What is the apocrypha?

[d0c markus]

I overheard somone talking about the apocrypha and that catholics have non biblical books in thier bible is this true?

 

[john14_20]

Hi Markus and many blessings to you. It is true that the Catholic Bibles have some books in them that do not appear in our Protestant Bibles, but it is not true to say that they are not Biblical.

I used to know exactly how this happened but I can't make a story of it anymore. All I remember is that it has to do with different translations of the original text. I think the Catholic Bible is a translation of the Latin text and the Protestant Bible is a translation of the Greek text, and those original texts differed in the books that were included.

Some of the writings in the Apocrypha are actually quite good.

Blessings to you and everyone, Pete.

 

[d0c markus]

that doesnt make much sense. Why would they translate from a latin text instead of the original greek, doesnt that make some translation issues.

 

[MattMMMan17]

Note: What Protestants refer to as Catholic Apocrypha, Catholics refer to as Deuterocanonical books.

I pray that I am corrected if I am wrong, so that you won't be misled. I seem to remember that the Old Testament of the Catholic Bible (46 books) differs from the Protestant Bible(39 books) because, in short, it suited Martin Luther's beliefs. The historical basis for it I think is that the Old Testament that was in use at the time of Jesus and the Apostles was the Greek Septuagint(Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures, put together by 70 people( i don't remember who, ) at the request of some King in 3rd century B.C. So it was the Bible of the Apostles. The Catholic Old Testament(generally accepted by the Church but confirmed at the Council of Carthage and Hippo in AD 393 and 397)included all of these writings with the exception of 1 and 2 Esdras and the Prayer of Manassas. (This was because it was believed that these books were written after Jesus' time and therefore weren't included in the Septuagint of Jesus' and the Apostles' time) The earliest Greek manuscripts of the Old Testament, such as Codex Sinaiticus (fourth century), and Codex Alexandrinus (c.450) include all of the deuterocanonical books mixed in with the others and not separated. It's also important to note that while many protestants will be quick to claim that the books were added at the Council of Trent in 1548, the only reason that the books were re-affirmed at the Council was because of the onset of Protestantism.

The Pharises, who did NOT accept Jesus as the messiah, in 90 AD rejected what we now know as the deuterocanonical books as a deterrent for their people who were quickly converting to Christianity.

Protestantism, following Martin Luther, removed the deuterocanonical books from their Bibles due to their clear teaching of doctrines which had been recently repudiated by Protestants, such as prayers for the dead (Tobit 12:12, 2 Maccabees 12:39-45 ff.; cf. 1 Corinthians 15:29), intercession of dead saints (2 Maccabees 15:14; cf. Revelation 6:9-10), and intermediary intercession of angels (Tobit 12:12,15; cf. Revelation 5:8, 8:3-4). He even questioned the New Testament books that are widely accepted by both Protestants and Catholics. He rejected from the New Testament Canon ("chief books") Hebrews, James ("epistle of straw"), Jude and Revelation, and placed them at the end of his translation, as a New Testament "Apocrypha." He regarded them as non-apostolic. Of the book of Revelation he said, "Christ is not taught or known in it." These opinions are found in Luther's Prefaces to biblical books, in his German translation of 1522. However, he couldn't toss out all of the books he wanted because obviously, the people would catch on to his heresy.

I'm sure I've missed much, but I've tried to remain accurate in the accounts that i did give. (I do not remember what the Pharises did with which books) I hope this rough outline helps. God Bless.

 

[d0c markus]

Can anyone refute this? The most interesting points i highlighted in red.

In the ever urgent work of winning souls for Christ, the Christian occasionally will encounter members of the Roman Catholic Church who note, with perhaps some degree of pride, that their version of the Bible contains more books than standard translations used by non-Catholics. More often than not, the average Christian is at a loss to explain why there are forty-six books in the Old Testament of the Catholic Bible, yet only thirty-nine books in the Old Testament of the common versions.

The qualified teacher needs to be able to give a reasonable explanation to his Catholic friends for the absence of those seven books in the versions we use.

The disputed books



The “Apocrypha” is a collection of documents, generally produced between the 2nd century B.C. and the 1st century A.D., which were not a part of the original Old Testament canon. The names of these books are: I Esdras, II Esdras, The Rest of Esther, Song of the Three Holy Children, History of Susanna, Bel and the Dragon, Prayer of Manasses, Tobit, Judith, Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, I Maccabees, and II Maccabees. The last seven of these are incorporated into Roman Catholic editions of the Bible. The Catholic Council of Trent (1546) affirmed the canonicity of these books, as found in the Latin Vulgate, and condemned those who reject them.

The title, “Apocrypha,” is a transliterated form of the term apokruphos, meaning “hidden.” A plural form of the word is used in Colossians 2:3, where Paul declares that all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge are “hidden” in Christ. The adjective “apocryphal” has come to be applied to those books that do not bear the marks of divine inspiration. There are several reasons why the Apocrypha is to be rejected as part of the Bible.

General Principles

1. There is abundant evidence that none of these books was ever received into the canon (that which conforms to “rule”) of the Hebrew Old Testament. Though they appear in the Septuagint (Greek Old Testament - known as LXX), that is not necessarily a reliable criterion. Professor G.T. Manley notes: “[These books] do not appear to have been included at first in the LXX [3rd/2nd centuries B.C.], but they found their way gradually into later copies, being inserted in places that seemed appropriate...” (The New Bible Handbook, Chicago: Inter-Varsity Press, 1962, p. 39).
   
2. The apocryphal books are not in those most ancient works which allude to the Old Testament Scriptures. For example:
   
   (a) Philo, the Jewish philosopher of Alexandria (20 B.C. - A.D. 50), wrote prolifically and frequently quoted the Old Testament, yet he never cited the Apocrypha, nor did he even mention these documents.
   
