-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
21 reasons why the Apocrypha is not inspired:
The Roman Catholic Church did not officially canonize the Apocrypha until the Council of Trent (1546 AD). This was in part because the Apocrypha contained material which supported certain Catholic doctrines, such as purgatory, praying for the dead, and the treasury of merit.
Not one of them is in the Hebrew language, which was alone used by the inspired historians and poets of the Old Testament
Not one of the writers lays any claim to inspiration.
These books were never acknowledged as sacred Scriptures by the Jewish Church, and therefore were never sanctioned by our Lord.
They were not allowed a place among the sacred books, during the first four centuries of the Christian Church.
They contain fabulous statements, and statements which contradict not only the canonical Scriptures, but themselves; as when, in the two Books of Maccabees, Antiochus Epiphanes is made to die three different deaths in as many different places.
The Apocrypha inculcates doctrines at variance with the Bible, such as prayers for the dead and sinless perfection.
The apocrypha contains offensive materials unbecoming of God's authorship.
-Ecclesiasticus 25:19 Any iniquity is insignificant compared to a wife's iniquity.
-Ecclesiasticus 25:24 From a woman sin had its beginning. Because of her we all die.
-Ecclesiasticus 22:3 It is a disgrace to be the father of an undisciplined, and the birth of a daughter is a loss.
It teaches immoral practices, such as lying, suicide, assassination and magical incantation
The apocryphal books themselves make reference to what we call the Silent 400 years, where there was no prophets of God to write inspired materials.
-And they laid up the stones in the mountain of the temple in a convenient place, till there should come a prophet, and give answer concerning them. (1 Maccabees 4:46)
-And there was a great tribulation in Israel, such as was not since the day, that there was no prophet seen in Israel. (1 Maccabees 9:27)
-And that the Jews, and their priests, had consented that he should be their prince, and high priest for ever, till there should arise a faithful prophet. (1 Maccabees 14:4)
Josephus rejected the apocryphal books as inspired and this reflected Jewish thought at the time of Jesu"From Artexerxes to our own time the complete history has been written but has not been deemed worthy of equal credit with the earlier records because of the failure of the exact succession of the prophets." ... "We have not an innumerable multitude of books among us, disagreeing from and contradicting one another, but only twenty-two books, which contain the records of all the past times; which are justly believed to be divine..."(Flavius Josephus, Against Apion 1:8)
The Manual of Discipline in the Dead Sea Scrolls rejected the apocrypha as inspired.
The Council of Jamnia held the same view rejected the apocrypha as inspired.
They debated the canonicity of a few books (e.g., Ecclesiastes), but they changed nothing and never proclaimed themselves to be authoritative determiners of the Old Testament canon. "The books which they decided to acknowledge as canonical were already generally accepted, although questions had been raised about them. Those which they refused to admit had never been included. They did not expel from the canon any book which had previously been admitted. 'The Council of Jamnia was the confirming of public opinion, not the forming of it.'" (F. F. Bruce, The Books and Parchments [Old Tappan, NJ.: Fleming H. Revell, 1963], p. 98])
Although it was occasionally quoted in early church writings, it was nowhere accepted in a canon. Melito (AD 170) and Origen rejected the Apocrypha, (Eccl. Hist. VI. 25, Eusebius) as does the Muratorian Canon.
Jerome vigorously resisted including the Apocrypha in his Latin Vulgate Version (400 AD), but was overruled. As a result, the standard Roman Catholic Bible throughout the medieval period contained it. Thus, it gradually came to be revered by the average clergyman. Still, many medieval Catholic scholars realized that it was not inspired.
The terms "protocanonical" and "deuterocanonical" are used by Catholics to signify respectively those books of Scripture that were received by the entire Church from the beginning as inspired, and those whose inspiration came to be recognized later, after the matter had been disputed by certain Fathers and local churches.
Pope Damasus (366-384) authorized Jerome to translate the Latin Vulgate. The Council of Carthage declared this translation as "the infallible and authentic Bible." Jerome was the first to describe the extra 7 Old Testament books as the "Apocrypha" (doubtful authenticity). Needless to say, Jerome's Latin Vulgate did not include the Apocrypha.
Cyril (born about A.D. 315) - "Read the divine Scriptures - namely, the 22 books of the Old Testament which the 72 interpreters translated" (the Septuagint).
