Do Catholic Priests ever say read your Bible?

[TP]

Greetings,

You wrote: The Septuagint is simply a translation of the Hebrew Scriptures. Nothing was added. The Hebrew Scriptures were completed in 400 B.C. and considered as canonized by that time.

Response: Again, you leave a lot out. WHICH Hebrew Scriptures are you speaking of? At the time of Jesus the Pharisees had a different canon from the Saducees. The Saducees accepted ONLY the Torah, the first 5 books. That is why they did not believe in resurrection, angels, etc. The Essenes had a very Large canon of scripture including many of their own WRitings. There was the Babylonian Canon which was missing many of the prophets. There was the Septuigint which DID include the Deuterocanonical books. The Hebrew canon was Never set until Jamnia around AD 90: At this council since it was a council of pharisees took the expanded canon, but removed anything NOT in hebrew. This council also removed ALL the Christian books. The Hebrew CAnon which Luther moved to was set by a council that Also condemned All christian books. Your understanding of the development of the OT canon is very reductionist.

peace

 

[TP]

 

[TP]

Greetings,

You said: This lame argument really makes me laugh.

REsponse: I responded to your arguement. However, you only dealt with ONE of my arguements. I also had other arguements regarding the Councils which set the new testament canon and their list of the Ot. Also the arguements dealing with the Orthodox and coptic churches.

peace

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by TP:
Greetings,

You said: This lame argument really makes me laugh.

REsponse: I responded to your arguement. However, you only dealt with ONE of my arguements. I also had other arguements regarding the Councils which set the new testament canon and their list of the Ot. Also the arguements dealing with the Orthodox and coptic churches.

peace

I can respond to the arguments. But all the other arguments in the world don't make one iota of difference. If you can't resolve this one major point then everything you have said has gone right down the drain.
How can a book written after the destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D. supposedely be included in a book that Jesus quoted from written in 250 B.C.? First answer that for me. All other questions are irrelevant concerning the apocrypha.
DHK

 

[steaver]

I can respond to the arguments. But all the other arguments in the world don't make one iota of difference. If you can't resolve this one major point then everything you have said has gone right down the drain.
How can a book written after the destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D. supposedely be included in a book that Jesus quoted from written in 250 B.C.? First answer that for me. All other questions are irrelevant concerning the apocrypha.
DHK

You have my attention brother!

I am eager to here an answer.

God Bless!

 

[TP]

Greetings,

I have done some research and I stand corrected. Not all of the deutercanonical books are in the LXX(septuigint). Although Some are: Judith and Wisdom were in the LXX. I also did some research and NONE of the writings were from the Christian era: Tobit 200 BC, 1/2 Maccabees 140 BC, Sirach 180 BC(possibly much older), Baruch 250 BC.

However, that does NOT exclude them from being canonical. Daniel was written in 165 BC and we still see Daniel as canonical.

All of these books were listed as canonical at the council of Hippo 393, Councils of Carthage 397 and 419. These were the same lists where we get the New Testament canon, these were councils that determined canonicity.

peace

 

[Doubting Thomas]

Originally posted by TP:
Greetings,

I have done some research and I stand corrected. Not all of the deutercanonical books are in the LXX(septuigint). Although Some are: Judith and Wisdom were in the LXX. I also did some research and NONE of the writings were from the Christian era: Tobit 200 BC, 1/2 Maccabees 140 BC, Sirach 180 BC(possibly much older), Baruch 250 BC.

However, that does NOT exclude them from being canonical. Daniel was written in 165 BC and we still see Daniel as canonical.

All of these books were listed as canonical at the council of Hippo 393, Councils of Carthage 397 and 419. These were the same lists where we get the New Testament canon, these were councils that determined canonicity.

peace

Good points. Plus, as I mentioned elsewhere in this thread various early Fathers--Polycarp, Clement (of Rome), Irenaeus, Hippolytus, Cyprian, and Clement (of Alexandria) and others--quote from these various deuterocanonical books as Scripture. Church historian JND Kelly documents this in his work Early Christian Doctrines and mentions how the Hellenic Jews of the Dispersion included these books mixed in with the protocanonicals according to genre (ie history, prophets, poetic). There are just certain folks here who would prefer to ignore these facts.

