Referencing of non-Canon books in the Bible

[dean24us]

Hello! I’m a “fan” of studying ancient literature, and I have been reading up on some of the non-canonical works that didn’t make it in to the Bible. There are a number of non-canon works that are referenced in the canonized books of the Bible (both in the OT and NT). There are several examples, but the one I am studying presently is the Book of Enoch (non-canon, but referenced in Jude 1:14-15).

My question is this: how can a work be considered non-canonized when a canonized book uses it as a source? It seems to me that if it was “good enough” to be referenced in a canonized work, it should be worthy of being canonized itself.

Best wishes,
Dean

 

[COPLAND_3]

Very good question! Those places, such in the book of Jude, have quoted a phrase or so from noncanonical writings. There is no doubt that those phrases are inspired, but it does not make all of the writings inspired. Usually many apocraphal writings contain truth mixed with legend. So those phrases quoted by the inspired writers are true. I believe the book of Enoch has actual prophecies that Enoch made, but that book in its present form is probably a combination of oral tradition from Enoch and pious legend added to it. Only the Church guided by thr Holy Spirit is able to define what is canonical.

 

[guanophore]

Hello! I’m a “fan” of studying ancient literature, and I have been reading up on some of the non-canonical works that didn’t make it in to the Bible. There are a number of non-canon works that are referenced in the canonized books of the Bible (both in the OT and NT). There are several examples, but the one I am studying presently is the Book of Enoch (non-canon, but referenced in Jude 1:14-15).

My question is this: how can a work be considered non-canonized when a canonized book uses it as a source? It seems to me that if it was “good enough” to be referenced in a canonized work, it should be worthy of being canonized itself.

Best wishes,
Dean

This is a good question. There are many sources quoted in scripture, including Pagan poets. Inspiration (Divine Truth) is not limited to the Holy Scriptures, and can be found in many places. However, these other sources do not meet the criteria for inclusion in the canon. There are many books used by the early Church and even read in Mass in the early centuries that were not included in the Scriptures. Some of these contain aposotlic teaching just as the other books of the NT, but for some reason or other, did not meet all the criteria necessary for inclusion. The standards are very rigorous.

 

[dean24us]

Thanks for the replies! On a related note, does anyone know of good Catholic resources (specifically, web sites) for studying non-canon writings? Like I mentioned in my original post, I am enjoying reading the non-canon writings, but I want to ensure that I’m interpreting them correctly and in the context of Church teachings.

Best wishes,
Dean

 

[COPLAND_3]

Thanks for the replies! On a related note, does anyone know of good Catholic resources (specifically, web sites) for studying non-canon writings? Like I mentioned in my original post, I am enjoying reading the non-canon writings, but I want to ensure that I’m interpreting them correctly and in the context of Church teachings.

Best wishes,
Dean

Do you mean something like a commentary on the non-canonical writings or a book from a Catholic perspective? Or do you mean a site that has those writings?

 

[COPLAND_3]

Another question. Are you talking about OT or NT apocrypha, or Church Fathers?

 

[dean24us]

Do you mean something like a commentary on the non-canonical writings or a book from a Catholic perspective? Or do you mean a site that has those writings?

Thanks for the reply Copland! What I was thinking of is something along the lines of the Aquinas Study Bible listed in your sig (great work, btw), where I could read the text of the work and it is followed-up with commentary from respected Catholics (either Church Fathers or more modern theologians). I’m not sure if such a thing exists, but I figured it didn’t hurt to ask.

And with regard to your other post, I’m interested in both OT and NT apocrypha. At the moment, I’ve been studying primarily the OT apocrypha, but I’d be interested in both if available.

Thanks,
Dean

 

[COPLAND_3]

Thanks for the reply Copland! What I was thinking of is something along the lines of the Aquinas Study Bible listed in your sig (great work, btw), where I could read the text of the work and it is followed-up with commentary from respected Catholics (either Church Fathers or more modern theologians). I’m not sure if such a thing exists, but I figured it didn’t hurt to ask.

And with regard to your other post, I’m interested in both OT and NT apocrypha. At the moment, I’ve been studying primarily the OT apocrypha, but I’d be interested in both if available.

Thanks,
Dean

Thanks for complimenting the project I’m working on, I appreciate that! As for a commentary on those works I don’t know of any Catholic ones, but there are probably non-catholic sources that have given their twist on it. There are some works that are done that have translated those texts and then given introductions that do help shed some light on them, but nothing that are indepth as a verse by verse commentary. Often you will find footnotes by the translators which are usually only noting things to do with translation and manuscript comparison.

The Fathers of the Church, especially some of the very early ones, often they would quote certain writings as if they were Scripture, or very close to being Scripture. If I was ever to do a project on any of the apocrypha I would surely look up all those quotes from the Fathers and then sift through to see what was actually edifying.

I had a great interest in those writings some time back and did devote some time of study on them. One that really caught my attention was “The Acts of Barnabas.” If authentic, which in my opinion it is, it was written by St. Mark. What I like about it is how it gives Marks account concerning the split between Paul and Barnabas. Paul had hard feelings towards Mark, thinking he whimped out of a mission, but according to Mark Paul misunderstood what happened, which led to Paul and Barnabas to go different ways. I highly recommend reading it, according to scholars it has great accuracy on locations and has also a great deal of Aramaic idioms which appears to be written by someone like Mark who may have written in Greek but thought in Aramaic.