Deutero-canonical / Apocryphal Books

[Rightlydivide]

A specific point has been brought up time and time again but you either refuse to answer it or cannot find an answer to it. When, where and who determined a single Jewish canon that might serve as a basis for a for the Old Testament canon of the Christian Bible?

Historical evidence has been provided that shows there was no single Jewish canon. Obviously there is no scriptural evidence as there was no scriptural “Table of Contents”. However, scripture does tell us that the Apostles, their successors and the Church will be guided by the Holy Spirit. The Church, guided by the Holy Spirit, determined the 73 books that are in the Christian Bible. The Catholic Church did not “add” anything. Others “removed” several books in the mid to late 1500’s for whatever reason.

What historical evidence are you referring to? Yes, they did add. But lets address my question first.

 

[Nicea325]

The LXX of the time of Christ did not contain the Deuterocanonical books. If you believe it did, please provide proof. This whole Martyr quote does nothing to disprove or prove your view. It actually does…nothing.

Rightlydivide no offense but you play the double standard game. You ask for proof and yet you have literally dodged my and Salvatores:

When was the OT fixed (Year)
Which specific Jews fixed the OT
Where was it fixed? Palestine? Abroad?
And by what authority did they have to canonize the OT?

The more you fail to answer it becomes apparent you possess no such ancient and conclusive evidence to back your belief. None! It is only based on strong emotions and reading into the text (Josephus) which simply does not support your belief.

 

[WFS5801]

This link supports my view…The Sadducees like all Jews believed that the Torah, the Law of Moses, was on a much higher plane than the rest of the Scriptures.

So there is no clear evidence from their arguments that they held less of the canon than the Pharisees. Apocalyptic material, or any Greek syncretism, they rejected outright. It may be that the Sadducees believed that only the Torah was canonical, or that the Torah was vastly more important than other Scripture, but there is simply no evidence for this.

Your view being… what? That only the Torah was in the Jewish Canon? You do realize that the word Torah refers to the first five books of the Old Testament and would have been in both the Hebrew and LXX Canons, right? So are we to reject the prophets and works like Psalms? I don’t quite get your meaning here. You should also note that the Sadducees and Pharisees were both parties within Judaism, they did not speak for all Jews.

 

[Rightlydivide]

Rightlydivide no offense but you play the double standard game. You ask for proof and yet you have literally dodged my and Salvatores:

When was the OT fixed (Year)
Which specific Jews fixed the OT
Where was it fixed? Palestine? Abroad?
And by what authority did they have to canonize the OT?

The more you fail to answer it becomes apparent you possess no such ancient and conclusive evidence to back your belief. None! It is only based on strong emotions and reading into the text (Josephus) which simply does not support your belief.

Offence…
Anyway, I am limiting the focus of the debate to specific points. I brought up Josephus and then you have repeatedly stated that its a weak source. Josephus says Jews have a 22 book canon. I believe him. Now, you do not apparently but do not state why.
You can also address my question in another thread. It is apparent that the writers of the NT refer to OT writings as scripture. They are not establishing it as such. They are recognizing what already occured. So the first premise is that the infallible authors of the New Testament, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, believe that there is scripture.
Who determined that?
We do not know the exact year that scripture was recognized. We have the New Testament, early Christian and Jewish writers that attest to it. But obviously it was scripture. That is the first thing that must be seen. If we admit that we have scripture, and we do, in 60 AD, then we deal with the next question as to whether a canon was recognized as including recent books or had been set for some time.
So…who made the OT scripture?

 

[Rightlydivide]

Your view being… what? That only the Torah was in the Jewish Canon? You do realize that the word Torah refers to the first five books of the Old Testament and would have been in both the Hebrew and LXX Canons, right? So are we to reject the prophets and works like Psalms? I don’t quite get your meaning here. You should also note that the Sadducees and Pharisees were both parties within Judaism, they did not speak for all Jews.

There is no proof that the Sadducees adhered to a lesser canon as the link also states.

 

[Nicea325]

I don’t write them anymore. I grade them. Now, why is he a weak source? He states the Jews have twenty two books. What is your basis for not believing his statement?

