| Author | Post |
|---|
cloudman
Member
| Joined: | Fri Aug 6th, 2004 |
| Location: | Lone Star State |
| Posts: | 14830 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 26th, 2009 05:53 pm |
|
The Apocrypha came up in another thread. I thought it would be interesting to see where this subject leads us.
http://www.bible.ca/catholic-apocrypha.htm
21 reasons why the Apocrypha is not inspired:
4. These books were never acknowledged as sacred Scriptures by the Jewish Church, and therefore were never sanctioned by our Lord.
8. The apocrypha contains offensive materials unbecoming of God’s authorship.
Ecclesiasticus 25:19 Any iniquity is insignificant compared to a wife's iniquity.
Ecclesiasticus 25:24 From a woman sin had its beginning. Because of her we all die.
Ecclesiasticus 22:3 It is a disgrace to be the father of an undisciplined, and the birth of a daughter is a loss.
9. It teaches immoral practices, such as lying, suicide, assassination and magical incantation.
|
BigE
Member
| Joined: | Mon Dec 26th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 4544 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 26th, 2009 10:05 pm |
|
cloudman wrote: The Apocrypha came up in another thread. I thought it would be interesting to see where this subject leads us.
http://www.bible.ca/catholic-apocrypha.htm
21 reasons why the Apocrypha is not inspired:
4. These books were never acknowledged as sacred Scriptures by the Jewish Church, and therefore were never sanctioned by our Lord. a) From Wiki: "Today, there is no scholarly consensus as to when the Jewish canon was set." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_canon b) And even if was set, why would Christians recognize the authority of Jewish Scholars over the Christian Church? Jewish Scholars also denied the NT writings and Christ. Are they right about God's sanctioning of those issues too? c) There is a further reason we should not rely on the first-century Jews for their determination of the canon, even if they had made such a determination: The rabbis of Jabneh eventually provided a new translation in Greek to replace their previous translation of the Septuagint. Why? Because the Gentile Christians were using the Septuagint for apologetic and evangelistic purposes—in other words, they were converting the Jews using their own Greek Scriptures. http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/2004/0409fea4.asp 8. The apocrypha contains offensive materials unbecoming of God’s authorship. Is this site arguing, and are you agreeing - that we should be using human reasoning to judge the Word of God? 9. It teaches immoral practices, such as lying, suicide, assassination and magical incantation. The Hebrew midwives lie to Pharaoh (Ex. 1:19), while Judges, in addition to presenting a situation similar to Judith (Judg. 4:17-22), also shows a man who offers his own daughter as a holocaust (Judg. 11:29-40) and another who gives his wife to a crowd to be raped to death in place of himself (Judg. 19:22-30), while Genesis shows Jacob being rewarded for stealing Esau's birthright (Gen. 25 and 27). http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/1998/9806fea2 Unfortunately the OT contains other less than edifying practices, for example: the deceit of Jacob in Genesis 27, incest in Genesis 19:32 and inhumanity in Psalm 137:9. Also in Hosea 1:2, God commands the prophet Hosea to marry a woman who would commit adultery. http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/resource.php?n=990
Last edited on Mon Oct 26th, 2009 10:08 pm by BigE
|
cloudman
Member
| Joined: | Fri Aug 6th, 2004 |
| Location: | Lone Star State |
| Posts: | 14830 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 26th, 2009 10:25 pm |
|
b) And even if was set, why would Christians recognize the authority of Jewish Scholars over the Christian Church? Jewish Scholars also denied the NT writings and Christ. Are they right about God's sanctioning of those issues too?
I believe you have misread the statement.
The Jewish church referred to is clearly before the time of Christ.
It is saying that even our "Lord", Jesus Christ, did not recognize the apocrypha as "inspired" scripture. Are you saying that is not a true statement, or that there is evidence Jesus did consider those books inspired?
|
BigE
Member
| Joined: | Mon Dec 26th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 4544 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 26th, 2009 11:53 pm |
|
cloudman wrote: b) And even if was set, why would Christians recognize the authority of Jewish Scholars over the Christian Church? Jewish Scholars also denied the NT writings and Christ. Are they right about God's sanctioning of those issues too?