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by TP:
Greetings,

I have done some research and I stand corrected. Not all of the deutercanonical books are in the LXX(septuigint). Although Some are: Judith and Wisdom were in the LXX. I also did some research and NONE of the writings were from the Christian era: Tobit 200 BC, 1/2 Maccabees 140 BC, Sirach 180 BC(possibly much older), Baruch 250 BC.

However, that does NOT exclude them from being canonical. Daniel was written in 165 BC and we still see Daniel as canonical.

All of these books were listed as canonical at the council of Hippo 393, Councils of Carthage 397 and 419. These were the same lists where we get the New Testament canon, these were councils that determined canonicity.

peace

There are too many inaccuracies in your post to make it believable. Apparently you have gleaned your information from modernistic and liberal sources that have nothing else in mind but to discredit the Bible. Let’s take the most glaring example first—the Book of Daniel.

The Hebrew Old Testament Canon was completed in 400 B.C. and you say that Daniel was written in 165 B.C. This really is absurd. It is a denial of the authorship of Daniel. It is a denial of the words of Christ. It is a denial of the facts of history. It is borne out of a denial of a belief in the supernatural. Those modern day scholars who want to discredit the Bible because they refuse to believe in the supernatural, the prophecies of Daniel assign a later date to Daniel, making Daniel’s prophecies look like history thereby discrediting them as being prophetic and supernatural. Thus the late date. This late date (165 B.C.) has long ago been refuted. Let’s look at the facts.

1. The Jews would not accept any book into their canon of Scripture that was not extant at 400 B,C, That eliminates the late date right there.

2. Daniel was carried off in the first deportation (603-604 B.C.) to Babylon. This is the time period that we are dealing with—very early 7th century to late 6th century B.C. –the time that Daniel was alive in Babylon.

3. We have the clear testimony of Jesus Himself in Matthew in the Olivet discourse.
Matthew 24:15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand
--If these words of Christ are reliably reported, we can only conclude that He believed the historic Daniel to the personal author of the prophecies containing this phrase. The prepositions used for “by” is “dia.” No other interpretation is possible in the light of this preposition, which refers to personal agency.
Was Christ lying?

4. The author of Daniel shows such an accurate knowledge of the 6th century events as would not have been open to a 2nd century writer; for example in 8:2, the city of Shushan is described as being in the province of Elam back in the time of the Chaldeans. But from the Greek and Roman historians Shushan was assigned a different province which was named after it.

5. We have in chapter 9 a series of remarkable predictions which defy any other interpretation by that they point to the coming of Christ and his crucifixion ca. A..D. 30, followed by the destruction of the city of Jerusalem within the ensuing decades.

The Maccabean date theory allege that it was impossible for a sixth century author to have composed such detailed predictions concerning coming events in the history of Israel. Thus the make the hook history itself! Incredible!
The theory is one borne out of unbelief. This date that you have affixed to the Book of Daniel calls into question your integrity regarding the dating of the other books.

Were Judith and Wisdom already in the LXX as you claim? Either you are ignorant of their dates, or are deliberately telling an outright lie. Let me state again. The Septuagint (LXX) was written no later than 250 B.C. No apocryphal (deuteron-canonical) book was written that early. How therefore do you claim that Judith and Wisdom was in the LXX, when they were written after the fact? Preposterous!!
Concerning Judith, though its exact date is uncertain, most put it in the Maccabean Age around 170 B.C. However one of the bigger problems with this book is its historical inaccuracies, which in itself makes it entirely uninspired. God makes no mistakes, especially glaring ones like this:
The Book of Judith speaks of Nebuchadnezzar reigning in Nineveh instead of Babylon.
Such inaccuracies are inconsistent with the doctrine of inspiration which teaches that when God inspires a book it is free from all errors.
A book written in ca. 170 B.C. cannot be included in the Septuagint written in 250 B.C.

Wisdom of Solomon: The book was probably composed about 120-100 BC. (ISBE)
Again, the same question is asked: How can a book written 150 years after the LXX, by included in the LXX?

