"extra-canonical books"

  • Thread starter Thread starter eo_chibears
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
E

eo_chibears

Guest
Jesus and his apostles quoted many times from the Deuterocanonical Books of the Bible. Why do non-Catholics not have these books in their bibles?
 
To be fair the book of Enoch is quoted in the NT too but we don’t regard it as holy scripture but the Ethiopian Orthodox Church regards it as such.
 
All I know is Catholics have the same books Jesus used and every other person calling themselves a Christian for 1500 years.
 
So under whose direct authority did anyone have to remove books from the Bible? Is it correct that under the authority of God the Catholic Church put the Bible together?
 
KP3243 said:
All I know is Catholics have the same books Jesus used and every other person calling themselves a Christian for 1500 years.
Click to expand...
It is doubful Jesus used the LXX as he was a Palestinian Jew…the LXX was used extensively by the Diaspora and many of the Diaspora had lost touch with Hebrew and Aramaic.

The writers of the NT used and quoted from the LXX is not disputed.
 
Publisher said:
It is doubful Jesus used the LXX as he was a Palestinian Jew…the LXX was used extensively by the Diaspora and many of the Diaspora had lost touch with Hebrew and Aramaic.

The writers of the NT used and quoted from the LXX is not disputed.
Click to expand...
So Jesus didn’t use it, but those who walked with him or were his disciples did? 🤷
 
Publisher said:
It is doubful Jesus used the LXX as he was a Palestinian Jew…the LXX was used extensively by the Diaspora and many of the Diaspora had lost touch with Hebrew and Aramaic.

The writers of the NT used and quoted from the LXX is not disputed.
Click to expand...
The Septuagint is the most ancient translation of the Old Testament and was around approximately 300 years before Christ. The Massorah did not arrive on the scene until the 6th century. The Septuagint was the only testament around in Christ’s time and was used even among Palestinian rabbis. As you have admitted, the Apostles and Evangelists used it also and quoted from it, mostly when they were speaking about the prophecies. To believe that Jesus, being who he was, did not use the Septuagint is really stretching reason, don’t you think?
 
SteveVH said:
The Septuagint is the most ancient translation of the Old Testament and was around approximately 300 years before Christ. The Massorah did not arrive on the scene until the 6th century. The Septuagint was the only testament around in Christ’s time and was used even among Palestinian rabbis. As you have admitted, the Apostles and Evangelists used it also and quoted from it, mostly when they were speaking about the prophecies. To believe that Jesus, being who he was, did not use the Septuagint is really stretching reason, don’t you think?
Click to expand...
No, not at all…since we disagree that any of Jesus original apostles wrote any of the NT books…and they all were Greek speakers of the Diaspora, the LXX was in common use among the Greek speaking world. In Palestine the Aramaic and Hebrew texts were used…Jesus certainly was aware of the LXX…but it is doubful it was used in synagouge in Palestine…especially among the people Jesus ministerd to.

Jesus was not a ‘superhuman’ who knew every language and every fact…“he grew in stature and wisdom”…"he emptied himself and became a servant’…he was human, 100% human with all human limitations…that is what makes the Incarnation so amazing…God emptied Himself and became man…one of us.

However, if you and your religious community believes differently…great…
 
Prosmith said:
I see similarities at best but no quotes.
Click to expand...
How do you suppose you will see exact quotes when we can’t even know exactly what words were used in any of the translations we use today?

Quick example from John 6:14:
*“When the people saw him do this miraculous sign, they exclaimed, “Surely, he is the Prophet we have been expecting!” *NLV
“Then those men, when they had seen the miracle that Jesus did, said, This is of a truth that prophet that should come into the world. KJV

There are probably better examples but I hope you get the point…Similar but not exact…

Jesus and/or his disciples could have quoted exactly word for word but we may never know looking at our translations today right?

Peace!!!
 
