Showing posts with label The Canon Debate. Show all posts
Showing posts with label The Canon Debate. Show all posts
Wednesday, December 07, 2016
Friday, October 16, 2015
Two respectful discussions about the Qur'an and the Bible - Dr. James White and Imam Muhammad Musri
The world at this time needs this kind of discussion and debate. We can disagree without resorting to sinful anger, ad hominem arguments, insults or violence.
Dr. White did an excellent job; and the Imam was very respectful and showed better knowledge of the issues than most Muslims. He had to be corrected on the common mistake that Muslims repeat that "The Council of Nicea and Constantine decided which books belong in the canon".
https://apologeticsandagape.wordpress.com/2015/10/15/two-respectful-and-peaceful-discussions-about-the-bible-and-the-quran/
Canon Issues have to be constantly talked about, because:
1. Liberal scholarship constantly attacks the dates of the NT books and distorts the canon process.
2. The claims of the Roman Catholic Church put the Church over the canon, and that needs to be challenged also.
Dr. White gave the Imam 2 books on the canon by Dr. Michael J. Kruger.
The Canon Revisited
The Question of Canon
These are two good blog series also by Michael J. Kruger on the canon:
http://michaeljkruger.com/the-complete-series-10-misconceptions-about-the-nt-canon/
http://michaeljkruger.com/the-complete-series-ten-basic-facts-about-the-nt-canon-that-every-christian-should-memorize/
Dr. White did an excellent job; and the Imam was very respectful and showed better knowledge of the issues than most Muslims. He had to be corrected on the common mistake that Muslims repeat that "The Council of Nicea and Constantine decided which books belong in the canon".
https://apologeticsandagape.wordpress.com/2015/10/15/two-respectful-and-peaceful-discussions-about-the-bible-and-the-quran/
Canon Issues have to be constantly talked about, because:
1. Liberal scholarship constantly attacks the dates of the NT books and distorts the canon process.
2. The claims of the Roman Catholic Church put the Church over the canon, and that needs to be challenged also.
Dr. White gave the Imam 2 books on the canon by Dr. Michael J. Kruger.
The Canon Revisited
The Question of Canon
These are two good blog series also by Michael J. Kruger on the canon:
http://michaeljkruger.com/the-complete-series-10-misconceptions-about-the-nt-canon/
http://michaeljkruger.com/the-complete-series-ten-basic-facts-about-the-nt-canon-that-every-christian-should-memorize/
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Possible Uses of the Apocrypha in the New Testament
Did the New Testament writers use the apocrypha? Most Roman Catholics will at least admit there are no explicit apocryphal citations in the New Testament. Most argue there are allusions to the apocrypha in the New Testament. Recently we saw just how these allusions sometimes play out in an example provided from the book, Why Catholic Bibles Are Bigger.
I recently read The Old Testament Apocrypha in the Early Church and Today by Daniel J. Harrington, S.J.. This is found in the book, The Canon Debate (Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, 2008), pp.196-210. The author of this chapter is Roman Catholic. I found some of his conclusions quite interesting. How refreshing to read a Roman Catholic writer that isn't grasping for any New Testament verse that may possibly be an allusion to the apocrypha.
Possible Uses in the New Testament and Early Christian Writings
A. New Testament
Can one prove that Jesus or the New Testament writers knew and used the apocrypha? One way to begin to answer this question is to consult the list of loci citati vel allegali in the Nestle-Aland Novum Testamentum Graece. Both Sundberg and McDonald haw culled this source for references to the apocrypha and pseudepigrapha, and have produced their own lists that are very impressive at first glance.' But what do such lists prove?
The first problem emerges with the Latin adjective allegati. How strong are these alleged references? This in turn raises the question whether we are dealing with verbal sim ilarities, or background information, or conceptual parallels, or merely "will-o'-the-wisps" proposed by modern scholars. Each of these references must be weighed on its own merits On closer examination many of the alleged sources or parallels disappear.
The second problem is that even if one could prove that Jesus or a New Testamest writer did use one of the apocrypha, this alone would not prove that they regarded the text as sacred scripture or as canonical. After all, Acts 17:28 has Paul quoting the Greek poet Aratus, and no one regards Aratus as canonical. Also, Jude 14-15 contains a quotation from 1 Enoch 1:9. In the rhetorical context of both passages, the quotations are presented as possessing some intrinsic authority but not necessarily as scriptural or canonical. Moreover, neither Jesus nor any New Testament author introduces a real or alleged quotation from the apocrypha with a fulfillment formula such as "all this took place to fulfill what had been spoken by the Lord through the prophet" (Matt 1:22).
The most that can be proved from the loci citati vel allegati is that Jesus and the New Testament writers may have used some of the apocrypha. Nothing can be inferred about the authority, canonicity, or sacred character that they may or may not have attributed to these books.
After this comment, Harrington looks at "three promising cases" in which it's possible the New Testament writers utilized the apocrypha (Matthew 11:25-30; Romans 1:18-32; Hebrews 1:3). In each of these, Harrington raises enough doubt for each, and concludes this section with skepticism.
I've done one other entry on related to this issue: Is Hebrews 11:35-37 a Proof for the Inclusion of the Apocrypha to the Canon?
I recently read The Old Testament Apocrypha in the Early Church and Today by Daniel J. Harrington, S.J.. This is found in the book, The Canon Debate (Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, 2008), pp.196-210. The author of this chapter is Roman Catholic. I found some of his conclusions quite interesting. How refreshing to read a Roman Catholic writer that isn't grasping for any New Testament verse that may possibly be an allusion to the apocrypha.
Possible Uses in the New Testament and Early Christian Writings
A. New Testament
Can one prove that Jesus or the New Testament writers knew and used the apocrypha? One way to begin to answer this question is to consult the list of loci citati vel allegali in the Nestle-Aland Novum Testamentum Graece. Both Sundberg and McDonald haw culled this source for references to the apocrypha and pseudepigrapha, and have produced their own lists that are very impressive at first glance.' But what do such lists prove?
The first problem emerges with the Latin adjective allegati. How strong are these alleged references? This in turn raises the question whether we are dealing with verbal sim ilarities, or background information, or conceptual parallels, or merely "will-o'-the-wisps" proposed by modern scholars. Each of these references must be weighed on its own merits On closer examination many of the alleged sources or parallels disappear.
The second problem is that even if one could prove that Jesus or a New Testamest writer did use one of the apocrypha, this alone would not prove that they regarded the text as sacred scripture or as canonical. After all, Acts 17:28 has Paul quoting the Greek poet Aratus, and no one regards Aratus as canonical. Also, Jude 14-15 contains a quotation from 1 Enoch 1:9. In the rhetorical context of both passages, the quotations are presented as possessing some intrinsic authority but not necessarily as scriptural or canonical. Moreover, neither Jesus nor any New Testament author introduces a real or alleged quotation from the apocrypha with a fulfillment formula such as "all this took place to fulfill what had been spoken by the Lord through the prophet" (Matt 1:22).
The most that can be proved from the loci citati vel allegati is that Jesus and the New Testament writers may have used some of the apocrypha. Nothing can be inferred about the authority, canonicity, or sacred character that they may or may not have attributed to these books.
After this comment, Harrington looks at "three promising cases" in which it's possible the New Testament writers utilized the apocrypha (Matthew 11:25-30; Romans 1:18-32; Hebrews 1:3). In each of these, Harrington raises enough doubt for each, and concludes this section with skepticism.
I've done one other entry on related to this issue: Is Hebrews 11:35-37 a Proof for the Inclusion of the Apocrypha to the Canon?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
