Wednesday, September 14, 2016

My Favorite NT References to the Deuterocanon / Apocrypha

If you were to lay a Catholic Bible next to a Protestant Bible*, you’d notice there is a slight difference in thickness between these two.

That’s because the Protestant Old Testament excludes 7 books which are included in the Catholic Bible.   Catholics refer to these books as the “Deuterocanon”.  Protestants refer to them as “the Apocrypha”.  They include:


One of the most common arguments one encounters when discussing the Deuterocanon is whether there are any direct quotes of those seven books in the New Testament.  The assertion works like this:

  • If there are direct references, you can justify its inclusion in the Old Testament.
  • If not, the book should (supposedly) be held in suspicion.  
Now, there are no direct, attributed references to the Deuterocanonical books in the New Testament.  But it doesn't really matter.  There are roughly a dozen Old Testament books which are not directly quoted in the New Testament...


.... and no one is suggesting we remove those.

Still, that’s not the end of the story.  From here one could ask:
“Are there any places where the books of the Deuterocanon are referenced indirectly or alluded to?”
Here the answer is “Yes”.  And today we’re going to look at four of them.




A Better Resurrection:

We will begin in Hebrews chapter 11, which is sometimes called the “Hall of Faith”.

In this chapter, the author of Hebrews starts at one end of the Old Testament and works his way through the narrative listing the great things which were done through faith in God.

Here is a section toward the end of the chapter:
"What more shall I say? I have not time to tell of Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jephthah, of David and Samuel and the prophets, who by faith conquered kingdoms, did what was righteous, obtained the promises; they closed the mouths of lions, put out raging fires, escaped the devouring sword; out of weakness they were made powerful, became strong in battle, and turned back foreign invaders.  Women received back their dead through resurrection. Some were tortured and would not accept deliverance, in order to obtain a better resurrection. - Hebrews 11:32-35
Take a look at that last line.  The books contained in the Protestant Old Testament do not speak of anyone enduring torture to receive a better resurrection.  To find it, we’re going to have to visit the second book of Maccabees.

 The book of Maccabees recounts the struggle for Jewish identity against the tyrannical occupation of the Greeks.  In one particularly gruesome episode contained within those books, we read of a group of brothers being tortured and killed rather than eating unlawful foods:
“It also happened that seven brothers with their mother were arrested and tortured with whips and scourges by the king, to force them to eat pork in violation of God's law. One of the brothers, speaking for the others, said: ‘What do you expect to achieve by questioning us? We are ready to die rather than transgress the laws of our ancestors.’”  
“At that the king, in a fury, gave orders to have pans and caldrons heated. While they were being quickly heated, he commanded his executioners to cut out the tongue of the one who had spoken for the others, to scalp him and cut off his hands and feet, while the rest of his brothers and his mother looked on. When he was completely maimed but still breathing, the king ordered them to carry him to the fire and fry him. As a cloud of smoke spread from the pan, the brothers and their mother encouraged one another to die bravely, saying such words as these: ‘The Lord God is looking on, and he truly has compassion on us, as Moses declared in his canticle, when he protested openly with the words, 'And he will have pity on his servants.'"  
“When the first brother had died in this manner, they brought the second to be made sport of. After tearing off the skin and hair of his head, they asked him, ‘Will you eat the pork rather than have your body tortured limb by limb?’  Answering in the language of his forefathers, he said,’Never!’ So he too in turn suffered the same tortures as the first. At the point of death he said: ‘You accursed fiend, you are depriving us of this present life, but the King of the world will raise us up to live again forever. It is for his laws that we are dying.’” - 2 Maccabees 7:1-9
So what do we see here?  Well, you see exactly what Hebrews 11:35 describes.

Now, the overall pattern in Hebrews 11 is continuous references to events found in Scripture.  These culminate in … what?   A final citation from Scripture... from Second Maccabees.





The Angels’ Day-Job:

For our second reference we are going to visit the eighth chapter of Revelation.  In this section, John is continuing to give us a glimpse of God’s throne in Heaven.  Note what the angel is described as doing:
“When he broke open the seventh seal, there was silence in heaven for about half an hour. And I saw that the seven angels who stood before God were given seven trumpets. Another angel came and stood at the altar, holding a gold censer. He was given a great quantity of incense to offer, along with the prayers of all the holy ones, on the gold altar that was before the throne. The smoke of the incense along with the prayers of the holy ones went up before God from the hand of the angel.” - Revelation 8:1-4
So we see seven angels before the heavenly throne offering to God the prayers of His people.  That’s actually not the only place this appears in the Biblical text… depending on whose Bible you have.

