Citing in New Testament is not a defense of deuterocanonical books

[Prodigal1984]

I don’t know why quoting something in the New Testament merits anything as to a books canonicity honestly. This happens throughout the Bible with books not considered scripture by Catholics(and besides Enoch , anyone for that matter). By the argument everyone giving to that if a book is canonical if alluded too, our Bibles should be much larger.

Book of Enoch (Jude 1:4, 1:6, 1:13, 1:14–15, 2 Peter 2:4; 3:13, and John 7:38 ).

Book of Jasher (2 Timothy 3:8, 2 Samuel 1:18, Joshua 10:13)

Life of Adam and Eve (2 Corinthians 11:14 “Satan as an angel of light”, 12:2 “Third Heaven”)

The Assumption of Moses (2 Timothy 3:8, Jude 9 “Michael… body of Moses”)

Martyrdom of Isaiah (Hebrews 11:37 “they were sawn in two”)

Also, Paul cites Pagans . Is anyone going to argue because of this pagan writings should be scripture?

Menander , Thais 218 (1 Cor. 15:33)

Epimenides , de Oraculis , (Titus 1:12-13, where Paul introduces Epimenides as “a prophet of the Cretans,”

Aratus , Phaenomena 5 (Acts 17:28, where Paul refers to the words of “some of your own poets”)

All I’m pointing out here is that just because someone cites or alludes to another writing does not mean that writing must also be scripture.

 

[adamhovey1988]

It is when they’re quoted as Scripture

 

[Gorgias]

It is when they’re quoted as Scripture

This!

If Scripture quotes a portion of a recipe for apple pie, it doesn’t mean that the original recipe is inspired Scripture. However, when Scripture quotes itself as Scriptural and inspired, then that’s a good sign that what’s being quoted is, itself, Scriptural!

 

[Wesrock]

I don’t know why quoting something in the New Testament merits anything as to a books canonicity honestly. This happens throughout the Bible with books not considered scripture by Catholics(and besides Enoch , anyone for that matter). By the argument everyone giving to that if a book is canonical if alluded too, our Bibles should be much larger.

Book of Enoch (Jude 1:4, 1:6, 1:13, 1:14–15, 2 Peter 2:4; 3:13, and John 7:38 ).

Book of Jasher (2 Timothy 3:8, 2 Samuel 1:18, Joshua 10:13)

Life of Adam and Eve (2 Corinthians 11:14 “Satan as an angel of light”, 12:2 “Third Heaven”)

The Assumption of Moses (2 Timothy 3:8, Jude 9 “Michael… body of Moses”)

Martyrdom of Isaiah (Hebrews 11:37 “they were sawn in two”)

Also, Paul cites Pagans . Is anyone going to argue because of this pagan writings should be scripture?

Menander , Thais 218 (1 Cor. 15:33)

Epimenides , de Oraculis , (Titus 1:12-13, where Paul introduces Epimenides as “a prophet of the Cretans,”

Aratus , Phaenomena 5 (Acts 17:28, where Paul refers to the words of “some of your own poets”)

All I’m pointing out here is that just because someone cites or alludes to another writing does not mean that writing must also be scripture.

And yet you’ve quoted people like Geisler before who say that a lack of citation is evidence against it being canon, as “most” other OT books are cited or referenced in the NT.

So I’m confused. Which side do you fall on (besides against the Latin Rite Deuterocanon in general)?