Just because they rejected Jesus doesn't mean they rejected the oracles of God which God had entrusted to them Rom 3:2. If they could not see what the scriptures said, why would they fell a need to exclude these scriptures from their canon? How could these Rabbis continue to see themselves as guardians of God's word if the rejected the books they and their forefathers knew were God's inspired word? It doesn't make sense.
Why does it not make sense that they would reject books which are clearly teaching the Deity of the Son of Man, when they had rejected the Son of Man Himself?
Look at this Hebrews' quotation of the Septuagint;
Who took the underlined portion out of the Hebrew text? It obviously was there when the Septuagint was translated before Jesus came, or else the translators would not have added it. It obviously speaks of the New Man body of human being flesh prepared in the womb of the virgin for the incarnation of the Living Spirit.Hbr 10:5 Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not,but a body hast thou prepared me:
The Essenes certainly believed Jubilees to be Scripture, just as Peter did believe that Jubilees was "inspired by God and so Peter followed the command of Jubilees 22:16-18 which I posted. You asked for it and I posted it and it is certainly plain that Peter believed it to be "Scripture", jsut as the Essenes did.
Also, in the DSS were copies of Tobit and the Wisdom of Jesus-Sirach, and others of the books included in the Septuagint and in the 1611 Kings James translation and in the first Geneva Bible.
http://faculty.bbc.edu/ggromacki/deadseascrolls/bible.htm#APOCRYPHAANDPSEUDEPIGRAPHA
Tobit is one of three deuterocanonical books (that is from the second canon or Apocrypha) that were found in the Qumran Caves. The other two are Ben Sira (also known as Sirach or Ecclesiasticus) and the Epistle of Jeremiah. These three books, although not recognized as authoritative by Protestant or Jewish communities, are recognized as canonical (sacred Scripture) by the Roman Catholic Church.
...
Several factors lead to the conclusion that Jubilees was viewed and used as Scripture by the Qumran community. First, a work called 4Qtext with a Citation of Jubilees (4Q228) seems to denote Jubilees by its Hebrew title “The Division of the Times” and later introduces the first word of the title by a citation formula, “For thus it is written in the Divisions of the Times” (fr. 1 i. 9). Second, Jubilees claims to be divine revelation in that its contents are given by an angel of God (Jub.1:26-29; 2:1) and have been inscribed on heavenly tablets (Jub.3:10, 31). Third, the fact that Jubilees is represented by such a large number of manuscripts shows that it was extensively used at Qumran, which points to its popularity and more likely authoritative status. Jubilees is found in about 15 scrolls. Fourth, Jubilees is quoted in some of the nonbiblical scrolls, which indicates its authoritative status to the authors of such texts. For example, the Damascus Document 16:2-4 cites Jubilees as the source of information concerning the times when Israel would be blind to the Law of Moses, while CD 10:7-10 may well be based on Jubilees 23:11, which refers to people’s loss of knowledge in their old age.
Being considered Scripture and translated and used by the Greek speaking Jews before Jesus came in flesh didn't mean that they must all be in one volume. No one had to wait for the 4th century to see what the Holy Spirit "inspired". We look back and are so silly as to think that there just was no understanding of what was "inspired" in the established Church or in Jewish minds, before certain men in certain places "decided" what God wanted everyone to believe about His "inspired" books. -and who follows the lists they made, anyway? Even that has changed over time. The first KJV and Geneva Bibles had the apocrypha -where'd they go? Who took them out, and when, and why? Even the Roman Catholic Church has changed its mind and deleted some and called others "inspired" for sure, and not "hidden".No sorry, the codexes of the Septuagint which contain the apocrypha date from about the 4th century. The Septuagint was originally just the Pentateuch, with other books of the Tanack translated later. It was only later when the books of the bible were combined into a single volume that we have the deuterocanonical books (ie 'the second canon', aka the apocrypha) being bound together in a single book along with the first canon of Law, Prophets and Psalms. We have no evidence Jesus the apostles or any Jewish rabbis ever considered the apocrypha scripture.
As I showed above, Peter believed Jubilees to be Scripture just as the Essenes did, so obviously there were many more Jews before Jesus and at His time of coming in flesh who also believed Jubilees to be Scripture, or inspired writings.
Jesus and the NT authors also believed 1 Enoch to be inspired, and the author of Hebrews and Paul believed Jasher as absolute truth, as I do. Abraham believed Enoch to be inspired truth and read Enoch to the Pharaoh's men when they returned Sarai to him and sought to learn from Abram righteousness and wisdom, as the Genesis Apocryphon in the DSS reports.
I do not say there has been no corruption of texts because even the OT and NT texts are not pure in and of themselves from little scribal mistakes, but in nothing do they fall short on the Message of Christ, as Enoch does not. Jasher fills in all the things that Moses redacted from the Genesis -Joshua accounts and answers many questions that one is left with when using only the Genesis -Joshua accounts. Jasher correlates beautifully with Genesis -Joshua.
[/quote]
Last edited:
Upvote
0