Help! Questions regarding Apocrypha

[Christ_s_friend]

Someone please answer my question post #18

 

[geezerbob]

Christ's friend:

Someone please answer my question post #18

You did not ask a question in post 18, you made a statement. What is your question?

 

[TNT]

Christ's friend:

Someone please answer my question post #18

BTW:Christ’s "friend":
Join Date: January 27, 2005
Posts Total Posts: 32 (32 posts per day)
**30+ posts / day…aren’t we the busy little trolls
**** Read the scripitures. NOWHERE, is the book “HEBREWS” even mentioned as part of the bible!
The 1st 200yrs of christians NEVER put it up as scripture either.
Therefore, you have a false bible, which means no true bible that can judge.
All you have is your opinion about some bible, which is 2,000 yrs too late.
At least Mohammed was only 500+ years too late.
There’s your answer.
Which BTW post 18 contains NO question.

Your automatic post generator needs some more work. From my experience with them, even the newer models need to be connected to a brain.

**

 

[copland]

1) Why are the 7 apocrypha books in the Catholic Canon?
Apocrapha is actually not the proper name to call them if you are a Catholic. Deuterocanonical is much more appropiate. The reason why they are in the Catholic Bible is beacuse they are inspired and deserve to be in there. They have always been universially accepted as Sacred Scripture by Christians for the last 2000 years. This question will continually to be answered as I go down you list of questions.

2) I heard that there were 2 canons to the Old Testament – the one by the Alexandrian Jews and also by the Palestinian Jews. Which did the Catholic follow and why?
The Catholic Church follows the Alexandrian Canon. Many Jews followed the Greek Septuagint as the OT. In fact, the authors of the New Testament quoted the Old Testament many times, and they quoted from the Septuagint 90% of that time. The Septuagint is the Alexandrian Canon. Those Deuterocanonicals are in the Greek Septuagint, and some of them are even found in the Hebrew Dead Sea Scrolls. The Early Christian Jews were proving that Jesus was the Messiah by using the Scriptures, and many of the Pharisees were so hardened that they only excepted their own Hebrew Scriptures as authoritative scripture, and they even changed some of the actual Scriptures such as Psalm 22, "they have pierced my hands and my feet’ to “like a lion are my hands and my feet.” They went ahead and even excluded the Deuters also. Keep in mind, the Alexandrian canon is pre-Christian while the Palestinian canon is post-Christian, a Pharisees revision/corruption.

1. The 7 books are referred to as the ‘Deuterocanonicals’. What does the word mean, in what language?
   It means “second canon.” Deuteros means 2nd in Greek, and canon means prinicple.

4) When was the Catholic Canon finalized, by whom/in which council? Were there a few Councils before a final Canon was adopted?
It was finalized at the Council of Trent. But it was also defined at the Council of Hippo in 393AD and at the Council of Carthage sometime around 400AD.

5) When did Protestants come up with their own canon? Is it directly at the beginning of the reformation? Why did this happen (why are the 7 books excluded)? And who was responsible for this?
The reason why they excluded the Deuters is because it was just too Catholic for them. That is why Martin Luther excluded Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, Jude and Revelation, but that was added back in by the Reformers. The reason why the reformers say they excluded the deuters is because the Jews excluded them. I wonder why they did not go all the way and reject Jesus too, the Jews did that! I guess they do reject Him since they reject the Eucharist. Truth be known though, the Reformers were dogmatic about one thing, and that was to not be Catholic, and that is the true motivation behind rejecting the Deuters.

How come there are 12 books as opposed to the 7 always claimed? Which ones are actually are the 7 books?
Because some of the books are part of the Book of Daniel, which forms one book.

Hopefully the sites that our brothers and sisters gave are good enough, I have not looked at them, but if you need furthur info just say. I hoppe this helps!

 

[Witness]

1) Why are the 7 apocrypha books in the Catholic Canon?
Apocrapha is actually not the proper name to call them if you are a Catholic. Deuterocanonical is much more appropiate.

Yes. As Jerome was not a RC so he called them Apocrypha.

By the waaaay: what does “Deuterocanonical” mean?? Does this mean that God talked less in the Apocrypha than in the canonical Books???

copland:

The reason why they are in the Catholic Bible is beacuse they are inspired and deserve to be in there.

The authors of the Apocrypha say that they are not inspired. But RC insist that they are inspired, but less inspired than the canonicals. The RC would have a problem to convince the authors of the Apocrypha that their books are Scripture.

copland:

They have always been universially accepted as Sacred Scripture by Christians for the last 2000 years.

