Jesus quoting the Deutero Canonicals

[Tietjen]

I didn’t really see any questions there…but I’ll comment on it paragraph by paragraph. It was by Lampo.

You submit to the authority of the church, I can’t find that authority in the Bible so I submit to the authority of God and He has given us His written word. What do you have that you can show me that gives authority to your church?

Mt 18:17 proves you are not a Bible believing Christian then. Jesus Christ Himself tells us to submit to the Church.

Then, not that you’ll believe this but the Apostles were appointed by Christ to begin the Church. We find that Christ delegates authority to the Church via the Apostles in Mt 28:18-20. Then again we see Christ giving the Apostles the power to forgive sins (obviously an authoritative ability). In 1 Cor 11:23-24 the Church has the authority to make sacrifice (IE - the HOLY Eucharist - which I know you don’t believe in even though Christ Himself told us it was true). In Luke 10:16 the Church is given the authority to speak with Christ’s voice. In Mt 18:18, the Church is given the power to legislate. What more can a blind man want? Sheesh, you are completely stiff-necked in your opposition to Jesus Christ and His Church aren’t you?

The church didn’t exist before the Bible, at least not before the Hebrew Bible and that is the one that is referred to hundreds of times by Jesus and the apostles. It was the apostles that set up the church by the inspiration of God.

Careful, your ignorance is showing yet again. The Church came into existence on Pentecost when the Holy Spirit came (as Christ had said He would) and rested upon the Apostles. Or, as some believe, the Church came into existence when Christ gave the Apostles the “Great Commission” to go forth and baptize, teaching all nations… Mat 28:18-20. Either way, the Alexandrian canon (AKA - the Septuagint canon, AKA - the LXX canon) wasn’t assembled and approved until 393 AD. As for the Hebrew Canon, it was not assembled/approved until approx 100 AD in Jamnia. Therefore, either way you look at it you are incorrect. Surprise surprise. One should also point out, that the Hebrew Canon for which you place so much importance is in fact a canon written by Jews who opposed the new Christian community. It came about because the Christians of the time were using Greek translations of the Scriptures and some Jewish rabbis wanted to separate themselves as much as possible from these young “upstarts” who embraced Jesus Christ as the Messiah. So, they put together what you now call the Hebrew Canon. It should also be noted that the Hebrew Canon was put together by rabbis who used the following formula for determining what books would be included:

1. The books had to be written in Hebrew
2. They had to conform to the Torah
3. They had to be older than the time of Ezra (400 B.C)
4. They had to be written in Palestine
   Well at the time, the rabbis involved in the creation of the Hebrew Canon could not find the 7 books in question written in Hebrew. They therefore rejected them. It should however be noted that upon the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in Qumran, some of these books were actually found written in Hebrew, thus making their rejection unsupportable today. But despite the fact that this is true and the evidence is there for the entire world to see; despite the fact that many REAL old scholars recognize these facts… you, undoubtedly know better and will continue to refuse to believe. Let me ask you… do you also oppose the concept of gravity?

The church did not teach that Scripture was derived from tradition in the early centuries. All the early church leaders thought that any tradition that contradicted Scripture was in error. All tradition that was pertaining to faith or morals was carefully written down so that we would know the truth. Can you give a reference for a single tradition that is not backed up by Scripture?

I doubt that it will make a difference. You have absolutely referred to all the other evidence that the Bible contains as being lies, but for the sake of argument:
1 Cor 11:2
2 Thess 2:15
2 Thess 3:6
Jn 21:25
Mk 13:31
Acts 20:35
2 Tim 1:13
2 Tim 2:2
2 Pet 1:20
2 Pet 3:15-16
1 Pet 1:25
Rom 10:17
1 Cor 15:1-2
Mk 16:15
Mt 23:2-3

If you deny the inspiration of the Bible, then we can’t really have a good discussion. A Christian that doesn’t believe the Bible is inspired must question his faith, else what would you believe?

Agreed, so why do you continue to do so?! So many have pointed out so much and yet your pride and arrogance will not be stopped… you believe that you know better than the Bible, the 2000 year old Church guarded by the Holy Spirit and 2000 years worth of doctors, philosophers, theologians, and clergy of the Church. Absolutely incredible!

Sorry but when Scripture establishes the church and the church establishes Scripture, that certainly seems a little circular to me.

Then stop turning it into a circular argument. Scripture came from God through the Church PERIOD - END OF DISCUSSION. Is this straight line enough for you.

