The Deuterocanonical Books / Apocrypha

  • Thread starter Thread starter kevdlandrig
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
K

kevdlandrig

Guest
I’ve gotten into a discussion with a Protestant friend of mine about the books in the bible. His argument as to the Catholic “extra” books is that when Jesus was talking to the Pharisees, He told them:

" 34"Therefore, behold, I am sending you prophets and wise men and scribes; some of them you will kill and crucify, and some of them you will scourge in your synagogues, and persecute from city to city,

35so that upon you may fall the guilt of all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah, the son of Berechiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar.

36"Truly I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation”

In his argument, my friend says that this means that there were no prophets after Zachariah, and that the ‘Apocrypha’ therefore, does not belong in the bible, because the prophets came after Zachariah.

My Counterarguments are thus: (I’m unsure of this one) The Prophets of the Deuterocanon did, in fact come before Zachariah.

Jesus was speaking in alphabetical order, not Chronological order. (Does the alphabet work the same in the Ancient languages?)

Jesus and His Apostles quoted many parts of each of the deuterocanonical books throughout the four Gospels. However, I need to find some of these quotes and have had trouble doing so. Can someone please help me to find both the quotes, and where they are located in the Apocrypha and the Gospel?

Thanks for all of your help in advance and God Bless.
 
First of all, John the Baptist is said in Scripture to be a “prophet” and he lived in the Old Covenant. So your friend’s argument is DOA right there.

But second, the resource you want to get is Gary Michuta’s Why Catholic Bibles Are Bigger, which goes into that argument, plus several other arguments of assumption made by non-Catholics against the Deuterocanon. I would but don’t have time to transcribe the pertinent parts this evening.
 
Here is a link to Scripturecatholic’s page on the deutero’s referenced in the Gospels.

I must admit this is the first time I’ve heard this argument.
My first thought was…This is reeaaallly a stretch…
My second thought was - "Was Abel a prophet?..🤷

I don’t know that your “alphabetical order” works because the original was written in Greek and isn’t the last letter in Greek “Omega”? I don’t know about Hebrew or Aramaic…🤷

I would suggest asking him for historical evidence that this is the reason that the reformers rejected the books…Since he cannot produce such evidence his argument falls apart.
Also, you might ask him if he can produce any sanctioned bible canon from 400 AD to 1500 AD in either the Eastern or Western Church that matches the 66 book canon of the Protestant bible.
Again he cannot, therefore there is no such thing as “extra books” in the Catholic Bible…🤷

Peace
James
 
A few quick thoughts…

It’s not alphabetical. Abel (alef) is alphabetically first, but Zechariah (zayin) is in the first third of the Hebrew alphabet. Same in the Greek.

It’s not first to last. Even in the Hebrew Bible the last book, chronologically and biblically, is Malachi.

It doesn’t refer to books or authors of the Bible. Abel is neither.

There is considerable controversy among biblical scholars just who this Zechariah is:
  1. the prophet, but his murder is not told in scripture
  2. the Zechariah of 2 Chron 24:20
  3. Zechariah son of Baruch, to be murdered in 68 AD
  4. the father of John the Baptist
  5. an unknown Zechariah
Zechariah’s was not the last righteous blood shed on earth. What about John the Baptist?

So, it’s a pretty long stretch from this statement by Jesus to conclusions regarding the canonicity of specific books of the Bible.
 
JerryS said:
A few quick thoughts…

It doesn’t refer to books or authors of the Bible. Abel is neither.

There is considerable controversy among biblical scholars just who this Zechariah is:
  1. the prophet, but his murder is not told in scripture
Click to expand...
I think that you had it right on the first one, and I think that Jesus may have been speaking metaphorically, and that the Jews murdered him between temple and altar with words. I could be wrong though, because I am not sure how this is still possible.
 
JerryS said:
A few quick thoughts…

It’s not alphabetical. Abel (alef) is alphabetically first, but Zechariah (zayin) is in the first third of the Hebrew alphabet. Same in the Greek.

It’s not first to last. Even in the Hebrew Bible the last book, chronologically and biblically, is Malachi.

It doesn’t refer to books or authors of the Bible. Abel is neither.

There is considerable controversy among biblical scholars just who this Zechariah is:
  1. the prophet, but his murder is not told in scripture
  2. the Zechariah of 2 Chron 24:20
  3. Zechariah son of Baruch, to be murdered in 68 AD
  4. the father of John the Baptist
  5. an unknown Zechariah
Zechariah’s was not the last righteous blood shed on earth. What about John the Baptist?

So, it’s a pretty long stretch from this statement by Jesus to conclusions regarding the canonicity of specific books of the Bible.
Click to expand...
The word we translate as “Abel” begins with a hey, not an aleph; hey is the fifth letter of the Hebrew alphabet.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top