Have you ever wondered why we have the books that we do in our Bibles?
You know, sometimes people are troubled by questions like,
“Why does the Catholic church have extra books in their Bible?”
“What about the 'so-called' lost books of the Bible?” and
“Why does the apostle Paul sometimes reference epistles that we don’t have today?”
"Why do we have the books and what we do in the Bible?"
"Are we missing any books from our Bibles?”
What is Canon Bible.
When we talk about what books belong in the Bible,you will sometimes here people use the term “canon” or “canonical.” It’s important that you understand these terms to understand this discussion.The Greek word “kanon” referred to a measuring device, a staff, or a ruler. It was a standard for measuring.
We use the word "canon" or "canonical" today to refer to something that is a standard. when we talk about a book being in the canon--or being canonical--what we mean is it is a book inspired by God.We mean that it belongs in the Bible.A non-canonical book, on the other hand,is an un-inspired book. We mean that does not belong in the Bible.
Canon is inspired Scriptures. Canonical is inspired. It belongs in the Bible.Non-Canonical: Not inspired, does not belong in the Bible.
The canon is determined by God, not by man.Sometimes men talk about determining if a book belongs in the canon.we're going to examine the book to see if it is one of God’s inspired books.Not that men determine what is Scripture and what is not.
Second Timothy 3:16 says, “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God.”
What is Apocrypha.
If it’s not inspired, then it’s not Scripture.One book I was reading summed this up very well.They said, “A book is not inspired because men made it canonical,it is canonical because God inspired it.” And that's very well said.Maybe you’ve had an experience like this.
You’ve sat down with a friend who is a Catholic and you're going to have a Bible Study.You're going to talk about the Bible together.And in the process of your discussion, your friend makes reference to a bookof the Bible that you’ve never heard of.You look at his Bible, and it contains, in fact, numerous books that your Bible does not.You’re stunned. You don’t know what to say.You don’t know how to answer this.
These extra books that the Catholic Bible has are known as the Apocrypha.
How to find the Apocrypha?
Sometimes they are grouped with what is called "the lost books of the Old Testament.”Now with that background, what we want to do is two things:
1) First, we want to discuss the Apocrypha.
What is it? Why does the Catholic Church defend it? Does it belong in the Bible?
2) Secondly, we’re going to examine the question, “Is there such a thing as lost books of the Bible, and if so,
Is this a problem for Bible believers?”Should this effect our faith?
what is the Apocrypha? The word “apocrypha" means “hidden.”
And when you hear someone talking about the Apocrypha, they’re talking about these extra books that some Bibles have added to the end of the Old Testament. we should also mention that there are some additions to the normally accepted 39 books of the Old Testament.
For example, at the end of the book of Daniel, it adds a story called, “Bel and the Dragon.”All of these Old Testament Apocryphal books are believed to have been written sometime between the time of Malachi and the life of Jesus.
That is very important because that is after the time that the Old Testament had been completed. In fact, it's time period commonly known as the 'Silent 400 Years' because no prophets of God were writing during this time.
Who accepted Apocrypha books?
The Catholic Church accepts seven of these apocryphal books.Their Old Testament contains 46 books, rather than the 39 that we have. And they--the Catholic church--declared these books to be canonical at their Council of Trent.
Why accepted Apocrypha books?
They’re putting these books in their Bible because they say they belong there.And since that time, translations of the Bible done by the Catholic Church--such as the Jerusalem Bible and the New American Bible--have included the Apocrypha.There are some other translations that you can get that contain the Apocrypha.The Revised Standard Version was put out in two forms--one with and without the Apocrypha.
It’s interesting that when King James had his translation done,it originally included the Apocrypha, but later it was removed.Some translation committees didn’t translate it at all including the American Standard,the New American Standard, and the New King James.
First and Second Esdras. These are not accepted by Catholics or Protestants.
What are those Apocrypha books?
Tobit, Judith, the rest of Esther, The Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiastics,Baruch (that is attached with the Epistle of Jeremiah),The Song of the Three Children, the History of Susanna (that is added to Daniel),Bel and the Dragon (also added to Daniel),The Prayer of Manasses are the apocrypha books in old testaments.
Example of Apocrypha book "The Prayer of Manasses"
One of the most wicked kings of Judah was Manasseh.Because of his sin, God determined to send Judah into captivity.Second Chronicles 33:12-13 tells us something that Second Kings does nottell us about Manasseh--and that is at the end of his life, he repented.In fact, he prayed to God.This book--The Prayer of Manasses-- attempts to provide that prayer.
Curiosity about Apocrypha Book.
Apocryphal books oftentimes seek to satisfy curiosity and to fill in gaps in our knowledge.And this book is one of those. This particular book incidentally is notaccepted by Catholics or Protestants.And then finally, there are the books of I and II Maccabees.
