Sirach...according to The King James Version

  • Thread starter Thread starter 2ndGen
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
How could it be “not inspired”,
yet be “in” the bible?

earlyjewishwritings.com/text/sirach.html
I am not sure I understand your question, or as I have detected as a pattern in your posts, the tendency to throw out a topic starter, with varying degrees of accuracy concerning the underlying premise.
If the question is whether or not the compilers of the KJV considered the Deuterocanonicals to be on the same level of scripture according to the 39 articles, clearly that answer is no,
 
I am not sure I understand your question, or as I have detected as a pattern in your posts, the tendency to throw out a topic starter, with varying degrees of accuracy concerning the underlying premise.
If the question is whether or not the compilers of the KJV considered the Deuterocanonicals to be on the same level of scripture according to the 39 articles, clearly that answer is no,
From the 39 articles:
Article VI
Of the sufficiency of the Holy Scripture for Salvation
Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation: so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should be believed as an article of the faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation.
In the name of Holy Scripture, we do understand those Canonical books of the Old and New testament, of whose authority was never any doubt in the Church.

Of the names and number of the Canonical Books.

Genesis.
Exodus.
Leviticus.
Numbers.
Deuteronomy
Joshua.
Judges.
Ruth.
The First Book of Samuel.
The Second Book of Samuel.
The First Book of Kings.
The Second Book of Kings.
The First Book of Chronicles.
The Second Book of Chronicles.
The First Book of Esdras.
The Second Book of Esdras.
The Book of Esther.
The Book of Job.
The Psalms.
The Proverbs.
Ecclesiastes, or the Preacher.
Cantica, or Songs of Solomon.
Four Prophets the Greater.
Twelve Prophets the Less.
All the books of the New Testament, as they are commonly received, we do receive, and account them canonical.

And the other books (as Hierome saith) the Church doth read for example of life and instruction of manners; but yet doth it not apply them to establish any doctrine. Such are these following:
The Third Book of Esdras.
The Fourth Book of Esdras.
The Book of Tobias.
The Book of Judith.
The rest of the Book of Esther.
The Book of Wisdom.
Jesus the Son of Sirach.
Baruch the Prophet.
The Song of the Three Children.
The Story of Susanna.
Of Bel and the Dragon.
The Prayer of Manasses.
The First Book of Maccabees.
The Second Book of Maccabees.
 

IOW, the C of E regards it as “good and useful”,but not as “inspired and canonical”; as an ecclesiastical book (hence its name *Liber Ecclesiasticus *in the 5th (?) century), though not as the inspired Word of God.​

Which is why Ecclesiasticus is read in the Lectionary.

We do something similar: one of the Ezra books that we (like Anglicans) don’t regard as canonical, is quoted in the pre-V2 Mass for the Departed. We use that book in the Roman Liturgy, in just the way that Anglicans use Ecclesiasticus in their Liturgy. 🙂
 
On a sidenote, I saw an original King James Version reprint at the bookstore the other day–complete with the seven deuterocanonicals and a few apocrypha. I’m happy, and I hope this practice becomes more commonplace. It would allow Protestants to read the books for themselves without feeling guilty. The NRSV ecumenical bibles have the apocrypha and deuterocanon. I’m hoping this practice will be resurrected in order to familiarize all the faithful, whether Catholics or otherwise, with these wonderful books.
 
I am not sure I understand your question, or as I have detected as a pattern in your posts, the tendency to throw out a topic starter, with varying degrees of accuracy concerning the underlying premise.
If the question is whether or not the compilers of the KJV considered the Deuterocanonicals to be on the same level of scripture according to the 39 articles, clearly that answer is no,
So if it’s “not” the inspired Word of God, how could they have “added” it to The Word of God?
 
From the 39 articles:
Article VI
Of the sufficiency of the Holy Scripture for Salvation
Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation: so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should be believed as an article of the faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation.
In the name of Holy Scripture, we do understand those Canonical books of the Old and New testament, of whose authority was never any doubt in the Church.

Of the names and number of the Canonical Books.

Genesis.
Exodus.
Leviticus.
Numbers.
Deuteronomy
Joshua.
Judges.
Ruth.
The First Book of Samuel.
The Second Book of Samuel.
The First Book of Kings.
The Second Book of Kings.
The First Book of Chronicles.
The Second Book of Chronicles.
The First Book of Esdras.
The Second Book of Esdras.
The Book of Esther.
The Book of Job.
The Psalms.
The Proverbs.
Ecclesiastes, or the Preacher.
Cantica, or Songs of Solomon.
Four Prophets the Greater.
Twelve Prophets the Less.
All the books of the New Testament, as they are commonly received, we do receive, and account them canonical.

And the other books (as Hierome saith) the Church doth read for example of life and instruction of manners; but yet doth it not apply them to establish any doctrine. Such are these following:
The Third Book of Esdras.
The Fourth Book of Esdras.
The Book of Tobias.
The Book of Judith.
The rest of the Book of Esther.
The Book of Wisdom.
Jesus the Son of Sirach.
Baruch the Prophet.
The Song of the Three Children.
The Story of Susanna.
Of Bel and the Dragon.
The Prayer of Manasses.
The First Book of Maccabees.
The Second Book of Maccabees.
So they kept The Holy Bible, but just decided that The Deuterocanonical Books that establish Catholicisms Doctrines were no longer canonical then, right?

Or “they’re not The Word of God, but we’ll keep them anyway.”
 
On a sidenote, I saw an original King James Version reprint at the bookstore the other day–complete with the seven deuterocanonicals and a few apocrypha. I’m happy, and I hope this practice becomes more commonplace. It would allow Protestants to read the books for themselves without feeling guilty. The NRSV ecumenical bibles have the apocrypha and deuterocanon. I’m hoping this practice will be resurrected in order to familiarize all the faithful, whether Catholics or otherwise, with these wonderful books.
From your lips to God’s ears.

Little known fact is that The Reformers used them,
but it was The Protestants that took them out a hundred years later.
 
So they kept The Holy Bible, but just decided that The Deuterocanonical Books that establish Catholicisms Doctrines were no longer canonical then, right?

Or “they’re not The Word of God, but we’ll keep them anyway.”
To the best of my knowledge they didn’t deem them canonical/inspired but kept them because “…the Church doth read for example of life and instruction of manners; but yet doth it not apply them to establish any doctrine.”
 
From your lips to God’s ears.

Little known fact is that The Reformers used them,
but it was The Protestants that took them out a hundred years later.
Using them and accepting them as God breathed are two different things.
 
From your lips to God’s ears.

Little known fact is that The Reformers used them,
but it was The Protestants that took them out a hundred years later.

The Reformers were Protestant. ISTM you may be thinking of John Lightfoot’s remark in 1643 about the “wretched Apocrypha”.​

At least in the UK, they were bound up with the (rest of the) Bible until 1827 (IIRC).
 
To the best of my knowledge they didn’t deem them canonical/inspired but kept them because “…the Church doth read for example of life and instruction of manners; but yet doth it not apply them to establish any doctrine.”
Where is that a quote from?

It sounds like the Book of Common Prayer. I’d have to get mine out.
 
One thing to remember:

There is not a SINGLE Christian manuscript of the Old Testament that does not have the Deuterocanonicals. Not One.
 
One thing to remember:

There is not a SINGLE Christian manuscript of the Old Testament that does not have the Deuterocanonicals. Not One.
You’re right. Not one. But hundreds…

Of the approximately 300 Old Testament quotes in the New Testament, approximately 2/3 of them came from the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Old Testament) which included the deuterocanonical books that the Protestants later removed. This is additional evidence that Jesus and the apostles viewed the deuterocanonical books as part of canon of the Old Testament. Here are some examples:

Matt. 1:23 / Isaiah 7:14 - behold, a “virgin” shall conceive. Hebrew - behold, a “young woman” shall conceive.

Matt. 3:3; Mark 1:3; John 1:23 / Isaiah 40:3 - make “His paths straight.” Hebrew - make “level in the desert a highway.”

Matt. 9:13; 12:7 / Hosea 6:6 - I desire “mercy” and not sacrifice. Hebrew - I desire “goodness” and not sacrifice.

Matt. 12:21 / Isaiah 42:4 - in His name will the Gentiles hope (or trust). Hebrew - the isles shall wait for his law.

Matt. 13:15 / Isaiah 6:10 - heart grown dull; eyes have closed; to heal. Hebrew - heart is fat; ears are heavy; eyes are shut; be healed.

Matt. 15:9; Mark 7:7 / Isaiah 29:13 - teaching as doctrines the precepts of men. Hebrew - a commandment of men (not doctrines).

Matt. 21:16 / Psalm 8:2 - out of the mouth of babes and sucklings thou has “perfect praise.” Hebrew - thou has “established strength.”

Mark 7:6-8 – Jesus quotes Isaiah 29:13 from the Septuagint – “This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.”

Luke 3:5-6 / Isaiah 40:4-5 - crooked be made straight, rough ways smooth, shall see salvation. Hebrew - omits these phrases.

Luke 4:18 / Isaiah 61:1 - and recovering of sight to the blind. Hebrew - the opening of prison to them that are bound.

Luke 4:18 / Isaiah 58:6 - to set at liberty those that are oppressed (or bruised). Hebrew - to let the oppressed go free.

John 6:31 / Psalm 78:24 - He gave them “bread” out of heaven to eat. Hebrew - gave them “food” or “grain” from heaven.

John 12:38 / Isaiah 53:1 - who has believed our “report?” Hebrew - who has believed our “message?”