The apocrypha wasn't included at first in the Septuagint, but was appended by the Alexandrian Jews, and was not listed in any of the catalogues of the inspired books till the 4th century.
Hilary (bishop of Poictiers, 350 A.D.) rejected the apocrypha (Prologue to the Psalms, Sec. 15).
Epiphanius (the great opposer of heresy, 360 A.D.) rejected them all. Referring to Wisdom of Solomon & book of Jesus Sirach, he said "These indeed are useful books & profitable, but they are not placed in the number of the canonical." http://www.bible.ca/catholic-apocrypha.htm
The Roman Catholic Church did not officially canonize the Apocrypha until the Council of Trent (1546 AD). This was in part because the Apocrypha contained material which supported certain Catholic doctrines, such as purgatory, praying for the dead, and the treasury of merit.
Not one of them is in the Hebrew language, which was alone used by the inspired historians and poets of the Old Testament
Not one of the writers lays any claim to inspiration.
These books were never acknowledged as sacred Scriptures by the Jewish Church, and therefore were never sanctioned by our Lord.
They were not allowed a place among the sacred books, during the first four centuries of the Christian Church.
They contain fabulous statements, and statements which contradict not only the canonical Scriptures, but themselves; as when, in the two Books of Maccabees, Antiochus Epiphanes is made to die three different deaths in as many different places.
The Apocrypha inculcates doctrines at variance with the Bible, such as prayers for the dead and sinless perfection.
The apocrypha contains offensive materials unbecoming of God's authorship.
-Ecclesiasticus 25:19 Any iniquity is insignificant compared to a wife's iniquity.
-Ecclesiasticus 25:24 From a woman sin had its beginning. Because of her we all die.
-Ecclesiasticus 22:3 It is a disgrace to be the father of an undisciplined, and the birth of a daughter is a loss.
It teaches immoral practices, such as lying, suicide, assassination and magical incantation
The apocryphal books themselves make reference to what we call the Silent 400 years, where there was no prophets of God to write inspired materials.
-And they laid up the stones in the mountain of the temple in a convenient place, till there should come a prophet, and give answer concerning them. (1 Maccabees 4:46)
-And there was a great tribulation in Israel, such as was not since the day, that there was no prophet seen in Israel. (1 Maccabees 9:27)
-And that the Jews, and their priests, had consented that he should be their prince, and high priest for ever, till there should arise a faithful prophet. (1 Maccabees 14:4)
Josephus rejected the apocryphal books as inspired and this reflected Jewish thought at the time of Jesu"From Artexerxes to our own time the complete history has been written but has not been deemed worthy of equal credit with the earlier records because of the failure of the exact succession of the prophets." ... "We have not an innumerable multitude of books among us, disagreeing from and contradicting one another, but only twenty-two books, which contain the records of all the past times; which are justly believed to be divine..."(Flavius Josephus, Against Apion 1:8)
The Manual of Discipline in the Dead Sea Scrolls rejected the apocrypha as inspired.
The Council of Jamnia held the same view rejected the apocrypha as inspired.
They debated the canonicity of a few books (e.g., Ecclesiastes), but they changed nothing and never proclaimed themselves to be authoritative determiners of the Old Testament canon. "The books which they decided to acknowledge as canonical were already generally accepted, although questions had been raised about them. Those which they refused to admit had never been included. They did not expel from the canon any book which had previously been admitted. 'The Council of Jamnia was the confirming of public opinion, not the forming of it.'" (F. F. Bruce, The Books and Parchments [Old Tappan, NJ.: Fleming H. Revell, 1963], p. 98])
Although it was occasionally quoted in early church writings, it was nowhere accepted in a canon. Melito (AD 170) and Origen rejected the Apocrypha, (Eccl. Hist. VI. 25, Eusebius) as does the Muratorian Canon.
Jerome vigorously resisted including the Apocrypha in his Latin Vulgate Version (400 AD), but was overruled. As a result, the standard Roman Catholic Bible throughout the medieval period contained it. Thus, it gradually came to be revered by the average clergyman. Still, many medieval Catholic scholars realized that it was not inspired.
The terms "protocanonical" and "deuterocanonical" are used by Catholics to signify respectively those books of Scripture that were received by the entire Church from the beginning as inspired, and those whose inspiration came to be recognized later, after the matter had been disputed by certain Fathers and local churches.
