Reply by R. Keith Stoner on November 17, 2009 at 4:10pm
Send Message
Delete
I would hope more seasoned believers would not regard how things sound but have confidence in the substance of their walk. The feast of the first born and Tu B'shvat for instance have deep signifigance in my view these days, hopefully tolerance some personal distinctions can be found among brothers. I am not mandated to bath but most folks are happy I do. "Unity in esstentials, tolerance in all else." Diversity is a good thing, thanks for bringing this up James, I hope things are well for you and yours.

Reply by DR on November 17, 2009 at 8:33pm
Send Message
Delete
Secondary to the canon issue, where my concern lies is that you said "YHWH commanded it". Where?

:)

James Trimm said:
Not Sure what your definition of "Body of Messiah" is. However for the record the Catholic Church is divided into four major parts:

The Roman Catholic Church
The Eastern Orthodox Church

Te loosely connected "Oriental Orthodoxy" (Syriac Orthodox, Coptic Orthodox, Ethiopian Orthodox, Eritrean Orthodox, Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church (India) and Armenian Apostolic churches)

Assyrian Church of the East

Of these it is my understanding that only Roman Catholicism rejects 3Maccabees. Eastern Orthodoxy absolutely accepts 3Maccabees as Scripture. It is my understanding that the six churches of "Oriental Orthodoxy" also accept 3Maccabees as canon. It is included as part of the Peshitta canon which makes it part of the canon of the Assyrian Church of the East.

So as a matter of fact 3Maccabees is regarded as canon by hundreds of millions of "Christians", perhaps collectively the majority of them.

The question for me as a Nazarene is how did this Jewish book become regarded as canon by ancient Christians? Clearly they had to have had it passed down as Scripture by their Nazarene forefathers, they certainly would not have adopted it from Judaism after the first century.







DR said:
1. Where does 3 Maccabees say it was Yahweh who commanded it? Likewise, under what authority is 3 Maccabees "Scripture" (and why didn't the Body of Messiah get the note? ;))

2. Point taken. I had forgotten Yehoshua lived in Egypt.

3. Get back to you on that, if I can.

Reply by James Trimm on November 18, 2009 at 11:05pm
Send Message
Delete
My point is that YHWH gave the canon, and the canon gives the festival....

Reply by DR on November 18, 2009 at 11:44pm
Send Message
Delete
I'm not sure I can agree with your assessment that "what's stated in canon = commandment", especially in the narrative portions of Scripture. I'm sure we could permit a number of things by its statement in Scriptural narrative alone.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this matter. :)

Reply by Lev/Christopher on November 19, 2009 at 12:44am
Delete
The OT canon was established at Jamnia in the first century AD/CE and that canon did not include any of the apocryphal books.

For a useful table of the canons of various churches, see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Books_of_the_Bible

I am curious as to WHY a particular Canon is the one being accepted by people - is it because it contains books which we "like" (so we find a canon that "agrees" with books we like) or is it because we believe that the canonisation process was genuine and authentic? The Eastern (Greek) Orthodox Canon is the ONLY one that contains 3 Maccabees - does the person acknowledging the eastern Canon do so on the basis that that church was inspired in its canonisation process and do we as a result therefore accept ALL the other books that are accepted? What are our motives?



