Deuterocanon question

  • Thread starter Thread starter JeffersonD
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

JeffersonD

Guest
I’m in a discussion about the canonicity of the Deuterocanonical books. The person I am debating has two problems with these books: 1. The Church Fathers didn’t agree on these books and so they shouldn’t be in the Bible and 2. He says the DC is not quoted in the New Testament and so it isn’t inspired. Of course this is really a problem with Church Authority rather than anything else but he asked me to find where the DC is quoted in the NT. I can handle the first question but am having trouble finding where the DC is quoted. I know it is, I found a source a while back but I can’t seem to find it anymore.

Thanks for the help

Jeff
 
It isnt quoted. There are some inferences. That will not stop people from breaking out a list that has been discredited by Catholics and Protestants alike…
Just watch.
 
Rightlydivide, I was really looking for Catholic answers on this rather than Protestant. Thanks
 
If I’m not mistaken, there are other books in the OT Canon (non-septuagint) which are not quoted in the NT. Can’t remember details but perhaps this will jog someone’s memory?
 
“The story of Hanukkah is recorded in the First Book of Maccabees, which is part of the Apocrypha. The Feast of Dedication is mentioned in the New Testament Book of John, chapter 10, verse 22.”

christianity.about.com/od/biblefeastsandholidays/p/feastofdedicati.htm

"The Catholic deuterocanonical scriptural texts are:

Tobit
Judith
Additions to Esther (Vulgate Esther 10:4-16:24)[18]
Wisdom
Sirach, also called Ben Sira or Ecclesiasticus
Baruch, including the Letter of Jeremiah (Additions to Jeremiah in the Septuagint)[19]
Additions to Daniel:
Prayer of Azariah and Song of the Three Holy Children (Vulgate Daniel 3:24-90)
Susanna (Vulgate Daniel 13, Septuagint prologue)
Bel and the Dragon (Vulgate Daniel 14, Septuagint epilogue)
1 Maccabees
2 Maccabees"

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deuterocanonical_books
 
Barbkw said:
“The story of Hanukkah is recorded in the First Book of Maccabees, which is part of the Apocrypha. The Feast of Dedication is mentioned in the New Testament Book of John, chapter 10, verse 22.”

christianity.about.com/od/biblefeastsandholidays/p/feastofdedicati.htm
Click to expand...
Actually, the link above contains a number of factual errors. The “story of Hanukkah”, at least as Mary Fairchild describes it, is not found in 1 Maccabees at all, but is from the Talmud–specifically Shabbat 21b.

The Encanaea described in John 10:22 is actually the festival Sukkot, where the dedication of the temple was celebrated, and which constituted one of the three mandated pilgrimage festivals for Israelites, which would explain why Jesus went to Jerusalem for the festival. (Hanukkah never has been a pilgrimage festival.)

This link is not too bad:

jewishfederations.org/page.aspx?id=47440
 
Thanks everyone for all the help. It’s much appreciated!

ctkrcia: Thanks, that was the link I was looking for!
 
JeffersonD said:
I’m in a discussion about the canonicity of the Deuterocanonical books. The person I am debating has two problems with these books: 1. The Church Fathers didn’t agree on these books and so they shouldn’t be in the Bible and 2. He says the DC is not quoted in the New Testament and so it isn’t inspired. Of course this is really a problem with Church Authority rather than anything else but he asked me to find where the DC is quoted in the NT. I can handle the first question but am having trouble finding where the DC is quoted. I know it is, I found a source a while back but I can’t seem to find it anymore.

Thanks for the help

Jeff
Click to expand...
Just because the ECFs argued about does not make it so…it was the Church authority acting through a duly constituted council that codified the Canon, that the DC books are now in the CC OT.
 
pablope: I know that the DC is in the canon of the CC but it’s not in most Protestant canon. I’m trying to answer my fellow debater’s questions so that I can show that essentially his problem is with the Authority of the CC. It will take time and a lot of prayer.
 
JeffersonD said:
pablope: I know that the DC is in the canon of the CC but it’s not in most Protestant canon. I’m trying to answer my fellow debater’s questions so that I can show that essentially his problem is with the Authority of the CC. It will take time and a lot of prayer.
Click to expand...
The whole issue of the canon is something I have started to study. Here is a very thorough audio resource (that you must purchase):

catholic-productions.com/store/audio/pitre/origin_CD.html

Here is a book:

amazon.com/Why-Catholic-Bibles-are-Bigger/dp/1581880103/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1297308800&sr=8-1

The fact of the matter is, the ECF disputed books that are in our canon as well, so your friend’s point (i.e., that some of the ECF disputed the so-called “extra” books) is moot. That many of the ECF DID count the “extra” books as canon is still a point in your favor, though, since it shows the books had pedigree. Beyond that, the two resources above should be a help.
 
