of a book was determined, primarily, by whether or not it was used in liturgy.
What criteria determines this for you?
Actually, there are a number of criteria, including the following:
1. The content of the DC. Although much of it is innocuous there are some relatively mythical stories such as Bel and the Dragon.
2. The absence of its use by the NT authors, as we have seen in this thread. This stands in glaring contrast with the use of other OT source material in the NT.
3. The Jewish Masoretic canon. Although it can be shown that the NT writers used the Septuagint, it appears that they used the canon of the Masoretes.
4. Saint Jerome's arguments against its canonicity. These are really quite convincing to me.
5. The broad support of a wide range of OT scholars.
So why not throw out Ruth, as well?Actually, there are a number of criteria, including the following:
1. The content of the DC. Although much of it is innocuous there are some relatively mythical stories such as Bel and the Dragon.
That, then, also excludes Ecclesiastes, and several others.2. The absence of its use by the NT authors, as we have seen in this thread. This stands in glaring contrast with the use of other OT source material in the NT.
So we should look the Jews, who killed Jesus, and didn't have a canon until after the Catholic Church developed theirs, who continued to persecute Christians after and up to the destruction of the Temple? I don't think so.3. The Jewish Masoretic canon. Although it can be shown that the NT writers used the Septuagint, it appears that they used the canon of the Masoretes.
What about Jerome's example of submitting to what the Church believes and teaches? That's convincing to me!4. Saint Jerome's arguments against its canonicity. These are really quite convincing to me.
Not Catholic scholars, though...5. The broad support of a wide range of OT scholars.
Well, that would have been impossible, since the Masoretes did not exist for another 600 years. I find it baffling that Christians would use the Masoretes as guides for our canon.
So why not throw out Ruth, as well?
Well, the issue is what the Masoretes can tell us about what 1st century Jews thought the canon was.
<snip>So why accept their canon if their canon was selected to show why Christianity is wrong?
A question Catholics and Protestants don't seem to think is important. Jerome was all goo-goo for the Hebrew as more original and the reformers bought that line of reasoning.
We now know from the Dead Sea Scroll scriptures, neither the MT or LXX traditions contain the whole picture. I mean, yes, the MT preserves a text tradition of Isaiah that goes back to before the Church, but when Jesus reads from Isaiah in the synagogue the (Aramaic?) scroll he uses leans toward the LXX text tradition...!
I would like to study Jerome closer some day. While he lived in Alexandria, he translated the Greek Septuagint OT into Latin. Then he moved on to Palestine and decided that he now had to redo that work and use the Hebrew OT. I would accuse the guy of wanting a very extended vacation (nearly 30 years) but he often lived like a hermit, even though he was being sponsored by the wealthy Roman widow, Paula. I thought about this earlier today and realized that for one man to translate the whole Bible from one language to another is a incredible feat by itself. Add to that that he was tracking down manuscript after manuscript in an obsessive drive to get the best sources and it was a monumental task. I realized that many of the manuscripts that he used have been lost to time. So we owe him a debt and have to overlook his personality traits. His life reads like Augustine's in many ways, a profligate youth followed by a dramatic conversion that led to a keen mind being totally dedicated to Christianity.
But they differ with other Jewish groups regarding canon...Well, the issue is what the Masoretes can tell us about what 1st century Jews thought the canon was.
But Ruth is a story, with nothing historical, a morality tale. So because part of Daniel seems too fantastic, it might be a tale, so the same criterion exists. But why worry about what the 1st century Jews thought? They didn't care about Christianity, and in fact persecuted the Church.Because it's part of the Hebrew canon that everyone accepts? Because it's referred to in Matthew 1:5?
Yes, all of those things helped me to overcome my ingrained Protestant dislike of all things Catholic and realize that here is a man for all of Christianity who sought God and His truth with all of his heart. I pray that I might be found to be as faithful as Jerome.
Agreed.I would like to study Jerome closer some day. While he lived in Alexandria, he translated the Greek Septuagint OT into Latin. Then he moved on to Palestine and decided that he now had to redo that work and use the Hebrew OT. I would accuse the guy of wanting a very extended vacation (nearly 30 years) but he often lived like a hermit, even though he was being sponsored by the wealthy Roman widow, Paula. I thought about this earlier today and realized that for one man to translate the whole Bible from one language to another is a incredible feat by itself. Add to that that he was tracking down manuscript after manuscript in an obsessive drive to get the best sources and it was a monumental task. I realized that many of the manuscripts that he used have been lost to time. So we owe him a debt and have to overlook his personality traits. His life reads like Augustine's in many ways, a profligate youth followed by a dramatic conversion that led to a keen mind being totally dedicated to Christianity.
I just noticed this..."A true opium of the people is a belief in nothingness after death the huge solace of thinking that for our betrayals, greed, cowardice, and murders we are not going to be judged." Czeslaw Milosz
Thanks for the resource. I'll definitely check it out.You might want to take a look at some of the Greek OT manuscripts used by Greek speaking Jews through the Middle Ages (the project is ongoing):
Greek Bible in Byzantine Judaism: Background
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?