the apocrypha

[bananaman]

I have been told the apocrypha are several books written by jewish authors that span the time between the old and new testaments. They are accepted as canon(scripture) by catholics and accepted as good writings but not scipture by protestants.

   I don't expect the catholic or protestant perspective in this forum of course. I am looking for a jewish perspective since the books are said to be by jewish authors.

    One contains the story of maccabees. one about Solomon. Anyway, any info would be appreaciated.

  Thank you.

 

[Talmid HaYarok]

I basicly addressed that in this thread

The Apocrypha has never been accepted as canonical by any group of Jews except the Falashmura (and their Apocrypha is different). Not Messianics, nor Rabbinics, nor pharisees, nor sadducees, nor essenes, etc, ad infinitum.

The Masoretic text used today is considered to be the same as the original old testament document and doesn't contain those works.

This does not make them false writings (heretical or pseudobibliogryhpa (sic)), just not divinely inspired.

 

[simchat_torah]

Bananaman,

In the thread linked in Talmid's post, I had made a few broad statements that I will now clarify.

The "Jews" didn't have a cannon in christian terms. Instead, in Jewish theology there is an idea of "levels of inspiration". Christian theology either sees something as inspired or not-inspired. In Judaism there are many levels of inspiration.

For example, in Jewish thought the Torah is the highest level of inspiration. The Torah is eternal and was given directly by the mouth of G-d. The torah is on the highest plane of inspiration.

Now, with this understanding we can then discuss first century groups and what they accepted as "cannon". Though there wasn't a generally accepted cannon amongst all of Judaism at the time, and even more so the idea of "cannon" will be very weak to convey this idea, there were different books accepted by different sects of Judaism.

The Sadducees had the narrowest 'cannon'. They accepted only the Torah as their writings. All other books were on a much lower level (again, I'm putting this in very simple terms compared to the actual theological stances of each sect).

The Pharisees had a larger cannon. The included the Writings and the Prophets, along with the Torah. Again, in the Pharasetical mind, the Torah was still the highest level of inspiration. Now the "apocrypha" (the collection of books labeled as such) had fluctuated through the 'cannon' of the Pharisees during different time periods. In fact, there were other books that were removed, added, put back in, etc multiple times through the pharisee timeline. So, it would depend on what time one is speaking of as to whether or not these books were among the writings and the prophets.

Finally, the Esscenes had the broadest cannon. They accepted the writings, the prophets, the Torah (again, on the highest level of inspiration), the Apocrypha, and much of the Psuedopigrapha as well.

This would bring us to current Judaism.

Again, there are varying sects, but the majority of the hold to the standards of the JPS Tenach. Essentially, this is the same as the protestant cannon, which does not include the Apocrypha. However, any Jew will tell you yes the Apocrypha is inspired. Again, the idea of a strict 'cannon' is a christian dogma, not Jewish.

So on these levels of inspiration one could view in Judaism that the Torah is held on the highest level of inspiration, then the Tenach (ot), then the Apocrypha, followed by the Pseudopigrapha, then possibly the Mishnah and Talmud, then the Midrashim, and so on. All of these works are considered 'inspired'.

But if we were to apply strict christian theology upon Jewish terms, then yes the Apocrypha would not be considered in the cannon. However, this just simply is too narrow a definition for Jewish thinking.

Also, if one asks, "was the apocrypha ever accepted as cannon in Judaism"...
the answer would be, "it depends on the time period and the sect of Judaism".

Now, as far as the christian history of the cannonization of the Apocrypha is concerned:
None of the original councils through history ever considered the 'inspiration' of books. Instead, later misguided people assumed such. Instead, what these councils addressed was what to include in the LITURGY. Some books were viewed as necessary to be read on an annual cycle during services. Different councils had varying viewpoints. Some included the Apocrypha, others did not.
But not one of the original councils addressed the issue of cannonization.

The Septuigint, a Greek translation of the Old testament done by Jews, actually included the apocrypha. The Septuigint is what many the early chrsitians used as the basis for their 'old testament'. Thus, in early christianity the Apocrypha was included.

Even up to the first translation of the KJV the Apocrypha was included. In fact, King James made it a mandate that if anyone was to print the bible, they were to include the Apocrypha.... or go to jail.

Finally, Martin Luther, the one responsible for removing many of the books labeled the 'apocrypha' wanted to remove many more (including James, I Cor., Rev., ect.). The books that were removed were not removed on the basis of 'inspiration' or 'non-inspiration'. Rather they were removed based on spurious Catholic doctrine.

For example, in the Book of I Macc. we have a story of a band of warriors. G-d told them he allow them to destroy a particular camp of idolitors... as long as they did not take any of the gold. However, a few of the men snuck gold into their cloaks. G-d then struck them dead. The others in the band of warriors made a peace offering to G-d out of fear.
Catholic doctrine then stated that one could give an offering to the church and their time in purgatory would be shortened.
Rather than rejecting the spurious catholic doctrine (which was created by misinterpreting the story in Maccebbes) Martin Luther instead tossed out the book.

Anyway, that is how it was finally removed to the Protestant cannon you have today.