I believe you have misread the statement.
The Jewish church referred to is clearly before the time of Christ.
It is saying that even our "Lord", Jesus Christ, did not recognize the apocrypha as "inspired" scripture. Are you saying that is not a true statement, or that there is evidence Jesus did consider those books inspired?
1) I was asking in general why you would rely on Jewish Scholars to decide what in the Christian faith is "inspired by God"? I did not misread your statement, as you were pointing to a lack of acceptance by the Jewish Church as a reason that some Christian OT Scripture should not be accepted. I just extended that logic to its natural conclusion.
2) Do you have a quote from Jesus saying the Apocrypha should be rejected? If not, then you do not have proof of your statement, only a Protestant interpretation...which of course I also have a Catholic interpretation. I'm sure we could go back and forth on this forever. Of course my interpretation is supported by the fact that the Apocrypha WAS included as part of the "Christian" Bible for a 1,000 years before the idea of Protestant vs Catholic was even a thought in someone's head.
3) And if a reference by Jesus is the only measurement of whether Scripture is inspired or not, then Joshua, Judges, Esther and other OT Books in the Protestant Bible would also have to be considered as not inspired.
4) But what authority do you recognize your Bible as "inspired"?
Last edited on Mon Oct 26th, 2009 11:55 pm by BigE
|
cloudman
Member
| Joined: | Fri Aug 6th, 2004 |
| Location: | Lone Star State |
| Posts: | 14830 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 27th, 2009 01:49 am |
|
BigE wrote: cloudman wrote: b) And even if was set, why would Christians recognize the authority of Jewish Scholars over the Christian Church? Jewish Scholars also denied the NT writings and Christ. Are they right about God's sanctioning of those issues too?
I believe you have misread the statement.
The Jewish church referred to is clearly before the time of Christ.
It is saying that even our "Lord", Jesus Christ, did not recognize the apocrypha as "inspired" scripture. Are you saying that is not a true statement, or that there is evidence Jesus did consider those books inspired?
1) I was asking in general why you would rely on Jewish Scholars to decide what in the Christian faith is "inspired by God"? I did not misread your statement, as you were pointing to a lack of acceptance by the Jewish Church as a reason that some Christian OT Scripture should not be accepted. I just extended that logic to its natural conclusion.
In that case, it was a stupid question.
There would be no one else that could possibly be an arbiter of "inspired" scripture before the time of Christ.
|
BigE
Member
| Joined: | Mon Dec 26th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 4544 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 27th, 2009 02:48 am |
|
cloudman wrote: BigE wrote: cloudman wrote: b) And even if was set, why would Christians recognize the authority of Jewish Scholars over the Christian Church? Jewish Scholars also denied the NT writings and Christ. Are they right about God's sanctioning of those issues too?
I believe you have misread the statement.
The Jewish church referred to is clearly before the time of Christ.
It is saying that even our "Lord", Jesus Christ, did not recognize the apocrypha as "inspired" scripture. Are you saying that is not a true statement, or that there is evidence Jesus did consider those books inspired?
1) I was asking in general why you would rely on Jewish Scholars to decide what in the Christian faith is "inspired by God"? I did not misread your statement, as you were pointing to a lack of acceptance by the Jewish Church as a reason that some Christian OT Scripture should not be accepted. I just extended that logic to its natural conclusion.
In that case, it was a stupid question.
There would be no one else that could possibly be an arbiter of "inspired" scripture before the time of Christ.
OK...I am confused.
Are you pointing to what you think Jewish Scholars accepted as Sacred Scriptures to support what you feel is inspired Christian Scripture or not?
