Do the deuterocanonicals claim to be inspired?

  • Thread starter Thread starter FLcath
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
F

FLcath

Guest
A strong fundamentalist Christian friend of mine recently gave me some materials he had that dealt with the differences between Protestant and Catholic Bibles. In them was a list of objections to the 7 books not included in their Bible. One of these was:

“Not one of the writers of these books claimed to be inspired. In fact, 1 Macc. 9:27 actually says ‘there hasn’t been a prophet in Israel for some time.’ (See also 1 Macc 4:46; 14:41.) This contrasts with the rest of the OT. You can’t read the OT without coming across ‘thus says the Lord’ or ‘the Lord spoke unto me saying’ everywhere-over 3000 times!”

Is this true? Is this really relevant? Any ideas on how I could answer him?
 
FLcath said:
A strong fundamentalist Christian friend of mine recently gave me some materials he had that dealt with the differences between Protestant and Catholic Bibles. In them was a list of objections to the 7 books not included in their Bible. One of these was:

“Not one of the writers of these books claimed to be inspired. In fact, 1 Macc. 9:27 actually says ‘there hasn’t been a prophet in Israel for some time.’ (See also 1 Macc 4:46; 14:41.) This contrasts with the rest of the OT. You can’t read the OT without coming across ‘thus says the Lord’ or ‘the Lord spoke unto me saying’ everywhere-over 3000 times!”

Is this true? Is this really relevant? Any ideas on how I could answer him?
Click to expand...
Most of the NT texts do not claim to be inspired.

Jesus used these books.

Paul, when he wrote “all scripture is inspired” was speaking of these books, which were part of the canon he used.

The Infallible Council declared them inspired in 430, along with the NT.

Rebels against the authority of Jesus and the Apostolic Successors changed the canon 1500+ years later.
 
FLcath said:
A strong fundamentalist Christian friend of mine recently gave me some materials he had that dealt with the differences between Protestant and Catholic Bibles. In them was a list of objections to the 7 books not included in their Bible. One of these was:

“Not one of the writers of these books claimed to be inspired. In fact, 1 Macc. 9:27 actually says ‘there hasn’t been a prophet in Israel for some time.’ (See also 1 Macc 4:46; 14:41.) This contrasts with the rest of the OT. You can’t read the OT without coming across ‘thus says the Lord’ or ‘the Lord spoke unto me saying’ everywhere-over 3000 times!”

Is this true? Is this really relevant? Any ideas on how I could answer him?
Click to expand...
Quote for him Wisdom 2:12-20 (written by Jews) and dare him to say that isnt inspired. It is the most explicit prophecy of Jesus in the OT.
 
FLcath said:
A strong fundamentalist Christian friend of mine recently gave me some materials he had that dealt with the differences between Protestant and Catholic Bibles. In them was a list of objections to the 7 books not included in their Bible. One of these was:

“Not one of the writers of these books claimed to be inspired. In fact, 1 Macc. 9:27 actually says ‘there hasn’t been a prophet in Israel for some time.’ (See also 1 Macc 4:46; 14:41.) This contrasts with the rest of the OT. You can’t read the OT without coming across ‘thus says the Lord’ or ‘the Lord spoke unto me saying’ everywhere-over 3000 times!”

Is this true? Is this really relevant? Any ideas on how I could answer him?
Click to expand...
There is not a “thus saith the Lord” in*** the truncated Protestant version of the Book of Esther…in fact their version doesn’t even mention God!*** The Catholic Book of Esther does. 😉

The excuses given by Protestants for abbreviating the Holy Bible are ridiculous.

See also: How Big is Your Book of Daniel?
 
Catholic_Dude said:
Quote for him Wisdom 2:12-20 (written by Jews) and dare him to say that isnt inspired. It is the most explicit prophecy of Jesus in the OT.
Click to expand...
1 For they have said, reasoning with themselves, but not right: The time of our life is short and tedious, and in the end of a man there is no remedy, and no man hath been known to have returned from hell:

2 For we are born of nothing, and after this we shall be as if we had not been: for the breath in our nostrils is smoke: and speech a spark to move our heart,

3 Which being put out, our body shall be ashes, and our spirit shall be poured abroad as soft air, and our life shall pass away as the trace of a cloud, and shall be dispersed as a mist, which is driven away by the beams of the sun, and overpowered with the heat thereof:

4 And our name in time shall be forgotten, and no man shall have any remembrance of our works.

5 For our time is as the passing of a shadow, and there is no going back of our end: for it is fast sealed, and no man returneth.

6 Come therefore, and let us enjoy the good things that are present, and let us speedily use the creatures as in youth.

7 Let us fill ourselves with costly wine, and ointments: and let not the flower of the time pass by us.

8 Let us crown ourselves with roses, before they be withered: let no meadow escape our riot.

9 Let none of us go without his part in luxury: let us everywhere leave tokens of joy: for this is our portion, and this our lot.

10 Let us oppress the poor just man, and not spare the widow, nor honour the ancient grey hairs of the aged.

11 But let our strength be the law of justice: for that which is feeble, is found to be nothing worth.

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.

21 These things they thought, and were deceived: for their own malice blinded them.

22 And they knew not the secrets of God, nor hoped for the wages of justice, nor esteemed the honour of holy souls.

23 For God created man incorruptible, and to the image of his own likeness he made him.

24 But by the envy of the devil, death came into the world:

25 And they follow him that are of his side.
 
Sacred writers are often humble about their divinely inspired writings. See, for example, 1 Cor. 7:40 – Paul says he “thinks” that he has the Spirit of God.

2 Tim. 3:16 - the inspired Scripture that Paul was referring to included the deuterocanonical texts. The books Baruch, Tobit, Maccabees, Judith, Sirach, Wisdom and parts of Daniel and Esther were all included in the Septuagint that Jesus and the apostles used.

If you want a huge list of NT verses referencing the deuterocanonical books go to scripturecatholic.com/deuterocanon.html

Here are a couple examples.

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.

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.

Also, I’m interested in hearing some of your friends other objections.

Peace,

Ryan 🙂
 
A book claiming to be inspired does not make it inspired. The Book of Mormon does. The Koran does. Neither of them are.

In the New Testament only Revelation claims to be inspired, yet we do not accept its inspiration on that basis. Gnostic writings claim to be inspired but we toss them out with no problems.

He’s using the wrong criterion.

By the way, Esther, the Song of Solomon, and a few other Old Testament books do not have a single “Thus says the Lord”.
 
FLcath said:
A strong fundamentalist Christian friend of mine recently gave me some materials he had that dealt with the differences between Protestant and Catholic Bibles. In them was a list of objections to the 7 books not included in their Bible. One of these was:

“Not one of the writers of these books claimed to be inspired. In fact, 1 Macc. 9:27 actually says ‘there hasn’t been a prophet in Israel for some time.’ (See also 1 Macc 4:46; 14:41.) This contrasts with the rest of the OT. You can’t read the OT without coming across ‘thus says the Lord’ or ‘the Lord spoke unto me saying’ everywhere-over 3000 times!”
Click to expand...

Does it occur in Genesis 😃 ? No.​

Is this true? Is this really relevant? Any ideas on how I could answer him?
Click to expand...

You could point out that:​

  • 1. The formula “Thus saith the LORD” does not of itself prove anything - except that those words occurs in those books.
  • 2. There are vast stretches of the Biblical text which have no such words in them
  • 3. That formula is used for the words of the Prophets - what justification is there for applying them to non-Prophetic texts as well ? Only this one - a Christian tends to take for granted that the words mean what he is used to their meaning; he’s Christian, so he interprets them in the light of the faith he has received. It does not follow that this is all they ever, or originally, meant - the Prophets were not Evangelicals, or Fundamemtalists, or Christians at all.
  • 4. Similar claims to inspiration appear outside Israel - which is why the mere fact of such a claim within the Biblical texts is not of itself a strong argument for the inspiration, etc., of the Biblical texts.
  • 5. As words, those are no more impressive than any others - it is the gift of faith, not the words as such, that shows the reader that these words are inspired. And this God-given gift, not the text as such, is what commends the Deuterocanonical books as inspired to us Catholics 🙂 Since we are prone to error, the God Who is the True Author of all Scripture also commends these Books to us by commending the Councils to us which have declared those books to be sacred, inspired, & canonical. Scripture gains its force as Scripture, not from the words it is made of, but, from God its Author: the same God who:
    • protects Councils from teaching falsehood
    • is at work in the Church
    • & in the Christian.
      None of this will prove anything whatever - taken together, they may re-inforce one another 🙂
 
Thanks so much for the super helpful replies. The list of NT verses referencing the deuterocanonicals was especially helpful. I’ll be posting another of my friend’s objections shortly that I’d appreciate some advice on too. He actually gave me a list of about seven reasons why they don’t include the deuterocanonicals, and I’d like to be able to answer each one in depth.
 
Do the deuterocanonicals claim to be inspired?
Yes. There is much ’ life wisdom ’ in the deuterocanonical books, therefore they are inspired too , and its good to read them.

Reading the Theological Literature we can see where is the wisdom , where is the good example for us , where is the moral.

Some Scriptural writings is like a finger who is pointing to heaven.
Instead of over-examining the finger some times its worthy to look above , to the direction where the finger is pointing.
 
Wisdom 2:12-20 Prophecy of Christ?

The Book of Wisdom
Chapter 2
1
they who said among themselves, thinking not aright: “Brief and troublous is our lifetime; neither is there any remedy for man’s dying, nor is anyone known to have come back from the nether world.
2
For haphazard were we born, and hereafter we shall be as though we had not been; Because the breath in our nostrils is a smoke and reason is a spark at the beating of our hearts,
3
And when this is quenched, our body will be ashes and our spirit will be poured abroad like unresisting air.
4
Even our name will be forgotten in time, and no one will recall our deeds. So our life will pass away like the traces of a cloud, and will be dispersed like a mist pursued by the sun’s rays and overpowered by its heat.
5
For our lifetime is the passing of a shadow; and our dying cannot be deferred because it is fixed with a seal; and no one returns.
6
Come, therefore, let us enjoy the good things that are real, and use the freshness of creation avidly.
7
Let us have our fill of costly wine and perfumes, and let no springtime blossom pass us by;
8
let us crown ourselves with rosebuds ere they wither.
9
1 Let no meadow be free from our wantonness; everywhere let us leave tokens of our rejoicing, for this our portion is, and this our lot.
10
Let us oppress the needy just man; let us neither spare the widow nor revere the old man for his hair grown white with time.
11
But let our strength be our norm of justice; for weakness proves itself useless.
12
2 3 Let us beset the just one, because he is obnoxious to us; he sets himself against our doings, Reproaches us for transgressions of the law and charges us with violations of our training.
13
He professes to have knowledge of God and styles himself a child of the LORD.
14
To us he is the censure of our thoughts; merely to see him is a hardship for us,
15
Because his life is not like other men’s, and different are his ways.
16
He judges us debased; he holds aloof from our paths as from things impure. He calls blest the destiny of the just and boasts that God is his Father.
17
Let us see whether his words be true; let us find out what will happen to him.
18
For if the just one be the son of God, he will defend him and deliver him from the hand of his foes.
19
With revilement and torture let us put him to the test that we may have proof of his gentleness and try his patience.
20
Let us condemn him to a shameful death; for according to his own words, God will take care of him.”
21
These were their thoughts, but they erred; for their wickedness blinded them,
22
And they knew not the hidden counsels of God; neither did they count on a recompense of holiness nor discern the innocent souls’ reward.
23
For God formed man to be imperishable; the image of his own nature he made him.
24
But by the envy of the devil, death entered the world, and they who are in his possession experience it.

Ah, NOT
 
**Let us condemn him to a shameful death; for according to his own words, God will take care of him." **
21
These were their thoughts, but they erred; for their wickedness blinded them,
22
And they knew not the hidden counsels of God; neither did they count on a recompense of holiness nor discern the innocent souls’ reward.

When was that book written?
Among the Dead Sea Scrolls there are fragment of Messianic text even more explicit. In fact the there is a growing strong case for the Septuagint with the deuterocannon as the Christian OT, not the Masoretic text.
 
Matthew 27

45From the sixth hour until the ninth hour darkness came over all the land. 46About the ninth hour Jesus cried out in a loud voice, “Eloi, Eloi,[c] lama sabachthani?”—which means, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”[d]
47When some of those standing there heard this, they said, “He’s calling Elijah.”

48Immediately one of them ran and got a sponge. He filled it with wine vinegar, put it on a stick, and offered it to Jesus to drink. 49The rest said, “Now leave him alone. Let’s see if Elijah comes to save him.”

Mark 15

36One man ran, filled a sponge with wine vinegar, put it on a stick, and offered it to Jesus to drink. “Now leave him alone. Let’s see if Elijah comes to take him down,” he said.

And, yet Elijah did not show up to take Jesus off the cross.
 
Prophecies to not have to get realized verbatim. If fact they rarely do. Still amazing for a prechristian text.
The issue of the Bible formation is moving me towards the RCC and EOC right now.
What are the probabilites of someone making a prophecy a century early and getting let say 75% of the details right?

Well, the writter missed on Elijah but something even more incredible happened according to the Bible. Could he prophetized that?
 
FLcath said:
A strong fundamentalist Christian friend of mine recently gave me some materials he had that dealt with the differences between Protestant and Catholic Bibles. In them was a list of objections to the 7 books not included in their Bible. One of these was:

“Not one of the writers of these books claimed to be inspired. In fact, 1 Macc. 9:27 actually says ‘there hasn’t been a prophet in Israel for some time.’ (See also 1 Macc 4:46; 14:41.) This contrasts with the rest of the OT. You can’t read the OT without coming across ‘thus says the Lord’ or ‘the Lord spoke unto me saying’ everywhere-over 3000 times!”

Is this true? Is this really relevant? Any ideas on how I could answer him?
Click to expand...
  • They don’t - so he’s right about that
  • With the possible exception of Revelation, none of the Biblical books do
    • but that does not matter
      As for the formulae that he mentions - these
  • do occur in prophetic oracles
  • do not occur in all or even most of the OT - let alone the New
    • a. don’t guarantee the inspiration
    • b. or the canonicity of the books they occur in,
    • c. but only the prophetic character of the oracles they occur in
    • d. & do not guarantee that the prophet is a genuine prophet
      So that particular argument is valueless as a guarantee of the inspiritation of the Bible as a whole. “This is the word of the Lord” can be extended to refer to the other OT books only by a theological argument for the rightness of doing so - & further argument is needed if it is to apply to the NT as well. And that is all before we get to discussing the longer canon of the CC - so even if one is a Protestant Fundamentalist, the words “This is the word of the Lord” will not work as a guarantee for the whole Bible as one has it - unless one shows by argument that those words apply to all 66 books.
Genesis does not include it - nor do Proverbs, Esther, Ecclesiastes, Luke, Romans, Revelation, John, etc.

In any case, there is no reason to suppose that what the NT writers call Scripture must mean all & only the books that modern Christians call Scripture. St. Jude treats 1 Enoch as a fully prophetic text - normal fundamentalist argument requires Enoch to be as fully & genuinely a prophet as Isaiah. Yet the inspired Apostle’s inspired quotation of the inspired Prophet Enoch, who prophesied before the Flood, is ignored. This is grossly disobedient to God’s words through His Apostle Jude: if Enoch is a prophet in Jude’s (= God’s) opinion, he should be a prophet in ours too - especially if we are Protestant Fundamentalists.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top