Difference between revisions of "Apocrypha"

Revision as of 01:52, July 13, 2016

The Apocrypha refers to books of the Bible that various religious denominations do not accept as part of the Biblical Canon—precisely which books are regarded as apocryphal varies between denominations.

1 Samaritans
2 Protestant canon
3 Council of Jamnia ? A.D. 70
4 Early Christian Bible
5 Martin Luther and the Reformation
6 Formation of Catholic Canon
7 Protestant doctrine: "these books were added to the Bible in the 4th century"
8 King James Bible and the Episcopal Church
9 Hebrew and Aramaic original texts
10 Protestant Canon of Apocrypha Books
11 Four New Testament Apocrypha Books according to Martin Luther
12 Reasons for rejecting the Apocrypha
13 Western art and theology
14 The Anagignoskomena, Apostolic Fathers, Pseudepigrapha, Gnostic writings and gospels
15 References
16 External links

Samaritans

The Samaritans, for example, accept only the Samaritan Pentateuch, the five books of Moses, as canonical and inspired: Genesis through Deuteronomy and Joshua (more precisely called the Hexateuch^[1]). All other writings are rejected by them as the uninspired works of men.

Protestant canon

The Protestant canon of 66 books was originally formulated by Martin Luther, who removed several books and texts from the 73 books of the Old Testament as read by the Catholic Church and separated them as "apocryphal". Some editions of the Protestant Bible feature them in a section between the Old and New Testaments as The Apocrypha (Greek, plural, "apocrypha", singular "apocryphon"). He cited the rabbinical authority of the Jews who have rejected these books as having no place in the Hebrew canon.

Council of Jamnia ? A.D. 70

In response to the rise of the Christian sect and the destruction of the Temple in A.D. 70, Jewish rabbis at the Council of Jamnia (some say there was no such council ^[2]) in A.D. 90 discussed rejecting the Septuagint which Christians were using with great effect in favor of selected Hebrew language scriptural texts, omitting certain books such as Baruch, Judith, Maccabees, Sirach, and Tobit (some of these originally written in Hebrew and/or Aramaic ^[3] which were relatively recent Jewish contributions of the 3rd through the 1st centuries before Christ) which had become part of Jewish culture. Needless to say, the Church disregarded the results of Jamnia/Javneh/Jabneh. The opinion of a Jewish council rendered after the time of Christ is not binding on the followers of Christ. If the Jews have been so entrusted with the word of God that they were therefore given the divine authority to also determine the canon of sacred scripture, then the whole New Testament is excluded from the canon of the Holy Bible because it does not meet established rabbinical criteria for what is sacred inspired scripture.

See Logical fallacy of Proof by authority: argumentum ad verecundiam ("appeal to unqualified authority")

According to the ordinary reading of the New Testament and the consensus of the majority of Christians from the 1st century to this day, the authority of the kingdom of God had been wholly taken away from the Jews in the 1st century and given to the leaders of the Gentiles and Jews in Christ long before the Council of Jamnia. Stephen the first martyr for Christ testified to the Sanhedrin this fact by the Holy Spirit:

"Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye. Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers: Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it." Acts 7:51-53 KJV

The Apostle Paul himself testified that the Jews are no longer the arbiters of Holy Scripture, but instead that Christian leaders are to be accounted as "the stewards of the mysteries of God". See the testimony of the following scriptures of the Bible:

2 Corinthians 3:14-16

1 Thessalonians 2:13-16

Historically, Jewish scholars since A.D. the 2nd–5th centuries (the Talmudists and the Masoretes) have considered the canon closed since the time of Malachi, and have not included the books and texts listed in the Protestant Apocrypha, which were written subsequent to his time.^[4] At the same time they simultaneously excluded as condemned and false the writings of the "heretics" (the minim, including Christians, called nozrim, no§rim, "Nazarenes"), and cursed Christians in a synagogue service "benediction" against them and others. Palestinian texts of the Eighteen Benedictions from the Cairo Genizah ^[5] present a text of the benediction which identifies the minim:

"For the apostates may there be no hope unless they return to Your Torah. As for the no§rim and the minim, may they perish immediately. Speedily may they be erased from the Book of Life, and may they not be registered among the righteous. Blessed are You, O Lord, Who subdues the wicked."

While other specimens of the Palestinian liturgy show slight variation, the no§rim, (usually translated “Christians”) and minim are included in the best texts of this benediction. The fact remains that the no§rim were included with apostates and heretics and the wicked in the Genizah documents.^[6] Jamnia considered 4 criteria (not found in the Bible) to determine which of the Writings - such as Ecclesiastes, Esther, and Song of Songs - should be retained for the Hebrew canon for Judaism:

the book should conform to the Torah;

it was written before the time of Ezra (circa 450 BC);

it was written in Hebrew;

and it was composed in Judah or Israel.^[7]

Although some books of the Old Testament were discussed in Judea at the Pharisaic Council of Jamnia in A.D. 90, the canon itself was not a topic of consideration and this group in fact had no decision-making power. Historically, Jewish scholars since the 2nd century have considered the canon closed since the time of Malachi, and have not included the books of the Protestant Apocrypha, which were written subsequent to his time.^[4] The Jews as arbiters of the Old Testament canon have excluded everything Christian. The Masoretic Text does not include the Apocrypha. The earliest manuscripts of the whole Christian Bible (Greek Bible) include the Apocrypha.^[8]

Early Christian Bible

The oldest extant manuscripts of the entire Christian Bible are written in Greek, the language of the apostles and the early Christian Church, representing the text of the Holy Bible as it was before the time of Jerome's 5th century Vulgate translation of the scriptures into Latin. They are the Codex Vaticanus, the Codex Sinaiticus, and the Codex Alexandrinus. They demonstrate that all of the books and parts of books that have been separated and designated as Apocrypha since the 16th century were included as integral parts of the whole Bible as handed down from the time of the apostles without any distinction or difference, as sacred scripture.

See especially the following three sources:

Codex Vaticanus (orthodoxwiki.org)
THE CODEX SINAITICUS, T. S. PATTIE. 1977 pdf (bl.uk/eblj)
THE CODEX ALEXANDRINUS AND THE ALEXANDRIAN GREEK TYPES, J. H. BOWMAN. 1998 pdf (bl.uk/eblj)

The response that there is no manuscript evidence predating the 4th century that the Apocrypha were included in the Greek Bible, and therefore no actual proof that the early Christian church ever accepted them as inspired sacred scriptures, is an example of an argument from silence. See Deuterocanonicals.

Martin Luther and the Reformation

Martin Luther and the leaders of the Reformation cite as authoritative and determinative the canon of the Hebrew Bible as defined by rabbinical authorities who excluded and condemned as false the entire New Testament scriptures and Jesus as the Messiah ^[9] because "unto them were committed the oracles of God." (see Romans 3:2). This presents a problem. If the Jews have been so entrusted with the word of God that they had therefore been given the divine authority to determine the canon of sacred scripture, as Luther and the Reformation Protestants maintain, then the whole New Testament is excluded from the canon of the holy Bible because it does not meet established rabbinical criteria for what is sacred inspired scripture.

Formation of Catholic Canon

The Catholic definitive final canon of 73 books was retained "as read by the Church" by the Council of Trent. When Constantine first made Christianity a legal religion in the Roman Empire in the early 300s, he called together leading Christians from the East and West parts of the empire to iron out the principles of Christianity, including cementing the canon. The entire canonical text was identified by Pope Damasus I and the Synod of Rome (382).^[10] Subsequent councils such as the Council of Hippo (393) and the Third Council of Carthage (397), dealt with minor questions of authenticity, affirming the canon of Damasus and the Synod of Rome, and set forth the first-ever listing of all 27 books of the New Testament together, with 46 books of the Old Testament, a canon of 73 books of the Bible, which quickly gained acceptance and remained unchanged for 1200 years. Jerome (Prologus Galeatus c. 420) listed the books rejected by the Jews as "apocryphal" but himself quoted them as if they were scripture.^[11] The canon of Damasus, and the Synods of Rome, Hippo and Carthage, was reaffirmed at the Council of Florence of the (briefly reunited) Church of the east and west in 1442.^[12] The Catholic Bible includes the 27 books of the New Testament and 46 Old Testament books "with all their parts" from the ancient Septuagint as used by the apostles and the early Christian church and included in Jerome's Vulgate translation as part of the Old Testament, and accepts those books as scripture.

—Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent. The Fourth Session. Celebrated on the eighth day of the month of April, in the year 1546. English translation by James Waterworth (London, 1848)

Protestant doctrine: "these books were added to the Bible in the 4th century"

Protestant doctrine constantly affirms that the apocryphal books were added to the Bible in the 4th century by the Catholic Church because they contain texts which support traditional Catholic and Orthodox teaching and practice, such as the intercession of saints and prayers for the dead, and the performance of good works and almsgiving as a means of deliverance from death and purging of every sin (see The Great Heresies, External links below). Since the Apocrypha were already in the Septuagint Old Testament from before the time of the apostles, and have been an integral part of the Greek Bible as read in the ancient Church and preserved by Eastern Orthodoxy from the 1st century to this day, it is difficult to see how they had been "added". Eastern Church leaders rejected the proposed Protestant canon of 66 books in the Bible.^[13]

Protestant doctrine also points out that none of the Apocrypha are quoted in the New Testament, presenting this fact as an additional indication that the New Testament writers did not regard them as inspired scripture. Jesus and the New Testament writers quote from all Old Testament Books except Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Solomon. This does not mean they are not inspired, and they are accepted by Protestants as canonical scriptures of the Holy Bible.

King James Bible and the Episcopal Church

For some time the King James Bible contained those books which Protestant Reformers deemed apocryphal in a separate section, "Apocrypha", between the Old Testament and the New Testament. The Episcopal Church includes the books of the Apocrypha in the cycle of scripture readings in its services, but holds that the apocryphal books are useful for study and edification, but not for doctrine. Most Protestant churches do not use the Apocrypha as scripture at all, and they are not included in standard published editions of Protestant Bibles.

Hebrew and Aramaic original texts

Most Protestant Christians are unaware that numerous quotations in the New Testament are from the Septuagint Old Testament containing the Apocrypha.^[14] Protestant doctrine has traditionally affirmed that the books of the Apocrypha were not originally written in Hebrew or Aramaic, presenting this as an additional indication that they cannot be regarded as sacred inspired scripture.

However, Biblical researchers in the 20th and 21st centuries have also discovered that most of the Apocrypha, except the Book of Wisdom (originally written in Greek?), were in fact originally written in Hebrew or Aramaic (Syriac) prior to the Christian era.^[15]^[3] The New Testament quotes from all of the Old Testament Books except Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Solomon, and the New Testament books themselves were originally written in Greek.^[16] This does not mean they are not inspired.

Protestant Canon of Apocrypha Books

Books apocryphal to the Protestant canon include (titles as listed in Bibles printed in 1881):

I Esdras
II Esdras
Baruch
- Epistle of Jeremiah is sometimes included with the Book of Baruch as chapter 6
Tobit
Judith
The Wisdom of Solomon
The Wisdom of Jesus the Son of Sirach, or, Ecclesiasticus
The Prayer of Manasses, king of Judah, when he was holden captive in Babylon
The rest of the Chapters of the book of Esther, which are found neither in the Hebrew, nor in the Chaldee (chapters 10:4—16:1-24)
The Song of the Three Holy Children"Which followeth in the third Chapter of Daniel after this place—fell down bound into the midst of the burning fiery furnace. That which followeth is not in the Hebrew, to wit, and they walked.... unto these words, Then Nebuchadnezzar... verse 24." (62 verses)
The History of Susanna "set apart from the Beginning of Daniel, because it is not in the Hebrew, as neither the Narration of Bel and the Dragon"
The History of the Destruction of Bel and the Dragon, cut off from the end of Daniel
First Book of the Maccabees
Second Book of the Maccabees

Four New Testament Apocrypha Books according to Martin Luther

Martin Luther pronounced as "apocryphal" these books of the New Testament:^[17]

Hebrews
James "an epistle of straw"
Jude
Revelation

He removed these 4 from the New Testament and placed them in an appendix to the New Testament of his German Bible as not equal to the inspired scriptures, classing them separately as apocryphal along with the 7 books he had removed from the Old Testament and segregated as The Apocrypha. Later, he revised his opinion of them and included them among the New Testament books as "useful", but continued to exclude from the Old Testament the 7 remaining books and parts of other books he had originally removed as "apocryphal".

Reasons for rejecting the Apocrypha

See Dispute on Canonicity: reasons for rejecting the Apocrypha (Daniel)

See Dispute on Canonicity: reasons for rejecting the Apocrypha (Esther)

Western art and theology

Western art and theology continued to make reference to Apocryphal subjects long after they were deemed apocryphal. For example:

the story of Judith and Holophernes was a popular subject for painters
Handel wrote an opera, Judas Maccabeus based on the books of Maccabees
the four cardinal virtues are taken from a verse in the book of Wisdom
the archangel Raphael is known from the book of Tobit.

The Anagignoskomena, Apostolic Fathers, Pseudepigrapha, Gnostic writings and gospels

There are also a number of books which are not included in the Catholic Bible, the Anagignoskomena,, which are part of the Orthodox canon: 1 Esdras, Prayer of Manasseh, Psalm 151, 3 Maccabees, and the appended 4 Maccabees. The Protestant canon of Apocrypha omits in silence Psalm 151 and 3rd and 4th Maccabees, perhaps because these were not part of the Vulgate. They were never part of the Apocrypha of the King James Bible.

Other apocryphal works are called "pseudepigrapha". These include, for example, the Book of Enoch and the Book of Jubilees and the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs from the Old Testament period.

In the Ethiopian Orthodox Church, many of these are included along with other works in the canon of the Ethiopian Orthodox Bible, a total Biblical canon of 81 books. See Biblical Canon.

The "Apostolic Fathers" include the Didache and the Epistles of Ignatius and the Shepherd of Hermas from the early 2nd century.

The later Gnostic writings and gospels such as the Gospel of Thomas, found hidden in the abandoned monastery library at Nag Hammadi in Egypt, were written after the New Testament period. These books were of disputed status in the early Church as to whether they were scriptural or not, and were not included by the regional Third Council of Carthage and by the later General Council of Trent in the list of canonical scriptures. The Early Church fathers were concerned only with books relevant to the Christian faith, books which concerned salvation and growing in the Lord, following the oral tradition of the apostles (2 Thessalonians 2:15).

