E
Eutychus123
Guest
Which teachings of the Catholic Church are based on the Deuterocanonicals, that do not find specific support in other Scripture?
- Status
T
Tietjen
Guest
The only specific teachings that comes to mind at the moment is praying to the dead (Saints). We see an example of this in 2 Maccabees 15:14 - “And Onias spoke, saying, This is a man who loves the brethren and prays much for the people and the holy city, Jeremiah [bodily dead], the prophet of God.”
And then again in 2 Maccabees 12:44 we see the issue of praying FOR the dead - “For if he were not expecting that those who had fallen would rise again, it would have been superfluous and foolish to pray for the dead.”
What I find more intriguing than teachings that are only found in the Deuterocanonicals are the many Deuterocanonical passages that are referenced by Jesus and the Apolostles in the New Testiment books.
Matt. 2:16 - Herod’s decree of slaying innocent children was prophesied in Wis. 11:7 - slaying the holy innocents.
Matt. 6:19-20 - Jesus’ statement about laying up for yourselves treasure in heaven follows Sirach 29:11 - lay up your treasure.
Matt… 7:12 - Jesus’ golden rule “do unto others” is the converse of Tobit 4:15 - what you hate, do not do to others.
Matt. 7:16,20 - Jesus’ statement “you will know them by their fruits” follows Sirach 27:6 - the fruit discloses the cultivation.
Matt. 9:36 - the people were “like sheep without a shepherd” is same as Judith 11:19 - sheep without a shepherd.
Matt. 11:25 - Jesus’ description “Lord of heaven and earth” is the same as Tobit 7:18 - Lord of heaven and earth.
Matt. 12:42 - Jesus refers to the wisdom of Solomon which was recorded and made part of the deuterocanonical books.
Matt. 16:18 - Jesus’ reference to the “power of death” and “gates of Hades” references Wisdom 16:13.
Matt. 22:25; Mark 12:20; Luke 20:29 - Gospel writers refer to the canonicity of Tobit 3:8 and 7:11 regarding the seven brothers.
Matt. 24:15 - the “desolating sacrilege” Jesus refers to is also taken from 1 Macc. 1:54 and 2 Macc. 8:17.
Matt. 24:16 - let those “flee to the mountains” is taken from 1 Macc. 2:28.
Matt. 27:43 - if He is God’s Son, let God deliver him from His adversaries follows Wisdom 2:18.
Mark 4:5,16-17 - Jesus’ description of seeds falling on rocky ground and having no root follows Sirach 40:15.
Mark 9:48 - description of hell where their worm does not die and the fire is not quenched references Judith 16:17.
Luke 1:42 - Elizabeth’s declaration of Mary’s blessedness above all women follows Uzziah’s declaration in Judith 13:18.
Luke 1:52 - Mary’s magnificat addressing the mighty falling from their thrones and replaced by lowly follows Sirach 10:14.
Luke 2:29 - Simeon’s declaration that he is ready to die after seeing the Child Jesus follows Tobit 11:9.
Luke 13:29 - the Lord’s description of men coming from east and west to rejoice in God follows Baruch 4:37.
Luke 21:24 - Jesus’ usage of “fall by the edge of the sword” follows Sirach 28:18.
Luke 24:4 and Acts 1:10 - Luke’s description of the two men in dazzling apparel reminds us of 2 Macc. 3:26.
John 1:3 - all things were made through Him, the Word, follows Wisdom 9:1.
John 3:13 - who has ascended into heaven but He who descended from heaven references Baruch 3:29.
John 4:48; Acts 5:12; 15:12; 2 Cor. 12:12 - Jesus’, Luke’s and Paul’s usage of “signs and wonders” follows Wisdom 8:8.
John 5:18 - Jesus claiming that God is His Father follows Wisdom 2:16.
John 6:35-59 - Jesus’ Eucharistic discourse is foreshadowed in Sirach 24:21.
John 10:22 - the identification of the feast of the dedication is taken from 1 Macc. 4:59.
John 10:36 – Jesus accepts the inspiration of Maccabees as He analogizes the Hanukkah consecration to His own consecration to the Father in 1 Macc. 4:36.
John 15:6 - branches that don’t bear fruit and are cut down follows Wis. 4:5 where branches are broken off.
S
SemperReformada
Guest
While there are certainly references to the dc’s in the NT one has to be careful giving carte blanche to various lists circulating around the internet which supposedly list many or all the varioius references.
For example you chose Matt 2:16 which reads…
***16When Herod realized that he had been outwitted by the Magi, he was furious, and he gave orders to kill all the boys in Bethlehem and its vicinity who were two years old and under, in accordance with the time he had learned from the Magi. 17Then what was said through the prophet Jeremiah was fulfilled: ***
18"A voice is heard in Ramah,
weeping and great mourning,
Rachel weeping for her children
and refusing to be comforted,
because they are no more."
Since Matthew, inspired by the Holy Spirit, tells us the slaying of the innocents was prophesied in Jeremiah I don’t understand the attempt to link it to the book of Wisdom. In fact, if you read the section of Wisdom that is referenced in your list it has nothing at all to do witht he slaying of the innocents.
