 |
| Encountering page 3 |
ELWELL, WALTER AND YARBROUGH, ROBERT W., Third Edition (2013) Encountering The New Testament, Grand Rapids, Baker Academic.
In 2014, prior of course to my current 2017 review of this textbook as far as graphic text images, I had written a section on Old Testament Apocrypha from the same book. For 2017, now that I have access to the better graphics from this textbook, I will provide an updated version.
Theological issues such as consistency with established doctrines within the Hebrew religious community are key issues in separating these texts. Even if a certain text should in reality be considered part of the Hebrew Bible, which is not my view, at least it is extant to read. I do have a version.
For me, the existence of the Old Testament Apocrypha is not a worrisome theological problem. As I have noted, via scholarship, I believe in the divine inspiration and inerrancy of original biblical manuscripts. I do not reason the originals were maintained by some supernatural divine, 'force field', they are not hidden in a vault somewhere, although there is theological accuracy in the copies. If somehow there is an (a) historical error in the Hebrew Bible canon, it is not a faith/philosophy killer. There has been consistent biblical theology presented within religious history.
OT Apocrypha: July 15 2014
'Encountering informs that some 'modern Bibles include a third section called the apocryphal/deuterocanonical books of the Old Testament.
These were written after the last Old Testament prophet (Malachi, ca 430 BC), mainly between about 200 BC and AD 100.' Elwell (2013: 4). But, although important and valuable religious history is contained, many within scholarship reason these works lack divine authorship in contrast to accepted canonical Scripture and therefore are distinguished from the Old Testament/Hebrew Bible and New Testament.
Jesus and the apostles (and associates) did not quote from the apocrypha Elwell (2013: 4) and therefore this is an important lack of seal of approval in regard to divine authority. And I would add, there is a lack of approval and acceptance in regard to authorship and divine inspiration and guidance.
Browning explains that after the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD Judaism was maintained by rabbis in the Pharisaic tradition and the apocrypha was not accepted. Browning (1997: 20). However, Christians for the most part accepted a longer list of Old Testament canon which led to the Roman Catholic Church labelling the apocrypha as deuterocanonical at second level in contrast to protocanonical at first level. Browning (1997: 20).
At the Reformation, Protestants reverted to a shorter canon, (closer to a Hebrew model) in part because of possible hints of purgatory being detected as doctrine in 2 Maccabees and also in Tobit it was claimed that the doctrine of justification by works existed. Browning (1997: 20). The Church of England keeps the apocrypha for life and instruction of manners but not as Scripture. Browning (1997: 20).
BROWNING, W.R.F. (1997) Dictionary of the Bible, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
ELWELL, WALTER AND YARBROUGH, ROBERT W., Third Edition (2013) Encountering The New Testament, Grand Rapids, Baker Academic.
