Even that information gives too much credit to the Protestant argument; it describes the case as was known during the reformation. We now know that at least five of the seven books WERE written in Hebrew. It’s simply that by the time of the Reformation (and even St. Jerome’s time), Hebrew manuscripts were unknown because the Jews no longer kept them: because they had been blamed for agitating hopes for the Messiah, which the Jews blamed for the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans.
http://www.studytoanswer.net/rcc/rvb_apocrypha.html
There are many references for further study ...
Being aware of the strong Christian readership at Free Republic I had thought of posting the information regarding the Christian Apocrypha Symposium as a courtesy to my fellow FReepers, but never got the chance.
Seeing your post provided the strong motivation to make the information available as a courtesy to my fellow FReepers.
Reading PaleoJudaica on a regular basis made me aware of the Symposium but only until seeing your post did I explore the links to the event towards posting it for the Christian community here at FR.
York Christian Apocrypha Symposium
About The Symposium
2013 York Christian Apocrypha Symposium
The 2013 York Christian Apocrypha Symposium, “Forbidden Texts on the Western Frontier: The Christian Apocrypha in North American Perspectives,” will take place at York University September 26–28, 2013.
The event is organized by Tony Burke (York University) in consultation with Brent Landau (University of Oklahoma). It brings together 22 Canadian and U.S. scholars to share their work and discuss present and future collaborative projects.
The symposium is open to scholars, students, and interested members of the public; all may register for the event and take part in discussions. One of the goals of the symposium is to make the work of North American scholars on the Christian Apocrypha more widely known, not only to scholars in cognate disciplines (such as New Testament Studies or Medieval Studies) but also to students, who will be the future scholars in the discipline, as well as to the wider public who is interested in the texts but has been ill-informed about them through films, novels, and fringe scholarship.
A detailed description of this year’s symposium can be found here.
http://tonyburke.ca/conference/
The 2013 York Christian Apocrypha Symposium in Retrospect: Part 1
http://www.tonyburke.ca/apocryphicity/2013/10/09/the-2013-york-christian-apocrypha-symposium-in-retrospect-part-one/
Apocryphicity
A weblog devoted to the study of the Christian Apocrypha
The 2013 York Christian Apocrypha Symposium in Retrospect: Part 2
http://www.tonyburke.ca/apocryphicity/2013/10/10/the-2013-york-christian-apocrypha-symposium-in-retrospect-part-two/
The 2013 York Christian Apocrypha Symposium in Retrospect: Part 3
http://www.tonyburke.ca/apocryphicity/2013/10/11/the-2013-york-christian-apocrypha-symposium-in-retrospect-part-three/
More Secret Scriptures 5: Pseudo-Memoirs of the Apostles
http://www.tonyburke.ca/apocryphicity/2013/07/23/more-secret-scriptures-5-pseudo-memoirs-of-the-apostles/
More Secret Scriptures 6: The Preaching of Simon Cephas in the City of Rome
http://www.tonyburke.ca/apocryphicity/2013/07/29/more-secret-scriptures-6-the-preaching-of-simon-cephas-in-the-city-of-rome/
The Historical Jesus and the Christian Apocrypha Panel
http://www.tonyburke.ca/apocryphicity/2013/09/16/the-historical-jesus-and-the-christian-apocrypha-panel/
PaleoJudaica
Apocryphicity latest
TONY BURKE has some good new posts over at Apocryphicity.
First, more supplements to Secret Scriptures Revealed:
More Secret Scriptures 5: Pseudo-Memoirs of the Apostles.
More Secret Scriptures 6: The Preaching of Simon Cephas in the City of Rome.
The earlier posts in the series are noted here.
Second, Tony has been posting profiles of speakers for his upcoming conference “Forbidden Texts on the Western Frontier: The Christian Apocrypha in North American Perspectives” (September 26–28, 2013).
