Catholic position weak regarding apocryphal books

[callofduty]

I’d be interested in his source for this claim, especially considering the fact that the DSS included at least 3 of the 7 deuterocanonical books, written in Hebrew and Aramaic.

You know, just a few hours ago the arguments given to me about the weakness of the apocryphal books seemed very convincing to me.

I just looked up the Manual of discipline online.

Originally known as The Manual of Discipline, the Community Rule contains a set of regulations ordering the life of the members of the “yahad,” the group within the Judean Desert sect who chose to live communally and whose members accepted strict rules of conduct.

Here is the entire translation;

And according to his insight he shall admit him. In this way both his love and his hatred. No man shall argue or quarrel with the men of perdition. He shall keep his council in secrecy in the midst of the men of deceit and admonish with knowledge, truth and righteous commandment those of chosen conduct, each according to his spiritual quality and according to the norm of time. He shall guide them with knowledge and instruct them in the mysteries of wonder and truth in the midst of the members of the community, so that they shall behave decently with one another in all that has been revealed to them. That is the time for studying the Torah (lit. clearing the way) in the wilderness. He shall instruct them to do all that is required at that time, and to separate from all those who have not turned aside from all deceit.

These are the norms of conduct for the Master in those times with respect to his loving and to his everlasting hating of the men of perdition in a spirit of secrecy. He shall leave to them property and wealth and earnings like a slave to his lord, (showing) humility before the one who rules over him. He shall be zealous concerning the Law and be prepared for the Day of Revenge.

He shall perform the will [of God] in all his deeds and in all strength as He has commanded. He shall freely delight in all that befalls him, and shall desire nothing except God’s will…

Transcription and translation by E. Qimron

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

There is nothing in here about the apocryphal books, just a blurb about the Torah.

Now I’m really confused.

 

[William_Pitts]

Hey Guy’s,

I have always wondered why the Catholic Church and Orthodox Church had extra OT books. Recently I was looking at an original 1611 King James and original Geneva Bible and discovered they also contained these apocryphal books (although in a seperate section) I found out it had to do with the Greek Septuagint version of the OT.

I asked a pastor via e-mail about this question and he responded that the Catholic position was a bit weak regarding this issue.

He responded;

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

I am no theologian and my attempts to research the question just left me more confused.

I figured it would be worth a try to get the information from Catholics, instead of biased sources. (my pastor believes the apocryphal books were “added” at the council of Trent)
I at least have found out that is misleading.

So, is the Catholic position weak on this ??

There is an interesting passage in the Book of Wisdom:

Wis 2:12-22 ‘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. He professes to have knowledge of God, and calls himself a child of the Lord. He became to us a reproof of our thoughts; 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.
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. Let us see if his words are true, and let us test what will happen at the end of his life; for if the righteous man is God’s child, he will help him, and will deliver him from the hand of his adversaries.
Let us test him with insult and torture, so that we may find out how gentle he is, and make trial of his forbearance. Let us condemn him to a shameful death, for, according to what he says, he will be protected.’
Thus they reasoned, but they were led astray, for their wickedness blinded them,
and they did not know the secret purposes of God, nor hoped for the wages of holiness, nor discerned the prize for blameless souls;

This sounds like a Messianic prophecy to me.

Another interesting passage:

Sir 24:21 **Those who eat of me will hunger for more, and those who drink of me will thirst for more. **

But Jesus promised to fill that hunger and thirst. I seem to recall something Jesus said that sounds like this.

Joh 6:35 Jesus said to them, 'I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never be hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty.

Have you really read the rejected books? These are only 2 of the many passages that testify of Jesus in the coming New Testament.

Some of the Jews accept the DC books as scripture. I believe the Ethiopian Jews do.

You also said DC books are never quoted in the NT. Check this out:

scripturecatholic.com/deuterocanon.html

I appreciate the way you asked your question. I believe you are really searching for answers. Remember the CC has been asked almost any question imaginable. So don’t be shy.

God bless you and keep you.

 

[jlmagee]

CallofDuty,

I understand your confusion. I have taken Bible classes at two evangelical universities including a major baptist university where I am majoring in religion and have come to this understanding.

While the seven books are not considered inspired by most evangelical groups, they have great value for all Christians. Hanukkah was celebrated by Jesus. I think that alone should give evidence for at least 1 Maccabees to be included in the canon.There are other books that were definitely excluded from the canon such as the Sheperd of Hermas that the early church fathers said were beneficial.

I have included them in my reading on a yearly basis. Inspired or not, I think they are valuable in giving understanding. They inspire me more than reading Max Lucado.

