An explanation of the Deuterocanonical, "Apocrypha " books

  • Thread starter Thread starter Theprodigalson84j
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

Theprodigalson84j

Guest
I’ve noticed in some posts people have had questions about the numbering of the deuterocanonical books. Why in contemporary Protestantism there is 15 apocryphal texts in some versions of their Bibles. But only 7 in the Catholic Bible. Here is why.
The Catholic Bible has seven additional books:
  1. Tobit
  2. Judith
  3. Sirach
  4. Wisdom
  5. Baruch
  6. 1 Maccabees
  7. 2 Maccabees
The reason there are more in the contemporary Protestant view is because certain additional texts are incorporated as additions to these books. So for the book of Daniel,
8. Prayer of Azariah and Song of the three Jews is in between the Hebrew Daniel 3:23-24. It is verses 3:24- 91 in Catholic Bibles.
9) Susanna is chapter 13 of Daniel.
10) Bel and the Dragon is chapter 14 of Daniel
11) Esther has additional chapters found in the Greek but not Hebrew and are considered " additions" separately in Protestant apocrypha.
12. Letter of Jeremiah is chapter 6 of Baruch.
13- 15 These texts are not canon in the Catholic Church however they have been put in an appendix to the Latin Vulgate since the Council of Trent and although they historically were in the Vulgate as “profitable to read”, were never considered canon by the Catholic Church. These are:
13. Prayer of Manessah
14. 1 Esdras( 3 Esdras in Vulgate)
15. 2 Esdras( 4 Esdras in Vulgate)
The reason for the discrepancy in numbering is because in the Vulgate, Ezra and Nehemiah are 1 and 2 Esdras. In early English Bibles the translators made the somewhat ridiculous choice to in that case call what are 3 and 4 Esdras in the Vulgate as 1 and 2 Esdras in modern English Bibles.

It gets even more confusing that Othodox even number them differently.
With that said the Orthodox also accept 3 and 4 Maccabees and Psalm 151 in their Bibles.

God bless and if anyone has anymore to ask regarding this just ask! The biblical canon is something that I study a lot!
 
Last edited:
Theprodigalson84j said:
I’ve noticed in some posts people have had questions about the numbering of the deuterocanonical books. Why in contemporary Protestantism there is 15 apocryphal texts in some versions of their Bibles. But only 7 in the Catholic Bible. Here is why.
The Catholic Bible has seven additional books:
  1. Tobit
  2. Judith
  3. Sirach
  4. Wisdom
  5. Baruch
  6. 1 Maccabees
  7. 2 Maccabees
The reason there are more in the contemporary Protestant view is because certain additional texts are incorporated as additions to these books. So for the book of Daniel,
8. Prayer of Azariah and Song of the three Jews is in between the Hebrew Daniel 3:23-24. It is verses 3:24- 91 in Catholic Bibles.
9) Susanna is chapter 13 of Daniel.
10) Bel and the Dragon is chapter 14 of Daniel
11) Esther has additional chapters found in the Greek but not Hebrew and are considered " additions" separately in Protestant apocrypha.
12. Letter of Jeremiah is chapter 6 of Baruch.
13- 15 These texts are not canon in the Catholic Church however they have been put in an appendix to the Latin Vulgate since the Council of Trent and although they historically were in the Vulgate as “profitable to read”, were never considered canon by the Catholic Church. These are:
13. Prayer of Manessah
14. 1 Esdras( 3 Esdras in Vulgate)
15. 2 Esdras( 4 Esdras in Vulgate)
The reason for the discrepancy in numbering is because in the Vulgate, Ezra and Nehemiah are 1 and 2 Esdras. In early English Bibles the translators made the somewhat ridiculous choice to in that case call what are 3 and 4 Esdras in the Vulgate as 1 and 2 Esdras in modern English Bibles.

It gets even more confusing that Othodox even number them differently.
With that said the Orthodox also accept 3 and 4 Maccabees and Psalm 151 in their Bibles.

God bless and if anyone has anymore to ask regarding this just ask! The biblical canon is something that I study a lot!
Click to expand...
  1. can you list the Protestant bible translations that you are referring to?
  2. What commentaries have you been accessing for this explanation
Thanks in advance
 
From the NRSV w the deuterocanonical books table of contents for starters.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
Last edited:
This is a recurring topic here at CAF. You may find it interesting to take at look at some of the other threads dealing with the same subject, such as this one, which ran a few months ago:
40.png
Which Catholic bible includes the most complete Apocrypha (14 books)? Sacred Scripture
Hi Everyone, As a non English speaker (ESL), I need your help to know which Catholic Bible is the most comprehensive for personal or group bible study ? Based on my findings and observation in some of the Christian bookshops, I like the layout, concordance, cross-references, foot notes, charts and the maps like in the below bible edition: NKJV Study Bible, Hardcover, Full-Color Edition by Thomas Nelson hxxps://www.amazon.com/NKJV-Study-Bible-Hardcover-Full-Color/dp/0529114380 NIV, Chr…
Click to expand...
 
It is. And even looking at that I think some people are confused when it comes to 1 and 2 Esdras and the Prayer of Manessah, or in the Vulgate, 3 and 4 Esdras and the Prayer of Manesses is how they are written. They were traditionally in the Latin Vulgate. 3 and 4 Esdras followed 1 and 2 Esdras( Ezra and Nehemiah) and the Prayer of Manessah followed 2 Chronicles. They were placed there as useful to read however none of the canon lists have them. Prior to the Council of Trent the Protestant revolutionaries put all of the books which Jerome separated from the Hebrew Bible and put them in a section in between the Old and New Testament. Usually how it goes today. As for the three texts in question they are in the Clementine Vulgate appendix and were in the original Douay Rheims Bible appendix however following 1752 were not any longer and is why really only those who know the Vulgate would be aware of this.
After the NT, there’s an appendix with the Prayer of Manasseh and 3–4 Ezra. And there’s a preface to the Appendix:
Oratio Manassa, necnon Libri duo, qui sub libri Tertii & Quarti Esdrae nomine circumferuntur, hoc in loco, extra scilicet seriem canonicorum Librorum, quos sancta Tridentina Synodus suscepit, & pro Canonicis suscipiendos decreuit, sepositi sunt, ne prorsus interirent, quippe qui a nonnullis sanctis Patribus interdum citantur, & in aliquibus Bibliis Latinis tam manuscriptis quam impressis reperiuntur.
Click to expand...
The Prayer of Manasseh, as well as two books, which circulate under the name of the Third and Fourth Book of Ezra, are set aside in this place—that is, outside the series of canonical books, which the holy Tridentine Synod accepted, and determined should be taken up for canonical—lest they should perish completely, since they are sometimes cited by some of the holy Fathers, and they are found in some Latin books, both manuscript and printed.
As this note suggests, it was the decree on the biblical canon by the Council of Trent (1546) that created the situation in which it made some sense to print the Vulgate with an appendix containing non-canonical books. For it was only at Trent that the biblical canon was definitively settled. Thenceforth, editions of the Vulgate for a Roman Catholic readership would need to conform to the canon approved by Trent, and so it would no longer be appropriate to print the Prayer of Manasseh and 3–4 Ezra among the other biblical books, as the Gutenberg Bible had done, for instance. An edition of the Vulgate could completely omit any non-canonical works, as the Sistine edition had done, but the editors of the Sixto-Clementine edition were concerned that these venerable though non-canonical books might no longer be available, even though previous generations of Christian authors had sometimes referred to them.
Click to expand...
Thus was born the Vulgate appendix.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top