I beg your pardon? You grade them and allow such liberty and flexibility when backing up arguments and positions? Wow! So I guess you allow your students to add biased and subjective positions with little to no evidence?

Why is he weak? Come on Rightlydivde. The fact you said you ‘grade’ them tells me you must be a teacher? Correct? He is weak because you are making an **absolute position **about the OT canon based on the quote you provided. And why? Because he merely states the Jews have twenty-two books? Which begs the question: Where are your empirical sources PROVING IT? Outside of Josephus? Where are the sources Rightlydivide?

What is my basis? Think about it,if you are stating Josephus is confirming a fixed canon,which means it was already fixed either before Josephus or during his life time.Hence,then it is obvious there must EXIST sources, other than Josephus, confirming it as a fact of ancient history. Thus these sources should confirm:

The specific Jews who fixed it (Sadducees,Pharisees,Essenes,etc)
The authority which they justified a fixed canon
The place and location
And more or less the year.

Where are these writings by OTHERS tellings us all of these factors? This what you have not done at all.

 

[WFS5801]

The LXX of the time of Christ did not contain the Deuterocanonical books. If you believe it did, please provide proof. This whole Martyr quote does nothing to disprove or prove your view. It actually does…nothing.

You’e just making this up as you go, aren’t you? The Deuteros were referred to in the New Testament, they were read as Scripture by the early (predominantly Greek-speaking) Jews. The Christians accepted them as Scripture early on in the life of Church. It wasn’t until 90 A.D. that the Jews decided to form their Old Testament Canon from just the Hebrew Canon. And this was done in response to Christians, who used passages in the Deuteros to prove their Christian Faith.

As for the St. Justin Martyr quote, it proved that the Jews and Christians of the time did not share the same Old Testament Canon (in opposition to your claim that the Christians simply used the Hebrew Canon until 350 A.D.). Did you forget what you wrote?

 

[Rightlydivide]

I beg your pardon? You grade them and allow such liberty and flexibility when backing up arguments and positions? Wow! So I guess you allow your students to add biased and subjective positions with little to no evidence?

Why is he weak? Come on Rightlydivde. The fact you said you ‘grade’ them tells me you must be a teacher? Correct? He is weak because you are making an **absolute position **about the OT canon based on the quote you provided. And why? Because he merely states the Jews have twenty-two books? Which begs the question: Where are your empirical sources PROVING IT? Outside of Josephus? Where are the sources Rightlydivide?

What is my basis? Think about it,if you are stating Josephus is confirming a fixed canon,which means it was already fixed either before Josephus or during his life time.Hence,then it is obvious there must EXIST sources, other than Josephus, confirming it as a fact of ancient history. Thus these sources should confirm:

The specific Jews who fixed it (Sadducees,Pharisees,Essenes,etc)
The authority which they justified a fixed canon
The place and location
And more or less the year.

Where these writings by OTHERS tellings us all of these factors?

I am addressing one source at a time. No where in this post do you assert why he was a weak source.
I am not making an absolute statement based upon this one quote. I am however directly asking you why it is a weak source. I am not going to allow you to state it as a fact unless you can give me a reason why it is weak.
So once again, why is it weak? You keep wanting to go back to the entire argument which is built upon many layers. We are going to examine them one at a time. Or at least try. We are going to get to all of these answers but only when we go through the facts carefully one at a time. I have provided a Jewish historican that states that Jews have a 22 book canon.

 

[WFS5801]

There is no proof that the Sadducees adhered to a lesser canon as the link also states.

Whether the Sadducees rejected the LXX or not, is moot to the question. Are you claiming that the Sadducees were the final authority in all things Jewish Canon? If so, that would be kind of inconvenient for the Jewish Canon, as the Sadducee movement died out with the destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D.

 

[Rightlydivide]

You’e just making this up as you go, aren’t you? The Deuteros were referred to in the New Testament, they were read as Scripture by the early (predominantly Greek-speaking) Jews. The Christians accepted them as Scripture early on in the life of Church. It wasn’t until 90 A.D. that the Jews decided to form their Old Testament Canon from just the Hebrew Canon. And this was done in response to Christians, who used passages in the Deuteros to prove their Christian Faith.