Pope Damasus (366-384) authorized Jerome to translate the Latin Vulgate. The Council of Carthage declared this translation as "the infallible and authentic Bible." Jerome was the first to describe the extra 7 Old Testament books as the "Apocrypha" (doubtful authenticity). Needless to say, Jerome's Latin Vulgate did not include the Apocrypha.
Cyril (born about A.D. 315) - "Read the divine Scriptures - namely, the 22 books of the Old Testament which the 72 interpreters translated" (the Septuagint).
The apocrypha wasn't included at first in the Septuagint, but was appended by the Alexandrian Jews, and was not listed in any of the catalogues of the inspired books till the 4th century.
Hilary (bishop of Poictiers, 350 A.D.) rejected the apocrypha (Prologue to the Psalms, Sec. 15).
Epiphanius (the great opposer of heresy, 360 A.D.) rejected them all. Referring to Wisdom of Solomon & book of Jesus Sirach, he said "These indeed are useful books & profitable, but they are not placed in the number of the canonical." http://www.bible.ca/catholic-apocrypha.htm
D
The letters in the Bible were compiled from all the important papers and all the sacred text protected during the 200 years Christians were in hiding because governments were trying to wipe them out. They took their important papers with them into the catacombs, caves, and hiding places. And they were broken up into very small groups for safety sake, so they weren't in constant contact with all the other groups.
And yet, each small cell did the same thing. They separated their important papers into two groups -- very good papers they liked and the ones they'd rather die for then give up. The first pile of papers was hidden well. The second pile was hidden further back and much better. The logic was simple -- if they were caught, the authorities would ransack their dwelling to confiscate all the illegal writings. And, when they found the pile of illegal papers, they might think that's all there were and then not search for the second pack, thus protecting the most sacred.
When Constantine became the ruler, Christians came out of hiding and brought their papers with them. And they finally got to see each other openly, without fear of being killed.
And something miraculous happened. Every group picked the same papers to protect with their lives. The Apocrypha was the group of papers hidden so if they were found, the really important papers might be protected. Important, but not important enough to die for. The ones that were worth dying for? That's what our Bible is today. That's what the Nicene Council decided was God's word, at the same time they dismissed the false gospels (Gospel of Thomas, Gospel of Mary Magdalene, Gospel of Jesus, etc.) One book caused a debate that lasted clear through into the Middle Ages -- James. The majority kept it in the worth-dying-for pile, but a huge group kept that one in the very-important group, so the vote was divided and the argument continued.
But to think it is back down to opinion millenniums later? I trust the men who were alive and made that decision in the 4th century more than any opinion given in the 21st century. This debate already happened. And the history of it doesn't change. This is one that can be researched, so there is no purpose in arguing it this much later... other than people just want to argue without knowing the facts are already out and have been out for 1500 years.
And yet, each small cell did the same thing. They separated their important papers into two groups -- very good papers they liked and the ones they'd rather die for then give up. The first pile of papers was hidden well. The second pile was hidden further back and much better. The logic was simple -- if they were caught, the authorities would ransack their dwelling to confiscate all the illegal writings. And, when they found the pile of illegal papers, they might think that's all there were and then not search for the second pack, thus protecting the most sacred.
When Constantine became the ruler, Christians came out of hiding and brought their papers with them. And they finally got to see each other openly, without fear of being killed.
And something miraculous happened. Every group picked the same papers to protect with their lives. The Apocrypha was the group of papers hidden so if they were found, the really important papers might be protected. Important, but not important enough to die for. The ones that were worth dying for? That's what our Bible is today. That's what the Nicene Council decided was God's word, at the same time they dismissed the false gospels (Gospel of Thomas, Gospel of Mary Magdalene, Gospel of Jesus, etc.) One book caused a debate that lasted clear through into the Middle Ages -- James. The majority kept it in the worth-dying-for pile, but a huge group kept that one in the very-important group, so the vote was divided and the argument continued.
But to think it is back down to opinion millenniums later? I trust the men who were alive and made that decision in the 4th century more than any opinion given in the 21st century. This debate already happened. And the history of it doesn't change. This is one that can be researched, so there is no purpose in arguing it this much later... other than people just want to argue without knowing the facts are already out and have been out for 1500 years.
1
Many good answers so far.