Contents
1 Tanakh or Old Testament
2 New Testament
2.1 Chart Notes
3 Protestant Canon
3.1 Old Testament
3.2 New Testament
3.3 Anglican Apocrypha
4 See also
5 Notes
6 External links
[edit] Tanakh or Old Testament
A table cell with an asterisk (*) indicates that a book is present but in a different order. Empty cells indicate that a book is absent from that canon; such books are often called apocrypha, a term that is sometimes used specifically (and possibly pejoratively) to describe the books in the Catholic and Orthodox canon that are absent from the Protestant Bible; Catholic Christians describe these books as deuterocanonical, meaning 'of the second canon, while Orthodox Christian call them the traditional name of anagignoskomena, meaning 'that which is to be read'.
Note that this table uses the spellings of the Douay-Rheims Bible in describing the Catholic biblical canon. More recent Catholic translations use similar or identical spellings (e.g. 1 Chronicles) as Protestant Bibles in those books which are jointly considered canonical.
Tanakh
(Jewish Bible) Protestant Old Testament Catholic Old Testament (Douay) Greek Orthodox Old Testament Slavonic Old Testament Original Language
Torah or Pentateuch
Genesis Genesis Genesis Genesis Genesis Hebrew
Exodus Exodus Exodus Exodus Exodus Hebrew
Leviticus Leviticus Leviticus Leviticus Leviticus Hebrew
Numbers Numbers Numbers Numbers Numbers Hebrew
Deuteronomy Deuteronomy Deuteronomy Deuteronomy Deuteronomy Hebrew
Nevi'im or Prophets
Historical books
Joshua Joshua Joshua Joshua Joshua Hebrew
Judges Judges Judges Judges Judges Hebrew
see below Ruth Ruth Ruth Ruth Hebrew
Samuel 1 Samuel 1 Kings 1 Samuel (1 Kingdoms)[1] 1 Kingdoms Hebrew
2 Samuel 2 Kings 2 Samuel (2 Kingdoms)[1] 2 Kingdoms Hebrew
Kings 1 Kings 3 Kings 1 Kings (3 Kingdoms)[1] 3 Kingdoms Hebrew
2 Kings 4 Kings 2 Kings (4 Kingdoms)[1] 4 Kingdoms Hebrew
Chronicles
see below 1 Chronicles 1 Paralipomenon 1 Chronicles 1 Chronicles Hebrew
2 Chronicles 2 Paralipomenon 2 Chronicles 2 Chronicles Hebrew
1 Esdras
(2 Esdras)* Greek (or Aramaic?)
Ezra (includes Nehemiah)
see below Ezra 1 Esdras Ezra (2 Esdras)[1] [2] Ezra Hebrew(+Aramaic)
Nehemiah 2 Esdras (Nehemias) Nehemiah (2 Esdras)[1] [2] Nehemiah Hebrew
(1 Esdras)* 2 Esdras
Greek (or Aramaic)
Tobias Tobit Tobit Aramaic
Judith Judith Judith Hebrew
see below Esther Esther[3] Esther[3] Esther[3] Hebrew
1 Machabees[4] 1 Maccabees see below Hebrew or Aramaic?
2 Machabees[4] 2 Maccabees see below Greek
3 Maccabees Greek
4 Maccabees Greek
Wisdom books
see below Job Job Job Job Hebrew
see below Psalms Psalms Psalms[5] Psalms[5] Hebrew
Odes[6] Hebrew(+Greek)
see below Proverbs Proverbs Proverbs Proverbs Hebrew
see below Ecclesiastes Ecclesiastes Ecclesiastes Ecclesiastes Hebrew
see below Song of Solomon Canticle of Canticles Song of Solomon Song of Songs Hebrew
Wisdom Wisdom Wisdom of Solomon Greek
Ecclesiasticus Sirach Sirach Hebrew, then translated into Greek
Major prophets
Isaiah Isaiah Isaias Isaiah Isaiah Hebrew
Jeremiah Jeremiah Jeremias Jeremiah Jeremiah Hebrew(+Aramaic)
see below Lamentations Lamentations Lamentations Lamentations of Jeremiah Hebrew
* * Letter of Jeremiah Greek (or Hebrew?)[7]
Baruch[8] Baruch[8] Baruch[8] Hebrew [9]
Letter of Jeremiah[10] * Greek (or Hebrew?)[7]
Ezekiel Ezekiel Ezechiel Ezekiel Ezekiel Hebrew
see below Daniel Daniel[11] Daniel[11] Daniel[11] Hebrew+Aramaic
Minor prophets
The Twelve Prophets Hosea Osee Hosea Hosea Hebrew
Joel Joel Joel Joel Hebrew
Amos Amos Amos Amos Hebrew
Obadiah Abdias Obadiah Obadiah Hebrew
Jonah Jonah Jonah Jonah Hebrew
Micah Micaeus Micah Micah Hebrew
Nahum Nahum Nahum Nahum Hebrew
Habakkuk Habacuc Habakkuk Habakkuk Hebrew
Zephaniah Sophonias Zephaniah Zephaniah Hebrew
Haggai Aggaeus Haggai Haggai Hebrew
Zechariah Zacharias Zechariah Zechariah Hebrew
Malachi Malachias Malachi Malachi Hebrew
Ketuvim or Writings[12]
Psalms Hebrew
Proverbs Hebrew
Job Hebrew
Song of Songs Hebrew
Ruth Hebrew
Lamentations Hebrew
Ecclesiastes Hebrew
Esther Hebrew
Daniel Hebrew+Aramaic
Ezra (includes Nehemiah) Hebrew(+Aramaic)
Chronicles Hebrew
see above[4] 1 Maccabees Hebrew or Aramaic?
see above[4] 2 Maccabees Greek


James Trimm said:
My point is that YHWH gave the canon, and the canon gives the festival....

Reply by James Trimm 1 day ago
Send Message
Delete
I am going to write an in depth article on the truth about the Apocrypha, I have just seen so much of this inaccurate information thrown around. I will address everything above and also a lot of other information (like showing places where the NT is plainly and clearly citing material from the Apocrypha.

Reply by DR 1 day ago
Send Message
Delete
James:

You had earlier asserted that the reason the Catholic churches embrace the Apocrypha is because it was handed down from the Nazarene forebears.