As for the St. Justin Martyr quote, it proved that the Jews and Christians of the time did not share the same Old Testament Canon (in opposition to your claim that the Christians simply used the Hebrew Canon until 350 A.D.). Did you forget what you wrote?

Jamnia…

catholic.com/thisrock/2004/0409fea4.asp

The Deuteros were not read as scripture by the earliest Christians…who made them scripture or fixed them prior to these councils if that is the case? Same question asked to me.
There is not a shred of evidence that a LXX in 50 AD contained these books. Believe me…I know

 

[Rightlydivide]

Whether the Sadducees rejected the LXX or not, is moot to the question. Are you claiming that the Sadducees were the final authority in all things Jewish Canon? If so, that would be kind of inconvenient for the Jewish Canon, as the Sadducee movement died out with the destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D.

Poco brought it up. I was answering him/her.
No, I did not claim that.
Thanks

 

[WFS5801]

There is no proof that the Sadducees adhered to a lesser canon as the link also states.

I’m starting to agree with Salvatore. This “debate” is a waste of time. You don’t engage in the argument. The fact is, the Reformers received the New Testament Canon from the Catholic Church and, eventually, most decided to reject the Deuteros (because Catholic doctrine was supported there) and accept the Hebrew Bible from the Jews. There is nothing more to it than that. If the Catholics hadn’t Canonized and Preserved the New Testament, there wouldn’t have been any New Testament for the Protestants to inherit and misinterpret.

If the Dueteros are not inspired (as you claim) how do you explain the following passage from the Book of Wisdom?

[12] Let us therefore lie in wait for the just, because he is not for our turn, and he is contrary to our doings, and upbraideth us with transgressions of the law, and divulgeth against us the sins of our way of life. [13] He boasteth that he hath the knowledge of God, and calleth himself the son of God. [14] He is become a censurer of our thoughts. [15] He is grievous unto us, even to behold: for his life is not like other men’s, and his ways are very different.

[16] We are esteemed by him as triflers, and he abstaineth from our ways as from filthiness, and he preferreth the latter end of the just, and glorieth that he hath God for his father. [17] Let us see then if his words be true, and let us prove what shall happen to him, and we shall know what his end shall be. [18] For if he be the true son of God, he will defend him, and will deliver him from the hands of his enemies. [19] Let us examine him by outrages and tortures, that we may know his meekness and try his patience. [20] Let us condemn him to a most shameful death: for there shall be respect had unto him by his words.

I’ll not hold my breath for waiting your answer.

 

[Salvatore123]

Rightly,

Ignore me if you wish, but I will ask nevertheless, in accordance with the discussion you are having with Nicea.

You challenged Nicea by saying:

“I am addressing one source at a time. No where in this post do you assert why he was a weak source. I am not making an absolute statement based upon this one quote. I am however directly asking you why it is a weak source. I am not going to allow you to state it as a fact unless you can give me a reason why it is weak. So once again, why is it weak? You keep wanting to go back to the entire argument which is built upon many layers. We are going to examine them one at a time. Or at least try. We are going to get to all of these answers but only when we go through the facts carefully one at a time. I have provided a Jewish historican that states that Jews have a 22 book canon.”

Here is MY response to why I think Josephus and his “22 book” statement is weak, and I will use YOUR “faith’s” doctrine of sola scriptura to do it (and rather quickly, I might add):

Citing Josephus as authority for ANYTHING is weak because:

1. Josephus does not appear in the bible (thus, violating sola scriptura).
2. Josephus is not recognized as having ANY authority in ANYTHING. He was only, by all accounts, a historian who lived after Christ died.
3. Josephus, writing against Apion, said: “We have not 10,000 books among us, disagreeing with and contradicting one another, but only twenty-two books which contain the records of all time, and are justly believed to be divine.”

So what. Josephus, a historian with no authority to do anything, wrote to someone that “we” have “only 22 books” that are “justly believed to be divine”.

Now, you want to take things one by one, so take what Josephus said, one by one:

A. Who was Josephus referring to when he said “we”? Source, please. And regardless of source, how do we know to whom Josephus was referring when he said “we”?