References

↑ See Topical Bible: Hexateuch (biblehub.com)
↑ Westminster Theological Journal 38.4 (Spring 1976) 319-348. Copyright © 1976 by Westminster Theological Seminary. THE COUNCIL OF JAMNIA AND THE OLD TESTAMENT CANON, by Robert C. Newman (faculty.gordon.edu)
↑ ^3.0 ^3.1
"some of these originally written in Hebrew and/or Aramaic". Discoveries of Hebrew and Aramaic manucripts of Tobit, ben Sira (Sirach, or Ecclesiasticus), Epistle of Jeremiah in the caves at Qumran near the Dead Sea, the "Dead Sea Scrolls", demonstrate that a Hebrew or Aramaic origin of a text included in the Greek translation of the Jewish scriptures in the Septuagint accepted by Christians was not the sole criterion for inclusion or exclusion in the Hebrew canon, but included consideration of evidence of content which supported Christian doctrine. Linguistic evidence shows that other Septuagint books which were excluded by rabbinical authority after A.D. 90 certainly had an original Hebrew or Aramaic text. See
- Jewish Virtual Library. Jewish Holy Scriptures: The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha, by Michael E. Stone
- BACKGROUND AND HISTORY TO THE APOCRYPHA, By David Phillips Article reprinted from Cross†Way Issue Autumn 2006 No. 102 (archive.churchsociety.org)
- The Origin of the Apocrypha
- The Apocrypha of the Old Testament: With Historical Introductions, a Revised Translation, and Notes Critical and Explanatory, by Edwin Cone Bissell. Scribner, 1890. 680 pages, page 208ff, citing evidence that the "additions to Esther" were also translated from the Hebrew. (Google eBook)
↑ ^4.0 ^4.1 BibleStudyTools.com. Bible, Canon of
↑ The New Yorker: Page-Turner. March 1, 2013 Treasures in the Wall, by Emily Greenhouse (newyorker.com)
Jewish Virtual Library: Modern Jewish History: The Cairo Genizah, by Alden Oreck
↑ Professor Lawrence H. Schiffman: The Benediction Against the Minim (lawrenceschiffman.com)
DEFENDING THE BRIDE. THE CURSE AGAINST CHRISTIANS AT JAMNIA ABOUT 90 AD (defendingthebride.com)
The Jewish “Council” of Jamnia and Its Impact on the Old Testament Canon and New Testament Studies, Tim Gordon October 20, 2007 (academia.edu/6811953)
↑ The Canon of the Old Testament
The Old Testament Canon, by Peter Reed (biblicalstudies.org.uk)
↑
See
- Codex Vaticanus (orthodoxwiki.org)
- THE CODEX SINAITICUS, T. S. PATTIE. 1977 pdf (bl.uk/eblj)
- THE CODEX ALEXANDRINUS AND THE ALEXANDRIAN GREEK TYPES, J. H. BOWMAN. 1998 pdf (bl.uk/eblj)
- Holy Scripture In The Orthodox Church. "The Bible" Compiled by Father Demetrios Serfes. Boise, Idaho, USA. August 20 2000
↑ Luther rejected the seven books of the Old Testament, citing the Palestinian Canon as his authority. Clearly his reasons were doctrinal. However, his decision poses serious difficulties. What authority from God would Jews have in the Christian era to determine which books of the Old Testament were or were not divinely inspired? In 1529, Luther proposed adoption of the 39-book canon of rabbinic Judaism as the Old Testament canon of the Christian Bible. He justified his decision to exclude seven books from the Old Testament canon of 46 books by an appeal to precedent, citing Jerome who, around A.D. 400 had expressed concerns also voiced by his rabbinical sources that these books in Greek had no Hebrew counterparts. Research into the Dead Sea Scrolls found at Qumran has discovered Hebrew copies of some of the disputed books, which makes their rejection on this ground unsupportable. Luther's principal reason for opposing these Old Testament books seems to be that they contain textual support for doctrines he had rejected, such as praying for the dead (2 Maccabees 12:42-45).
See Luther and the Canon of the Bible, by Jim Seghers
The Canon of the Bible
Wednesday, July 20, 2011. Can Protestants Rely Upon the "Council of Jamnia" for Their Bible?
↑ Major Church Pronouncements on the Bible
Decree of Council of Rome (AD 382) on the Biblical Canon, by Dr Taylor Marshall
BlogSpot. Beggars All: Reformation & Apologetics. Pope Damasus and the Canon of Scripture (Part One) (beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com) See also (Part Two) Both offer clear explanations and clarifications by one Protestant apologist of the rationale for the firm Protestant position that the decision by Pope Damasus and the Synod of Rome in 382 on the canon of the books of the Bible is invalid (includes discussions).
↑ Edmon Gallagher on Jerome's Prologus and the Council of Hippo regarding the Canon (2013)
↑ Saturday, October 26, 2013. The Council of Florence on the Pope, the Church and the Bible
Catholic Encyclopedia (1915) Canon of the Old Testament "During the deliberations of the Council [of Trent] there never was any real question as to the reception of all the traditional Scripture. Neither--and this is remarkable--in the proceedings is there manifest any serious doubt of the canonicity of the disputed writings. In the mind of the Tridentine Fathers they had been virtually canonized, by the same decree of Florence, and the same Fathers felt especially bound by the action of the preceding ecumenical synod" [of Florence]."
Christian Classics Ethereal Library. History of the Church, Vol. 6: § 18. The Council of Ferrara-Florence. 1438–1445.
Canons of the ECUMENICAL COUNCIL OF FLORENCE (1438-1445) (Basel/Ferrara/Florence/Rome)
↑ Luther Had His Chance (orthodoxinfo.com)
↑
See the following four sources:
↑ Baker's Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology - Apocrypha
The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha (jewishvirtuallibrary.org)
↑ The Gospel According to Matthew alone among the scriptures of the New Testament was probably originally written by Matthew in Hebrew or Aramaic, according to the earlier tradition cited by Eusebius Pamphilus in his Ecclesistical History (Book III, Chapter XXIV). —The Ecclesiastical History Of Eusebius Pamphilus: Bishop Of Caesarea, In Palestine, C. F. Cruse, 1874, London: George Bell and Sons, York Steet, Covent Garden. pages 97—98.
↑ The Reasons Why the Catholic Bible is not Accepted by Modern Churches
Luther and "New Testament Apocrypha"
Defending the Deuterocanonicals

External links

The Old Testament Text. (wmcarey.edu/browning/Classes)

Codex Vaticanus (orthodoxwiki.org)

THE CODEX SINAITICUS, T. S. PATTIE. 1977 pdf (bl.uk/eblj)

THE CODEX ALEXANDRINUS AND THE ALEXANDRIAN GREEK TYPES, J. H. BOWMAN. 1998 pdf (bl.uk/eblj)

Septuagint Quotes in the New Testament
Catholic Encyclopedia: Canon of the Old Testament (discusses differences in the canon)
Catholic Encyclopedia: Apocrypha
Jerome on the Canon translation of Jerome's Prologus Galeatus to 1 Kings (bible-researcher.com)
Edmon Gallagher on Jerome's Prologus and the Council of Hippo regarding the Canon (oxfordpatristics.blogspot.com).
See also Jerome's Prologus Galeatus and the Old Testament Canon of North Africa, Studia Patristica 69: 2013
The Old Testament Canon and the Apocrypha. Part 3: From Jerome to the Reformation. William Webster (christiantruth.com)
A list of Old Testament books quoted by Jesus and other New Testament writers.
Luther Had His Chance (orthodoxinfo.com)
Refuting an Attack on the Deuterocanonicals. A Response to 11 ‘reasons’ that the Deuterocanonicals Should be Thrown Out of the Bible, By Matt1618. Introduction (matt1618.freeyellow.com)
Roman Catholic and Orthodox Faith Examined, and The Apocrypha: "Reasons why the Apocrypha does NOT belong in the Bible!" (bible.ca)
CARM Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry: Reasons why the Apocrypha does not belong in the Bible, by Ryan Turner (carm.org)
Reasoning From the Scriptures with Ron Rhodes Critique of Chapter 2, Does the Apocrypha Belong in the Bible?, by Matt1618
Background and History to the Apocrypha, By David Phillips Article reprinted from Cross†Way Issue Autumn 2006 No. 102 (churchsociety.org)
What are the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha?
Question: What are the Pseudepigrapha? (gotquestions.org)
The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha (Wesley Center Online)
New Testament Apocrypha: Early Christian Writings
The Lost Books of the Bible (haneefandassoc.com)
See essay: "A Defense of the Protestant position on the Apocrypha", by Jim Carroll. (Presbyterian) —jiminger.com.
See essay: "Why Luther and the Protestant Reformers Removed Books From the Bible" —when the page comes up with photo-image of Orthodox Study Bible, scroll down to the essay immediately below it.
The Great Heresies list of heresies committed by Catholics

[1] See Topical Bible: Hexateuch (biblehub.com)

[2] Westminster Theological Journal 38.4 (Spring 1976) 319-348. Copyright © 1976 by Westminster Theological Seminary. THE COUNCIL OF JAMNIA AND THE OLD TESTAMENT CANON, by Robert C. Newman (faculty.gordon.edu)

[HebrewAramaic-3] 3.0 ^3.1 "some of these originally written in Hebrew and/or Aramaic". Discoveries of Hebrew and Aramaic manucripts of Tobit, ben Sira (Sirach, or Ecclesiasticus), Epistle of Jeremiah in the caves at Qumran near the Dead Sea, the "Dead Sea Scrolls", demonstrate that a Hebrew or Aramaic origin of a text included in the Greek translation of the Jewish scriptures in the Septuagint accepted by Christians was not the sole criterion for inclusion or exclusion in the Hebrew canon, but included consideration of evidence of content which supported Christian doctrine. Linguistic evidence shows that other Septuagint books which were excluded by rabbinical authority after A.D. 90 certainly had an original Hebrew or Aramaic text. See
Jewish Virtual Library. Jewish Holy Scriptures: The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha, by Michael E. Stone

BACKGROUND AND HISTORY TO THE APOCRYPHA, By David Phillips Article reprinted from Cross†Way Issue Autumn 2006 No. 102 (archive.churchsociety.org)

The Origin of the Apocrypha

The Apocrypha of the Old Testament: With Historical Introductions, a Revised Translation, and Notes Critical and Explanatory, by Edwin Cone Bissell. Scribner, 1890. 680 pages, page 208ff, citing evidence that the "additions to Esther" were also translated from the Hebrew. (Google eBook)

[4] Jewish Virtual Library. Jewish Holy Scriptures: The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha, by Michael E. Stone