In summary form the apocrypha included in the original King James are considered historical books. Much of that history only reveals evil and has no teaching or rebuke against those evils. If considered inspired, those teachings about past evils some might try to make acceptable practices, and thus those books no longer placed aside the scriptural books.
The Nag Hammadi and other texts and gospels are not considered as a part of these historical books. It is interesting that for similar but perhaps deeper and darker reasons parts of Daniel (Bel and the Dragon, Sussanah) were left out of the inspired texts. The book of Enoch might fall into both of the latter categories tho I find it [also] to be a good read ...
In summary form the apocrypha included in the original King James are considered historical books. Much of that history only reveals evil and has no teaching or rebuke against those evils. If considered inspired, those teachings about past evils some might try to make acceptable practices, and thus those books no longer placed aside the scriptural books.
The Nag Hammadi and other texts and gospels are not considered as a part of these historical books. It is interesting that for similar but perhaps deeper and darker reasons parts of Daniel (Bel and the Dragon, Sussanah) were left out of the inspired texts. The book of Enoch might fall into both of the latter categories tho I find it [also] to be a good read ...
I didn't misjudge. Some people may compare my posts and your posts in this thread and guess why I said what I said.
Part of Philippians 3:1
It is no trouble for me to write the same things to you again, and it is a safeguard for you.
I didn't post anything wrong. God has wanted me to post in the way I have posted.
There are parts of the Apocrypha that are very similar to those found in the Bible. An example is found in Tobit that describes the new Jerusalem in a way close to that found in Revelation. Bearing in mind that Tobit was written a lot
earlier than NT books I conclude that John must have been familiar with it, and the Holy Spirit brought it to his mind. Another example is the quotation from the book of Enoch in Jude. Before the Reformation these books were treated by the Church as part of the Bible. The Protestant OT is based on the Hebrew version of the Bible. Most early Christians used the Greek version which included these books. There is a lot of controversy over them. Before dismissing them out of hand it should be remembered that Martin Luther didn't want the book of James in the Bible either.
earlier than NT books I conclude that John must have been familiar with it, and the Holy Spirit brought it to his mind. Another example is the quotation from the book of Enoch in Jude. Before the Reformation these books were treated by the Church as part of the Bible. The Protestant OT is based on the Hebrew version of the Bible. Most early Christians used the Greek version which included these books. There is a lot of controversy over them. Before dismissing them out of hand it should be remembered that Martin Luther didn't want the book of James in the Bible either.
You clarify nothing. If you assumed I did not read it, you were wrong, plain and simple.
You deceive yourself.
You keep saying that. I don't believe you any more now than the first time.
You think you are led by the Holy Spirit of God and that others are not.
You seem to be in need of Scripture here. Try Luke 18:11-14.
You deceive yourself.
You keep saying that. I don't believe you any more now than the first time.
You think you are led by the Holy Spirit of God and that others are not.
You seem to be in need of Scripture here. Try Luke 18:11-14.
when we start to mature in Christ and the scriptures, after many years of living our old carnal life and then
after our conversion, I mean when we can truly look back and see our old selves and realize that
we really were depraved and lost, and when we can discern that we are being led and brought
into the Body of Christ, only then are we able to 'get-into and understand' the True Love/Word of God',
then, this brings each of us a certain confidence and finality that absolutely no one can take away or
steal/rob from us...it is a done deal'...the only problem is, others cannot fathom this, unless
our Holy Father also tells them His secret...so, it really doesn't matter if they get it or not,
although we pray that they do...for we must live according to how our Heavenly Father commands,
teaches us, for there is no other way to live a life of real Truth...
even though the deceiver never gives up his quest to steal us away from our Master...
after our conversion, I mean when we can truly look back and see our old selves and realize that
we really were depraved and lost, and when we can discern that we are being led and brought
into the Body of Christ, only then are we able to 'get-into and understand' the True Love/Word of God',
then, this brings each of us a certain confidence and finality that absolutely no one can take away or
steal/rob from us...it is a done deal'...the only problem is, others cannot fathom this, unless
our Holy Father also tells them His secret...so, it really doesn't matter if they get it or not,
although we pray that they do...for we must live according to how our Heavenly Father commands,
teaches us, for there is no other way to live a life of real Truth...
even though the deceiver never gives up his quest to steal us away from our Master...
Last edited:
What may you think proves that precisely ? I didn't say anything wrong to you.
