D
DavidFilmer
Guest
As Catholics defend the complete Canon of Scripture (including the deuterocanonicals of the LXX) we are sometimes faced with the protestant challenge that the NT does not directly quote any of the deuterocanonical books.
Yes, I KNOW the history of the LXX and the deuterocanonical books, and I know exactly WHY these writings belong in our Canon. And I am fully aware of the reasons that this whole line of reasoning is completely spurious.
But I also know that the NT does not quote from each and every one of the non- deuterocanonical books, either. If a protestant wants to reject the deuterocanonicals because the NT does not directly quote from them, then I believe s/he must also reject all Hebrew books (part of the regular protestant Canon) which are likewise not directly quoted. But protestants who advance the “not quoted” argument are not equally willing to discard the Hebrew OT Scriptures which fail this exact same test (a double standard).
Does anyone know the list of Hebrew OT “books” that are not directly quoted in the NT?
Yes, I KNOW the history of the LXX and the deuterocanonical books, and I know exactly WHY these writings belong in our Canon. And I am fully aware of the reasons that this whole line of reasoning is completely spurious.
But I also know that the NT does not quote from each and every one of the non- deuterocanonical books, either. If a protestant wants to reject the deuterocanonicals because the NT does not directly quote from them, then I believe s/he must also reject all Hebrew books (part of the regular protestant Canon) which are likewise not directly quoted. But protestants who advance the “not quoted” argument are not equally willing to discard the Hebrew OT Scriptures which fail this exact same test (a double standard).
Does anyone know the list of Hebrew OT “books” that are not directly quoted in the NT?