Finally there was a statement that said: “To believe in a fallible Church is to believe that Christ did not mean what he said and that he did not deliver on his promises.”

Once any church starts teaching anything regarding faith or morals that cannot be backed up by Scripture, then that church is fallible. The claim of infallibility is wrong. Nowhere does the church receive infallibility. Where would it come from?

First, as I pointed out above the Bible says that we are to follow both written (the Bible) and oral (sacred Tradition). If you deny this, then you call the Bible error-filled. Next, we find… IN THE BIBLE… that the Church is guided by the Holy Spirit into ALL Truth (John 16:13). The Church speaks with Christ’s own voice (Lk 10:16). Is Christ a liar in your opinion? In 1 Tim 3:15 we see that the Church is the pillar and foundation of truth. We see in 1 Jn 2:27 that the anointing of the Holy Spirit is with the Church always (it doesn’t wash off). In Mat 28:20 we see Christ telling the Apostles that He is with them always (remember they are the leaders within Church at this point). Then, if you please, we have St. Irenaeus in about 200 A.D. saying, “For where the Church is, there is the Spirit of God; and where the Spirit of God, there the Church and every grace. The Spirit, however, is Truth.” I know that St. Irenaeus isn’t in the Bible but in earlier posts you appeared to have great respect for the earlier Church Fathers and so I thought that you’d appreciate it.

The only infallible human being ever to exist on this earth was Jesus. No one else! To think that any church, or man, could be infallible is anathema.

HOWEVER, to think that Christ would allow His Church to fall into error in the arena of faith and morals, would be to call Jesus Christ a liar. Mat 16:18 tells us this. If you dispute it, perhaps you are a far braver man (or possibly fool) than I give you credit for.

God bless and do your soul a favor. Take in knowledge only after it is known to be true. Your “church,” whatever “church” that is since you appear to be too embarrassed to name it, has lied to you on so many things and now you simply look ridiculous.

 

[thistle]

You should and I plead guilty. I never properly answered your post #17. I apologize to you for that.

However I am sure you can see it seems to be me against the whole world and I try my best to answer all posts. However my computer time is limited and I am now being called. (Friday night is usually “eat out” night here)

I promise I will, at next opportunity, read your post more carefully and answer it as best as I can. I know everyone takes time to look up things in order to properly answer a post and they all should be answered.

Bear with me. I only get so long outside my cell. Later!

I know this has nothing to do with the thread but I’m curious. What does the picture in your signature represent?

 

[beeliner]

It should also be noted that the Hebrew Canon was put together by rabbis who used the following formula for determining what books would be included:…3) They had to be older than the time of Ezra (400 B.C)…

I believe that Daniel, Esther, possibly one or two others that I have forgotten, and a few Psalms, were considerably more recent than the time of Ezra.

 

[Tietjen]

I believe that Daniel, Esther, possibly one or two others that I have forgotten, and a few Psalms, were considerably more recent than the time of Ezra.

Please read more here.

 

[mark_a]

And the pope’s infallibility has been shown to not be true as well. Too many popes have declared something infallible and then other popes reversed their teachings.

Conditions that must be met for a papal statement to be infallible

• Must teach or in some way clarify
• Can’t contradict previous teachings
• Must involve faith and morals
• To be held by all
• Statement made of his own free will
• He must invoke the full authority of his office

No man is infallible. Only the written word of God is infallible and even that has some translation errors in it, but nothing that affects faith or morals is in error.

What makes your interpretation of the word of God more correct than the Catholic interpretation?

 

[Tietjen]

I believe that Daniel, Esther, possibly one or two others that I have forgotten, and a few Psalms, were considerably more recent than the time of Ezra.

You could be correct on the issue of Esther and Daniel (at least), but the point is that if the Hebrew Canon was not established until Jamnia at approx 100 A.D. then I believe that it is safe to assume that Christ and the Apostles were not using this Canon. The LXX however, being completed between 250-125 B.C. was around during the life of Christ. The Greek translation was very popular at that time in the Mediterranean area. Therefore, it is extremely likely that Jesus and His followers used it. Now, the Hebrew Canon came into existence as an opposing Canon to what the new Christian movement used (the Septuagint). Therefore, when one decides to embrace the Hebrew Canon they are embracing a Canon created to oppose the Christian Church. Why would any decide to use this Canon when we have the Canon used by Christ and the early Church (the Septuagint)?