Like I said, I didn't misjudge. Some people may compare my posts and your posts in this thread and guess why I said what I said.
What may you think proves that precisely ? I'm led by The Holy Spirit.
I didn't judge you would believe it. I'm not boasting, I have posted more than 300 posts in this website. I have sent many private messages.
I have never said I'm the only one led by The Holy Spirit. I'm led by the Holy Spirit. God knows you will never prove that I am not led by The Holy Spirit.
I judge it's right to appreciate people working to say things to be helpful to me. Before you said that, I wasn't thinking more highly of myself than I should.
Like I said, I didn't misjudge. Some people may compare my posts and your posts in this thread and guess why I said what I said.
What may you think proves that precisely ? I'm led by The Holy Spirit.
I didn't judge you would believe it. I'm not boasting, I have posted more than 300 posts in this website. I have sent many private messages.
I have never said I'm the only one led by The Holy Spirit. I'm led by the Holy Spirit. God knows you will never prove that I am not led by The Holy Spirit.
I judge it's right to appreciate people working to say things to be helpful to me. Before you said that, I wasn't thinking more highly of myself than I should.
J
if the Apocrypha books were never accepted by Jews and Christians or "anyone" then why were they included in the septuagint which was 200 years before Jesus was teaching. if many of the Apostles were teaching in Greece, speaking in Greek and writing in Greek, which collection of books you think they would have used when doing their assembly readings?
J
Matthew 7:16-20
[SUP]16 [/SUP]By their fruit you will recognize them.[SUP](A)[/SUP] Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles?[SUP](B)[/SUP] [SUP]17 [/SUP]Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. [SUP]18 [/SUP]A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit.[SUP](C)[/SUP] [SUP]19 [/SUP]Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.[SUP](D)[/SUP] [SUP]20 [/SUP]Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.
Sirach 27:6-7 (Apocrypha)
[SUP]6 [/SUP][SUP](A)[/SUP]You can tell how well a tree has been cared for by the fruit it bears, and you can tell a person's feelings by the way he expresses himself. [SUP]7 [/SUP]Never praise anyone before you hear him talk; that is the real test.
[SUP]16 [/SUP]By their fruit you will recognize them.[SUP](A)[/SUP] Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles?[SUP](B)[/SUP] [SUP]17 [/SUP]Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. [SUP]18 [/SUP]A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit.[SUP](C)[/SUP] [SUP]19 [/SUP]Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.[SUP](D)[/SUP] [SUP]20 [/SUP]Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.
Sirach 27:6-7 (Apocrypha)
[SUP]6 [/SUP][SUP](A)[/SUP]You can tell how well a tree has been cared for by the fruit it bears, and you can tell a person's feelings by the way he expresses himself. [SUP]7 [/SUP]Never praise anyone before you hear him talk; that is the real test.
The Apocryphal books were included in the Septuagint for historical and religious purposes, but are not recognized by Protestant Christians or Orthodox Jews as canonical (inspired by God). Most reformed teachers will point out that the New Testament writers never quoted from the Apocryphal books, and that the Apocrypha was never considered part of the canonical Jewish scripture. However, the Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox churches include the Apocrypha in their Bible (except for the books of Esdras and the Prayer of Manasseh). Septuagint
I never said you did. But you have claimed that others are not when you
know no such thing. You deceive yourself and attempt to deceive others.
Good luck trying to prove that others are not led by the Holy Spirit of God. Are you always
such a hypocrite? So far it seems so, falsely accusing and assuming all manner of things.
What you say is not helpful to me at all. You misjudge, wrongly assume, pretend I have said things I have not, completely misunderstand, falsely accuse, then do the very things you falsely accuse me of, and put on airs pretending you are more this or that than I am, and now you deny it? How quickly you forget. Like I said, you deceive yourself. Good bye.
know no such thing. You deceive yourself and attempt to deceive others.
Good luck trying to prove that others are not led by the Holy Spirit of God. Are you always
such a hypocrite? So far it seems so, falsely accusing and assuming all manner of things.
What you say is not helpful to me at all. You misjudge, wrongly assume, pretend I have said things I have not, completely misunderstand, falsely accuse, then do the very things you falsely accuse me of, and put on airs pretending you are more this or that than I am, and now you deny it? How quickly you forget. Like I said, you deceive yourself. Good bye.