1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Apocrypha

Discussion in 'Fundamental Baptist Forum' started by The Scribe, Jan 22, 2008.

  1. The Scribe

    The Scribe New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    952
    Likes Received:
    0
    bbas 64,

    They were rejected for seven reasons..says this site.

    The reason are good ones.
     
  2. cowboymatt

    cowboymatt New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2008
    Messages:
    350
    Likes Received:
    0
    Some clarifications:

    The RCC views the Apocrypha as deutero-canonical, that is canonical but of a secondary nature, while the Orthodox Church retains it in their Bibles though not as fully canonical (though useful for teaching). Protestants generally ignore the Apocrypha altogether or simply view it as useful to set the stage for the NT.

    The books of the Apocrypha pre-date the NT and generally believed to have been written later than the OT documents. The Pseudepigrapha is basically all the other non-canonical, non-Apocryphal documents from around this same period (a few of which are from the first century though most pre-date the NT).

    There is a distinction between OT Apocrypha and NT Apocrypha. Tobit, the Maccabees, Wisdom of Solomon, etc are OT Apocrypha, whereas the Gospels of Thomas, Mary, Judas, etc, and the Acts of Peter, Paul, etc, are NT Apocrypha. Basically, if a book is non-canonical and deals with pre-Jesus stuff then it is considered OT Apocrypha and if it deals with post-Jesus stuff and is not considered part of the Church Fathers, then it's NT Apocrypha.

    The OT Apocrypha is not Gnostic. Gnosticism did not come into fruition until around AD 150, a date much later than all of the books in the OT Apocrypha. However, virtually all of the documents of the NT Apocrypha are Gnostic, which, along with their late dates and loose apostolic connections, is the reason they aren't included in the NT.

    The original KJV contained the Apocrypha because the Greek texts they translated from did, which is the same reason why the Orthodox Church has kept them as well. However, when translators of the Bible like Luther and others during the Reformation wanted to get back to the original languages of the biblical writers, they did not find the Apocrypha in the Masoretic Text (the most common Hebrew text of the OT) or any other versions of the OT in Hebrew. Therefore, since they were translating from the Hebrew and not the Greek they did not include the Apocrypha.

    I think that The Scribe's point about the original KJV having the Apocrypha is a tough question for the KJVO folks to deal with, especially those that assert that the Greek texts used by the translators of the KJV are inspired.
     
  3. StefanM

    StefanM Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,333
    Likes Received:
    210
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Apologies for my error regarding NT apocrypha.
     
  4. cowboymatt

    cowboymatt New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2008
    Messages:
    350
    Likes Received:
    0
    Its all good!
     
  5. EdSutton

    EdSutton New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    I suspect "a 611 version" is the version of jerome, namely, the Vulgate, no? [​IMG] [​IMG]

    Ed
     
  6. Linda64

    Linda64 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2004
    Messages:
    2,051
    Likes Received:
    0
    Way of Life Encyclopedia
    APOCRYPHA


    The word apocrypha is derived from the Greek abscondita, which historically identified writings which had an obscure origin or which were heretical. In the Talmud the Jewish rabbis used this word to describe works which were not canonical Scripture. The term has come to be applied particularly to the 15 books added to the Roman Catholic Bible but ordinarily rejected by non-Catholics. These were written during the two hundred years preceding and one hundred years following Christ's birth. The Roman Catholic Church considers most of these writings to be part of the inspired Scripture. In 1546 the Council of Trent decreed that the canon of the O.T. should include them (except the Prayer of Manasseh and I and II Esdras) ... the decree pronounces an anathema upon anyone who "does not accept as sacred and canonical the aforesaid books in their entirety and with all their parts" (The Oxford Annotated Apocrypha, pp. x,xv).

    The Council of Trent was an attempt by the Catholic Church to counteract the Protestant Reformation with its battle cry of "faith alone" and "Scripture alone." By adding the Apocrypha to the canon of Scripture, the Catholic Church, in effect, rendered the rest of the Bible impotent. "The books named in the decree [of Trent] include the apocryphal Old Testament books, and placed unwritten traditions of the church upon an equal footing with Holy Scriptures as approved of Christ or of the Holy Spirit. Any appeal to Holy Scripture as expressing the supreme will of God was thereafter useless in the Latin Church" (Edwin W. Rice, Our Sixty-six Sacred Books, p. 112).

    continued...
     
  7. Linda64

    Linda64 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2004
    Messages:
    2,051
    Likes Received:
    0
    Way of Life Encyclopedia
    APOCRYPHA


    THE FIFTEEN APOCRYPHAL BOOKS

    I and II Esdras

    Tobit

    Judith

    The additions to the Book of Esther

    The Wisdom of Solomon

    Ecclesiasticus, or the Wisdom of Jesus the Son of Sirach

    Baruch

    The Letter of Jeremiah

    The Prayer of Azariah & the Song of the Three Young Men

    Susanna

    Bel and the Dragon

    The Apocrypha have a variety of content. Some are histories of events concerning the Jews. Some are short sayings similar to the Proverbs. Some are sermons; others are like novels. One purports to be symbolical prophecy.