   (b) Josephus (A.D. 37-95) rejected them. He wrote: “We have not an innumerable multitude of books among us, disagreeing from and contradicting one another, but only twenty-two books, which contain the records of all the past times; which are justly believed to be divine...” (Against Apion 1.8). By combining several Old Testament narratives into a “book,” the thirty-nine of our current editions become the twenty-two alluded to by Josephus.
   
   (c) The most ancient list of Old Testament books is that which was made by Melito of Sardis (cf. A.D. 170); none of the apocryphal books is included (cf. Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 4.26.14).
   
   (d) In the early 3rd century A.D., neither Origin nor his contemporary, Tertullian, recognized the books of the Apocrypha as being canonical.
   
   (e) Though some of the apocryphal books were being used in the church services by the 5th century A.D., they were read only by those who held inferior offices in the church (see: T.H. Horne, Critical Introduction to the Holy Scriptures, Philadelphia: Whetham & Son, 1841, Vol. I, p. 436).
   
3. The apocryphal books were produced in an era when no inspired documents were been given by God. Malachi concludes his narrative in the Old Testament by urging Israel: “Remember ye the law of Moses my servant, which I commanded unto him in Horeb for all Israel, even statutes and ordinances.” He then projects four centuries into the future and prophesied: “Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the great and terrible day of Jehovah come...” (Mal. 4:4-5). This text pictured the coming of John the Baptist (cf. Mt. 11:14; Lk. 1:17). The implication of Malachi’s prophecy is that no prophet would arise from God until the coming of John. This excludes the apocryphal writings.
   
   Josephus confirms this when he declares:
   
   
   “It is true, our history has been written since Artaxerxes very particularly, but has not been esteemed of the like authority with the former by our forefathers, because there has not been an exact succession of prophets since that time.”​
   
   He further says that no one “has been so bold as either to add any thing to them, to take any thing from them, or to make any change in them . . .” (Against Apion 1.8).
   
   F.F. Bruce contended that there “is no evidence that these books were ever regarded as canonical by any Jews, whether inside or outside Palestine, whether they read the Bible in Hebrew or in Greek” (The Books and the Parchments, London: Pickering & Inglis, 1950, p. 157).
   
4. Jesus Christ and His inspired New Testament penmen quoted from, or alluded to, the writings and events of the Old Testament profusely. In fact, some 1,000 quotations or allusions from thirty-five of the thirty-nine Old Testament books are found in the New Testament record. And yet, significantly, not once is any of these apocryphal books quoted or even explicitly referred to by the Lord, or by any New Testament writer. Noted scholar Emile Schurer argued that this is really remarkable since most of the New Testament habitually quoted from the LXX (Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, New York: Funk & Wagnalls, 1894, Vol. I, 99).
   
   
   “Despite the fact that New Testament writers quote largely from the Septuagint rather than from the Hebrew Old Testament, there is not a single clear-cut case of a citation from any of the fourteen apocryphal books . . . . The most that can be said is that the New Testament writers show acquaintance with these fourteen books and perhaps allude to them indirectly, but in no case do they quote them as inspired Scripture or cite them as authority” (Merrill F. Unger, Introductory Guide to the Old Testament, Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1951, p. 101).​
5. Finally, it must be observed that the apocryphal books, unlike the canonical books of the Old Testament, make no direct claims of being inspired of God. Not once is there a, “thus says the Lord,” or language like, “the word of the Lord came unto me, saying.” In fact, some of the documents actually confess non-inspiration! In the Prologue of Ecclesiasticus, the writer states:
   
   
   “Ye are intreated therefore to read with favour and attention, and to pardon us, if in any parts of what we have laboured to interpret, we may seem to fail in some of the phrases” (The Apocrypha, New York: Thomas Nelson & Sons, 1894).​
6. Too, there is the matter of literary style. Dr. Raymond Surburg has written:
   
   
   “When a comparison is instituted of the style of the Apocrypha with the style of the Biblical Hebrew Old Testament writings, there is a considerable inferiority, shown by the stiffness, lack of originality and artificiality of expression characterizing the apocryphal books” (The Christian News, November 24, 1980, p. 7).​

Evidence negating inspiration



The Apocrypha contains a great variety of historical, geographical, chronological, and moral errors. Professor William Green of Princeton wrote: “The books of Tobit and Judith abound in geographical, chronological, and historical mistakes...” (General Introduction to the Old Testament, New York: Scribner’s & Sons, 1899, p. 195). A critical study of the Apocrypha’s contents clearly reveals that it could not be the product of the Spirit of God. The following examples are ample evidence of this:

1. Rather that the creation being spoken into existence from nothing by the word of Almighty God, as affirmed in the Scriptures (Gen. 1:1; Psa. 33:6-9; Heb. 11:3), the Apocrypha has God creating the world out of “formless matter” (Wisdom of Solomon 11:17).
   
2. According to the prophet Jeremiah, Nebuchadnezzar burned Jerusalem on the tenth day, fifth month, or the nineteenth year of his reign (Jer. 52:12-13). Subsequent to this, both the prophet and his scribe, Baruch, were taken into Egypt (Jer. 43:6-7). According to the Apocrypha, however, at this very time Baruch was in Babylon (Baruch 1:1-2).
   
3. There are two contradictory accounts of the death of Antiochus Epiphanes, that dreaded enemy of the Jews. One narrative records that Antiochus and his company were “cut to pieces in the temple of Nanaea by the treachery of Nanaea’s priests” (II Maccabees 1:13-16), while another version in the same book states that Antiochus was “taken with a noisome sickness” and so “ended his life among the mountains by a most piteous fate in a strange land” (II Maccabees 9:19-29).
   
