Apocrypha, use it, trust it?

Discussion in 'General Baptist Discussions' started by LorrieAB, Dec 24, 2005.

  1. LorrieAB

    LorrieAB
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2005
    Messages:
    34
    Likes Received:
    0
    Just wondering.
     
  2. TaterTot

    TaterTot
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    I wouldnt discount it. Wouldnt call it inspired scripture either. Theres some neat stuff in there, though. I am sure I will get blasted for that view though.
     
  3. nate

    nate
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2005
    Messages:
    811
    Likes Received:
    0
    I've seen more of this lately I believe especially the OT apocrypha is a good read but have heard it has errors and contradicts other parts of Scripture but can't confirm or deny this maybe someone else on here can.
     
  4. MatthewHenry

    MatthewHenry
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2005
    Messages:
    209
    Likes Received:
    0
    :eek: :eek: :eek:

    I would, RUN!, Not walk, Away from that. it is NOT the Inspired Word of God. and ANY Real Bible Believing Baptist, would not be caught dead reading that tripe. :mad:

    MH :D
     
  5. TaterTot

    TaterTot
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    I JUST got through saying I didnt think it was inspired. its a good read. Like Josephus. Not scripture, but enlightening. For me anyway. Maybe I am not a real Bible believing Baptist. :D
     
  6. PastorSBC1303

    PastorSBC1303
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2003
    Messages:
    15,125
    Likes Received:
    0
    :rolleyes: Yeah we wouldn't want to be educated on it or anything [​IMG]
     
  7. Paul of Eugene

    Paul of Eugene
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2001
    Messages:
    2,782
    Likes Received:
    0
    Its good for showing the way people were thinking at the time it was written. You learn they thought the world was 7 parts land and 1 part water, for instance.
     
  8. LorrieAB

    LorrieAB
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2005
    Messages:
    34
    Likes Received:
    0
    MH, funny you'd say that as I did have a BAD Spritual experence with the book of Enoch once. Long story, but I assure you that I pray on things like that BEFORE I read them now. Thanks for the input everyone.
     
  9. TaterTot

    TaterTot
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    Threw me for a loop first time I realized the book of Enoch was alluded to in the Bible. Heard it as a prospective seminary student in a NEw Testament class. Woooo!

    Just outta curiosity, Lorrie, why do you ask about it?
     
  10. mountainrun

    mountainrun
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2001
    Messages:
    567
    Likes Received:
    0
    I wouldn't compare it to Josephus at all, TaterTot. Josephus was recording history, albeit in a way that would not offend his Roman employers {which should be remembered when studying him}.

    The Apocrypha claims to be restoring some "lost" scriptures.

    Remember that Jesus never quoted from any of these books or the other 21 apocrypha known as "The Books of Eden."

    As far as I know, the Jews have never accepted these writings as scripture either, though I may be mistaken.

    The Catholic doctrine of purgatory finds it's roots in II Maccabees.

    Most of Catholic doctrine finds it's roots in the Apocrypha.
    TaterTot, I would most definitely discount it.

    Apocrypha means "hidden things" and Jesus said he did nothing in secret so I would stay in the Light.

    MR
     
  11. TaterTot

    TaterTot
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    The Comparison was that its not scripture, but may help our understanding of scripture
     
  12. PastorSBC1303

    PastorSBC1303
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2003
    Messages:
    15,125
    Likes Received:
    0
    The Apocrypha is considered a historical document. A comparison with Jospehus is legitimate.
     
  13. shannonL

    shannonL
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2005
    Messages:
    686
    Likes Received:
    0
    Nothing at all wrong with reading it. Just remember it is not a part of the canon of Scripture for a reason. Which is the fact that God did not want it to be because He had His reasons.
     
  14. mountainrun

    mountainrun
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2001
    Messages:
    567
    Likes Received:
    0
    Josephus does not claim to be scripture.
    The Apocrypha does. Note 4 Ezra, ch 1.

    A comparison is not legitimate.
    A document recording Judas Maccabeus belief in purgatory will not help us understand the Bible.

    Jesus didn't bother with it. Neither should we.
    Most of us spend little enough time in the Bible as it is without making a foray into false scriptures to satisfy our curiosity.

    MR
     
  15. mountainrun

    mountainrun
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2001
    Messages:
    567
    Likes Received:
    0
    Lorrie, Where are you from in Alaska, if you don't mind my asking? I was born in Fairbanks and raised in Clear. I was at Kenai in August and realized how much I miss it up there.

    MR
     
  16. Trotter

    Trotter
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/6412.jpg>

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2003
    Messages:
    4,815
    Likes Received:
    0
    The Jews didn't regard the extra-biblical books as scripture. The early church didn't either. I guess I agree with them.

    The Apocrypha contradicts the bible in several places, and adds things not found in scripture.

    Read it to see why it was not included in the canon, but steer clear as far as understadning the worg of God and doctrine.

    In Christ,
    Trotter
     
  17. PastorSBC1303

    PastorSBC1303
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2003
    Messages:
    15,125
    Likes Received:
    0
    Actually Jesus did bother with it...it is quoted in the New Testament.

    And it is a historical document. To claim otherwise is to be clueless as to what a historical document is and about.
     
  18. LorrieAB

    LorrieAB
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2005
    Messages:
    34
    Likes Received:
    0
    TaterTot, kind of got started looking there when the "fallen ones" came up. Then heard about this book of Enoch so I looked him up in Scripture and you have to admit it's kind of weird how little he's mentioned and how he just disappears... It gets a little more involved than that, but any more than that I think should be via PM.

    Mountainrun, I'm in the Copper River Basin near Copper Center. Don't know how you could have moved back to the lower 48, don't see myself doing that; but maybe I just haven't been up here long enough (~3.5 yrs.). Have a neighbor that came here from Mt., he came up here ~30 yrs. ago and he's now back in Mt. but keeps his place up here too. In fact, he's the one I bought my horses from (well 1 horse and a mule).
     
  19. StraightAndNarrow

    StraightAndNarrow
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2003
    Messages:
    2,508
    Likes Received:
    3
    The Apocrypha was included in the 1611 Authorized King James Bible. It was removed for later revisions including the one we use today. So, if you believe the Authorized 1611 KJV was the word of God you accept the Apropha.
     
  20. gb93433

    gb93433
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,496
    Likes Received:
    6
    Amazing how closely James follows Sirach.

    One should understand the context of the quotes from the pseudepigrapha and apocrypha to understand the parts of scripture where those historical books are quoted.

    There is a lot of the same imagery used in the NT which is used in the intertestamental books. A lot of nonsense has resulted from those who claim to understand the Bible when they do not understand the imagery of the time.
     

Share This Page

Loading...