I and II Maccabees
I Maccabees: The First Book of the Maccabees covers the period of forty years from the accession of Antiochus (175 B.C.) to the death of Simon the Maccabee (135 B.C.).
The terminus a quo of the work is found in the fact that John Hyreanus I., who began to reign in 135 B.C., is mentioned at the close of the book (xvi. 21-24)
As the Romans are throughout spoken of in terms of respect and friendliness, it is clear that the terminus ad quem must be sought at some time before the conquest of Jerusalem by Pompey in 63 B.C. As to whether the date can be more nearly determined scholars are not agreed. The determining fact is held by most to be the statement in xvi. 23, 24, that the "rest of the acts of John . . . are written in the chronicles of his high-priesthood." It is thought by many that this implies that John had died and that a sufficient time had elapsed since his death to permit the circulation of the chronicles. Bissell (Lange's "Commentary," p. 479) thinks that not more than a score or two of years had passed, while Schürer ("Hist. of the Jewish People," div. ii., vol. iii., p. 8) and Fairweather (in "Cambridge Bible" and Hastings, "Dict. Bible") think that not more than a decade or two had elapsed, and date the work in the first or second decade of the first century B.C.
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=18&letter=M

Thus the date of I Maccabees would be no later than 20 B.C.

II Maccabees
The Second Book of the Maccabees opens with two letters written by Jews resident in Palestine to brethren dwelling in Egypt.
The time covered by this material is barely fifteen years, from the very end of the reign of Seleucus IV., whose servant was Heliodorus, to the victory of Judas over Nicanor (175-160 B.C.)
Jason is thought by Schürer (l.c. p. 212) to have compiled his work from hearsay shortly after 160 B.C. at Cyrene. If this is true, the work of Jason, like II Maccabees, concluded with the victory over Nicanor. There can be no doubt that both the work of Jason and that of his epitomizer (i.e., the author of II Maccabees) were written in Greek, and that the latter was a Hellenistic Jew.
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=18&letter=M

Tobit:
More historical inaccuracies : (1) There are historical and geographical inaccuracies in the book. It was not Shalmaneser (Enemessar) who made the tribes of Naphtali and Zebulun exiles in Assyria, but Tiglath-pileser (734); see 2 Kings 15:29. Sennacherib was not the son of Shalmaneser (Tobit 1:15), but of Sargon the Usurper. Moreover, the Tigris does not lie on the way from Nineveh to Ecbatana, as Tobit 6 f. imply. (ISBE)

The writer has borrowed largely from other sources, Biblical and non-Biblical, and he shows no regard for correctness of facts so long as he succeeds in making the teaching clear and the tale interesting. The legend about the angel who pretended to be an orthodox Jew with a proper Jewish name and pedigree was taken from popular tradition and could hardly have been accepted by the writer as literally true. (ISBE)

The Book was written about 160 B.C. What a forgery that one is!

Sirach:
Sirach is the largest and most comprehensive example of Wisdom Literature
and it has also the distinction of being the oldest book in the Apocrypha,
It was written between 180 and 200 B.C. This is the oldest book of the Apocrypha, still at least 50 years short of the writing of the Septuagint.

Baruch:
One may conclude that the introduction was the last part of the book to be composed and that therefore its date is that of the completion of the book. Reasons will be given (see below) for believing that 4:5 through 5:9 belongs to a time subsequent to the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple in 70 AD. This is still more true of this introduction intended as a foreword to the whole book.
The second temple was in existence in the writer's day. Baruch 2:26 must (with the best scholars) be translated as follows: "And thou hast made the house over which thy name is called as it is this day," i.e. the temple--still in being--is shorn of its former glory. Moreover though Daniel 9:7-14 is largely quoted in Baruch 1:15 through 2:12, the prayer for the sanctuary and for Jerusalem in Daniel 9:16 is omitted, because the temple is not now in ruins.
There is irrefutable evidence that the Book of Baruch was written well after 70 A.D. as he looks back at the destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D.
http://bibletools.org//index.cfm/fuseaction/Def.show/RTD/ISBE/ID/1187


II Esdras:
Since the eagle in the fifth vision undoubtedly represents the Roman empire, most critics agreeing that the three heads are Vespasian, Titus, and Domitian, and since the destruction of Jerusalem so often referred to must be that by Titus in 70 C.E., the book must date from the last quarter of the first century—probably between 90 and 96.
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=463&letter=E
Here is a book written not only after the birth of Christ, but near the completion of the New Testament as well! And you expect us to believe that it should be included in the Old Testament Canon??