4. Tobit is said to have lived 158 years (14:11), yet, supposedly, he was alive back when Jeroboam revolted against Jerusalem (931 B.C.), and then still around when the Assyrians invaded Israel (722/21 B.C.)óa span of some 210 years (Tobit 1:3-5)!
   
5. The Apocrypha teaches the erroneous doctrine of the pre-existence of the soul, suggesting that the kind of body one now has is determined by the character of his soul in a previous life. “Now I was a goodly child, and a good soul fell to my lot; Nay rather, being good, I came into a body undefiled” (Wisdom of Solomon 8:19-20). The foregoing was a common belief among heathen peoples, but certainly it is contrary to the biblical view that the soul of man is formed with him at conception (Psa. 139:13-16; Zech. 12:1).
   
6. The Apocrypha teaches that prayer may be made for the dead. “Wherefore he made the propitiation for them that had died, that they might be released from their sins” (II Maccabees 12:45). Roman Catholics cite this passage to find support for their dogma of praying for the dead to be released from purgatory (obviously there’s no New Testament passage to buttress the notion), but the effort is vain.
   
7. The Apocrypha suggests that one may atone for his sins by the giving of alms. “It is better to give alms than to lay up gold: alms doth deliver from death, and it shall purge away all sin” (Tobit 3:9).
   
8. The moral tone of the Apocrypha is far below that of the Bible. Note some examples:
   
   (a) It applauds suicide as a noble and manful act. II Maccabees tells of one Razis who, being surrounded by the enemy, fell upon his sword, choosing “rather to die nobly” than to fall into the hands of his enemy. He was not mortally wounded, however, and so threw himself down from a wall and “manfully” died among the crowds (14:41-43).
   
   (b) It describes magical potions which are alleged to drive demons away (Tobit 6:1-17). (c) The murder of the men of Shechem (Gen. 34), an act of violence which is condemned in the Scriptures (cf. Gen. 49:6-7), is commended and is described as an act of God (Judith 9:2-9).
   

These, along with various other considerations, lead only to the conclusion that the Apocrypha cannot be included in the volume of sacred Scripture.

ADDED COPYRIGHT INFO BY JEFFREYLLOYD - Copyright © 1998-2003 by Christian Courier Publications

I know thats long, but thanks for reading it.

 

[JeffreyLloyd]

The Protestants attempt to defend their rejection of the deuterocanonicals on the ground that the early Jews rejected them. However, the Jewish councils that rejected them (e.g., council of Jamnia in 200 A.D.) were the same councils that rejected the entire New Testatment canon. Thus, Protestants who reject the Catholic Bible are following a Jewish council who rejected Christ and the Revelation of the New Testament.

Here is a list of New Testament mentiones of deuterocanonicals scripture:

Matt. 2:16 - Herod's decree of slaying innocent children was prophesied in Wis. 11:7 - slaying the holy innocents.

Matt. 6:19-20 - Jesus' statement about laying up for yourselves treasure in heaven follows Sirach 29:11 - lay up your treasure.

Matt.. 7:12 - Jesus' golden rule "do unto others" is the converse of Tobit 4:15 - what you hate, do not do to others.

Matt. 7:16,20 - Jesus' statement "you will know them by their fruits" follows Sirach 27:6 - the fruit discloses the cultivation.

Matt. 9:36 - the people were "like sheep without a shepherd" is same as Judith 11:19 - sheep without a shepherd.

Matt. 11:25 - Jesus' description "Lord of heaven and earth" is the same as Tobit 7:18 - Lord of heaven and earth.

Matt. 12:42 - Jesus refers to the wisdom of Solomon which was recorded and made part of the deuterocanonical books.

Matt. 16:18 - Jesus' reference to the "power of death" and "gates of Hades" references Wisdom 16:13.

Matt. 22:25; Mark 12:20; Luke 20:29 - Gospel writers refer to the canonicity of Tobit 3:8 and 7:11 regarding the seven brothers.

Matt. 24:15 - the "desolating sacrilege" Jesus refers to is also taken from 1 Macc. 1:54 and 2 Macc. 8:17.

Matt. 24:16 - let those "flee to the mountains" is taken from 1 Macc. 2:28.

Matt. 27:43 - if He is God's Son, let God deliver him from His adversaries follows Wisdom 2:18.

Mark 4:5,16-17 - Jesus' description of seeds falling on rocky ground and having no root follows Sirach 40:15.

Mark 9:48 - description of hell where their worm does not die and the fire is not quenched references Judith 16:17.

Luke 1:42 - Elizabeth's declaration of Mary's blessedness above all women follows Uzziah's declaration in Judith 13:18.

Luke 1:52 - Mary's magnificat addressing the mighty falling from their thrones and replaced by lowly follows Sirach 10:14.

Luke 2:29 - Simeon's declaration that he is ready to die after seeing the Child Jesus follows Tobit 11:9.

Luke 13:29 - the Lord's description of men coming from east and west to rejoice in God follows Baruch 4:37.

Luke 21:24 - Jesus' usage of "fall by the edge of the sword" follows Sirach 28:18.

Luke 24:4 and Acts 1:10 - Luke's description of the two men in dazzling apparel reminds us of 2 Macc. 3:26.

John 1:3 - all things were made through Him, the Word, follows Wisdom 9:1.

John 3:13 - who has ascended into heaven but He who descended from heaven references Baruch 3:29.

John 4:48; Acts 5:12; 15:12; 2 Cor. 12:12 - Jesus', Luke's and Paul's usage of "signs and wonders" follows Wisdom 8:8.

John 5:18 - Jesus claiming that God is His Father follows Wisdom 2:16.

John 6:35-59 - Jesus' Eucharistic discourse is foreshadowed in Sirach 24:21.

John 10:22 - the identification of the feast of the dedication is taken from 1 Macc. 4:59.

John 15:6 - branches that don't bear fruit and are cut down follows Wis. 4:5 where branches are broken off.