Last edited on Tue Oct 27th, 2009 02:50 am by BigE
|
cloudman
Member
| Joined: | Fri Aug 6th, 2004 |
| Location: | Lone Star State |
| Posts: | 14830 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 28th, 2009 01:04 pm |
|
BigE wrote: cloudman wrote: The Apocrypha came up in another thread. I thought it would be interesting to see where this subject leads us.
http://www.bible.ca/catholic-apocrypha.htm
21 reasons why the Apocrypha is not inspired:
9. It teaches immoral practices, such as lying, suicide, assassination and magical incantation. The Hebrew midwives lie to Pharaoh (Ex. 1:19), while Judges, in addition to presenting a situation similar to Judith (Judg. 4:17-22), also shows a man who offers his own daughter as a holocaust (Judg. 11:29-40) and another who gives his wife to a crowd to be raped to death in place of himself (Judg. 19:22-30), while Genesis shows Jacob being rewarded for stealing Esau's birthright (Gen. 25 and 27). http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/1998/9806fea2 Unfortunately the OT contains other less than edifying practices, for example: the deceit of Jacob in Genesis 27, incest in Genesis 19:32 and inhumanity in Psalm 137:9. Also in Hosea 1:2, God commands the prophet Hosea to marry a woman who would commit adultery. http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/resource.php?n=990
Won't wash.
"Teaching" immoral practices it is not the same as recording instances of immoral human behavior.
|
cloudman
Member
| Joined: | Fri Aug 6th, 2004 |
| Location: | Lone Star State |
| Posts: | 14830 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 28th, 2009 01:07 pm |
|
BigE wrote: cloudman wrote: The Apocrypha came up in another thread. I thought it would be interesting to see where this subject leads us.
http://www.bible.ca/catholic-apocrypha.htm
21 reasons why the Apocrypha is not inspired:
8. The apocrypha contains offensive materials unbecoming of God’s authorship. Is this site arguing, and are you agreeing - that we should be using human reasoning to judge the Word of God?
Weak.
The Apocrypha is being judged in light of it's radical departures from truly "inspired" scripture.
|
BigE
Member
| Joined: | Mon Dec 26th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 4544 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 28th, 2009 01:19 pm |
|
cloudman wrote: BigE wrote: cloudman wrote: The Apocrypha came up in another thread. I thought it would be interesting to see where this subject leads us.
http://www.bible.ca/catholic-apocrypha.htm
21 reasons why the Apocrypha is not inspired:
9. It teaches immoral practices, such as lying, suicide, assassination and magical incantation. The Hebrew midwives lie to Pharaoh (Ex. 1:19), while Judges, in addition to presenting a situation similar to Judith (Judg. 4:17-22), also shows a man who offers his own daughter as a holocaust (Judg. 11:29-40) and another who gives his wife to a crowd to be raped to death in place of himself (Judg. 19:22-30), while Genesis shows Jacob being rewarded for stealing Esau's birthright (Gen. 25 and 27). http://www.catholic.com/thisrock/1998/9806fea2 Unfortunately the OT contains other less than edifying practices, for example: the deceit of Jacob in Genesis 27, incest in Genesis 19:32 and inhumanity in Psalm 137:9. Also in Hosea 1:2, God commands the prophet Hosea to marry a woman who would commit adultery. http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/resource.php?n=990
Won't wash.
"Teaching" immoral practices it is not the same as recording instances of immoral human behavior.
Interpret it any way you want Cloudman, because as I said before we can go round and round on "interpretation" forever without any resolution.
But it doesn't change the reality that this is all "after the fact" logic to justify the removal of 6 books that had been a part of the Christian Bible for 1,000 years before anyone even thought of Catholic vs Protestant.
And exactly which authority are you recognizing in determining which books are inspired?
|
BigE
Member
| Joined: | Mon Dec 26th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 4544 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 28th, 2009 01:26 pm |
|
cloudman wrote: BigE wrote: cloudman wrote: The Apocrypha came up in another thread. I thought it would be interesting to see where this subject leads us.
http://www.bible.ca/catholic-apocrypha.htm
21 reasons why the Apocrypha is not inspired:
8. The apocrypha contains offensive materials unbecoming of God’s authorship. Is this site arguing, and are you agreeing - that we should be using human reasoning to judge the Word of God?