Councils convened 300 years after the completion of the New Testament have no bearing on what should be included in the Old Testament. The Jewish Canon was decided in 400 B.C. It was not decided by the Catholic Church, and neither was the New Testament. For your information, neither was the trinity discovered by the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church has the audacity to claim many things: everything from the nature of God to the inspiration and canonicity of the Word of God, but in reality they had nothing to do with it all.
DHK

 

[Living4Him]

God makes no mistakes, especially glaring ones like this:

That's the problem with the fundamentalist approach to the Scriptures. The Bible is the inspired Word of God, but that does not mean that dictated Word for Word what the writers of the Bible should convey.

Once again from what I posted on page 9

The Bible is the inspired Word of God and it is to teach the truths needed for our salvation.

The contexual approach of interpreting the Bible, will enable us to go back to the original intent of its authors by analyzing their times, culture, languages, and other circumstances.

The contextual approach to the Bible does not deny the truth of the Bible. God is the author of the Bible. Since God is the author of the Bible, the books of Scripture teach without error the truths that God intends to reveal for the sake of our salvation.

But truth is expressed in different ways in various literary forms, such as history, prophecy, poetry, law, proverbs (wise sayings), myths (stories or descriptions of actual events that explain ultimate reality), legends (popular unverifiable stories handed down from the past, often conveying a moral), fables (fictitious stories, often with animal characters, that teach a lesson), and parables (simple stories that illustrate a moral or a religious lesson).

All these literary forms are capable of communicating truth in dramatic fashion. They express truths in ways that a mere dictionary cannot.

Worth noting, is the distinction between truth and historical actuality. A story which is not historical can convey truth, as the parables of Jesus show.

Why do you suppose so many people argue over the creation account and the scientific age of the earth? Using the straight literal six day approach doesn't work. However, if you read Genesis from the contextual approach, you'll understand that the story is meant to convey the truth that all things were created by God out of nothing and that God is the uncreated who has always been and will always be.

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by Living4Him:
Why do you suppose so many people argue over the creation account and the scientific age of the earth? Using the straight literal six day approach doesn't work. However, if you read Genesis from the contextual approach, you'll understand that the story is meant to convey the truth that all things were created by God out of nothing and that God is the uncreated who has always been and will always be.

Why?
Because some people want to believe in the lie of evolution.
Because some people have a problem believing that God is a God of the supernatural and is quite able to do miracles.
Because some people will do everything in their power to discredit the Bible.
Because some people do not want to believe the written Word of God, not even the history of it.
Because some people have an easier time believing a secular history book written by an atheist than a sacred history book written by God, and his prophets.

Those are just some reasons for starters. I am sure there are many more.
DHK

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by Living4Him:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> God makes no mistakes, especially glaring ones like this:

That's the problem with the fundamentalist approach to the Scriptures. The Bible is the inspired Word of God, but that does not mean that dictated Word for Word what the writers of the Bible should convey.

Once again from what I posted on page 9</font>[/QUOTE]It doesn't matter what you wrote on page 9.
Here is the full quote of what I said:

God makes no mistakes, especially glaring ones like this:
The Book of Judith speaks of Nebuchadnezzar reigning in Nineveh instead of Babylon.

The very fact that the book has such glaring historical inaccuracies demonsrates that the book is not inspired. How can an inspired book make such mistakes as this. To believe that this book is inspired (without error) only makes one look foolish, when confronted with such errors as this.
DHK

 

[Living4Him]

The very fact that the book has such glaring historical inaccuracies demonsrates that the book is not inspired. How can an inspired book make such mistakes as this. To believe that this book is inspired (without error) only makes one look foolish, when confronted with such errors as this.

DHK,
It appears that your not hearing or it's not registering with you.

Look at the resurrection narratives. The all have something different in each one of the accounts. They are not precisely identical.

How can that be? According to your logical, they can't be inspired as they contain "errors" as to what happened.

However, it doesn't matter that the accounts differ, what matters is the Truth that Christ is risen and was seen by many

Matthew
28:1
In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.

28:2
And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it.

28:3
His countenance was like lightning, and his raiment white as snow:

28:4
And for fear of him the keepers did shake, and became as dead men.

28:5
And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not ye: for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified.

28:6
He is not here: for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay.

28:7
And go quickly, and tell his disciples that he is risen from the dead; and, behold, he goeth before you into Galilee; there shall ye see him: lo, I have told you.

28:8
And they departed quickly from the sepulchre with fear and great joy; and did run to bring his disciples word.

28:9
And as they went to tell his disciples, behold, Jesus met them, saying, All hail. And they came and held him by the feet, and worshipped him.