Acts 1:15 - Luke's reference to the 120 may be a reference to 1 Macc. 3:55 - leaders of tens / restoration of the twelve.

Acts 10:34; Rom. 2:11; Gal. 2:6 - Peter's and Paul's statement that God shows no partiality references Sirach 35:12.

Acts 17:29 - description of false gods as like gold and silver made by men follows Wisdom 13:10.

Rom 1:18-25 - Paul's teaching on the knowledge of the Creator and the ignorance and sin of idolatry follows Wis. 13:1-10.

Rom. 1:20 - specifically, God's existence being evident in nature follows Wis. 13:1.

Rom. 1:23 - the sin of worshipping mortal man, birds, animals and reptiles follows Wis. 11:15; 12:24-27; 13:10; 14:8.

Rom. 1:24-27 - this idolatry results in all kinds of sexual perversion which follows Wis. 14:12,24-27.

Rom. 4:17 - Abraham is a father of many nations follows Sirach 44:19.

Rom. 5:12 - description of death and sin entering into the world is similar to Wisdom 2:24.

Rom. 9:21 - usage of the potter and the clay, making two kinds of vessels follows Wisdom 15:7.

1 Cor. 2:16 - Paul's question, "who has known the mind of the Lord?" references Wisdom 9:13.

1 Cor. 6:12-13; 10:23-26 - warning that, while all things are good, beware of gluttony, follows Sirach 36:18 and 37:28-30.

1 Cor. 8:5-6 - Paul acknowledging many "gods" but one Lord follows Wis. 13:3.

1 Cor. 10:1 - Paul's description of our fathers being under the cloud passing through the sea refers to Wisdom 19:7.

1 Cor. 10:20 - what pagans sacrifice they offer to demons and not to God refers to Baruch 4:7.

1 Cor. 15:29 - if no expectation of resurrection, it would be foolish to be baptized on their behalf follows 2 Macc. 12:43-45.

Eph. 1:17 - Paul's prayer for a "spirit of wisdom" follows the prayer for the spirit of wisdom in Wisdom 7:7.

Eph. 6:14 - Paul describing the breastplate of righteousness is the same as Wis. 5:18. See also Isaiah 59:17 and 1Thess. 5:8.

Eph. 6:13-17 - in fact, the whole discussion of armor, helmet, breastplate, sword, shield follows Wis. 5:17-20.

1 Tim. 6:15 - Paul's description of God as Sovereign and King of kings is from 2 Macc. 12:15; 13:4.

2 Tim. 4:8 - Paul's description of a crown of righteousness is similar to Wisdom 5:16.

Heb. 4:12 - Paul's description of God's word as a sword is similar to Wisdom 18:15.

Heb. 11:5 - Enoch being taken up is also referenced in Wis 4:10 and Sir 44:16. See also 2 Kings 2:1-13 & Sir 48:9 regarding Elijah.

Heb 11:35 - Paul teaches about the martyrdom of the mother and her sons described in 2 Macc. 6:18, 7:1-42.

Heb. 12:12 - the description "drooping hands" and "weak knees" comes from Sirach 25:23.

James 1:19 - let every man be quick to hear and slow to respond follows Sirach 5:11.

James 2:23 - it was reckoned to him as righteousness follows 1 Macc. 2:52 - it was reckoned to him as righteousness.

James 3:13 - James' instruction to perform works in meekness follows Sirach 3:17.

James 5:3 - describing silver which rusts and laying up treasure follows Sirach 29:10-11.

James 5:6 - condemning and killing the "righteous man" follows Wisdom 2:10-20.

1 Peter 1:6-7 - Peter teaches about testing faith by purgatorial fire as described in Wisdom 3:5-6 and Sirach 2:5.

1 Peter 1:17 - God judging each one according to his deeds refers to Sirach 16:12 - God judges man according to his deeds.

2 Peter 2:7 - God's rescue of a righteous man (Lot) is also described in Wisdom 10:6.

Rev. 1:18; Matt. 16:18 - power of life over death and gates of Hades follows Wis. 16:13.

Rev. 2:12 - reference to the two-edged sword is similar to the description of God's Word in Wisdom 18:16.

Rev. 5:7 - God is described as seated on His throne, and this is the same description used in Sirach 1:8.

Rev. 8:3-4 - prayers of the saints presented to God by the hand of an angel follows Tobit 12:12,15.

Rev. 8:7 - raining of hail and fire to the earth follows Wisdom 16:22 and Sirach 39:29.

Rev. 9:3 - raining of locusts on the earth follows Wisdom 16:9.

Rev. 11:19 - the vision of the ark of the covenant (Mary) in a cloud of glory was prophesied in 2 Macc. 2:7.

Rev. 17:14 - description of God as King of kings follows 2 Macc. 13:4.

Rev. 19:1 - the cry "Hallelujah" at the coming of the new Jerusalem follows Tobit 13:18.

Rev. 19:11 - the description of the Lord on a white horse in the heavens follows 2 Macc. 3:25; 11:8.

Rev. 19:16 - description of our Lord as King of kings is taken from 2 Macc. 13:4.

Rev. 21:19 - the description of the new Jerusalem with precious stones is prophesied in Tobit 13:17.

Exodus 23:7 - do not slay the innocent and righteous - Dan. 13:53 - do not put to death an innocent and righteous person.

2 Tim. 3:16 - the inspired Scripture that Paul was referring to included the deuterocanonical texts that the Protestants removed. The books Baruch, Tobit, Maccabees, Judith, Sirach, Wisdom were all included in the Septuagint that Jesus and the apostles used.

http://www.scripturecatholic.com/deuterocanon.html

 

[JeffreyLloyd]

The Old Testament Canon

During the Reformation, primarly for doctrinal reasons, Protestants removed seven books from the Old Testament: 1 and 2 Maccabees, Sirach, Wisdom, Baruch, Tobit, and Judith, and parts of two others, Daniel and Esther. They did so even though these books had been regarded as canonical since the beginning of Church history.