Why does the Catholic church defend the Apocrypha?
We should believe that the main reason the Catholic Church defends the Apocrypha so vehemently is not because of any evidence showing it to be valid,but rather because it supports some of their doctrines.For instance, the Catholic Church teaches the doctrine of praying for the dead and that sacrifices can be made for the dead.
That is, they believe that once a person has passed from this life and they go into Torment-- they go into suffering--they believe that prayers could be made, money could be paid and actually effect the person's eternity and move them from suffering into a place of reward.
In fact, the Bible teaches just the opposite of this.The Bible teaches that a man’s eternal destiny is sealed when he dies.In Luke 16, we have an account there of the rich man and Lazarus.The man named Lazarus--who was a very poor but righteous man-- and a rich man who was wicked.The rich man dies and goes to Torment.And Lazarus dies and goes to be with Abraham in Paradise what the Bible says.In Luke 16:25, Abraham is speaking to this rich man who is in Torment.And he says, 'Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things;but now he is comforted and you are tormented.
Hebrews 9:27 says, “It is appointed unto men once to die and after this the judgement.”The Bible teaches when a person dies and he goes to reward or he goes to Torment, he is there to stay.People living on this earth can't pray for him, they can't pay for him to change his destiny.
Listen to this from the Apocrypha:
Second Maccabees 12:45, seeking to justify this false doctrine says,“Wherefore he made the propitiation for them that had died,that they might be released from their sin.”
Let me read that again.
"He made propitiation for them that had died, that they might be released from their sin.”
Bertrand Conway, seeking to justify the Roman Catholic doctrine of praying for the dead,pointed to this passage in II Maccabees and he said,“It's true that the Protestants consider the book of Maccabees apocryphal,but they rest upon the same authority as Isaias or St. John--the divine, infallible witness of the Catholic Church.”
Of course he’s wrong about that. We don’t believe that John and Isaiah are inspired because of the witness of the Catholic Church.he's also wrong about this idea that prayers can be made that can effect the eternity and the destiny of the dead.
The Apocrypha also suggests that a person may atone for his sins by the giving of alms.That is, he can pay money to have sins forgiven. Tobit says, “It is better to give alms than to lay up gold..."
Now listen to this part:
"Alms doth deliver from death, and it shall purge away all sin.”
Here lies the Roman Catholic doctrine of “so much pray for so much pay.”Okay, let’s get to the most important question.
Why is the Apocrypha not in my Bible?
Does the Apocrypha belong in my Bible?
My Old Testament has 39 books.And I’ve always taught that there are 66 books in the Bible.Twenty-seven in the New Testament. Thirty-nine in the Old Testament.
The answer to that question is “No.”
why the Apocrypha does not belong in the Bible.Want to give you four reasons to support the statement:
Number 1: The Apocrypha does not belong in the Bible because the Jews never recognised the Apocrypha as part of the inspired Scriptures.The Jews of Jesus’ day, they did not recognise these extra books that we’re talking about as being a part of the Hebrew canon.
Josephus--the famous Jewish Historian--wrote this.He said, “We (the Jews) have not 10,000 books among us disagreeing with and contradicting one another." He meant like the Greeks have."But only 22 books, which contain the records of all time, and are justly believed to be divine.”
Five of them are the books of Law written by Moses.Thirteen of them cover the time from Moses to King Artaxerxes.The remaining four contain hymns and precepts for the conduct of human life.
Why did Josephus say they recognised the Old Testament?
Having only 22 books when we have 39 books in the Old Testament?”it’s because of the way the Jews counted their books.They counted the Minor prophets as one book known as “The Twelve”rather than counting them as 12 separate books as we do.
That brings the number from 22 to 33.They combined I & II Samuel into one book called Samuel.That brings us to 34.They combined I & II Kings, making 35. Same with I & II Chronicles, 36.Ezra and Nehemiah were counted as one work. Ruth was joined to Judges.Lamentations was attached to Jeremiah. And that brings us to 39 books.
When you understand how the Jews grouped their books,you see that they had the same books that you and I have in our Bibles today.Their 22 books was exactly the same as our 39 books.
The Jews did not accept the Apocrypha. And incidentally, Josephus and numerous other sources indicate that the Jews rejected any writing after the time of King Artaxerxes, which is the time of the book of Malachi.
The Babylonian Talmud stated,
That's reason after the latter prophets departed Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi the Holy Spirit departed from Israel.”
Number 2: we reject that the Apocrypha should be in the Bible because Jesus did not recognize the Apocrypha as being Scripture.In Luke 24:44, Jesus said, “These are the words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things must be fulfilled.Which were written in the Law of Moses and in the Prophets.
