What is the main reason why the Apocrypha doesn’t belong in the Bible?

[Andrew]

I guess the Holy KJV 1611 wasn't completely Holy to begin with... "Apocrypha" is NOT a fancy word for "uninspired" NOR does it mean "Non Canon".. Jerome labeled it that ONLY because POST Christianity unbelieving Jews in Jerusalem a thousand years later did not include them in the Masoretic which is obviously flawed and contradicts the perfect NT Gospel according to the NEW TESTAMENT..

The Masoretic if you don't already know is the later POST Christian era JEWISH "canon" that is the OT in your KJV bibles today.. along with the updated versions from that bible..

The prejudice is towards early Christians who held these OT greek translations as Gods words as proven in early pre Nicene church letters.

But I guess they were just silly men and women who were martyred btw and who held the Septuagint as the early Word of God predating the NT, such a fool was Clement who was obviously ignorant in discerning which OT books were inspired or not.. :/

 

[atpollard]

I guess the Holy KJV 1611 wasn't completely Holy to begin with... "Apocrypha" is NOT a fancy word for "uninspired" NOR does it mean "Non Canon".. Jerome labeled it that ONLY because POST Christianity unbelieving Jews in Jerusalem a thousand years later did not include them in the Masoretic which is obviously flawed and contradicts the perfect NT Gospel according to the NEW TESTAMENT..

The Masoretic if you don't already know is the later POST Christian era JEWISH "canon" that is the OT in your KJV bibles today.. along with the updated versions from that bible..

The prejudice is towards early Christians who held these OT greek translations as Gods words as proven in early pre Nicene church letters.

But I guess they were just silly men and women who were martyred btw and who held the Septuagint as the early Word of God predating the NT, such a fool was Clement who was obviously ignorant in discerning which OT books were inspired or not.. :/

Do you believe that one can earn the favor of God by doing good works?
(Some books in the Apocrypha teach that you can, but the Apostle Paul emphatically teaches that you cannot. Which is mistaken?)

Do you believe Paul when he writes “to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord” and John when he writes in John 3:18 that “He who believes in Him (Jesus) is not judged” or do you believe that our sins must still be burned away in the refining fire of purgatory like some books in the Apocrypha teach?

The inter testament books were not excluded because of Jewish prejudice. They were excluded because they contradict scripture or contain glaringly false statements.

How much poison do you want in your food before you feel that it is bad for you?

 

[Andrew]

Do you believe that one can earn the favor of God by doing good works?
(Some books in the Apocrypha teach that you can, but the Apostle Paul emphatically teaches that you cannot. Which is mistaken?)

Do you believe Paul when he writes “to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord” and John when he writes in John 3:18 that “He who believes in Him (Jesus) is not judged” or do you believe that our sins must still be burned away in the refining fire of purgatory like some books in the Apocrypha teach?

The inter testament books were not excluded because of Jewish prejudice. They were excluded because they contradict scripture or contain glaringly false statements.

How much poison do you want in your food before you feel that it is bad for you?

The "Apocrypha" are not from the New Testament, so "favor of God by doing good works" is nothing new in the Old Testament, but I have heard this argument before so please cite exactly what passages bring you to the conclusion that the Apocrypha preaches keeping the Law that's any different from the Torah or our modern day Masoretic KJV.

As for Purgatory, no book in the Apocrypha teaches this, regardless of what the RCC or Protestants claim.