[5] BACKGROUND AND HISTORY TO THE APOCRYPHA, By David Phillips Article reprinted from Cross†Way Issue Autumn 2006 No. 102 (archive.churchsociety.org)

[6] The Origin of the Apocrypha

[7] The Apocrypha of the Old Testament: With Historical Introductions, a Revised Translation, and Notes Critical and Explanatory, by Edwin Cone Bissell. Scribner, 1890. 680 pages, page 208ff, citing evidence that the "additions to Esther" were also translated from the Hebrew. (Google eBook)

[biblestudytools.com-4] 4.0 ^4.1 BibleStudyTools.com. Bible, Canon of

[5] The New Yorker: Page-Turner. March 1, 2013 Treasures in the Wall, by Emily Greenhouse (newyorker.com)
Jewish Virtual Library: Modern Jewish History: The Cairo Genizah, by Alden Oreck

[6] Professor Lawrence H. Schiffman: The Benediction Against the Minim (lawrenceschiffman.com)
DEFENDING THE BRIDE. THE CURSE AGAINST CHRISTIANS AT JAMNIA ABOUT 90 AD (defendingthebride.com)
The Jewish “Council” of Jamnia and Its Impact on the Old Testament Canon and New Testament Studies, Tim Gordon October 20, 2007 (academia.edu/6811953)

[7] The Canon of the Old Testament
The Old Testament Canon, by Peter Reed (biblicalstudies.org.uk)

[8] See
Codex Vaticanus (orthodoxwiki.org)

THE CODEX SINAITICUS, T. S. PATTIE. 1977 pdf (bl.uk/eblj)

THE CODEX ALEXANDRINUS AND THE ALEXANDRIAN GREEK TYPES, J. H. BOWMAN. 1998 pdf (bl.uk/eblj)

Holy Scripture In The Orthodox Church. "The Bible" Compiled by Father Demetrios Serfes. Boise, Idaho, USA. August 20 2000

[13] Codex Vaticanus (orthodoxwiki.org)

[14] THE CODEX SINAITICUS, T. S. PATTIE. 1977 pdf (bl.uk/eblj)

[15] THE CODEX ALEXANDRINUS AND THE ALEXANDRIAN GREEK TYPES, J. H. BOWMAN. 1998 pdf (bl.uk/eblj)

[16] Holy Scripture In The Orthodox Church. "The Bible" Compiled by Father Demetrios Serfes. Boise, Idaho, USA. August 20 2000

[Luther-9] Luther rejected the seven books of the Old Testament, citing the Palestinian Canon as his authority. Clearly his reasons were doctrinal. However, his decision poses serious difficulties. What authority from God would Jews have in the Christian era to determine which books of the Old Testament were or were not divinely inspired? In 1529, Luther proposed adoption of the 39-book canon of rabbinic Judaism as the Old Testament canon of the Christian Bible. He justified his decision to exclude seven books from the Old Testament canon of 46 books by an appeal to precedent, citing Jerome who, around A.D. 400 had expressed concerns also voiced by his rabbinical sources that these books in Greek had no Hebrew counterparts. Research into the Dead Sea Scrolls found at Qumran has discovered Hebrew copies of some of the disputed books, which makes their rejection on this ground unsupportable. Luther's principal reason for opposing these Old Testament books seems to be that they contain textual support for doctrines he had rejected, such as praying for the dead (2 Maccabees 12:42-45).
See Luther and the Canon of the Bible, by Jim Seghers
The Canon of the Bible
Wednesday, July 20, 2011. Can Protestants Rely Upon the "Council of Jamnia" for Their Bible?

[10] Major Church Pronouncements on the Bible
Decree of Council of Rome (AD 382) on the Biblical Canon, by Dr Taylor Marshall
BlogSpot. Beggars All: Reformation & Apologetics. Pope Damasus and the Canon of Scripture (Part One) (beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com) See also (Part Two) Both offer clear explanations and clarifications by one Protestant apologist of the rationale for the firm Protestant position that the decision by Pope Damasus and the Synod of Rome in 382 on the canon of the books of the Bible is invalid (includes discussions).

[11] Edmon Gallagher on Jerome's Prologus and the Council of Hippo regarding the Canon (2013)

[12] Saturday, October 26, 2013. The Council of Florence on the Pope, the Church and the Bible
Catholic Encyclopedia (1915) Canon of the Old Testament "During the deliberations of the Council [of Trent] there never was any real question as to the reception of all the traditional Scripture. Neither--and this is remarkable--in the proceedings is there manifest any serious doubt of the canonicity of the disputed writings. In the mind of the Tridentine Fathers they had been virtually canonized, by the same decree of Florence, and the same Fathers felt especially bound by the action of the preceding ecumenical synod" [of Florence]."
Christian Classics Ethereal Library. History of the Church, Vol. 6: § 18. The Council of Ferrara-Florence. 1438–1445.
Canons of the ECUMENICAL COUNCIL OF FLORENCE (1438-1445) (Basel/Ferrara/Florence/Rome)

[13] Luther Had His Chance (orthodoxinfo.com)

[14] See the following four sources:
Septuagint Quotes in the New Testament

The Septuagint (LXX): History of the Septuagint

Canons of the Hebrew Bible

Official King James Bible online: Apocrypha Books

[23] Septuagint Quotes in the New Testament

[24] The Septuagint (LXX): History of the Septuagint

[25] Canons of the Hebrew Bible

[26] Official King James Bible online: Apocrypha Books

[15] Baker's Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology - Apocrypha
The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha (jewishvirtuallibrary.org)

[16] The Gospel According to Matthew alone among the scriptures of the New Testament was probably originally written by Matthew in Hebrew or Aramaic, according to the earlier tradition cited by Eusebius Pamphilus in his Ecclesistical History (Book III, Chapter XXIV). —The Ecclesiastical History Of Eusebius Pamphilus: Bishop Of Caesarea, In Palestine, C. F. Cruse, 1874, London: George Bell and Sons, York Steet, Covent Garden. pages 97—98.

[17] The Reasons Why the Catholic Bible is not Accepted by Modern Churches
Luther and "New Testament Apocrypha"
Defending the Deuterocanonicals

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

[16]

