Note: Unless otherwise noted, all references to the apocrypha / deuterocanonical books throughout this series, have been taken from the Douay-Rheims Bible, 1899 American Edition Version (DRA). The Douay–Rheims Bible is a translation of the Bible from the Latin Vulgate into English made by members of the Catholic seminary English College, Douai, France. It is the foundation on which nearly all English Catholic versions are still based. It is in the public domain. All other biblical references used in this series are from the New King James Version® (NKJV), Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson. Used by permission. All rights reserved.
Roman Catholics insist the Apocrypha (which they refer to as the deuterocanonical books – the term literally means “second canon.”) is part of the inspired Scriptures, and that it always has been. They present several common arguments in an attempt to prove their point. These common arguments include:
1. The New Testament refers to the Apocrypha numerous times;
2. The early church accepted the Septuagint, which contained the Apocrypha, as part of the inspired canon of Scripture
3. The Roman Catholic Church Discerned the Canon of Scripture Under The Power of The Holy Spirit
In this series of articles, I will attempt to answer and refute each of these arguments. The fourth and final installment of this series features a response to a Roman Catholic's apologist concerning the book, Where We Got the Bible: Our Debt to the Catholic Church by Rev. Henry Graham; as well as an alphabetical list of all research sources used in the preparation of this series. And now, here is part one:
In part one of this series, we'll look at the claim that the New Testament quotes the Apocrypha numerous times. In discussions with Roman Catholic apologists (both professional and lay apologists), especially in online discussions, they will invariably point to a list of alleged occurrences of the Apocrypha in the New Testament, and in almost every instance they will copy and paste from a list of these alleged occurrences compiled by well-known Roman Catholic apologist, John Salza, which he has titled Deuterocanonical Books in the New Testament. Sadly, not one of the Roman Catholics who has copied and pasted segments of Mr. Salza's list has apparently actually checked Mr. Salza's reliability with regard to this list. If they had just done the research themselves, rather than blindly trusting Mr. Salza's list they would likely have not used it to prove their point. At least I like to think they wouldn't.
I have personally gone through each and every one of the alleged occurrences noted by Mr. Salza. Researched each and every one of them thoroughly, and with an open mind, fully prepared to go where ever the evidence takes me. Fully prepared to accept the Apocrypha as inspired canon if, and only if, the evidence definitively proves that it is, starting with Mr. Salza's list, which I have posted, along with the Scriptural evidence for each one, below.
1. “Matt. 2:16 - Herod's decree of slaying innocent children was prophesied in Wis. 11:7 - slaying the holy innocents.”
When read in the context of the entire chapter, Wisdom 11:7 is clearly seen as a reference to Exodus 1:16,22; and the Egyptian Pharaoh ordering the murder of newborn male babies. Of course, this gruesome action of Pharaoh is a foreshadowing of Herod's murder of all infants two years old and younger during the time of Jesus' birth, however, Wisdom 11:7 cannot in anyway be construed as a prophesy of Herod killing the children in Israel.
2. “Matt. 6:19-20 - Jesus' statement about laying up for yourselves treasure in heaven follows Sirach 29:11 - lay up your treasure.”
Matthew 6:19-20 states, “19 “Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy and where thieves break in and steal; 20 but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys and where thieves do not break in and steal.” (NKJV) The teaching of Jesus here is clear: Do not lay up possessions here on earth, because in the end, they will not last; but rather, obey the Lord's commands and in doing so, you will have rewards in heaven. Sirach 29:11 states, “But yet towards the poor be thou more hearty, and delay not to shew him mercy.” (DRA) It says nothing about “lay up your treasure” as Mr. Salza claims. In fact, there is nothing about “lay up your treasure” anywhere in the entire chapter of Sirach 29.
3. “Matt. 7:12 - Jesus' golden rule "do unto others" is the converse of Tobit 4:15 - what you hate, do not do to others.”
Mr. Salza apparently did not proof-read his list, as Tobit 4:15 actually states, “15 If any man hath done any work for thee, immediately pay him his hire, and let not the wages of thy hired servant stay with thee at all.”(DRA) Perhaps what he meant was Tobit 4:16, which states, “16 See thou never do to another what thou wouldst hate to have done to thee by another.” This verse, like Matthew 7:12 (and others) is known as the “Golden Rule,” or the Law of Reciprocity, and is stated positively numerous times in the Old Testament, as noted by Jesus in Matthew 7:12, “Therefore, whatever you want men to do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.”(NKJV)
It is most notably presented in Leviticus 19:18,34 which states, “You shall not take vengeance, nor bear any grudge against the children of your people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself: I am the Lord. … The stranger who dwells among you shall be to you as one born among you, and you shall love him as yourself; for you were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God.” In other words, treat others as you would treat yourself. It is this principle that Jesus draws from in Matthew 7:12; and also from where the Tobit passage draws from. Jesus did not, however, quote from or draw from Tobit.
4. “Matt. 7:16,20 - Jesus' statement "you will know them by their fruits" follows Sirach 27:6 - the fruit discloses the cultivation.”
Matthew 7:16-20 states, “16 You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles? 17 Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Therefore by their fruits you will know them.”
Sirach 27:6-7 (I've had to correct Mr. Salza's mistake again, and add verse 7) states, “6 The furnace trieth the potter's vessels, and the trial of affliction just men. 7 Be the dressing of a tree sheweth the fruit thereof, so a word out of the thought of the heart of man.”
As can be seen, the former does not actually follow the latter. The universal truism that a persons behavior is dictated by his inner beliefs, which Jesus has drawn upon for His illustration, can be found among many beliefs systems, including throughout the Old Testament. Proverbs 4:23; Jeremiah 17:9; Jon 15:35, Psalm 7:14; Isaiah 59:4; and many others all speak to this truism. There is little, if any, doubt that Jesus drew upon the numerous Old Testament passages that teach this truism, just as the author of Sirach did. In reading Mr. Salza's (corrected) references, it is clear they are at best vaguely similar, but cannot be said to follow one another.
5. “Matt. 9:36 - the people were "like sheep without a shepherd" is same as Judith 11:19 - sheep without a shepherd.”
Matthew 9:36 reads, “36 But when He saw the multitudes, He was moved with compassion for them, because they were weary and scattered, like sheep having no shepherd.” And Judith 11:15 (not verse 19 as Mr. Salza referenced) reads, “15 And he will tell me when he will repay them for their sins, and I will come and tell thee, so that I may bring thee through the midst of Jerusalem, and thou shalt have all the people of Israel, as sheep that have no shepherd, and there shall not so much as one dog bark against thee:”
Mr. Salza's implied claim is that Matthew 9:36 is somehow drawn from Judith 11:15; or, at least the phrase, “like sheep without a shepherd.” A quick look at the Scriptures, however, reveals that phrase, and the context within which that phrase (an accusation against the Jewish religious leaders who have failed the people), is found in numerous places in the Old Testament, such as Numbers 27:17; 1 Kings 22:17; Ezekiel 34:1-6; and Jeremiah 23:1-6. Matthew 9:36 is drawn from these passages, and not from Judith 11:15 (or Judith 11:19 for that matter.)