Judas Maccabee and his men saw that their fellow comrades who had died in battle were all found wearing pagan charms and therefore the reason they died was due to their sin.
Judas and his men collected offerings to take to the Temple and to purchase animals with for sacrifice on behalf of these fallen men to cover their sins... now why we Judas do that? To commemorate them in hopes that they may receive a better Resurrection, and while expecting a prophet to raise the dead the hope was that the offering would atone for their sin when the Messiah came.
They believed in the Resurrection!
They believed in the coming Messiah!
Did the offerings actually benefit their lost men??? Who knows! but it was the HOPE of a RESURRECTION through the coming SAVIOR that compelled him to take up an offering.
The RCC ignored Christ's atonement with the dogma of purgatory because they were taking an OT passage that was in favor of sacrifices (for the Lord had not yet come) and exploited it for monetary gain.
Jesus is the final, one and only sacrifice for sins.
The RCC and Luther both took it out of context and for obvious reasons.. While the RCC used it to justify prayers and offerings to the dead via indulgence to save them from limbo/purgatory, Luther denied it because well... he was a Catholic himself.. and thus likewise believed that the heretical church dogmas came from 2nd Maccabees (which is not true) thus 2nd Maccabees was thrown out of the protestant bible but equally thrown out of context by both the RCC and Protestants, probably why it's so undesired along with many other books...

 

[Andrew]

Do you believe that one can earn the favor of God by doing good works?
(Some books in the Apocrypha teach that you can, but the Apostle Paul emphatically teaches that you cannot. Which is mistaken?)

Do you believe Paul when he writes “to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord” and John when he writes in John 3:18 that “He who believes in Him (Jesus) is not judged” or do you believe that our sins must still be burned away in the refining fire of purgatory like some books in the Apocrypha teach?

The inter testament books were not excluded because of Jewish prejudice. They were excluded because they contradict scripture or contain glaringly false statements.

How much poison do you want in your food before you feel that it is bad for you?

Pop quiz (take your time)

How many of Jacob's descendents went into Egypt?

A: 70

B: 75

 

[NathanH83]

Do you believe that one can earn the favor of God by doing good works?
(Some books in the Apocrypha teach that you can, but the Apostle Paul emphatically teaches that you cannot. Which is mistaken?)

Do you believe Paul when he writes “to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord” and John when he writes in John 3:18 that “He who believes in Him (Jesus) is not judged” or do you believe that our sins must still be burned away in the refining fire of purgatory like some books in the Apocrypha teach?

The inter testament books were not excluded because of Jewish prejudice. They were excluded because they contradict scripture or contain glaringly false statements.

How much poison do you want in your food before you feel that it is bad for you?

The apocrypha doesn’t teach purgatory.

 

[Andrew]

"Judith, too, became perfect among women. In the siege of the city, at the entreaty of the elders, she went forth into the stranger's camp, despising all danger for her country's sake."
-Clement of Alexandria (c 195)

 

[Andrew]

Some more crazy early Christians quoting and referencing "uninspired" books

 

[Josiah]

Pop quiz (take your time)

How many of Jacob's descendents went into Egypt?

A: 70

B: 75

Not answerable in this thread since this issue is not so much as even mentioned in ANY book that ANY denomination regards to be a DEUTEROcanonical or Apocrypha book. Since no such book mentions this, it's an irrelevant question here.

 

[Andrew]

Not answerable in this thread since this issue is not so much as even mentioned in ANY book that ANY denomination regards to be a DEUTEROcanonical or Apocrypha book. Since no such book mentions this, it's an irrelevant question here.

It's relevant, because the same Hebrew sources that was used for the greek translation included the "Apocrypha", it also included the same number of Jacobs household that Stephen the Martyr states...
So.. what's the answer? 70 or 75?

 

[Josiah]

It's relevant, because the same Hebrew sources that was used for the greek translation included the "Apocrypha", it also included the same number of Jacobs household that Stephen the Martyr states...
So.. what's the answer? 70 or 75?

Which book - accepted as "Apocrypha" by some denomination - has the answer?

If none, then friend, it's irrelevant to this thread. This thread is about why some books are rejected by some as Apocrypha.

 

[Andrew]

Which book - accepted as "Apocrypha" by some denomination - has the answer?

If none, then friend, it's irrelevant to this thread. This thread is about why some books are rejected by some as Apocrypha.