    Why reject the Apocrypha:


    It is important that God's people understand why the Apocryphal books (also called the Deuterocanonical Books) are rejected from the canon of inspired Scripture. Because of ecumenical activities involving the Roman Catholic Church, there is an increasing tendency for publishers to include the Apocryphal writings with the Bible. This is being done by the United Bible Societies in many languages. By 1981, for example, the American Bible Society had published over 500,000 copies of the Today's English Version with the Apocryphal books included. In the mid-1980s I visited the Bible Society book depot in Calcutta, India, and was shown massive stacks of Revised Standard Version Bibles containing the Apocrypha. These had been published by the American Bible Society and shipped to India for distribution. The 1992-93 American Bible Society catalog of Scripture Resources lists at least nine different Bibles containing the Apocrypha.
     
    #27 Linda64, Jan 22, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 23, 2008
  8. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K) Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    80
    Major issue here of course is that the 1611 King James Bible also included the Apocrypha and included it in cross references and the list of suggested daily readings. .


    Just a note Linda, Bro. Cloud has a paragraph that he requests always accompany any information copied and pasted from his site. Thanks.

     
    #28 NaasPreacher (C4K), Jan 23, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 23, 2008
  9. Linda64

    Linda64 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2004
    Messages:
    2,051
    Likes Received:
    0
    That was my Bible software---it didn't come from David Cloud's website. I didn't post the entire article. It is perfectly legal to post portions of articles and books according to U.S copyright laws, and that is what I did.

     
    #29 Linda64, Jan 23, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 23, 2008
  10. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K) Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    80
    I am not questioning the legality or ethics of your posts. Bro Cloud graciously allows the use of his materials, but he is particular about the way he wants them credited. I am not sure about the software, but I would guess that he would want more than just the title of the source used.

    Thank you for adding this note above:

    [...is not to be copied or distributed without the written consent of Brother David Cloud]

    At the very least the full copyright info should be given.

    I disagree with Bro Cloud on many issues, but as an author he is due full recognition for his work.
     
    #30 NaasPreacher (C4K), Jan 23, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 23, 2008
  11. rbell

    rbell Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    11,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm devastated.

    All this time, I thought that it was spelled,

    Now I find out, there's not an apocryphal book named after me.

    Oh, the humanity!
    :tonofbricks:
     
  12. Linda64

    Linda64 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2004
    Messages:
    2,051
    Likes Received:
    0
    I also disagree with Bro. Cloud on some issues, but most know that the Way of Life Encyclopedia/Things Hard To Be Understood was written by David Cloud. In the future when I use his material, I'll add David Cloud's name.
     
  13. bbas 64

    bbas 64 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Messages:
    57
    Likes Received:
    0
    Good Day, Ed

    611 = Vulgate :thumbs:

    :wavey: LOL

    In Him,

    Bill
     
  14. jesusrules3

    jesusrules3 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2008
    Messages:
    8
    Likes Received:
    0
    The reason the apocrypha is not included in most Bibles is because they were not inspired by God.We know that they werent inspired because the Jews did not include them in their OT Canon,and Romans 3:1-3 says this about the Jews:

    1 So what advantage does the Jew have? Or what is the benefit of circumcision? 2 Considerable in every way. First, they were entrusted with the spoken words of God. 3 What then? If some did not believe, will their unbelief cancel God's faithfulness?
    The Jews were entrusted with the Scripture.They didnt include the Apocrypha in their canon because it wasnt inspired.It was written from 300 B.C. to 100 B.C.,after all of God's prophets had died.And also,if it was inspired,Why didnt Jesus or any of the apostles quote from them?
     
  15. cowboymatt

    cowboymatt New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2008
    Messages:
    350
    Likes Received:
    0
    But what about the quotes from non-canonical and non-Apocryphal stuff in Jude? Does that mean that those books are inspired by your logic? Or just the words that were quoted?
     
  16. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K) Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    80
    All posters, please note:

    The following is a personal note from Bro. Cloud.

    He is our brother in Christ. Lets honour his request.
     
  17. Gold Dragon

    Gold Dragon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    Messages:
    5,143
    Likes Received:
    149
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    I wrote a relatively long post on the history of the Apocrypha in this thread a while back that gives my long answer to these questions.
     
  18. readmore

    readmore New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2007
    Messages:
    250
    Likes Received:
    0
    I hate to sound like I'm nit-picking, but does he not want entire articles posted, or are people not even allowed to quote his articles? I can understand not wanting your articles reposted on other websites, but not being able to quote them?
     
  19. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K) Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    80
    Legally, of course, short sections of articles could be posted, as long as they are fully documented, like a footnote, but our brother's request is that his material not be posted.
     
  20. jesusrules3

    jesusrules3 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2008
    Messages:
    8
    Likes Received:
    0
    it just seems that Jude took that particular verse in the book of Enoch as the genuine word of Enoch whose story is told in Genesis 5:18-24.just because he quotes 1 verse,doesnt mean that the rest of the book or the apocrypha is inspired.
     
Loading...