The Psalms concerning us "This phrase used by Jesus “the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms”is the same phrase that Jewish writers used to refer to the whole of the Old Testament, which we just noticed consisted of 5 books of Law, 13 books of Prophets, and 4 books of Psalms.
what's the point?
The point is Jesus endorsed their view on this matter as being correct.He was saying, "This is the complete Hebrew Canon."Matthew 23:35.
Jesus there pronounced this upon the wicked Pharisees:
He said, “That on you may come all the righteous blood shed on the earth,from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah, son of Bereciah,whom you murdered between the temple and the altar.”This passage is very significant because it covers from the first book of the Bible--Genesis, when it mentions Abel-- to the last book of the Hebrew Bible--which was Chronicles, when he mentions Zechariah--which chronologically is the time of Malachi as we have our Bible laid out today.
Here's the point: Jesus recognized as Scripture from Genesis to the time of Malachi,which incidentally excludes the books of the Old Testament Apocrypha.
Number 3: We reject the Apocrypha as belonging in the Bible because the New Testament nowhere validates these Old Testament Apocryphal books.You know there are some passages and some characters which we know to be genuine because of their inclusion in the NT.
Some people have questioned the account of Jonah and whale--Jonah and the great fish-- as to whether that really happened.But Jesus confirms it for us in the New Testament in Matthew 12:40,when He says,
“For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish,so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth."
But what is very interesting is that out of the many references in the New Testament back to the Old Testament, there is not one single reference to something in the Apocrypha in a sense that it validates it or says that it is inspired or "Thus sayeth the Lord."
Someone who has counted has said that there are 263 quotations and 370 allusions in the Old Testament that are found in the New Testament and not one of them validates or in any sense gives credibility to the Apocrypha as being inspired from God.
Number 4: We reject the Apocrypha as belonging in the Biblebecause the Apocrypha itself shows itself to be uninspired.First, the Apocrypha does not even claim inspiration.Most of the inspired books of the Old Testament claim inspiration.I think it’s most telling that the Apocrypha itself doesn’t even claim to be inspired.Some of the Apocryphal books even acknowledge non-inspiration.
In the prologue to the book of Ecclesiastics you find these words:
“Ye are intended therefore to read with favour and attention..."
Now listed to this.
"And to pardon us, if in any part of what we have laboured to interpret, we may seem to fail in some of the phrases.”That is very interesting that it is written in such a way that there is going to be errors,such is not the case with the inspired Scriptures.
The Apocrypha is filled with mistakes
Historical mistakes, geographical mistakes, chronological, and moral errors.Clearly the Apocrypha is not the same quality as the inspired Scriptures which have stood the test of time with no contradictions. The Apocrypha is filled with scribal tradition and myths.
Some examples of historical inaccuracies in the Apocrypha.
Tobit 1:4, Tobit claims to have lived during the days when the Jewish Kingdom divided.Later, he claims to have been taken away into Assyrian captivity (1:10).But you see, these two events were separated by more than 200 years.Which by the way, is 43 years longer than Tobit supposedly lived.
The Apocryphal book of Judith has the Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar ruling in Nineveh over Assyria (Judith 1:1). Clearly inaccurate. Rather than having the creation resulting from nothing by the Word of God.
Apocrypha has God creating the world out of “formless mass” (Wisdom of Solomon 11:17).
The Apocrypha contains two contradictory accounts of the death of Antiochus Epiphanes.One account says that he was “cut to pieces in the temple of Nanaea by the treachery of Nanaea’s priests” (II Maccabees 1:13-16).The other says he was “taken with a noisome sickness”and so ended "his life among the mountains by a most piteous fate in a strange land" (II Maccabees 9:19-29).
The Apocrypha is also filled with doctrinal errors.
We already mentioned that the Apocrypha teaches that prayers can be made for the dead in hopes of influencing their eternal destiny. The Bible doesn't teach that.Clearly, that is a contradiction to plain verses of the inspired Scripture.
We mentioned previously the fact that the Apocrypha suggests that a man may atone for his sins through money-- by the giving of alms. Clearly, the Bible doesn't teach that.
The Apocrypha also teaches the erroneous doctrine of the preexistence of the soul.It suggests that the kind of body a person has is determined by the character of his soul in a previous life (Wisdom of Solomon 8:19-20).
Tobit 5:15-19 teaches that angels can have families.Of course, that directly contradicts what the Bible says in Mark 12:25.
With regard to its moral tone, the Apocrypha is far below that of the Bible.The Apocrypha applauds suicide as a noble and manful--a manly--act.