B. Who told Josephus only 22 books were divine? Source, please.

And now, for the big question:

C. JOSEPHUS SAID ONLY 22 BOOKS WERE DIVINE. YET, WHILE JOSEPHUS WAS ALIVE, NT BOOKS WERE BEING WRITTEN. BUT JOSEPHUS SAID ONLY 22 BOOKS WERE DIVINE, AND THOSE 22 ARE ONLY FOUND IN THE OT. SO WHAT KIND OF AUTHORITY DOES THAT MAKE JOSEPHUS WHEN IT COMES TO A CANON OF THE BIBLE? YOU HAVE REPEATEDLY SAID THAT “JESUS AND THE APOSTLES AND THE CHRISTIANS OF THAT TIME SIMPLY KNEW WHAT WAS SCRIPTURE”. SO WHAT DO WE DO WITH JOSEPHUS NOT ADDRESSING ANY NT BOOKS THAT WERE WRITTEN BEFORE HE DIED IN 100 AD (WHICH, OF COURSE, WOULD BE ALL OF THE NT, AS ST. JOHN IS THOUGHT TO HAVE DIED IN 100 AD ON THE ISLE OF PATMOS)?

You are going to accept, as “strong” (because you said he was not weak), the opinion of Josephus, and yet Josephus died without EVER discussing the canon of the NT, all of which was written by the time Josephus died.

Care to address this about Josephus?

It is ONE subject - one man - Josephus. It is NOT “layers and layers”.

I focused, as you requested of Nicea, on ONE person/thing: Josephus.

Please, please answer the questions I asked above about why anyone should accord any weight or authority to Josephus for anything.

 

[WFS5801]

The Deuteros were not read as scripture by the earliest Christians…who made them scripture or fixed them prior to these councils if that is the case? Same question asked to me.There is not a shred of evidence that a LXX in 50 AD contained these books. Believe me…I know

No, you don’t know. If it were true that the Deuteros did not exist in 50 A.D., why did the Jews want to remove them in 90 A.D.? Why did the Jews re-write the Greek Scriptures and remove the Deuteros if they were never there in the first place? All the “Alexandrian” (name given to the LXX) versions contained the Deuteros. Not only did they contain these books, they were also interspersed within the rest of the Bible, showing that they were given the same weight as the other books found there.

It is a significant fact that in all these Alexandrian Bibles the traditional Hebrew order is broken up by the interspersion of the additional literature among the other books, outside the law, thus asserting for the extra writings a substantial equality of rank and privilege.

newadvent.org/cathen/03267a.htm

It is true that the Jews in Jerusalem (for the most part) showed some disdain for the LXX – but that’s immaterial to Christianity, as the Christians not only used the LXX (80% of the Old Testament quotes in the New Testament came from the LXX) but they also defended the LXX (including the Deuteros) from the Jews. It’s also telling that the early Church Fathers quoted from the Deuteros. So the fact that the Jews eventually rejected them has no bearing on their acceptance in the Church. God’s spiritual authority had passed from the Jews to the Christians by that time.

 

[Nicea325]

I am addressing one source at a time. No where in this post do you assert why he was a weak source.
I am not making an absolute statement based upon this one quote. I am however directly asking you why it is a weak source. I am not going to allow you to state it as a fact unless you can give me a reason why it is weak.
So once again, why is it weak? You keep wanting to go back to the entire argument which is built upon many layers. We are going to examine them one at a time. Or at least try. We are going to get to all of these answers but only when we go through the facts carefully one at a time. I have provided a Jewish historican that states that Jews have a 22 book canon.

Seriously? You cannot see it or acknowledge it? WHO is Josephus? Was he one of the leading figures? Was he involved in the process? What role did he play? Where are his statements clearly declaring or a mentioning the ratification of the OT canon? His opponents? The number of men involved in the process. By whose authority? The place and location? Where are those references Rightlydivide? Nothing you quoted from him proves your argument because as I stated he never mentions a fixed and accepted canon set BEFORE him or during his lifetime.

Likewise, as I said in an earlier post:

What is my basis? Think about it,if you are stating Josephus is confirming a fixed canon,which means it was already fixed either before Josephus or during his life time.Hence,then it is obvious there must EXIST sources, other than Josephus, confirming it as a fact of ancient history. Thus these sources should confirm:

The specific Jews who fixed it (Sadducees,Pharisees,Essenes,etc)
The authority which they justified a fixed canon
The place and location
And more or less the year.

