I have found Neil R. Lightfoot's work about the Bible canon to be a helpful resource. (But for a more detailed account, see Bruce Metzger's work on the NT canon.) Lightfoot outlines seven reasons to "reject" the Deuterocanonicals (also known as the Apocrypha):
1. The books "were never" included in the OT canon.
2. Lightfoot also writes: "These books, as far as the evidence goes, were
never accepted as canonical by Jesus and his apostles." Neither the apostles
nor Jesus quoted from the Apocrypha.
3. No Jewish writer of the first century (such as Philo or Josephus) accepted these books as genuine. Jerome (translator of the Latin Vulgate) likewise believed that these books were "apocryphal."
4. The apocryphal writings contain historical, chronological, and geographical
errors. See Judith 1:1.
5. "There is no evidence that the [LXX] ever had a fixed or closed canon of
books."
6. The books cannot be maintained "on a compromise basis." I.e. The Deuterocanonicals may possibly supplement (at times) or conversely be at odds with Scripture. Therefore, these works must not be accepted at all.
7. The "Roman Catholic Church" pronounced the OT Apocrypha (except 2 Esdras
and the Prayer of Manasseh) as "authoritative and canonical Scripture" at the Council of Trent. Yet conciliar authority is not a sufficient condition for determining a work to be canonical. Prior to Trent, Lightfoot states, there were officials of the "Roman Church" who spoke out against the canonicity of apocryphal works.
These points can be found on pp. 121-122 of Lightfoot's book, the Second edition which was published by the Baker Pub Group in August 1988. The work has since been updated.
Regards,
Edgar
Wednesday, October 19, 2011
Seven Reasons for Excluding the Deuterocanonicals from the Biblical Canon
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
https://readingacts.com/2021/01/28/is-judith-historically-inaccurate/
Not the only one that is historically inaccurate it would seem.
I wouldn't be surprised if other deuterocanonicals were historically inaccurate.
https://www.catholiceducation.org/en/religion-and-philosophy/apologetics/5-myths-about-7-books.html
1. The assertion that these books were never included in the Old Testament canon is historically inaccurate. The Septuagint (LXX), the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible widely used by Jews before and during the time of Christ, included the Deuterocanonicals. The early Christian Church, including major centers of Christianity, also used the Septuagint, which is why these books were accepted in the early Church. Furthermore, several early Church Fathers referenced the Deuterocanonicals as authoritative Scripture, and they were widely used in the liturgy of the early Church. The Council of Trent did not invent their inclusion; it confirmed what had been used for centuries.
2. While it is true that Jesus and the apostles did not directly quote the Deuterocanonicals, this argument is flawed. Many other Old Testament books (e.g., Esther, Ecclesiastes) were also never directly quoted by Jesus or the apostles, yet they are universally accepted as canonical. The mere absence of quotations does not imply rejection. Additionally, the themes and ideas from the Deuterocanonicals, such as prayers for the dead (2 Maccabees 12:45–46), are echoed in the New Testament, indicating an implicit acceptance of their content.
3. Josephus and Philo reflect one segment of Jewish tradition, but they do not represent the entire Jewish experience. Other Jewish communities, especially those outside of Palestine, used the Septuagint, which contained the Deuterocanonicals. Jerome’s early hesitation about the Deuterocanonicals is often cited, but it must be noted that he eventually included them in the Vulgate at the Church's request, respecting the authority of the Church. Furthermore, Jerome's personal opinions do not outweigh the tradition of the early Church as a whole, which had already accepted these books.
4. The presence of historical or geographical difficulties is not unique to the Deuterocanonical books; even universally accepted books like Genesis and Daniel present challenges in terms of modern historical-critical methods. Furthermore, many of these "errors" are misunderstandings or are exaggerated. Ancient texts should not be judged by modern standards of historiography, as their primary purpose is theological, not strictly historical. Moreover, allegory, symbolism, and theological messaging were often prioritized over precise historical detail.
5. While the precise boundaries of the Septuagint’s canon may have been fluid, it is indisputable that the early Christians, including Greek-speaking Jews, used the Septuagint as their primary scripture. The fact that the canon was not fully closed until later does not detract from the Deuterocanonicals' widespread use and acceptance. Early Christian writers such as Irenaeus, Origen, and Augustine recognized the Deuterocanonicals as part of the canon. The process of canonization was gradual for all parts of the Bible, including books that Protestants accept as canonical.
6. The claim that the Deuterocanonicals are at odds with Scripture is unfounded. The theological themes found in these books, such as the resurrection of the dead, the importance of almsgiving, and the intercession of the saints, are fully in line with Christian teaching. Any perceived conflicts are often due to differences in interpretation or the lack of an understanding of the context of the writings. The Church, in its wisdom, saw these books as fully complementary to the rest of Scripture.
7. The Council of Trent did not create a new canon; it reaffirmed what had been long accepted by the Church. While it is true that individuals such as Jerome and certain Church officials had differing opinions on the Deuterocanonicals, the broader tradition of the Church consistently used these books. The authority of the Church is essential in the process of canonization, as evidenced by the fact that it was the Church that definitively recognized the New Testament canon as well. The canon is not self-evident; it required the discernment of the Church, guided by the Holy Spirit, to establish.
Post a Comment