2013 York Christian Apocrypha Symposium Profiles: Brent Landau.
2013 York Christian Apocrypha Symposium Profiles: Lee McDonald.
2013 York Christian Apocrypha Symposium Profiles: Lorenzo DiTommaso.
2013 York Christian Apocrypha Symposium Profiles: Stephen Shoemaker.
2013 York Christian Apocrypha Symposium Profiles: F. Stanley Jones.
Friday, August 30, 2013
Apocryphicity latest
TONY BURKE has some good new posts over at Apocryphicity.
First, more supplements to Secret Scriptures Revealed:
More Secret Scriptures 5: Pseudo-Memoirs of the Apostles.
More Secret Scriptures 6: The Preaching of Simon Cephas in the City of Rome.
http://paleojudaica.blogspot.com/2013_08_25_archive.html#7348581842057597553
York Symposium update
http://paleojudaica.blogspot.co.uk/2013_09_01_archive.html#1833360875109848101
Interesting. I had wondered why they were in the Catholic versions, but not others. Thanks for posting this.
Yes - let us ignore contradictions that the Apocrypha (Deuterocanonical books) introduce. Add to it the serious historical errors, and the radical departure from the rest of scripture on the use of magic, offering of money for the sins of the deceased, payment of money for forgiveness of sins, and other practices clearly against scripture.
Jesus seems to not include those books in His statement regarding the prophets (Luke 11:51).
Many ancient Jewish scholars rejected those additional books, and indeed those books were not recognized by the Jews of Christ’s time.
The vast majority of the “church fathers” of the first 4 centuries of church history rejected the Apocrypha.
One might make a reasonable offer that the Apocrypha can be used as a sort of picture into the inter-testamental period (between the end of the Old Testament and Christ’s advent). Much like the fiction of today that somewhat draws from the culture and events of the times can be a window in the future to our own time.
But scripture, the Apocrypha is not.
Thanks for posting another divisive piece.
I will ask this question:
Where in the Apocrypha books is “Thus saith The Lord” (like all the other books of the OT minus Book of Esther) or God directly talking to someone with directives (like the Torah)?
A side note: Luther had good reason to question Esther based on the above entry argument. There is absolutely no mention of God in Esther.
So since I am not so well versed on the Apocrypha, please tell me the books where the above question is true.
“1) They were included in the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Old Testament from the third century B.C.), which was the “Bible” of the Apostles. They usually quoted the Old Testament scriptures (in the text of the New Testament) from the Septuagint.”
This is false. There is no evidence for the LXX including the apocrypha prior to the time of Jesus. In fact, we don’t even know when the Old Testament was translated into Greek. We only know that the Books of Moses were translated, some of them more than once, with the rest being translated at some later date, by unknown people. And as the article confesses for itself:
“These books and chapters were found in Bible manuscripts in Greek only, and were not part of the Hebrew Canon of the Old Testament, as determined by the Jews.”
Therefore, if the Jews did not regard these books as canonical, neither should we.
“2) Almost all of the Church Fathers regarded the Septuagint as the standard form of the Old Testament. The deuterocanonical books were in no way differentiated from the other books in the Septuagint, and were generally regarded as canonical. St. Augustine thought the Septuagint was apostolically-sanctioned and inspired, and this was the consensus in the early Church.”
He says “almost all,” admitting that there was not a universal consensus of the fathers. But even that is still false, because the consensus was that these books were to be used for edification, but not for doctrine.
Athanasius on the apocrypha:
“But for the sake of greater exactness I add this also, writing under obligation, as it were. There are other books besides these, indeed not received as canonical but having been appointed by our fathers to be read to those just approaching and wishing to be instructed in the word of godliness: Wisdom of Solomon, Wisdom of Sirach, Esther, Judith, Tobit, and that which is called the Teaching of the Apostles, and the Shepherd. But the former [standard new and old testament canon], my brethren, are included in the Canon, the latter being merely read.” (Thirty-Ninth Festal Epistle, A.D. 367.)