[17]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-The '''Apocrypha''' refers to books of the Bible that are not considered part of the Biblical Canon - precisely which books varies between denominations.
+The '''Apocrypha''' refers to books of the Bible that various religious denominations do not accept as part of the [[Biblical Canon]]—precisely which books are regarded as apocryphal varies between denominations.
-The Protestant canon was formulated by [[Martin Luther]], the Catholic by the [[Council of Trent]].  The [[Catholic Church]] includes the Apocrypha as part of the [[Old Testament]] and accepts those books as scripture.  For some time the [[King James Bible]] contained apocryphal books in a separate section.  The [[Episcopal Church]] includes the books of the Apocrypha in the cycle of scripture readings in its services, but holds that the apocryphal books are useful for study and [[edification]], but not for doctrine.  Most Protestant churches do not use the Apocrypha as scripture at all.
+==Samaritans==
+The [[Samaritan]]s, for example, accept only the ''Samaritan Pentateuch'', the five books of [[Moses]], as canonical and inspired: Genesis through Deuteronomy and Joshua (more precisely called the ''Hexateuch''<ref>See [http://biblehub.com/topical/h/hexateuch.htm Topical Bible: Hexateuch] (biblehub.com)</ref>). All other writings are rejected by them as the uninspired works of men.
-Books apocryphal to the Protestant canon include:
+==Protestant canon==
-*[[1 Esdras]]
+The Protestant canon of 66 books was originally formulated by [[Martin Luther]], who removed several books and texts from the 73 books of the Old Testament as read by the Catholic Church and separated them as "apocryphal". Some editions of the Protestant Bible feature them in a section between the Old and New Testaments as '''The Apocrypha''' (Greek, plural, "apocrypha", singular "apocryphon"). He cited the rabbinical authority of the Jews who have rejected these books as having no place in the Hebrew canon.
-*[[2 Esdras]]
-*[[Book of Baruch]]
-**[[Epistle of Jeremiah]] is sometimes included with the Book of Baruch
-*[[Book of Tobit]]
-*[[Book of Judith]]
-*[[Book of Wisdom]]
-*[[Ecclesiasticus]], also known as Sirach
-*[[Prayer of Manasseh]]
-*[[First Book of the Maccabees|1 Maccabees]]
-*[[Second Book of the Maccabees|2 Maccabees]]
-*Additions to the Book of Esther
-*Additions to the Book of Daniel
-**[[Story of Susanna]]
-**[[Bel and the Dragon]]
-**[[The Prayer of Azariah and Song of the Three Holy Children]]
+==Council of Jamnia ? A.D. 70==
+In response to the rise of the Christian sect and the destruction of the Temple in A.D. 70, Jewish rabbis at the [[Council of Jamnia]] (some say there was no such council <ref>[https://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/ted_hildebrandt/otesources/00-introduction/text/articles/newman-canonjamnia-wtj.pdf Westminster Theological Journal 38.4 (Spring 1976) 319-348. Copyright © 1976 by Westminster Theological Seminary. THE COUNCIL OF JAMNIA AND THE OLD TESTAMENT CANON, by Robert C. Newman] (faculty.gordon.edu)</ref>) in A.D. 90 discussed rejecting the Septuagint ''which Christians were using with great effect'' in favor of selected Hebrew language scriptural texts, omitting certain books such as [[Book of Baruch|Baruch]], [[Judith]], [[Maccabees]], [[Book of Sirach|Sirach]], and [[Book of Tobit|Tobit]] (some of these originally written in Hebrew and/or Aramaic <ref name=HebrewAramaic>"some of these originally written in Hebrew and/or Aramaic". Discoveries of Hebrew and Aramaic manucripts of [[Book of Tobit|Tobit]], [[Book of Sirach|ben Sira (Sirach, or Ecclesiasticus)]], [[Epistle of Jeremiah]] in the caves at [[Qumran]] near the [[Dead Sea]], the "[[Dead Sea Scrolls]]", demonstrate that a Hebrew or Aramaic origin of a text included in the Greek translation of the Jewish scriptures in the Septuagint accepted by Christians was not the sole criterion for inclusion or exclusion in the Hebrew canon, but included consideration of evidence of content which supported Christian doctrine. Linguistic evidence shows that other Septuagint books which were excluded by rabbinical authority after A.D. 90 certainly had an original Hebrew or Aramaic text. See
+*[http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/apocrypha.html Jewish Virtual Library. Jewish Holy Scriptures: The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha, by Michael E. Stone]
+*[http://archive.churchsociety.org/crossway/documents/Cway_102_ApocryphaBackground.pdf BACKGROUND AND HISTORY TO THE APOCRYPHA, By David Phillips] Article reprinted from Cross†Way Issue Autumn 2006 No. 102 (archive.churchsociety.org)
+*[http://churchsociety.org/issues_new/doctrine/misc/apocrypha/iss_doctrine_misc_apocrypha_origin.asp The Origin of the Apocrypha]
+*[https://books.google.com/books?id=dtlDAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA203&lpg=PA203&dq=apocryphal+books+having+evidence+of+hebrew+or+aramaic+origin&source=bl&ots=CkMPwQMciG&sig=y6w4tnI_wvIqyzCWqCoN3xo8mvQ&hl=en&sa=X&ei=VGGcVP2RH4r2yQT7toKYAw&ved=0CFMQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=apocryphal%20books%20having%20evidence%20of%20hebrew%20or%20aramaic%20origin&f=false The Apocrypha of the Old Testament: With Historical Introductions, a Revised Translation, and Notes Critical and Explanatory, by Edwin Cone Bissell. Scribner, 1890. 680 pages], page 208ff, citing evidence that the "additions to Esther" were also translated from the Hebrew. (Google eBook)</ref> which were relatively recent Jewish contributions of the 3rd through the 1st centuries before Christ) which had become part of Jewish culture. Needless to say, the Church disregarded the results of Jamnia/Javneh/Jabneh. The [[opinion]] of a Jewish council rendered after the time of Christ is not binding on the followers of Christ. If the Jews have been so entrusted with the word of God that they were therefore given the divine authority to also determine the ''canon'' of sacred scripture, then the whole New Testament is excluded from the canon of the Holy Bible because it does not meet established rabbinical criteria for what is sacred inspired scripture.
+See [[Logical fallacy#Proof by authority|Logical fallacy of Proof by authority]]:  ''argumentum ad verecundiam'' ("appeal to unqualified authority")
+According to the ordinary reading of the New Testament and the consensus of the majority of Christians from the 1st century to this day, the authority of the kingdom of God had been wholly taken away from the Jews in the 1st century and given to the leaders of the Gentiles and Jews in Christ long before the Council of Jamnia. [[Stephen]] the first martyr for Christ testified to the Sanhedrin this fact by the Holy Spirit: <blockquote>"Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye. Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers: Who have received the law by the disposition of angels, and have not kept it." Acts 7:51-53 KJV</blockquote> The Apostle Paul himself testified that the Jews are no longer the arbiters of Holy Scripture, but instead that Christian leaders are to be accounted as "the stewards of the mysteries of God". See the testimony of the following scriptures of the Bible:
+:[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew%2015:13-14&version=KJV Matthew 15:13-14]
+:[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew%2016:18-19&version=KJV Matthew 16:18-19]
+:[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew%2018:17-18&version=KJV Matthew 18:17-18]
+:[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew%2021:43&version=KJV Matthew 21:43]
+:[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew%2028:18-20&version=KJV Matthew 28:18-20]
+:[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=luke%201:32-33&version=KJV Luke 1:32-33]
+:[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=luke%2010:16&version=KJV Luke 10:16]
+:[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=luke%2022:29-30&version=KJV Luke 22:29-30]
+:[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=acts%207:51-53&version=KJV Acts 7:51-53]
+:[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=romans%2016:17-19&version=KJV Romans 16:17-19]
+:[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1corinthians%204:1&version=KJV 1 Corinthians 4:1]
+:[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1corinthians%206:2-3&version=KJV 1 Corinthians 6:2-3]
+:[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2corinthians%203:14-16&version=KJV 2 Corinthians 3:14-16]
+:[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1thessalonians%202:13-16&version=KJV 1 Thessalonians 2:13-16]
+:[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1timothy%203:14-15&version=KJV 1 Timothy 3:14-15]
+:[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1timothy%206:20-21&version=KJV 1 Timothy 6:20-21]
+:[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=hebrews%2013:17&version=KJV Hebrews 13:17]
+:[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1john%204:2-6&version=KJV 1 John 4:2-6]
+:[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2john%201:9-11&version=KJV 2 John 9-ll]