As Protestant church historian J. N. D. Kelly writes, "It should be observed that the Old Testament thus admitted as authoritative in the Church was somewhat bulkier and more comprehensive [than the Protestant Bible]. . . . It always included, though with varying degrees of recognition, the so-called apocrypha or deuterocanonical books" (Early Christian Doctrines, 53), which are rejected by Protestants.

Below we give patristic quotations from each of the deuterocanonical books. Notice how the Fathers quoted these books along with the protocanonicals. The deuterocanonicals are those books that were included in the Bible even though there had been some discussion about whether they should be. The protocanonical books are those whose inclusion in the Bible did not occasion any discussion and were universally recognized.

Also included are the earliest official lists of the canon. For the sake of brevity these are not given in full. When the lists of the canon cited here are given in full, they include all the books and only the books found in the modern Catholic Bible.

When examining the question of what books were originally included in the Old Testament canon, it is important to note that some of the books of the Bible have been known by more than one name. Sirach is also known as Ecclesiasticus, 1 and 2 Chronicles as 1 and 2 Paralipomenon, Ezra and Nehemiah as 1 and 2 Esdras, and 1 and 2 Samuel with 1 and 2 Kings as 1, 2, 3, and 4 Kings—that is, 1 and 2 Samuel are named 1 and 2 Kings, and 1 and 2 Kings are named 3 and 4 Kings. The history and use of these designations is explained more fully in Scripture reference works.


The Didache

"You shall not waver with regard to your decisions [Sir. 1:28]. Do not be someone who stretches out his hands to receive but withdraws them when it comes to giving [Sir. 4:31]" (Didache 4:5 [A.D. 70]).


The Letter of Barnabas

"Since, therefore, [Christ] was about to be manifested and to suffer in the flesh, his suffering was foreshown. For the prophet speaks against evil, ‘Woe to their soul, because they have counseled an evil counsel against themselves’ [Is. 3:9], saying, ‘Let us bind the righteous man because he is displeasing to us’ [Wis. 2:12.]" (Letter of Barnabas 6:7 [A.D. 74]).


Clement of Rome

"By the word of his might [God] established all things, and by his word he can overthrow them. ‘Who shall say to him, "What have you done?" or who shall resist the power of his strength?’ [Wis. 12:12]" (Letter to the Corinthians 27:5 [ca. A.D. 80]).


Polycarp of Smyrna

"Stand fast, therefore, in these things, and follow the example of the Lord, being firm and unchangeable in the faith, loving the brotherhood [1 Pet. 2:17].
. . . When you can do good, defer it not, because ‘alms delivers from death’ [Tob. 4:10, 12:9]. Be all of you subject to one another [1 Pet. 5:5], having your conduct blameless among the Gentiles [1 Pet. 2:12], and the Lord may not be blasphemed through you. But woe to him by whom the name of the Lord is blasphemed [Is. 52:5]!" (Letter to the Philadelphians 10 [A.D. 135]).


Irenaeus

"Those . . . who are believed to be presbyters by many, but serve their own lusts and do not place the fear of God supreme in their hearts, but conduct themselves with contempt toward others and are puffed up with the pride of holding the chief seat [Matt. 23:6] and work evil deeds in secret, saying ‘No man sees us,’ shall be convicted by the Word, who does not judge after outward appearance, nor looks upon the countenance, but the heart; and they shall hear those words to be found in Daniel the prophet: ‘O you seed of Canaan and not of Judah, beauty has deceived you and lust perverted your heart’ [Dan. 13:56]. You that have grown old in wicked days, now your sins which you have committed before have come to light, for you have pronounced false judgments and have been accustomed to condemn the innocent and to let the guilty go free, although the Lord says, ‘You shall not slay the innocent and the righteous’ [Dan. 13:52, citing Ex. 23:7]" (Against Heresies 4:26:3 [A.D. 189]; Daniel 13 is not in the Protestant Bible).

"Jeremiah the prophet has pointed out that as many believers as God has prepared for this purpose, to multiply those left on the earth, should both be under the rule of the saints and to minister to this [new] Jerusalem and that [his] kingdom shall be in it, saying, ‘Look around Jerusalem toward the east and behold the joy which comes to you from God himself. Behold, your sons whom you have sent forth shall come: They shall come in a band from the east to the west. . . . God shall go before with you in the light of his splendor, with the mercy and righteousness which proceed from him’ [Bar. 4:36—5:9]" (ibid., 5:35:1; Baruch was often considered part of Jeremiah, as it is here).

Hippolytus

"What is narrated here [in the story of Susannah] happened at a later time, although it is placed at the front of the book [of Daniel], for it was a custom with the writers to narrate many things in an inverted order in their writings. . . . [W]e ought to give heed, beloved, fearing lest anyone be overtaken in any transgression and risk the loss of his soul, knowing as we do that God is the judge of all and the Word himself is the eye which nothing that is done in the world escapes. Therefore, always watchful in heart and pure in life, let us imitate Susannah" (Commentary on Daniel [A.D. 204]; the story of Susannah [Dan. 13] is not in the Protestant Bible).

Cyprian of Carthage

"In Genesis [it says], ‘And God tested Abraham and said to him, "Take your only son whom you love, Isaac, and go to the high land and offer him there as a burnt offering . . ."’ [Gen. 22:1–2]. . . . Of this same thing in the Wisdom of Solomon [it says], ‘Although in the sight of men they suffered torments, their hope is full of immortality . . .’ [Wis. 3:4]. Of this same thing in the Maccabees [it says], ‘Was not Abraham found faithful when tested, and it was reckoned to him for righteousness’ [1 Macc. 2:52; see Jas. 2:21–23]" (Treatises 7:3:15 [A.D. 248]).