6. “Matt. 11:25 - Jesus' description "Lord of heaven and earth" is the same as Tobit 7:18 - Lord of heaven and earth.”
Tobit 7:18 reads, “18 And Raguel called to him Anna his wife, and bade her prepare another chamber.” Not only does the phrase “Lord of heaven and earth” NOT appear in Tobit 7:18, it does not appear anywhere in the entire chapter of Tobit 7!
7. “Matt. 12:42 - Jesus refers to the wisdom of Solomon which was recorded and made part of the deuterocanonical books.”
Matthew 12:42 reads, “The queen of the South will rise up in the judgment with this generation and condemn it, for she came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon; and indeed a greater than Solomon is here.”
The context of this passage clearly indicates Jesus was referring to the wisdom possessed by King Solomon, and not the apocryphal book “Wisdom of Solomon.”
8. “Matt. 16:18 - Jesus' reference to the "power of death" and "gates of Hades" references Wisdom 16:13.”
These two verses have nothing whatsoever in common. Matthew 16:18 states: “And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it.” and Wisdom 16:13 states: “You have power over life and death; you can bring a person to the brink of death and back again.” Clearly, the Matthew passage says nothing about the power of death, and Wisdom passage says nothing about the gates of Hades. While the Wisdom passage is referring to the Israelites wanderings in the wilderness, the Matthew passage is referring to the permanence of the Church. They are totally unrelated.
9. “Matt. 22:25; Mark 12:20; Luke 20:29 - Gospel writers refer to the canonicity of Tobit 3:8 and 7:11 regarding the seven brothers.”
Tobit 3 presents the story of a woman who had seven husbands who died as a factual event; whereas in the gospels, the writers, Matthew, Mark and Luke, are recording an incident where a group of Sadducees were presenting what was obviously a hypothetical situation in an attempt to trap Jesus. If the Sadducees were presenting Jesus with an historical event, they would have presented it as such, and not as a hypothetical story. Their use of a hypothetical story that happens to be vaguely similar to the events in Tobit 3, does not indicate the Sadducees even knew about Tobit (or the apocrypha) and even less that they were indicating Tobit was canonical. To say the Gospel writers were referring to the canonicity of Tobit requires stretching credulity beyond its limits.
10. “Matt. 24:15 - the "desolating sacrilege" Jesus refers to is also taken from 1 Macc. 1:54 and 2 Macc. 8:17.”
The passages in 1 & 2 Maccabees refer to an historical event that had already taken place. The Matthew passage, however, refers to a future event that had not yet taken place, as the context clearly shows. They do not refer to the same event, and therefore Jesus is not quoting the Maccabees passages.
11. “Matt. 24:16 - let those "flee to the mountains" is taken from 1 Macc. 2:28.”
Again, the Maccabees passage is referring to an historical event that had already taken place, while the Matthew passage refers to a future event that has yet to occur. Two different events separated by thousands of years. Again, the Matthew passage is not taken from the Maccabees passage.
12. “Matt. 27:43 - if He is God's Son, let God deliver him from His adversaries follows Wisdom 2:18.”
These are two completely different events that have nothing in common, including the language. The Wisdom 2:18 passage refers to unrighteous people (plural) planning to attack the righteous people (plural), and the unrighteous say, “If the righteous really are God's children, God will save them from their enemies.” The Matthew passage refers to the crucifixion of Jesus (a solitary individual), and the Chief Priests, Scribes and elders say “He (singular) saved others; Himself He cannot save. If He is the King of Israel, let Him now come down from the cross, and we will believe Him. He trusted in God; let Him deliver Him now if He will have Him; for He said, ‘I am the Son of God.’” Clearly, these two very different passages have nothing in common.
13. “Mark 4:5,16-17 - Jesus' description of seeds falling on rocky ground and having no root follows Sirach 40:15.”
Once again, these are two very different scenarios and lessons that have nothing in common whatsoever. The Sirach passage, properly taken in context (verses 12-17) refers to the temporariness of gain achieved through dishonest, wicked or ungodly methods; and the permanence of that which is achieved through loyalty, honesty, kindness and charity. It is dealing with human interactions with one another. The Mark passage, however, refers to sharing the gospel of Jesus Christ and the eternal salvation of those who accept Christ compared to the temporary spirituality of those who reject Him.
14. “Mark 9:48 - description of hell where their worm does not die and the fire is not quenched references Judith 16:17.”
Actually, the Mark passage, and also the Judith passage (written in the late 2nd century or early 1st century B.C.) as well, references Isaiah 66:24 (which was written approximately 600 years before Judith, and approximately 100 years before Jesus quoted it). Both Mark, and Judith, are referencing Isaiah.
15. “Luke 1:42 - Elizabeth's declaration of Mary's blessedness above all women follows Uzziah's declaration in Judith 13:18.”
Elizabeth, in the Luke passage tells Mary, “Blessed are you among women.” She did not say that Mary was blessed “above all women,” just blessed “among” women. This is quite different from Uzziah stating that Judith was blessed “more than any other woman on earth.” Mr. Salza has failed to notice an obvious difference between these two passages, namely that Mary is simply blessed among women, while Judith is blessed “more” than “any other woman on earth.” Apparently Judith received a far greater blessing than Mary did if one were to accept the apocryphal book of Judith as canonical as the Roman Catholics do, which calls into question the veneration Roman Catholics have for Mary, but not Judith. Mr. Salza has also (once again) failed to reference the correct verse, as it is not Judith 13:18 in which Judith is blessed above all women on earth, but verse 23, which reads, “And Ozias the prince of the people of Israel, said to her: Blessed art thou, O daughter, by the Lord the most high God, above all women upon the earth.” It should also be noted that while Mary was blessed among women because she would be bearing the unborn Christ; Judith was blessed above all women because she chopped off a man's head.
16. “Luke 1:52 - Mary's magnificat addressing the mighty falling from their thrones and replaced by lowly follows Sirach 10:14.”
The context of these two passages reveal different meanings entirely. While in Luke 1:52 Mary is praising the Lord and reciting His magnificent works including overthrowing mighty rulers and exalting the lowly and humble; the Sirach passage, which reads, “14 The beginning of the pride of man, is to fall off from God” (DRA), refers to pride and how it leads to destruction, including causing the Lord to remove prideful rulers and replacing them with humble rulers. Clearly then, the Sirach passage is expounding on Proverbs 16:18, “Pride goeth before destruction: and the spirit is lifted up before a fall.” (DRA), which was written 700 years before Sirach.
17. “Luke 2:29 - Simeon's declaration that he is ready to die after seeing the Child Jesus follows Tobit 11:9.”