Mark
16:1
And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him.

16:2
And very early in the morning the first day of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun.

16:3
And they said among themselves, Who shall roll us away the stone from the door of the sepulchre?

16:4
And when they looked, they saw that the stone was rolled away: for it was very great.

16:5
And entering into the sepulchre, they saw a young man sitting on the right side, clothed in a long white garment; and they were affrighted.

16:6
And he saith unto them, Be not affrighted: Ye seek Jesus of Nazareth, which was crucified: he is risen; he is not here: behold the place where they laid him.

16:7
But go your way, tell his disciples and Peter that he goeth before you into Galilee: there shall ye see him, as he said unto you.

16:8
And they went out quickly, and fled from the sepulchre; for they trembled and were amazed: neither said they any thing to any man; for they were afraid.

16:9
Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils.

16:10
And she went and told them that had been with him, as they mourned and wept.

16:11
And they, when they had heard that he was alive, and had been seen of her, believed not.

16:12
After that he appeared in another form unto two of them, as they walked, and went into the country.

16:13
And they went and told it unto the residue: neither believed they them.

16:14
Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen.

Luke
Luke 24:1
Now upon the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they came unto the sepulchre, bringing the spices which they had prepared, and certain others with them.

24:2
And they found the stone rolled away from the sepulchre.

24:3
And they entered in, and found not the body of the Lord Jesus.

24:4
And it came to pass, as they were much perplexed thereabout, behold, two men stood by them in shining garments:

24:5
And as they were afraid, and bowed down their faces to the earth, they said unto them, Why seek ye the living among the dead?

24:6
He is not here, but is risen: remember how he spake unto you when he was yet in Galilee,

24:7
Saying, The Son of man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again.

24:8
And they remembered his words,

24:9
And returned from the sepulchre, and told all these things unto the eleven, and to all the rest.

24:10
It was Mary Magdalene and Joanna, and Mary the mother of James, and other women that were with them, which told these things unto the apostles.

24:11
And their words seemed to them as idle tales, and they believed them not.

24:12
Then arose Peter, and ran unto the sepulchre; and stooping down, he beheld the linen clothes laid by themselves, and departed, wondering in himself at that which was come to pass.

24:13
And, behold, two of them went that same day to a village called Emmaus, which was from Jerusalem about threescore furlongs.

24:14
And they talked together of all these things which had happened.

24:15
And it came to pass, that, while they communed together and reasoned, Jesus himself drew near, and went with them.

24:16
But their eyes were holden that they should not know him.

24:17
And he said unto them, What manner of communications are these that ye have one to another, as ye walk, and are sad?

24:18
And the one of them, whose name was Cleopas, answering said unto him, Art thou only a stranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known the things which are come to pass there in these days?

24:19
And he said unto them, What things? And they said unto him, Concerning Jesus of Nazareth, which was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people:

John
John 22:1
The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre.

20:2
Then she runneth, and cometh to Simon Peter, and to the other disciple, whom Jesus loved, and saith unto them, They have taken away the LORD out of the sepulchre, and we know not where they have laid him.

20:3
Peter therefore went forth, and that other disciple, and came to the sepulchre.

20:4
So they ran both together: and the other disciple did outrun Peter, and came first to the sepulchre.

20:5
And he stooping down, and looking in, saw the linen clothes lying; yet went he not in.

20:6
Then cometh Simon Peter following him, and went into the sepulchre, and seeth the linen clothes lie,

20:7
And the napkin, that was about his head, not lying with the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself.

20:8
Then went in also that other disciple, which came first to the sepulchre, and he saw, and believed.

20:9
For as yet they knew not the scripture, that he must rise again from the dead.

20:10
Then the disciples went away again unto their own home.

20:11
But Mary stood without at the sepulchre weeping: and as she wept, she stooped down, and looked into the sepulchre,

20:12
And seeth two angels in white sitting, the one at the head, and the other at the feet, where the body of Jesus had lain.

20:13
And they say unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? She saith unto them, Because they have taken away my LORD, and I know not where they have laid him.

20:14
And when she had thus said, she turned herself back, and saw Jesus standing, and knew not that it was Jesus.

20:15
Jesus saith unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? whom seekest thou? She, supposing him to be the gardener, saith unto him, Sir, if thou have borne him hence, tell me where thou hast laid him, and I will take him away.

