tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2491780696589313269.post7190915835509780309..comments2024-02-29T18:08:19.941-05:00Comments on Practical Apologetics: Early Church Fathers on Apocrypha/ Deuterocanonical BooksBrianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14973146489522357402noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2491780696589313269.post-40817314311401673882022-01-05T20:24:06.776-05:002022-01-05T20:24:06.776-05:00Thanks. I did this 10 years ago so I don't rem...Thanks. I did this 10 years ago so I don't remember what happened. I'll remove the duplicate.Brianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14973146489522357402noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2491780696589313269.post-41198126315452193562022-01-04T14:55:45.592-05:002022-01-04T14:55:45.592-05:00Brian,
Just wanted to let you know there appears ...Brian,<br /><br />Just wanted to let you know there appears to be an error in the Irenaeus quotes - they are nearly identical and you quote one as Book 4, Ch. 38, but that quote was not there. It is indeed contained in the second reference, book 5, ch. 35, v. 1 (where he, like you say in the first reference, quotes Isaiah twice). And the Baruch reference is correct in the second, but not the first, being Baruch 4:36 ff.TheMonasticBaptisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14888251890451215322noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2491780696589313269.post-22937265371551167982020-03-08T22:12:07.436-04:002020-03-08T22:12:07.436-04:00Hi Truth Seeker. That is a good question. Doing so...Hi Truth Seeker. That is a good question. Doing some looking on this subject it seems that Maccabees 3 and 4 were added after the original gathering of the 72 jewish elders by at least 24 years. The original gathering was under Ptolemy II and Maccabees 3 tells of the persecution of jews under Ptolemy IV. It is possible this is the case for the others or that we believe the books were part of the Septuagint because the oldest collections had them together but were really not part of it. For example the dead sea scrolls had noncanonical books with canonical books. Since a criteria for canonization was that the books were read in the liturgy and the earliest christian lists do not include them I think we can assume that the first bishops and priests knew what old testament books should have truly been a part of the Septuagint. Brianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14973146489522357402noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2491780696589313269.post-39521564674706831412020-03-08T01:48:15.676-05:002020-03-08T01:48:15.676-05:00Hi Brian.
Excellent work out here. A real treasur...Hi Brian. <br />Excellent work out here. A real treasure chest. <br />Wonder if you can help me on an imp question that I have had for a while.<br />I understand that the LXX was put together by God in Greek and outside the domain of the Jews, to prevent the Jews from corrupting the scriptures, as they have eventually done with the scriptures that they have (changing verses like Psalm 22:16, Isa 7:14, etc. And removing some books). This is also mentioned by Justin Martyr which is also quoted here right at the beginning. <br />However, if the early church used the LXX, and the LXX have 78 books in total, then how did the Catholic Church come to only have 74 books? When and how did this differences in books happen between the Orthodox and Catholic church? Since the Orthodox Church have all the 78 books in their Canon. <br />Thks so much for all the effort.<br />God bless u.Truth Seekerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01245440855552146628noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2491780696589313269.post-77812138551178187362018-06-25T03:23:10.815-04:002018-06-25T03:23:10.815-04:00Whether or not the early Church Fathers were Catho...Whether or not the early Church Fathers were Catholic, they DEFINITELY accepted the Apocrypha as Scripture, despite the revisionist claims of many Protestants.JM1999https://www.blogger.com/profile/18021172040137455414noreply@blogger.com