II Maccabees, it tells us of one Razis who, being surrounded by the enemy,fell upon his sword, choosing “rather to die nobly”than to fall into the hands of the enemy.And since he wasn’t mortally wounded, he threw himself from a wall and “manful”--in a manly way, they're saying-- died among the crowds (14:41-43).
The book of Tobit describes magical potions which are alleged to drive away demons.
Tobit 6:1-7 talks about incense-- that is fish hearts or perhaps livers--cooked on live coal, that's reportedly efficient to drive away the devil.And one can anoint with fish gall to heal.
The murder of the men of Shechem which is condemned as an act of violence in the Bible(Genesis 49:6-7) is commended in the Apocrypha and said to be of God (Judith 9:2-9).
The point is the Apocrypha has no business being included in the Bible.
The Jews never included it. Jesus did not accept it.And, the fact is, it was hundreds of years after the establishment of the church before men tried to give these books--the Apocrypha--a place in the canon.
Are there really 'lost books’ of the Bible, and if so, is this a problem for Bible believers?
Should this in any sense shake our faith?
It certainly is the case that the Bible sometimes references works and books that no longer exist.As a matter of fact, this fact has caused some people to doubt their Bibles.It has been a tool that's used by atheists to attack the Bible.
“Are There Lost Books of the Bible?” and they will give a more detailed answer.
For now, let me say this: it is the case that there are times when the Bible references books that we no longer have.In fact, there are at least 30 different works mentioned in the Bible that we no longer have today. Twenty-eight of these are in the Old Testament and two are in the New Testament.
what’s the explanation for this? Is this a cause for concern about Apocrypha?.
First, as we consider these 30 references-- or 30 supposed missing books--some of them may be references to the same source book,but referred to by different names.
For example I and 2 Kings mention two works “the Chronicles of the Kings of Israel”and “the Chronicles of the Kings of Judah.”
Likely, these are references to the same source and not two separate ones.Maybe different sections of that same source.But these type of cases would actually make the number lower than 30.
Secondly, as we consider these 30 missing books or 30 references,Bible scholars believe that some of these may actually be references to other books of the Bible. So in actuality, they’re not missing at all.
Thirdly, it’s likely that some of the “missing books” are actually references to secular history books. (Chronicles, if you will).That being the case, they don’t actually represent any missing portions of inspired Scriptures.
Fourthly, some of the "missing books" or references are non-Hebrew sources,making them non-biblical compositions and therefore they're not canonical writings.When you eliminate the “missing books” that fall into the four categories we've just mentioned,the number that remains is not 30. In fact, it's much, much lower than that.
But someone says, "Still, what about that number?Even though it's a smaller number,are you suggesting that there are some missing references?"There are two instances in the New Testament when the apostle Paul references epistles which we do not have today.
One of those accounts is in I Corinthians 5:9. Paul writes there,
“I wrote to you in my epistle not to keep company with sexually immoral people.”
In this statement, Paul seems to be implying that he had previously written to the Corinthians specifically mentioning fornication or the sexually immoral.Where is that epistle? We don’t have it.
The second time is in Colossians 4:16. Paul writes to the Colossian brethren,Now when this epistle is read among you, see that it is read also in the church of the Laodiceans...
"And that you likewise read the epistle from Laodicea.”
Now, where is the epistle from Laodicea? We don’t know.It was the practice in the first century when a church received a letter that they would pass it on to other congregations for them to read. That's evident from this verse.
Some people have speculated that the epistle of the Laodiceans is actually the letter to the Ephesians,and that it had been passed on to them, and they were to pass it on to the Colossians. The language in the Greek can mean the epistle that is in the possession of the Laodiceans, and thus this is a distinct possible explanation for this account.
What about the epistle that Paul mentions that he had written to the Corinthians?
Some theories have been put forth to explain this, but I think in reality, it does appear that there was a letter that Paul wrote, which we don’t have today.
Now, the question is, “Is that a problem? Should that shake our faith?"
If there were inspired letters or epistles that were written, that God chose not to preserve, it’s because we don’t need them.John 20:30, the Bible says,
The point being, there were a lot of other things that took place,that God chose not to preserve, because they weren’t necessary for us.
Second Peter 1:3 says that God has given us all things that pertain to life and godliness.we have everything that we need to serve the Lord.There may have been another letter to the Corinthians that God did not choose to preserve.But if that’s the case, it’s because God intended it for a particular historical setting,but it wasn’t necessary for mankind for the rest of history.
Conclusion:
“None of the books God intended to be in the Bible is lost.The phrase 'lost' refers only to those books of which no record exist.Whatever these 'lost books' contained is irrelevant, because we have the Word of God exactly as He wanted us to have it-- nothing more, and certainly nothing less.”
Comments
Post a Comment