 

[Barbkw]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luther’s_canon

Luther’s Canon

Luther made an attempt to remove the books of Hebrews, James, Jude and Revelation from the canon (echoing the opinions of several Catholics, also labeled Christian Humanists — such as Cardinal Ximenez, Cardinal Cajetan, and Erasmus[4] — and partially because they were perceived to go against certain Protestant doctrines such as sola gratia and sola fide), but this was not generally accepted among his followers. However, these books are ordered last in the German-language Luther Bible to this day.[5]

 

[callofduty]

CallofDuty,

I understand your confusion. I have taken Bible classes at two evangelical universities including a major baptist university where I am majoring in religion and have come to this understanding.

While the seven books are not considered inspired by most evangelical groups, they have great value for all Christians. Hanukkah was celebrated by Jesus. I think that alone should give evidence for at least 1 Maccabees to be included in the canon.There are other books that were definitely excluded from the canon such as the Sheperd of Hermas that the early church fathers said were beneficial.

I have included them in my reading on a yearly basis. Inspired or not, I think they are valuable in giving understanding. They inspire me more than reading Max Lucado.

Thanks for the understanding.

This all started when I got a copy of the original King James (the only version our Church uses) and I kept running into these cross-references in the margins to books I had never heard of before. (apocrypha) The verses the King James translators were referencing were very similair to the NT passages. Almost as if the NT author was quoting it directly.

I have always heard my pastor dismiss these books as “additions” by the Catholic Church after the reformation.

Guess I have my work cut out for me trying to figure this all out…

 

[pablope]

You know, just a few hours ago the arguments given to me about the weakness of the apocryphal books seemed very convincing to me.

I just looked up the Manual of discipline online.

Originally known as The Manual of Discipline, the Community Rule contains a set of regulations ordering the life of the members of the “yahad,” the group within the Judean Desert sect who chose to live communally and whose members accepted strict rules of conduct.

Here is the entire translation;

And according to his insight he shall admit him. In this way both his love and his hatred. No man shall argue or quarrel with the men of perdition. He shall keep his council in secrecy in the midst of the men of deceit and admonish with knowledge, truth and righteous commandment those of chosen conduct, each according to his spiritual quality and according to the norm of time. He shall guide them with knowledge and instruct them in the mysteries of wonder and truth in the midst of the members of the community, so that they shall behave decently with one another in all that has been revealed to them. That is the time for studying the Torah (lit. clearing the way) in the wilderness. He shall instruct them to do all that is required at that time, and to separate from all those who have not turned aside from all deceit.

These are the norms of conduct for the Master in those times with respect to his loving and to his everlasting hating of the men of perdition in a spirit of secrecy. He shall leave to them property and wealth and earnings like a slave to his lord, (showing) humility before the one who rules over him. He shall be zealous concerning the Law and be prepared for the Day of Revenge.

He shall perform the will [of God] in all his deeds and in all strength as He has commanded. He shall freely delight in all that befalls him, and shall desire nothing except God’s will…

Transcription and translation by E. Qimron

There is nothing in here about the apocryphal books, just a blurb about the Torah.

Now I’m really confused.

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

Where did you get this statement from? Could you provide the link?

The DSS are about 2000 years old. So I would doubt the Manual would state such. How could the writer of the manual even know what is meant by “inspired” in today’s language?

 

[pablope]

Thanks for the understanding.

This all started when I got a copy of the original King James (the only version our Church uses) and I kept running into these cross-references in the margins to books I had never heard of before. (apocrypha) The verses the King James translators were referencing were very similair to the NT passages. Almost as if the NT author was quoting it directly.

 

[callofduty]

Where did you get this statement from? Could you provide the link?

The DSS are about 2000 years old. So I would doubt the Manual would state such. How could the writer of the manual even know what is meant by “inspired” in today’s language?

Sorry, this was a statement made by an evangelical pastor when asked about the apocryphal books. This was one of his reasons for rejecting them. (among others, see the original post)

I looked up the Manual of Discipline in the Dead Sea Scrolls online and there seems to be no such statement.

I believed him at first (not being a scholar).

Never thought to even question it, until all the responses in this thread so far.

Thanks

 

[jlmagee]

This is one issue that I tend to side with our Catholic brothers and sisters. While my professors specifically pointed out the term “Deuterocanonical”, most of them even suggested reading them.

When I found out that the books were translated with the intent to be included, I really began to question my church (KJV only at the time). I totally understand the confusion.

My experience with KJV only churches is they tend to discourage reading anything (even commentaries) except the original 1611 KJV (which has been revised 6? times I think since then).

I feel the Catholic position through the ages is very strong for these books, especially since the DSS discovery someone pointed out.

I would like to praise God for giving you an open mind in this area!

 

[neophyte]

…Guess I have my work cut out for me trying to figure this all out…

About the time I got to where you are, I decided it was enough for the moment to know that there were serious inconsistencies in what I had been taught from childhood.

