Catholic position weak regarding apocryphal books

  • Thread starter Thread starter callofduty
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sorry Mr. Lamb, but there is no credible evidence that I have been able to find that can prove that the so called Council at Jamnia took place. I think there is ample evidence that a school existed in Jamnia that was akin to a law school. However, there is, at best, scant evidence that this school was in anyway engaged in “deciding” what books should be included in an official Jewish Canon. I found literally hundreds of references to this so called Council, but none provided any sort of actual evidence that the Council took place. I’m afraid that I came around to the viewpoint that it’s little more than an internet hoax. A falsehood that has been repeated so many times that it becomes a sort of urban myth.

Interestingly though, the vast majority of references came from protestant sources that used it to undermine the Catholic Canon. However, I found this argument to also be weak. If we stipulate that the Council did take place, we are left with at least two vexing problems. First, it seems that the Jewish world continued to use varying “Canons” for hundreds of years after Jamnia supposedly took place. So, it would appear that even if it had happened, the Jewish world did not seem to recognize it as in any way authoritative. Why should we then give it any weight?

Second, the supposed Council was convened to deal with the burgeoning Christian movement. They wanted to institute a Canon that would undermine the Christian interpretation which supported Jesus as Savior. This is the most commonly attributed motivation, if the various internet memes are to be believed. So, as the story goes, they decided on a Canon that specifically struck out the books that tended to support Jesus as Savior or Christ. It seems contrary to Christian belief that we should accept the mandate, whether real or not, of a Council whose sole goal was to undermine Christianity. Shouldn’t we instead condemn it as a false teaching?

I would welcome any evidence that the Council took place. I spent days rummaging through sources that made reference to Jamnia. In almost every case, they referenced it as a fact, but never did I find a source that offered any sort of hard evidence, beyond Josephus’ account. In fact, I found a piece that took me days to read, from a protestant scholar, that basically blew up the whole thing. I studied Politics and history in College, so I am generally persuaded by historical evidence. His argument for a school existing at Jamnia was very persuasive. He also found no evidence that the school was actually engaged in deciding a Canon and totally found that the rumor of a Council in the First century to be without any support. I trust God. All others should offer evidence.

:o Sorry mate. All the best and God Bless.
The Council of Jamnia is one of the major canards perpetrated here at CAF; there have been numerous threads on the topic, but the idea seemingly just won’t die. Some people want very, very badly for the story to be true, so I guess that desire makes it so for them.
 
my pastor believes the apocryphal books were “added” at the council of Trent)
I at least have found out that is misleading.
Trent reaffirmed the OT books that are in Catholic bibles as being inspired in reaction to Luther rejecting them. The first Christian Bible had them, and they were in every Catholic/Christian Bible that came before Protestantism.
 
The Council of Jamnia is one of the major canards perpetrated here at CAF; there have been numerous threads on the topic, but the idea seemingly just won’t die. Some people want very, very badly for the story to be true, so I guess that desire makes it so for them.
Do you find that the same people repeat the story after being corrected, or is it that new people show up to perpetuate the claim out of ignorance?

Usagi
 
Do you find that the same people repeat the story after being corrected, or is it that new people show up to perpetuate the claim out of ignorance?

Usagi
I think it’s a mixture of both. It would be nice if people would explain where they are getting this particular information (cite their sources), then the problematic sources themselves could be addressed.
 
I think it’s a mixture of both. It would be nice if people would explain where they are getting this particular information (cite their sources), then the problematic sources themselves could be addressed.
Indeed. I had read the various threads and over and over again read about the mythical Council. It wasn’t until I decided to look in to it myself that I discovered the truth, as I see it, about the Council.

Again, I would welcome any reliable historical evidence that supports the position that the Council took place. I have repeatedly asked for such evidence and none has been forthcoming. I don’t mean to set myself up as someone who needs to be responded to, but I do find the silence deafening. Mr. Noonan, to what extent do you think that trolls may be responsible for continuing to perpetrate the fraud? It seems to me that these posts are not really followed up on by the original posters. Just a hunch.
 
"The Greek-speaking Jews never treated the apocryphal books as divinely inspired Scripture. Even though some apocryphal books were included in the Septuagint, they were never considered God-breathed Scripture. It is well documented that Jews didn’t consider the apocryphal books to be authored by God. Josephus, a venerated Jewish historian, specifically stated that the apocryphal books weren’t from God in his writing Against Apion.

Answer: Where is the exact location in this writing?

The Manual of Discipline in the Dead Sea Scrolls stated that the Apocrypha wasn’t inspired.

To further prove the point, the Apocrypha itself says that it isn’t Scripture! The apocryphal book, 2 Maccabees, specifically says that it isn’t inspired by God in 15:38-39, and the author apologizes for any inaccurate information he might have provided.

Answer: The Haydock Commentary refers to 2 Cor 11:6 where Paul speaks of his style and manner of writing and that’s what is referred to in the verses in Maccabees, not the truth of the content. The interesting thing about the Baptist pastor saying this is that none of the books in the bible say they are inspired or part of the canon of scripture. Ask him how he knows a book in the bible is inspired?

Though the apocryphal books are unique historical accounts, they are never quoted in the New Testament,

Answer: Yes they are! scripturecatholic.com/deuterocanon.html

and they were never accepted by the church or the Jewish community as divinely inspired text. That is exactly why it isn’t necessary that they be included in modern translations of the Bible – they aren’t Bible, just secular history."

Answer: The protestants go by the Palestinian Canon. The Palestinian Jews were the ones who rejected Christ! We use the Alexandrian Canon.
 
callofduty;7680741:
"The Greek-speaking Jews never treated the apocryphal books as divinely inspired Scripture. Even though some apocryphal books were included in the Septuagint, they were never considered God-breathed Scripture. It is well documented that Jews didn’t consider the apocryphal books to be authored by God. Josephus, a venerated Jewish historian, specifically stated that the apocryphal books weren’t from God in his writing Against Apion.

Answer: Where is the exact location in this writing?

The Manual of Discipline in the Dead Sea Scrolls stated that the Apocrypha wasn’t inspired.

To further prove the point, the Apocrypha itself says that it isn’t Scripture! The apocryphal book, 2 Maccabees, specifically says that it isn’t inspired by God in 15:38-39, and the author apologizes for any inaccurate information he might have provided.

Answer: The Haydock Commentary refers to 2 Cor 11:6 where Paul speaks of his style and manner of writing and that’s what is referred to in the verses in Maccabees, not the truth of the content. The interesting thing about the Baptist pastor saying this is that none of the books in the bible say they are inspired or part of the canon of scripture. Ask him how he knows a book in the bible is inspired?

Though the apocryphal books are unique historical accounts, they are never quoted in the New Testament,

Answer: Yes they are! scripturecatholic.com/deuterocanon.html
and they were never accepted by the church or the Jewish community as divinely inspired text. That is exactly why it isn’t necessary that they be included in modern translations of the Bible – they aren’t Bible, just secular history."

Answer: The protestants go by the Palestinian Canon. The Palestinian Jews were the ones who rejected Christ! We use the Alexandrian Canon.

I can’t speak to the validity of this argument in terms of the historical accuracy of your assertions. I’ll look in to it when I have some time, but for now I’ll take you at your word in the interest of charity. However, it still remains that the Catholic Church has always included those books and considers them to be Scripture. The determinations of the Jewish world not with standing. Why should we be bound by their proclamations? Should they be bound by our determinations as to what should or should not be in the Canon? Roma locuta est. Causa finita est. God Bless.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top