1. The Apocryphal books and portions of books specified. 2. The decree of the Couucil of Trent, Sess. iv. 3. The Apocryphal books rejected by Protestants, Art. vi. Ch. of Eng. and Westminster Conf. of Faith, chap. i. sec. 3. 4. Evidence against, external and internal evidence, those books not in the Hebrew Bible. 5. Not received by the Jews, Josephus, Du Pin, Bellarmine, &c. cited. 6. Neither Christ nor His Apostles charged the Jews with mutilating the Scriptures. They never referred to those books in the New Testament. 7. The Apocrypha not received by the Primitive Church; Du Pin, Cajetan, De Lyra cited. 8. Particular books referred to: Esther, by Du Pin, Lyra, and Cajetan. 9. Baruch, Tobit, and Judith, referred to by Du Pin. 10. Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, and Maccabees. II. Susanna and Bel, Bellarmine, &c. 12. Apocryphal books not received by most eminent Romanists for 1500 years. 13. Council of Carthage, A.D. 397, referred to by Milner, examined, Du Pin cited. 14. Whittaker's argument as to the Council of Carthage. Cajetan referred to in note. 15. This Council had no authority, being only a Provincial Council; Caranza and Bellarmine. 16. Genuineness of the 47th Canon disputed. Sir Humphrey Lynde quoted. Internal evidence against its genuineness. 17. Epistle of Innocent I. to Exuperius referred to. Proved by Comber to be a forgery. 18. Pope Gelasius and his Council referred to by Romanists. Comber proves that this also is a forgery. 19. Allegation that the Greek Bibles used in the Primitive Church contained the Apocrypha. Answered by Dr. Alexander. 20. Answered further. 21. Internal evidence. Tobit. The angel is represented as telling a lie Compare Ch. v. 16.18, with xii. 15. Absurd story, vi. 1-9, also xi. 9, about the dog wagging his tail; and the note thereon in the Douay Bible. 22. Judith, ch. v. 3, It is made to appear that Holofernes did not know who or what the Israelites were. Ch. ix. 2-3. Judith is represented as approving of the murder of the Shechemites. Ch. xvi. 28-30 opposed to history, 23. Maccabees. 2nd book, an abridgment of five books written by Jason of Cyrene. Author apologizes for faults, xv. 38-39. Contradictions, &c.; suicide commended, 2 Macc. xiv. 37-42. 24. Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus. Prologue of Ecclesiasticus cited. 25. According to the Romanists, many books of the Scriptures have been lost. Milner, Curoe, and Lyons cited, also Maguire in a note. 26. Answer. If the Jewish and Romish Churches were infallible, how did they lose these books? Books may be referred to in inspired books without being themselves inspired. 27. Du Pin cited to prove that no books have been lost from the Canon. 28. Alleged lost books from the New Test.; 1 Cor. v. 9, cited by Romanists. Du Pin's answer. Bp. Middleton. 29. Col. iv. 16, cited by Romanists. Answered by Du Pin. No Epistle To the Laodiceans. 30. Matt. ii. 23. "He shall be called a Nazarene." Answered. Whitby and Barnes referred to. 31. Matt. xxvii. 9. "Spoken by JEREMY the prophet." Answered. 32. The Romish difficulty as to Mark i, 2. A parallel case to Matt. xxvii. 9. THE APOCRYPHA. 1.—It is objected by Romanists, that Protestants have not the whole Bible; that they have rejected several books belonging to the Old Testament. Those books and portions of books are Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees; also "the rest of the book of Esther," viz., from the 3rd verse of the tenth chapter of Esther to the end of the 16th chapter; and after the 12th chapter in Daniel, two chapters numbered 13 and 14 in the Roman Catholic Bible, containing the history of Susanna, of Bel and the dragon; also the song of the three children inserted between the 24th verse and the 91st verse of the 3rd chapter of Daniel. These are all included amongst the books which Rome pronounced to be canonical. 2. The Council of Trent, Session iv., says in the decree concerning the canonical Scriptures :— "And it (ie., the sacred and holy, cecumenical, and general synod of Trent,')" has thought it meet that a list of the sacred books be inserted in this decree, lest a doubt may arise in any one's mind which are the books that are received by this Synod." (Here a list of the books is given, including those books and portions which I have mentioned as being rejected by Protestants. The decree proceeds :) "But if anyone receive not as sacred and canonical the said books, entire with all their parts, as they have been used to be read in the Catholic Church, and as they are contained in the old Latin vulgate edition; and knowingly and wilfully contemn the traditions aforesaid; let him be anathema." * 3.-Protestants exclude those books and portions of books from the Canon of Scripture. The Church of England and the Church of Ireland speak with regard to them, and certain other apocryphal books which the Church of Rome also rejects, in the sixth Article, where, after enumerating the canonical books, the Article proceeds : "And the other books (as Hierom saith) the Church doth read for example of life, and instruction of manners, but yet it doth not apply them to establish any doctrine." The Westminster Confession of Faith held by the Church of Scotland and the other Presbyterian Churches in these kingdoms, teaches thus: Chapter i., sec. iii.