John 12:40 / Isaiah 6:10 - lest they should see with eyes…turn for me to heal them. Hebrew - shut their eyes…and be healed.

Acts 2:19 / Joel 2:30 - blood and fire and “vapor” of smoke. Hebrew - blood and fire and “pillars” or “columns” of smoke.

Acts 2:25-26 / Psalm 16:8 - I saw…tongue rejoiced…dwell in hope… Hebrew - I have set…glory rejoiced…dwell in safety.

Acts 4:26 / Psalm 2:1 - the rulers “were gathered together.” Hebrew - rulers “take counsel together.”

Acts 7:14 / Gen. 46:27; Deut. 10:22 - Stephen says “seventy-five” souls went down to Egypt. Hebrew - “seventy” people went.

Acts 7:27-28 / Exodus 2:14 - uses “ruler” and judge; killed the Egyptian “yesterday.” Hebrew - uses “prince” and there is no reference to “yesterday.”

Acts 7:43 / Amos 5:26-27 - the tent of “Moloch” and star of god of Rephan. Hebrew - “your king,” shrine, and star of your god.

Acts 8:33 / Isaiah 53:7-8 - in his humiliation justice was denied him. Hebrew - by oppression…he was taken away.

Acts 13:41 / Habakkuk 1:5 - you “scoffers” and wonder and “perish.” Hebrew - you “among the nations,” and “be astounded.”

Acts 15:17 / Amos 9:12 - the rest (or remnant) of “men.” Hebrew - the remnant of “Edom.”

Rom. 2:24 / Isaiah 52:5 - the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles. Hebrew - blasphemed (there is no mention of the Gentiles).

Rom. 3:4 / Psalm 51:4 - thou mayest “prevail” (or overcome) when thou art judged. Hebrew - thou might “be clear” when thou judges.

Rom. 3:12 / Psalm 14:1,3 - they “have gone wrong.” Hebrew - they are “corrupt” or “filthy.”

Rom. 3:13 / Psalm 5:9 - they use their tongues to deceive. Hebrew - they flatter with their tongues. There is no “deceit” language.

Rom. 3:13 / Psalm 140:3 - the venom of “asps” is under their lips. Hebrew - “Adder’s” poison is under their lips.
 
One thing to remember:

There is not a SINGLE Christian manuscript of the Old Testament that does not have the Deuterocanonicals. Not One.
Rom. 3:14 / Psalm 10:7 - whose mouth is full of curses and “bitterness.” Hebrew - cursing and “deceit and oppression.”

Rom. 9:17 / Exodus 9:16 - my power “in you”; my name may be “proclaimed.” Hebrew - show “thee”; may name might be “declared.”

Rom. 9:25 / Hosea 2:23 - I will call my people; I will call my beloved. Hebrew - I will have mercy (love versus mercy).

Rom. 9:27 / Isaiah 10:22 - only a remnant of them “will be saved.” Hebrew - only a remnant of them “will return.”

Rom. 9:29 / Isaiah 1:9 - had not left us “children.” Hebrew - Jehova had left us a “very small remnant.”

Rom. 9:33; 10:11; 1 Peter 2:6 / Isaiah 28:16 - he who believes will not be “put to shame.” Hebrew - shall not be “in haste.”

Rom. 10:18 / Psalm 19:4 - their “voice” has gone out. Hebrew - their “line” is gone out.

Rom. 10:20 / Isaiah 65:1 - I have “shown myself” to those who did not ask for me. Hebrew - I am “inquired of” by them.

Rom. 10:21 / Isaiah 65:2 - a “disobedient and contrary” people. Hebrew - a “rebellious” people.

Rom. 11:9-10 / Psalm 69:22-23 - “pitfall” and “retribution” and “bend their backs.” Hebrew - “trap” and “make their loins shake.”

Rom. 11:26 / Isaiah 59:20 - will banish “ungodliness.” Hebrew - turn from “transgression.”

Rom. 11:27 / Isaiah 27:9 - when I take away their sins. Hebrew - this is all the fruit of taking away his sin.

Rom. 11:34; 1 Cor. 2:16 / Isaiah 40:13 -the “mind” of the Lord; His “counselor.” Hebrew - “spirit” of the Lord; “taught” Him.

Rom. 12:20 / Prov. 25:21 - feed him and give him to drink. Hebrew - give him “bread” to eat and “water” to drink.

Rom. 15:12 / Isaiah 11:10 - the root of Jesse…“to rule the Gentiles.” Hebrew - stands for an ensign. There is nothing about the Gentiles.

Rom. 15:21 / Isaiah 52:15 - been told “of him”; heard “of him.” Hebrew - does not mention “him” (the object of the prophecy).

