Re: [lxx] Apocrypha quoted in NT?
- John Jackson wrote:
> The Jude case certainly leaves us with an interesting situation. AsThat would depend on a person's concept of canonicity and
> has been pointed out, two non-canonical books have been quoted in
> Jude.... So, are non-canonical books "in" to support Jude, or is
> Jude out?
inspiration. If an Apostle quotes from a book, does that make the
source he's quoting into scripture? Saint Paul repeatedly quotes from
Epimenedes (even calling him a "prophet") but nobody has ever thought
of adding Epimenides to the canon :-)
Apocalypses were popular religious reading at the time; analogous
maybe to the Tim LaHaye rapture novels many Evangelicals enjoy today.
Maybe it'd make sense to think of Jude and Peter quoting a well-known
piece of spiritual literature, as a preacher today might quote a
relevant passage in Milton or Dante, without his necessarily putting
a seal of approval on that author's whole work.
On the topic of the LXX quoted in the New Testament, there's an
interesting bit of maneuvering in Matthew 22 where the Sadducees
"who say there is no resurrection" ask Jesus about the implications
in the resurrection of one woman's marrying seven brothers in a row.
Of course that's a familiar plot point in the deuterocanonical book
of Tobit. The Sadducees, who use only the Pentateuch, are cynically
using a text they themselves reject as uncanonical to poke fun at the
notion of a resurrection.
The Sadducees' reference to the seven brothers in Tobit shows that
the average armchair theologian of Jesus' day was familiar with the
book of Tobit - as Jude's casually quoting Enoch tells us a little
about what the original reader recognized as a familiar contemporary
Walla Walla, Washington
- Other apocryphal works reflect knowledge of the Enoch
story of the Watchers, notably the Testaments of the
Twelve Patriarchs and the Book of Jubilees. Many of
the early church fathers also supported the Enochian
writings. Justin Martyr ascribed all evil to demons
whom he alleged to be the offspring of the angels who
fell through lust for women (from the Ibid.)? directly
referencing the Enochian writings. Athenagoras,
writing in his work called Legatio in about 170 A.D.,
regards Enoch as a true prophet. He describes the
angels which "violated both their own nature and their
office." In his writings, he goes into detail about
the nature of fallen angels and the cause of their
fall, which comes directly from the Enochian writings.
Many other church fathers: Tatian (110-172); Irenaeus,
Bishop of Lyons (115-185); Clement of Alexandria
(150-220); Tertullian (160-230); Origen (186-255);
Lactantius (260-330); in addition to: Methodius of
Philippi, Minucius Felix, Commodianus, and Ambrose of
Milanalso, also approved of and supported the Enochian
writings. The twentieth-century discovery of several
Aramaic Enochian texts among the Dead Sea Scrolls
prompted Catholic scholar J.T. Milik to compile a
complete history of the Enochian writings, including
translations of the Aramaic manuscripts. Milik's
400-page book, published in 1976 by Oxford (J. T.
Milik, ed. and trans., The Books of Enoch: Aramaic
Fragments of Qumran Cave 4, Oxford: Clarendon Press,
1976) is a milestone in Enochian scholarship, and
Milik himself is no doubt one of the finest experts on
the subject. His opinions, based as they are on years
of in-depth research, are highly respected. One by one
the arguments against the Book of Enoch fade away. The
day may soon arrive when the final complaints about
the Book of Enoch's lack of historicity and "late
date" are also silenced by new evidence of the book's
real antiquity. TheFinalTruthMinistry@...
EARLY church fathers and bishops. What more do we
need? Oh! The early church fathers used LXX that said
Angels in Gen 6:4!!!!!! Thanks a lot guys at NETS !
--- Chris Gait <zhouyi235@...> wrote:
"Johnny Silver's postings have now moved firmly into
the realm of ad hominem. Please act before this
--- johnny silver <naxxos377@...> wrote:
> Hi Philip, i can tell that your making off the cuff__________________________________
> remarks. The only qualifacation needed is sincere
> Philip Silouan Thompson <himself@...>
> wrote:johnny silver <naxxos377@...> wrote:
> > This book is pre-Jewish. Its an ancient book! Its
> > claims are huge! Please investigate for yourself
> > then make your own conclusions. I`ll throw in any
> > i`ve come across.
> Hi Johnny,
> Actually the claims that a book makes about itself
> are not very important. After all *every* apocalypse
> and apocryphal gospel claims to be true and ancient
> and from the hand of an apostle :-)
> What is of interest is how the text was transmitted
> and how history is documented to have regarded it.
> I'm not aware of any Christian council or hierarch
> recommending it.
> I know Irenaeus and a few other early writers
> alluded to or quoted 1 Enoch in passing, but that's
> to be expected from the book's popularity.
> Interestingly as we watch the concept of a Christian
> canon grow stronger over the first three or four
> Christian centuries, we see references to 1 Enoch
> diminish and disappear. The fact that only the
> Ethiopian Church includes 1 Enoch in their Bible
> (and in a very different version) ought to be a clue
> that the book didn't stand the test of time.
> Within the text of 1 Enoch, Christians felt free to
> replace the older "Book of Giants" section with the
> Christian "Similitudes". To me that says Christians
> saw 1 Enoch as a piece of popular religious
> literature, not as Scripture; nobody casually
> replaces a section of a text he regards as inspired.
> Meanwhile the fringes of Judaism kept on cranking
> out Enoch literature (for example there's the
> third-century A.D. book of 3 Enoch) but I've read
> that the second-century A.D. Rabbi Simeon ben Yochai
> cursed all who read the Enoch literature; he felt it
> drove dangerous messianic movements like those of
> Simon Bar Kochba, and of Jesus.
> As for 1 Enoch being pre-Jewish, I'm not qualified
> to say whether there's a pre-Jewish core in the
> work, but the fact that the book condemns those who
> returned from exile in Babylon (see 89:73; 93:9)
> should tell us that the versions of 1 Enoch we have
> today aren't that ancient.
> Just some observations,
> Silouan Thompson
> Walla Walla, Washington
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
> Visit your group "lxx" on the web.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
> Yahoo! Terms of Service.
> Yahoo! Messenger NEW - crystal clear PC to PC
> calling worldwide with voicemail
Yahoo! Music Unlimited
Access over 1 million songs. Try it free.
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
Visit your group "lxx" on the web.
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
Terms of Service.
To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com