The Apocrypha

[Falco Knotwise]

One of the common views on the Septuagint is that the second and third century church fathers used some of it, and thereby it should be included in the OT cannon. I reject that argument as they had no such authority. Many if not most of them were really disconnected from Judaism by that point. Remember, information flowed very differently in the premodern world.

I see. Well, I suppose I don’t agree with that viewpoint, but then I don’t think Romans 3:1-3 necessarily means the Church has no authority whatsoever in such matters at least insofar as it pertains to the Church.

I would say it says in Paul’s view they were entrusted to the Jews. Frankly, they did an outstanding job of preservation. Where the second century church would have that authority is beyond me.

There was no universally accepted canon of scripture amongst the Jews by the 1st Century A.D. and when they finally did establish one is a matter of dispute among scholars. All of that and how the Catholic Church believes it derives authority from Jesus to make such decisions (even in the 2nd century A.D.) with Bible references, you can find in that article I referenced if you’re interested.

I think that article was written by Scott Hahn who is widely regarded as an excellent Bible scholar in the Catholic Church today. Even his critics admit he’s excellent on most things he publishes.

I like him, anyway.

[RZehr]

The Tobit allusion proves nothing, as it merely suggests that that was a common question. It is actually fairly easy to pick these quotes out, as most of the time they use the Septuagint, Matthew excepted perhaps, This makes sense, as many of them were ministering in Greek. I used Smith and Van Dyke when I ministered in Arabic. The fact that they used the Septuagint does not give it some kind of secondary inspiration.

Well you claim one thing, and others claim the opposite.
Neither side actually can prove it

Frankly, I could care less if David agrees with me or not. Frankly, we really don’t have any Hebrew Scholars in the Anabaptist world.

My friend is one.

And why would anyone want an Orthodox Study Bible? I reject virtually all of Eastern Orthodoxy’s distinctives. Especially their view of church state relations and where final authority lies. Like most study Bibles it contains the doctrinal views of those who put it together. If you like where the EO church, feel free to partake of their doctrinal views. I don’t.

I was pointing out that you are unaware of some of the references for the Apocrypha. I don’t espouse Orthodoxy or their doctrines but I don’t espouse Mennonite doctrine or teachings from blindness or ignorance either.
I reject the “400 years of silence” as one of those.

Does he have a Ph. D., preferably from a university that actually has a branch in Israel? Is he on the faculty of a grad school that has a language program In Hebrew? That is what I consider an “expert “ to be. If there is anyone like that in the Mennonite world, I would love to know who they are.

If you dig up my article on the subject, you will follow my complete argument for rejection.

I have a friend who does have a PhD in Hebrew language studies from an Israeli university. It is in the Hebrew Language Department, with the title being: Jewish Grammarians in the Lexicography of Wilhelm Gesenius, Specifically the Comparisons to Arabic.
In plain language, it has to do with the comparisons to the Arabic language which help us understand the ancient Hebrew text.
And he teaches there in Israel. And has lived there since 2004. He is no longer attending an Anabaptist church, and is not in the Mennonite world other than correspondence. So I guess he doesn’t quite meet that criteria.

[Sudsy]

One of the main doctrinal differences between Catholics and Protestants/Anabaptists is the doctrine of purgatory (a cleansing place) that appears to be first mentioned in the Apocrypha book of 2 Maccabees 12:46: “Thus he made atonement for the dead that they might be freed from sin.” It was believed that since the Jews prayed for the dead shows that they believed in a place where they could be helped (now call purgatory) and that the prayers of their living brothers and sisters could help them in that place. Some believe the Bible seems to imply a place for an intermediate state of purification after we die in many passages.

I think the doctrine of being sin free to enter Heaven is an interesting subject and one that has some roots in the Apocrypha. Catholics, I believe, address sins as either being a venial sin or a mortal sin. Venial sins prepare the believer for Heaven and are cleaned up in purgatory. I was raised where some unrepentent sin as a believer would send me to hell. This caused considerable fear in my early years and I was quite eternally insecure. I suppose with the Catholic belief I would not be as insecure knowing that these failures would be cleaned up in purgatory after I die. Seems to me, Anabaptists beliefs also lean more toward this tyoe of eternal insecurity belief. Anyway, perhaps this is a thread of it's own for those who are interested in being assured of their salvation.

[Josh]

Jude has a clear quote from the Book of Enoch, which is why. I consider Enoch canonical.

[Soloist]

One of the main doctrinal differences between Catholics and Protestants/Anabaptists is the doctrine of purgatory (a cleansing place) that appears to be first mentioned in the Apocrypha book of 2 Maccabees 12:46: “Thus he made atonement for the dead that they might be freed from sin.” It was believed that since the Jews prayed for the dead shows that they believed in a place where they could be helped (now call purgatory) and that the prayers of their living brothers and sisters could help them in that place. Some believe the Bible seems to imply a place for an intermediate state of purification after we die in many passages.

