Quick Apology: The Deuterocanon

A couple of days ago I posted some of the important dates concerning the setting of the Biblical canon. Closely related to the subject of the canon is the issue of the deuterocanon, the books referred to by Protestants as “the apocrypha”, which were removed from the canon at the time of the Reformation.

I haven’t done a “Quick Apology” post this week, so here goes. However, rather than dealing with just one objection in this post, today I’m going to provide a series of brief rebuttals of the top ten most common objections raised….

Protestants typically say that the deuterocanonical books shouldn’t be included in the Bible because…

Objection #1: “…the New Testament doesn’t quote them”

There are three problems with this:

1. Although there are no direct quotations, there are many strong allusions to the deuterocanonical texts in the New Testament.  For example, the Nestle Aland Critical Apparatus lists Maccabees as being referenced in the New Testament. The following verse comes from a passage in the Epistle to the Hebrews where the author is recounting the great heroes of the Old Testament:

…For time would fail me to tell of Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jephthah, of David and Samuel and the prophets— who through faith conquered kingdoms, enforced justice, received promises, stopped the mouths of lions, quenched raging fire, escaped the edge of the sword, won strength out of weakness, became mighty in war, put foreign armies to flight.  Women received their dead by resurrection. Some were tortured, refusing to accept release, that they might rise again to a better life. – Hebrews 11:32-35

The only place in the Old Testament which speaks of someone being tortured, refusing to give up their faith, dying rather than recanting, is found in the deuterocanon:

…When he too had died, they maltreated and tortured the fourth in the same way. And when he was near death, he said, “One cannot but choose to die at the hands of men and to cherish the hope that God gives of being raised again by him. But for you there will be no resurrection to life!” … – 2 Maccabees 6:18-7:42

There are also several examples in the deuterocanon of prophecy of New Testament events.

2. The New Testament quotes Pagan writings (e.g. Acts 17:22-31). Does that mean these Pagan documents should be considered as Scripture? Clearly, being quoted in the Bible doesn’t automatically mean it’s Scripture.

3. There are many Old Testament books not quoted in the New Testament, but they’re still considered Scripture:

Obadiah, Zephaniah, Judges, 1 Chronicles, Nahum, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Solomon.

As we can see, an Old Testament book doesn’t have to be quoted by the New Testament in order to be considered Scripture.

Objection #2: “…the books never claim to be inspired”

What would claiming inspiration actually prove? Just because a book claims to be inspired, it doesn’t necessarily mean it is inspired! Not only that, many books of the Old Testament don’t explicitly make such a claim; the Hebrew version of the Book of Esther doesn’t even mention God once!

Objection #3: “…the Catholic Church added them at the Council of Trent”

There are serious problems with such a claim:

1. It’s factually incorrect, as my previous post demonstrated. The deuterocanon was used as Scripture in the life of the Church from the very beginning.

2. If the Church added the deuterocanon at Trent in 1545, how could Luther protest them and then remove them a couple of decades earlier?! If they weren’t part of the established canon, what’s to protest and what’s to be removed?!

3. If Trent added them, why do the Orthodox Churches (Eastern and Oriental) who parted with the Catholic Church centuries before Trent have those books in their Bibles?

Objection #4: “…they were never written in Hebrew”

As with so many of these objections, we must again ask what makes this a requirement? While at certain points in history it could be asserted that none of the deuterocanonical books were written in Hebrew, that is no longer possible. The “Dead Sea Scrolls” were a cache of documents found in the middle of the twentieth century and among these scrolls were found deuterocanonical books, which included a Hebrew version of Sirach, as well as Tobit which was also found in Aramaic.

Objection #5: “…they weren’t considered Scripture by the Jews”

This objection assumes that there was a uniform belief in the First Century among the Jews as to what was and what was not Scripture. However, that was not the case. Different groups held to different canons. Which group had the authority to declare the canon?

For example, the Saducces only considered the first five books of the Old Testament to be canonical. The Essenes appeared to have a far larger canon. The Palestinian Jews typically used one canon, but the Alexandrian Jews used the Septuagint (LXX), a Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures which included the deuterocanonical books. It’s also worth noting that the Septuagint is the version of the Old Testament most quoted in the New Testament.

As a side note, it’s also worth pointing out that the Jews celebrated many feasts which commemorated the anniversary of great events of God’s salvation found recorded in Scripture. Given this, it’s interesting to note that Jesus celebrated Hanukkah (John 10:22), an event which is only recounted in the deuterocanonical Books of Maccabees.

Objection #6: “…the Council of Jamnia rejected the deuterocanon”

This is an argument I’ve never really understood.

1. The “Council of Jamnia” is purely a hypothetical construct. We have no record of such a Jewish council in the First Century. However, assuming it did actually happen…

2. …those at the council weren’t Christian – they rejected Jesus as the Messiah. They therefore also rejected the New Testament – does that mean we should reject the New Testament too? Why do these Jews have authority to say what is and isn’t Scripture? Shouldn’t that be the responsibility of the Church?

3. The Christians used the deuterocanon to prove that Jesus was the Messiah. The exclusion of these books by later Jews is therefore hardly surprising.

Objection #7: “…early Christians didn’t regard them as Scripture”

This is incorrect. Early Church Fathers such as Irenaeus, Origen and Clement of Alexandria, quote them as Scripture. A more thorough analysis can be found here. The very fact that there was discussion in the Early Church over which books were considered Scripture demonstrates the fact that the Jewish canon wasn’t clear and settled.

Objection #8: “…Jerome rejected the deuterocanon”

There are two main problems with this argument:

1. Does the person raising this objection hold Jerome to be some kind of authority? What makes Jerome the ultimate authority? Are they in agreement with Jerome on other matters (the Eucharist, Baptism, Papacy, Perpetual Virginity of Mary,  etc)?

2. Although Jerome initially raised objections concerning the canon, he later changed his mind:

“Does not the Scripture say: ‘Burden not thyself above thy power’ [Sirach 13:2]…”
– Jerome, To Eustochium, Epistle 108

It is also good to look at Jerome’s writings where he speaks about the objections given to him by the Jews.

Objection #9: “…they contain mistakes”

Difficulties are not the same as mistakes. Many opponents of Christianity would make the same claim regarding the New Testament. However, like the New Testament, these difficulties can be resolved.

Objection #10: “…they contain doctrinal errors e.g. prayers for the dead”

This is kind of a chicken and egg situation. Which comes first, the faith or Scripture? After all, if Maccabees is Scripture, then the Jewish practice of praying for the dead can’t be heresy! It seems strange to me to deny that something is Scripture simply because it teaches something you don’t believe. This was the situation Luther found himself in concerning the Epistle of James since it denied something which Luther emphatically affirmed, that we are saved by faith alone. It was for this reason that Luther moved the epistle to an appendix in his version of the Bible. Does that seem right?

---

I hope this post helps! I’d like to end by suggesting a really good question to ask when someone is arguing with you about the deuterocanon…

“I hear your objections concerning the deuterocanon, but I have to ask, have you actually read them? If not, wouldn’t that be a good idea to have read some of them prior to making a decision?”