And, we use them in our liturgical celebrations -- the Prayer of Manasseh, something the Latins are missing along with you protestants -- is an important part of Great Compline as said throughout the course of Great Lent, and readings from them occur regularly in the lectionary for Vespers (the only time in the normal liturgical cycle we read from the Old Testament, other than the Psalms).
In fact, they are better regarded in this last respect than the Apocalypse of St. John (a.k.a. Revelations) which is never appointed to be read at any service of the Orthodox Church, though it is part of our canon.
“No, actually, we use them to establish doctrine: the only Scriptural support for the doctrine of creation ex nihilo occurs in 2nd Maccabees (the account in Genesis does not preclude creation from amorphous pre-existing material, and there are no other texts in the Scriptures to support creation ex nihilo, so if you believe it and don’t have 2nd Maccabees in your canon, you’re holding a “non-Biblical” doctrine),”
So your doctrine for God creating all things from nothing (John 1:3, Cor 1:15) comes from a book that was not written by a Prophet, asserts that it is a condensed version of some other original, and even apologizes for any possible imperfections within it?
“...all such things as have been comprised in 5 books by Jason of Cyrene, we have at-tempted to abridge in one book. For considering the difficulty that they find that desire to undertake the narrations of histories, because of the multitude of the matter, we have taken care for those indeed that are willing to read,...And as to ourselves indeed, in undertaking this work of abridging, we have taken in hand no easy task, yea. rather a business full of watching and sweat. .. Leaving to the authors the exact handling of every particular, and as for ourselves. according to the plan proposed, studying to brief... For to collect all that is known, to put the discourse in order, and curiously to discuss every particular point, is the duty of the author of a history. But to pursue brevity of speech and to avoid nice declarations of things, is to be granted to him that maketh an abridgement.” (2 Maccabees 2: 24-32).
“...I will also here make an end of my narration. Which if I have done well, and as it becometh the history, it is what I desired; but if not so perfectly, it must be pardoned me. For as it is hurtful to drink always wine, or always water, but pleasant to use sometimes the one, and sometimes the other, so if the speech be always nicely framed, it will not be grateful to the readers...” 12 Maccabees 15: 39-40).
If you took the time to actually read the actual inspired books of the scripture, you wouldn’t have to rely on such an imperfect work for your doctrines.
“(As an aside, I would also note that while the New Testament provides adequate support for the doctrine of the general resurrection, the only plain testimony that it was held by the Jews before Christ’s Incarnation is again to be found in “the Apocrypha”.)”
Interestingly, Christ’s argument for the resurrection did not mention the Apocrypha at all, but on the fact that God is the God of the living and not of the dead.
Mat 22:31-32 But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying, (32) I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.
“In fact, they are better regarded in this last respect than the Apocalypse of St. John (a.k.a. Revelations) which is never appointed to be read at any service of the Orthodox Church, though it is part of our canon.”
Probably because in the 4th century, the Greeks did not consider the Book of Revelation part of the canon at all, as Jerome testifies. But to speak fairly, the Romans did not consider the Epistle to the Hebrews part of the canon back then either. So, you both were out one book.
Oops, one of the references should be to Col 1:16, not 1 Cor 1:15. Typo.