I think the doctrine of being sin free to enter Heaven is an interesting subject and one that has some roots in the Apocrypha. Catholics, I believe, address sins as either being a venial sin or a mortal sin. Venial sins prepare the believer for Heaven and are cleaned up in purgatory. I was raised where some unrepentent sin as a believer would send me to hell. This caused considerable fear in my early years and I was quite eternally insecure. I suppose with the Catholic belief I would not be as insecure knowing that these failures would be cleaned up in purgatory after I die. Seems to me, Anabaptists beliefs also lean more toward this tyoe of eternal insecurity belief. Anyway, perhaps this is a thread of it's own for those who are interested in being assured of their salvation.

There are some mysteries in Scripture such as baptism for the dead and what exactly it means by preaching to the spirits in prison.
That passage however doesn’t speak of purgatory but rather the resurrection so I don’t think one can rightly say the Jews believed in purgatory based on this passage.
Under the law, these men would have been put to death anyway so I’m not exactly sure what is going on here .

[Valerie]

One of the main doctrinal differences between Catholics and Protestants/Anabaptists is the doctrine of purgatory (a cleansing place) that appears to be first mentioned in the Apocrypha book of 2 Maccabees 12:46: “Thus he made atonement for the dead that they might be freed from sin.” It was believed that since the Jews prayed for the dead shows that they believed in a place where they could be helped (now call purgatory) and that the prayers of their living brothers and sisters could help them in that place. Some believe the Bible seems to imply a place for an intermediate state of purification after we die in many passages.

I think the doctrine of being sin free to enter Heaven is an interesting subject and one that has some roots in the Apocrypha. Catholics, I believe, address sins as either being a venial sin or a mortal sin. Venial sins prepare the believer for Heaven and are cleaned up in purgatory. I was raised where some unrepentent sin as a believer would send me to hell. This caused considerable fear in my early years and I was quite eternally insecure. I suppose with the Catholic belief I would not be as insecure knowing that these failures would be cleaned up in purgatory after I die. Seems to me, Anabaptists beliefs also lean more toward this tyoe of eternal insecurity belief. Anyway, perhaps this is a thread of it's own for those who are interested in being assured of their salvation.

Orthodox say that passage is an example of praying for the dead, and not an example of purgatory which Orthodox do not hod to that doctrine of purgatory.
Praying for the dead is based o.n praying for God's mercy before final "Judgement Day" because God will have mercy on whom He will have mercy. That passage was an example of their understanding that one can pray for the dead. Plus there were "oral" teachings. There were prayers for the dead that were written in the catacombs.

[ken_sylvania]

Jude has a clear quote from the Book of Enoch, which is why. I consider Enoch canonical.

Do Cretica and Phenomena get added as well considering the quotes in Actus 17:28?

[RZehr]

The Jews in Palestine never accepted the books that we know as the apocrypha. That is the center of Judaism. The reason they. had a degree of acceptance outside of Palestine was they were included in the manuscripts that were translated into th,e Septuagint. Thus, these books were widely circulated in the Greek speaking world.

Wasn't the Septuagint believed to be the primary book used by Jews and Jesus and the disciples?

[Soloist]

The Jews in Palestine never accepted the books that we know as the apocrypha. That is the center of Judaism. The reason they. had a degree of acceptance outside of Palestine was they were included in the manuscripts that were translated into th,e Septuagint. Thus, these books were widely circulated in the Greek speaking world.

Wasn't the Septuagint believed to be the primary book used by Jews and Jesus and the disciples?

Everything I’ve read suggests that the exactness of the text was less important then some of us like to think and as near as the stuff I read estimates, both Jesus and the apostles quoted from both Greek text as well as Hebrew.

[RZehr]

Of note, none of the OT quotes in the New Testament are from the Apocrypha. There is an interesting piece on the subject in Walter Kaiser’s “The Uses of the Old Testament in the New.” Many of the Old Testament quotes are from the Septuagint, but clearly not all.

It's been said that none of Judges, Ruth, Ezra, Esther, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon, Lamentations, Obadiah, Jonah or Zephaniah are directly quoted in the New Testament.

Hebrews 11:32 references accounts found in Judges. Ruth may have been attached to Judges at the time of Christ. But no quotes.

And if Ezra was on the same scroll as Nehemiah, I suppose we could take Ezra off the list because Nehemiah 9:15 "Thou didst give them bread from heaven for their hunger and bring forth water for them from the rock for their thirst, and thou didst tell them to go in to possess the land which thou hadst sworn to give them."
Is quoted in John 6:31" Our fathers ate the manna in the wilderness; as it is written, `He gave them bread from heaven to eat. '"

We could use the same logic to include Obadiah and Jonah and Zephaniah, since The Twelve minor prophets were on one roll.

Ecclesiastes has near hints in the NT in Timothy: Ecc 11:10 & 2 Tim 2:22 and Ecc 5:10 & 1 Tim 6:10

Song of Solomon was traditionally read at Passover - but no quotes.

Lamentations? I don't know. Apparently it enjoys credibility as being written by Jeremiah, but this authorship is assumed.

Should Esther be included? It really doesn't talk of God, nor is quoted in NT. In John 5:1, Jesus when to Jerusalem for a feast. We may assume that this is Purim, which is cited in Esther 9:28 and there is the Jews are told to always observe it. But that is sort of a tenuous connection to the NT in my estimation.