However, I think you'll find this quote from Melito of Sardis interesting:
Melito of Sardis (died 180 A.D.): 12. But in the Extracts made by him the same writer gives at the beginning of the introduction a catalogue of the acknowledged books of the Old Testament, which it is necessary to quote at this point. He writes as follows: 13. “Melito to his brother Onesimus, greeting: Since thou hast often, in thy zeal for the word, expressed a wish to have extracts made from the Law and the Prophets concerning the Saviour and concerning our entire faith, and hast also desired to have an accurate statement of the ancient book, as regards their number and their order, I have endeavored to perform the task, knowing thy zeal for the faith, and thy desire to gain information in regard to the word, and knowing that thou, in thy yearning after God, esteemest these things above all else, struggling to attain eternal salvation. 14. Accordingly when I went East and came to the place where these things were preached and done, I learned accurately the books of the Old Testament, and send them to thee as written below. Their names are as follows: Of Moses, five books: Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, Leviticus, Jesus Nave [i.e. Joshua, Son of Nun], Judges, Ruth; of Kings, four books; of Chronicles, two; the Psalms of David, the Proverbs of Solomon, Wisdom also, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Job; of Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah; of the twelve prophets, one book; Daniel, Ezekiel, Esdras. From which also I have made the extracts, dividing them into six books.” Such are the words of Melito (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 4.26.13-14).

This list (which comes from at the most the middle of the second century A.D.) lists the current Protestant canon. 37 books are listed, but when you bear in mind that some scrolls were combined (i.e. Ezra-Nehemiah, Jeremiah-Lamentations, etc.), you get the current 39 book canon. This proves that the Protestant canon was accepted within the early Christian Church and not necessarily "handed down" in the manner you describe.

This is all I've been able to find given the limited time, but will dig more as I find more time. I'm not sure when the Apocrypha came to be accepted (let alone entertained), but I do believe its popularity stemmed because it was part of the Alexandrian canon of Scripture (i.e. the Septuagint), which was largely used by the earliest Christian churches.

(Only part I find dubious is the attribution to "Wisdom", which if it refers to "Wisdom of Solomon", was accepted from an early date as "Scripture" but for whatever reason is omitted today: possibly because it was pseudopigrapha and in no possible way was written by Solomon.)

Reply by DR 1 day ago
Send Message
Delete
Correction: I accidentally omitted Deuteronomy when transcribing. Its there in the original quote. :)

Reply by Yaacov 7 hours ago
Send Message
Delete
What then to do with the following?"

Zechariah 8:18-19
18 And the word of YHWH Tzva'ot came unto me, saying:
19 "Thus says YHWH Tzva'ot: The fast of the fourth month, and the fast of the fifth, and the fast of the seventh, and the fast of the tenth, shall be to the House of Y'hudah joy and gladness, and cheerful seasons; therefore love you truth and peace."

Reply by James Trimm 5 hours ago
Send Message
Delete
'The fast of the fourth month' took place on the 17th Tammuz in memory of the taking of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar and the interruption of the daily sacrifice. To this tradition adds, that it was also the anniversary of making the golden calf, and of Moses breaking the Tables of the Law.

The fast of the fifth month,' on the 9th of Ab, was kept on account of the destruction of the first (and afterwards of the second) Temple. It is significant that the second Temple (that of Herod) was destroyed on the first day of the week. Tradition has it, that on that day God had pronounced judgment that the carcasses of all who had come out of Egypt should fall in the wilderness, and also, that again it was fated much later to witness the fulfilment of Jeremiah 26:18-23, when a Roman centurion had the ploughshare drawn over the site of Zion and of the Temple.

'The fast of the seventh month,' on the 2nd of Tishri, is said by tradition to be in memory of the slaughter of Gedaliah and his associates at Mizpah (Jer 41:1).

'The fast of the tenth month' was on the 10th of Tebeth, when the siege of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar commenced.

Reply by James Trimm 4 hours ago
Send Message
Delete
The Clear Truth
About the Apocrypha
By James Scott Trimm



The term “Apocrypha” can be confusing at times, because it can be used in many different ways. For the purpose of this article, the term “Apocrypha” refers to the following collection of tthirteen books:

1 Esdras
2 Esdras
Tobit
Judith
Wisdom of Solomon
Wisdom of Ben Sira
Baruch
Letter of Jeremiah
The Prayer of Manasseh
1 Maccabee
2 Maccabee
3 Maccabee
4 Maccabee

These are books which are regarded as canon by some, but not all groups of Christians. I have not included in this list:

Additions to Esther
The Prayer of the Three Young Men
Susana
Bel and the Dragon
Psalm 151

These are not actually books, but rather extracts from “long versions” of the books of Esther. Daniel and Psalms. Whether or not the “long” versions of these books should be used is another, very important question, but not the question we are dealing with in this article.