 

[beeliner]

1. The LXX however, being completed between 250-125 B.C. was around during the life of Christ. The Greek translation was very popular at that time in the Mediterranean area. Therefore, it is extremely likely that Jesus and His followers used it.
2. Now, the Hebrew Canon came into existence as an opposing Canon to what the new Christian movement used (the Septuagint). Therefore, when one decides to embrace the Hebrew Canon they are embracing a Canon created to oppose the Christian Church. Why would any decide to use this Canon when we have the Canon used by Christ and the early Church (the Septuagint)?

1. Absolutely. This is obvious from the number of NT allusions that are clearly to the LXX.
2. I have, frankly, in a lifetime of interest in Bible history, never heard it put that way before. I guess I would have to say that I agree with your conclusion but question the way you arrive there. The Hebrew canon had to be closed at some point. To have left it open indefinitely would have meant, in effect, no canon at all. The reasons for deciding on circa 150BC as the cut-off point are now obscure. I do not see the influence of Christianity here. The EJ has a comprehensive entry on the matter, within which I do not recall Christianity being mentioned, except perhaps in passing. In any case, it seems certain that the books excluded were on the basis of date rather than content, and of course, this applied to liturgical use only. The stories of Judith and of the Maccabees, for instance, remain well-known to Jews today, as I stated earlier in the thread.

But this was certainly the time when Christianity was becoming less and less Jewish and more and more Gentile, as the Jewish protoChristians were expecting an imminent return of Christ, which did not occur, and the Gentiles had no such expectation, accepting Him as a different kind of Saviour.

I’m just not sure how the removal of these particular writings from liturgical use can be construed as opposition to Christianity. Most of the Messianic prophecies which Christians believe Jesus to have fulfilled are found in Isaiah and the other prophets, all retained in the Jewish canon.

 

[Tietjen]

I’m just not sure how the removal of these particular writings from liturgical use can be construed as opposition to Christianity. Most of the Messianic prophecies which Christians believe Jesus to have fulfilled are found in Isaiah and the other prophets, all retained in the Jewish canon.

Perhaps I should not have said they “opposed” the Christian movement. I thought about it after I had signed off. Instead, I believe that perhaps they simply wanted separation from rather than opposition to Christianity. They did not want to share the same Canon that the Christians were using.

 

[Canto]

**Judith identifies Nebuchadnezzar as King of the Assyrians in Judith 1:1, 7, but he was not. It was a mistake. Wasn’t it Tobit that endorsed the superstitious use of fish liver to ward off demons in
Tobit 6:6-7 ?

The teaching of those books is equally in error.**

Mark Ch 2 New Jerusalem Bible

26 how he went into the house of God when Abiathar* was high priest.

*[In fact his father, Ahimelech, was high priest, 1 S 21:1-7]

Is this a mistake?

I’m sure I remember reading that the Synoptic gospels and John’s disagree over wether Jesus was tried before the whole Sandrenhim (sp?) or in private.

---

From EWTN
Acts 19:11,12 … Paul’s handkerchiefs and aprons.
2 Kg 13:20-21 … Elisha’s bones.
Acts 5:15-16 … Peter’s shadow.
Mt 9:20-22 … Jesus’ garment cures woman.

---

What gives you the authoirty for the canon?
Why is your interpretation of teaching correct and other’s not - what authority?

 

[eagertolearn]

This is not an anti-catholic book. It is the word of God. And since you asked, it is the KJV Bible.

I get here a little late. Apologize if the following info. already posted.

The original KJV Bible did include the Deuterocanonical (Apocrypha) 7 books. I believe, at one time, it was an offense in England to publish the Bible without those books. Unfortunately, the rule was later relaxed and KJV Bible began appearing without the Apocrypha. There were one problem for KJV later versions! Eventhough, these books were excluded, many referrences from the Bible back to these books were still there, which were later taken out completely.

If Old Scholar had the old version of KJV, he would not even ask anyone to cite any verses referring back to the 7 Deuterocanonical books

Have a great day.

ETL.

 

[Old_Scholar]

I get here a little late. Apologize if the following info. already posted.

The original KJV Bible did include the Deuterocanonical (Apocrypha) 7 books. I believe, at one time, it was an offense in England to publish the Bible without those books. Unfortunately, the rule was later relaxed and KJV Bible began appearing without the Apocrypha. There were one problem for KJV later versions! Eventhough, these books were excluded, many referrences from the Bible back to these books were still there, which were later taken out completely.