"So Daniel, too, when he was required to worship the idol Bel, which the people and the king then worshipped, in asserting the honor of his God, broke forth with full faith and freedom, saying, ‘I worship nothing but the Lord my God, who created the heaven and the earth’ [Dan. 14:5]" (Letters 55:5 [A.D. 253]; Daniel 14 is not in the Protestant Bible).


Council of Rome

"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; Joshua [Son of] Nave, one book; Judges, one book; Ruth, one book; Kings, four books [that is, 1 and 2 Samuel and 1 and 2 Kings]; Paralipomenon [Chronicles], two books; Psalms, one book; Solomon, three books: Proverbs, one book, Ecclesiastes, one book, [and] Canticle of Canticles [Song of Songs], one book; likewise Wisdom, one book; Ecclesiasticus [Sirach], one book . . . . Likewise the order of the historical [books]: Job, one book; Tobit, one book; Esdras, two books [Ezra and Nehemiah]; Esther, one book; Judith, one book; Maccabees, two books" (Decree of Pope Damasus [A.D. 382]).


Council of Hippo

"[It has been decided] that besides the canonical scriptures nothing be read in church under the name of divine Scripture. But the canonical scriptures are
as follows: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua the Son of Nun, Judges, Ruth, the Kings, four books, the Chronicles, two books, Job, the Psalter, the five books of Solomon [Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Wisdom, and a portion of the Psalms], the twelve books of the prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Ezekiel, Tobit, Judith, Esther, Ezra, two books, Maccabees, two books . . ." (Canon 36 [A.D. 393]).


Council of Carthage III

"[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, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, Paralipomenon, two books, Job, the Psalter of David, five books of Solomon, twelve books of the prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Ezekiel, Tobit, Judith, Esther, two books of Esdras, two books of the Maccabees . . ." (Canon 47 [A.D. 397]).


Augustine

"The whole canon of the scriptures, however, in which we say that consideration is to be applied, is contained in these books: the five of Moses . . . and one book of Joshua [Son of] Nave, one of Judges; one little book which is called Ruth . . . then the four of Kingdoms, and the two of Paralipomenon . . . . [T]here are also others too, of a different order . . . such as Job and Tobit and Esther and Judith and the two books of Maccabees, and the two of Esdras . . . . Then there are the prophets, in which there is one book of the Psalms of David, and three of Solomon. . . . But as to those two books, one of which is entitled Wisdom and the other of which is entitled Ecclesiasticus and which are called ‘of Solomon’ because of a certain similarity to his books, it is held most certainly that they were written by Jesus Sirach. They must, however, be accounted among the prophetic books, because of the authority which is deservedly accredited to them" (Christian Instruction 2:8:13 [A.D. 397]).

"We read in the books of the Maccabees [2 Macc. 12:43] that sacrifice was offered for the dead. But even if it were found nowhere in the Old Testament writings, the authority of the Catholic Church which is clear on this point is of no small weight, where in the prayers of the priest poured forth to the Lord God at his altar the commendation of the dead has its place" (The Care to be Had for the Dead 1:3 [A.D. 421]).


The Apostolic Constitutions

"Now women also prophesied. Of old, Miriam the sister of Moses and Aaron [Ex. 15:20], and after her, Deborah [Judges. 4:4], and after these Huldah [2 Kgs. 22:14] and Judith [Judith 8], the former under Josiah and the latter under Darius" (Apostolic Constitutions 8:2 [A.D. 400]).


Jerome

"What sin have I committed if I follow the judgment of the churches? But he who brings charges against me for relating [in my preface to the book of Daniel] the objections that the Hebrews are wont to raise against the story of Susannah [Dan. 13], the Song of the Three Children [Dan. 3:29–68, RSV-CE], and the story of Bel and the Dragon [Dan. 14], which are not found in the Hebrew volume, proves that he is just a foolish sycophant. I was not relating my own personal views, but rather the remarks that they are wont to make against us. If I did not reply to their views in my preface, in the interest of brevity, lest it seem that I was composing not a preface, but a book, I believe I added promptly the remark, for I said, ‘This is not the time to discuss such matters’" (Against Rufinius 11:33 [A.D. 401]).


Pope Innocent I

"A brief addition shows what books really are received in the canon. These are the things of which you desired to be informed verbally: of Moses, five books, that is, of Genesis, of Exodus, of Leviticus, of Numbers, of Deuteronomy, and Joshua, of Judges, one book, of Kings, four books, and also Ruth, of the prophets, sixteen books, of Solomon, five books, the Psalms. Likewise of the histories, Job, one book, of Tobit, one book, Esther, one, Judith, one, of the Maccabees, two, of Esdras, two, Paralipomenon, two books . . ." (Letters 7 [A.D. 408]).

Copyright © 1979-2003, Catholic Answers. All Rights Reserved.
Used with Permissions www.catholic.com

 

[Philip]

I used to know exactly how this happened but I can't make a story of it anymore. All I remember is that it has to do with different translations of the original text. I think the Catholic Bible is a translation of the Latin text and the Protestant Bible is a translation of the Greek text, and those original texts differed in the books that were included.

The Deuterocanonical texts were part of the Greek Old Testament used by the early Christians. They were rejected by the Jews after the coming of Christ.

Some of the writings in the Apocrypha are actually quite good.

Especially the book of Wisdom.

 

[Philip]

Can anyone refute this? The most interesting points i highlighted in red

Happy to do so. Since it is long, I will only address the parts you highlighted. I will be happy to discuss the other parts later.