Rufinus on the Apocrypha:
“But it should be known that there are also other books which our fathers call not ‘Canonical’ but ‘Ecclesiastical:’ that is to say, Wisdom, called the Wisdom of Solomon, and another Wisdom, called the Wisdom of the Son of Syrach, which last-mentioned the Latins called by the general title Ecclesiasticus, designating not the author of the book, but the character of the writing. To the same class belong the Book of Tobit, and the Book of Judith, and the Books of the Maccabees. In the New Testament the little book which is called the Book of the Pastor of Hermas (and that) which is called the Two Ways, or the Judgment of Peter; all of which they would have read in the Churches, but not appealed to for the confirmation of doctrine. The other writings they have named ‘Apocrypha.’ These they would not have read in the Churches. These are the traditions which the Fathers have handed down to us, which, as I said, I have thought it opportune to set forth in this place, for the instruction of those who are being taught the first elements of the Church and of the Faith, that they may know from what fountains of the Word of God their draughts must be taken” (Philip Schaff and Henry Wace, Nicene and Post Nicene Fathers (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1953), Rufinus, Commentary on the Apostles’ Creed 36, p. 557-558.).
Jerome on the Apocrypha
“These instances have been just touched upon by me (the limits of a letter forbid a more discursive treatment of them) to convince you that in the holy scriptures you can make no progress unless you have a guide to shew you the way...Genesis ... Exodus ... Leviticus ... Numbers ... Deuteronomy ... Job ... Jesus the son of Nave ... Judges ... Ruth ... Samuel ... The third and fourth books of Kings ... The twelve prophets whose writings are compressed within the narrow limits of a single volume: Hosea ... Joel ... Amos ... Obadiah ... Jonah ... Micah ... Nahum ... Habakkuk ... Zephaniah ... Haggai ... Zechariah ... Malachi ... Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel ... Jeremiah also goes four times through the alphabet in different metres (Lamentations)... David...sings of Christ to his lyre; and on a psaltry with ten strings (Psalms) ... Solomon, a lover of peace and of the Lord, corrects morals, teaches nature (Proverbs and Ecclesiastes), unites Christ and the church, and sings a sweet marriage song to celebrate that holy bridal (Song of Songs) ... Esther ... Ezra and Nehemiah.
You see how, carried away by my love of the scriptures, I have exceeded the limits of a letter...The New Testament I will briefly deal with. Matthew, Mark, Luke and John ... The apostle Paul writes to seven churches (for the eighth epistle - that to the Hebrews - is not generally counted in with the others) ... The Acts of the Apostles ... The apostles James, Peter, John and Jude have published seven epistles ... The apocalypse of John ...I beg of you, my dear brother, to live among these books, to meditate upon them, to know nothing else, to seek nothing else (Philip Schaff and Henry Wace, Nicene and Post Nicene Fathers (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1953, Volume VI, St. Jerome, Letter LIII.6-10).
As, then, the Church reads Judith, Tobit, and the books of Maccabees, but does not admit them among the canonical Scriptures, so let it also read these two volumes (Wisdom of Solomon and Eccesiasticus) for the edification of the people, not to give authority to doctrines of the Church...I say this to show you how hard it is to master the book of Daniel, which in Hebrew contains neither the history of Susanna, nor the hymn of the three youths, nor the fables of Bel and the Dragon...(Ibid., Volume VI, Jerome, Prefaces to Jerome’s Works, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and the Song of Songs; Daniel, pp. 492-493).
Let her treasures be not silks or gems but manuscripts of the holy scriptures...Let her begin by learning the psalter, and then let her gather rules of life out of the proverbs of Solomon...Let her follow the example set in Job of virtue and patience. Then let her pass on to the gospels...the Acts of the Apostles and the Epistles...let her commit to memory the prophets, the heptateuch, the books of Kings and of Chronicles, the rolls also of Ezra and Esther. When she has done all these she may safely read the Song of Songs...Let her avoid all apocryphal writings, and if she is led to read such not by the truth of the doctrines which they contain but out of respect for the miracles contained in them; let her understand that they are not really written by those to whom they are ascribed, that many faulty elements have been introduced into them, and that it requires infinite discretion to look for gold in the midst of dirt (Ibid., Letter CVII.12).