Now let’s go to Tobit.  Tobit is a story of an old man who goes blind and receives back his sight while his son goes on an adventure to get married.  The narrative introduces an angel named Raphael who assists the son on his journey.  Toward the end of the book, Raphael reveals his secret identity to the astonished family:
"I will now tell you the whole truth; I will conceal nothing at all from you. I have already said to you, 'A king's secret it is prudent to keep, but the works of God are to be made known with due honor.' I can now tell you that when you, Tobit, and Sarah prayed, it was I who presented and read the record of your prayer before the Glory of the Lord; and I did the same thing when you used to bury the dead.’”  - Tobit 12:11-16
Now, it would be wrong to say John got the idea for the angels with their incense from Tobit.  John, after all, received that information from direct revelation.

But we can say this:  Tobit contains accurate revelation about the goings on before God’s court in Heaven.




The Wisdom of God:

The next example takes a bit of background.

The eighth chapter of Proverbs presents to us the mysterious character of Lady Wisdom.  She describes herself thusly:
"The Lord begot me, the first-born of his ways, the forerunner of his prodigies of long ago. From of old I was poured forth, at the first, before the earth. When there were no depths I was brought forth, when there were no fountains or springs of water.  [...] Then was I beside him as his craftsman, and I was his delight day by day, playing before him all the while, playing on the surface of his earth, and I found delight in the sons of men." - Proverbs 8:22-31
Now, despite Wisdom being referred to in the feminine, Christian commentators have always seen this as a veiled reference to the Logos, the Word… the Son of God.  Keep that in mind.

In the beginning of the letter to the Hebrews, the author describes the deity of Jesus in comparison to the angels.  Let’s look at the language which is used:
“In times past, God spoke in partial and various ways to our ancestors through the prophets; in these last days, he spoke to us through a son, whom he made heir of all things and through whom he created the universe, who is the refulgence of his glory, the very imprint of his being, and who sustains all things by his mighty word.” - Hebrews 1:1-4
So we see Jesus being described as the one through whom God created and sustains the universe, the reflection of God’s glory, imprint of His being.   Where did the author get that sort of language from?

Let's go to the book of Wisdom.  In the seventh chapter of Wisdom, we read some descriptions of divine Wisdom:
“The beginning and the end and the midpoint of times, the changes in the sun's course and the variations of the seasons. Cycles of years, positions of the stars, natures of animals, tempers of beasts, Powers of the winds and thoughts of men, uses of plants and virtues of roots- such things as are hidden I learned and such as are plain. For Wisdom, the artificer of all, taught me.  
For in her is a spirit intelligent, holy, unique, Manifold, subtle, agile, clear, unstained, certain, not baneful, loving the good, keen, unhampered, beneficent, kindly, Firm, secure, tranquil, all-powerful, all-seeing, and pervading all spirits, though they be intelligent, pure and very subtle.  For Wisdom is mobile beyond all motion, and she penetrates and pervades all things by reason of her purity. For she is an aura of the might of God and a pure effusion of the glory of the Almighty; therefore nought that is sullied enters into her.  
For she is the refulgence of eternal light, the spotless mirror of the power of God, the image of his goodness. And she, who is one, can do all things, and renews everything while herself perduring and passing into holy souls from age to age, she produces friends of God and prophets.” - Wisdom 7:18-27
Does that sound familiar?   The author of Hebrews used the description found in Wisdom 7 – almost word for word – to describe the Son.  The only thing missing are the words, “As it says in the book of Wisdom”.

This shows, at the very least, that the writer of Hebrews was familiar with Wisdom and was willing to use it as a guide in doing theology.



The Prophecy of God’s Son:

Now for one final reference.  For this one we turn to Matthew’s account of Jesus’ crucifixion.  Pay close attention to what the scribes and elders say to mock Jesus.
“Then two robbers were crucified with him, one on the right and one on the left. And those who passed by derided him, wagging their heads and saying, ‘You who would destroy the temple and build it in three days, save yourself! If you are the Son of God, come down from the cross.’"  
“So also the chief priests, with the scribes and elders, mocked him, saying, ‘He saved others; he cannot save himself. He is the King of Israel; let him come down now from the cross, and we will believe in him.  He trusts in God; let God deliver him now, if he desires him; for he said, ‘I am the Son of God.'"  - Matthew 27:38-43
So they note that Jesus claimed to be the son of God – and therefore God should deliver Him.  Where do they get that idea from?

