Apocrypha

Scripture and study.

Apocrypha

Postby scrivener » Wed Oct 05, 2005 8:39 am

Have you read the apocrypha? If so, what do you think of it?
If not, aren't you at least a little curious about what it contains?

I studied it for a bit when I took an Old Testament class at LCC a long time ago, and I found it very interesting, but could also see why Protestant churches didn't think it needed to be canonized.

Still, I don't see the harm in reading it, and I wonder why it's not discussed more within the evangelical church. Any thoughts?
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God.
-----
Scrivener's Sudoku
User avatar
scrivener
Youth Choir
 
Posts: 128
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2005 2:21 pm
Location: Kapalama Heights

Postby kaholo4Him » Sun Oct 16, 2005 11:32 pm

uh... by definition, apocrypha means 'hidden' --- goodness, people have the hardest time just getting thru the old & new testaments! more reading?! you're kidding, right? ;P i don't know if a lot of pastors feel the need to discuss it --- the way the bible is presented in many congregations, that is THE book. period. you don't hear much about historical context and all that nowadays either (those durned 3point life application sermons, y'know?). i took the new testament class at u.h. a LONG time ago (it was taught by a professor made it a sport of shooting down outspoken Jesus Freaks in class) & actually enjoyed burying myself in hamilton library looking up stuff like that... i don't remember any of it though...dang, scriv, i may just have to make a trip up to manoa to refresh my memory!
*romans 15:13*
kaholo4Him
Nursery
 
Posts: 22
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 10:55 pm
Location: kalihi

Re: Apocrypha

Postby Pua'i » Thu Dec 01, 2005 2:51 pm

scrivener wrote:Have you read the apocrypha? If so, what do you think of it?
If not, aren't you at least a little curious about what it contains?

I studied it for a bit when I took an Old Testament class at LCC a long time ago, and I found it very interesting, but could also see why Protestant churches didn't think it needed to be canonized.

Still, I don't see the harm in reading it, and I wonder why it's not discussed more within the evangelical church. Any thoughts?


I have always found the canon issue a fascinating one, as well as the stories of other letters/gospels (e.g. the gnostics, the Gospel of Thomas, etc). The deuterocanonicals are interesting because they offer a great glimpse of Judaism during their Hellenistic period, when Greek was the "English" of their day. I understand (and may be wrong) that the Jews recognize these texts as inspired, but not holy, because they weren't written in either Hebrew or Aramaic; the languages of their holy writings. The New Testament was also written in Greek, because the deuterocanonicals are only 500 years or so older than the NT, and thus within the same Hellenistic period, but later were challenged by Luther and the gang (well, other Protestants, but forgive me as I could never keep track of this and that Council™) because the NT writers (and Jesus, for that matter) never referred to them, as they did the OT.

A handy link on these books:
http://my.execpc.com/~gto/Apocrypha/

As a side note, studying these books and other inspired texts are very important in understanding the culture behind God's original followers, the peoples of the middle east. And I have always found it fascinating that different ages saw different people wanting to toss out this or that book (I have read that Esther almost got cut, as did Ecclaisastes; Martin Luther hated the Gospel of James in the NT, etc). Maybe that is why that these other gospels, scrolls, books, texts etc aren't in common circulation today.

aloha, Pua'i
Pua'i
Nursery
 
Posts: 19
Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 10:32 pm


Return to In the Word

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron