Double standards.. judging the "Apocrypha"

[Metaron]

Anybody ever read the Book of Enoch"?

Amazing stuff in there!

I believe it to be a historical account of what happened in Genesis 6. I have it in my top drawer. Remember, the council of Trent only defined *the minimum *of Biblical books. Their may be a few more out there. Who knows?

 

[inthecloud]

I agree with Luther. The Book of Esther doesn’t acknowledge God ever

Actually the Quramm sect have a big issue with the Pharisees in considering Esther and Daniel as inspired according to them they were as inspired or not as Macabees and Ben Sirach. And they were written in at the same time and in hebrew.
Each time I study the Dead Sea Scrolls issue I tend to support the case for the Septuagint canon and OT text as the right Christian text. So the RCC and even more the EOC were right about the Bible canon.
And I can tell you things about Jeremiah and Isaias (most of those book were heavely modified by 90AD).
Maybe is too late to revise the OT canon, but some deuterocanonicals were inspired and some canonical books were not. The Esenes wanted Daniel and Esther out of the canon. The Pharisees wanted Macabees out for political reasons, and Tobit and Wisdom for other reason we can suppose (aramaic, like Mark and maybe Q you get the picture). The jews sects had several canons them. The Pharisees won after the destruction of the Second Temple and imposed their canon and became the Tannaites. The Christians went for the Septuagint until some german exmonk…

 

[inthecloud]

BTW Jesus even quoted from the book on Enoch, insane stuff there! And Paul quoted from…

 

[Alexius]

Actually the Quramm sect have a big issue with the Pharisees in considering Esther and Daniel as inspired according to them they were as inspired or not as Macabees and Ben Sirach. And they were written in at the same time and in hebrew.
Each time I study the Dead Sea Scrolls issue I tend to support the case for the Septuagint canon and OT text as the right Christian text. So the RCC and even more the EOC were right about the Bible canon.
And I can tell you things about Jeremiah and Isaias (most of those book were heavely modified by 90AD).
Maybe is too late to revise the OT canon, but some deuterocanonicals were inspired and some canonical books were not. The Esenes wanted Daniel and Esther out of the canon. The Pharisees wanted Macabees out for political reasons, and Tobit and Wisdom for other reason we can suppose (aramaic, like Mark and maybe Q you get the picture). The jews sects had several canons them. The Pharisees won after the destruction of the Second Temple and imposed their canon and became the Tannaites. The Christians went for the Septuagint until some german exmonk…

I recall that Esther has historically caused many issues among the Jewish Rabbis…

 

[inthecloud]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mannyfit75
The Jews did not have a set canon for a long time. The Sadducees had a separate canon. The Pharisees had a separate canon.

Again, Beckwith and Bruce disagree w/ you Manny. Can you provide a primary source for your claim?

A good reading might be Hershel Schanks compilation of scholary articles in the Dead Sea Scrolls. They have founded huge polemics between Jews about the books that were inspired during Jesus times.
And yes the Saducees only regarded as inspired the Torah, so did the Samaritans, the Pharisees regarded as inspired the books Hillel listed plus Daniel and Esther.
The Quramm books in hebrew generaly matched the Septuagint
text. Ben Sirach and 1 Macabees were written in Hebrew.
Josephus was a Pharisee and quoted the Pharisees canon and a complete Samuel 1, 11 now founded for the first time in Quramm. Philo had a very light knowledge of the Esenes. The Jewish sect closer to the early Christian were the Esenes but is now clear that Jesus took a swing at them too in the sermon of the Mountain and in the discussion on the fishing vessel. But John the Baptist and John the Apostle might have been Esenes because their behavior and writting style.

 

[Alexius]

It does if you read the unabridged version; try any Catholic Bible. God is in there. (For that matter, He’s in the abridged Esther too; just not by name). :nope::bigyikes: :nope: :bigyikes:

Paul does not say " faith alone". The only place that uses the phrase " faith alone" is James, and that says that “faith alone” will NOT save you!
(You seriously have gotta read, say, the Latin. Or the original Greek).

I was giving Luther’s argument as found in his writings. He added “alone” to the Romans passage in his German translation of the Scripture and told his followers that if they were questioned about the addition, to tell them it was done under the authority of Dr. Martin Luther. That’s why I put the :doh2: at the end…Luther also hated James and wanted it out. I believe “an epistle of chaff” was his description of it. The truth is that he wanted to rework the faith. He valued the Councils and Fathers, but only insofar as they supported his theology. That is why he deemed certain books incorrectly placed in the canon. In his Bible, I believe the Deuterocanonicals were placed in the endnotes. Later, the Radical Reformers trashed them.

Prayers and petitions,
Alexius

 

[Mannyfit75]

There is no evidence that the rabbi’s at Jamnia even discussed the deuterocanonicals.

Cite your source.

Can you quote some source for these claims, other than an apologist? You haven’t established what books were included in the Jewish Septuagint and which books in the Jewish septuagint were considered canonical and which books weren’t.

Again, Beckwith and Bruce disagree w/ you Manny. Can you provide a primary source for your claim?

Who is Beckwith and Bruce?

Source: columbia.edu/cu/augustine/arch/sbrandt/canon.htm

matt1618.freeyellow.com/cloud.html

I quoted most of the sources that Matt’s website verbatim

 

[exoflare]

That fizzled out too quickly…

Doesn’t any Protestant know of some consistent standard they use to determine inspiration, then? None have been mentioned so far. It’s funny but over on some other boards I saw some guy talking about how those 7 books supposedly didn’t “meet the criterion” for inspired scripture. Needless to say, he didn’t explain what that “criterion” was either… just expected readers to take his word for it.