Actually Tobit 11 tells the story of Tobias blind father, who has his sight restored when Tobias smears a magic formula made of fish gall on his eyes. In the entire chapter, however, no one declares he is ready to die. In fact, when the story is read in its entirety, one soon sees that Tobias believed if he took the heart and liver of the fish and burned it, that would drive away the evil spirits that caused blindness. The story of Tobias curing his father's blindness by following a form of sorcery and a magic spell is antithetical to God's people, and to equate it somehow with the birth of Christ is nothing short of blasphemous.
18. “Luke 13:29 - the Lord's description of men coming from east and west to rejoice in God follows Baruch 4:37.”
Again, these two passages refer to two very different events. The Baruch passage refers to the Jew's who have been dispersed throughout the world returning to Jerusalem; and the Luke passage refers to those who have come to Christ for salvation around the world, all coming together, from all points in the world, in heaven where they will live forever.
19. “Luke 21:24 - Jesus' usage of "fall by the edge of the sword" follows Sirach 28:18.”
Mr. Salza should have noted Sirach 28:22, and not verse 18 which says nothing about a sword. Verse 22 reads, “22 Many have fallen by the edge of the sword, but not so many as have perished by their own tongue.” This is a proverb, not a recounting of an actual event. Luke 21:24, however, is a prophecy of a future event, the destruction of Jerusalem. Trying to make a connection between the New Testament and the apocrypha by noting the use of a common ambiguous phrase such as “fall by the edge of the sword” is at best, a stretch, especially when the Old Testament is full of similar “sword” phrases, such as in Jer. 42:16;44:12,13,27; Num. 14:43; Job 15:22; Ezek. 17:21; 21:12; 23:25; 24:21; 26:6,8,11; 28:23; 29:8; 30:4-6; 32:12,20; 33:27; 35:8; Dan. 11:33; Hos. 7:16; 13:16; Amos 7:17; 9:10.
20. “Luke 24:4 and Acts 1:10 - Luke's description of the two men in dazzling apparel reminds us of 2 Macc. 3:26.”
Luke 24:4 describes two angels “in shining garments” standing by at Jesus' tomb after His resurrection, and Acts 1:10 describes two angels “in white apparel” standing by at the bodily ascension of Jesus. 2 Maccabees 3:26, however, describes “two other young men beautiful and strong, bright and glorious, and in comely apparel” who were busy whipping a man to death. There is nothing in Luke 24 or Acts 1 that reminds us of 2 Maccabees 3:26.
21. “John 1:3 - all things were made through Him, the Word, follows Wisdom 9:1.”
Actually, Wisdom 9:1 is referencing Genesis 1:3-29; Psalm 33:9; Psalm 148:5; and Lamentations 3:37 (among other passages) which tell us about God speaking creation into existence. The writer of Wisdom would not have known of Jesus, especially as the God the Son, through whom all things were created.
22. “John 3:13 - who has ascended into heaven but He who descended from heaven references Baruch 3:29.”
John 3:13 is a direct reference to Jesus Christ. Baruch 3:29 is not. In fact, when read in its proper context (Baruch 3:26-33), it quickly becomes clear the subject is wisdom, and the passage is drawn from numerous Old Testament passages. Baruch 3:29, and its companion verse, 30, are rhetorical questions: “29 Who hath gone up into heaven, and taken her, and brought her down from the clouds? 30 Who hath passed over the sea, and found her, and brought her preferably to chosen gold?” And when taken in context (again verses 26-33), the answer is that no one on earth has done these things as they do not possess wisdom.
Mr. Salza has taken passages out of their proper context in an attempt, and a poor attempt at that, to try and fit them together in such a way as to make a connection between them. When they are properly read, however, his argument quickly falls apart.
23. “John 4:48; Acts 5:12; 15:12; 2 Cor. 12:12 - Jesus', Luke's and Paul's usage of "signs and wonders" follows Wisdom 8:8.”
In each of the above listed New Testament passages, the “signs and wonders” were actually done by actual people. There were something that was seen, was witnessed by people. Wisdom 8:8, however, is something else entirely. “8 And if a man desire much knowledge: she knoweth things past, and judgeth of things to come: she knoweth the subtilties of speeches, and the solutions of arguments: she knoweth signs and wonders before they be done, and the events of times and ages.” (Wisdom 8:8 DRA). The “she” spoken of in Wisdom 8:8, and indeed throughout chapter 8 as well as both preceding and succeeding chapters, is, in fact, the attribute of wisdom. Wisdom “knows” all these things, it is a sign of wisdom based knowledge, which is obviously not the same thing as the working of an actual, physical signs and wonders as witnessed by many others as noted in the New Testament passages above. They do not “follow” Wisdom 8:8 anymore than a wheel barrow “follows” a race car. They both have wheels, but there the similarity ends.
24. “John 5:18 - Jesus claiming that God is His Father follows Wisdom 2:16.”
In Wisdom 2:16, and indeed, the entirety of chapter 2, we see evil doers scheming to do evil to the just. One of the reasons for their hatred of the just, is their condemnation because of their sin and the refusal of the just to join them in their sin. The wicked then mock the just by saying the just “glorieth that he hath God for his father.”(DRA).
In John 5:18 we find a completely different scenario as the Jewish religious leaders scheme to kill Jesus because He specifically stated that He specifically was God's Son, thus making Himself equal with God.
In the Wisdom passage(s) there is a general hatred of all of the just and righteous people, and part of that hatred is they have God for their collective father. This is a common theme throughout the Old Testament, and found in such passages as Deut. 32:6; Isa. 63:16; 64:8; Jer. 3:4,19 ; Mal. 1:6; 2:10; 2 Sam. 7:14; 1 Chron. 17:13; 22:10; 28:6; Ps. 68:5; and Psalm 89:26.
These two passages clearly speak on two entirely different and unrelated issues; and Just as clearly, John 5:18 does not “follow” Wisdom 2:16. In fact, if anything, Wisdom 2:16 follows the theme of God being the Father of His creation in the numerous Old Testament passages noted above.
25. “John 6:35-59 - Jesus' Eucharistic discourse is foreshadowed in Sirach 24:21.”
In John 6:35-59, we find Jesus speaking in the synagogue, and the subject of His discourse is that He is “the bread which came down from heaven.”(NKJV) and that His body (which He referred to as the Bread) will be broken and His blood will be shed, and whoever partakes of His sacrifice will have eternal life.
Sirach 24:21 states, “21 And I perfumed my dwelling as storax, and galbanum, and onyx, and aloes, and as the frankincense not cut, and my odour is as the purest balm.”(DRA)
It is obvious that Sirach 24:21 does not foreshadow Jesus' words in John 6:35-59. Painfully obvious.
26. “John 10:22 - the identification of the feast of the dedication is taken from 1 Macc. 4:59.
The Feast of Dedication was first instituted during the Intertestamental period, and was once known as the Feast of the Maccabees. Today it is known as Hanukkah, or the Festival of Lights. It was a celebration that was commonly observed by the first century Jews, and had been since it was instituted. Therefore, the “identification of the feast of the dedication” as noted in John 10:22 is not taken from 1 Maccabees 4:59, but rather from the common knowledge and practice of the time period.
