How do we answer the claims that:
- The deuterocanonical books were not included in the LXX at the time of Christ, but were added later - therefore we should not consider them inspired. (Earliest LXX manuscripts are apparently from c. 400AD, indicating that we can’t really confirm or deny whether the disputed books were there or not.)
The earliest known manuscripts (from the 4th and 5th centuries) contain the DCs. Some non-Catholics merely deny that the earliest known manuscripts match the New Testament-era manuscripts. Thus the burden of proof rests on them: they must prove that there is a difference between the earliest known Septuagint manuscripts and the Septuagint manuscripts of the New Testament-era.
- The NT does not quote from the deutercanonical books.
Sure it does.
Sirach – In 1st Corinthians 2:6-10, Paul shows how the wisdom of the world has been given to us by fusing a quotation (v. 9) out of Isaiah 64:42 and Sirach 1:8, applying to them his famous “it is written” which he customarily appends to his Scriptural quotations.
Evidence for the citation: the last four words of the quote (“for those who love him”; in Greek these are four words) are verbatim from Sirach 1:8 but are found nowhere in Isaiah. Additionally, Paul’s subject is God’s secret wisdom, while Isaiah is not speaking of Wisdom, but of the afterlife of believers. If Paul is quoting Sirach, however, this inconsistency is resolved, for Sirach is indeed speaking of divine wisdom in that passage.
Maccabees – In John 10:22-39, Jesus spoke of the Feast of Dedication as a divinely-mandated celebration. However, the mandate to celebrate this holy day is only found in the Books of Maccabees.
Evidence for the citation: Jesus only speaks explicitly of His special consecration by God twice in the Bible: once here and once in John 17. What are the chances that it is mere coincidence making Him teach of His consecration in the context of celebrating the Temple’s consecration?
Elsewhere (in John 2:19-21), He says that the Temple is a symbol of His Body. Now that he is doing exactly what Judas Maccabees decreed about the Temple’s dedication, would it not make the most sense for Him to take this occasion to speak of His own dedication by God for service to Mankind? And when we read that He does indeed speak thus on this occasion, does it not seem extraordinarily silly to deny that He is alluding to this event?
In this context, we read how He cites as support of His consecration, Psalms 82:6. But it cannot be ascertained from that Psalm alone that the Temple consecration symbolizes His own; thus He clarifies that, also, “the Scripture cannot be broken”, which by its language indicates that He is speaking of some kind of command. This language only makes sense if He is alluding to the decree in 1st Maccabees 4:59; He thus called that declaration “Scripture”.
Wisdom – In Hebrews 1, the sacred author reminds us that the prophets all point to the fulfillment of God’s revelation; that is, Christ the Lord. In support, he cites Wisdom 7:25-26. This shows that he considered the Book of Wisdom prophetic and, by effect, inspired.
Evidence for the citation: In the immediate context of the Prophetic revelations (v. 1) and in the extended context of other such examples (vv. 5-13), he uses language and phraseology identical to that of the Book of Wisdom to create imagery identical to that of the Book of Wisdom. One of the words used,
apaugasma, is exclusive in all the Hebraic Scriptures to the passage in Wisdom. It is exceedingly difficult to discount all of this as coincidence and yet maintain rationality.
However if we admit that this is, indeed, a reference to this passage from Wisdom, then we must not forget that the sacred author led us to this reference with the words, “God spoke of old to our fathers by the prophets”, and thereupon identifies “a Son, whom [God] appointed the heir of all things” as the object of their prophecies. If, then, he refers us to this passage from Wisdom, identifying its object as this Son, what are we to conclude but that he is giving us an example of his prior observation? This is his obvious intention, as per the rest of the chapter.
To recap, the author intends to give us examples of prophecies of Christ. He says that the prophets, through whom God used to speak, all pointed toward Christ, through Whom He has spoken now. He then identifies Christ as the glory and image of God, referring to the passage from the Book of Wisdom. Therefore, the sacred author identifies the Book of Wisdom as a prophetic (and by effect inspired) work.
Judith – In 1st Corinthians 10, Paul explains the symbolism of various Old Testament stories, ending with a quote from Judith 8:25. Of these things, Paul says, “they were written” (v. 11), a variation of the phrase Paul uses throughout all his epistles to denote canonical status.
Evidence for the citation: The context is the Old Testament stories of the Exodus (vv. 1-5), the giving of the 10 Commandments (v. 7), and the Moabite plague (v. 8). Verses 9 and 10 continue the examples with men who “perished by the serpents” and were “destroyed by the destroyer”. This is verbatim from the passage in Judith: men were “destroyed by the destroyer, and perished by serpents.” It would be nonsense to affirm that coincidence dictated that he use twice in two sentences the exact same statements that Judith made without even alluding to her. It makes ever-so-much more sense to accept that he was quoting her in support of the observation that “some of them murmured and were destroyed by the destroyer”, just as she observed, “[for] murmuring against the Lord, [they] Were destroyed by the destroyer”. Now these things were done in a figure of us, that we should not covet evil things as they also coveted. 7Neither become ye idolaters, as some of them, as it is written: The people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play. 8Neither let us commit fornication, as some of them committed fornication, and there fell in one day three and twenty thousand. 9Neither let us tempt Christ: as some of them tempted, and perished by the serpents. 10Neither do you murmur: as some of them murmured, and were destroyed by the destroyer. 11Now all these things happened to them in figure: and they are written for our correction, upon whom the ends of the world are come. – 1st Corinthians 10:6-11 (Douay-Rheims version of the Bible, as revised by Bishop Challoner)
But they that did not receive the trials…and the reproach of their murmuring against the Lord, 25Were destroyed by the destroyer, and perished by serpents. – Judith 8:24-25 (Douay-Rheims version of the Bible, as revised by Bishop Challoner)
Tobit – When confronting Jesus in Matthew 22 regarding the Resurrection, the Sadducees quoted the Old Testament Law together with a story from the Book of Tobit involving an angel. Jesus responds by telling them that they have misunderstood these “Scriptures” (v. 29).
Evidence for the citation: the Sadducees accepted only the Law as canonical. Partially for this reason, they denied the Resurrection (cf. v. 23). Thus Jesus observes that they “know neither the scriptures nor the power of God” (v. 29). If they merely confronted Him about the Resurrection, only the part about them not knowing “the power of God” would apply. But because He says that they were also wrong about “the Scriptures”, it follows that they also were confronting Him about the writings they denied.
To show that Jesus was inconsistent, they tried to show that the Writings He accepted were inconsistent with the teachings He accepted, proving that both could not be true: thus we read (vv. 25-27) that they (for the sake of their argument) granted the truth of the story (which matches the story in Tobit), and they also granted (only for the sake of their argument) the doctrine of the Resurrection (v. 28), however only to show (as per their argument) that these two things were inconsistent.
In answer, Jesus explains for them the true reading of the Law (vv. 31-32), showing that He accepts also the Books that they do. But then He explains the significance of “the angels” (v. 30). Since the Sadducees did not believe in angels (cf. Acts 23:8), it would not make sense for Jesus to reference them, unless they were granting them for the sake of the argument – which is senseless without Tobit, since they appear only in Tobit. Thus Jesus tries to explain that even their involvement (in Tobit) should point toward the true nature of marriage.