We will also not discuss other books which are not part of these thirteeen books, which have some claim to authority (such as 1Enoch and the Book of Jasher).

The thirteen books mentioned above were originally part of the Tanak (the so-called “Old Testament”) and were taken out of your Bible! In the following article I intend to prove beyond any doubt, that these thirteen books were originally part of the Bible and have since been removed.

The word “Apocrypha” means literally “hidden” indicating that these books were being removed from their place in Scripture, and placed or “hidden” in an appendix in the back of the book.


THE ANCIENT CANONS

None of these thiteen books are to be found in the canon of the Masoretic Text. However, the Masoretic Text is a rather late compilation, being a product of the Masorites between the 7th and 11th centuries C.E..

However the much older canon of the Greek Septuagint text, the translation of which was begun by the third century B.C.E. and completed before 132 B.C.E., included all of these books with the exception of 2 Esdras.

Also the canon of Aramaic Peshitta Tanak which was translated from the Hebrew, probably in the second century C.E.. contains all of these books except for 1 Esdras.

The books are also to be found in the fifth century canon of the so-called Christian Palestinian Aramaic Version.

These books are also to be found in the canons of the Old Slavonic, Old Armenian, Old Georgian and Old Coptic and Old Ethiopic versions of the Tanak.

These books are also to be found in the canon of the Old Latin version of the Tanak, and all but 2nd and 3rd Maccabees (though in modern editions 1st and 2nd Esdras are moved to an appendix).

In short, the earliest canon to omit these thirteeen books, is that of the Masoretic Text, which does not arise until the 7th to 11th centuries CE!


THE CHURCH FATHERS

One critic of the Apocrypha claimed: “The majority of the early church writers rejected these books as being inspired.”

This is absolutely false. Originally when writing this article, I intended to include quotations in which the pre-Nicean “Church Fathers” quote from the books of the Apocrypha as “Scripture”. I began gathering these quotes and soon realized that this task was well beyond the scope of this article. These “Church Fathers” do not just occasionally quote the books of the Apocrypha, they quote these books with as much consistency as the quote the other books of the Tanak And in quoting these books they refer to them as “Scripture” and even “Divine Scripture.” Among these “Church Fathers” are Ignatius, Polycarp, Pseudo-Barnabas, Clement of Rome, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Irenaeus, Eusebius, Cyprian and Tertullian. This clearly demonstrates that the earliest “Christians” used these books and regarded them as canon.


ANCIENT JEWISH USAGE

Some or all of these books were used by the Essene community at Qumran. Among the manuscripts of Biblical books found among the Dead Sea Scrolls are also included many manuscripts of books of the Apocrypha including Ben Sira, Tobit and the Letter of Jeremiah. These texts are all Hebrew and Aramaic except for one fragment of the Letter of Jeremiah in Greek. There is every reason to believe that the Qumran Community accepted these books as part of their canon.

Josephus in his historical works makes use of historical portions of the Apocrypha. He makes use of both 1st and 2nd Maccabees and follows 1 Esdras as his primary source over the books of Ezra and Nehemiah, including the account of the competition in 1 Esdras 3:1-5:6 which is not to be found in Ezra or Nehemiah.

The Talmud quotes Ben Sira as “Scripture” three times (b.Hag. 13a; b.Yev. 63b; b.Ket.110b) six times in Midrash Rabbah (X:6; LXXIII:12; XCI:3; XXXIII:1; VII, 19; XII,11) and once in the Zohar (Raya Mehemna 42b).

The stories of the books of Tobit, Judith and the Maccabees also find themselves transcribed, usually in an abridged form, into the Midrashim.


USED IN THE NT

One critic of the Apocrypha wrote “These books existed before New Testament times, yet there is not one single quotation from the Apocrypha is in the New Testament.”

This is at the very least misleading, and at the very most, false.

These books were clearly used by the earliest believers in Messiah. While they are never quoted outright in the “New Testament”, they are often strongly alluded to.

The following comparisons are all taken from the KJV version for consistency.


"For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are
clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his
eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because
that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were
thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish
heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became
fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image
made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and
creeping things. Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness
through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies
between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and
worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is
blessed for ever. Amen.
For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their
women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman,
burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that
which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of
their error which was meet. And even as they did not like to retain
God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do
those things which are not convenient; Being filled with all
unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness;
full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,"
(Rom. 1:20-29)

Clearly alluding to:

For by the greatness and beauty of the creatures proportionably the
maker of them is seen. ... Howbeit neither are they to be pardoned.
...They kept neither lives nor marriages any longer undefiled: but
either one slew another traiterously, or grieved him by adultery....
For the worshipping of idols not to be named is the beginning, the
cause, and the end, of all evil."
(Wis. 13:5, 8; 14:24,27)