Sad you can't just answer a simple question, it regards why the EOC accepts the Apocrypha.. They would proudly give the answer as 75, because they hold the Septuagint over the Masoretic, the latter doesn't include any Apocrypha.. it's a relevant question because it involves the EOC and their doctrine which includes the Apocrypha.. 70 or 75?

 

[atpollard]

Sad you can't just answer a simple question, it regards why the EOC accepts the Apocrypha.. They would proudly give the answer as 75, because they hold the Septuagint over the Masoretic, the latter doesn't include any Apocrypha.. it's a relevant question because it involves the EOC and their doctrine which includes the Apocrypha.. 70 or 75?

Can you provide any indication that the books of the Apocrypha were ever viewed as part of the sacred writings of the Jewish Nation? They predate the coming of Christ, so the issue is one of God’s Holy Scripture to the nation of Israel.

Jesus defined it as “the Law and the Prophets” (which was an idiom for the three parts of the sacred scripture ... and did not include the Apocrypha)
Jesus defined the first and last prophet-martyr as “from Abel to Zacharias“ which excludes the Apocrypha.

The Early Church Fathers quoted what was available, including gnostic texts at points, which the Apostle John makes clear are the “antichrist”. So an ECF quote only proves that the text existed and THAT LINE was true in the opinion of that ECF. The Apostles performed signs and wonders to verify their authority and establish that God was truly with them, did all of the ECF have their writings so verified by God? Did any of the Apocrypha?

For me, personally, the fact that Jesus rejected the Apocrypha by defining scripture in terms excluding it and setting the bookmarks on the blood of the martyrs for that generation far outweighs anything that any ECF might have quoted in passing or what books those that rejected Christ chose to circulate in Greek.

 

[Andrew]

Can you provide any indication that the books of the Apocrypha were ever viewed as part of the sacred writings of the Jewish Nation? They predate the coming of Christ, so the issue is one of God’s Holy Scripture to the nation of Israel.

Jesus defined it as “the Law and the Prophets” (which was an idiom for the three parts of the sacred scripture ... and did not include the Apocrypha)
Jesus defined the first and last prophet-martyr as “from Abel to Zacharias“ which excludes the Apocrypha.

The Early Church Fathers quoted what was available, including gnostic texts at points, which the Apostle John makes clear are the “antichrist”. So an ECF quote only proves that the text existed and THAT LINE was true in the opinion of that ECF. The Apostles performed signs and wonders to verify their authority and establish that God was truly with them, did all of the ECF have their writings so verified by God? Did any of the Apocrypha?

For me, personally, the fact that Jesus rejected the Apocrypha by defining scripture in terms excluding it and setting the bookmarks on the blood of the martyrs for that generation far outweighs anything that any ECF might have quoted in passing or what books those that rejected Christ chose to circulate in Greek.

The ECF did NOT just take in whatever they got their hands on.. They strictly forbade gnostic stories in fact they spoke about them with great consistency and authority concerning what is NOT accepted as Gods words!
Yet they quote the "Apocrypha" over 300 times as Jewish OT Holy Scripture.
The pictures I posted above are just a few.. but NONE of these ECF accepted any gnostic text! They completely shut them down and warn against exactly what they were teaching! At the same time they were referring to "Apocrypha" books the same way they were referencing any other Jewish Holy Scripture at the time.
How exactly do you believe God handed down the completed Hebrew text to the gentiles in the first century to the point that the Corinthians understood what Clement was speaking about?
The LAW refers to the TORAH, "History" is included throughout the Tanakh! So either you take the TORAH as Gods ONLY words to the Jews, or you accept the wisdom, prophets, history and other Jewish writings that predated Christianity (that somehow gentiles were very aware of and familiar with during the 1rst century)..
6 Jews to each of the 12 tribes of Israel translated the Hebrew into Greek for the greek speaking Jews just before the dawn of Christianity, if you have a better suggestion then please edify me of how these ECF were quoting from the Apocrypha for CENTURIES while perfectly discerning against all gnostic propaganda and stories. You see God handed the Hebrew scrolls to the greeks through Alexandria, a kingdom that was prophesied just as Luther mentioned regarding the book of Daniel and 1rst Maccabees.