What the Savior declares was written down was certainly written down. Where is it written down? The Septuagint does not have it, and the Church does not recognize the Apocrypha. Therefore we must go back to the book of the Hebrews, which is the source of the statements quoted by the Lord, as well as the examples cited by the disciples...But he who brings charges against me for relating the objections that the Hebrews are wont to raise against the story of Susanna, the Song of the Three Children, and the story of Bel and the Dragon, which are not found in the Hebrew volume, proves that he is just a foolish sycophant...The apostolic men use the Hebrew Scripture. It is clear that the apostles themselves and the evangelists did likewise. The Lord and Savior, whenever He refers to ancient Scripture, quotes examples from the Hebrew volumes...We do not say this because we wish to rebuke the Septuagint translators, but because the authority of the apostles and of Christ is greater...”(The Fathers of the Church (Washington: Catholic University, 1965), Volume 53, Saint Jerome, Against Rufinus, Book II.27, 33, pp. 151, 158-160).
Cardinal Cajetan calls them not “canonical for the confirmation of the faith,” but “canonical” only in a certain sense for the “edification of the faithful.”
“Here we close our commentaries on the historical books of the Old Testament. For the rest (that is, Judith, Tobit, and the books of Maccabees) are counted by St. Jerome out of the canonical books, and are placed amongst the apocrypha, along with Wisdom and Ecciesiasticus, as is plain from the Protogus Galeatus. Nor be thou disturbed, like a raw scholar, if thou shouldest find anywhere, either in the sacred councils or the sacred doctors, these books reckoned as canonical. For the words as well of councils as of doctors are to be reduced to the correction of Jerome. Now, according to his judgment, in the epistle to the bishops Chromatius and Heliodorus, these books (and any other like books in the canon of the Bible) are not canonical, that is, not in the nature of a rule for confirming matters of faith. Yet, they may be called canonical, that is, in the nature of a rule for the edification of the faithful, as being received and authorised in the canon of the Bible for that purpose. By the help of this distinction thou mayest see thy way clearly through that which Augustine says, and what is written in the provincial council of Carthage.” (Cardinal Cajetan, “Commentary on all the Authentic Historical Books of the Old Testament,” cited by William Whitaker in “A Disputation on Holy Scripture,” Cambridge: Parker Society (1849), p. 424)
Official prefaces to Latin translations of the scripture making the same distinction:
“At the dawn of the Reformation the great Romanist scholars remained faithful to the judgment of the Canon which Jerome had followed in his translation. And Cardinal Ximenes in the preface to his magnificent Polyglott Biblia Complutensia-the lasting monument of the University which he founded at Complutum or Alcala, and the great glory of the Spanish press-separates the Apocrypha from the Canonical books. The books, he writes, which are without the Canon, which the Church receives rather for the edification of the people than for the establishment of doctrine, are given only in Greek, but with a double translation.” ( B.F. Westcott, A General Survey of the History of the Canon of the New Testament (Cambridge: MacMillan, 1889), pp. 470-471.)
“4) The Church Councils at Hippo (393) and Carthage (397, 419), influenced heavily by St. Augustine, listed the deuterocanonical books as Scripture, which was simply an endorsement of what had become the general consensus of the Church in the west and most of the east.”
This is false. The Councils of Hippo and Carthage were regional councils. The consensus in the west was, as Cardinal Catejan expressed, that of Jerome’s.
“5) Since these Councils also finalized the 66 canonical books which all Christians accept, it is quite arbitrary for Protestants to selectively delete seven books from this authoritative Canon. This is all the more curious when the complicated, controversial history of the New Testament Canon is understood.”
This is false. Keeping them out of the inspired canon is keeping with historical norms. And secondly, many of these books are known to have serious historical and geographical errors, as admitted by Rome itself. For example,
Here are RCC sources on the faux history of Judith:
From the Vatican website introduction to Judith:
“Any attempt to read the book directly against the backdrop of Jewish history in relation to the empires of the ancient world is bound to fail. The story was written as a pious reflection on the meaning of the yearly Passover observance. It draws its inspiration from the Exodus narrative (especially Exodus 14:31) and from the texts of Isaiah and the Psalms portraying the special intervention of God for the preservation of Jerusalem. The theme of God’s hand as the agent of this providential activity, reflected of old in the hand of Moses and now in the hand of Judith, is again exemplified at a later time in Jewish synagogue art. God’s hand reaching down from heaven appears as part of the scene at Dura-Europos (before A.D. 256) in paintings of the Exodus, of the sacrifice of Isaac (Gen 22), and of Ezekiel’s valley of dry bones (Eze 37).”