If Old Scholar had the old version of KJV, he would not even ask anyone to cite any verses referring back to the 7 Deuterocanonical books

Have a great day.

ETL.

I do have a version of the KJV that includes the apocrypha. However, just as the original did, it is included between the Old Testament and the New Testament with a note saying that they are not canon and are only listed for their historical and reading value.

If you look at a copy of the original 1611 King James Bible, the book of Malachi ends with these words: “The end of the Prophets”. Then the whole Apocrypha, which itself means “unknown, or spurious” is clearly marked off from the rest of the Scriptures by the words “Apocrypha” twice at the top of every page throughout. It then ends with these words: “The end of Apocrypha”. Then on the next page is an elaborate woodcutting and it says: “The Newe Testament of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.”

 

[Pete_1]

I repeat, all the references that were listed are, in most part, just jokes. Read the account of Herod slaying all those children under 2 years of age in Matthew 2:16 and then read Wisdom 11:7 and you will find it is not even talking about the same thing. I have given a few more verses to put it in context.

what about this one?

Mark 9:48 - description of hell where their worm does not die and the fire is not quenched references Judith 16:17.

 

[eagertolearn]

I do have a version of the KJV that includes the apocrypha. However, just as the original did, it is included between the Old Testament and the New Testament with a note saying that they are not canon and are only listed for their historical and reading value.

If you look at a copy of the original 1611 King James Bible, the book of Malachi ends with these words: “The end of the Prophets”. Then the whole Apocrypha, which itself means “unknown, or spurious” is clearly marked off from the rest of the Scriptures by the words “Apocrypha” twice at the top of every page throughout. It then ends with these words: “The end of Apocrypha”. Then on the next page is an elaborate woodcutting and it says: “The Newe Testament of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.”

May I ask who was the one that consolidated these 7 books to the end and categorized them as Apocrypha, around 16th century? Luther did! So, using "The end of the Prophets","The end of Apocrypha" as an argument are meaningless!

He disliked some of the books because they were against his philosophy. By using St. Jerome’s writings about Apocrypha books as the basis for his argument, he would be able to take care of the problem by elimination. Early years of life, St Jerome was internship under Jewish Hebrew Rabi, thus there was a possibility that he was influenced by the Jewish canonical process of their Bible which determined to exclude these books as Apocrypha, due to Greek influences. Interestingly, the Dead Sea crolls shows one or more of these books were written in Hebrew. The whole basis of the canonical process of Jewish Bible which excluded these books is now called into question! So the term “Apocrypha” as it was categorized by early Jewish scholars maybe erroneous!

ETL

 

[eagertolearn]

what about this one?

Mark 9:48 - description of hell where their worm does not die and the fire is not quenched references Judith 16:17.

We cannot cross referrence back to Deuterocanonical books because his KJV does not include them. We may have to spell it out. However, that would also help everyone. Going back to the Bible every time does take lots of time.

In our Bible, all those books were scattered throughout; not in one place categorized as “Apocrypha”, as you misunderstood it

ETL

 

[savedsinner]

I do have a version of the KJV that includes the apocrypha. However, just as the original did, it is included between the Old Testament and the New Testament with a note saying that they are not canon and are only listed for their historical and reading value.

If you look at a copy of the original 1611 King James Bible, the book of Malachi ends with these words: “The end of the Prophets”. Then the whole Apocrypha, which itself means “unknown, or spurious” is clearly marked off from the rest of the Scriptures by the words “Apocrypha” twice at the top of every page throughout. It then ends with these words: “The end of Apocrypha”. Then on the next page is an elaborate woodcutting and it says: “The Newe Testament of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.”

While the original books of scripture were inspired by God, the footnotes in the bibles are not.

And while some protestants love the KJV, it is not the best translation of the bible on the market, it was based upon 12th century Catholic manuscripts and on top of that it also contains many translation errors and included as scripture items which were only footnotes in those manuscripts it was based on.
There are a lot better bible versions available today which are based upon much earlier manuscripts.

 

[anthony022071]

catholic.com/thisrock/1998/9807frs.asp

Didache

“You shall not waver with regard to your decisions [Sir. 1:28]. Do not be someone who stretches out his hands to receive but withdraws them when it comes to giving [Sir. 4:31]” (Didache 4:5 [A.D. 70]).