Where these writings by OTHERS tellings us all of these factors?

Do you actually have any intentions of answering those questions or will you continue with circular and spiral arguments?

 

[Poco]

What historical evidence are you referring to?

Ummm… :ehh: How about:

Council of Rome 382 A.D. (disputed in previous posts)
Council of Carthage 397
Council of Carthage 419
Council of Nicea II 787
Council of Florence 1442
Council of Trent 1546 (canon closed)

Yes, they did add.

When and where? At Carthage in 397 A.D.? And to what did they add anything to, as there was no single fixed, closed Jewish canon at the time? There was nothing to add anything to!

But lets address my question first.

Your question has been addressed repeatedly. It is you who refuses to answer the question when, where and by what authority was a single Jewish canon fixed and closed?

On a side note, I am a “he”.

 

[Rightlydivide]

Interesting. I never thought I could win a debate with THREE people and yet…I am!
Lets look at what has been said about Josephus. The main crux appears to be that he does not cite who, where, and also would have rejected the NT canon. What Josephus does state is that there is a Jewish canon of 22 books. So it appears that Josephus will not convince anyone but instead is time the next bit of evidence presented. I should let people know that we will be looking at around 15 bits of evidence before we are done.
First, before I proceed, I need to clear up some statements others have made as there seems to be a belief stated by one of the people that Jamnia debated the Deuterocanonical books. I have provided a Catholic link refuting that.
If Jamnia existed in any form traditionally attributed to it…say 50 years ago…there is no evidence to support exactly what occured. Catholic apologists usually do not use it one way or another anymore. However, this is a public forum and people may not be up to speed.
Second, there is no evidence the LXX at the time of Christ contained the Deuterocanonical books. In this forum, not two years ago, the author of Why Catholic Bibles are Bigger stated he thought the Deuteros were in the LXX at the time of Christ. But he acknowledged that no one can prove it.
The oldest versions of the LXX, 300 years LATER than the era we are discussing, had some of the Deuteros. So we are to believe that they were in there 300 years earlier, and then some confusion and they were taken out?
These are just straightening out the facts presented.
So lets go to point number two.
If the NT calls books from the OT scripture, and they do, what made them scripture? Who did that? No one has answered this for an obvious reason.

 

[Salvatore123]

Rightly - the answer to your last question is simple:

You have refused - absolutely refused - to state WHO decided what books are OT scripture, WHEN it was decided that books are OT scripture, and WHAT AUTHORITY was given to those you claim decided that books are OT scripture.

You just cannot say, “well the NT says the books of the OT are scripture” (which no one disagrees with), and yet draw a conclusion from that “given” that the books RIGHTLY claims are OT scripture, are, in fact, OT scripture.

YOU adhere to sola scriptura. Where, in the NT, does it say which books should be in the OT?

Please quit patting yourself on the back and answer the questions put to you. Everyone has responded to everything you have asked and yet you have repeatedly refused to answer the primary questions put to you: WHO, WHAT, WHEN, BY WHAT AUTHORITY was the OT (and NT, for that matter) scripture determined?

Until you answer those, this so-called “debate-winning by Rightly” is a joke . . . and a bad one at that . . .

P.S. - I, too, can give obvious answers to questions that aren’t even in dispute. You say that “we won’t answer who made the NT canon”. Of course we will, and we have. The same person who made the OT canon: The Holy Spirit.

But that is not the point. NOT ONE PERSON IN THIS THREAD HAS CLAIMED THE HOLY SPIRIT IS NOT THE AUTHOR OF SCRIPTURE.

BUT YOU HAVE REFUSED TO TELL US HOW THE HOLY SPIRIT COMMUNICATED THAT DETERMINATION TO MAN. UNLESS YOU CAN POINT TO A DELIVERY MECHANISM LIKE GOD DID TO MOSES WITH THE TEN COMMANDMENTS, THEN YOU ARE OUT OF LUCK.