Weak.
The Apocrypha is being judged in light of it's radical departures from truly "inspired" scripture.
So you are agreeing that humans should be judging what is the "inspired " word of God? Who exactly is qualified to make that judgement and how exactly do they do it?
|
cloudman
Member
| Joined: | Fri Aug 6th, 2004 |
| Location: | Lone Star State |
| Posts: | 14830 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 28th, 2009 04:49 pm |
|
BigE wrote: cloudman wrote: BigE wrote: cloudman wrote: The Apocrypha came up in another thread. I thought it would be interesting to see where this subject leads us.
http://www.bible.ca/catholic-apocrypha.htm
21 reasons why the Apocrypha is not inspired:
8. The apocrypha contains offensive materials unbecoming of God’s authorship. Is this site arguing, and are you agreeing - that we should be using human reasoning to judge the Word of God?
Weak.
The Apocrypha is being judged in light of it's radical departures from truly "inspired" scripture.
So you are agreeing that humans should be judging what is the "inspired " word of God? Who exactly is qualified to make that judgement and how exactly do they do it?
Already answered.
I would think you could do better.
But it is worth noting that none of the authors of the books in the Apocrypha claim to be inspired by God.
Last edited on Wed Oct 28th, 2009 04:51 pm by cloudman
|
Danokan
Member
|
Posted: Wed Oct 28th, 2009 05:14 pm |
|
BigE wrote: cloudman wrote: BigE wrote: cloudman wrote: The Apocrypha came up in another thread. I thought it would be interesting to see where this subject leads us.
http://www.bible.ca/catholic-apocrypha.htm
21 reasons why the Apocrypha is not inspired:
8. The apocrypha contains offensive materials unbecoming of God’s authorship. Is this site arguing, and are you agreeing - that we should be using human reasoning to judge the Word of God?
Weak.
The Apocrypha is being judged in light of it's radical departures from truly "inspired" scripture.
So you are agreeing that humans should be judging what is the "inspired " word of God? Who exactly is qualified to make that judgement and how exactly do they do it?
I agree with that statement BigE.
I think the issue of the Canon and the decisions made were well thought out and a very tedious process.
That is why (as far as I can tell) the apocrypha was NOT included in the original Canon at Jamnia.
|
BigE
Member
| Joined: | Mon Dec 26th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 4544 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 28th, 2009 05:49 pm |
|
cloudman wrote: BigE wrote: cloudman wrote: BigE wrote: cloudman wrote: The Apocrypha came up in another thread. I thought it would be interesting to see where this subject leads us.
http://www.bible.ca/catholic-apocrypha.htm
21 reasons why the Apocrypha is not inspired:
8. The apocrypha contains offensive materials unbecoming of God’s authorship. Is this site arguing, and are you agreeing - that we should be using human reasoning to judge the Word of God?
Weak.
The Apocrypha is being judged in light of it's radical departures from truly "inspired" scripture.
So you are agreeing that humans should be judging what is the "inspired " word of God? Who exactly is qualified to make that judgement and how exactly do they do it?
Already answered.
I would think you could do better.
But it is worth noting that none of the authors of the books in the Apocrypha claim to be inspired by God.
As always Cloudman, you start getting obscure when you begin to backpedal.
1) Should humans be deciding judging what is the inspired" word of God, yes or no?
2) If the answer to 1) above is yes, then who, and how?
|
BigE
Member
| Joined: | Mon Dec 26th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 4544 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 28th, 2009 06:06 pm |
|
Danokan wrote: BigE wrote: cloudman wrote: BigE wrote: cloudman wrote: The Apocrypha came up in another thread. I thought it would be interesting to see where this subject leads us.
http://www.bible.ca/catholic-apocrypha.htm
21 reasons why the Apocrypha is not inspired:
8. The apocrypha contains offensive materials unbecoming of God’s authorship. Is this site arguing, and are you agreeing - that we should be using human reasoning to judge the Word of God?