27. “John 10:36 – Jesus accepts the inspiration of Maccabees as He analogizes the Hanukkah consecration to His own consecration to the Father in 1 Macc. 4:36.”
Let's take a look at these two verses:
“36 do you say of Him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’?” (John 10:36 NKJV)
“36 Then Judas, and his brethren said: Behold our enemies are discomfited: let us go up now to cleanse the holy places and to repair them.” (1 Maccabees 4:36 DRA)
Clearly, Jesus' statement in John 10:36 is a statement of fact, not an analogy of Hanukkah, nor the cleansing of the temple as noted in 1 Maccabees 4:36. Jesus is directly stating His deity, therefore, Mr. Salza's attempt to analogize the Lord's statement is akin to analogizing His deity. A heretical practice to say the least.
28. “John 15:6 - branches that don't bear fruit and are cut down follows Wis. 4:5 where branches are broken off.”
These two passages present two interesting teachings, although they do not refer necessarily to the same thing. In Wisdom 4:5, and indeed all of chapter 4, the writer is saying that while the righteous will thrive, the wicked will fall. The writer notes that both come from the same group of people, the same tree so to speak. Obviously he is talking about the Jews. While righteous Jews will thrive, wicked Jews who rebel against God will fall.
In John 15:6, however, Jesus is not talking about a race of people such as the Jews. He is talking about those who profess to follow Him. When the passage is read in context (John 15:1-8) this becomes very clear. What Jesus is teaching is, those whose professions of faith are true, the true believers, will produce good fruit. Not may produce good fruit, not could produce good fruit, but will produce good fruit. Those whose professions of faith were not real, the false believers if you will, cannot produce good fruit. Again He states this emphatically. Jesus also teaches that the “false believers” will be cast out, gathered up, and burned, as is described elsewhere in Scripture as being cast into the lake of fire.
Clearly then, John 15:6 does not follow Wisdom 4:5, as the two passages are speaking about two entirely different things. What makes the attempted connection between the two interesting, however, is that taking a group of writings such as the apocrypha, which contain numerous contradictions and obvious errors, and trying to pass off such an obviously fallible group of writings as inspired infallible Scripture, is a clear example of bad fruit.
29. “Acts 1:15 - Luke's reference to the 120 may be a reference to 1 Macc. 3:55 - leaders of tens / restoration of the twelve.”
Luke's reference to the 120 in Acts 1:15, refers to the number of disciples present at the choosing of Matthias to replace the traitor Judas after he committed suicide. 1 Maccabees 3:55 is a reference to the military captains appointed by Judas more than 100 years before the choosing of Matthias. There is no connection whatsoever between these two passages. Mr. Salza is grasping at straw in the wind with this one.
30. “Acts 10:34; Rom. 2:11; Gal. 2:6 - Peter's and Paul's statement that God shows no partiality references Sirach 35:12.”
Acts 10:34; Romans 2:11; and Galatian 2:6 all emphatically teach there is no partiality in God. This truth is just as emphatically taught in the Old Testament. For example, Deuteronomy 10:17 states, “17 For the Lord your God is God of gods and Lord of lords, the great God, mighty and awesome, who shows no partiality nor takes a bribe.” (NKJV, see also 2 Chron. 19:7). In fact, impartiality is taken so seriously in the Old Testament, it is actually commanded (see Lev. 19:15; Deut. 1:16-17; Prov. 28:21; Ecc. 3:16-22). Being well versed in the Old Testament, it is not surprising that the Apostles Peter and Paul (and Jesus for that matter) continue that truth in the New Testament.
Sirach 35:12, on the other hand, states, “12 Give to the most High according to what he hath given to thee, and with a good eye do according to the ability of thy hands” (DRA). This verse refers to how an individual is to give to the Lord, and how to live; and it says nothing whatsoever about the impartiality of God. In fact, nowhere in Sirach chapter 35 is the impartiality of God spoken of.
Clearly, Acts 10:34; Romans 2:11; and Galatian 2:6 do not reference anything in Sirach 35, much less verse 12 of that chapter.
31. “Acts 17:29 - description of false gods as like gold and silver made by men follows Wisdom 13:10.”
Peter, just as all the Apostles, and also those who were listening to Peter's exhortation in Acts 17:29, would have been very familiar with the third commandment (Exodus 20:3-6) and also with the Lord's fuller explanation of it in Exodus 20:23, “23 You shall not make anything to be with Me—gods of silver or gods of gold you shall not make for yourselves.”(NKJV)
The exhortation to refrain from making false gods out of (among other things) gold and silver, can also be found in Deut. 29:17; Ps. 115:4; Ps. 135:15; Is. 2:20; Is. 30:22; Is. 40:19; Is. 41:7; Is. 44:10; Is. 46:6; Jer. 10:4; Dan. 5:4; Hab. 2:19.
Clearly, Wisdom 13:10 is following all of these Old Testament passages, just as Acts 17:29 is; rather than Acts 17:29 following Wisdom 13:10 – which it doesn't.
32. Rom 1:18-25 - Paul's teaching on the knowledge of the Creator and the ignorance and sin of idolatry follows Wis. 13:1-10.
Romans 1;18-25 actually references Psalm 2:5, 12; 45:7; 75:8; 76:6-7; 78:49-51; 90:7-9; Isaiah 51:17; Psalm 81:11-12; Proverbs 1:23-31; Hosea 4:17. If anything, Wisdom 13:1-10 follows these numerous Old Testament passages just as Romans 1:18-25 does. Romans 1:18-25, however, does not follow Wisdom 13:1-10.
33. Rom. 1:20 - specifically, God's existence being evident in nature follows Wis. 13:1.
Romans 1:20 actually references Psalm 19-1-8; 94:9.
34. Rom. 1:23 - the sin of worshipping mortal man, birds, animals and reptiles follows Wis. 11:15; 12:24-27; 13:10; 14:8.
Romans 1:23 actually references Joshua 24:2; Exodus 20:3-5. cf. Isaiah 44:9-17; 2 Kings 17:13-16.
35. Rom. 1:24-27 - this idolatry results in all kinds of sexual perversion which follows Wis. 14:12,24-27.
Romans 1:24-27 actually references Ezekiel 23:49; 1 Kings 14; Job 4:8; Proverbs 1:31-33; Hosea 8:7; Hosea 10:12.
36. Rom. 4:17 - Abraham is a father of many nations follows Sirach 44:19.
Romans 4:17 actually references Genesis 17:4-5.
37. Rom. 5:12 - description of death and sin entering into the world is similar to Wisdom 2:24.
Romans 5;12 actually references Genesis 3:1-7; cf. Psalm 51:5, Genesis 2:17; Ezekiel 18:4.