T
Tietjen
Guest
Of course you are correct. However, using this logic one would say that since Christ was prophesized about in Micah, the references to Him found in Genesis, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Isaiah, Daniel, Zachariah, etc. must be speaking of other sons of God. I.E. - there can be and are multiple references to specific future events found throughout the Old Testament.
Alas, you got me.
Wisdom 11:6-8:
It was verse 7. Sorry about the confusion. There is the possibility that this verse is speaking about the children of Egypt that were slain during the Passover however.
S
SemperReformada
Guest
Of course there can be multiple references/prophecies of the same future event.
But, I think in context the book of Wisdom in this area is discussing an even that took place in the past (from the point of view of the authro of Wisdom). I think, if I remember correctly, these Wisdom verses are dealing w/ the Israelite children who perished in the desert.
Anyway, I have a hard time seeing the context in Wisdom being that of the innocents slain at Herods command.
No problem I understood what you meant. I just don’t see the context as applying to the slaying of the innocents.
Thanks for your response.
S
SteveVH
Guest
I would think that, since the Septuagint was the version used by the Jews of Jesus time, thus used by Jesus himself, that it is probably acceptable to include the deuterocanonical books in the canon of Sacred Scripture.
B
BrianH
Guest
But no one knows what books were included in the LXX at the time of Christ:shrug:
The earliest versions all differ
N
Nine_Two
Guest
Because there was no official Hebrew canon until after Christ.But no one knows what books were included in the LXX at the time of Christ:shrug:
The earliest versions all differ
S
SteveVH
Guest
Ptolemy II Philadelphus, the King of Egypt from 287 to 247 B.C. had established a valuable library at Alexandria and wanted to include the sacred books of the Jews. He requested seventy two Jewish scholars (hence the term “Septuagint”, meaning seventy), six scholars each, from each of the twelve tribes, to translate their sacred writings from Hebrew into Greek so that he and the rest of the Greek-speaking world could understand them, as Greek had become the universal language by that time. Amazingly enough, they each returned with identical translations. While there is some question as to exact dates, it is agreed by most biblical scholars that the use of the Alexandrian version, or the “Septuagint”, was wide-spread by at least 150-100 B.C. (probably sooner) and therefore certainly in use at the time of Christ, and therefore at the origin of the Church (Pentecost). As that was the only canon in existence at that time, it was the canon from which the Catholic Church taught (and still does) and therefore was included in the canon of the Bible. At least that is my understaningBut no one knows what books were included in the LXX at the time of Christ:shrug:
The earliest versions all differ
B
BrianH
Guest
That is probably correct. However, to be fair, there is not really proof either way.
B
BrianH
Guest
I did not know that people still actually believed that old story. I thought most everyone thought that was just a legend. I have five or six books on the subject and none of them think that really occured. That means we have an inspired translation? Can you imagine six scholars from the twelve tribes (thats probably the funniest part) having an exact translation?
Where did you get that information from?
N
Nine_Two
Guest
Yes there is. We know about the meetings of the Jewish scribes which met to create their canon. The manuscripts, called the Masoretic Text, are even named after the group which created them - the Mesorah.That is probably correct. However, to be fair, there is not really proof either way.
B
BrianH
Guest
Really? Tell us what you know
S
SteveVH
Guest
Well, I’m just a poor stupid country boy, Brian, so you’ll have to excuse me. Hopefully I will be as enlightened as you one day.I did not know that people still actually believed that old story. I thought most everyone thought that was just a legend. I have five or six books on the subject and none of them think that really occured. That means we have an inspired translation? Can you imagine six scholars from the twelve tribes (thats probably the funniest part) having an exact translation?
Where did you get that information from?
Try this: newadvent.org/cathen/13722a.htm
B
BrianH
Guest
Even the 1912 source of your informationWell, I’m just a poor stupid country boy, Brian, so you’ll have to excuse me. Hopefully I will be as enlightened as you one day.
Try this: newadvent.org/cathen/13722a.htm
also says
N
Nine_Two
Guest
What exactly are you asking for? Evidence that the Jews created their canon between the Fall of the Temple and the Bar Kokba rebellion, or proof that they had no proper canon before that?
B
BrianH
Guest
Really either one would be fine. What sources/books are you using as well?
N
Nine_Two
Guest
The original source I got this from was a protestant study bible I had years ago, however pretty much any book on textual criticism of the MT will bring it up (particularly in light of Qumran).
S
SteveVH
Guest
Like I said… I’m just a poor stupid country boy.Even the 1912 source of your information
also says
Regardless of the manner of its translation, my original point was its legitimacy as the text in use at the time of Jesus. It seems to me to be the most reliable translation of the Jewish texts, that’s all.
Peace.
B
BrianH
Guest
Qumran? I will find your statement very interesting. Any dogmatic statements or conclusions based upon Qumran(at one time considered to be a grand total of 4000 people according to Philo) will be interesting to evaluate.
As far as any book, I probably own it so lets hear what your conclusions are and the proof please.
- Status