Weak.
The Apocrypha is being judged in light of it's radical departures from truly "inspired" scripture.
So you are agreeing that humans should be judging what is the "inspired " word of God? Who exactly is qualified to make that judgement and how exactly do they do it?
I agree with that statement BigE.
I think the issue of the Canon and the decisions made were well thought out and a very tedious process.
That is why (as far as I can tell) the apocrypha was NOT included in the original Canon at Jamnia.
1) Sounds like there is debate about the Council of Jamnia:
"Heinrich Graetz introduced the notion in 1871; based on Mishnaic and Talmudic sources, he concluded that there must have been a Council of Jamnia which had decided the Jewish canon sometime in the late 1st century. This became the prevailing scholarly consensus for much of the 20th century. However, from the 1960s onwards, based on the work of Jack P. Lewis, Sidney Z. Leiman, and others, this view came increasingly into question. In particular, later scholars noted that none of the sources actually mentioned books that had been withdrawn from a canon, and questioned the whole premise that the discussions were about canonicity at all, asserting that they were actually dealing with other concerns entirely."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Jamnia
|
cloudman
Member
| Joined: | Fri Aug 6th, 2004 |
| Location: | Lone Star State |
| Posts: | 14830 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 28th, 2009 06:18 pm |
|
BigE wrote: cloudman wrote: BigE wrote: cloudman wrote: BigE wrote: cloudman wrote: The Apocrypha came up in another thread. I thought it would be interesting to see where this subject leads us.
http://www.bible.ca/catholic-apocrypha.htm
21 reasons why the Apocrypha is not inspired:
8. The apocrypha contains offensive materials unbecoming of God’s authorship. Is this site arguing, and are you agreeing - that we should be using human reasoning to judge the Word of God?
Weak.
The Apocrypha is being judged in light of it's radical departures from truly "inspired" scripture.
So you are agreeing that humans should be judging what is the "inspired " word of God? Who exactly is qualified to make that judgement and how exactly do they do it?
Already answered.
I would think you could do better.
But it is worth noting that none of the authors of the books in the Apocrypha claim to be inspired by God.
As always Cloudman, you start getting obscure when you begin to backpedal.
1) Should humans be deciding judging what is the inspired" word of God, yes or no?
It is a silly question. However, since you want to belabor the obvious...
With God's inspiration and guidance, of course.
Always has been. And it was men that decided the Apocrypha was to be considered "inspired" when no one else, including the authors, ever believed it was.
Are you claiming the men who decided it was inspired, and no one else has been for thousands of years?
Try another line of obtuse reasoning.. This one is getting you no where.
Last edited on Wed Oct 28th, 2009 06:22 pm by cloudman
|
cloudman
Member
| Joined: | Fri Aug 6th, 2004 |
| Location: | Lone Star State |
| Posts: | 14830 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 28th, 2009 06:27 pm |
|
More reasons:
2. Not one of them is in the Hebrew language, which was alone used by the inspired historians and poets of the Old Testament.
7. The Apocrypha inculcates doctrines at variance with the Bible, such as prayers for the dead and sinless perfection.
"And making a gathering, he sent twelve thousand drachmas of silver to Jerusalem for sacrifice to be offered for the sins of the dead, thinking well and religiously concerning the resurrection, (For if he had not hoped that they that were slain should rise again, it would have seemed superfluous and vain to pray for the dead,) And because he considered that they who had fallen asleep with godliness, had great grace laid up for them. It is therefore a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead, that they may be loosed from sins." (2 Maccabees 12:39-46)
12. The Manual of Discipline in the Dead Sea Scrolls rejected the apocrypha as inspired.
16. The terms "protocanonical" and "deuterocanonical" are used by Catholics to signify respectively those books of Scripture that were received by the entire Church from the beginning as inspired, and those whose inspiration came to be recognized later, after the matter had been disputed by certain Fathers and local churches.