38. Rom. 9:21 - usage of the potter and the clay, making two kinds of vessels follows Wisdom 15:7.
Romans 9:21 actually references Isaiah 64:6-8; Jeremiah 18:3-16. Paul possibly is alluding to Wisdom 15:7, but he has not quoted exactly, and alluding to an apocryphal passage is not the same as quoting that passage. Additionally, one must note that Wisdom 15:7 is following the teaching of the older Isaiah and Jeremiah passages, therefore, the Wisdom passage is not unique to the apocrypha. Therefore, this is not a definitive New Testament quote of the apocrypha.
39. 1 Cor. 2:16 - Paul's question, "who has known the mind of the Lord?" references Wisdom 9:13.
1 Corinthians 2:16 actually references Isaiah 40:13.
40. 1 Cor. 6:12-13; 10:23-26 - warning that, while all things are good, beware of gluttony, follows Sirach 36:18 and 37:28-30.
Actually, the 1 Corinthians passages reference numerous Old Testament passages, such as: Proverbs 23:20-21; Proverbs 25:16; Psalm 78:18; and Numbers 11:31-34. The Sirach passage do not mention gluttony at all: “Reward them that patiently wait for thee, that thy prophets may be found faithful: and hear the prayers of thy servants,” (Sirach 36:18), “28 The life of a man is in the number of his days: but the days of Israel are innumerable. 29 A wise man shall inherit honour among his people, and his name shall live for ever. 30 My son, prove thy soul in thy life: and if it be wicked, give it no power:” (Sirach 37:28-30)
41. 1 Cor. 8:5-6 - Paul acknowledging many "gods" but one Lord follows Wis. 13:3.
1 Corinthians 8:5-6 actually references Psalm 82. Wisdom 13:3 has no connection to either 1 Corinthians 8:5-6, or Psalm 82, as it refers to those who are so beautiful they are mistakenly believed to be gods.
42. 1 Cor. 10:1 - Paul's description of our fathers being under the cloud passing through the sea refers to Wisdom 19:7.
1 Corinthians 10:1 actually references Exodus 13:21; 14:16. in fact, Wisdom 19:7 is a reference to this as well.
43. 1 Cor. 10:20 - what pagans sacrifice they offer to demons and not to God refers to Baruch 4:7.
Paul is actually alluding to Deuteronomy 32:16-17; and the Baruch passage is a direct reference to Deuteronomy 32:16-17.
44. 1 Cor. 15:29 - if no expectation of resurrection, it would be foolish to be baptized on their behalf follows 2 Macc. 12:43-45.
The 1 Corinthians passage is referring to baptizing for the dead, and the 2 Maccabees passage is talking about praying for the dead. These are two completely different things, so no 1 Cor. 15:29 is not a reference to 2 Macc. 12:43-45. Additionally, Paul would not have promoted the practice of praying for the dead, since doing so serves no useful purpose. Praying for the dead does not change the eternal destiny of someone who has died. Hebrews 9:27 tells us that after death we will face judgment. Once dead there is no second chance. And if someone is a true believer, then why pray for them at all when they die, as upon death, they immediately enter directly into the presence of the Lord (Luke 23:43; Philippians 1:23; 2 Corinthians 5:6, 8); and those who die in their sins, well, “The soul who sins is the one who will die. . . . The righteousness of the righteous man will be credited to him, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against him” (Ezekiel 18:20). It's as simple as that. Praying for dead people can do nothing to change their eternal destiny after they have died. The time to pray for people is before they pass away.
With regard to Paul's teaching in 1 Corinthians 15, Paul is defending the doctrine of the resurrection, and he is doing so by pointing out the contradictory practices of a group of false teachers who perform baptisms for the dead, but they don't believe the dead will be resurrected. As Paul so masterfully points out, what is the point of practicing something that depends completely on the resurrection if there is no resurrection! Paul completely destroys their argument by pointing out the obvious fallacy of it. That this group was denying the resurrection is evidence they were not true believers (Romans 10:9-10; 1 John 2:18-4:6), and had infiltrated the Church, bringing their false teachings with them. Throughout 1 Corinthians 15, Paul is clearly not, by any means, condoning the practice of baptism for the dead.
45. Eph. 1:17 - Paul's prayer for a "spirit of wisdom" follows the prayer for the spirit of wisdom in Wisdom 7:7.
Paul is asking for wisdom for others in Ephesians 1:17, while the passage in Wisdom 7:7 is asking for wisdom for self, and is a reference to 1 Kings 3:1-15 when Solomon asks the Lord for wisdom.
46. Eph. 6:14 - Paul describing the breastplate of righteousness is the same as Wis. 5:18. See also Isaiah 59:17 and 1 Thess. 5:8.
47. Eph. 6:13-17 - in fact, the whole discussion of armor, helmet, breastplate, sword, shield follows Wis. 5:17-20.
Actually, the Wisdom passage is incorrectly noted by Mr. Salva. It should be Wisdom 5:17-24, not just verse 18; and it (Wisdom 5:17-24) is a reference to Isaiah 59:15-21. If anything, the Ephesians passage and the 1 Thessalonians passage allude to Isaiah 59:15-21; but they do not refer to or follow the Wisdom passage, but rather, the Wisdom passage follows the Isaiah passage.
48. 1 Tim. 6:15 - Paul's description of God as Sovereign and King of kings is from 2 Macc. 12:15; 13:4.
This is at best, a very poor argument. The first passage from 2 Maccabees refers to God as the Lord of the world. This is a very commonly reference to God throughout the Old Testament. The second passage from 2 Maccabees refers to God as the King of kings. Again, numerous Old Testament passages refer to God as the sole sovereign King who is over all earthly kings. Paul's description in 1 Timothy 6:15 is not a quote from either of the 2 Maccabees passages. By using the same practice as used here by the Roman Catholic apologist, I could easily cobble together a group of passages from the Book of Mormon to prove the Pope quotes from it!
49. 2 Tim. 4:8 - Paul's description of a crown of righteousness is similar to Wisdom 5:16.
Wisdom 5:16 doesn't say anything about a crown (this happens when people cut and paste without actually doing the research themselves). However, Wisdom 5:17 makes a reference to a “crown of beauty.” This is not the same thing as the “Crown of Righteousness” referred to by Paul in 2 Tim. 4:8. The closest reference to the crown of Wisdom 5:17, is the crown of beauty found in Isaiah 62:3, although the references are dissimilar. Possibly the writer of Wisdom was alluding to the older passage found in Isaiah; but Paul was clearly not alluding to or referencing the Wisdom passage.
50. Heb. 4:12 - Paul's description of God's word as a sword is similar to Wisdom 18:15.
As with the previous verse, Wisdom 18:15 does not have anything to do with Hebrews 4:12, as the Wisdom verse does not mention a sword. What the Roman Catholic apologist meant to say (and isn't it ironic that a Protestant has to help the Roman Catholic apologist present his argument correctly?), is Wisdom 18:15-16, which states, “15 Thy almighty word leapt down from heaven from thy royal throne, as a fierce conqueror into the midst of the land of destruction. 16 With a sharp sword carrying thy unfeigned commandment, and he stood and filled all things with death, and standing on the earth reached even to heaven.” As can be seen, however, the Hebrews passage does not say that God's word is a sword, but rather is sharper than any sword. The Wisdom passage, on the other hand, actually states the word was carrying a sword. These are two distinctly different passages, stating two distinctly different things. The only thing they have in common is that each of them mentions the word of God and a sword. There is nothing similar about them.
