During this time we have Alexander The Great, the Romans, the Maccabean wars, the rededication of the Temple, etc. These were hardly silent years that were undeserving of written text and mention at all.

The only account of The Feast of Dedication (Hanukkah) is found at 1 Maccabees 4:52-59.
No other mention will be found in any of the remaining biblical texts.
Hanukkah was the last feast day the Jews instituted before Christ.
Without the Apocrypha the biblical historical record stops at the Persian captivity. Without the Apocrypha there is no record of the Greek and Roman captivity/occupation, the Maccabean wars in the centuries preceding Christ.

This is a video of an interview with Tom Horn on his book on the Apocrypha:

http://vimeo.com/34964018

murray leslie wrote:on this subject, i would like you to be silent, the Lord rebuke you, alex.

Ha,ha, of course the religious want silence from any dissenting party, we should just believe the church and not rock the boat. The church has been so used to dealing out fear they themselves are afraid of what a little investigation in to them might turn up, because there is a lot to turn up.

There are some really good people involved in any church, it is to bad the church itself is putting them into bondage that Christ never taught. Christ said those that are in me are completely free, (John 8:36 If then the son makes you free, you will be truly free).

As always, just follow the money, the Bible warns us about those who profit from the Bible, big profit these days.

2 Cor. 2:17 For we are not as the majority, who are peddling the word of God, but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God in Christ, are we speaking.

2 Cor. 2:17 For we are not like the great number who make use of the word of God for profit: but our words are true, as from God, being said as before God in Christ.

Alex wrote:There are some really good people involved in any church, it is to bad the church itself is putting them into bondage that Christ never taught. Christ said those that are in me are completely free, (John 8:36 If then the son makes you free, you will be truly free).

As always, just follow the money, the Bible warns us about those who profit from the Bible, big profit these days.

2 Cor. 2:17 For we are not as the majority, who are peddling the word of God, but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God in Christ, are we speaking.

2 Cor. 2:17 For we are not like the great number who make use of the word of God for profit: but our words are true, as from God, being said as before God in Christ.

Now that is something I can agree with...

The term "Apocrypha"

The term itself is a dead give away that something is amiss here and that some one wanted to steer the faithful in a new direction, away from old doctrine and towards new ones.

Apocrypha means hidden or secret, by introducing this connotation the process of defaming with the intent to remove was started. These books were never secret or hidden, unlike many that likely were both secret and hidden in the Temple. The Apocrypha of The Septuagint and KJV were never secret or hidden and in fact can be shown to be in every Bible until such time as they were removed.

From the very first time the term Apocrypha was applied to these books we can see it was done with the intent to deceive. After a lot of time and substantial effort the term Apocrypha became to be known as a derogatory label meaning, inferior, corrupt, spurious, etc.
Through a slow process of making a distinction, then moving to a separate section and finally removing these books the Bible falls silent for nearly five hundred years, a blank space of time represented by nothing. By doing this modern doctrine and dogma could be formed without the nuisance of those pesky historical books of the pre Christ era.

I don't think it was a conspiracy. I think it was much more practical than that. At least early on. Many of the early writers did quote (somewhat sparingly except for a couple of writers) from the "apocrypha", but they were not adamant about it being equal with Scripture. In fact, I would say there was more doubt than not. Not so much because of content though. I can't remember there being any great concern about what was in these books. (I'll have to double check that)

I think the main concern was about the lack of information and certainty about the source. Most of the books in Scripture we know for certain who wrote them. This was a major criteria for canonicity.

However, the authors of most or all of the apocrypha are uncertain. Some we know were not written by those to whom it is ascribed.

These uncertainties are the main reason why there was not a concensus in the early church to include these books along-side Scripture, though no doubt many of these writings were held in high regard by some of the early writers.

Unworthy1 wrote:I don't think it was a conspiracy. I think it was much more practical than that. At least early on. Many of the early writers did quote (somewhat sparingly except for a couple of writers) from the "apocrypha", but they were not adamant about it being equal with Scripture. In fact, I would say there was more doubt than not. Not so much because of content though. I can't remember there being any great concern about what was in these books. (I'll have to double check that)

I think the main concern was about the lack of information and certainty about the source. Most of the books in Scripture we know for certain who wrote them. This was a major criteria for canonicity.

However, the authors of most or all of the apocrypha are uncertain. Some we know were not written by those to whom it is ascribed.

These uncertainties are the main reason why there was not a concensus in the early church to include these books along-side Scripture, though no doubt many of these writings were held in high regard by some of the early writers.

Actually these books were in the Old testament mingled amongst the rest and there was no reason to question their validity. The New Testament writers borrowed from them and even debated the content of them, Christ Himself knew them well and was taken to task and debated on them by the sadducees.
When it comes to sourcing the original writers of the texts there are books in the Bible that the authors are not only doubtful but were obviously not written by those they are attributed to.

Song of Songs - anonymous
Ecclesiastes - the date of writings is up for grabs and the author is not certain.
I and II Samuel - anonymous
Lamentations - anonymous
I and II Kings - author unknown
Chronicles - unknown, tradition points to Ezra
Esther - author unknown
Job - I would not even hazard a guess at the author

2 Peter - obviously a pseudepigrapha
2nd and 3 John - author is questionable at best
Jude - obviously a pseudepigrapha
Hebrews - anonymous
Revelation - attributed to the Apostle John but there is not one iota of proof that is who wrote it.

Calling these books apocrypha is in itself misleading and meant to create doubt in the minds of those who were using them. If the scriptures are sacred and God's word to man then how come these were God's word until man decided to remove them two thousand years after the fact. They were in the OT of the Bible for millennia after which time they were moved by the reformers, but not removed that is the plain truth of the matter. At the time they were banned and removed it was done forcefully by the Bible societies in the late nineteenth century.

Uhhh, mmmmm, cough cough . . . clears throat. If I may be permitted to briefly interrupt this conversation for this small announcement.

I found The Book of Jasher in a PDF format today. Thought y'all might like this format better than the HTML version I posted earlier. I sure like it better than the HTML version, and that's a fact, Jack.

http://www.nazarenemedia.net/uploads/8/ ... jasher.pdf

Now back to our regularly scheduled and quite enlightening conversation.

The Book of Jasher or Book of The Upright has been lost for many centuries, there have been many forgeries tried to get passed off as the authentic book. The best copy we have in English today is the 1840 translation, there are others still available so do not fall for one of those. The 1840 Jasher can not be authenticated as being the one referenced in the Bible but at least it comes down to us from a respectable Hebrew MS. The 1840 MS does have some problems when compared with the text of The Bible, however it certainly is an interesting read and not proven to be a fraud like all the others. Interpolations and names from later eras have certainly found their way into the MS whatever its origin maybe. At this point it is best recognized as a Hebrew Midrash

I had a midrash once and let me tell you mister... NOT fun