Some online version, with notes as to alleged "quotations" from OT Apocrypha?
I did notice that the other gave no source for the list of "favorites". Leaving you having to do things the hard way.
In the past I've seen a few different lists purporting to be NT use of Apocrypha, with the one at "scripture-catholic" among the worst. As bad as that was --- it was reorganized to make it even more difficult to dig out what was actually being said, with the claim itself reliant upon the commentary.
If one doesn't go to all the effort to dig out each verse of Apocrypha, then compare them to claim, then I can see how in the realm of RC apologetic, with those claims being oft repeated (but not examined with critical eye as to test for whether or not they can be falsified) would lead many to believe those sort of claims were true. But they're not.
In the past, I was able to dismiss one or two listed at scripture-catholic, from off the top of my head (and my head isn't one that could be much bragged about) and then found another quite by accident, while hip-deep in searching through and comparing OT text, in way of examination towards wider "thematic" context, on issues unrelated to Apocrypha/NT claims.
There are golden threads as it were, running through the texts from the very beginnings. Those themes are interwoven into strong cordage, making spurious deviations from those themes stand out like broken filaments of a line or wire rope which snag badly on the hands if not oh-so-carefully handled.
What's really a pain, is when as you have pointed out with some of those passages, that the information, even almost word-for-word be found elsewhere than Apocrypha, is still stubbornly attributed to being sourced from Apocrypha, when it was itself nothing new, but found there in those works do to those writers having accessed or touched upon some previous theme -- but quite often mangling it with enough change of context and usage there (in Apocryphal works) to be disjointed compared to original OT use, and then later theological application as can be discerned in NT.
But to explain those "spurs" and broken strands, takes many words, leaving efforts to thoroughly debunk the listings be as a giant rabbit warren-maze sort of affair, which at times is defended by snakes which hiss & bite. So my thanks and admiration to you for your efforts. I could see that it was no cut-and-paste job. I would that some treatments along those lines be more readily available -- but do NOT feel yourself obligated. Let the Spirit be your guide --
Rabbit holes (and gopher holes) are fine for rodents, I guess, but otherwise I despise them. It's too bad a guy couldn't just give it the Carl Spackler treatment, and call it a day.