You mean that they have always been in the Septuagint. As the Apostles used the Septuagint ( because it was the only Greek translation available ), and as there are people who worship something called “tradition”, and as they found it in the Septuagint, so they considered it Scripture!!What an authority to decide which books belong in the Bible! If there are no other translations available other than RC translations, and if I use today a RC translation, does this mean that I accept all the books that it contains???

 

[Witness]

copland:

The Early Christian Jews were proving that Jesus was the Messiah by using the Scriptures, and many of the Pharisees were so hardened that they only excepted their own Hebrew Scriptures as authoritative scripture, and they even changed some of the actual Scriptures such as Psalm 22, "they have pierced my hands and my feet’ to “like a lion are my hands and my feet.”

You are zero in Hebrew, and you are just quoting what others are saying. Do you know what is the Hebrew word translated as “like a lion” or “they have pierced” ???

Hehe… RC philosophers! You are even doubting about the fact that God can keep His Scripture from human corruption!!!

copland:

Keep in mind, the Alexandrian canon is pre-Christian while the Palestinian canon is post-Christian, a Pharisees revision/corruption.

Keep in mind that Jesus Christ quoted the Scripture AS SCRIPTURE BEFORE there was this Palestinian canon you are dreaming of! It seems that you don’t know that God has the sole Authority over His Word!! Only God can decide what is the Canon!

4) When was the Catholic Canon finalized, by whom/in which council? Were there a few Councils before a final Canon was adopted?
It was finalized at the Council of Trent. But it was also defined at the Council of Hippo in 393AD and at the Council of Carthage sometime around 400AD.

If it was defined at the Council of Hippo, then what was the need to finilize it at the Council of Trent? Were the RC not sure about the canon of Hippo?

copland:

The reason why they excluded the Deuters is because it was just too Catholic for them.

Yes, they were too pagan for them. And they were too human, without any divine element. So they were very “Catholic”

copland:

The reason why the reformers say they excluded the deuters is because the Jews excluded them. I wonder why they did not go all the way and reject Jesus too, the Jews did that!

The Virgin Mary, Peter and all the Apostles were Jews. And they didn’t reject Jesus. All of them were using the Scripture of Palestine. And Jesus didn’t blame them for not accepting some pagan books.

copland:

Hopefully the sites that our brothers and sisters gave are good enough, I have not looked at them, but if you need furthur info just say. I hoppe this helps!

Yes, indeed, the link that I gave is very interesting. :tiphat:

 

[st_felicity]

Witness,

How did King James come up with the texts to include in his Bible?
And on what authority?

 

[st_felicity]

Witness:

Only God can decide what is the Canon! :tiphat:

Oh…King James must be God.

 

[st_felicity]

If there is clear New Testament reference to scripture only found in so called “Apocryphal” texts, would the protesters be assuaged?

see: http://st-takla.org/pub_Deuterocanon/Deuterocanon-Apocrypha_El-Asfar_El-Kanoneya_El-Tanya__0-index.html not all are only found in dueterocanonical books, (which BTW simply means they were scrutinized more fully and approved at a later date) but many are…

As a former protestant, I am particularly convinced by:
§ 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.

§ Rom. 9:21 - usage of the potter and the clay, making two kinds of vessels follows Wisdom 15:7.

§ 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.

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

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

§ Rev. 11:19 - the vision of the ark of the covenant (Mary) in a cloud of glory was prophesied in 2 Macc. 2:7. [actually, 2:5-8]

Peace!

 

[Lisa4Catholics]

st_felicity:

Oh…King James must be God.

 

[Witness]

st_felicity:

Witness,

How did King James come up with the texts to include in his Bible?
And on what authority?

The king James doesn’t have much to do with all this.

Why talk about that king? Our King Is Jesus.

Why talk about one translation? Are there not other good translations?

As for the authority of the Scripture, don’t you know that God has the sole authority?

By the way: Did you have the courage to open the link I gave here and to follow the topic there?

Ah, poor RC… Your theologians have deceived you with their vanities. :nope:

:tiphat:

 

[st_felicity]

Witness:

The king James doesn’t have much to do with all this.

Why talk about that king? Our King Is Jesus.

Why talk about one translation? Are there not other good translations?

As for the authority of the Scripture, don’t you know that God has the sole authority?

By the way: Did you have the courage to open the link I gave here and to follow the topic there?

Ah, poor RC… Your theologians have deceived you with their vanities. :nope:

:tiphat:

Methinks there is a little wavering here…are you a sola scriptura type? if so–what about those references I cited? Are they part of scripture or not? If they are, what say you concerning their “Apocryphal” allusions?

