Changes

===Third objection: They do not have the "marks" of inspired writing===

===Third objection: They do not have the "marks" of inspired writing===

This is the principle of "private judgment", which is highly subjective, and can be in error. The expertise and judgment of the ancients among the Jews before the time of Christ should not be dismissed.<blockquote>"We attach great importance to the reading [text] of the Septuagint, because it was translated 280 years before Christ, by men who had every facility for ascertaining the real meaning of the Hebrew text, and their work was honoured by the cordial approbation of the Sanhedrim of Alexandria, at a time when Hebrew learning was at its highest state of perfection in that city."

This is the principle of "private judgment", which is highly subjective, and can be in error.<ref>See the essay [http://www.newmanreader.org/works/essays/volume2/private.html Private Judgment [British Critic, July 1841]] (newmanreader.org)</ref> With regard to what texts belong in the Bible it is a certainty that the expertise and judgment of the ancients among the Jews before the time of Christ should not be lightly dismissed.<blockquote>"We attach great importance to the reading [text] of the Septuagint, because it was translated 280 years before Christ, by men who had every facility for ascertaining the real meaning of the Hebrew text, and their work was honoured by the cordial approbation of the Sanhedrim of Alexandria, at a time when Hebrew learning was at its highest state of perfection in that city."

:—John Grigg Hewlett, D.D. ''Bible difficulties explained'' (1860), p. 162 –<small>book in the public domain</small></blockquote><ref>See the essay [http://www.newmanreader.org/works/essays/volume2/private.html Private Judgment [British Critic, July 1841]] (newmanreader.org)</ref> [[Marcion]], around A.D. 140 declared that the entire Old Testament was "obviously" not of God. He dismissed the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and John, he edited the Gospel of Luke to purify it, and he threw out four of Paul's 14 Epistles as writings contrary to the Gospel.<ref>See the [[Biblical Canon#Canon of Marcion (Heretic) c. 140|Canon of Marcion]]</ref> The [[Deuterocanonicals]] were disputed from the 1st century to the 16th century and included 7 books of the New Testament, four of which Martin Luther in 1539 declared hostile to the Gospel because they did not have "the marks of inspired scripture" and did not clearly "preach Christ": '''Hebrews, James, Jude''' and '''Revelation'''—he held that they were not on the same level as the pure scriptures.<ref>[http://www.bible-researcher.com/antilegomena.html Luther's Treatment of the 'Disputed Books' of the New Testament] (bible-researcher.com/antilegomena)<br/>[http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Bible/Text/Canon/wilkgren.html Luther And "New Testament Apocrypha", A. Wikgren, in R. H. Fischer's A Tribute To Arthur Vööbus: Studies In Early Christian Literature, 1977, pp. 379-390. © University of Chicago Press]</ref> In 1546 at the [[Council of Trent]] the Catholic Church [[dogma]]tically "added" the 7 disputed New Testament books to the canon of the Bible along with the 7 disputed Old Testament books and parts of books.

:—John Grigg Hewlett, D.D. ''Bible difficulties explained'' (1860), p. 162 –<small>book in the public domain</small></blockquote>

[[Marcion]],<ref>Marcion of Sinope (84 - c.160 A.D.). See [http://www.theopedia.com/Marcionism Theopedia: Marcionism] and [[http://www.theopedia.com/Marcion Theopedia: Marcion]]<br/>See also [http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09645c.htm Catholic Encyclopedia: Marcionites] (newadvent.org)</ref> around A.D. 140 declared that the entire Old Testament was "obviously" not of God. He dismissed the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and John, he edited the Gospel of Luke to purify it, and he threw out four of Paul's 14 Epistles as writings contrary to the Gospel.<ref>See the [[Biblical Canon#Canon of Marcion (Heretic) c. 140|Canon of Marcion]]</ref> He was condemned as a heretic for his views about the nature of God and salvation.

The [[Deuterocanonicals]] were disputed from the 1st century to the 16th century, and include 7 books of the New Testament which many Christians and some individual scholars of those centuries confidently asserted were not authentic, but were ''clearly'' perceived by them as spurious writings.

:*[[Story of Susanna|Susanna]] (Vulgate Daniel 13, Septuagint prologue to Daniel)

The meaning of the term "deuterocanonical" is therefore not identical with "apocryphal".

