re deuterocanonicals esp sirach andrew continuing the discussion on the deuterocanonicals in article may geneva rutgers edu revdak netcom com d andrew kille writes poram ihlpb att com wrote lets talk about principles if we accept that god sets the standards for what ought to be included in scripture then we can ask is it authoritative authoritative is not a quality of the writing itself it is a statement by the community of faith whether it will accept the writing as normative arguably it is both since authority is a matter of both communicator and recepiant we can say that for example jesus is lord whether the world at large accepts the authority or not thus the bible can be considered for its authoritative content whether or not it is accepted this issue is at the heart of pilate s pragmatic question what is truth to jesus when our lord was brought before him jesus reply was to appeal to the authority of his father you also might like to consider the claimed authority represented by the statements thus says the lord in the bible which claim to put across the exact words of god you fall into the danger of relativism with your rejection of inherant authority and claim that it lies only in the community of faith does something become truth because it is accepted the main thrust of my argument is that there is a godward direction as well as a manward which is where the reference to rev came in is it prophetic how is prophecy to be defined if it is speaking forth of god s message much of the apocrypha must surely qualify if we narrowed it down to the predictive elements which will cut out some of the accepted ot books as well we nonetheless have criteria for determining the validity of the book jesus standards were that scripture cannot be broken can you name a single prophecy that fits the bill in the apocrapha ie definitely fulfilled after it has been written is it authentic again by what standard is authenticity a function of the authors the historical accuracy does it have a subjective ring of truth about it and does other evidence that has come to light contradict or confirm the authenticity archaeological other textual evidence for example is it dynamic what is this supposed to mean many of the apocryphal books are highly dynamic thought provoking faithful even exciting what this is getting at is the relationship between text and reader it is to do with the quality of writing which should have the ability to fire the mind affect our thought life and cause us to act in a certain way there is something of this in jesus quote man does not live by bread alone but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of the lord matt is it received collected read and used by whom of course the apocryphal books were received by some collected or else we would not have them read and used and they still are in the catholic and orthodox churches does the catholic church give the same authority to the apocrapha as to the accepted books certainly it is not as widely used as the ot and nt on these counts the apocrapha falls short of the glory of god this is demonstrably false think about what i have said above you may want to revise your conclusion in addition think about other sacred writings eg the koran the book of mormon and how and why you would categorise them using the above principles one word of caution you may find some reflected glory in some of these books in that the inspired quality may be derived from the bible remember that lucifer is quite capable of appearing as an angel of light and quoting scripture to quote unger s bible dictionary on the apocrapha they abound in historical and geographical inaccuracies and anachronisms so do other books of the bible what were you thinking of deletions how do you then view the words i warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book if anyone adds anything to them god will add to him the plagues described in this book and if anyone takes away from this book the prophecy god will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city rev surely this sets the standard and not just man made traditions these words clearly were meant to refer to the book of revelation alone not to the whole body of scripture revelation itself was accepted very late into the canon the church simply did not see it as having a primary role of any kind in identifying and limiting scripture we ve lost the point and the context here i am not arguing that the statement in rev can be applied indescriminately just that the whole acceptance rejection idea does not just follow on from man made traditions but there is i believe an act of god involved in the selection and criteria of what is classified as scripture and comes under the definition of tim revdak netcom com barney resson many shall run to and fro knowledge shall increase daniel