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0839/__PCP.HTM
And another, also official Catholic source:
“Judith is a dramatic fictional narrative...” “Because Judith is fiction replete with historical and geographical inaccuracies, it is difficult to date its composition.” (New Jerome Biblical Commentary, Nihil Obstat: Raymond E. Brown, S.S., Joseph A. Fitzmyer, S.J., Roland E. Murphy, O. Carm., Imprimatur: Reverend William J. Kane, Vicar General, Diocese of Washington)
If even Rome does not believe in them, why should Protestants be badgered to accept them into the canon?
“9) 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). We know this from plain statements of Luther and other Reformers.”
This is a boastful charge, but it doesn’t appear that the Papists can prove even these doctrines from the apocrypha, even if they were entered into the canon. They’re free to try, though.
BTTT!
http://www.bibletopics.com/biblestudy/23.htm
Nuff said.....
“The history of Jonah is so monstrous that it is absolutely incredible.” (’The Facts About Luther, O’Hare, TAN Books, 1987, p. 202.)
“The book of Esther I toss into the Elbe. I am such an enemy to the book of Esther that I wish it did not exist, for it Judaizes too much and has in it a great deal of heathenish foolishness.” (Ibid.)
“Of very little worth is the Book of Baruch, whoever the worthy Baruch might be.” (Ibid.)
“...the epistle of St. James is an epistle full of straw, because it contains nothing evangelical.” (’Preface to the New Testament,’ ed. Dillenberger, p. 19.)
“If nonsense is spoken anywhere, this is the very place. I pass over the fact that many have maintained, with much probability, that this epistle was not written by the apostle James, and is not worthy of the spirit of the apostle.” (’Pagan Servitude of the Church,’ ed. Dillenberger, p. 352.)
“John records but few of the works of Christ, but a great deal of his preaching, whereas the other three evangelists record many of His works, but few of His words. It follows that the gospel of John is unique in loveliness, and of a truth the principal gospel, far, far superior to the other three, and St. Paul and St. Peter are far in advance of the three gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke.” (’Preface to Romans,’ ed. Dillenberger, pp. 18-19.)
And he complained about the Book of Revelation: “to my mind it bears upon it no marks of an apostolic or prophetic character... Everyone may form his own judgment of this book; as for myself, I feel an aversion to it, and to me this is sufficient reason for rejecting it.” (Sammtliche Werke, 63, pp. 169-170, ‘The Facts About Luther,’ O’Hare, TAN Books, 1987, p. 203.)
And finally, he admitted adding the word ‘alone’ to Rom. 3:28 of his own volition: “If your Papist annoys you with the word (’alone’), tell him straightway, Dr. Martin Luther will have it so: Papist and ass are one and the same thing. Whoever will not have my translation, let him give it the go-by: the devil’s thanks to him who censures it without my will and knowledge. Luther will have it so, and he is a doctor above all the doctors in Popedom.” (Amic. Discussion, 1, 127,’The Facts About Luther,’ O’Hare, TAN Books, 1987, p. 201.)
“Jews are young devils damned to hell.” (’Luther’s Works,’ Pelikan, Vol. XX, pp. 2230.)
The "Apocrypha": Why It's Part of the Bible
How to Read the Bible – A Three Step Plan (written for Catholics - valid for all)
Where Does the Bible Say We Should Pray to Dead Saints?
The Canon of Scripture [Ecumenical]
To understand Bible, one must understand its nature, pope says
Let the Bible be “entrusted” to the faithful
But Seriously — Who Holds the Bible’s Copyright?
