Nazarene Space

Should the Apocrypha be in Our Bibles?

Views: 677

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

why not?

No.   There are teachings in the apocryphal books that do not agree with legitimate Scriptures.  A case in point:  The "sons of God" who married the "daughters of men" in Genesis 6 refer to mortal human men.  By the context, the sons of God were called out men by God (Yahweh) to convert to and obey His Torah.  The "daughters of men" referred to ungodly, sinful women those Godly men had married, who caused many of those men to turn away from Yahweh and His Torah.   Two exceptions to this were Enoch and Noah, who stayed converted to Torah and obeyed Yahweh to the end of their mortal lives.   In the apocryphal book of Enoch, it is stated that those sons of God were angels who married mortal women, and whose offspring were giants, called Nephilim.   Scriptures like these are false Scriptures.   According to the genuine Scriptures, angels are spirit beings who cannot procreate.  Only mortal beings can procreate.  So angels cannot impregnate women.  Right in line with this is Yeshua's statement that, regarding former mortals who will live forever in the Kingdom as spirt beings:   "In the Kingdom of God there are no marriages (not even lawful sex by marriage, since these people will become spirit beings and thus sexless beings), nor will anyone be given in marriage, FOR THEY WILL BE LIKE THE ANGELS".        

I don't think so. Demons need a property and in this case it will only work with a "unsaved" property, what doe not mean because of this it is considered not scriptural respective should not be considered a part of the whole Scriptures. here is somebody who has really studied the issue and if you like you can listen to the teaching. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEx8u4Vgurs  ; it get's really interesting around after 1 hour.

Apocryphas were integral part of Scriptures at the time of Jesus and the Apostles.

After the destruction of the Temple, in Yavne around year 90, the Jewish Akhamim, which established the new Judaism, decided an official list of the books to keep on, and decided to burn all the other ones, including what we consider today as Apocryphas, along with Hebrew Matthew Gospel and other Jewish books.

But the Jews in Alexandria did not destroyed the Greek translations of these books.

The Western historical Churches (which became later Catholics and Orthodoxes) took all the Scripture books of the Jews of Alexandria, yet translated in Greek. This set included what we name the "Apocryphas" which were part of the Scriptures in Alexandria.

1000 years later, Protestant Churches selected the books to include in their Bible, and declared the other ones as "Apocryphas", a fancy word for Catholics which only consider as apocryphas later books as Acts of Peter, Gospel of Thomas, Gospel of Judah, etc.

 

Now, when we consider the "Apocryphas" (in the Protestant point of view), we see books of less importance.

Catholic Church, for instance, considers these books as Bible but use them very few. In liturgy, only a little part of Ben Sirach is used 1 or 2 sundays every 4 years.

 

For me, I am sorry people don't know 1st Maccabees, which is an important historical book in which we found many things to rightly understand the Gospels.

For instance, 1st Maccabees tells:

-Who are "THE JEWS" in John Gospel language: the sons of those who resisted the forced Greek civilisation, only speaking Hebrew when everybody was forced to speak Greek, circumcising thier sons when it was prohibited, etc.

150 years later, the descendants of those JEWS used to consider them as the only very plain JEWS, whithout any mixing in their origins with foreign gods. They formed a sort of political Nationalist Party Of True JEWS, with some pride against others considered as questionable Jews.

-Who are the PERUSHIM: those who considered enough to have liberated the Temple, and separated (Hebrew PARASH) from the Zelots who would continue the war against occupiers to deliver all the country.

PERUSHIM concentrated on religion and Zelots on politics.

The Book of Enoch should be mandatory reading for all serious Christians and it was included in the Bible in some sections of the Church and used in the days of Yahshua as the Dead Sea Scrolls clearly show. The book of Enoch was removed around the time of Constantine and he is the one who amalgamated paganism into the Roman Catholic Church. In my opinion the book of Enoch supports much of the person and work of Christ and gives us real insight into the Spiritual realm which is where our fight is. The term Son of Man could be seen to come from this book.

amn



Henri Orquera said:

Apocryphas were integral part of Scriptures at the time of Jesus and the Apostles.

After the destruction of the Temple, in Yavne around year 90, the Jewish Akhamim, which established the new Judaism, decided an official list of the books to keep on, and decided to burn all the other ones, including what we consider today as Apocryphas, along with Hebrew Matthew Gospel and other Jewish books.

But the Jews in Alexandria did not destroyed the Greek translations of these books.

The Western historical Churches (which became later Catholics and Orthodoxes) took all the Scripture books of the Jews of Alexandria, yet translated in Greek. This set included what we name the "Apocryphas" which were part of the Scriptures in Alexandria.