20:16
Jesus saith unto her, Mary. She turned herself, and saith unto him, Rabboni; which is to say, Master.

20:17
Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.

20:18
Mary Magdalene came and told the disciples that she had seen the LORD, and that he had spoken these things unto her.

20:19
Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you.

20:20
And when he had so said, he shewed unto them his hands and his side. Then were the disciples glad, when they saw the LORD.

 

[DHK]

This did not happen. Look it up in history. It is a lie of history. How much plainer can I be.
The Book of Judith speaks of Nebuchadnezzar reigning in Nineveh instead of Babylon.

Now, If you cannot reconcile the above statements of Scripture for yourself, and see how they harmonize together, I feel sorry for you. There are no contradictions.
DHK

 

[TP]

Greetings,

You continue to insist that: The Jewish Canon was decided in 400 B.C.

Response: This is 100% ERROR. We are still in temple based Judiaism at the time of Jesus. The Priestly class was the class that governed the Jewish people: The priests of the Temple. At the time of Jesus the Priestly Class ACCEPTED only the Torah as scripture. ONLY the first 5 books of the Old Testament. This is why they did NOT believe in resurrection, or angels, etc. They did not see many of historical books or prophets as part of divinely revealed scripture. They didn't even seen the psalms which were used in temple worship as divinely inspired. If you are looking for canon from long ago, then you are left with only the first 5 books.

The rest of the OT was from the Pharisaical/lawyer class. But these were just pious lay people- not the official priestly class. The Hebrew scriptures as thought of as canonical today were collected at Jamnia AFTER the destruction of the temple at the end of the first and beginning of the second century AD. I have NO idea where you are getting your 400 BC number from, but it sounds like you are pulling it out of the air.

peace

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by TP:
Greetings,

You continue to insist that: The Jewish Canon was decided in 400 B.C.

Response: This is 100% ERROR. We are still in temple based Judiaism at the time of Jesus. The Priestly class was the class that governed the Jewish people: The priests of the Temple. At the time of Jesus the Priestly Class ACCEPTED only the Torah as scripture. ONLY the first 5 books of the Old Testament. This is why they did NOT believe in resurrection, or angels, etc. They did not see many of historical books or prophets as part of divinely revealed scripture. They didn't even seen the psalms which were used in temple worship as divinely inspired. If you are looking for canon from long ago, then you are left with only the first 5 books.

No, it is not error. The Jews would not allow any book written after the date of 400 B.C. to even be considered as canonical. That in itself excludes all apocryphal books, the oldest of which dated back to ca. 180 B.C. The period between the two testaments (New and Old), called the inter-testamental period. It was during this period that Pharisees and the Sadducees arose, not before. The Sadducees were hellenized Jews, those who had accepted the Greek culture, and thus had denied some of the fundamentals of the faith. They were the liberals of the day.

The last prophet was Zechariah

Matthew 23:34-35 Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city: That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.

2 Chronicles 24:20-21 And the Spirit of God came upon Zechariah the son of Jehoiada the priest, which stood above the people, and said unto them, Thus saith God, Why transgress ye the commandments of the LORD, that ye cannot prosper? because ye have forsaken the LORD, he hath also forsaken you. And they conspired against him, and stoned him with stones at the commandment of the king in the court of the house of the LORD.

Note that Christ said that He (God) sent them prophets from Abel to Zacharias, all of whom they had killed. Zacharias was the last of the prophets. In the Hebrew Canon of Scripture there are only 22 books because many of the books are combined. For example all 12 of the minor prophets are combined into just one book. They are also in a different order. The last book of the Masoretic Text is 2Chronicles. So Christ says: Behold, from the first of all the prophets (Adam in the first book, Genesis) to Zecharias (the last prophet in the last book 2Chronicles), all of them you have taken and murdered.
I and II Chronicles were written by Ezra. Ezra and Malachi were contemporaries. Jesus was pointing to Zecharias as the last prophet of the Old Testament. After that, there was 400 silent years when God didn’t speak to any prophet. Those that claim that God spoke to them, are false prophets. Thus all the apocryphal books can be said to be written by false prophets.

