Who was the first ECF to reject the deutero's?

[Pwrlftr]

I don’t think any Early Church Father rejected any books of Sacred Scripture.

Marcion attempted to teach the rejection of many of the Sacred Books and was throughly denounced as a heretic for not retracting his teachings. I do not consider Marcion an Early Church Father.

What do you make of Melito or Jerome (for example)? Or for goodness sakes, what about Jerome?

 

[Pwrlftr]

Maybe if you want to add to what was ACTUALLY written…
I wonder, what about in Mt. 12…should we change the wording to “Proverbs of Solomon” also?
42 The queen of the south shall rise in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: because she came from the ends of the earth to hear the Wisdom of Solomon, and behold a greater than Solomon here.

First, the text doesn’t read the “Wisdom of Solomon” as if it is the title of a book, which is what you listed it as above. What version of the Bible did you use that translates this as “Wisdom of Solomon” instead of “wisdom of Solomon”? I am really, really, curious about this.

Let’s see what they DR has to say:
Matthew 12:42:

42 The queen of the south shall rise in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: because she came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon, and behold a greater than Solomon here.

I tell you, I don’t see the KJV, RSV, ESV, NASB, NAB, DR or any other version of the Bible translating the “wisdom of Solomon” as a book title, so please tell us which version capitalizes the W in wisdom?

 

[Harpazo]

All of this thread really boils down to one thing: trusting God.

Christ made a promise in St. Matthew 16:18-19. We know that Church was the Catholic Church (and still is and shall be). That Church, guided by the Holy Spirit canonized the WHOLE Bible. If you trust Christ, you’ll trust His Church. If you trust His Church, you’ll trust their canon. You trust their canon, you trust Christ. It’s almost circular.

To deny one or part of those is essentially denying Christ.

Pace e Bene
Andrew

 

[jmcrae]

Good catch.

FF Bruce says:

Maybe the phrase “…the Proverbs of Solomon, Wisdom also…” should read “…the Proverbs of Solomon, called Wisdom also…”.

Not likely. He probably actually meant the Book of Wisdom, since the Book of Proverbs has never gone by the name “Wisdom.”

Another possibility is that he meant to say, “The book of proverbs that is called Wisdom,” which is still referring to the Book of Wisdom (which contains a great many proverbs), but omitting the Book of Proverbs.

I consider it more likely that he intended both books.

In any case, none of the Early Fathers “rejected” the Deuteros - questioned them from time to time, yes, but all of them, including Jerome, eventually considered them Scripture, right alongside the Church, once they got their questions answered.

 

[Pwrlftr]

All of this thread really boils down to one thing: trusting God.

Christ made a promise in St. Matthew 16:18-19. We know that Church was the Catholic Church (and still is and shall be). That Church, guided by the Holy Spirit canonized the WHOLE Bible. If you trust Christ, you’ll trust His Church. If you trust His Church, you’ll trust their canon. You trust their canon, you trust Christ. It’s almost circular.

To deny one or part of those is essentially denying Christ.

Pace e Bene
Andrew

So, who was the first ECF to deny the deutero’s?

 

[Ilroy]

First, the text doesn’t read the “Wisdom of Solomon” as if it is the title of a book, which is what you listed it as above. What version of the Bible did you use that translates this as “Wisdom of Solomon” instead of “wisdom of Solomon”? I am really, really, curious about this.

I capitolized it for effect…you don’t like it when someone else plays with the words like you were doing huh?

 

[Pwrlftr]

Gosh, all you guys need to read your own sources.

newadvent.org in the section under the OT canon has this to say about Melito of Sardis and the canon he accepted.
Catholic Encyclopedia:

St. Melito, Bishop of Sardis (c. 170), first drew up a list of the canonical books of the Old Testament While maintaining the familiar arrangement of the Septuagint, he says that he verified his catalogue by inquiry among Jews; Jewry by that time had everywhere discarded the Alexandrian books, ***and Melito’s Canon consists exclusively of the protocanonicals ***minus Esther.

It would seem obvious that Melito rejected the deutero’s, uncomfortable apparently to some of you but obvious none the less.

Did anyone before Melito reject the deutero’s?

 

[Pwrlftr]

I capitolized it for effect…you don’t like it when someone else plays with the words like you were doing huh?

Uh…I went back and found another translation.

Regardless, it seems obvious that Melito rejected the deutero’s, does that bother you?

Do you know of another father who rejected the deutero’s from an earlier date?

 

[Pwrlftr]

Not likely. He probably actually meant the Book of Wisdom, since the Book of Proverbs has never gone by the name “Wisdom.”