Please cite where Jesus says that Esdras was not a prophet or that the feast of dedication which he celebrated was unspoken of or written about, or how the much later Masoretic revision holds the correct number of chapters of Daniel opposed to the sections that ECF quotes and referenced over and over again.

I guarantee you that they were blessed with Gods words as handed to them and were given the Holy gift of discernment regarding false gnostic gospels!

 

[Josiah]

The ECF quote the "Apocrypha" over 300 times as Jewish OT Holy Scripture.

Which Apocrypha? That of the Ethiopean Orthodox Church? That of the Anglican Church? That of the Catholic Church? Which?


I've love to see this substantiated.... Did all the Early Church Fathers (and we're talking HUNDREDS of men) specifically QUOTE verbatim from some set of books that some denomination (It would not be more than one denomination) formally accepts as "APOCRYPHA" and when quoting such they state, "THIS is from an inerrant, verbally inspired, inscripturated words of God and thus the canon/rule/norm for doctrine" Or even "thus saith the Lord" or even "thus saith canonical Scripture?" And all of them did this 309 times? I'd love to see the proof of that.



.

 

[Josiah]

why the EOC accepts the Apocrypha..

Which EOC?

What Apocrypha?

If "they" (whoever "they" are) accept some unknown number of books as "Apocrypha" then "they" don't accept "them" as Scripture.

I's a relevant question because it involves the EOC and their doctrine which includes the Apocrypha.

I know of no dogma of any Eastern Orthodox Church that is normed by any book a part of the "66." And if something "they" include is "the Apocrpha" then by definition such "they" are not accepted as Scripture but as Apocrypha.

 

[Andrew]

Which EOC?

What Apocrypha?

If "they" (whoever "they" are) accept some unknown number of books as "Apocrypha" then "they" don't accept "them" as Scripture.






I know of no dogma of any Eastern Orthodox Church that is normed by any book a part of the "66." And if something "they" include is "the Apocrpha" then by definition such "they" are not accepted as Scripture but as Apocrypha.

I like to use bunny ears when I use the word Apocrypha (hence "Apocrypha") for the sake of the books Luther threw out, that were in the original king james and were included in the Septuagint, stop setting up straw men "denominational canon" arguments. I mean the entire Septuagint, whatever books you despise and that Luther threw in the garbage as "uninspired" are the books I am talking about.. you know which ones they are

 

[Andrew]

Btw the term "Apocrypha" did not exist in the times of the ECF.. It was used by Jerome when he believed the Jews, the same Jews that deem the NT as blasphemy so.. there ya go

 

[NathanH83]

Which Apocrypha? That of the Ethiopean Orthodox Church? That of the Anglican Church? That of the Catholic Church? Which?


I've love to see this substantiated.... Did all the Early Church Fathers (and we're talking HUNDREDS of men) specifically QUOTE verbatim from some set of books that some denomination (It would not be more than one denomination) formally accepts as "APOCRYPHA" and when quoting such they state, "THIS is from an inerrant, verbally inspired, inscripturated words of God and thus the canon/rule/norm for doctrine" Or even "thus saith the Lord" or even "thus saith canonical Scripture?" And all of them did this 309 times? I'd love to see the proof of that.



.

The Catholics, Greek Orthodox, and Ethiopian Orthodox churches - all three of these accept the books of 1 and 2 Maccabees, Judith, Tobit, Wisdom, Sirach, and Baruch, plus the extra chapters in Daniel and Esther.

There are ones they disagree upon, like 3 and 4 Maccabees, or 3 and 4 Esdras, and Enoch, and a few others.

But when it comes to the ones ALL 3 agree upon (the ones which the Protestants have flippantly and carelessly thrown down the garbage disposal).....
.....those are the ones we’re talking about.

