Apocryphal Septuagint books

[Miguel2]

Why didn’t the Church accept all the Septuagint books? What criteria did the Church use to define some of them as apocryphal?

 

[adamhovey1988]

I don’t know enough about it to know

 

[tuffsmurf]

I don’t know exactly how the Church decided the bible canon, but there are apocryphical books that are not part of the bible but still part of sacred tradition. The Prayer of Manasseh comes to mind, a very beautiful prayer for forgiveness by the Judean king Manasseh who fell away but repented.

 

[BartholomewB]

You could try approaching the question from the other end, moving from the specific to the general. Why was 3 Maccabees rejected? Why was 4 Maccabees rejected? Why were the Psalms of Solomon rejected? And so on, until a pattern begins to emerge.

 

[bob4]

Why didn’t the Church accept all the Septuagint books? What criteria did the Church use to define some of them as apocryphal?

Why Are 3 and 4 Maccabees Not in the Bible? | Catholic Answers Q&A

Some info by Tom Nash

 

[po18guy]

As I understand it, provenance and moral/doctrinal error were the basic standards.

 

[Bithynian]

What criteria did the Church use to define some of them as apocryphal?

Most answers regarding “for what reason was X book rejected” will necessarily be somewhat vague and approximate as there isn’t a large body of documentary evidence outlining the decision making of the early Church.

To a large extent, the canonical status was generally determined by (1) apostolic authorship; (2) congruity of teachings; and (3) existing liturgical use of the text.