--------

"Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the
thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?
Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one
vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour. What if God, willing
to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much
longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: And that he
might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy,
which he had afore prepared unto glory,"
(Rom. 9:20-23)

Certainly alluding to:

"For who shall say, What hast thou done? or who shall withstand thy
judgment? or who shall accuse thee for the nations that perish, whom
thou made? or who shall come to stand against thee, to be revenged for
the unrighteous men?... For if thou didst punish the enemies of thy
children, and the condemned to death, with such deliberation, giving
them time and place, whereby they might be delivered from their
malice:... For the potter, tempering soft earth, fashioneth every
vessel with much labour for our service: yea, of the same clay he
maketh both the vessels that serve for clean uses, and likewise also
all such as serve to the contrary: but what is the use of either sort,
the potter himself is the judge."
(Wis. 12:12, 20; 15:7)

------

"For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were
dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands,
eternal in the heavens....
For we that are in this tabernacle do groan, being burdened: not for
that we would be unclothed, but clothed upon, that mortality might be
swallowed up of life."
(2Cor. 5:1, 4)

No doubt Paul is alluding to:

"For the corruptible body presseth down the soul, and the earthy
tabernacle weigheth down the mind that museth upon many things."
(Wis. 9:15)

------

"Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against
the wiles of the devil. For we wrestle not against flesh and blood,
but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the
darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able
to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand. Stand
therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the
breastplate of righteousness;
And your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace; Above
all, taking the shield of faith, wherewith ye shall be able to quench
all the fiery darts of the wicked.
And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which
is the word of God:"
Eph. 6:11-17

Well it does not take much to figure out that Paul did not invent the
"full/complete armour" of Elohim , but drew the idea from:

"He shall take to him his jealousy for complete armour, and make the
creature his weapon for the revenge of his enemies. He shall put on
righteousness as a breastplate, and true judgment instead of an
helmet. He shall take holiness for an invincible shield. His severe
wrath shall he sharpen for a sword, and the world shall fight with him
against the unwise."
(Wis 5:17-20)

"...he [Eleazar] conqured the besiegers with the shield of his devout
reason. ... Therefore let us put on the full armour of self-control. .."
(4Macc. 7:4; 13:16 RSV)

-----

"Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God
waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein
few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.: The like figure
whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of
the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward
God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ"
(1Pt. 3:20-21)

Kefa is alluding to the allegory in 4Maccabees:

"For like a most skilful pilot, the reason of our father Eleazar
steered the ship of religion over the sea of the emotions, and though
buffeted by the stormings of the tyrant and overwhelmed by the mighty
waves of tortures, in no way did he turn the rudder of religion until
he sailed into the haven of immortal victory....
Just as Noah's ark, carrying the world in the universal flood, stoutly
endured the waves, so you, O guardian of the law, overwhelmed from
every side by the flood of your emotions and the violent winds, the
torture of your sons, endured nobly and withstood the wintry storms
that assail religion."
(4Macc. 7:1-3 15:31-32 RSV)

-------

"Wherefore, my beloved brethren, let every man be swift to hear, slow
to speak, slow to wrath:"
(James 1:19)

A near quote from Sirach:

"Be swift to hear; and let thy life be sincere; and with patience give
answer."
(Sir. 5:11)

------

"Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God
cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:"
(James 1:13)

Again Ya'akov (James) draws from Sirach:

"Say not thou, It is through the Lord that I fell away: for thou
oughtest not to do the things that he hateth. Say not thou, He hath
caused me to err: for he hath no need of the sinful man."
(Sir. 15:11-12)

-----

"Behold, the hire of the labourers who have reaped down your fields,
which is of you kept back by fraud, crieth: and the cries of them
which have reaped are entered into the ears of the Lord of sabaoth."
(James 5:4)

Seems to allude to Tobit:

"Let not the wages of any man, which hath wrought for thee, tarry with
thee, but give him it out of hand: for if thou serve God, he will also
repay thee: be circumspect my son, in all things thou doest, and be
wise in all thy conversation. " (Tobit 4:14)

-----

"And I saw the seven angels which stood before God; and to them were
given seven trumpets." (Rev. 8:2)

This concept draws from Tobit:

"I am Raphael, one of the seven holy angels, which present the prayers
of the saints, and which go in and out before the glory of the Holy
One." (Tobit 12:15)

-----

"And after these things I heard a great voice of much people in
heaven, saying, Alleluia; Salvation, and glory, and honour, and power,
unto the Lord our God:...
And the foundations of the wall of the city were garnished with all
manner of precious stones. The first foundation was jasper; the
second, sapphire; the third, a chalcedony; the fourth, an emerald;:
The fifth, sardonyx; the sixth, sardius; the seventh, chrysolite; the
eighth, beryl; the ninth, a topaz; the tenth, a chrysoprasus; the
eleventh, a jacinth; the twelfth, an amethyst.: And the twelve gates
were twelve pearls; every several gate was of one pearl: and the
street of the city was pure gold, as it were transparent glass." (Rev.
19:1; 21:19-21)