[edit]

 

[atpollard]

2 Maccabees 12

39 On the next day, as by that time it had become necessary, Judas and his men went to take up the bodies of the fallen and to bring them back to lie with their kinsmen in the sepulchres of their fathers. 40 Then under the tunic of every one of the dead they found sacred tokens of the idols of Jam′nia, which the law forbids the Jews to wear. And it became clear to all that this was why these men had fallen. 41 So they all blessed the ways of the Lord, the righteous Judge, who reveals the things that are hidden; 42 and they turned to prayer, beseeching that the sin which had been committed might be wholly blotted out. And the noble Judas exhorted the people to keep themselves free from sin, for they had seen with their own eyes what had happened because of the sin of those who had fallen. 43 He also took up a collection, man by man, to the amount of two thousand drachmas of silver, and sent it to Jerusalem to provide for a sin offering. In doing this he acted very well and honorably, taking account of the resurrection. 44 For if he were not expecting that those who had fallen would rise again, it would have been superfluous and foolish to pray for the dead. 45 But if he was looking to the splendid reward that is laid up for those who fall asleep in godliness, it was a holy and pious thought. Therefore he made atonement for the dead, that they might be delivered from their sin.​

I would post an OT verse on the subject of making offerings for the dead, except there are none. All OT offerings are made by the living for the living. From the NT, we get ...

[Heb 9:27 NASB] 27 And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this [comes] judgment,

[Jhn 3:16-18 NASB] 16 "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. 17 "For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him. 18 "He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

Which directly contradicts the notion of buying forgiveness for the dead.

Even the books that you want to include in scripture, acknowledge that they were not written by prophets of God:

1 Maccabees 9: 27 So there was great distress in Israel, such as had not been since the time that prophets ceased to appear among them.​

 

[Andrew]

2 Maccabees 12

39 On the next day, as by that time it had become necessary, Judas and his men went to take up the bodies of the fallen and to bring them back to lie with their kinsmen in the sepulchres of their fathers. 40 Then under the tunic of every one of the dead they found sacred tokens of the idols of Jam′nia, which the law forbids the Jews to wear. And it became clear to all that this was why these men had fallen. 41 So they all blessed the ways of the Lord, the righteous Judge, who reveals the things that are hidden; 42 and they turned to prayer, beseeching that the sin which had been committed might be wholly blotted out. And the noble Judas exhorted the people to keep themselves free from sin, for they had seen with their own eyes what had happened because of the sin of those who had fallen. 43 He also took up a collection, man by man, to the amount of two thousand drachmas of silver, and sent it to Jerusalem to provide for a sin offering. In doing this he acted very well and honorably, taking account of the resurrection. 44 For if he were not expecting that those who had fallen would rise again, it would have been superfluous and foolish to pray for the dead. 45 But if he was looking to the splendid reward that is laid up for those who fall asleep in godliness, it was a holy and pious thought. Therefore he made atonement for the dead, that they might be delivered from their sin.​

I would post an OT verse on the subject of making offerings for the dead, except there are none. All OT offerings are made by the living for the living. From the NT, we get ...

[Heb 9:27 NASB] 27 And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this [comes] judgment,

[Jhn 3:16-18 NASB] 16 "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. 17 "For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him. 18 "He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

Which directly contradicts the notion of buying forgiveness for the dead.

Even the books that you want to include in scripture, acknowledge that they were not written by prophets of God:

1 Maccabees 9: 27 So there was great distress in Israel, such as had not been since the time that prophets ceased to appear among them.​

Christ's atonement had not yet come, it was only commendable at the time, it was the HOPE, not DOGMA, that Maccabees was teaching.. This is a teaching that Jews LATER rejected as it implied such a Resurrection via a Messianic figure, the passage clearly suggest that they were in dire hopes of sacrifice to justify a better resurrection, it did NOT imply a dogma for the commentator said it was commemorated as hopeful but never suggests that it did the men any good.
Again, this was BEFORE Christ's coming!
You also wont find "Forgiveness" in the OT through Faith, only the LAW/Torah.