=(name removed by moderator);9620768]"During the Reformation, primarily for doctrinal reasons, Protestants removed seven books from the Old Testament: 1 and 2 Maccabees, Sirach, Wisdom, Baruch, Tobit, and Judith, and parts of two others, Daniel and Esther. They did so even though these books had been regarded as canonical since the beginning of Church history.
Click to expand...
If it was for doctrinal reasons, why did Catholics such as Cardinal Cajetan say they were not part of the canon? I think to say that is simply doctrinal leaves out a whole lot of the reasons the deutero-canonical books were in dispute for centuries.
As Protestant church historian J. N. D. Kelly writes, “It should be observed that the Old Testament thus admitted as authoritative in the Church was somewhat bulkier and more comprehensive [than the Protestant Bible]. . . . It always included, though with varying degrees of recognition, the so-called apocrypha or deuterocanonical books” (Early Christian Doctrines, 53), which are rejected by Protestants. "

catholic.com/tracts/the-old-testament-canon
Click to expand...
Its that varying degrees of recognition that Luther pointed to, in the same way he questioned the NT antilagomena. One also needs to define “rejected”. Lutherans will not use the D-C’s for doctrine, but we do use them, even liturgically, in our hymnody, etc.

Jon
 
Publisher said:
No, not at all…since we disagree that any of Jesus original apostles wrote any of the NT books…and they all were Greek speakers of the Diaspora, the LXX was in common use among the Greek speaking world. In Palestine the Aramaic and Hebrew texts were used…Jesus certainly was aware of the LXX…but it is doubful it was used in synagouge in Palestine…especially among the people Jesus ministerd to.

Jesus was not a ‘superhuman’ who knew every language and every fact…“he grew in stature and wisdom”…"he emptied himself and became a servant’…he was human, 100% human with all human limitations…that is what makes the Incarnation so amazing…God emptied Himself and became man…one of us.

However, if you and your religious community believes differently…great…
Click to expand...
From what manuscripts do you think the Septuagint was translated into Greek? They were Hebrew, and the Dead Sea Scrolls provide much evidence of this.
 
JonNC said:
Lutherans will not use the D-C’s for doctrine, but we do use them, even liturgically, in our hymnody, etc.
Click to expand...
The Anglican church I attend is similar. Article VI (of the thirty-nine articles) lists the deuterocanonical books and says that, following Hierome (Jerome), “the Church doth read for example of life and instruction of manners; but yet doth it not apply them to establish any doctrine.” Varying portions of them can be found in the lectionary and liturgy of the different versions of the book of common prayer.
 
SteveVH said:
From what manuscripts do you think the Septuagint was translated into Greek? They were Hebrew, and the Dead Sea Scrolls provide much evidence of this.
Click to expand...
And your point? Just because the LXX was translated in the 3rd century BCE, doesn’t mean Jesus used the LXX being born some centuries later…it was translated for the Greek speaking Diaspora…Jesus was a Palestinian Jew…the writers of the NT were Greek speaking Jews of the Diaspora.
 
adf417 said:
How do you suppose you will see exact quotes when we can’t even know exactly what words were used in any of the translations we use today?

Quick example from John 6:14:
*“When the people saw him do this miraculous sign, they exclaimed, “Surely, he is the Prophet we have been expecting!” *NLV
“Then those men, when they had seen the miracle that Jesus did, said, This is of a truth that prophet that should come into the world. KJV

There are probably better examples but I hope you get the point…Similar but not exact…

Jesus and/or his disciples could have quoted exactly word for word but we may never know looking at our translations today right?

Peace!!!
Click to expand...
Nah, that’s not what I was talking about. I’m talking about the direct correlation in John to the Psalms and when St. Paul said, “It is written”. Those are direct parallels to the Old Testament. There is no such thing as these correlations to the apocrypha.
 
Prosmith said:
I’m talking about the direct correlation in John to the Psalms and when St. Paul said, “It is written”. Those are direct parallels to the Old Testament. There is no such thing as these correlations to the apocrypha.
Click to expand...
There is a list at the link below, which says, “The original translation of the A.V. cross-referenced 12 New Testament passages to the Apocrypha.”

biblewiki.be/wiki/References_to_the_Apocrypha_in_the_New_Testament

Not all of these are quotes; some are just historical references, such as to the feast of the dedication that was instituted by Judas Maccabaeus (John 10:22 referenced to 1 Macc 4:59).

The strongest parallel might be that of Hebrews 11:35 to a story told about in 2 Macc 7. James Akin cites that one under the “The Apostles & the Deuteros” section of a short article here:
ewtn.com/library/answers/deuteros.htm
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top