Again the idea draws from Tobit:

"And the streets of Jerusalem shall be paved with beryl and carbuncle
and stones of Ophir.
And all her streets shall say, Alleluia; and they shall praise him,
saying, Blessed be God, which hath extolled it for ever." (Tobit 13:17-18)

------

Another case if founs in comparing Jude 1:6-7 and 2Peter 2:4-6 with 3Maccabees 2:4-5:

6: And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.
7: Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
(Jude 1:6-7 KJV)

4: For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;
5: And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly;
6: And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes condemned them with an overthrow, making them an ensample unto those that after should live ungodly;
(2Peter 2:4-6 KJV)

This reference to the fallen angels event of Gen. 6 which brought the birth of “giants” wiped out by the flood immediately followed by a reference to the judgment of Sodom certainly alludes to:

It was thou who didst destroy the former workers of unrighteousness, among whom were the giants, who trusted in their strength and hardihood, by covering them with a measureless flood.
It was thou who didst make the Sodomites, those workers of exceeding iniquity, men notorious for their vices, an example to after generations, when thou didst cover them with fire and brimstone.
(3Macc. 2:4-5)

(Notice also the common phrase “an example to after generations/those after”)


SETTING SOME THINGS STRAIGHT

There are many claims made by those who oppose the Apocrypha, which need to be addressed:

1. "the lack of any Hebrew originals"

This argument fails on three levels.

First of all it fails because we do have Hebrew originals for at least
parts of several of the books of the Apocrypha including Tobit,
Judith, Ben Sira and 1Maccabees. We also have Aramaic Peshitta
versions of all but 1Esdras, and we have good reason to believe (based
on comparing the Hebrew of the Tanak and Ben Sira with the Aramaic of
the Peshitta) that most or all of these were translated directly from
the Hebrew and very literally. (For those that do not know, Aramaic
is very similar to Hebrew, so a literal Aramaic translation of a
Hebrew original is almost as good as having the Hebrew itself).

Second of all, at the time Rabbinic Judaism rejected these books most
of all of them still existed in Hebrew, and at the time Protestantism
rejected them, more of them existed in Hebrew than exist now. This is
circular thinking. The Hebrew originals have largely been lost (or in
some cases fallen into obscurity) because Protestantism and Rabbinic
Judaism rejected them, and now they should be rejected because the
Hebrew originals have been lost or fallen into obscurity.

A similar situation exists with certain books of the "New Testament".
For example we can now establish beyond any real doubt that
Revelation was originally written in Hebrew, but the original Hebrew
is now lost and only Aramaic and Greek remain. Even for those of us
who maintain Hebrew and Aramaic origins for the books of the NT, no
good contenders for the original Hebrew or Aramaic of 2Kefa, 2 & 3
Yochanan and Jude are currently known. Would one also have us reject
these books?

2. "and many of them contain theologically or factually problematic
statements"

Again, those who reject all or part of the Bible make the same
argument against the books that are in the canon. Antimissionaries
make the same arguments against the NT. Certainly the canonical books
contain statements which have been used by various groups as proof
texts to "prove" various false doctrines. Moreover we are still
trying to resolve just exactly what the original Hebrew and Aramaic of
these books actually says.

OBJECTION:

1 and 2 Macabees disagree on how Antiochus IV died. 1 Mac 6:8-16 says
he became grief stricken and died of sorrow in his bed. 2 Mac 9 says
God struck him with a disease in his bowels on the battlefield and he was
hurled from his chariot, dieing painfully on the ground with worms coming
out of his eyes and his flesh rotting as the army looked on. Obviously,
both accounts cannot be true, but both accounts appear in the Catholic
edition of "Scripture".

RESPONSE:

This reminds me of anti-missionary arguments that Matthew and Acts
disagree on how Judas died. When the various manuscript versions are
compared in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek we find that the two accounts
can be resolved. In fact the original Hebrew of 1Maccabees has many
agreements with 2Maccabees on the death of Antiochus Epiphanies
against the Greek version of 1Maccabees.

CLAIM:

2 Macabees encourages us to pray for the dead, a common Catholic
practice. This practice is justified by this passage...

"Judas urged the people to keep themselves free from all
sin,....he took a collection from them individually, amounting
to nearly two thousand drachmae, and sent it to Jerusalem to have
a sacrifice for the sin offered, an altogether fine and noble action,
in which he took full account of the resurrection. For if he had not
expected the fallen to rise again, it would have been superflurious
to pray for the dead, whereas if he had in view the splendid recompense
reserved for those who make a pious end, the thought was holy and
devout. This was why he had this atonement sacrifice
offered for the dead, so that they might be released from their sin."
(2 Mac 12:42-45, The Jerusalem Bible)

This passage was used to support the Catholic idea of indulgences –
that money can buy atonement for one's sins by someone other than
the sinner even after he died!!!!