Two more things:

1) The Apocrypha is quoted multiple times throughout the New Testament.

2) There are currently today more bibles published with the Apocrypha than those without.

Well, make your own conclusions, now you have the facts.

Shalom,
Yafet.

 

[simchat_torah]

A quick mention about the term "pseudopigrapha".

The word is created from "pseudo" meaning 'false' and "pigrapha" meaning 'writings'.

Again, many have misunderstood why this label was created, or rather the term. The Pseudopigrahpa is actually a very very very random collection of books. Basically, anything Jewish not already included in the Tenach (ot) or Apocrypha is lumped into the Pseudopigrapha. It is a rather odd conglomeration of books.



The history of the term itself:

Some of the books had been written during the time frame of the Duetorcannonical era. This means "between the cannons"... or the 500 year time frame between the old and new testaments. It is a misunderstanding that there weren't prophets during this time period. There were, they were just highly persecuted. These prophets knew that if they brought the word of the L-rd to the people, that they would be stoned. So, instead, they wrote down their prophecies and stuck them in a cave somewhere. They would then say to the people... hey, look at this writing I found by so and so (typically, a famous Jew from history... like Adam or Daniel or Enoch, etc).

In otherwords, the acclaimed author in the book was not the true author.
Thus the term "false writings" came about because the books were not written by the acclaimed authors in the books.
That is how the term 'pseudopigrapha' came about.

However, the above only applies to a few of the books. Some of the books in the Pseudopigrapha were written long before this time period (possilby I Enoch and many others). Some of these books were even written after the 1st century, and possibly as late as the third for a few of them.

Essentially, the origins of the term 'pseudopigrapha' just doesn't apply to all of the books, but they have been lumped together for a lack of a better home.

The Pseudopigrapha is also quoted numerous times in the new testament.
Some even claim that a few of the books are quoted in the Tenach (ot).

The Pseudopigrapha was also found among the books of the Dead Sea Scrolls. In fact, some of the books of the pseudopigrapha (specifically I Enoch) were found in more abundance than any book of the Tenach.

Now, again, draw your own conclusions.

Inspired? that has to be looked at by each individual book, not the collection, as the collection is just a conglomerate.
You decide.

Shalom,
Yafet.

p.s. If you want to study this further, I would reccomend anything written by Dr. Charlesworth. He is acclaimed as the foremost scholar in the world on the Pseudopigrapha. He and his team have worked extensively to translate these manuscripts.

 

[isshinwhat]

None of the original councils through history ever considered the 'inspiration' of books.

As an historical aside, here are the relevant portions of the Councils which discussed the Canon.

"Likewise it has been said: Now indeed we must treat of the divine Scriptures, what the universal Catholic Church accepts and what she ought to shun.The order of the Old Testament begins here: Genesis one book, Exodus one book, Leviticus one book, Numbers one book, Deuteronomy one book, Josue Nave one book, Judges one book, Ruth one book, Kings four books, Paraleipomenon two books, Psalms one book, Solomon three books, Proverbs one book, Ecclesiastes one book, Canticle of Canticles one book, likewise Wisdom one book, Ecclesiasticus one book. Likewise the order of the Prophets. Isaias one book, Jeremias one book,with Ginoth, that is, with his lamentations, Ezechiel one book,Daniel one book, Osee one book, Micheas one book, Joel one book, Abdias one book, Jonas one book, Nahum one book, Habacuc one book, Sophonias one book, Aggeus one book, Zacharias one book, Malachias one book. Likewise the order of the histories. Job one book, Tobias one book, Esdras two books, Esther one book, Judith one book, Machabees two books. Likewise the order of the writings of the New and eternal Testament, which only the holy and Catholic Church supports. Of the Gospels, according to Matthew one book, according to Mark one book, according to Luke one book, according to John one book. The Epistles of Paul [the apostle] in number fourteen. To the Romans one, to the Corinthians two, to the Ephesians one, to the Thessalonians two, to the Galatians one, to the Phillipians one, to the Colossians one, to Timothy two, to Titus one, to Philemon one, to the Hebrews one. Likewise the Apocalypse of John, one book. And the Acts of the Apostles one book. Likewise the canonical epistles in number seven. Of Peter the Apostle two epistles, of James the Apostle one epistle, of John the Apostle one epistle, of another John, the presbyter, two epistles, of Jude the Zealut, the Apostle one epistle."
Pope Damasus(regn A.D. 366-384),Decree of,Council of Rome,The Canon of Scripture(A.D. 382),in DEN,33

"Besides the canonical Scriptures, nothing shall be read, in the church under the title of divine writings.'. The canonical books are:---Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, the four books of Kings, the two books of Paraleipomena(Chronicles), Job, the Psalms of David, the five books of Solomon, the twelve books of the (Minor) Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Ezekiel, Tobias, Judith, Esther, two books of Esdras, two books of the Maccabees. The books of the New Testament are:---the four Gospels, the Acts of the Apostles, thirteen Epistles of S. Paul, one Epistle of S. Paul to the Hebrews, two Epistles of S. Peter, three Epistles of S. John, the Epistle of S. James, the Epistle of S. Jude, the Revelation of S. John. Concerning the confirmation of this canon, the transmarine Church shall be consulted."
Council of Hippo, Canon 36 (A.D. 393), in HCC,2:400