And look at the corner into which you painted yourself with your last question: You said the NT said the books of the OT were scripture, so the OT was scripture. But where do you look to tell you THAT THE BOOKS OF THE NT WERE SCRIPTURE?

Good grief, man. Can’t you see the illogic of your position? Are you that afraid of acknowledging that you cannot answer the questions put to you by us repeatedly, because YOU HAVE NO ANSWERS. ANY person who is truly as sure of himself as you are would have gladly answered the questions put to you long ago. Now you appear running away, and it is becoming quite sad to see this . . .

 

[Poco]

Interesting. I never thought I could win a debate with THREE people and yet…I am!

How absolutely absurd! You think you are winning a debate when the only thing you can say is, “Well, Josephus cited a 22 book canon.”

I’ll submit this:

“The New Jerome Biblical Commentary” © 1990, 1968 Prentice-Hall, Inc.

page 1041

40 (V) The Ancient Christian Canon of the Old Testament. The conclusion that there was no rigidly closed canon in Judaism in the 1st and early 2nd cents. AD means that when the church was in its formative period and was using the sacred books of the Jews, there was no closed canon for the church to adopt.

41 After the NT period (i.e. 50-150), the Christian church continued to cite the Scriptures according to the LXX; and since the LXX itself reflected the lack of a rigidly fixed canon in Judaism, the early Christian writers had no sharp guidelines. The oft-repeated thesis that from the beginning all Christians agreed on the exact canon and that only later doubts arose about certain books has little to recommend it. Such a thesis is based on the assumption that the contents of the canon were revealed to the apostles – an unwarranted assumption, probably flowing from a misunderstanding that revelation was closed in the apostolic era. (-> 17 above).

 

[Byzman]

Interesting. I never thought I could win a debate with THREE people and yet…I am!
Lets look at what has been said about Josephus. The main crux appears to be that he does not cite who, where, and also would have rejected the NT canon. What Josephus does state is that there is a Jewish canon of 22 books. So it appears that Josephus will not convince anyone but instead is time the next bit of evidence presented. I should let people know that we will be looking at around 15 bits of evidence before we are done.
First, before I proceed, I need to clear up some statements others have made as there seems to be a belief stated by one of the people that Jamnia debated the Deuterocanonical books. I have provided a Catholic link refuting that.
If Jamnia existed in any form traditionally attributed to it…say 50 years ago…there is no evidence to support exactly what occured. Catholic apologists usually do not use it one way or another anymore. However, this is a public forum and people may not be up to speed.
Second, there is no evidence the LXX at the time of Christ contained the Deuterocanonical books. In this forum, not two years ago, the author of Why Catholic Bibles are Bigger stated he thought the Deuteros were in the LXX at the time of Christ. But he acknowledged that no one can prove it.
The oldest versions of the LXX, 300 years LATER than the era we are discussing, had some of the Deuteros. So we are to believe that they were in there 300 years earlier, and then some confusion and they were taken out?
These are just straightening out the facts presented.
So lets go to point number two.
If the NT calls books from the OT scripture, and they do, what made them scripture? Who did that? No one has answered this for an obvious reason.

I havent read through all the posts here on this thread…but if this has already been stated I apologize.

The canon of the Jewish Scriptures was not closed anytime before or near the time of Christ and His Apostles. A couple things I noticed brought up in this thread was Jospehus and Jamina. I know alot of people on both sides of the argument bring up Jamnia for the sake of their arugment. Well, I am going to bring it up here too, but I am taking a different perspective that says Jamnia did not settle the Jewish Canon. What we know for certain is that Song of Solomon and Ecclesiastes were disputed of being Canonical at Jamnia. This info we know from the Talmud. What we also know from the Talmud is that it quotes quite a bit from the Book of Sirach, saying “it is written in Ben Sira.” The Talmud was developed over a period of about 300 years. From the 3rd to 5th centuries AD. It is because of the Talmud that historians believe the the Jewish Scriptures were not a final settled closed Canon until a few hundred years after Christ. By this time the Church was already long established and inherited from the Jews not a closed canon, but instead they inherited books that were passed down that became known as Scripture for the Christians.

If you would like refenerces to see this info in the Talmud I can surely take the time to look them up for you if you would like.