Finally, it must be observed that the apocryphal books, unlike the canonical books of the Old Testament, make no direct claims of being inspired of God. Not once is there a, “thus says the Lord,” or language like, “the word of the Lord came unto me, saying.” In fact, some of the documents actually confess non-inspiration! In the Prologue of Ecclesiasticus, the writer states:

“Ye are intreated therefore to read with favour and attention, and to pardon us, if in any parts of what we have laboured to interpret, we may seem to fail in some of the phrases” (The Apocrypha, New York: Thomas Nelson & Sons, 1894).

First, note that not all of the Protocanon make a claim of being inspired. In particular, Esther does not claim to be inspired. In fact, it doesn't even mention God. Second, not every book that claims to be inspired actually is. For example, the Koran claims to be inspired, but is not. That is, claims of inspiration are not a good method of determining inspiration

The so-called confession of non-inspiration is nothing of the sort. It is an example of humility, placing any error on the human writer, not God.

There are two contradictory accounts of the death of Antiochus Epiphanes, that dreaded enemy of the Jews. One narrative records that Antiochus and his company were “cut to pieces in the temple of Nanaea by the treachery of Nanaea’s priests” (II Maccabees 1:13-16), while another version in the same book states that Antiochus was “taken with a noisome sickness” and so “ended his life among the mountains by a most piteous fate in a strange land” (II Maccabees 9:19-29).

How did Judas Ischariot die? Do you need to through out the Book of Acts?

Tobit is said to have lived 158 years (14:11), yet, supposedly, he was alive back when Jeroboam revolted against Jerusalem (931 B.C.), and then still around when the Assyrians invaded Israel (722/21 B.C.)óa span of some 210 years (Tobit 1:3-5)!

Tobit is not historical. It is a long parable.

(b) It describes magical potions which are alleged to drive demons away (Tobit 6:1-17).

Remember when Christ spat in dirt to make dirt to cure the blind man? Was that "magic potion"? What about St James telling people to anoint the sick with oil? Was that a "magic potion"?

(c) The murder of the men of Shechem (Gen. 34), an act of violence which is condemned in the Scriptures (cf. Gen. 49:6-7), is commended and is described as an act of God (Judith 9:2-9).

This is not a contradiction. Rather, it reveals the difference in the way that Jacob and Judith perceived the event.

 

[JeffreyLloyd]

I agree. The book of wisdom is amazing.

 

[d0c markus]

The so-called confession of non-inspiration is nothing of the sort. It is an example of humility, placing any error on the human writer, not God.

Humility? I would hope that anyone guided by the Holy Spirit would be confident they wouldnt make a mistake. But interesting point.

How did Judas Ischariot die? Do you need to through out the Book of Acts?

Im not quite sure i follow what you mean. Are you referring to one account adds that he spilled his guts and the other doesnt.

I am assuming its extra detail, you know how parts of the gospels describe something with more emphasis than the other. The problem with the account in 2 maccabees is that one says he was chopped to pieces and the other he commited suicide after coming down with some sickness.

Tobit is not historical. It is a long parable.

Parables have a meaning, whats the significance of the age contradiction? Does Jesus ever contradict himself or a character in any of his parables? (this i dunno; i'm askin you not defendin my position. but im pretty confident that he did not)

This is not a contradiction. Rather, it reveals the difference in the way that Jacob and Judith perceived the event.

This sounds like when witnesses see a crime they often screw up details, so one God condems the event, making it evil. And the other attributes Evil to being of God and blessing him for it. Isnt that the so called blasphemy of the holy spirit?

As for the other Guy who responded with all the NT qoutes.. Thank You, but how do you reconcile the mistakes in these books. It stands reason that if something considered to be from God it is free from error and if shown to have error in it it is not from God.

This is my own speculation and random thought "what-if" ... Satan has the power to fool men, by miracles and other "divine" acts. The fact that someone has the ability to predict a future event doesnt necessarily have to come from God. I would not apply this to Daniel or Jerimiah or the other prophets protestants and catholics both agree on. Your thoughts.. Does anyone know where i can get an online apocrypha (i'll use my word because its easier )?


and we all know the koran has fulfilled prophecy in it as well..is that from God as well??

thanks!!!

 

[JeffreyLloyd]

Just so you know... Philip is not Roman Catholic...

 

[Philip]

Humility? I would hope that anyone guided by the Holy Spirit would be confident they wouldnt make a mistake. But interesting point.

Consider this passage:

1 Corinthians 1:16
I did baptize also the household of Steph'anas. Beyond that, I do not know whether I baptized any one else.​

Where is Paul's confidence?

Im not quite sure i follow what you mean. Are you referring to one account adds that he spilled his guts and the other doesnt.

I am assuming its extra detail, you know how parts of the gospels describe something with more emphasis than the other. The problem with the account in 2 maccabees is that one says he was chopped to pieces and the other he commited suicide after coming down with some sickness.

Matthew 27:5
And throwing down the pieces of silver in the temple, he departed; and he went and hanged himself.
Acts 1:18
Now this man bought a field with the reward of his wickedness; and falling headlong he burst open in the middle and all his bowels gushed out. ​

In one account, he hanged himself. In another, he fell. It is not just some extra detail.

Parables have a meaning, whats the significance of the age contradiction? Does Jesus ever contradict himself or a character in any of his parables? (this i dunno; i'm askin you not defendin my position. but im pretty confident that he did not)

Not every detail of a story has significance. I do not believe that any of Jesus's parables have such problems. However, the same type of historical "errors" exist in Esther, Jonah, and Daniel.

This sounds like when witnesses see a crime they often screw up details, so one God condems the event, making it evil. And the other attributes Evil to being of God and blessing him for it. Isnt that the so called blasphemy of the holy spirit?

Are you suggesting that no person in the Bible ever sinned? Is Judith's comment worse that the sins of Saul, David, or Solomon?

As for the other Guy who responded with all the NT qoutes.. Thank You, but how do you reconcile the mistakes in these books. It stands reason that if something considered to be from God it is free from error and if shown to have error in it it is not from God.

