re deuterocanonicals esp sirach poram ihlpb att com writes on these counts the apocrapha falls short of the glory of god to quote unger s bible dictionary on the apocrapha they abound in historical and geographical inaccuracies and anachronisms they teach doctrines which are false and foster practices which are at variance with sacred scripture they resort to literary types and display an artificiality of subject matter and styling out of keeping with sacred scripture they lack the distinctive elements which give genuine scripture their divine character such as prophetic power and poetic and religious feeling first to point out the obvious while would clearly be a highly subjective issue one would be hard pressed to point to another book of the ot or for that matter the nt that doesn t on some issues in some way fail one or more of the first three of these tests second one factor the deuterocanonicals share is the lateness of their composition i don t recall the exact dating of all of the books but most if not all were written after the latest of the canonical books i e daniel furthermore while the deuterocanonical may or may not have been originally written in greek they are clearly deeply hellenistic in nature both of these features probably figured heavily in the rejection of these books from the various canons these may not be strict and uniformly applicable criteria by which to judge the canonicity of these books but as these discussions have shown i think the one thing we can see is that there are no purely objective standards for determining canonicity nichael and funcall get smurfy smile icon like predicate lisp sys honk