Yes there are “other good translations”, even ones missing sacred scriptures–KJ included. Are you willing to accept a “good translation” that includes the Deuterocanonical texts as inspired scripture?

Also, what courage is involved in going over a discussion of which I am certain will only be a bunch of bickering about what is in my mind a settled topic? I’ll do it if it will make you happy, but why get tangled in arguments elsewhere and muddy-up this thread?

 

[st_felicity]

P.S. You keep calling us RCs. Would you like it if we referred to you as “Prots”? It’s not exactly courteous.

 

[Lisa4Catholics]

Witness:

The king James doesn’t have much to do with all this.

Why talk about that king? Our King Is Jesus.

Why talk about one translation? Are there not other good translations?

As for the authority of the Scripture, don’t you know that God has the sole authority?

By the way: Did you have the courage to open the link I gave here and to follow the topic there?

Ah, poor RC… Your theologians have deceived you with their vanities. :nope:

:tiphat:

The translation you have is incomplete and worded to fit your desired translation,mans translation not God’s.

 

[st_felicity]

OH MY!!! not THAT thread…Yes, I read through much of that thread a while ago (before it got to 242) and I just couldn’t take any more of that YAQUBOS self-righteous smugness and quit without even bothering a reply. If you think that guy has the answer…nevermind.

 

[st_felicity]

Hey…YAQUBOS refers to his own post 242-247 on that other thread several times as the definative “word” on what is Divine Scripture…you and he wouldn’t be “related” would you?

 

[Maranatha]

alyssa:

Try this:

cin.org/users/james/files/deuteros.htm

Also note- the Jewish cannon was not determined until 100AD- AFTER Christ, therefore not binding on us. It was because of the threat of Christianity- for those Jews whp did not believe he was Lord- that influenced much of which books were kept and thrown.

Since the Jewish temple was destroyed in 70 A.D. there have been no Jewish High Priests since that time.

By what authority did the Rabinical Jews decide what was cannon in 90 A.D.?

 

[Witness]

st_felicity:

If there is clear New Testament reference to scripture only found in so called “Apocryphal” texts, would the protesters be assuaged?

hahahaha! In fact, in the Apocrypha, there are references to OT texts that are used in the NT . And the uninspired writers of the Apocrypha have given so many wrong interpretations to those OT texts that I don’t wonder why the RC are so misled.

st_felicity:

As a former protestant, I am particularly convinced by:
§ 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.

§ Rom. 9:21 - usage of the potter and the clay, making two kinds of vessels follows Wisdom 15:7.

§ 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.

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

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

§ Rev. 11:19 - the vision of the ark of the covenant (Mary) in a cloud of glory was prophesied in 2 Macc. 2:7. [actually, 2:5-8]

Peace!

As I was never a protestant, I am convinced that Paul has also quoted pagan authors. If I was a deceived RC, I would add those authors’ writings to the Bible too.

I will not refute the claims concerning each of these passages. I know that RC need the basics yet, so I don’t need to waste my time. Let me just give you some OT references for one of those passages which is Romans 9: To understand this passage, go to passages like Jeremiah 18:6, Isaiah 45:9, Proverbs 16:4. All these are Scripture, unlike those Apocrypha books.



Wake up, dear RCs :tiphat:

 

[st_felicity]

Witness:

hahahaha!
As I was never a protestant, I am convinced that Paul has also quoted pagan authors. If I was a deceived RC, I would add those authors’ writings to the Bible too.

I will not refute the claims concerning each of these passages. I know that RC need the basics yet, so I don’t need to waste my time. Let me just give you some OT references for one of those passages which is Romans 9: To understand this passage, go to passages like Jeremiah 18:6, Isaiah 45:9, Proverbs 16:4. All these are Scripture, unlike those Apocrypha books.



Wake up, dear RCs :tiphat:

Your maniacal laughing is…weird.

I didn’t claim all those that I found to be convincing weren’t referenced elsewhere in the OT–I just said “I” found them convincing–

How about just ONE?

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

Where is this referenced anywhere else in scripture?

OH WAIT–Paul quotes PAGAN authors to convey Sacred Truth…So we can’t use THAT verse…

What planet are you from? Oh Yeah… Planet YAQUBOS.

It’s all adding up now, and I’m not interested in arguing nonsense with someone who makes up the rules as they go.

 

[st_felicity]

Witness:

hahahaha! In fact, in the Apocrypha, there are references to OT texts that are used in the NT . And the uninspired writers of the Apocrypha have given so many wrong interpretations to those OT texts that I don’t wonder why the RC are so misled.

Wake up, dear RCs :tiphat:

What are you talking about here? Oh…nevermind…I’m not really interested.