1 Cor. 1:19 / Isaiah 29:14 - “I will destroy” the wisdom of the wise. Hebrew - wisdom of their wise men “shall perish.”

1 Cor. 5:13 / Deut. 17:7 - remove the “wicked person.” Hebrew - purge the “evil.” This is more generic evil in the MT.

1 Cor. 15:55 / Hosea 13:14 - O death, where is thy “sting?” Hebrew - O death, where are your “plagues?”

2 Cor. 4:13 / Psalm 116:10 - I believed and so I spoke (past tense). Hebrew - I believe, for I will speak (future tense).

2 Cor. 6:2 / Isaiah 49:8 - I have “listened” to you. Hebrew - I have “answered” you.

Gal. 3:10 / Deut. 27:26 - cursed be every one who does not “abide” by all things. Hebrew - does not “confirm” the words.

Gal. 3:13 / Deut. 21:23 - cursed is everyone who hangs on a “tree.” Hebrew - a hanged man is accursed. The word “tree” does not follow.

Gal. 4:27 / Isaiah 54:1 - “rejoice” and “break forth and shout.” Hebrew - “sing” and “break forth into singing.”

2 Tim. 2:19 / Num. 16:5 - The Lord “knows” those who are His. Hebrew - God will “show” who are His.

Heb. 1:6 / Deut. 32:43 - let all the angels of God worship Him. Hebrew - the Masoretic text omits this phrase from Deut. 32:43.

Heb. 1:12 / Psalm 102:25 - like a “mantle” … “roll them”… “will be changed.” Hebrew - “raiment”… “change”…“pass away.”

Heb. 2:7 / Psalm 8:5 - thou has made Him a little “lower than angels.” Hebrew - made Him but a little “lower than God.”

Heb. 2:12 / Psalm 22:22 - I will " sing" thy praise. Hebrew - I will praise thee. The LXX and most NTs (but not the RSV) have “sing.”

Heb. 2:13 / Isaiah 8:17 - I will “put my trust in Him.” Hebrew - I will “look for Him.”

Heb. 3:15 / Psalm 95:8 - do not harden your hearts as “in the rebellion.” Hebrew - harden not your hearts “as at Meribah.”

Heb. 3:15; 4:7 / Psalm 95:7 - when you hear His voice do not harden not your hearts. Hebrew - oh that you would hear His voice!

Heb. 8:9-10 / Jer. 31:32-33 - (nothing about husband); laws into their mind. Hebrew - I was a husband; law in their inward parts.

Heb. 9:28 / Isaiah 10:22 - “to save those” who are eagerly awaiting for Him. Hebrew - a remnant of them “shall return.”

Heb. 10:5 / Psalm 40:6 - “but a body hast thou prepared for me.” Hebrew - “mine ears hast thou opened.”

Heb. 10:38 / Hab. 2:3-4 - if he shrinks (or draws) back, my soul shall have no pleasure. Hebrew - his soul is puffed up, not upright.

Heb. 11:5 / Gen. 5:24 - Enoch was not “found.” Hebrew - Enoch was “not.”

Heb. 11:21 / Gen. 47:31 - Israel, bowing “over the head of his staff.” Hebrew - there is nothing about bowing over the head of his staff.

Heb. 12:6 / Prov. 3:12 - He chastises every son whom He receives. Hebrew - even as a father the son in whom he delights.

Heb. 13:6 / Psalm 118:6 - the Lord “is my helper.” Hebrew - Jehova “is on my side.” The LXX and the NT are identical.
 

The Reformers were Protestant. ISTM you may be thinking of John Lightfoot’s remark in 1643 about the “wretched Apocrypha”.​

At least in the UK, they were bound up with the (rest of the) Bible until 1827 (IIRC).
No, The Reformers were Apostate Catholics. Anyone who came after them that were baptized by their varioius churches were Protestants.
 
One thing to remember:

There is not a SINGLE Christian manuscript of the Old Testament that does not have the Deuterocanonicals. Not One.
So?

The Glossa Ordinaire included the deutero’s but rejected their canonical status.

The vulgate was sent out complete with Jeromes negative comments attached to the preface of each deuterocanonical book.
 
So if you can’t trust them for the canon, how do you trust them for the text?
The Glossa Ordinaire included the deutero’s but rejected their canonical status.
There loss. We’ve Orthodox: we’re not beholding to the Glossa’s mistakes.
The vulgate was sent out complete with Jeromes negative comments attached to the preface of each deuterocanonical book.
Yes, Jerome was the first to move the mark his Fathers had set, following the tradtions of the Phariseesa, Sadducees and Scribes instead of the Apostles, and translated from A (not the Masoretic, which didn’t exist yet) text. And St. Augustine castigated him for it.

Btw the Deuterocanonicals appear among the Dead Sea Scrolls, and, for instance, Sirach is commented in the Jewish Talmud. And Hanukkah makes no sense without Maccabbees.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top