Pope Clement I

“By the word of his might [God] established all things, and by his word he can overthrow them. ‘Who shall say to him, “What have you done?” or who shall resist the power of his strength?’ [Wis. 12:12]” (Letter to the Corinthians 27:5 [ca. A.D. 80]).

Polycarp

“Stand fast, therefore, in these things, and follow the example of the Lord, being firm and unchangeable in the faith, loving the brotherhood [1 Pet. 2:17]. . . . When you can do good, defer it not, because ‘alms deliver from death’ [Tob. 4:10, 12:9]. Be all of you subject to one another [1 Pet. 5:5], having your conduct blameless among the Gentiles [1 Pet. 2:12], and the Lord may not be blasphemed through you. But woe to him by whom the name of the Lord is blasphemed [Isa. 52:5]!” (Letter to the Philadelphians 10 [A.D. 135]).

Irenaeus

“Jeremiah the prophet has pointed out that as many believers as God has prepared for this purpose, to multiply those left on the earth, should both be under the rule of the saints and to minister to this [new] Jerusalem and that [his] kingdom shall be in it, saying, ‘Look around Jerusalem toward the east and behold the joy which comes to you from God himself. Behold, your sons whom you have sent forth shall come: They shall come in a band from the east to the west. . . . God shall go before with you in the light of his splendor, with the mercy and righteousness which proceed from him’ [Bar. 4:36–5:9]” (ibid., 5:35:1; Baruch was often reckoned as part of Jeremiah, as it is here).

Irenaeus

“Those . . . who are believed to be presbyters by many, but serve their own lusts and do not place the fear of God supreme in their hearts, but conduct themselves with contempt toward others and are puffed up with the pride of holding the chief seat [Matt. 23:6] and work evil deeds in secret, saying ‘No man sees us,’ shall be convicted by the Word, who does not judge after outward appearance, nor looks upon the countenance, but the heart; and they shall hear those words to be found in Daniel the prophet: ‘O you seed of Canaan and not of Judah, beauty has deceived you and lust perverted your heart’ [Dan. 13:56]”

Hippolytus

“What is narrated here [in the story of Susannah] happened at a later time, although it is placed at the front of the book [of Daniel], for it was a custom with the writers to narrate many things in an inverted order in their writings. . . . [W]e ought to give heed, beloved, fearing lest anyone be overtaken in any transgression and risk the loss of his soul, knowing as we do that God is the judge of all and the Word himself is the eye which nothing that is done in the world escapes. Therefore, always watchful in heart and pure in life, let us imitate Susannah” (Commentary on Daniel [A.D. 204]; the story of Susannah [Daniel 13] is not in the Protestant Bible).

Cyprian

“In Genesis [it says], ‘And God tested Abraham and said to him, “Take your only son whom you love, Isaac, and go to the high land and offer him there as a burnt offering.” ’ [Gen. 22:1–2] . . . Of this same thing in the Wisdom of Solomon [it says], ‘Although in the sight of men they suffered torments, their hope is full of immortality’ [Wis. 3:4]. Of this same thing in the Maccabees [it says], ‘Was not Abraham found faithful when tested, and it was reckoned to him for righteousness’” [1 Macc. 2:52; see Jas. 2:21–23] (Treatises 7:3:15 [A.D. 248]).

Cyprian

“So Daniel, too, when he was required to worship the idol Bel, which the people and the king then worshiped, in asserting the honor of his God, broke forth with full faith and freedom, saying, ‘I worship nothing but the Lord my God, who created the heaven and the earth’ [Dan. 14:5]” (Letters 55:5 [A.D. 253]; Dan. 14 is not in the Protestant Bible).

 

[anthony022071]

Council of Rome

“Now indeed we must treat of the divine Scriptures, what the universal Catholic Church accepts and what she ought to shun. The order of the Old Testament begins here: Genesis, one book; Exodus, one book; Leviticus, one book; Numbers, one book; Deuteronomy, one book; Joshua [Son of] Nave, one book; Judges, one book; Ruth, one book; Kings, four books [that is, 1 and 2 Samuel and 1 and 2 Kings]; Paralipomenon [Chronicles], two books; Psalms, one book; Solomon, three books: Proverbs, one book; Ecclesiastes, one book; Canticle of Canticles, one book; likewise Wisdom, one book; Ecclesiasticus, one book . . . . Likewise the order of the historical [books]: Job, one book; Tobit, one book; Esdras, two books [Ezra and Nehemiah]; Esther, one book; Judith, one book; Maccabees, two books” (Decree of Pope Damasus [A.D. 382]).

