Deuterocanonicals

[Mangy_Donkey]

Did the Jewish Old Testament hold the Deuterocanonicals? I have been told by protestants that it did not and that it still today does not, and that our Savior, being a Jew, would not have had the Deuterocanonicals in his Scripture.

 

[NewAbdalMaseeh]

Before I begin, let me say glory be to the one who created us, our Lord, God, and Savior, Jesus Christ… glory unto ages!

…and greetings to Mangy!

To answer your question, there was not a single, solidified Jewish canon before the time of Christ. Consider the following from the Encyclopaedia Judaica:

It is true that in the generation after the destruction of the Temple the author of IV Esdras 14:41-46 (cf. Joseph., Apion, 1:39-41) seems to imply a closed biblical canon of 24 books; nevertheless, tannaitic and amoraic disputes about the canonicity of Proverbs, Song of Songs, and Ecclesiastes (Eduy. 5:3; Yad. 3:5; ARN 1:2), as well as Esther (Meg. 7a), show that the widely held, though unsupported, view that the formal and final canonization of the Ketuvim occurred at the Synod of Jabneh (c. 100 C.E.) has to be considerably modified. More probably, decisions taken on that occasion came to be widely accepted and thus regarded as final in succeeding generations.

**SOURCE: **“Bible” in The Encyclopaedia Judaica, (Keter, 1971), Vol. 4, p. 825.

In other words, the Jewish canon was still fluid well into the second century! The same entry says the following regarding Sirach:

The ambivalent attitude on the part of the Rabbis to the Wisdom of Ben Sira is highly significant. The fact that in the middle of the second century C.E. it was necessary to emphasize the uncanonical status of this book (Tosef., Yad. 2:13) and to forbid its reading (TJ, Sanh. 10:1, 28a) proves that the corpus of Ketuvim was still fluid at this time, and that Ben Sira had acquired a measure of sanctity in the popular consciousness. Despite the ban, the book continued to achieve wide circulation. The amoraim even quote from it, employing the introductory terminology otherwise exclusively reserved for Scripture (cf. Nid. 16b di-khetiv; Ber 55 she-ne’emar). In one instance, a third-generation Babylonian amora actually cites Ben Sira as Ketuvim as opposed to Torah and Prophets (BK 92b).

At the end it quotes tractate Baba Qama 92b in the Babylonian Talmud. I’ll quote the relevant passage here, which was discussing scriptural proof for a saying similar to “birds of a feather flock together”:

Raba said to Rabbah bar Maree: "From where [do we find scriptural support for] this utterance that people say “a bad palm grows next to barren trees’?” [Rabbah Bar Maree] said: "this utterance is written in the Torah, repeated in the Nebiim, and stated a third time in the Ketubim.* …] It is written in the Torah, for it is written: Esau went to Ishmael (Genesis 28:9). It is repeated in the Nebiim, for it is written: boorishmen collected aroundJephthah and went forth with him (Judges 11:3). And it is stated a third time in the Ketubim, for it is written: every being is drawn to its own kind; with his own kind every man associates (Sirach 13:15).

In other words, some Talmudic sages considered Sirach to be part of their canon (i.e. in the “Ketuvim” or “Writings” section).

Beyond that, in a footnote to the Soncino translation of Sanhedrin (another tractate in the Babylonian Talmud, which has a portion in which Talmudic sages dispute one sage’s attempt to ban Sirach), one finds the following:

Yad Ramah records a reading confirmed by many MSS. ‘Had not the Rabbis hidden this book, we should have expounded them, etc.’ implying that Ben Sira was hitherto included in the canon

**SOURCE: **Isidore Epstein, H. Freeman, The Babylonian Talmud: Sanhedrin, (Soncino, 1935), p. 682.

EvenRabbi Adin Steinsaltz, one of the greatest Talmudic scholars alive today, concedes the following in his commentaryon Sanhedrin:

It must be added that even in the Talmud the Book of Ben Sira is quoted as though it were Scripture, and in some places it is hinted that the passages are indeed scriptural.

**Source: **Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz, The Talmud: The Steinsaltz Edition, (Random House, 1999), vol. XXI, p. 47.

 

[NewAbdalMaseeh]

Let me add a bit more, by appealing to Josephus (which usually those who attack the “Deuterocanonicals” try to emply in their favor).

Here I would like to look at how Josephus understood the book of Esther, but first I want to touch on his sources for “Jewish Antiquities”. Note that at the very beginning of Against Apion, Josephus writes the following:

In my history of our Antiquities, most excellent Epaphroditus, I have, I think, made sufficiently clear to any who may peruse that work the extreme antiquity of our Jewish race, the purity of the original stock, and the manner in which it established itself in the country which we occupy today. That history embraces a period of five thousand years, and was written by me in Greek on the basis of our sacred books.

**Source: **Josephus, “Against Apion,” Book I, Chapter 1, from H.St.J. Thackeray (trans.), Loeb Classic Library 186 Harvard, 1997), p. 186

Josephus is saying that “Jewish Antiquities” was based on the scriptures. Josephus again claims the scriptures as his source for “Jewish Antiquities” later in “Against Apion”:

In my Antiquities, as I said, I have given a translation of our sacred books; being a priest and of priestly ancestry, I am well versed in the philosophy of those writings.

**Source: **Josephus, “Against Apion,” Book I, Chapter 10, from Thackeray, p. 185

At the beginning of “Jewish Antiquities” itself, Josephus writes the following:

I have undertaken this present work in the belief that the whole Greek-speaking world will find it worthy of attention; for it will embrace our entire ancient history and political constitution,
translated from the Hebrew records.

**Source: **Josephus, “Jewish Antiquities,” Book I (preface), section 2, from Thackeray, Loeb Classic Library 242 (Harvard, 1991), p. 5

So, again, Josephus cites the scriptures as the source of his “Jewish Antiquities” (and at the end of his work he makes the same claim). With that in mind, we can safely assume that Josephus wished to convey that what he said about Esther was from the scriptures. With that in mind, let us consider what Josephus wrote about Esther.

It is in book XX, chapter 6, of “Jewish Antiquities” that Josephus discusses Esther. Of that chapter, I would like to focus specifically on sections 5, 6 and 7. Section 5 corresponds with Esther 3:1-8, where Haman comes into contact with Mordecai, is enraged by the fact that he will not prostrate in reverence before him, and subsequently speaks to the King about destroying the Jewish people.

The beginning of section 6 corresponds with Esther 3:9-13, where Haman gets permission to produce a written edict in the King’s name calling for the destruction of the Jews, and is also provided with finances and manpower to carry out the task of sending the written edict to all the lands/peoples within the King’s domain.

Jumping to the end of section 6, that portion corresponds with Esther 3:14-15, where the decree is hastily sent out, while Haman stayed in Shushan (Susa) eating and drinking. Then, section 7 corresponds with the fourth chapter of Esther, starting with Mordecai finding out about the written decree, ripping his garments, and putting on sack-cloth and ashes.

What is significant is what Josephus puts in between the beginning of section 6 and the ending of section 6, just mentioned immediately above. The meat of section 6 corresponds with a large chunk of text that does not exist in the Masoretic text, but is in the Septuagint (and falls right between 3:13 and 3:14). It is the text of the decree, which in the 1611 King James Bible appeared in the “Apocrypha” section as the 13th chapter of Esther (first seven verses).

So let me be clear here: Josephus follows the order of the Septuagint, not the Masoretic Text, and even includes text only found in the Septuagint (which was disdainfully called “Apocrypha” by Protestants and ripped from the historic Christian Old Testament). So this begs the question for anyone seeking to appeal to Josephus when attacking the ‘Deuterocanonical’ texts of the Bible: what did Josephus’ canon look like? Josephus claimed he was employing the Hebrew scriptures - why does his text mirror the Septuagint? And why, for that matter, does the Septuagint have such “extra” text if it was never originally part of the Hebrew canon?

The fact that Josephus’ canon differed from the way the Masoretic Text is today shows that there was not a single, fixed Jewish canon even in the first century. The fact that the Jewish canon of today was only formalized AFTER the advent of Christianity results in the conclusion that Christians should not look to the Jewish canon for determining their Old Testament.

 

[thistle]

Did the Jewish Old Testament hold the Deuterocanonicals? I have been told by protestants that it did not and that it still today does not, and that our Savior, being a Jew, would not have had the Deuterocanonicals in his Scripture.

Jesus and the Apostles quoted from the deuterocanonicals.

Eph. 1:17 - Paul’s prayer for a “spirit of wisdom” follows the prayer for the spirit of wisdom in Wisdom 7:7.

Eph. 6:14 - Paul describing the breastplate of righteousness is the same as Wis. 5:18. See also Isaiah 59:17 and 1Thess. 5:8.

Eph. 6:13-17 - in fact, the whole discussion of armor, helmet, breastplate, sword, shield follows Wis. 5:17-20.

1 Tim. 6:15 - Paul’s description of God as Sovereign and King of kings is from 2 Macc. 12:15; 13:4.

2 Tim. 4:8 - Paul’s description of a crown of righteousness is similar to Wisdom 5:16.

Heb. 4:12 - Paul’s description of God’s word as a sword is similar to Wisdom 18:15.

Heb. 11:5 - Enoch being taken up is also referenced in Wis 4:10 and Sir 44:16. See also 2 Kings 2:1-13 & Sir 48:9 regarding Elijah.

Heb 11:35 - Paul teaches about the martyrdom of the mother and her sons described in 2 Macc. 6:18, 7:1-42.

Heb. 12:12 - the description “drooping hands” and “weak knees” comes from Sirach 25:23.

James 1:19 - let every man be quick to hear and slow to respond follows Sirach 5:11.

James 2:23 - it was reckoned to him as righteousness follows 1 Macc. 2:52 - it was reckoned to him as righteousness.

James 3:13 - James’ instruction to perform works in meekness follows Sirach 3:17.

James 5:3 - describing silver which rusts and laying up treasure follows Sirach 29:10-11.

James 5:6 - condemning and killing the “righteous man” follows Wisdom 2:10-20.

1 Peter 1:6-7 - Peter teaches about testing faith by purgatorial fire as described in Wisdom 3:5-6 and Sirach 2:5.

1 Peter 1:17 - God judging each one according to his deeds refers to Sirach 16:12 - God judges man according to his deeds.

2 Peter 2:7 - God’s rescue of a righteous man (Lot) is also described in Wisdom 10:6.

Rev. 1:18; Matt. 16:18 - power of life over death and gates of Hades follows Wis. 16:13.

Rev. 2:12 - reference to the two-edged sword is similar to the description of God’s Word in Wisdom 18:16.

Rev. 5:7 - God is described as seated on His throne, and this is the same description used in Sirach 1:8.

Rev. 8:3-4 - prayers of the saints presented to God by the hand of an angel follows Tobit 12:12,15.

Rev. 8:7 - raining of hail and fire to the earth follows Wisdom 16:22 and Sirach 39:29.

Rev. 9:3 - raining of locusts on the earth follows Wisdom 16:9.

Rev. 11:19 - the vision of the ark of the covenant (Mary) in a cloud of glory was prophesied in 2 Macc. 2:7.

Rev. 17:14 - description of God as King of kings follows 2 Macc. 13:4.

Rev. 19:1 - the cry “Hallelujah” at the coming of the new Jerusalem follows Tobit 13:18.

Rev. 19:11 - the description of the Lord on a white horse in the heavens follows 2 Macc. 3:25; 11:8.

Rev. 19:16 - description of our Lord as King of kings is taken from 2 Macc. 13:4.

Rev. 21:19 - the description of the new Jerusalem with precious stones is prophesied in Tobit 13:17.

Exodus 23:7 - do not slay the innocent and righteous - Dan. 13:53 - do not put to death an innocent and righteous person.

continued…

 

[thistle]

continued…

1 Cor. 8:5-6 - Paul acknowledging many “gods” but one Lord follows Wis. 13:3.

1 Cor. 10:1 - Paul’s description of our fathers being under the cloud passing through the sea refers to Wisdom 19:7.

1 Cor. 10:20 - what pagans sacrifice they offer to demons and not to God refers to Baruch 4:7.

1 Cor. 15:29 - if no expectation of resurrection, it would be foolish to be baptized on their behalf follows 2 Macc. 12:43-45.

Eph. 1:17 - Paul’s prayer for a “spirit of wisdom” follows the prayer for the spirit of wisdom in Wisdom 7:7.

Eph. 6:14 - Paul describing the breastplate of righteousness is the same as Wis. 5:18. See also Isaiah 59:17 and 1Thess. 5:8.

Eph. 6:13-17 - in fact, the whole discussion of armor, helmet, breastplate, sword, shield follows Wis. 5:17-20.

1 Tim. 6:15 - Paul’s description of God as Sovereign and King of kings is from 2 Macc. 12:15; 13:4.

2 Tim. 4:8 - Paul’s description of a crown of righteousness is similar to Wisdom 5:16.

Heb. 4:12 - Paul’s description of God’s word as a sword is similar to Wisdom 18:15.

Heb. 11:5 - Enoch being taken up is also referenced in Wis 4:10 and Sir 44:16. See also 2 Kings 2:1-13 & Sir 48:9 regarding Elijah.

Heb 11:35 - Paul teaches about the martyrdom of the mother and her sons described in 2 Macc. 6:18, 7:1-42.

Heb. 12:12 - the description “drooping hands” and “weak knees” comes from Sirach 25:23.

James 1:19 - let every man be quick to hear and slow to respond follows Sirach 5:11.

James 2:23 - it was reckoned to him as righteousness follows 1 Macc. 2:52 - it was reckoned to him as righteousness.

James 3:13 - James’ instruction to perform works in meekness follows Sirach 3:17.

James 5:3 - describing silver which rusts and laying up treasure follows Sirach 29:10-11.

James 5:6 - condemning and killing the “righteous man” follows Wisdom 2:10-20.

1 Peter 1:6-7 - Peter teaches about testing faith by purgatorial fire as described in Wisdom 3:5-6 and Sirach 2:5.

1 Peter 1:17 - God judging each one according to his deeds refers to Sirach 16:12 - God judges man according to his deeds.

2 Peter 2:7 - God’s rescue of a righteous man (Lot) is also described in Wisdom 10:6.

Rev. 1:18; Matt. 16:18 - power of life over death and gates of Hades follows Wis. 16:13.

Rev. 2:12 - reference to the two-edged sword is similar to the description of God’s Word in Wisdom 18:16.

Rev. 5:7 - God is described as seated on His throne, and this is the same description used in Sirach 1:8.

Rev. 8:3-4 - prayers of the saints presented to God by the hand of an angel follows Tobit 12:12,15.

Rev. 8:7 - raining of hail and fire to the earth follows Wisdom 16:22 and Sirach 39:29.

Rev. 9:3 - raining of locusts on the earth follows Wisdom 16:9.

Rev. 11:19 - the vision of the ark of the covenant (Mary) in a cloud of glory was prophesied in 2 Macc. 2:7.

Rev. 17:14 - description of God as King of kings follows 2 Macc. 13:4.

Rev. 19:1 - the cry “Hallelujah” at the coming of the new Jerusalem follows Tobit 13:18.

Rev. 19:11 - the description of the Lord on a white horse in the heavens follows 2 Macc. 3:25; 11:8.

Rev. 19:16 - description of our Lord as King of kings is taken from 2 Macc. 13:4.

Rev. 21:19 - the description of the new Jerusalem with precious stones is prophesied in Tobit 13:17.

Exodus 23:7 - do not slay the innocent and righteous - Dan. 13:53 - do not put to death an innocent and righteous person.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

Is there a textual commentary for these books?

 

[inthecloud]

To be fair with the protestants.

1. The Reformers and St Jerome and St Athanasius weren’t as aware of Jewish politics in the first century as we are today.
2. The word Apocrypha did not had the negative meaning it has today. It meaned hidden books. Origen tought they were no longer usefull in debating Jews (coming from the pharisee/tannaitic/rabbinic traditions) that no longer tought in them as inspired (of course one of the reasons it was because they were too christian). In Luther’s Bible and in the AV 1611 the books were there but in a separate part of the Bible. Were the Calvinist and brittish separatist traditions that in their anything but catholic rage took them out of the Bible completely. And gave the term apocrypha the negative meaning it have today.