Just because a certain passage has been misused by some group does not
mean the book should be rejected. If that were the case we would
reject the canon based on its misuse by the Jehovah's Witnesses.

OBJECTION:

2 Mac 5:12-16 claims that Jeremiah prayed for Israel after he died,
which provided the Catholic Church it's basis for praying to Mary
and other cannonized "saints". In fact that essentially means that
there were corruptions in the Catholic Church that did not come
from paganism but from ancient writings written by Jewish men ....
but rejected by the overwhelming majority of Jewish leaders.

RESPONSE:

Although Catholics have justified this doctrine from this passage this
is only rationalizing of a doctrine they transferred from paganism.
They pray to various "saints" as to pagan gods. This event was much
more akin to that of the mount of transfiguration event in Matthew 17.

OBJECTION:

Sirach, found only in the Apocrypha, also promotes this concept by
saying "almsgiving atones for sins." (Sirach 3:33) and Tobit also says
"alms deliver from all sin, and from death, and will not suffer the soul
to go into darkness." (Tobit 4:11).

I assume they refer to Sira 3:29 which is 3:30 in some versions. The
Hebrew may be understood as "Therefore the almsgiver shall be atoned
for his sins" (no cause and effect indicated) and the Aramaic
literally reads "Therefore the almsgiver forsakes his sins".
The KJV of Tobit 4:10-11 reads:

10: Because that alms do deliver from death, and suffereth not to come
into darkness.
11: For alms is a good gift unto all that give it in the sight of the
most High.

The Hebrew of Tobit 4:11 reads "… and alms do deliver from death; and
everyone who occupies himself in almsgiving shall behold the face of
Elohim, as it is written, "I will behold your face by almsgiving" (Ps.
17:15)

Likewise we read in Proverbs” “By mercy and truth iniquity is purged: and by the fear of YHWH men depart from evil.” (Prov. 16:6)… should we remove Proverbs from the canon?

OBJECTION:

Sirach 10:26 even says "Do not try to be smart when you do your work.".
Why not? My career would be in ruins if I followed that advice.

RESPONSE:

The Aramaic says "Be not lazy when you do your work"


OBJECTION:

Judith 1:1 incorrectly claims that Nebuchadnezzar was king of Assyria
when he was king of Babylon and claims that he reigned from Ninevah,
contrary to the Scriptures which tell us he reigned from Babylon..
Keep in mind that it was the Assyrians that captured the Northern
Kingdom of Israel/Ephraim and the Babylonians that captured the
southern kingdom of Judah.

Another critic says:
They [The Apocrypha] abound in historical and geographical inaccuracies and anachronisms. [referring to the book of Judith]

RESPONSE:

This "problem" is just plain silliness. The proper names in the Book
of Judith were encoded. The Book was written during the Maccabean
rebellion and names were changed to protect Judith herself as well as
anyone possessing a copy pf the book. "Nebuchadnezzar" stood in place
of "Antiochus Epiphanies" because both names have the same numerical
value (gematria) in Hebrew. "Assyria" is used as code for the
Seleucid Empire, and "Nineveh" is the codeword used for "Antioch".
These facts are well recognized in the Midrashim which refer to this
story with that decoding scheme.


HOW DID WE GET OUR CANON?

Now it is very unlikely that early Christians, after their split from Nazarene Judaism would have adopted any books from Rabbinic Jews. Thus any “Old Testament” books used as canon by the earliest Christians would have to have been inherited to them from their Nazarene forefathers.

The evidence is overwhelming, these books were originally part of the Bible and have since been removed.

Reply by Lev/Christopher 1 hour ago
Delete
Thank you for taking the time to produce this as this can serve as the basis for ongoing discussion. I do think you are straining some of the comparisons between the NT and alleged quotations from the Apocrypha somewhat, though. I am not saying that you are necessarily wrong - rather that there are other equally, if not more, plausible explanations in many of the case studies you make. I don't have time to make an in-depth study myself right now but the following article does highlight some of the difficulties and will hopefully serve for further discussion:

Are the Apocrypha Quoted in the New Testament? Question: Catholic apologists claims Jesus and His apostles quoted from the deuterocanonicals (the apocrypha), contrary to what you and others claim. It is said that there are many such references. [1]

Answer: Is it true that there are many references in the New Testament to the apocrypha? And if there are any references, do they imply that the authors considered these writings as divine scripture? I took several hours comparing the New Testament verses given by the Catholic authors with the supposed references to the apocrypha. (I did not look up all of them, but I took a large enough sample to get a good idea). Here are my conclusions:

1. Many of the supposed references are so vague that they could either be a reference to other works or else the similarity may simply be coincidental. They may not even be references to anything at all. That's why the Catholic apologist often says that one is "similar to" the other. I'm sure he'll find many "similar to's" if he compares the Bible to the Sunday newspaper!