Another possibility is that he meant to say, “The book of proverbs that is called Wisdom,” which is still referring to the Book of Wisdom (which contains a great many proverbs), but omitting the Book of Proverbs.

I consider it more likely that he intended both books.

In any case, none of the Early Fathers “rejected” the Deuteros - questioned them from time to time, yes, but all of them, including Jerome, eventually considered them Scripture, right alongside the Church, once they got their questions answered.

Uh, did you ever hear of Jerome? I don’t know anyone who maintains that he accepted the deutero’s, other than matt1618.

Anyway, go back and read the one of my previous posts where even the catholic encyclopedia admits Melito rejected the deutero’s.

 

[jmcrae]

Uh…I went back and found another translation.

Regardless, it seems obvious that Melito rejected the deutero’s, does that bother you?

Do you know of another father who rejected the deutero’s from an earlier date?

He had an incomplete list of the Old Testament, but it is not at all clear that he “rejected the Deuteros.” What do you make of the fact that he excludes the Book of Esther, but includes the Book of Wisdom? This seems to me to be a third canon - neither Palestinian nor Alexandrian.

Is it at all possible that he was going from memory, and simply forgot a few books?

 

[jmcrae]

Uh, did you ever hear of Jerome?

Yes. I even own a copy of his Bible. It has a 46-book Old Testament, corresponding to the Alexandrian canon. Meaning that, at some point along the way, he changed his mind.

Anyway, go back and read the one of my previous posts where even the catholic encyclopedia admits Melito rejected the deutero’s.

If he did, your quote doesn’t prove it, since the canon he lists doesn’t correspond either to the Alexandrian, or to the Palestinian.

 

[Pwrlftr]

In any case, none of the Early Fathers “rejected” the Deuteros - questioned them from time to time, yes, but all of them, including Jerome, eventually considered them Scripture, right alongside the Church, once they got their questions answered.

You know something, the catholic apologists who participate in debates such as Gary Michuta don’t make this strong a claim.

Also, until Trent, one was quite free in matters regarding the canon.

 

[Pwrlftr]

Yes. I even own a copy of his Bible. It has a 46-book Old Testament, corresponding to the Alexandrian canon. Meaning that, at some point along the way, he changed his mind.

If he did, your quote doesn’t prove it, since the canon he lists doesn’t correspond either to the Alexandrian, or to the Palestinian.

Read what he says at the preface of each of the apocrypha. There is no evidence that he ever changed his mind on the apocrypha as even Mark Shea has now admitted.

I only asked who was the first father to reject the deutero’s which apparently Melito was. I didn’t say anything else one way or the other about the man.

 

[Pwrlftr]

He had an incomplete list of the Old Testament, but it is not at all clear that he “rejected the Deuteros.” What do you make of the fact that he excludes the Book of Esther, but includes the Book of Wisdom? This seems to me to be a third canon - neither Palestinian nor Alexandrian.

Is it at all possible that he was going from memory, and simply forgot a few books?

I doubt it. How would he have forgotten since he went out of his way to get the canon from the Jews? How much clearer can it be? Even catholic sources, other than you guys on this thread, admit Melito rejected the deutero’s.

FF Bruce and newadvent.org apparently intepret Wisdom to be Proverbs in this case.

 

[Pwrlftr]

From newadvent.org

St. Jerome cast his weighty suffrage on the side unfavourable to the disputed books. In appreciating his attitude we must remember that Jerome lived long in Palestine, in an environment where everything outside the Jewish Canon was suspect, and that, moreover, he had an excessive veneration for the Hebrew text, the Hebraica veritas as he called it. In his famous “Prologus Galeatus”, or Preface to his translation of Samuel and Kings, he declares that everything not Hebrew should be classed with the apocrypha, and explicitly says that Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Tobias, and Judith are not on the Canon. These books, he adds, are read in the churches for the edification of the people, and not for the confirmation of revealed doctrine. **An analysis of Jerome’s expressions on the deuterocanonicals, in various letters and prefaces, yields the following results: first, he strongly doubted their inspiration; **secondly, the fact that he occasionally quotes them, and translated some of them as a concession to ecclesiastical tradition, is an involuntary testimony on his part to the high standing these writings enjoyed in the Church at large, and to the strength of the practical tradition which prescribed their readings in public worship. Obviously, the inferior rank to which the deuteros were relegated by authorities like Origen, Athanasius, and Jerome, was due to too rigid a conception of canonicity, one demanding that a book, to be entitled to this supreme dignity, must be received by all, must have the sanction of Jewish antiquity, and must moreover be adapted not only to edification, but also to the “confirmation of the doctrine of the Church”, to borrow Jerome’s phrase.

Apparently, Jerome wasn’t “down” w/ the deutero’s.