Let us turn to the book of Wisdom again.  In the second chapter of Wisdom, we read a series of taunts attributed to the enemies of God’s “righteous one”.  They say:
 “Let us beset the just one, because he is obnoxious to us; he sets himself against our doings, Reproaches us for transgressions of the law and charges us with violations of our training. He professes to have knowledge of God and styles himself a child of the Lord. To us he is the censure of our thoughts; merely to see him is a hardship for us, because his life is not like other men's, and different are his ways. He judges us debased; he holds aloof from our paths as from things impure. He calls blest the destiny of the just and boasts that God is his Father.” 
“Let us see whether his words be true. Let us find out what will happen to him. For if the just one be the son of God, He will defend him and deliver him from the hand of his foes. With revilement and torture let us put him to the test that we may have proof of his gentleness and try his patience. Let us condemn him to a shameful death.  For according to his own words, God will take care of him." - Wisdom 2:12-20




Hopefully it is obvious that we see the Pharisees’ taunt is contained in this text.  There are a couple ways of interpreting this.

Suppose the Pharisees had Wisdom 2 in mind when they offered those taunts at Jesus’ crucifixion.  That would mean they are familiar with text and believed it contained accurate promises for the protection of God’s righteous one.  If that is the case, it would show the ancient Jews of Jesus time considered Wisdom to be Scripture.

But now suppose they weren’t purposefully recalling the text of Wisdom 2 when they mocked Jesus.  That would mean the text is something even more remarkable;  a messianic prophecy.  From there one might ask:
 “If the book of Wisdom isn’t inspired… what is a startlingly accurate Messianic prophecy doing in a non-inspired book?”
In either case, the similarity between Matthew 27 and Wisdom 2 is not a coincidence.  It is safe to say that Matthew did not record the Pharisees’ words by accident.

At the very least, the Apostle was trying to insinuate that the actions on Calvary fulfill the words of Wisdom 2’s prophecy of the “righteous one”.  And that is strong evidence that the Apostle – and his audience – would have regarded it as inspired.


Loose Canon:

What does all of this prove?

As I said, one of the most common arguments against the inclusion of the Deuterocanon in the Bible is the lack of explicit, direct quotes.  However, this argument turns against its user when examined closely.

First, it proves way too much – for it would force the removal of a 15 more books from the Old Testament.  Second, there are a handful of indirect quotes and allusions which show the Deuterocanon was used by the first century Palestinian Jews and the Apostles.

And so should we.

---------------------------

*[Note:   I normally don’t use the word “Protestant” and “Protestantism”.   But today I’m going to refer to the “Protestant Bible” for simplicity’s sake]



Addendum:

While on a business trip last year I found a spot where it seems the Apostle Paul was pulling from the book of Wisdom.  Check out this passage from Wisdom 13, which talks about God’s natural revelation:
For all people who were ignorant of God were foolish by nature; and they were unable from the good things that are seen to know the one who exists, nor did they recognize the artisan while paying heed to his works; but they supposed that either fire or wind or swift air, or the circle of the stars, or turbulent water, or the luminaries of heaven were the gods that rule the world.

If through delight in the beauty of these things people assumed them to be gods, let them know how much better than these is their Lord, for the author of beauty created them. And if people were amazed at their power and working, let them perceive from them how much more powerful is the one who formed them.
For from the greatness and beauty of created things comes a corresponding perception of their Creator.  

Yet these people are little to be blamed, for perhaps they go astray while seeking God and desiring to find him. For while they live among his works, they keep searching, and they trust in what they see, because the things that are seen are beautiful. Yet again, not even they are to be excused; for if they had the power to know so much that they could investigate the world, how did they fail to find sooner the Lord of these things?” - Wisdom 13:1-9

Now read Paul’s discourse on the same subject in Romans 1:
“For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and wickedness of those who by their wickedness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. Ever since the creation of the world his eternal power and divine nature, invisible though they are, have been understood and seen through the things he has made. So they are without excuse.  For though they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their senseless minds were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools; and they exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling a mortal human being or birds or four-footed animals or reptiles.” - Romans 1:18-23



7 comments:

  1. The fact is that many Christians are leaving Christianity. I believe that debates between skeptics and believers on the internet are helping to fuel this exodus.

    However, a "one size fits all" approach to debating Christians is misguided. I recently wrote a post on my blog entitled, "How to Debate a Christian". I believe that the key to debating Christians is to know which type of Christian he or she is: a Liberal, a Moderate, or a Fundamentalist. I believe that each of these three types of Christian has a different weakness in their Christian belief system; a weakness which the atheist/skeptic can take advantage of to win the debate. I would be interested in a Christian critique of my post if anyone has the time and inclination.