In 1539 Martin Luther declared that four of the New Testament deuterocanonicals are clearly hostile to the Gospel because they do not have "the marks of inspired scripture" and do not clearly "preach Christ": '''Hebrews, James, Jude''' and '''Revelation'''—he held that they were not on the same level as the pure scriptures.<ref>[http://www.bible-researcher.com/antilegomena.html Luther's Treatment of the 'Disputed Books' of the New Testament] (bible-researcher.com/antilegomena)<br/>[http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Bible/Text/Canon/wilkgren.html Luther And "New Testament Apocrypha", A. Wikgren, in R. H. Fischer's A Tribute To Arthur Vööbus: Studies In Early Christian Literature, 1977, pp. 379-390. © University of Chicago Press]</ref> He found several books of the Bible to be ''clearly'' lacking the "marks of inspired writing".<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=ZUAuAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA11&lpg=PA11&dq=Martin+Luther+on+the+Book+of+Tobit&source=bl&ots=o2f-ODSQ5i&sig=5akAGrPB7QUCRHbiEqqWxg5Egek&hl=en&sa=X&ei=hqmUVLrgM8_4yQS19IGgAw&ved=0CFYQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=Martin%20Luther%20on%20the%20Book%20of%20Tobit&f=false The Table Talk of Martin Luther (1599), By Martin Luther, translated Alexander Chalmers, editor William Hazlitt. Bell & Daldy, 1872. 390 pages] ISBN-10: 0486443590 ISBN-13: 978-0486443591.<br/>[http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/False%20Religions/Lutherans/truth_about_martin_luther.htm The Truth About Martin Luther] (jesus-is-savior.com)</ref>

In 1546 at the [[Council of Trent]] the bishops of the Catholic Church [[dogma]]tically "added" the [[Deuterocanonicals]], the 7 disputed New Testament books along with the 7 disputed books and parts of 2 other books of the Old Testament "with all their parts", to the canon of the Bible. The leaders of the Roman Catholic Church had definitively found all 73 books of the Catholic Bible to be "certainly" inspired scripture, given by God himself. Writers who point out that the Apocrypha were added to the Bible by the Catholic Church do not include the fact that the disputed books of Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, 2 John, 3 John, Jude and Revelation were ''added'' to the Bible by the Catholic Church at the same time.

Historical-critical researchers who use the literary methods of [[Historical-critical method (Higher criticism)|Higher Criticism]] seek to find out all they can with regard to the portion of the Bible they are studying; the author, the date, the circumstances, and purpose of its writing. The Higher Criticism means nothing more than the study of the literary structure of the various books of the Bible, and more especially of the Old Testament. Historical criticism assumes the time-conditions; the historical character of the Scriptures. This does not necessarily mean that the individual historical critic conceives of God revealing Himself objectively within history, but that he conceives the production of Scripture to have taken place within historical causes. What one scholar holds to be very probable another considers to be very unlikely. The regular majority of intelligent higher critical scholars who take the Bible seriously have found the Bible to be historically reliable and truthful and unique as a ''very credible witness'' to what the Lord of history has actually done in history, and as documents in character superior to all the ethical rationalism of the writings of secular humanists. This includes those deuterocanonicals called "apocrypha".<blockquote>"'''''The more conservative theologians who employ the historical-critical method believe that the Scriptures are 'more than the writings of mortal men'...'''''" —(Siegbert W. Becker, "The Historical-Critical Method of Bible Interpretation", page 4. ''bold-face emphasis added''.)</blockquote>They have found that the Scriptures are unique among world literature, and that the Bible is of a wholly different order from the pagan mythologies of the nations.<ref name=BFMKwatera>St. John's Abbey: ''The Bible’s message is both ‘divine’ and ‘human’.'' Friday, January 17th, 2014, Benedictine Father Michael Kwatera, a monk of St. John’s Abbey in Collegeville, MN. A discussion of the meaning of historical-critical methodology.</ref><ref name=literature>[https://bibleasliterature.wordpress.com/ The Bible as Literature: The Bible ~ A Literary Work and an Artistic Presentation of Human Experience]</ref>

It is evident that those portions of the Book of Daniel called ''The Prayer of Azariah and Song of the Three Holy Children, Story of Susanna,'' and ''Bel and the Dragon,'' cannot be evaluated solely on the basis of Jewish rejection, apparent lack of evidence of an original Hebrew text, and subjective assessment of content according to what seems ''to the reader'' to be marks of inspired writing.

Every person who approaches Bible study, usually to learn about the historical events it relates, is heavily influenced by the hermeneutical theory, or interpretive understandings, he or she brings to the text, consciously or unconsciously. According to Dr. J. Philip Hyatt, very little of the Bible relates history for its own sake, or for the purposes that a modern historian would adopt. It is, therefore, history of a special order, designed not simply to inform the reader, but to awaken in the reader a response to what the Lord of history has done.<ref name=Hyatt>John Grigg Hewlett, D.D. ''Bible difficulties explained'' (1860), p. 162 –<small>book in the public domain</small></ref><ref name=Bond>"Bible hermeneutics", Steve Bond, ''Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary'', pp. 203–207.</ref>

{{Old Testament Books}}

{{Old Testament Books}}