Also, remind your friend that, before 1599, Protestants had the same “extra” books in their Bible as well! So even by his own tradition, the Deuterocanonicals were accepted until they were later taken out. So, no matter how you slice it, it is the Protestants that changed the Bible, and, in the words of Ricky Ricardo, they have some splaining to do. :cool:
 
JeffersonD said:
I’m in a discussion about the canonicity of the Deuterocanonical books. The person I am debating has two problems with these books: 1. The Church Fathers didn’t agree on these books and so they shouldn’t be in the Bible and 2.
Click to expand...
The Church Fathers also didn’t agree on some of the books of the NT that ended up being included in the canon of Scripture (for example, Revelation comes to mind). So disagreement between Church Fathers should not motivate someone to deny that certain scriptural texts are divinely inspired.
He says the DC is not quoted in the New Testament and so it isn’t inspired. Of course this is really a problem with Church Authority rather than anything else but he asked me to find where the DC is quoted in the NT.
Click to expand...
There is a big problem with your friend’s position here. He should consider the full ramifications of his statement. Does he believe that an Old Testament book being quoted in the New Testament demonstrates divine inspiration? If so, tell him about the Book of Enoch: sacred-texts.com/bib/boe/boe004.htm
It is part of the Pseudepigrapha, a collection of apocryphal Jewish texts which many of the ancient Jews and Christians thought was divinely inspired. Nevertheless, the Book of Enoch was excluded from the Old Testament canon and has never appeared in a Catholic or Protestant Bible (Jews no longer consider it divinely inspired either).

In the Book of Enoch the following statement is found:

“And behold! He cometh with ten thousands of His holy ones
To execute judgment upon all,
And to destroy all the ungodly:
And to convict all flesh
Of all the works of their ungodliness which they have ungodly committed,
And of all the hard things which ungodly sinners have spoken against Him.” (Enoch 1:9)

And yet, this is quoted in the New Testament’s Letter of Jude:

“It was of these also that Enoch
in the seventh generation from Adam prophesied, saying,
‘Behold, the Lord came with myriads of his holy ones,
to execute judgment on all,
to convict all the ungodly of all their deeds of ungodliness
which they have committed in such an ungodly way,
and of all the harsh things which ungodly sinners have spoken against him’.” (Jude 1:14-15)

So if your friend rejects the Deuterocanonical books because they are not quoted in the New Testament, should he now believe that the Book of Enoch is divinely inspired because it is?
Put that question to him.
 
It is my understanding, though, that they are quoted in the NT. The book I linked to earlier cites many examples.
 
Dave_Noonan said:
Actually, the link above contains a number of factual errors. The “story of Hanukkah”, at least as Mary Fairchild describes it, is not found in 1 Maccabees at all, but is from the Talmud–specifically Shabbat 21b.

The Encanaea described in John 10:22 is actually the festival Sukkot, where the dedication of the temple was celebrated, and which constituted one of the three mandated pilgrimage festivals for Israelites, which would explain why Jesus went to Jerusalem for the festival. (Hanukkah never has been a pilgrimage festival.)

This link is not too bad:

jewishfederations.org/page.aspx?id=47440
Click to expand...
As the link states, observance of Sukkot may have been shifted to Hanukkah. That does not mean it wasn’t Hanukkah.

Read how a Jew translates it (emphasis in original):
Jewish New Testament
Yochanan 10:22
Then came Chanukkah in Yerushalayim. It was winter.

Notice also the second part of the verse says, “It was winter.” Sukkot is celebrated in autumn (late September to early October on the Gregorian calendar). Hanukkah, however, is (or can be) celebrated in winter.
 
There are no direct quotes. You can go over that entire list and see for yourself. Most of that list is bogus. Go to the verses they cite and see.
There are a few inferences however.
 
Rightlydivide said:
There are no direct quotes. You can go over that entire list and see for yourself. Most of that list is bogus. Go to the verses they cite and see.
There are a few inferences however.
Click to expand...
The criteria is specious anyway. If quotation = canonicity, then we’d all have to throw out Song of Songs, Ecclesiastes, Esther, Obadiah, Zephaniah, Judges, 1 Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Lamentations and Nahum—none of which are quoted in the NT. And we’d have to add Enoch, the Assumption of Moses and maybe some pagan poets—which are quoted in the NT.
 
JeffersonD said:
The Church Fathers didn’t agree on these books and so they shouldn’t be in the Bible and 2.
Click to expand...
If your friend really believed debate disqualified something, then the debate in Acts 15 cannot be resolved, no? And your friend would also have to discard other books the ECFs debated on like Esther or Revelation or 2 Peter, etc… In other words, your friend is positing a made-up criteria that would disintegrate his own Bible if he adhered to it.
 
MarcoPolo said:
The criteria is specious anyway. If quotation = canonicity, then we’d all have to throw out Song of Songs, Ecclesiastes, Esther, Obadiah, Zephaniah, Judges, 1 Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Lamentations and Nahum—none of which are quoted in the NT. And we’d have to add Enoch, the Assumption of Moses and maybe some pagan poets—which are quoted in the NT.
Click to expand...
I have never stated that quotation=canonicity.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top