Apocrypha accuracy

Discussion in '2004 Archive' started by Phillip, Nov 27, 2004.

  1. Phillip

    Phillip
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't think anybody here will argue with the fact that the apocrypha is not part of the Bible canon.

    My question is, how accurate is the apocrypha historically?

    I assume the Macabees are fairly close to reality since they seem to match other sources of history such as Josephus (although his accuracy has been questioned).

    How about the other books?

    Since the Apocrypha was Pre-New Testament, I assume it was written in Hebrew (except for its translation in the Septuagint).

    I assume that none of it was Aramiac, correct?
     
  2. Turpius

    Turpius
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2004
    Messages:
    407
    Likes Received:
    0
    It is my understanding that I Macc is more reliable than II Macc, more objective, although I have recently been informed that I Macc has a few historical problems of it's own.

    Judith and Tobit have definite chronological mistakes.

    I Esdras is basically a repeat of a collection of verses from Ezra, II Chronicles, with a couple of fanciful tales added.

    not sure about the rest of them.
     
  3. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    II Mac 12:44 in the AV "For if he [Judas Maccabeus] had not hoped that they that were slaine should haue risen againe, it had be superfluous and vaine to pray for the dead."

    That is HORRENDOUS ERROR neatly stuck in these false books. I reject them.
     
  4. Rich_UK

    Rich_UK
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/6181.jpg>

    Joined:
    May 26, 2003
    Messages:
    389
    Likes Received:
    0
    Also the Apocrypha says Tobit was alive when the Assyrians conquered Israel in 722 B.C. and also when Jeroboam revolted against Judah in 931 B.C. which would make him at least 209 years old yet according to the account, he died when he was only 158 years....wrong!

    I've heard that another error is found in the Book of Judith where it Nebuchadnezzar reigned in Nineveh instead of Babylon. Although the exact name is "Nabuchodonosor"....don't know why this is or if this is even actually the same person.
     
  5. mioque

    mioque
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2003
    Messages:
    3,899
    Likes Received:
    0
    Judith and Tobit are certainly fiction and probably were never intended by their authors to be seen as anything but.

    I Macc. is as good an historical account as you will get from that era (meaning that it is far from perfect).

    The additions to Esther were added to make it more of a religious text. Ofcourse some would claim that the whole of Esther belongs in the same category as Tobit and Judith.

    The story of Susannah and the elders was probably intended as an introduction to Daniƫl. It's most likely fictional.
     
  6. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    In comparing the tradition OT text with apocryphal additions, one might wonder why Esther or Jonah were included in the list of "inspired" books, rather than just "historical".

    While Esther has a moral lesson, its ommission of any reference to God is puzzling.

    And as a fisherman, I've had some stories of big fish that rival Jonah.

    (I believe them, of course, both inspired. But arguments have been made . . . )
     
  7. Charles Meadows

    Charles Meadows
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2003
    Messages:
    2,276
    Likes Received:
    0
    The apocrypha exists only in Greek. Given its provenance we would assume there may have been some Aramaic or Hebrew vorlage but we don't know.

    None of the books should be considered historically accurate, especially 2 Maccabees.

    There's a reason they're not in the Bible!
     
  8. Phillip

    Phillip
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    While Martin Luther questioned James because of the heavy emphasis on "works"; I have always wondered about the Song of Solomon. I get a little tired of hearing pastors explain this is an example of how to treat your wife, when the man was writing about one of his many concubines.

    Dr. Bob, I never meant that we should accept the apocrypha, only questioning the historical accuracy. I know what was said about the prayer for the dead, but is it possible that he actually said that? (Doesn't make it right.)
     
  9. mioque

    mioque
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2003
    Messages:
    3,899
    Likes Received:
    0
    Phillip
    "I have always wondered about the Song of Solomon."
    "
    Solomon may have been the author of the piece, he isn't one of the main protagonists in it.
     

Share This Page

Loading...