For example, we are told that Matthew 13:43, "Then the just will shine forth..." is found in Wisdom 3:7. This is "found in", so we should think that the link is very clear. Well, let's see what Wisdom 3:7 actually says: "And in the time of their visitation they shall shine, and run to and fro like sparks among the stubble." What do you think? Both speak of 'shining', but can you really say that Jesus is quoting Wisdom? Hardly! By the same token Jesus may be referring to the Book of Daniel, which says: "And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament" (Daniel 12:3). Or perhaps Jesus is referring to neither one of them. After all Jesus actually said, "Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father" (Matthew 13:43). Wisdom is speaking about "sparks"; Jesus is speaking about a brightness like that of the sun! We are not impressed by the long list of this kind of references!

2. There are some examples that are certainly not referring to the apocrypha at all. Luke 2:37 is supposedly found in Judith 8:4-6. "...as a widow...She never left the temple, but worshipped night and day with fasting and prayer." Give us a break! Luke is speaking about a the prophetess Anna, who lived many years after Judith; the former "never left the temple" whereas the latter "was a widow in her house."

3 There are few examples that may be references to the apocrypha, the most clear one being Hebrews 11:35b (compared with 2 Maccabees 7:1-29). The incident recorded in Second Maccabees could have been in the mind of the author of Hebrews, but then, similar incidents are recorded in the writings of the Jewish historian, Josephus. [2] It is difficult to be certain what he had in mind. However, even if this is a reference to the apocrypha, by no means is the author of Hebrews implying divine authority to Maccabees (or to Josephus for that matter).

The New Testament authors also draw from works other than the Holy Scriptures. For example, the apostle Paul quotes pagan poets and writers (1 Corinthians 15:33; Acts 17:28); Jude quotes from the Jewish apocryphal books of Enoch and the Assumption of Moses. Obviously an author may cite something from a work that he takes to be true without thereby ascribing divine authority to that work. Just as no one considers the Greek poets or the Jewish "Assumption of Moses" as inspired, the same applies to any references to the apocrypha. In a sermon, the preacher may quote Shakespeare or Socrates or whoever else he wants, as long at the particular statement fits his purpose, and yet he does not imply that all that Shakespeare and Socrates ever wrote is gospel truth!

4 By contrast to the possible and vague references to the apocrypha, the references to the Old Testament books are both clear, and more importantly they imply that those books carried divine authority. For example in John 10:34,35 the Lord Jesus quotes from Psalm 82:6, and immediately comments that the scriptures cannot be broken. For the apostle Paul, "it is written" (in the Old Testament books) was the sure ground for his doctrinal teaching. Thus the New Testament testifies to divine authority of the Old Testament. Significantly there are no such quotations to the apocrypha that imply divine inspiration of these books.

As an example of how the Jesus uses the Scriptures, it’s profitable to study a specific portion of the New Testament, say Mark chapter 12 (I chose this chapter simply because we read it at church tonight). You notice first of all, that Jesus is quoting from the Old Testament books - Exodus, Leviticus, Deuteronomy and the Psalms - and that there are no similar quotations from the apocrypha. Moreover, they are not the kind of vague allusions, but clear-cut quotations (almost word for word). And finally, it is clear that Jesus is using the Old Testament quotations because He believes (as well as His Jewish audience) that they have the authority of the Word of God. He uses prophecy to explain why the Jews had rejected Him; to establish an important doctrine about the resurrection and to determine which commandment is the greatest; and to show that He is not a mere man (He is Lord of David, not only the son of David, and therefore Divine). Obviously, His arguments would have not carried any weight if He and the Jews did not believe that the Scriptures quoted were inspired and part of the canon.

In brief, the quotations and references to the Old Testament by Jesus and the NT writers provide strong evidence in favour of the Jewish canon (as in the Protestant Bible); whereas the absence of similar quotations to the apocrypha argues against the canonicity of these books.

References:

[1] See The Canon of Scripture and The Deuterocanonicals [back]

[2] "The martyrdom of a heroic mother and her seven sons occupies a prominent place in the Chanukah story, and has inspired generations of Jews. Although a brief version of this story is presented in the Talmud and Midrash, the Book of Maccabees and Yosipon (Josephus) give much lengthier and detailed accounts, with significant variations." www.shemayisrael.com/chanukah/more/chanah.

http://www.justforcatholics.org/a63.htm