Recently a pastor friend of mine here in town asked me what my opinion was on Apocryphal literature, and I sent him this reply: hey man, well I guess it really depends on what your definition of apocryphal is. If you mean stuff like the Gospel of Judas or Thomas I see them as nothing more then heretical books that the Church identified early as not divinely inspired or by their supposed author. I believe by as early as 187 A.D. the Church had recognized that their were only 4 true Gospels (mind you this was at least 200 years before the Church would vote on a canon). The debate over the other 23 books would take a couple of centuries.
On the other hand the epistles written by the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th generation of bishops, priests, apologists, etc... (Early Church Fathers) show us a great glimpse into the faith that was passed down by the disciples.
However, if you mean the 7 extra books in my Old Testament that don't appear in your Old Testament then I have to give a hearty amen to them. From what I read at the time of Jesus when the Alexandrian Canon and Palestinian Canons were floating around (no Jewish canon would be set until the council of Jamnia around 90 A.D.) the Alexandrian Canon contained 46 books including the 7 extra, as opposed to the Palestinian Canon containing only 39. Perhaps the missing 7 books were due to Jewish hatred towards all things Roman or Greek.
It appears that the majority of the time when Jesus or the Apostles quote the Old Testament they use the Greek (Alexandrian) translation or Septuagint as opposed to the Hebraic (Palestinian). So that would lead me to believe they were very familiar with the Alexandrian Canon containing the 7 extra books. In fact the earliest canons produced by the Councils of Carthage and Hippo use a 46 book Old Testament.
History shows us an Old Testament containing no less then 46 books was used up until the reformation when Luther, with his German Bible, removed the 7 books. When you remove 2nd Maccabees you don't have to explain why the Jews made prayers for the dead. As you may also know he lobbied to remove 2nd Peter, 2nd John, 3rd John, Hebrews, James, and Revelation. The closest he got was moving James to the concordance (he felt chapter 2 disagreed with his belief in sola fide) and adding the word "alone" to the statement saved by faith in Romans.
But beyond History I like reading them. 1st Maccabees and 2nd Maccabees give us a great look into Jewish history at the time of the beginning of Roman Occupation. The 5 other books offer great wisdom and insight into the character of God.
On the other hand the epistles written by the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th generation of bishops, priests, apologists, etc... (Early Church Fathers) show us a great glimpse into the faith that was passed down by the disciples.
However, if you mean the 7 extra books in my Old Testament that don't appear in your Old Testament then I have to give a hearty amen to them. From what I read at the time of Jesus when the Alexandrian Canon and Palestinian Canons were floating around (no Jewish canon would be set until the council of Jamnia around 90 A.D.) the Alexandrian Canon contained 46 books including the 7 extra, as opposed to the Palestinian Canon containing only 39. Perhaps the missing 7 books were due to Jewish hatred towards all things Roman or Greek.
It appears that the majority of the time when Jesus or the Apostles quote the Old Testament they use the Greek (Alexandrian) translation or Septuagint as opposed to the Hebraic (Palestinian). So that would lead me to believe they were very familiar with the Alexandrian Canon containing the 7 extra books. In fact the earliest canons produced by the Councils of Carthage and Hippo use a 46 book Old Testament.
History shows us an Old Testament containing no less then 46 books was used up until the reformation when Luther, with his German Bible, removed the 7 books. When you remove 2nd Maccabees you don't have to explain why the Jews made prayers for the dead. As you may also know he lobbied to remove 2nd Peter, 2nd John, 3rd John, Hebrews, James, and Revelation. The closest he got was moving James to the concordance (he felt chapter 2 disagreed with his belief in sola fide) and adding the word "alone" to the statement saved by faith in Romans.
But beyond History I like reading them. 1st Maccabees and 2nd Maccabees give us a great look into Jewish history at the time of the beginning of Roman Occupation. The 5 other books offer great wisdom and insight into the character of God.
No comments:
Post a Comment