"[It has been decided] that nothing except the Canonical Scriptures should be read in the church under the name of the Divine Scriptures. But the Canonical Scriptures are:Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Josue, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, Paraleipomenon two books, Job, the Psalter of David, five books of Solomon, twelve books of the Prophets, Isaias, Jeremias, Daniel, Ezechiel, Tobias, Judith, Esther, two books of Esdras, two books of the Maccabees. Moreover, of the New Testament: Four books of the Gospels, the Acts of the Apostles one book, thirteen epistles of Paul the Apostle, one of the same to the Hebrews, two of Peter, three of John, one of James, one of Jude, the Apocalypse of John."
Council of Carthage III,Canon 47(A.D. 397),in DEN,39-40

God Bless,

Neal

 

[bananaman]

wow. this is much more than I expected. I am so grateful for all this info. Thank G-d for you are are well informed on these matters.

 

[Talmid HaYarok]

I'll get back to this later, its a busy packing day.

 

[Ruhama]

A few comments. First Simchat Torah - you rock! 

Second - the term pseudepigrapha comes from 3 words actually, not just two (pseudo = false) (epi = upon) (grapha = writings).  So the epigrapha bit refers to what is inscribed on the outside of the book (like title and author). Therefore it's not "false writings" but rather "falsely ascribed." A very small side note but I thought I'd mention it.   You described the meaning of it perfectly with your examples in any case.

to isshinwhat - thanks for posting that the difference between the Jewish councils and the Catholic ones is rather well illustrated there.

 

[MissytheButterfly]

Simchat..thanks a lot for that information. It's greatly appreciated. And thanks for the clarification note you made Ruhama..



Missy

 

[Talmid HaYarok]

Okay, I really wanted to add a few things to this thread but my books are mostly packed and stuff. So bear with me if I don't provide references for a while.

The "Inspiration levels" is also the same as seen among the Prophets and also applied to Christian writings. The gospels are generally seen as the highest of the Brit Chasash as they quote Yeshua himself. The epistles are second to them as inspired works of the apostles.

The Sadducees did indeed have the Tanakh, and most of the scribes who preserved were from them. They didn't however use it in Liturgy. Same as how many Christians have the entire Bible, but they'll only use and pull out a few books of it for sermons.

The Essenes had their own "Deuterocanon", but it wasn't the same as the one in the LXX. Like everyone else they also had the Tanakh.

The Pharisees had the Tanakh, but they also added to their teachings the sayings of many Rabbis. Which they regarded as the "Oral Torah", that their teachings were on a par with the Torah.

The common Jews who were not part of any religious order also were used to and accepted the entire Tanakh, Masoretic. Of course back then when a Greek Jew wanted to read the Tanakh there was only one translation to turn to... and that included the Apocrypha.

Anyways the Apocrypha is the apocrypha and neither considered false writings nor canonical so as to be used in liturgy or included with scripture. More later....

 

 

[keng]

The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha comes in two volumes (thick textbooks) ISBN #'s 0-385-09630-5 (v. 1) 0-385-18813-7 (v. 2). The reason the ISBN #'s are so far apart is because they were published at different times. I waited for the second volume unpatiently for the second volume. They are probably available at the library.

1 Enoch is quoted in Jude verses 15 & 16.

You will also soon discover there are other supposed Gospels. For instance, the book: The Lost Books of The Bible and the Forgotten Books of Eden ISBN 0-529-03385-2, I think there is another book by a similar title. It is obvious Mohammed read The Gospel of the Birth of Mary since his remarks seem to relate to topics in this book concerning Mary and the childhood of Jesus. Mohammed seems to be the first "higher critic" (ahead of his time).

Another group of books are The Nag Hammadi Library ISBN 0-06-066933-0. I like the first part of The Treatise on Resurrection, it's like a good sermon. Perhaps Gnosticism tried to Christianize Kabalah but when you get done, you find yourself asking the question, "Now what was it I wanted to know?"

I have these books and others and I think you can get them from Barnes & Noble but I'm sure they can be found at the Library.

 

[Ruhama]

This is off topic but it is fascinating how much the Qur'an parallels the extracannonical books of the NT rather than the cannonical.

 

[Ruhama]

Today at 09:13 PM keng said this in Post #11 

Perhaps Gnosticism tried to Christianize Kabalah but when you get done, you find yourself asking the question, "Now what was it I wanted to know?"

Actually I think it was more like Gnosticism tried to gnostify Christianity and Judaism and came out with funky Christianity and Kabbalah.  Well, early Kabbalah I mean, like the merkavah stuff.

 

[Talmid HaYarok]

Gnostics and Christianity came before Rabbinic Judaism and its compilations, let alone the Kabbalah.    Most of the Kabbalah came from the middle ages, though I think there are a few works that precede that quite a bit. Might even precede Akiba or Yeshua.

 

[Ruhama]

well the mysticism came earlier on, but "kabbalah" was apparently named as such in the middle ages.