+:[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=jude%201:3&version=KJV Jude 3]
+Historically, Jewish scholars since A.D. the 2nd–5th centuries (the [[Talmud]]ists and the [[Masoretic Text|Masoretes]]) have considered the canon closed since the time of Malachi, and have not included the books and texts listed in the Protestant Apocrypha, which were written subsequent to his time.<ref name="biblestudytools.com">[http://www.biblestudytools.com/dictionaries/bakers-evangelical-dictionary/the-bible-canon-of.html BibleStudyTools.com. Bible, Canon of]</ref> At the same time they simultaneously excluded as condemned and false the writings of the "heretics" (the ''minim'', including Christians, called nozrim, no§rim, "Nazarenes"), and cursed Christians in a synagogue service "benediction" against them and others. Palestinian texts of the Eighteen Benedictions from the Cairo Genizah <ref>[http://www.newyorker.com/books/page-turner/treasures-in-the-wall The New Yorker: Page-Turner. March 1, 2013 Treasures in the Wall, by Emily Greenhouse] (newyorker.com)<br/>[http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/Genizah.html Jewish Virtual Library: Modern Jewish History: The Cairo Genizah, by Alden Oreck]</ref> present a text of the benediction which identifies the minim:<blockquote>"''For the apostates may there be no hope unless they return to Your Torah. As for the no§rim and the minim, may they perish immediately. Speedily may they be erased from the Book of Life, and may they not be registered among the righteous.  Blessed are You, O Lord, Who subdues the wicked.''"</blockquote>While other specimens of the Palestinian liturgy show slight variation, the no§rim, (usually translated “Christians”) and minim are included in the best texts of this benediction. The fact remains that the no§rim were included with apostates and heretics and the wicked in the Genizah documents.<ref>[http://lawrenceschiffman.com/?s=the+benediction+against+the+minim Professor Lawrence H. Schiffman: The Benediction Against the Minim] (lawrenceschiffman.com)<br/>[http://www.defendingthebride.com/bb/curse.html DEFENDING  THE  BRIDE. THE  CURSE  AGAINST  CHRISTIANS  AT  JAMNIA  ABOUT  90 AD] (defendingthebride.com)<br/>[http://www.academia.edu/6811953/The_Jewish_Council_of_Jamnia_and_Its_Impact_on_the_Old_Testament_Canon_and_New_Testament_Studies The Jewish “Council” of Jamnia and Its Impact on the Old Testament Canon and New Testament Studies, Tim Gordon October 20, 2007] (academia.edu/6811953)</ref> Jamnia considered 4 criteria (''not found in the Bible'') to determine which of the Writings - such as Ecclesiastes, Esther, and Song of Songs - should be retained for the Hebrew canon for Judaism:
+:the book should conform to the Torah;
+:it was written before the time of Ezra (circa 450 BC);
+:it was written in Hebrew;
+:and it was composed in Judah or Israel.<ref>[http://biblescripture.net/Canon.html The Canon of the Old Testament]<br/>[http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/article_canon.html The Old Testament Canon, by Peter Reed] (biblicalstudies.org.uk)</ref>
+Although some books of the Old Testament were discussed in Judea at the Pharisaic Council of Jamnia in A.D. 90, the canon itself was not a topic of consideration and this group in fact had no decision-making power. Historically, Jewish scholars since the 2nd century have considered the canon closed since the time of Malachi, and have not included the books of the Protestant Apocrypha, which were written subsequent to his time.<ref name="biblestudytools.com"/> The Jews as arbiters of the Old Testament canon have excluded everything Christian. The [[Masoretic Text]] does not include the Apocrypha. The earliest manuscripts of the whole Christian Bible (''[[Biblical Canon#Greek Old Testament canon (A.D. 1st century)|Greek Bible]]'') include the Apocrypha.<ref>See
+*[http://orthodoxwiki.org/Codex_Vaticanus Codex Vaticanus] (orthodoxwiki.org)
+*[http://www.bl.uk/eblj/1977articles/pdf/article1.pdf THE CODEX SINAITICUS, T. S. PATTIE. 1977 pdf] (bl.uk/eblj)
+*[http://www.bl.uk/eblj/1998articles/pdf/article12.pdf THE CODEX ALEXANDRINUS AND THE ALEXANDRIAN GREEK TYPES, J. H. BOWMAN. 1998 pdf] (bl.uk/eblj)
+*[http://www.serfes.org/orthodox/scripturesinthechurch.htm Holy Scripture In The Orthodox Church. "The Bible" Compiled by Father Demetrios Serfes. Boise, Idaho, USA. August 20 2000]</ref>
+==Early Christian Bible==
+The oldest extant manuscripts of the entire Christian Bible are written in Greek, the language of the apostles and the early Christian Church, representing the text of the Holy Bible as it was before the time of Jerome's 5th century Vulgate translation of the scriptures into Latin. They are the ''Codex Vaticanus'', the ''Codex Sinaiticus'', and the ''Codex Alexandrinus''. They demonstrate that all of the books and parts of books that have been separated and designated as Apocrypha since the 16th century were included as integral parts of the whole Bible as handed down from the time of the apostles without any distinction or difference, as sacred scripture.
+See especially the following three sources:
+*[http://orthodoxwiki.org/Codex_Vaticanus Codex Vaticanus] (orthodoxwiki.org)
+*[http://www.bl.uk/eblj/1977articles/pdf/article1.pdf THE CODEX SINAITICUS, T. S. PATTIE. 1977 pdf] (bl.uk/eblj)
+*[http://www.bl.uk/eblj/1998articles/pdf/article12.pdf THE CODEX ALEXANDRINUS AND THE ALEXANDRIAN GREEK TYPES, J. H. BOWMAN. 1998 pdf] (bl.uk/eblj)
+The response that there is no manuscript evidence predating the 4th century that the Apocrypha were included in the Greek Bible, and therefore no actual proof that the early Christian church ever accepted them as inspired sacred scriptures, is an example of an [[Logical fallacy#Argument from silence|argument from silence]]. See [[Deuterocanonicals]].
+==Martin Luther and the Reformation==
+Martin Luther and the leaders of the [[Reformation]] cite as authoritative and determinative the canon of the Hebrew Bible as defined by rabbinical authorities who excluded and condemned as false the entire New Testament scriptures and Jesus as the Messiah <ref name=Luther>Luther rejected the seven books of the Old Testament, citing the Palestinian Canon as his authority. Clearly his reasons were doctrinal. However, his decision poses serious difficulties. What authority from God would Jews have in the Christian era to determine which books of the Old Testament were or were not divinely inspired? In 1529, Luther proposed adoption of the 39-book canon of rabbinic Judaism as the Old Testament canon of the Christian Bible. He justified his decision to exclude seven books from the Old Testament canon of 46 books by an appeal to precedent, citing Jerome who, around A.D. 400 had expressed concerns also voiced by his rabbinical sources that these books in Greek had no Hebrew counterparts. Research into the Dead Sea Scrolls found at Qumran has discovered Hebrew copies of some of the disputed books, which makes their rejection on this ground unsupportable. Luther's principal reason for opposing these Old Testament books seems to be that they contain textual support for doctrines he had rejected, such as praying for the dead (2 Maccabees 12:42-45).<br/>See [http://www.totustuus.com/luther Luther and the Canon of the Bible, by Jim Seghers]<br/>[http://www.olswahiawa.org/uploads/2/1/8/4/21845996/session_3.pdf The Canon of the Bible]<br/>[http://catholicdefense.blogspot.com/2011/07/can-protestants-rely-upon-council-of.html Wednesday, July 20, 2011. Can Protestants Rely Upon the "Council of Jamnia" for Their Bible?]</ref> because "''unto them were committed the oracles of God.''" (see [http://biblehub.com/multi/romans/3-2.htm Romans 3:2]). This presents a problem. If the Jews have been so entrusted with the word of God that they had therefore been given the divine authority to determine the ''canon'' of sacred scripture, as Luther and the Reformation Protestants maintain, then the whole New Testament is excluded from the canon of the holy Bible because it does not meet established rabbinical criteria for what is sacred inspired scripture.
+==Formation of Catholic Canon==
