Origin of the Bible?

Question

What religions/denominations believe in the apocryhpha (dubious origin of books) of the Bible?

Answer 1

The canon of the Old Testament that Catholics use is based on the text used by Alexandrian Jews, a version known as the "Septuagint" and which came into being around 280 B.C. as a translation of then existing texts from Hebrew into Greek by 72 Jewish scribes (the Torah was translated first, around 300 B.C., and the rest of Tanach was translated afterward).

The Septuagint is the Old Testament referred to in the Didache or "Doctrine of the Apostles" (first century Christian writings) and by Origen, Irenaeus of Lyons, Hippolytus, Tertullian, Cyprian of Carthage, Justin Martyr, St. Augustine and the vast majority of early Christians who referenced Scripture in their writings. The Epistle of Pope Clement, written in the first century, refers to the Books Ecclesiasticus and Wisdom, analyzed the book of Judith, and quotes sections of the book of Esther that were removed from Protestant Bibles.


In the 16th c., Luther, reacting to serious abuses and clerical corruption in the Latin Church, to his own heretical theological vision (see articles on sola scriptura and sola fide), and, frankly, to his own inner demons, removed those books from the canon that lent support to orthodox doctrine, relegating them to an appendix. Removed in this way were books that supported such things as prayers for the dead (Tobit 12:12; 2 Maccabees 12:39-45), Purgatory (Wisdom 3:1-7), intercession of dead saints (2 Maccabees 15:14), and intercession of angels as intermediaries (Tobit 12:12-15). Ultimately, the "Reformers" decided to ignore the canon determined by the Christian Councils of Hippo and Carthage.

The Latin Church in no way ignored the post-Temple rabbincal texts. Some Old Testament translations of the canon used by the Latin Church were also based in part on rabbinical translations, for example St. Jerome's 5th c. Latin translation of the Bible called the Vulgate.

The "Masoretic texts" refers to translations of the Old Testament made by rabbis between the 6th and 10th centuries; the phrase doesn't refer to ancient texts in the Hebrew language. Some people think that the Masoretic texts are the "original texts" and that, simply because they are in Hebrew, they are superior.

Some Protestants claim that the "Apocrypha" are not quoted in the New Testament so, therefore, they are not canonical.
Going by that standard of proof, we'd have to throw out Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 2 Kings, 1 Chronicles, 2 Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon, Lamentations, Obadiah, Nahum, and Zephaniah because none of these Old Testament Books are quoted in the New Testament.


But there is a bigger lesson in all this confusion over not only the canon but proper translation of the canon , especially considering that even within the Catholic Church there have been differing opinions by individual theologians about the proper place of the deuterocanonicals (not that an individual theologian's opinions count for Magisterial teaching!).
The lesson, though, is this: relying on the "Bible alone" is a bad idea; we are not to rely solely on Sacred Scripture to understand Christ's message. While Scripture is "given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness" (2 Timothy 3:16-17), it is not sufficient for reproof, correction and instruction in righteousness.
It is the Church that is the "pillar and ground of Truth" (1 Timothy 3:15)!
Jesus did not come to write a book; He came to redeem us, and He founded a Sacramental Church through His apostles to show us the way.
It is to them, to the Church Fathers, to the Sacred Deposit of Faith, to the living Church that is guided by the Holy Spirit, and to Scripture that we must prayerfully look.

Answer 2

If I am not mistaken, there were many different books by various prophets. in the Middle East written. The Dead Sea scrolls were also included in the making of one unified book. Pope Innocent of Rome adopted Christianity based on all of these various text. He pulled in scholars and had them organize the text leaving out some writings such as The books of Phillip and Mary. From that the Bible and basic concepts of Roman Catholic Christianity was formed. I don't have a college degree, but I watch a lot of TV. So take what I wrote here and verify on your own because there may be mistakes.

Answer 3

You might find that a lot of people think every book in the Bible is of dubious origin.

Answer 4

skepsis' huge answer actually was pretty good, though you have to sift through it to get to the answer.

As he said, the separation is essentially along Protestant lines. In other words, nearly all Protestant sects do not accept them. Nearly all others do. Exception: The Episcopal communion, which includes the Church of England, the U.S. Episcopal church, and several other nation-based sects throughout the world, all of whom accept these books as inspired.

Thus, the Roman Catholic Church, those churches with which it is in communion, and nearly every church that has the word "Orthodox" in its title also accepts most of these books. Note that only the Ethiopian Orthodox Church, to my knowledge, accepts *all* of these books as inspired.

You can read more about the apocrypha, particularly how it became excluded from many bible versions, at the link below.

Jim, http://www.jimpettis.com/bibles/dc.htm

Answer 5

origin bible

Answer 6

Catholics hold to the apocrapha for some reason as being legitimate.

But the true origin of Scripture comes from the mouth & heart of God Himself. Not Constantine......not Luther........but God.

2 Peter 1:20-21 “Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation. For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.”

2 Timothy 3:16 “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness”

Answer 7

The Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches use the apocrypha, as do a few protestant sects oddly enough.

Answer 8

The Catholic Church believes the Apocrypha was from God, but in essence, the Catholic Church does not believe any of the Bible to be the true Word of God because they feel the pope can change anything he wishes.

Answer 9

It is a good example of ancient plagiarism by the Hebrews and later by the Catholics.

Answer 10

the all-to-human origin of the bible is well documented and available to anyone who wants to know the truth.