 

[Pwrlftr]

Yes. I even own a copy of his Bible. It has a 46-book Old Testament, corresponding to the Alexandrian canon. Meaning that, at some point along the way, he changed his mind.

Let’s see what the good old catholic encyclopedia says about the vulgate:
Cat Encyc:

This period exhibits a curious exchange of opinions between the West and the East, while ecclesiastical usage remained unchanged, at least in the Latin Church. During this intermediate age the use of St. Jerome’s new version of the Old Testament (the Vulgate) became widespread in the Occident. With its text went Jerome’s prefaces disparaging the deuterocanonicals, and under the influence of his authority the West began to distrust these and to show the first symptoms of a current hostile to their canonicity. On the other hand, the Oriental Church imported a Western authority which had canonized the disputed books, viz., the decree of Carthage, and from this time there is an increasing tendency among the Greeks to place the deuteros on the same level with the others–a tendency, however, due more to forgetfulness of the old distinction than to deference to the Council of Carthage.

We see that Jerome included the books but his comments led to the “disparaging of the deuterocanonicals”.

 

[Pwrlftr]

Yes. I even own a copy of his Bible. It has a 46-book Old Testament, corresponding to the Alexandrian canon. .

The Alexandrian canon? There is no such thing. There is no evidence the Jews in Alexandria accepted a wider canon than those in Palestine. I am assuming you are using the phrase Alexandrian Canon as it is often used to denote a canon used by Jews of the diaspora prior to the first century.

If you think there was such a canon I would like for you to prove this by:
a.) List the manuscripts we have of an Alexandrian canon by name.

OR

b.) Provide a quote from someone such as a Philo or Josephus that lists the books of the Alexandrian canon.

Everything I have ever read on this subject rejects the Alexandrian canon as myth so it will be interesting to see what you come up with.

 

[Alexius]

I found another translation of the text from Eusebius…

“…two of Chronicles, the Psalms of David, Solomon’s Proverbs or Wisdom…” which indicates that Melito did in fact equate Proverbs and Wisdom.

I know Bruce, Beckwith, and MacDonald all credit Melito as accepting Proverbs but rejecting Wisdom (the deutero) but will try to look into this further.

Why the discrepancies in translating it? One must be faulty…Were a few words missing in the original manuscript?

Prayers and petitions,
Alexius

 

[Pwrlftr]

Why the discrepancies in translating it? One must be faulty…Were a few words missing in the original manuscript?

Prayers and petitions,
Alexius

Put it this way, I don’t know of any scholar who disputes that Melito rejects the deutero’s. Admittedly my knowledge of the scholarship on this subject is not exhaustive but even the Catholic Encyclopedia admits Melito rejected the deutero’s.

As to which translation is correct, I don’t know but that same translation that I first posted is the one I have seen used to demonstrate that Melito rejected the deutero’s.

If Melito wasn’t the first, who do think was the first to reject the deutero’s?

 

[b_justb]

What do you make of Melito or Jerome (for example)? Or for goodness sakes, what about Jerome?

The problem I am having with the question you are asking is that is it akin to:

When did you stop beating your wife?

The question assumes a fact that has not been established. The ECF did not reject the deuterocanon. Since the EFC did not reject the deuterocanon there is no answer to:

Who was the first ECF to reject the deutero’s?

To reject something you have to acknowledge it and then state firmly your rejection to it and most likely why you reject it. We don’t have that from any ECF.

I think St. Jerome’s arguments are sound theological arguments. St. Jerome was a profound scholar and theologian. St. Jerome was never part of the Teaching Office of The Church, however. Just like today, theologians always look at, scrutinize, and ponder dogma and doctrine. They are forever giving their (mostly unwanted ) (name removed by moderator)ut to the Teaching Office of The Church. The Church in her mercy considers their (name removed by moderator)ut (no matter how whacked it is) and then renders Official Church Teaching, not because of the (name removed by moderator)ut but in spite of it. Sometimes The Church will quote a particular theologian in expressing a point, not because that theologian has become part of the teaching office of The Church, but because at the time that particular snippet by that particular theologian offers a sound and logical statement of the teaching. The Church is entrusted to hand down what was taught by the Apostles and to take those teachings and attempt to shepherd souls in a world far removed from the time those teachings originated. Once that teaching is given the theologians then use it in a feed back loop into their own ideas and re-tailor their writings and the whole thing just keeps going and going like the energizer bunny. This is why theologians **** off a lot of people. Is it any wonder they get banished at various times in history? I mean you can only take so much of it before your say, “Enough is enough, already.”

I think maybe you should re-tool your question so that it doesn’t presume a fact that is not established.