The next thing I did was to read the letters written by the men who learned the faith directly from the Apostles, Ignatius of Antioch and Clement of Rome among them. I was certain that I’d see that they held to Reformed theology.

 

[Erich]

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

I haven’t read every post in this thread, but the above caught my eye.

From Septuagint Quotes in the New Testament:
Of the approximately 300 Old Testament quotes in the New Testament, approximately 2/3 of them came from the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Old Testament) which included the deuterocanonical books that the Protestants later removed. This is additional evidence that Jesus and the apostles viewed the deuterocanonical books as part of canon of the Old Testament. Here are some examples:

(etc.)

From The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Deuterocanonical Books of the Old Testament:

   		 			 				In 1947, when the State of Israel was coming into existence, the  Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered. Among the scrolls, were the writings  and records of a community of Jews with strong messianic and apocalyptic  expectations that were active from about 150 B.C. to 68 A.D. and who  many believe were Essenes. But more interesting for me is the fact that  in addition to scrolls reflecting the life of the Essene community,  among the Dead Sea Scrolls were many biblical scrolls, i.e., many copies  of books used by Jews as scripture. In 1999, several scholars collected  and translated these biblical scrolls and published them as *The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible*  (Harper Collins 1999), translated by and with commentary by Martin  Abegg, Jr., Peter Flint, & Eugene Ulrich (hereafter "DSC"). These  scholars describe the biblical content of these scrolls as follows: Parts  of every book of the the Jewish and Protestant Old Testament are  included, with the exception of Esther and Nehemiah. In addition, some  other books now included in Roman Catholic Bibles were found at Qumran  [the site of this Essene community]: Tobit, Ben Sira (also known as  Sirach or Ecclesiasticus), and the Letter of Jeremiah (also known as  Baruch 6).All of these deuterocanonical books or parts of books (Tobit, Sirach, and the Letter of Jeremiah) are also found in the Septuagint,  the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures made by Jewish scholars  prior to the time of Christ that was used by the early Church and which  is the basis for the current Old Testament canon of the Catholic Church  and the Eastern Orthodox churches. One British scholar of biblical  manuscripts writes about the role of the Septuagint in the early Church: The first Christians knew and used the Septuagint  in Greek. It was the only body of Scripture known to Saint Paul, for  the Gospels did not yet exist as a written text when he was first  preaching Christianity. . . . When Saint Paul invoked the Bible, he did  so by reference to the Septuagint. The  Gospel writers used it too. When the author of Saint Matthew's Gospel  cites the prophecy of Isaiah in Matthew 1:23, he uses the phrasing of  the Septuagint which differs very slightly from that of the text in Hebrew....

In addition, some who question the deuterocanonical books have raised the point that some of the deuterocanonical books were not originally written in Hebrew. Of the deuterocanonical books found among the Dead Sea Scrolls, Sirach is found in Hebrew, the Epistle of Jeremiah (Baruch 6) is found in Greek (although the editors state that it was “likely composed in Hebrew”), and Tobit is found in the Semitic languages of Aramaic and Hebrew (see DSC, pp. 599, 628, & 636). Some of those who raised doubts about the original language of some of the deuterocanonicals were fathers of the Church, who now stand corrected.

 

[Ignatius]

Actually, I am very interested in the truth.

I think what got me really interested in this subject was seeing the books in the original King James.

The Deuterocanonical books (Apocrapha is incorrect terminology) have been part of the Old Testament since hundreds of years before Christ. The Septuagent version includes the Deuterocanonical books. The Septuagent version is what Christ, the Apostles and all of the first Christians used. Ninty percent of the New Testament quotations of the OT are virtually verbatim from the Septuagent. Every Bible up until the 17th century contained them.
What happened in the 17th century in which men felt they they could remove books that were in the bible since before the time of Christ?

 

[pablope]

Sorry, this was a statement made by an evangelical pastor when asked about the apocryphal books. This was one of his reasons for rejecting them. (among others, see the original post)

I looked up the Manual of Discipline in the Dead Sea Scrolls online and there seems to be no such statement.

I believed him at first (not being a scholar).

Never thought to even question it, until all the responses in this thread so far.

Thanks

Thanks.

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

I thought this was in irresponsible statement. Did he expect you to just accept what he told you?

How could a Manual of Discipline, that obviously speaks of how to conduct one’s life in the community speak of something inspired or not? The writer of the Manual was most probably not aware of what is “inspired” or not?

It is good you questioned and investigated.

 

[Zooey]

.

Wow, great answers so far!

Does anyone know anything regarding Josephus and the Dead Sea scrolls?

“Josephus, a venerated Jewish historian, specifically stated that the apocryphal books weren’t from God in his writing Against Apion. The Manual of Discipline in the Dead Sea Scrolls stated that the Apocrypha wasn’t inspired.”