Ignorance of Scripture is Ignorance of Christ
Apostolic Authority and the Selection of the Gospels (Ecumenical)
The Bible - 73 or 66 Books? (Ecumenical Thread)
How Rediscovering the “Plot” of Sacred Scripture is Essential to Evangelization
The Word of God is a Person Not Merely a Text
Are Catholics into the Bible?
Are the Gospels Historical?
What is Biblical Prophecy? What Biblical Prophecy is NOT, and What It Really IS
Biblical Illiteracy and Bible Babel
The Pilgrims' Regress - The Geneva Bible And The "Apocrypha"
The "Inconvenient Tale" of the Original King James Bible
The Bible - an absolutely amazing book
Christian Scriptures, Jewish Commentary
Essays for Lent: The Canon of Scripture
Essays for Lent: The Bible
1500 year-old ‘ Syriac ‘ Bible found in Ankara, Turkey
How we should read the Bible
St. Jerome and the Vulgate (completing the FIRST Bible in the year 404) [Catholic Caucus]
In Bible Times
Deuterocanonical References in the New Testament
Translations Before the King James: - The KJV Translators Speak!
EWTN Live - March 23 - A Journey Through the Bible
"Our Father's Plan" - EWTN series with Dr. Scott Hahn and Jeff Cavins on the Bible timeline
The Daunting Journey From Faith to Faith [Anglicanism to Catholicism]
Reflections on the Soon to Be Released New American Bible (Revised Edition)[Catholic Caucus]
New American Bible changes some words such as "holocaust"
Is the Bible the Only Revelation from God? (Catholic / Orthodox Caucus)
History of the Bible (caution: long)
Catholic and Protestant Bibles
THE CATHOLIC CHURCH: ON READING THE BIBLE [Catholic Caucus]
Because I Love the Bible
Where Is That Taught in the Bible?
When Was the Bible Really Written?
Three Reasons for Teaching the Bible [St. Thomas Aquinas]
The Smiting Is Still Implied (God of the OT vs the NT)
Where Is That Taught in the Bible?
Friday Fast Fact: The Bible in English
Bible Reading is Central in Conversions to Catholicism in Shangai, Reports Organization
Verses (in Scripture) I Never Saw
5 Myths about 7 Books
Lectionary Statistics - How much of the Bible is included in the Lectionary for Mass? (Popquiz!)
Pope calls Catholics to daily meditation on the Bible
What Are the "Apocrypha?"
The Accuracy of Scripture
US Conference of Catholic Bishops recommendations for Bible study
CNA unveils resource to help Catholics understand the Scriptures
The Dos and Don’ts of Reading the Bible [Ecumenical]
Pope to lead marathon Bible reading on Italian TV
The Complete Bible: Why Catholics Have Seven More Books [Ecumenical]
Beginning Catholic: Books of the Catholic Bible: The Complete Scriptures [Ecumenical]
Beginning Catholic: When Was The Bible Written? [Ecumenical]
The Complete Bible: Why Catholics Have Seven More Books [Ecumenical]
U.S. among most Bible-literate nations: poll
Bible Lovers Not Defined by Denomination, Politics
Dei Verbum (Catholics and the Bible)
Vatican Offers Rich Online Source of Bible Commentary
Clergy Congregation Takes Bible Online
Knowing Mary Through the Bible: Mary's Last Words
A Bible Teaser For You... (for everyone :-)
Knowing Mary Through the Bible: New Wine, New Eve
Return of Devil's Bible to Prague draws crowds
Doctrinal Concordance of the Bible [What Catholics Believe from the Bible] Catholic Caucus
Should We Take the Bible Literally or Figuratively?
Glimpsing Words, Practices, or Beliefs Unique to Catholicism [Bible Trivia]
Catholic and Protestant Bibles: What is the Difference?
Church and the Bible(Caatholic Caucus)
Pope Urges Prayerful Reading of Bible
Catholic Caucus: It's the Church's Bible
How Tradition Gave Us the Bible
The Church or the Bible
I understand the Orthodox Churches have as many as Catholics and more, but many do the Eastern Catholic Rites use? How many old testament books do the the LDS, Jehovah Witnesses and Seventh Day Adventists use?
Freegards