Apocrypha

[mr_natural]

I am looking for the reason that the Jews removed these books from their Bible. I have used Maccabees as a defense for the existance of Purgatory but since my fallen away friend doesn’t accept Mcc I need addtiional data to protect my defense. Any suggestions?

 

[Dan_Parker]

I am looking for the reason that the Jews removed these books from their Bible. I have used Maccabees as a defense for the existance of Purgatory but since my fallen away friend doesn’t accept Mcc I need addtiional data to protect my defense. Any suggestions?

Actually read what Jerome said about the apocryphal writings. he was writing to Laeta, a friend of his and giving advice as to how she should be educated:
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.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

I have heard that conversion to Christianity was especially prevalent among the Greek speaking Jews. Also, the Temple had been suppressed and the Jews exiled. They became quite xenophobic and rejected all that was not in Hebrew. Note that the Jews include the whole New Testament in this category.

Note that Apocrypha refers to two sets of writings: those accepted by the Catholics but not others, which we refer to as the Deuterocanonical, and the true Apocrypha. e.g. the Gospel of James, which no one accepts today. The latter includes both some valid histories which were judged non-inspired, and others which were cooked up later to justify certain heresies.

Note also that the Deuterocanonicals contain some of the best prophecies of the Messiah. For example: Wisdom 2:12-20

12 “Let us lie in wait for the righteous man, because he is inconvenient to us and opposes our actions; he reproaches us for sins against the law, and accuses us of sins against our training. 13 He professes to have knowledge of God, and calls himself a child* of the Lord. 14 He became to us a reproof of our thoughts; 15 the very sight of him is a burden to us, because his manner of life is unlike that of others, and his ways are strange. 16 We are considered by him as something base, and he avoids our ways as unclean; he calls the last end of the righteous happy, and boasts that God is his father. 17 Let us see if his words are true, and let us test what will happen at the end of his life; 18 for if the righteous man is God’s son, he will help him, and will deliver him from the hand of his adversaries. 19 Let us test him with insult and torture, that we may find out how gentle he is, and make trial of his forbearance. 20 Let us condemn him to a shameful death, for, according to what he says, he will be protected.”

One can see why the Jews rejected it; it is more difficult to see why Christians would reject it.

 

[Cachonga]

mr_natural:

I am looking for the reason that the Jews removed these books from their Bible. I have used Maccabees as a defense for the existance of Purgatory but since my fallen away friend doesn’t accept Mcc I need addtiional data to protect my defense. Any suggestions?

Actually, the Jews never included them in their Scriptures, so how could they take them out? In regard to using 2 Macc to defend Purgatory, this doesn’t work anyway. If you read the reference carefully, you’ll find that the men who were killed were killed by God because of their idolatry (isn’t that a “mortal sin”?). The sin offering was a nice gesture, but there is no indication that it had any real value to those who they were made for.

 

[NotWorthy]

Actually, the Jews never included them in their Scriptures, so how could they take them out?

This isn’t 100% accurate, as the Jews didn’t have a fixed Canon at the time. The Deutero’s were included in the Septuagint, but so were about 4 other books that are not in the Catholic Bible. During Jesus’ time, the Sadducees only recognized 5 books (the Torah, which consists of the first 5 books). The Pharisees basically used the Septuagint.

In regard to using 2 Macc to defend Purgatory, this doesn’t work anyway. If you read the reference carefully, you’ll find that the men who were killed were killed by God because of their idolatry (isn’t that a “mortal sin”?). The sin offering was a nice gesture, but there is no indication that it had any real value to those who they were made for.

I don’t think 2nd Maccabees intends to teach us that Judas Maccabeus’ prayers were fruitful (we don’t know whether they were or not), but that it was a commonly held belief in this era that the Jews prayed for the souls of the dead.

 

[NotWorthy]

Actually read what Jerome said about the apocryphal writings. he was writing to Laeta, a friend of his and giving advice as to how she should be educated: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.