51. Heb. 11:5 - Enoch being taken up is also referenced in Wis 4:10 and Sir 44:16. See also 2 Kings 2:1-13 & Sir 48:9 regarding Elijah.
The taking up of Enoch and Elijah are recorded in Genesis 5:21-24 (Enoch) and 2 Kings 2:1-13 (Elijah). Both Genesis and 2 Kings were written long, long, long before Wisdom and Sirach. Clearly then, the Wisdom and Sirach passages were copied from these older books; and, the writer of Hebrews was quoting from them as well.
52. Heb 11:35 - Paul teaches about the martyrdom of the mother and her sons described in 2 Macc. 7:1-42.
Hebrews 11:35 refers to the widow of Zarephath (1 Kings 17:22 where Elijah prays and the child returns to life) and the woman of Shunern (2 Kings 4:34 where Elisha prays, and then lays on the child, and he returns to life). In both of these instances, the woman is not martyred, nor does she die at all; and, there is only one son returning to life. There is no similarity between the Hebrews passage and the 2 Maccabees passage which relates in gruesome detail the tortuous deaths of a single woman and her numerous sons. There is no mention of the sons or their mother being raised to life again.
53. Heb. 12:12 - the description "drooping hands" and "weak knees" comes from Sirach 25:23.
The reference to weak or drooping hands and weak knees actually comes from Isaiah 35:3, which states, “Strengthen the weak hands, and make firm the feeble knees.” It does not come from Sirach 25:23, which states, “And there is no anger above the anger of a woman. It will be more agreeable to abide with a lion and a dragon, than to dwell with a wicked woman.” which connects to nothing in Hebrews 12.
54. James 1:19 - let every man be quick to hear and slow to respond follows Sirach 5:11.
The principle taught in James 1:19 is not only common sense, but commonly taught throughout the Old Testament (for example: Proverbs 10:19; 17:27; 16:32; Ecclesiastes 7:9). Sirach 5:11, however, is only remotely similar to these Old Testament passages: “Winnow not with every wind, and go not into every way: for so is every sinner proved by a double tongue.” (Sirach 5:11)
55. James 2:23 - it was reckoned to him as righteousness follows 1 Macc. 2:52 - it was reckoned to him as righteousness.
Actually, James 2:23 is a quote from Genesis 15:6, just as 1 Maccabees 2:52 is a loose quote from the same Genesis verse.
56. James 3:13 - James' instruction to perform works in meekness follows Sirach 3:17.
The principle taught in James 3:13 is taught throughout the Old Testament (for example: Num 12:3; Deut 8:2,16; 2 Chron 7:14; 2 Chron 34:27; Job 22:29; Ps 9:12; 10:12,17; 34:2; 69:32; Ps 22:26; 25:9; 37:11; 76:9; 147:6; 149:4), and James would have been very familiar with it. It is not, however, taught in Sirach 3:17, which states, “And in justice thou shalt be built up, and in the day of affliction thou shalt be remembered: and thy sins shall melt away as the ice in the fair warm weather.”
57. James 5:3 - describing silver which rusts and laying up treasure follows Sirach 29:10-11.
Although James 5:3 does speak about laying up treasure that corrodes, Sirach 29:10-11 does not: “10 Many have refused to lend, not out of wickedness, but they were afraid to be defrauded without cause. 11 But yet towards the poor be thou more hearty, and delay not to shew him mercy.” (Sirach 29:10-11 Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition)
58. James 5:6 - condemning and killing the "righteous man" follows Wisdom 2:10-20.
The Old Testament contains numerous references to condemning and killing righteous and innocent people (practices the Lord condemns). For example, see: Exodus 23:7; Deuteronomy 27:25; Proverbs 17:15; Psalm 94:21; Leviticus 24:19-22; Proverbs 6:16-19. It is far more likely that James is drawing from these passages, as it is closer in context to them. The James passage, like the other Old Testament passages, condemns the practice; while in the Wisdom passage, the practice is being condoned by the ones speaking.
59. 1 Peter 1:6-7 - Peter teaches about testing faith by purgatorial fire as described in Wisdom 3:5-6 and Sirach 2:5.
1 Peter 1:6-7 is drawn from numerous Old Testament passages that speak of the righteous having their faith tested and refined by fire. For example, see: Zechariah 13:9; Isaiah 48:10; Malachi 3:1-18; Job 23:10; Proverbs 17:3; Psalm 66:10-12; Psalm 66:10. Both the Wisdom and the Sirach passages are also drawn from these Old Testament passages. Additionally, there is no mention in any of these passages of purgatory; and that includes the Wisdom and Sirach passages. Nowhere in Holy Scripture is the doctrine of purgatory taught.
60. 1 Peter 1:17 - God judging each one according to his deeds refers to Sirach 16:12 - God judges man according to his deeds.
Sirach 16:12 says nothing about God judging each one according to his deeds. Sirach 16:12 states, “12 For mercy and wrath are with him. He is mighty to forgive, and to pour out indignation” There is no connection between Sirach 16:12 and 1 Peter 1:17.
61. 2 Peter 2:7 - God's rescue of a righteous man (Lot) is also described in Wisdom 10:6.
2 Peter 2:7 states, “ and delivered righteous Lot, who was oppressed by the filthy conduct of the wicked.” This is drawn from Genesis 19. Wisdom 10:6, on the other hand, talks about some woman delivering a righteous man. It says nothing about God, or Lot, and is not a reference to God's deliverance of Lot from Sodom: “She delivered the just man who fled from the wicked that were perishing, when the fire came down upon Pentapolis” (Wisdom 10:6 Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition)
62. Rev. 1:4 – the seven spirits who are before his throne is taken from Tobit 12:15 – Raphael is one of the seven holy angels who present the prayers of the saints before the Holy One.
The Angels and the seven spirits of Revelation 1:4, are two different things entirely. When John refers to the “seven angels” in Revelation, he always refers to them as “the seven angels,” and not as spirits (see Rev.8:2;16:1). The “Seven Spirits” which are at the throne of God, is a reference to the Holy Spirit of God. Note the description of the Spirit in Isaiah 11:2, where the Spirit is given seven titles: 1) The Spirit of the Lord, 2) the Spirit of Wisdom, 3) the Spirit of Understanding, 4) the Spirit of Counsel, 5) the Spirit of Might, 6) the Spirit of Knowledge, and 7) the Spirit of the Fear of the Lord. These are attributes or characteristics of the Holy Spirit. Revelation 1:4 is not taken from Tobit 12:15.