+The [[Catholic Church|Catholic]] definitive final canon of 73 books was retained "as read by the Church" by the [[Council of Trent]]. When Constantine first made Christianity a legal religion in the Roman Empire in the early 300s, he called together leading Christians from the East and West parts of the empire to iron out the principles of Christianity, including cementing the canon. The entire canonical text was identified by Pope [[Damasus I]] and the [[Synod of Rome (382)]].<ref>[http://www.catholicapologetics.org/ap031100.htm Major Church Pronouncements on the Bible]<br/>[http://taylormarshall.com/2008/08/decree-of-council-of-rome-ad-382-on.html Decree of Council of Rome (AD 382) on the Biblical Canon, by Dr Taylor Marshall]<br/>[http://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/2006/12/pope-damasus-and-canon-of-scripture.html BlogSpot. Beggars All: Reformation & Apologetics. Pope Damasus and the Canon of Scripture (Part One)] (beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com)  See also [http://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/2006/12/pope-damasus-and-canon-of-scripture_31.html (Part Two)] ''Both offer clear explanations and clarifications by one Protestant apologist of the rationale for the firm Protestant position that the decision by Pope Damasus and the Synod of Rome in 382 on the canon of the books of the Bible is invalid (includes discussions)''.</ref> Subsequent councils such as the Council of Hippo (393) and the [[Third Council of Carthage (397)]], dealt with minor questions of authenticity, affirming the canon of Damasus and the Synod of Rome, and set forth the first-ever listing of all 27 books of the New Testament together, with 46 books of the Old Testament, a canon of 73 books of the Bible, which quickly gained acceptance and remained unchanged for 1200 years. [[Jerome]] (''Prologus Galeatus'' c. 420) listed the books rejected by the Jews as "apocryphal" but himself quoted them as if they were scripture.<ref>Edmon Gallagher on Jerome's ''Prologus'' and the Council of Hippo regarding the Canon (2013)</ref> The canon of Damasus, and the Synods of Rome, Hippo and Carthage, was reaffirmed at the [[Council of Florence]] of the (briefly reunited) Church of the east and west in 1442.<ref>[http://catholicdefense.blogspot.com/2013/10/the-council-of-florence-on-pope-church.html Saturday, October 26, 2013. The Council of Florence on the Pope, the Church and the Bible]<br/>[http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03267a.htm Catholic Encyclopedia (1915) Canon of the Old Testament] "''During the deliberations of the Council'' [of Trent] ''there never was any real question as to the reception of all the traditional Scripture. Neither--and this is remarkable--in the proceedings is there manifest any serious doubt of the canonicity of the disputed writings. In the mind of the Tridentine Fathers they had been virtually canonized, by the same decree of Florence, and the same Fathers felt especially bound by the action of the preceding ecumenical synod''" [of Florence]."<br/>[http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/hcc6.iii.iii.vii.html Christian Classics Ethereal Library. History of the Church, Vol. 6: § 18. The Council of Ferrara-Florence. 1438–1445.]<br/>[http://www.ewtn.com/library/COUNCILS/FLORENCE.HTM Canons of the ECUMENICAL COUNCIL OF FLORENCE (1438-1445)] (Basel/Ferrara/Florence/Rome)</ref> The Catholic Bible includes the 27 books of the New Testament and 46 Old Testament books "with all their parts" from the ancient [[Septuagint]] as used by the apostles and the early Christian church and included in [[Jerome]]'s [[Vulgate]] translation as part of the [[Old Testament]], and accepts those books as scripture.
+:—[http://www.bible-researcher.com/trent1.html Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent. The Fourth Session. Celebrated on the eighth day of the month of April, in the year 1546. English translation by James Waterworth (London, 1848)]
+==Protestant doctrine: "these books were added to the Bible in the 4th century"==
+Protestant doctrine constantly affirms that the apocryphal books were ''added'' to the Bible in the 4th century by the Catholic Church because they contain texts which support traditional Catholic and Orthodox teaching and practice, such as the intercession of saints and prayers for the dead, and the performance of good works and almsgiving as a means of deliverance from death and purging of every sin (''see'' [[Apocrypha#External links|'''The Great Heresies''']], External links ''below''). Since the Apocrypha were already in the Septuagint Old Testament from before the time of the apostles, and have been an integral part of the Greek Bible as read in the ancient Church and preserved by Eastern Orthodoxy from the 1st century to this day, it is difficult to see how they had been "added". Eastern Church leaders rejected the proposed Protestant canon of 66 books in the Bible.<ref>[http://orthodoxinfo.com/inquirers/tca_luther.aspx Luther Had His Chance] (orthodoxinfo.com)</ref>
+Protestant doctrine also points out that none of the Apocrypha are quoted in the New Testament, presenting this fact as an additional indication that the New Testament writers did not regard them as inspired scripture. Jesus and the New Testament writers quote from all Old Testament Books ''except Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Ecclesiastes,'' and the ''Song of Solomon''. This does not mean they are not inspired, and they are accepted by Protestants as canonical scriptures of the Holy Bible.
+==King James Bible and the Episcopal Church==
+For some time the [[King James Bible]] contained those books which [[Protestant Reformation|Protestant Reformers]] deemed apocryphal in a separate section, "Apocrypha", between the Old Testament and the New Testament. The [[Episcopal Church]] includes the books of the Apocrypha in the cycle of scripture readings in its services, but holds that the apocryphal books are useful for study and [[edification]], but not for doctrine.  Most Protestant churches do not use the Apocrypha as scripture at all, and they are not included in standard published editions of Protestant Bibles.
+==Hebrew and Aramaic original texts==
+Most Protestant Christians are unaware that numerous quotations in the New Testament are from the Septuagint Old Testament containing the Apocrypha.<ref>See the following four sources:
+*[http://www.scripturecatholic.com/septuagint.html Septuagint Quotes in the New Testament]
+*[http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/septuagint.html The Septuagint (LXX): History of the Septuagint]
+*[http://www.cresourcei.org/canonot.html Canons of the Hebrew Bible]
+*[http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Apocrypha-Books/ Official King James Bible online: Apocrypha Books]</ref> Protestant doctrine has traditionally affirmed that the books of the Apocrypha were not originally written in Hebrew or Aramaic, presenting this as an additional indication that they cannot be regarded as sacred inspired scripture.
+However, Biblical researchers in the 20th and 21st centuries have also discovered that most of the Apocrypha, except the Book of Wisdom (originally written in Greek?), were in fact originally written in Hebrew or Aramaic (Syriac) prior to the Christian era.<ref>[http://www.biblestudytools.com/dictionary/apocrypha/ Baker's Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology - Apocrypha] <br/>[http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/apocrypha.html The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha] (jewishvirtuallibrary.org)</ref><ref name=HebrewAramaic/> The New Testament quotes from all of the Old Testament Books except Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Solomon, and the New Testament books themselves were originally written in Greek.<ref>''The Gospel According to Matthew'' alone among the scriptures of the New Testament was probably originally written by Matthew in Hebrew or Aramaic, according to the earlier tradition cited by Eusebius Pamphilus in his ''Ecclesistical History'' (Book III, Chapter XXIV). —''The Ecclesiastical History Of Eusebius Pamphilus: Bishop Of Caesarea, In Palestine'', C. F. Cruse, 1874, London: George Bell and Sons, York Steet, Covent Garden. pages 97—98.</ref> This does not mean they are not inspired.
+==Protestant Canon of Apocrypha Books==
+Books apocryphal to the Protestant canon include (''titles as listed in Bibles printed in 1881''):
+*[[1 Esdras|I Esdras]]
+*[[2 Esdras|II Esdras]]
+*[[Book of Baruch|Baruch]]
+**[[Epistle of Jeremiah]] is sometimes included with the Book of Baruch as chapter 6
+*[[Book of Tobit|Tobit]]
+*[[Book of Judith|Judith]]
+*[[Book of Wisdom|The Wisdom of Solomon]]
+*[[Book of Sirach|The Wisdom of Jesus the Son of Sirach, or, Ecclesiasticus]]
+*[[Prayer of Manasseh|The Prayer of Manasses, king of Judah, when he was holden captive in Babylon]]
+*[[Rest of Esther (Bible)|The rest of the Chapters of the book of Esther, which are found neither in the Hebrew, nor in the Chaldee]] (chapters 10:4—16:1-24)
+*[[The Prayer of Azariah and Song of the Three Holy Children|The Song of the Three Holy Children]]"<small>Which followeth in the third Chapter of Daniel after this place—''fell down bound into the midst of the burning fiery furnace.'' That which followeth is not in the Hebrew, to wit, ''and they walked....'' unto these words, ''Then Nebuchadnezzar...'' verse 24.</small>" (62 verses)
+*[[Story of Susanna|The History of Susanna]] "<small>set apart from the Beginning of ''Daniel'', because it is not in the Hebrew, as neither the Narration of ''Bel and the Dragon''</small>"
+*[[Bel and the Dragon|The History of the Destruction of Bel and the Dragon, cut off from the end of Daniel]]
+*[[1 Maccabees|First Book of the Maccabees]]
+*[[2 Maccabees|Second Book of the Maccabees]]
+==Four New Testament Apocrypha Books according to Martin Luther==
+Martin Luther pronounced as "apocryphal" these books of the New Testament:<ref>[http://www.onearthasinheaven.com/cathbible.html The Reasons Why the Catholic Bible is not Accepted by Modern Churches]<br/>[http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Bible/Text/Canon/wilkgren.html Luther and "New Testament Apocrypha"]<br/>[http://www.ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/DEUTEROS.HTM Defending the Deuterocanonicals]</ref>