1000 years later, Protestant Churches selected the books to include in their Bible, and declared the other ones as "Apocryphas", a fancy word for Catholics which only consider as apocryphas later books as Acts of Peter, Gospel of Thomas, Gospel of Judah, etc.

 

Now, when we consider the "Apocryphas" (in the Protestant point of view), we see books of less importance.

Catholic Church, for instance, considers these books as Bible but use them very few. In liturgy, only a little part of Ben Sirach is used 1 or 2 sundays every 4 years.

 

For me, I am sorry people don't know 1st Maccabees, which is an important historical book in which we found many things to rightly understand the Gospels.

For instance, 1st Maccabees tells:

-Who are "THE JEWS" in John Gospel language: the sons of those who resisted the forced Greek civilisation, only speaking Hebrew when everybody was forced to speak Greek, circumcising thier sons when it was prohibited, etc.

150 years later, the descendants of those JEWS used to consider them as the only very plain JEWS, whithout any mixing in their origins with foreign gods. They formed a sort of political Nationalist Party Of True JEWS, with some pride against others considered as questionable Jews.

-Who are the PERUSHIM: those who considered enough to have liberated the Temple, and separated (Hebrew PARASH) from the Zelots who would continue the war against occupiers to deliver all the country.

PERUSHIM concentrated on religion and Zelots on politics.

this was my reply to Ed:
Mikha'ELa said:

I don't think so. Demons need a property and in this case it will only work with a "unsaved" property, what doe not mean because of this it is considered not scriptural respective should not be considered a part of the whole Scriptures. here is somebody who has really studied the issue and if you like you can listen to the teaching. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEx8u4Vgurs  ; it get's really interesting around after 1 hour.

amn!

Jacqueline Hahn said:

The Book of Enoch should be mandatory reading for all serious Christians and it was included in the Bible in some sections of the Church and used in the days of Yahshua as the Dead Sea Scrolls clearly show. The book of Enoch was removed around the time of Constantine and he is the one who amalgamated paganism into the Roman Catholic Church. In my opinion the book of Enoch supports much of the person and work of Christ and gives us real insight into the Spiritual realm which is where our fight is. The term Son of Man could be seen to come from this book.

As for the Old testament Books - YES! As they were in the Scripture collections of the days of The Anointed One, and are in the Aramaic Peshitta, The Greek Septuagint, as well as other ancient translations of the Scriptures. If they were Scripture then they should be Scripture now. Forget what Christianity has done and simply go back to the way things where inj the 1st century sect of the Netzari, awmayn[Strong's #H543].

amn

will brinson: ferguson said:

As for the Old testament Books - YES! As they were in the Scripture collections of the days of The Anointed One, and are in the Aramaic Peshitta, The Greek Septuagint, as well as other ancient translations of the Scriptures. If they were Scripture then they should be Scripture now. Forget what Christianity has done and simply go back to the way things where inj the 1st century sect of the Netzari, awmayn[Strong's #H543].

I agree we need to get back to the time of the early Church too much has been taken away by the plans of the Adversary. The Protestant revival only went so far and many of those who were instrumental in getting away from the Catholic Church did not see the big picture and people like Martin Luther who rediscovered Sola Scriptura, Sola Fides failed at the time to understand the wicked 'replacement theology' that the Foul Catholic Church had put into place. So while on one hand we can thank God for the Protestant Revival and the invention of the printing press to place the Word back into the hands of the people we should not be blind to the fact that many were still blind to Satan's tares in the Wheat. Did you know that Martin Luther supported the aggression against the Jews in His time. You would also find other Protestant believers having the same mindset. In the last few months Yahshua has led me to read several of the so called Apocrypha. 



will brinson: ferguson said:

As for the Old testament Books - YES! As they were in the Scripture collections of the days of The Anointed One, and are in the Aramaic Peshitta, The Greek Septuagint, as well as other ancient translations of the Scriptures. If they were Scripture then they should be Scripture now. Forget what Christianity has done and simply go back to the way things where inj the 1st century sect of the Netzari, awmayn[Strong's #H543].

The reformation  may have gotten rid of some of the catholic churches practices, but even they, the reformationist, knew the Aphacryphal Books to be Scripture.as all the early English copies retained them. It was basically the later American Christians that got rid of the Apocryphal Books.

Reply to Discussion

RSS

 

 

 

















 

LINKS

 

 

 

 

Badge

Loading…

© 2019   Created by James Trimm.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service