63. Rev. 1:18; Matt. 16:18 - power of life over death and gates of Hades follows Wis. 16:13.
Revelation 1:18 describes Jesus Christ, and points out His victory over death and the grave (Hades). Matthew 16:18 states that hell itself cannot prevail over the Church. These two verses are not connected as they speak about two very different things. Wisdom 16:13 is not connected to either of these two verses, as it speaks of God having power over death: “For it is thou, O Lord, that hast power of life and death, and leadest down to the gates of death, and bringest back again” (Wisdom 16:13 Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition). None of these verses “follow” each other. The Wisdom verse, however, does draw from numerous Old Testament passages, namely: Isaiah 25:8; Psalm 68:20; Psalm 16:10; and also: Joshua 2:13; Job 5:20; 10:21; 26:6; 30:23; 34:22; 38:17; Psalm 9:13; 33:19; 56:13; 68:20; Proverbs 10:2; 11:4; 18:21; 23:14; and Hosea 13:14.
64. Rev. 2:12 - reference to the two-edged sword is similar to the description of God's Word in Wisdom 18:16.
Revelation 2:12 states that God possesses a two-edged sword. Wisdom 18:15-16 states the “almighty word” has a sword: “15 Thy almighty word leapt down from heaven from thy royal throne, as a fierce conqueror into the midst of the land of destruction. 16 With a sharp sword carrying thy unfeigned commandment, and he stood and filled all things with death, and standing on the earth reached even to heaven.” These two verse are not similar. The only thing they have in common is the word “sword.” The sword of God is not, however, unique to Revelation 2:12, and can be found in the Old Testament. In fact, Ezekiel 21 contains numerous references to the sword of God. If anything, Revelation 2:12 is similar to Ezekiel 21, but not Wisdom 18:15-16.
65. Rev. 5:7 - God is described as seated on His throne, and this is the same description used in Sirach 1:8.
The description of God sitting on His throne is the same description used in Isaiah 6:1; 2 Chronicles 18:18; Psalm 47:8; 1 Kings 22:19; and Isaiah 40:22. It is not, therefore, exclusively the same as Sirach 1:8.
66. Rev. 8:3-4 - prayers of the saints presented to God by the hand of an angel follows Tobit 12:12,15.
These two passages actually describe two entirely different things happening. In Revelation 8:3-4, an angel offers incense with the prayers of the saints upon the golden alter before God. The “saints” referred to here are all true believers. In Tobit 12:12,15, an angel offers the prayers of pious Jews to the Lord personally. Since the Tobit angel only offers the prayers of certain Jews, while the Revelation angel offers the prayers of all true believers; and since the settings are completely different, as are the method of offering the prayers, it is clear these two passages do not follow one another.
67. Rev. 8:7 - raining of hail and fire to the earth follows Wisdom 16:22 and Sirach 39:29.
In Revelation 8:7, we see hail and fire raining down upon the earth together. In Wisdom 16:22, we see the land is already on fire, and the fire is not extinguished by falling hail. These are two entirely different things that have nothing in common with each other. Sirach 39:29, which states, “Even as he turned the waters into a dry land, and the earth was made dry: and his ways were made plain for their journey: so to sinners they are stumbling blocks in his wrath.”, has nothing whatsoever to do with either of the other two passages.
68. Rev. 9:3 - raining of locusts on the earth follows Wisdom 16:9.
Revelation 9:3 refers to demonic creatures coming forth out of the abyss; and Wisdom 16:9 refers to actual locusts gathering together, presumably against the Egyptians prior to the exodus. In neither case are they “raining,” and these two passages are nothing alike. There is a big difference between demonic creatures from the abyss and grasshoppers.
69. Rev. 11:19 - the vision of the ark of the covenant (Mary) in a cloud of glory was prophesied in 2 Macc. 2:7.
To begin with, the ark of the covenant is not Mary. Trying to make the ark a metaphor for Mary is simply changing the meaning of Scripture to fit whatever one wants it to fit. No, the ark of the covenant seen in the temple of God in Revelation 11:19 is the actual ark of the covenant. As for the alleged prophesy in 2 Maccabees 2:7, as can be seen, there is nothing in 2 Maccabees 2:7 that can be even remotely construed as relating to anything in Revelation 11:19, or even Mary for that matter: “And when Jeremias perceived it, he blamed them, saying: The place shall be unknown, till God gather together the congregation of the people, and receive them to mercy.” (2 Maccabees 2:7 Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition)
70. Rev. 17:14 - description of God as King of kings follows 2 Macc. 13:4.
Revelation 17:14 is a reference to Jesus Christ, while 2 Maccabees 13:4 is a reference to God the Father. They are not the same person. Using the logic employed by the Roman Catholic apologist who prepared this list, it could also be said that 2 Maccabees 13:4 follows Ezra 7:12; Ezekiel 26:7; and Daniel 2:37, all of which use the title King of kings. Since Revelation 17:14 and 2 Maccabees 13:4 are referring to two different people, the one does not “follow” the other.
71. Rev. 19:1 - the cry "Hallelujah" at the coming of the new Jerusalem follows Tobit 13:18.
Revelation 19:1 states, “After these things I heard a loud voice of a great multitude in heaven, saying, “Alleluia! Salvation and glory and honor and power belong to the Lord our God!” (Revelation 19:1 NKJV); and Tobit 13:18 states, “Blessed are all they that love thee, and that rejoice in thy peace.” (Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition). Clearly, the two verse have nothing whatsoever to do with one another.
72. Rev. 19:11 - the description of the Lord on a white horse in the heavens follows 2 Macc. 3:25; 11:8.
First, let's examine these passages:
Revelation 19:11 (NKJV)
11 Now I saw heaven opened, and behold, a white horse. And He who sat on him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness He judges and makes war.
2 Maccabees 3:25 (Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition)
25 For there appeared to them a horse with a terrible rider upon him, adorned with a very rich covering: and he ran fiercely and struck Heliodorus with his fore feet, and he that sat upon him seemed to have armour of gold.
2 Maccabees 11:8 (Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition )
8 And when they were going forth together with a willing mind, there appeared at Jerusalem a horseman going before them in white clothing, with golden armour, shaking a spear.
In the Revelation passage we see Jesus Christ, seated upon a white horse, coming out of heaven. In the two passages from 2 Maccabees, we see an unnamed rider, seated upon a horse with no color given for the horse, and rather than coming out of heaven, this unnamed rider appears on earth, wearing white clothing and full armor and shaking a spear. Clearly then, Revelation 19:11 is completely different from the two passages from 2 Maccabees. The only thing they have in common is someone is sitting on a horse, a description that can be found in numerous places within the Old Testament.
73. Rev. 19:16 - description of our Lord as King of kings is taken from 2 Macc. 13:4.
Revelation 19:16 is a reference to Jesus Christ, while 2 Maccabees 13:4 is a reference to God the Father. They are not the same person. Using the logic employed by the Roman Catholic apologist who prepared this list, it could also be said that 2 Maccabees 13:4 follows Ezra 7:12; Ezekiel 26:7; and Daniel 2:37, all of which use the title King of kings. Since Revelation 19:16 and 2 Maccabees 13:4 are referring to two different people, the one does not “follow” the other.