Other Scripture:
Luke 24:44 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.
--There are only three categories to the Hebrew Old Testament, and Jesus mentions them here:
1. The Law of Moses or the Torah
2. The Prophets
3. The Psalms (literally the writings—mostly poetical books)

Josephus wrote near the end of the first century:

”We have but 22 (books) containing the history of all time, books that are justly believed in; and of these, five are the books of Moses, which comprise the laws and earliest traditions from the creation of mankind down to his death. From the death of Moses to the reign of Artaxerxes, King of Persia, the successor of Xerxes, the prophets who succeeded Moses wrote the history of the events that occurred in their own time, in thirteen books. The remaining four documents comprise hymns to God and practical precepts to men” (contra pionem, 1.8).

(Gleason Archer)

The oldest catalogue of the books of the Old Testament canon now in existence is the list of Bishop Meito of Sardis, written ca. A.D. 170. He states that he went to the Orient to investigate the number and order of the books of the Old Testament and came to the following result: “Five of Moses—Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy; Joshua, Judges, Ruth, four of Kingdoms, two of Chronicles, Psalms of David, Proverbs of Solomon, Ecclesiastes, Canticles, Job, the Prophets—Isaiah, Jeremiah, and the Twelve in one book, Daniel, Ezekiel, Ezra.” In this list note: 1) Lamentations is omitted but probably subsumed under Jeremiah; 2) Nehemiah likewise, but probably included with Ezra; 3) Esther is omitted altogether for unknown reason; 4) no book of the Apocrypha is included.

(Gleason Archer)

In the third century Origen left a catalogue of 22 books of the Old Testament which was preserved in Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical History (6:25). This indicates the same list as the 22 book canon of Josephus and of the MT). Tertullian and Jerome also give similar lists. It was Jerome that did not want to put the apocrypha into his vulgate, but only did so under great pressure of the church authorities.
DHK

 

[Living4Him]

It is a lie of history. How much plainer can I be.

Judith is a parable - a usually short fictitious story that illustrates a moral attitude or a religious principle, a spiritual truth. History doesn't have to be accurate in a parable. People do not have to be real and factual historical figures in a parable.

According to Haper's Bible Dictionary parables can be either historical or fictional, and the fictional ones may be either possible or impossible.

 

[TP]

Greetings,

You keep saying: No, it is not error. The Jews would not allow any book written after the date of 400 B.C. to even be considered as canonical.

Response: what happened in 400 BC. There was no council, there was no king or leadership who made this decision. There is no document saying or listing the canon. It is as if you picked this date out of the air. The Rabbinic Canon was NOT set until Jamnia at the end of the FIRST CENTURY AD. The Priest of the Temple Never Accepted Any of the books other than the first 5.

peace

 

[BobRyan]

Why do you suppose so many people argue over the creation account and the scientific age of the earth? Using the straight literal six day approach doesn't work. However, if you read Genesis from the contextual approach, you'll understand that the story is meant to convey the truth that all things were created by God out of nothing

This is the muddled and confused logic of those who have rejected the Word of God on this subject.

SCIENTISTS do NOT claim that SCIENCE shows them that "ALL Things were CREATED by God out of NOTHING"!!! You would have to read the Bible to get that view of the origins of ALL THINGS!

This could not be any more obvious.

When you say that 6 days "won't work" -- there is NOTHING THAT DOES WORK from Man's POV!! NO one has been able to create ANYTHING!! It is not like "six days won't work but six years works just fine"!!

When you begin to reject the Word of God from the VERY START and argue in favor of the confused and conflicting traditions and speculations of man OVER God's WORD - is it any wonder we end up with "prayers to the dead"???

Actually it is MORE likely (and historically accurate) that such rejection of the Bible in favor of speculations from atheists results in extermination of the Jews, abortion rights, destruction of the sanctity of marriage etc. (Yes - EVEN among Christian groups!)

In Christ,

Bob

 

[Living4Him]

Actually it is MORE likely (and historically accurate) that such rejection of the Bible in favor of speculations from atheists

Bob,
I was speaking of the Christian POV.
I have seen on this very website different Christian groups debating over the age of the earth and if Genesis is a literal six day or not.

 

[BobRyan]

However, that does NOT exclude them from being canonical. Daniel was written in 165 BC and we still see Daniel as canonical.

Yet "another lie"???

Is there no end to the lies that have been accepted as "truth" by our befuddled brethren??

I truly feel sorry for a group so steeped in myth and lies that it can not tell the truth when it sees it!!

How sad that a "Christian" should deny the historic account of Daniel - though CHRIST HIMSELF endorses it!!

IN Christ,

Bob