    Blog: Escaping Christian Fundamentalism
    Post: How to Debate a Christian

    Thanks,
    Gary

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I jotted down a summary of your tactics. Does this accurate summarize your post?

      Liberal Christian: Since the person tries to craft an ideology around a God who won't embarrass them, confront them with the violence in the Old Testament and the problem of evil.

      Moderate Christian: Challenge the person to disprove the metaphysical naturalist worldview. Ask for examples of spectacular miracles in that person's life and demand an explanation to unanswered prayers. Present the person with conflicts within the resurrection narratives and the modern secular scholars' point of view on the authorship of the Gospels. Present the idea that the resurrection is a ghost citing and God is an imaginary friend.

      Fundamentalist Christian: Undermine the person's belief in the inerrancy of Scripture using modern textual criticism of the Bible and modern science.

      Delete
    2. If you don't mind, let me amend your summary:

      Liberal Christian: Since the person tries to craft an ideology around a God who is inherently loving, kind, good, and merciful, confront him with the violence in the Old Testament and the problem of evil.

      Moderate Christian: Challenge the person to prove the existence of a super-naturalist worldview. Ask for examples of spectacular miracles in that person's life that cannot be explained as rare coincidences. Have they ever seen Jesus heal an amputee? Have they ever seen Jesus physically move a mountain or just levitate a lamp, when asked for confirmation of his existence. Ask him to present evidence that prayers to the Christian god are any more effectual than prayers to other gods or not praying at all. Ask for statistical proof that Christians experience more inexplicable healings compared to persons of other religions and compared to atheists. Present the person with conflicts within the resurrection narratives and the majority positions of New Testament scholars' (Christian and non-Christian)on the authorship of the Gospels. Present the idea that the early resurrection belief was quite possibly based on appearance claims alone (ghost sightings) and suggest the possibility that their perception that God lives inside of them is no different than a child's belief in an imaginary friend.

      Fundamentalist Christian: Undermine the person's belief in the inerrancy of Scripture using modern textual criticism of the Bible and modern science. Demonstrate to the fundamentalist that not one copy of the Bible, in the original languages, exists today which does not contain human error, alterations, and additions. How is this consistent with God's promise to "preserve" his Word?

      Delete
    3. Well, your take on Liberal Christianity is about right.

      As for Fundamentalists, I've never met one who was actually bothered the fact that we don't have the original autographs of the New Testament books. So I'm not sure how much traction one will find there. However, the issues with modern science does tend to be a sore point in this group.

      As for "moderate Christianity", this is a group which is so large and varied that it is difficult to say anything of worth. Although many of the things you listed are somewhat absurd parodies of actual Christian beliefs. So I would say one rule of thumb would be to listen to the person, assume he is intelligent, and be prepared for an answer which requires something more than a glib comeback to handle adequately.

      One thing of note is the burden of proof in any discussion depends on who is making a positive assertion. If a Christian is trying to his case to a Metaphysical Naturalist, it behooves the Christian to provide good reasons to move to a worldview which includes the supernatural. If a Metaphysical Naturalist is trying to assert his worldview, he has to provide good reasons to believe in his perspective.

      Delete
    4. Very good points.

      You said, "Although many of the things you listed are somewhat absurd parodies of actual Christian beliefs. So I would say one rule of thumb would be to listen to the person, assume he is intelligent, and be prepared for an answer which requires something more than a glib comeback to handle adequately."

      This is excellent advice. People, regardless of whether or not they are Christians or atheists, do not like to be spoken down to. We all like to be respected. If your goal is to "convert" the other person, being snide, rude, and condescending is not a good strategy.

      It is a very tricky discussion to explain to a Christian that you believe that his supernatural belief system is simply an ancient superstition and at the same time demonstrate respect for his belief. Any suggestions on how to do this?

      Delete
    5. Well, I'd say the best way to demonstrate respect for any belief is to be able to state it and explain it in a way which is agreeable to the people who actually believe it.

      So, for instance, I have a post in which I look at the question of whether life has meaning without God. And I had an Atheist commenter show up and say, "Yep. Pretty much."

      http://actsapologist.blogspot.com/2016/06/can-life-have-meaning-without-god.html

      Delete
    6. Well said. It would behoove both atheists/skeptics and theists to follow your advice!

      Delete