74. Rev. 21:19 - the description of the new Jerusalem with precious stones is prophesied in Tobit 13:17.
Revelation 21:19 provides a description of the New Jerusalem, stating, “The foundations of the wall of the city were adorned with all kinds of precious stones: the first foundation was jasper, the second sapphire, the third chalcedony, the fourth emerald,” (NKJV); while Tobit 13:17, the alleged prophecy, states, “But thou shalt rejoice in thy children, because they shall all be blessed, and shall be gathered together to the Lord.” (Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition). Clearly, the Tobit passage is not a prophecy of Revelation 21:19.
75. Exodus 23:7 - do not slay the innocent and righteous - Dan. 13:53 - do not put to death an innocent and righteous person.
Since Exodus 23:7 is far older than Daniel 13:53 (which is an addition to the actual book of Daniel), clearly it is Daniel 13:53 which follows Exodus 23:7, and not the other way around.
76. 1 Sam. 28:7-20 – the intercessory mediation of deceased Samuel for Saul follows Sirach 46:20.
Since 1 Samuel 28:7-20 is far older than Sirach 46:20, clearly it is Sirach which follows 1 Samuel, and not the other way around.
77. 2 Kings 2:1-13 – Elijah being taken up into heaven follows Sirach 48:9.
Since 2 Kings 2:1-3 is far older than Sirach 48:9, clearly it is Sirach which follows 2 Kings, and not the other way around.
78. 2 Tim. 3:16 - the inspired Scripture that Paul was referring to included the deuterocanonical texts that the Protestants removed. The books Baruch, Tobit, Maccabees, Judith, Sirach, Wisdom and parts of Daniel and Esther were all included in the Septuagint that Jesus and the apostles used.
There is absolutely no evidence to support the argument that Paul was referring to the apocrypha/deuterocanonical books in 2 Timothy 3:16. In fact, if he was referring to the apocrypha/deuterocanonical books, then according to this Roman Catholic apologist argument, Paul must have also been referring to 1 Esdras, 2 Esdras, the Prayer of Manasseh, 3 Maccabees, 4 Maccabees, Psalm 151 – all of which are rejected as inspired Scripture by the Roman Catholic church, thus making the Roman Catholic church guilty of “removing” these books from the Bible, the same charge they level against Protestantism.
79. Sirach and 2 Maccabees – some Protestants argue these books are not inspired because the writers express uncertainty about their abilities. But sacred writers are often humble about their divinely inspired writings. See, for example, 1 Cor. 7:40 – Paul says he “thinks” that he has the Spirit of God.
This is incorrect. Protestants say these books are not inspired canon for several reasons. They are not quoted anywhere in the New Testament, they are not noted anywhere in the New Testament as being inspired; they were not accepted by the Jews as inspired; there is absolutely no evidence to support their inspiration, regardless of how the writers of Sirach and 2 Maccabees felt about themselves.
80. The Protestants attempt to defend their rejection of the deuterocanonicals on the ground that the early Jews rejected them. However, the Jewish councils that rejected them (e.g., School of Javneh (also called “Jamnia” in 90 - 100 A.D.) were the same councils that rejected the entire New Testament canon. Thus, Protestants who reject the Catholic Bible are following a Jewish council that rejected Christ and the Revelation of the New Testament.
This anti-Protestant argument is based on a false premise. Following the logic of this argument, it could easily be said of any Roman Catholic who accepts the any of the canonical Old Testament books, since the same Jewish councils who reject the entire New Testament (as any good Jew will do, since they reject Jesus as the Messiah), also accept every book between Genesis and Malachi. And if they are “following” the decisions of these Jewish councils who reject the entire New Testament, then why aren't the Roman Catholics also rejecting the entire New Testament.
As can be seen from an examination of the quotations, references, allusions, etc., of the apocryphal / deuterocanonical writings that are alleged to be found in the New Testament, the fact of the matter is, not one of them passes muster. In other words, there are no apocryphal / deuterocanonical writings quoted, referred to, or alluded to in the New Testament. Not one. I will grant that there are several instances where the apocrypha / deuterocanonical writings refer to the same Old Testament passages that some New Testament passages refer to, however, this does not mean the New Testament is actually referring to the apocrypha / deuterocanonical writings as they are actually referring to the Old Testament. That the apocrypha / deuterocanonical writings also refer to the same Old Testament passage only proves that Jews during the intertestamental period were aware of the accepted Old Testament canon, and they referred to in their own writings just as Jesus, the Apostles and others of the New Testament time period. That and nothing more. When Mr. Salza and others try to point to these concidental references and claim them as evidence the New Testament writers quoted, referred to or alluded to the apocrypha / deuterocanonical writings is nothing more than hoping to make a case based on slim circumstantial evidence that is tenuous at best; and in some cases, as has been shown, evidence that is completely nonexistent.
According to the Blue Letter Bible website [https://www.blueletterbible.org/study/pnt/pnt08.cfm], there 855 Old Testament quotations found within the New Testament. While the fact that the New Testament quotes from the Old does not prove the Old Testament is inspired Scripture, it does give strong evidence that Jesus and the Apostles considered it as such. In all of the 77 alleged occurrences of the apocrypha / deuterocanonical books in the New Testament, however, not one of them can be shown to be an actual occurrence of them in the New Testament. Not one. Again, this simple fact in and of itself does not indicate the apocrypha / deuterocanonical writings are not inspired, but it does provide strong evidence that Jesus and Apostles, and indeed all of the New Testament writers did not consider them authoritative.
Many Roman Catholic apologists look to the alleged quotations and references to the apocryphal / deuterocanonical writings in the New Testament, as evidence of their canonicity. However, if a spurious book is quoted in the accepted New Testament, or even a mere mention of a spurious book is in the New Testament, is evidence of canonicity; then the Roman Catholic church must also accept the Book of Jasher and the Book of Enoch as inspired Scripture as well. The Book of Jasher is included in Paul's writings when he makes note of the sorcerers Jannes and Jambres (2 Timothy 3:8). The event Paul describes seems to follow Jasher 79:27 rather closely. And, the Book of Enoch (1 Enoch 1:9) is quoted almost verbatim in Jude 1:14-15. Of course, both Paul and Jude are merely confirming ancient events, while not confirming the credibility or the canonicity of Jasher and Enoch. But you can see the problem that arises when Roman Catholics attempt to use the mention, reference, or quotation of an apocryphal / deuterocanonical writing in the New Testament as evidence of canonicity.
The requirements for inclusion in the canon of sacred inspired Scripture will be discussed in more detail in parts two and three of this series. Suffice to say, the only possible conclusion one can come to at this point, and still remain honest to oneself, is that the apocryphal / deuterocanonical writings were not quoted, referenced, nor even alluded to by Jesus, the Apostles, nor any of the New Testament writers.