The canonised Old Testament is no different from the Apocrypha except with more scary fables and mythology

by fukitol 16 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Doug Mason

  For a comprehensive and detailed listing of "quotations, allusions and parallels to the New Testament", see "Ancient Texts for New Testament Studies: A Guide to the Background Literature", pages 342 - 409, by Craig A. Evans (Baker Academic, 2005).

  The same book provides a comprehensive summary of "The Old Testament Apocrypha" (pages 9-25) and also of "The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha" (pages 26-75).
  

  Doug
  
• 

  Connie

  I understand the Roman Catholic canon was fixed by the time of the Council of Hippo in 393, according to the preface of the New Revised Standard Version. I also understand that in the first century, Christians were using the Greek Septuagint and quoting from it, so that the Jewish Rabbis wanted to distance themselves from this translation. The Greek Septuagint contains the additional books which are not found in the Protestant Canon. At the end of the first century the Jewish Rabbis established a new canon which only included books that were written in Hebrew and Aramaic, thus excluding these additional books found in the Septuagint. I have found "Where We Got the Bible" by Henry G. Graham to be helpful. But I also learned a lot about the history of the Bible and its authenticity when researching the DaVinci Code apologetic. Some of the research I did on that subject went into a lot of detail on the Gnostic writings, and the formation of the New Testament Canon. You could also check out the early church writings which are available on-line at the New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia website and I also research using the Jewish Encyclopedia. I also enjoy Craig Evans and have several of his books on the historical Jesus. He also has a lot on YouTube you can watch.
• 

  opusdei1972

  As mentioned before, books like Wisdom of Solomon, were quoted by early Christians. Even the canonical book of Jude quotes the book of Enoch. So, how could a canonical inspired book quote an uninspired book as it were inspired??. Of course, the Book of Enoch contains many fantasies, but the same happens with the canonical books. So, there is no such a thing as "divine books".
  
• 

  Doug Mason

  opusdei,

  Those early Christians were focused on the person, now known as Jesus Christ. The initial Christians were not interested in writing - even their Leader Jesus left nothing in writing. The earliest written material comes from 49 CE by the Apostle Paul - who never witnessed Jesus. Indeed, none of the writers either saw or heard Jesus.

  Paul's writings were local instructions covering specific topics, never intended to be read as Scripture. This attitude gradually changed as we see in the letters falsely attributed to Peter, written about 150 CE.

  Paul was focused completely on local issues because he fully expected Jesus to return during his own lifetime. Paul had no vision for a long future( which is one reason we know he did not write those letters that discuss organisational matters, such as the appointment of elders.)
  

  When they started to document their thoughts, these writers searched the Hebrew texts with the sole intent of supporting their predetermined ideas about a Person - Jesus Christ. So they selectively quoted texts that they could twist to mean that the Hebrew texts applied to Jesus. So they did not quote texts because they considered them to be "inspired".

  The writers of the NT never claim that their writings were "inspired". The sole text brought up by Fundamentalists uses a unique word "theopneustos" - literally meaning "God-breathed", but used only once (by someone who pretended to be Paul - so much for his/her inspiration).

  A small but very interesting book, "A High View of Scripture?" by Allert puts a lot of this into perspective.

  Investigate "Higher Criticism".

  Doug
  
• 

  Doug Mason

  Connie,

  Hippo is in Algeria, North Africa. A Synod was held at that time, not a Council. And the decision made in North Africa corresponds with the canon later accepted by the Church of Rome. I presume but do not know if Rome was invited to Hippo.

  The power base of early Christianity lay in North Africa - Carthage and Alexandria in particular, with the Eastern Church having great influence (as per the Council of Nicea, where Rome was an observer only).

  The 4th and 5th centuries saw the bloodiest conflicts between Christians, based solely on doctrinal differences (think of the current civil war among Muslim sects, but many times worse). These conflicts weakened the Christian Church's hold in North Africa, enabling the Muslims to take over, and Christianity moved northwards to Europe, and thus Christianity became a European religion, with its Middle Eastern origins taken over by European cultures.

  Doug
  
• 

  Connie

  Doug,

  I have found several other references to a council of Hippo, I am not sure what the difference is between a synod and a council. I think both terms are made up of a council of bishops. I am a little confused, but I guess the point is that already by 393 a list of accepted books was drafted which later became the canon as we know it today. Thanks for your insightful comments.

  Connie
• 

  fukitol

  You really do mix facts with rubbish Doug.

  I'm still waiting for the quotes from the apocrypha in the NT that you asserted exist. Please produce them.