Have you given as much effort to reconciling these proported "errors" in the Deuterocanon as you would give to reconciling "errors" in the Protocanon?

This is my own speculation and random thought "what-if" ... Satan has the power to fool men, by miracles and other "divine" acts. The fact that someone has the ability to predict a future event doesnt necessarily have to come from God. I would not apply this to Daniel or Jerimiah or the other prophets protestants and catholics both agree on.

Why not? Couldn't Satan confuse Protestants as well as Catholics? Are you aware that Catholics and Orthodox agree on the Deuterocanon?

Does anyone know where i can get an online apocrypha (i'll use my word because its easier

Try http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/rsv.browse.html

and we all know the koran has fulfilled prophecy in it as well..is that from God as well??

Does it contain prophesies of Christ?

 

[Philip]

Just so you know... Philip is not Roman Catholic...

But JefferyLloyd is.

 

[JeffreyLloyd]

 

[Philip]

I couldn't resist

 

[d0c markus]

1 Corinthians 1:16
I did baptize also the household of Steph'anas. Beyond that, I do not know whether I baptized any one else

Theres a subtle difference. Paul is doubting his memory concerning the thousands of believers he has been around.

In the other text the author layed doubt to an entire biblical text. Paul does not do that.

Matthew 27:5
And throwing down the pieces of silver in the temple, he departed; and he went and hanged himself.
Acts 1:18
Now this man bought a field with the reward of his wickedness; and falling headlong he burst open in the middle and all his bowels gushed out.

Ok, i can see how you could scream contradiction. Its not at all plausable that the two events are one and the same at different times.

In Matthew thats where he hung himself. And The acts verse after a period of time his body began to decay the rope broke or became untied and splat.

Are you suggesting that no person in the Bible ever sinned? Is Judith's comment worse that the sins of Saul, David, or Solomon?

Not so fast buddy, Did Saul, David, or Solomon ever commit the unforgivable sin, attributing evil to God?

MT 12:31 And so I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven.

Not every detail of a story has significance. I do not believe that any of Jesus's parables have such problems. However, the same type of historical "errors" exist in Esther, Jonah, and Daniel.

The age of death in a story is significant. The reasons for age of death can either collaborate an event or not.

I have never heard of the "errors" in those Books, can you please list them or give a source and i'll have a look. Secondly the Word of God in your mind is not Infallible?

Have you given as much effort to reconciling these proported "errors" in the Deuterocanon as you would give to reconciling "errors" in the Protocanon?

Never Heard of it. Your dealing with an amatuer

Why not? Couldn't Satan confuse Protestants as well as Catholics? Are you aware that Catholics and Orthodox agree on the Deuterocanon?

I did know this. I dont know the difference between the two groups though.
And yes i would concede we are all equally fallable when it comes to the devil.

Try http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/rsv.browse.html

Thanks!!!

Does it contain prophesies of Christ?

Lookin....haha wait a sec. The koran wasnt written till like 500 years after jesus.

But it does say Jesus was the messiah. (God probably made satan put that in there.)

So no you cant equate those prophecies to the ones in the koran.
----------------------------------------------------------------

Well now, get back to me. Do any protestants in here know what they are talkin about who can add to this discussion? That'd be nice..

- Mark

 

[Reader Nilus]

I overheard somone talking about the apocrypha and that catholics have non biblical books in thier bible is this true?

The simple answer is no. Catholics do not have non-Biblical books in their Bible. The more complex answer is that the differences in Canons are traced to the Jewish Council in the mid-90's AD that rejected the books in the LXX that were not in the so-called Hebrew Canon. The Church including the Apostles themselves used the LXX as their Scripture. The real question is why do most Protestant Bibles leave Biblical books out?
Jeff the Finn

 

[JeffreyLloyd]

...The real question is why do most Protestant Bibles leave Biblical books out? - Jeff the Finn

Very good question, indeed.

 

[Philip]

Theres a subtle difference. Paul is doubting his memory concerning the thousands of believers he has been around. In the other text the author layed doubt to an entire biblical text. Paul does not do that.

I do not see the difference. By your earlier statment, Paul should have confidence that the Holy Spirit would protect his memory. It seems that you are making exceptions to your own statement in order to justify your beliefs on the canon.

Ok, i can see how you could scream contradiction. Its not at all plausable that the two events are one and the same at different times.

In Matthew thats where he hung himself. And The acts verse after a period of time his body began to decay the rope broke or became untied and splat.

Notice how quickly you try to reconcile these two accounts. Have you tried to reconcile the other "contradictions".

Not so fast buddy, Did Saul, David, or Solomon ever commit the unforgivable sin, attributing evil to God?

MT 12:31 And so I tell you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven.

I disagree with your theology on this point, so your question means nothing to me.

The age of death in a story is significant. The reasons for age of death can either collaborate an event or not.

What is there to collaborate if the story if a parable?

I have never heard of the "errors" in those Books, can you please list them or give a source and i'll have a look.

You have not looked very hard, then. I will consider posting a link. I am not sure if I wish to do what may become a stumbling block for others.

Secondly the Word of God in your mind is not Infallible?

There is a difference between infallible and perfect in historical detail. Consider carefully your logic. It seems that you assume that the Protocanon (The Old Testament without the Deuterocanon) is the word of God, therefore it is without error. That is, any possible error can be explained away. However, you assume the Deuterocanon is not the word of God, and every possible error must actually be an error.

Answer me this: How do you know for certain that Esther, as an example, is the word of God and belongs in the Bible?

Thanks!!!

No problem. Be sure to read the second chapter of Wisdom. It is, in my opinion, the greatest prophesy of Christ.

I think the KJV of the Deuterocanon is somewhere at that site as well.