+*[[Epistle to the Hebrews|Hebrews]]
+*[[Epistle of James|James]] "''an epistle of straw''"
+*[[Epistle of Jude|Jude]]
+*[[Book of Revelation|Revelation]]
+He removed these 4 from the New Testament and placed them in an appendix to the New Testament of his German Bible as not equal to the inspired scriptures, classing them separately as apocryphal along with the 7 books he had removed from the Old Testament and segregated as ''The Apocrypha''. Later, he revised his opinion of them and included them among the New Testament books as "useful", but continued to exclude from the Old Testament the 7 remaining books and parts of other books he had originally removed as "apocryphal".
+==Reasons for rejecting the Apocrypha==
+See '''[[Daniel (Biblical book)#Dispute on Canonicity|Dispute on Canonicity: reasons for rejecting the Apocrypha (Daniel)]]'''
+See '''[[Rest of Esther (Bible)#Dispute on Canonicity|Dispute on Canonicity: reasons for rejecting the Apocrypha (Esther)]]'''
+==Western art and theology==
 Western [[art]] and [[theology]] continued to make reference to Apocryphal subjects long after they were deemed apocryphal. For example:
-* the story of [[Judith]] and [[Holophernes]] was a popular subject for painters
+* the story of [[Judith]] and [[Holofernes|Holophernes]] was a popular subject for painters
-* [[Handel]] wrote an opera, [[Judas Maccabeus]] based on the books of [[Maccabees]]
+* [[Handel]] wrote an opera, [[Judas Maccabeus (opera)|Judas Maccabeus]] based on the books of [[Maccabee]]s
 * the four cardinal [[virtue]]s are taken from a verse in the book of Wisdom
-* the [[archangel]] [[Raphael]] is known from the book of Tobit.
+* the [[archangel]] [[Raphael (archangel)|Raphael]] is known from the book of Tobit.
-There are also a number of apocryphal books which are not included in the Catholic Bible either.  These include, for example, the [[Book of Enoch]] and the [[Book of Jubilees]] from the Old Testament period, and the [[Didache]] and the [[Gospel of Thomas]] from the New Testament period.  These books were of disputed status in the early Church as to whether they were scriptural or not, and were rejected by the Council of Trent. The Early Church fathers were concerned only with books relevant to the Christian faith, books which concerned salvation and growing in the Lord.
+==The Anagignoskomena, Apostolic Fathers, Pseudepigrapha, Gnostic writings and gospels==
+There are also a number of books which are not included in the Catholic Bible, the ''[[Anagignoskomena]],'', which are part of the [[Orthodox Church|Orthodox canon]]: 1 Esdras, Prayer of Manasseh, Psalm 151, 3 Maccabees, and the appended 4 Maccabees. The Protestant canon of Apocrypha omits in silence Psalm 151 and 3rd and 4th Maccabees, perhaps because these were not part of the [[Vulgate]]. They were never part of the Apocrypha of the King James Bible.
+Other apocryphal works are called "[[pseudepigrapha]]". These include, for example, the [[1 Enoch|Book of Enoch]] and the [[Book of Jubilees]] and the [[Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs]] from the Old Testament period.
+In the [[Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church|Ethiopian Orthodox Church]], many of these are included along with other works in the canon of the Ethiopian Orthodox Bible, a total Biblical canon of 81 books. See [[Biblical Canon]].
+The "[[Apostolic Fathers]]" include the [[Didache]] and the [[Epistles of Ignatius]] and the [[Shepherd of Hermas]] from the early 2nd century.
+The later [[Gnostic]] writings and gospels such as the [[Gospel of Thomas]], found hidden in the abandoned monastery library at [[Nag Hammadi]] in Egypt, were written after the New Testament period. These books were of disputed status in the early Church as to whether they were scriptural or not, and were not included by the regional Third Council of Carthage and by the later General Council of Trent in the list of canonical scriptures. The Early Church fathers were concerned only with books relevant to the Christian faith, books which concerned salvation and growing in the Lord, following the oral tradition of the apostles ([http://biblehub.com/multi/2_thessalonians/2-15.htm 2 Thessalonians 2:15]).
+== References ==
+{{reflist}}
 == External links ==
+*[http://www.wmcarey.edu/browning/Classes/HOB/BibleD-OTText.pdf The Old Testament Text. (wmcarey.edu/browning/Classes)]
+*[http://orthodoxwiki.org/Codex_Vaticanus Codex Vaticanus] (orthodoxwiki.org)
+*[http://www.bl.uk/eblj/1977articles/pdf/article1.pdf THE CODEX SINAITICUS, T. S. PATTIE. 1977 pdf] (bl.uk/eblj)
+*[http://www.bl.uk/eblj/1998articles/pdf/article12.pdf THE CODEX ALEXANDRINUS AND THE ALEXANDRIAN GREEK TYPES, J. H. BOWMAN. 1998 pdf] (bl.uk/eblj)
+*[http://www.scripturecatholic.com/septuagint.html Septuagint Quotes in the New Testament]
+*[http://ww.newadvent.org/cathen/03267a.htm Catholic Encyclopedia: Canon of the Old Testament] (discusses differences in the canon)
+*[http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01601a.htm Catholic Encyclopedia: Apocrypha]
+*[http://www.bible-researcher.com/jerome.html Jerome on the Canon] translation of Jerome's ''Prologus Galeatus'' to 1 Kings (bible-researcher.com)
+*[http://oxfordpatristics.blogspot.com/2011/06/edmon-gallagher-jeromes-prologus.html Edmon Gallagher on Jerome's ''Prologus'' and the Council of Hippo regarding the Canon] (oxfordpatristics.blogspot.com).<br/>See also [http://www.academia.edu/4307125/_Jeromes_Prologus_Galeatus_and_the_OT_Canon_of_North_Africa_Studia_Patristica_69_2013_ Jerome's Prologus Galeatus and the Old Testament Canon of North Africa, ''Studia Patristica'' 69: 2013]
+*[http://www.christiantruth.com/articles/Apocrypha3.html The Old Testament Canon and the Apocrypha. Part 3: From Jerome to the Reformation. William Webster] (christiantruth.com)
+*[http://www.bible.ca/b-canon-old-testament-quoted-by-jesus-and-apostles.htm A list of Old Testament books quoted by Jesus and other New Testament writers.]
+*[http://orthodoxinfo.com/inquirers/tca_luther.aspx Luther Had His Chance] (orthodoxinfo.com)
+*[http://matt1618.freeyellow.com/cloud.html Refuting an Attack on the Deuterocanonicals. A Response to 11 ‘reasons’ that the Deuterocanonicals Should be Thrown Out of the Bible, By Matt1618. Introduction] (matt1618.freeyellow.com)
+*[http://www.bible.ca/catholic-apocrypha.htm Roman Catholic and Orthodox Faith Examined, and The Apocrypha: "Reasons why the Apocrypha does NOT belong in the Bible!"] (bible.ca)
+*[http://carm.org/why-apocrypha-not-in-bible CARM Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry: Reasons why the Apocrypha does not belong in the Bible, by Ryan Turner] (carm.org)
+*[http://matt1618.freeyellow.com/chapter2.html Reasoning From the Scriptures with Ron Rhodes Critique of Chapter 2, Does the Apocrypha Belong in the Bible?, by Matt1618]
+*[http://archive.churchsociety.org/crossway/documents/Cway_102_ApocryphaBackground.pdf Background and History to the Apocrypha, By David Phillips] Article reprinted from Cross†Way Issue Autumn 2006 No. 102 (churchsociety.org)
+*[http://www.provethebible.net/T2-Integ/B-1101.htm What are the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha?]
+*[http://www.gotquestions.org/pseudepigrapha.html Question: What are the Pseudepigrapha?] (gotquestions.org)
+*[http://www.holyhome.nl/ot%20pseudepigrapha.pdf The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha] (Wesley Center Online)
+*[http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/apocrypha.html New Testament Apocrypha: Early Christian Writings]
+*[http://www.haneefandassoc.com/itsui/downloads/Itsui_Materials/The%20Lost%20Books%20of%20The%20Bible.pdf The Lost Books of the Bible] (haneefandassoc.com)
 *See essay: [http://www.jiminger.com/Jim/apocrypha.html "A Defense of the Protestant position on the Apocrypha", by Jim Carroll.] (Presbyterian) —jiminger.com.
 *See essay: [http://theorthodoxchurch.info/blog/ocrc/2009/06/the-orthodox-bible/ "Why Luther and the Protestant Reformers Removed Books From the Bible"] —''when the page comes up with photo-image of Orthodox Study Bible, scroll down to the essay immediately below it.''
+*'''[http://www.catholic.com/tracts/the-great-heresies The Great Heresies]''' ''list of heresies committed by Catholics''
 [[Category:Bible]]
 [[Category:Apocrypha]]

Difference between revisions of "Apocrypha"

Revision as of 01:52, July 13, 2016

Contents

Samaritans

Protestant canon

Council of Jamnia ? A.D. 70

Early Christian Bible

Martin Luther and the Reformation

Formation of Catholic Canon

Protestant doctrine: "these books were added to the Bible in the 4th century"

King James Bible and the Episcopal Church

Hebrew and Aramaic original texts

Protestant Canon of Apocrypha Books

Four New Testament Apocrypha Books according to Martin Luther

Reasons for rejecting the Apocrypha

Western art and theology

The Anagignoskomena, Apostolic Fathers, Pseudepigrapha, Gnostic writings and gospels

References

External links

Navigation menu

Personal tools

Namespaces

Variants

Views

More

Search

Popular Links

donate

Edit Console