Council of Hippo

“[It has been decided] that besides the canonical Scriptures nothing be read in church under the name of divine Scripture. But the canonical Scriptures are as follows: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua the Son of Nun, Judges, Ruth, the Kings, four books, the Chronicles, two books, Job, the Psalter, the five books of Solomon, the twelve books of the Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Ezekiel, Tobit, Judith, Esther, Ezra, two books, Maccabees, two books . . .” (canon 36 [A.D. 393]).

Council of Carthage III

“[It has been decided] that nothing except the canonical Scriptures should be read in the Church under the name of the divine Scriptures. But the canonical Scriptures are: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, Paralipomenon, two books, Job, the Psalter of David, five books of Solomon [Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Wisdom, Sirach], twelve books of the Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Ezekiel, Tobit, Judith, Esther, two books of Esdras, two books of the Maccabees . . .” (canon 47 [A.D. 397]).

Augustine

" [T]here are also others too, of a different order . . . such as Job and Tobit and Esther and Judith and the two books of Maccabees, and the two of Esdras . . . . Then there are the Prophets, in which there is one book of the Psalms of David, and three of Solomon. . . . But as to those two books, one of which is entitled Wisdom and the other of which is entitled Ecclesiasticus and which are called ‘of Solomon’ because of a certain similarity to his books, it is held most certainly that they were written by Jesus Sirach. They must, however, be accounted among the prophetic books, because of the authority which is deservedly accredited to them" (Christian Instruction 2:8:13 [A.D. 397]).

Augustine

“We read in the books of the Maccabees [2 Macc. 12:43] that sacrifice was offered for the dead. But even if it were found nowhere in the Old Testament writings, the authority of the Catholic Church which is clear on this point is of no small weight, where in the prayers of the priest poured forth to the Lord God at his altar the commendation of the dead has its place” (The Care to Be Had for the Dead 1:3 [A.D. 421]).

Apostolic Constitutions

“Now women also prophesied. Of old, Miriam the sister of Moses and Aaron [Ex. 15:20], and after her, Deborah [Judg. 4:4], and after these Huldah [2 Kgs. 22:14] and Judith [Jud. 8], the former under Josiah and the latter under Darius” (Apostolic Constitutions 8:2 [A.D. 400]).

 

[Old_Scholar]

what about this one?

Mark 9:48 - description of hell where their worm does not die and the fire is not quenched references Judith 16:17.

Actually it references this:

Isaiah 66:24 And they shall go forth, and look upon the carcases of the men that have transgressed against me: for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched; and they shall be an abhorring unto all flesh

Christ was quoting from Isaiah, written long before Judith.

 

[Old_Scholar]

May I ask who was the one that consolidated these 7 books to the end and categorized them as Apocrypha, around 16th century? Luther did! So, using "The end of the Prophets","The end of Apocrypha" as an argument are meaningless!

He disliked some of the books because they were against his philosophy. By using St. Jerome’s writings about Apocrypha books as the basis for his argument, he would be able to take care of the problem by elimination. Early years of life, St Jerome was internship under Jewish Hebrew Rabi, thus there was a possibility that he was influenced by the Jewish canonical process of their Bible which determined to exclude these books as Apocrypha, due to Greek influences. Interestingly, the Dead Sea crolls shows one or more of these books were written in Hebrew. The whole basis of the canonical process of Jewish Bible which excluded these books is now called into question! So the term “Apocrypha” as it was categorized by early Jewish scholars maybe erroneous!

ETL

You are blaming Luther for something he is not gjuilty of. Luther included the apocrypha books in his Bible but as apocrypha, not canon.

The Jews believed that when a prophet finished writing, his works were canonized. The Jewish Bible was canonized prior to 400 BC, after the last prophet. The argument came after Jerusalem was destroyed in 70 AD and many of the Jewish people were speaking Greek and not following their laws as put out in the OT(as we call it). The council in 70 - 90 A.D. at Jamnia was to again canonize the books so that the Jews would not be reading the apocrypha as it was listed in the Septuagint, although even then, they were considered not canonical.

 

[mark_a]

The council in 70 - 90 A.D. at Jamnia was to again canonize the books so that the Jews would not be reading the apocrypha as it was listed in the Septuagint, although even then, they were considered not canonical.

So the council of Jamnia is your authority for the OT and the Catholic Church is your authority for the NT?