___________________________________
Heretical teaching is bolded.
|
Repenta
Member
|
Posted: Wed Oct 28th, 2009 06:48 pm |
|
Hi everyone, I have always wondered about the Apocrypha but have never read it. I respectfully ask this question:
I may be wrong but is not the account of the the Jewish Festival of the Dedication which is called Channukah (spelling varies) in the Apocrypha. I do not think this is in the Old Testament but I could be wrong.
it is mentioned that Jesus was in the Temple at this time? I believe it is in John: 22-39 but will have to check that.
Can anyone shed some light on this?
|
BigE
Member
| Joined: | Mon Dec 26th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 4544 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 28th, 2009 07:37 pm |
|
cloudman wrote: BigE wrote: cloudman wrote: BigE wrote: cloudman wrote: BigE wrote: cloudman wrote: The Apocrypha came up in another thread. I thought it would be interesting to see where this subject leads us.
http://www.bible.ca/catholic-apocrypha.htm
21 reasons why the Apocrypha is not inspired:
8. The apocrypha contains offensive materials unbecoming of God’s authorship. Is this site arguing, and are you agreeing - that we should be using human reasoning to judge the Word of God?
Weak.
The Apocrypha is being judged in light of it's radical departures from truly "inspired" scripture.
So you are agreeing that humans should be judging what is the "inspired " word of God? Who exactly is qualified to make that judgement and how exactly do they do it?
Already answered.
I would think you could do better.
But it is worth noting that none of the authors of the books in the Apocrypha claim to be inspired by God.
As always Cloudman, you start getting obscure when you begin to backpedal.
1) Should humans be deciding judging what is the inspired" word of God, yes or no?
It is a silly question. However, since you want to belabor the obvious...
Thank you for answering. It keeps things clear. With God's inspiration and guidance, of course.
Always has been. This is where I'm confused by your answer. "Who" then is it that receives or has received God's guidance and inspiration. The Early Church? The Church Fathers? Martin Luther? Can you or I decide what is "inspired"? And it was men that decided the Apocrypha was to be considered "inspired" when no one else, including the authors, ever believed it was. Are you claiming the men who decided it was inspired, and no one else has been for thousands of years? Yep, led by the Holy Spirit of course. I'm trying to figure out who you think was inspired to make that decision. Try another line of obtuse reasoning.. This one is getting you no where. I don't think its obtuse at all. I think it is a very pertinent question.
|
BigE
Member
| Joined: | Mon Dec 26th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 4544 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 28th, 2009 08:13 pm |
|
cloudman wrote: More reasons:
2. Not one of them is in the Hebrew language, which was alone used by the inspired historians and poets of the Old Testament.
Among the Dead Sea Scrolls were a number of manuscripts of the Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha.....
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/apocrypha.html
A complete list of the portions of the Apocrypha written Hebrew:
http://www.catholicapologetics.net/apocrypha_books__in_the_hebrew.htm
|
BigE
Member
| Joined: | Mon Dec 26th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 4544 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 28th, 2009 08:15 pm |
|
cloudman wrote: More reasons:
7. The Apocrypha inculcates doctrines at variance with the Bible, such as prayers for the dead and sinless perfection.
"And making a gathering, he sent twelve thousand drachmas of silver to Jerusalem for sacrifice to be offered for the sins of the dead, thinking well and religiously concerning the resurrection, (For if he had not hoped that they that were slain should rise again, it would have seemed superfluous and vain to pray for the dead,) And because he considered that they who had fallen asleep with godliness, had great grace laid up for them. It is therefore a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead, that they may be loosed from sins." (2 Maccabees 12:39-46)
Which is of course why they were "removed" from the Bible by Protestants after the Reformation.
|
Current time is 08:05 pm | Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ...   |
|