Seems convicing on the surface. ( especially for those who have no theological training, like myself)

Question;

It seems that the Catholic counter arguments rely on historical accounts of early Church councils that attest to the canonicity of the apoctyphal books.

Why can’t protestants use historical accounts such as Josephus to justify removing the books?

Thanks.

Well, I was going to write an answer, but the posts quoted below say pretty much what I planned to say:

Here’s a side point I find interesting, if not convincing on its own: why does anyone care whether the Jews accepted these books as canonical? They rejected Our Lord, so why should we accept what they have to say in determining a canon for followers of Christ?

And nowhere is scripture does Jesus call them out for it.

And note that Josephus was indeed:

"Josephus, a venerated Jewish historian,

(Bolding my emphasis).

 

[Zooey]

The Deuterocanonical books (Apocrapha is incorrect terminology) have been part of the Old Testament since hundreds of years before Christ. The Septuagent version includes the Deuterocanonical books. The Septuagent version is what Christ, the Apostles and all of the first Christians used. Ninty percent of the New Testament quotations of the OT are virtually verbatim from the Septuagent. Every Bible up until the 17th century contained them.
What happened in the 17th century in which men felt they they could remove books that were in the bible since before the time of Christ?

It was actually the Nineteenth Century. Before that, all Bibles had the full complement of books included.
They were left out* then*, to save money on paper. (Am I the only one who would hate being the guy who made **that **decision at the Last Judgment???)

 

[djrakowski]

It was actually the Nineteenth Century. Before that, all Bibles had the full complement of books included.
They were left out then**, to save money on paper. (Am I the only one who would hate being the guy who made **that **decision at the Last Judgment???)

Seriously? Not that I doubt you or anything , but I’d love to see some documentation. I teach an apologetics class and the issue of the canon comes up frequently.

 

[Zooey]

Seriously? Not that I doubt you or anything , but I’d love to see some documentation. I teach an apologetics class and the issue of the canon comes up frequently.

Seriously!!
I was told about this by a Free Methodist pastor. Since he would now be well over 100 years old, I expect that he has long since gone to his eternal reward.
I do know that the early Bible Societies were extremely short on cash, & that they were &modern ones are] in the habit of releasing “Scripture portions”. Apparently they decided to release only the parts of Scripture that they themselves were in the habit of using.
As late as the 1950’s, the pulpit Bible in the FM church I attended as a child, still contained the full # of books, albeit arranged differently than Catholic or EO Bibles. (One or two people actually suggested that someone should “cut those things out of there”.They were sternly refused, thank Heaven).
I know that this happened at about the time that the American Standard Version was being published. Until then (late 19th C) all Bibles indeed contained all the books that are now deleted…
This subject has come up before here, I wish I could tell you when…I will try to do a little research, if you would like.

 

[djrakowski]

Seriously!!
I was told about this by a Free Methodist pastor. Since he would now be well over 100 years old, I expect that he has long since gone to his eternal reward.
I do know that the early Bible Societies were extremely short on cash, & that they were &modern ones are] in the habit of releasing “Scripture portions”. Apparently they decided to release only the parts of Scripture that they themselves were in the habit of using.
As late as the 1950’s, the pulpit Bible in the FM church I attended as a child, still contained the full # of books, albeit arranged differently than Catholic or EO Bibles. (One or two people actually suggested that someone should “cut those things out of there”.They were sternly refused, thank Heaven).
I know that this happened at about the time that the American Standard Version was being published. Until then (late 19th C) all Bibles indeed contained all the books that are now deleted…
This subject has come up before here, I wish I could tell you when…I will try to do a little research, if you would like.

Fascinating story - thanks!

I’ve received copies of the N.T. and Psalms from the Gideons, but they’re clearly marked as such. I wonder if these were properly marked as well.

And I wasn’t aware of any other churches using the deuteros (or apocrypha) for regular instruction. I was an Episcopalian for a number of years and don’t recall any lectionary readings being drawn from them, though they were included in our NRSV Bibles.

Does your current church make use of these books? And do Methodists generally follow the RCL?

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

Seriously? Not that I doubt you or anything , but I’d love to see some documentation. I teach an apologetics class and the issue of the canon comes up frequently.

not the best source but from wikipedia

All King James Bibles published before 1640 included the Apocrypha.[citation needed] In 1826,[8] the British and Foreign Bible Society decided that no BFBS funds were to pay for printing any Apocryphal books anywhere.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_apocrypha

 

[djrakowski]

not the best source but from wikipedia

All King James Bibles published before 1640 included the Apocrypha.[citation needed] In 1826,[8] the British and Foreign Bible Society decided that no BFBS funds were to pay for printing any Apocryphal books anywhere.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_apocrypha

No need to apologize for referencing Wikipedia. I use it as a starting point for research all the time!