-"The books commonly called apocrypha, not being of Divine inspiration, are no part of the Canon of Scripture; and therefore are of no authority in the Church of God, nor to be any otherwise approved, or made use of, than other human writings." All, therefore, who agree with the authorized teaching of the Protestant Churches, in rejecting the apocryphal books, are under the curse of the Church of Rome. By apocrypha, we mean those books whose authenticity as inspired books is not admitted. The word comes from о×рултй, to conceal. 4. The evidence against those books is both external and internal. EXTERNAL EVIDENCE. (1). Those books are not in the Hebrew Bible, they were written in Greek, a language not known to the Jews till after the canon of the Old Testament was closed. 5.-(2). They were not received into the Canon by the Jews. This is proved by the testimony of Josephus, and of the early Christian writers. Josephus says in his book * Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent, translated by the Rev. James Waterworth. E against Apion, chapter i. sec. 8, after referring to the Sacred Books of the Jews : "But as to the books which have been written since the time of Artaxerxes until our times, they are not considered worthy of the same credit as the former, because they do not contain accurate doctrine sanctioned by the prophets." Such is the decisive testimony of Josephus. Du Pin, the learned Roman Catholic, tells us that "Origen, St. Jerome, the author of the abridgment attributed to St. Athanasius, Št. Epiphanius, and several other Christian writers, do testify that the Jews received but twenty-two books into the Canon of their sacred volume."* Du Pin cites from St. Jerome the following important statement :— "Thus all the books of the Old Testament among the Jews just made up the number of twenty-two, five whereof were written by Moses, eight by the prophets, and nine are the Hagiographa. Some persons make them twenty-four in number, by separating Ruth and the Lamentations of the prophet Jeremy, and placing them amongst the Hagiographa. This prologue to the Bible, continues he, may serve as a preface to all those books, that we have translated out of the Hebrew, and we ought to understand that whatsoever book is not to be found in this number is apocryphal. From hence it follows that the book of Wisdom, commonly attributed to Solomon, the Ecclesiasticus of Jesus, the son of Sirach, Judith, Tobit, and the Pastor, don't belong to the Canon, no more than the two books of Maccabees do."t The preface to the books of Maccabees in the Douay Bible admits that those books were not received by the Jews. Bellarmine admits that the apocryphal books were excluded from the Hebrew Canon. Concerning the books of Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, and the Maccabees: "All these books are at once rejected by the Hebrews, as St. Jerome testifies in his Helmot, preface." The Jewish Church was the Church of God. Romanists say she was infallible, (Keenan, 81). If, then, an infallible Eccl. History, vol. i., page 16, Dublin, 1723. + Ibid., vol. i., pp. 16, 17. De libris Tobia, Judith, Sapientia, Ecclesiastici, et Machabæorum: "Hi libri simul omnes rejiciuntur ab Hebræis, ut B. Hieronymus testatur in prologo Galeato," p. 15. Cited by Pope in Roman Misquotation, pp. 312, 313. Church rejected those books, on what grounds can another infallible Church repudiate her decision, and that, too, with an anathema ? 6.-(3). Neither Christ nor His Apostles charged the Jews with mutilating the Scriptures. Now, "to the Jews were committed the oracles of God." If they had omitted from the canon of Scripture so large a portion as that which comprises the "Apocrypha," can we suppose that our Lord, who so strongly condemned them for laying aside the commandment of God, and following the traditions of men, would not also have most emphatically condemned them for having proved unfaithful to their trust by rejecting the inspired written word of God? (4). Neither Christ nor His Apostles referred to the apocryphal books in all their public teaching. In the New Testament there are nearly three hundred references, made by Christ and His Apostles, to the canonical books of the Old Testament, but not one to the apocryphal books. This is also the opinion of Du Pin. He says: "There are none quoted in the New Testament but those that were received into the Canon of the Jews, and the greatest part of these are frequently cited there." Eccl. Hist., p. 17.* * NOTE. With respect to certain texts in the New Testament which some Romanists refer to as being taken from the Apocryphal books, Du Pin says in note (6) p. 21, of his Preliminary Dissertation: Some persons say that the book of Wisdom is cited by St. Paul, Rom. xi. in these words, 'Who hath known the mind of the Lord? or, who hath been His Counsellor?' which they say are the very same in effect with those in Wisdom, chap. ix., For what man can know the counsel of God?' But this passage cited by the Apostle, is to be found word for word in Isaiah xi. 15, where the Greek terms are the same that are used by St. Paul." "Tis also pretended that the passage in his Epistle to the Hebrews, where it is said that Enoch was translated that he might not taste of death is taken out of that book. But it is in Genesis v. 25. It is likewise said that there are several allusions in the Gospel and the Epistles of the Apostles, to some places in Ecclesiasticus, the book of Wisdom, Judith, and Tobit. Every one abounds in his own sense, and can find out what resemblances and allusions he pleases; but, it is not necessary that two persons that have happened upon the same thought, should take it one from the other. St. Justin and the Ancients don't accuse the Jews for not acknowledging all the books of Holy Scripture for canonical." |