So, what was Jerome calling “apocryphal writings”. Your words imply that he thought Maccabees (I and II) were apochryphal. I don’t think St. Jerome ever felt that. I think he was talking of The Gospel of Thomas and such like that.

 

[LanD]

So, what was Jerome calling “apocryphal writings”. Your words imply that he thought Maccabees (I and II) were apochryphal. I don’t think St. Jerome ever felt that. I think he was talking of The Gospel of Thomas and such like that.

I agree. If St. Jerome was really against books like those which we have in our Catholic Bibles, he probably wouldn’t have put them in his Vulgate. Besides, a lot of people back then had different views on what the canon should be. I trust the church and her councils.

 

[NotWorthy]

I agree. If St. Jerome was really against books like those which we have in our Catholic Bibles, he probably wouldn’t have put them in his Vulgate. Besides, a lot of people back then had different views on what the canon should be. I trust the church and her councils.

St. Jerome didn’t feel that the Deutero’s were inspired, but neither did he consider them apocryphal. He simply thought they were useful.

But that’s irrelevant, because when its all boiled down into basics, St. Jerome’s primary role in the composing of the Vulgate was simply to translate the Catholic Canon from Greek into Latin. His role was NOT to determine what books comprised that Canon.

 

[Dan_Parker]

So, what was Jerome calling “apocryphal writings”. Your words imply that he thought Maccabees (I and II) were apochryphal. I don’t think St. Jerome ever felt that. I think he was talking of The Gospel of Thomas and such like that.

Jerome in his preface to The Books of Samuel and Kings lists the 22 books he considers to be inspired and the rest are considered apocrypha. The 22 books have some combined and they refer to the 39 books we have today. You can read this list of those 22 in the link I have provided. He lists some apocrypha after identifying those 22 with these words:

And so there are also twenty-two books of the Old Testament; that is, five of Moses, eight of the prophets, nine of the Hagiographa, though some include Ruth and Kinoth (Lamentations) amongst the Hagiographa, and think that these books ought to be reckoned separately; we should thus have twenty-four books of the old law. And these the Apocalypse of John represents by the twenty-four elders, who adore the Lamb, and with downcast looks offer their crowns, while in their presence stand the four living creatures with eyes before and behind, that is, looking to the past and the future, and with unwearied voice crying, Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord God Almighty, who wast, and art, and art to come.

This preface to the Scriptures may serve as a “helmeted” introduction to all the books which we turn from Hebrew into Latin, so that we may be assured that what is not found in our list must be placed amongst the Apocryphal writings. Wisdom, therefore, which generally bears the name of Solomon, and the book of Jesus, the Son of Sirach, and Judith, and Tobias, and the Shepherd are not in the canon. The first book of Maccabees I have found to be Hebrew, the second is Greek, as can be proved from the very style. Seeing that all this is so, I beseech you, my reader, not to think that my labours are in any sense intended to disparage the old translators.

From the text that precedes this you can see that these Apocryphal including Maccabees is not in the 22 he lists.

 

[Dan_Parker]

St. Jerome didn’t feel that the Deutero’s were inspired, but neither did he consider them apocryphal. He simply thought they were useful.

But that’s irrelevant, because when its all boiled down into basics, St. Jerome’s primary role in the composing of the Vulgate was simply to translate the Catholic Canon from Greek into Latin. His role was NOT to determine what books comprised that Canon.

Jerome coined the term apocrypha and included the Deutero’s in that description.

 

[peregrinus_sg]

Actually, the Jews never included them in their Scriptures, so how could they take them out?

As NotWorthy has mentioned, there was neither a fixed nor single canon among the Jews. Among Palestinian Jews, the Sadducees, the Pharisees and the Jews of the Qumran community had different canons of Scripture, while the Jews of the Diaspora may have their own canon(s). It is very likely that the deuterocanonical books were accepted by some of the Jews, but certainly not all.

In regard to using 2 Macc to defend Purgatory, this doesn’t work anyway. If you read the reference carefully, you’ll find that the men who were killed were killed by God because of their idolatry (isn’t that a “mortal sin”?). The sin offering was a nice gesture, but there is no indication that it had any real value to those who they were made for.

Whether a person died in a state of mortal sin is not for any other human being, including Judas Maccabeus or the human author of the scriptural book, to judge. Just like Judas Maccabeus and the author of 2 Maccabees, the Catholic Church entrusts everybody to God’s mercy, and prays for all her deceased children, whether they’re living saints like Mother Teresa, or those whose lives left much to be desired such as Ted Kennedy, because we know that God wants us to pray for those who have fallen asleep. How God answers our prayers, we leave in his loving hands.

 

[Brian2589]

Praying for the dead is a practice of the jews that they do even up to present day.

 

[quasimodo]

There is no authoritative Jewish canon because there is no authority to set a canon. Today’s widely accepted Jewish canon was set by the only group of respected scholars left standing after the destruction of the temple. Before that there were as many canons are there were sects (read: a lot).

 

[NotWorthy]

There is no authoritative Jewish canon because there is no authority to set a canon. Today’s widely accepted Jewish canon was set by the only group of respected scholars left standing after the destruction of the temple. Before that there were as many canons are there were sects (read: a lot).

If you are referring to the Council of Jamnia, then you are not entirely correct. The Council of Jamnia did not set a Canon, they simply rejected various books.

The Jewish Canon was not fixed until somewhere around the 14th century.

 

[Baloo]

I remember learning that one of the reasons there was the whole debate over the Deuterocanonical books were that they weren’t found written in Hebrew (until the Dead Sea Scrolls were found) and that was the reason they were labeled apocryphal by non-Catholic denominations and why there was the whole debate about them being accepted or not.

There is a lot of things found in the Deuterocanonical books not found anywhere else, such as the angel Raphael.

What I find odd about the Jews not including these is how some of their traditions are found in the Deuterocanonical books, such as Hanukkah being found only in Maccabees.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

There is no authoritative Jewish canon because there is no authority to set a canon. Today’s widely accepted Jewish canon was set by the only group of respected scholars left standing after the destruction of the temple. Before that there were as many canons are there were sects (read: a lot).

Note that, until the destruction of the Temple, the Temple sacrifices were the center of the Jewish religion. With the loss of the Temple sacrifice was no longer possible, and it was necessary to recenter the religion on the study of Scripture in the Synagogue. This then needed a codification of Scriptures.

This would seem to be the same issue with the Protestants. With the rejection of the sacraments, there was no ritual sacrifice. So it was necessary to center worship on the Scriptures.

 

[thequeen]

Apocrypha is a protestant term the correct way torefer to the extra books found in the Catholic Bible is the deuterocanical books I do not know if I spelled the right so please forgive me if I didnt

 

[NotWorthy]

Apocrypha is a protestant term the correct way torefer to the extra books found in the Catholic Bible is the deuterocanical books I do not know if I spelled the right so please forgive me if I didnt

I don’t think that’s entirely accurate. Apocrypha, as you mentioned, is a term incorrectly applied to the Deuterocanonicals. But apocryphal books do not necessarily mean “spurious”, which is what I think our Protestant brothers seem to indicate.

For instance, The Proto-Evangelium of James is apocryphal, but not false (or spurious). The Shepherd of Hermas is apocryphal, but not false.

 

[dsulpizio]

Calling the Dueterocanonicals the ‘apocrypha’ plays into the hands of protestants…use the correct term instead.

 

[Jason_1977]

Actually, the Jews never included them in their Scriptures, so how could they take them out? In regard to using 2 Macc to defend Purgatory, this doesn’t work anyway. If you read the reference carefully, you’ll find that the men who were killed were killed by God because of their idolatry (isn’t that a “mortal sin”?). The sin offering was a nice gesture, but there is no indication that it had any real value to those who they were made for.

but the purpose of the praying for the dead was what mattered. making atonement for their sins on their behalf.