Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
601 bytes added ,  22:34, April 18, 2018
→‎Hebrew and Aramaic original texts: cited the fact of discrepancies between Old Testament Hebrew texts and New Testament quotations of them, with ref note linking biblehub.com commentaries on Heb 1:6
Line 84: Line 84:  
*[http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/septuagint.html The Septuagint (LXX): History of the Septuagint]
 
*[http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/septuagint.html The Septuagint (LXX): History of the Septuagint]
 
*[http://www.cresourcei.org/canonot.html Canons of the Hebrew Bible]
 
*[http://www.cresourcei.org/canonot.html Canons of the Hebrew Bible]
−
*[http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Apocrypha-Books/ Official King James Bible online: Apocrypha Books]</ref> Protestant doctrine has traditionally affirmed that the books of the Apocrypha were not originally written in Hebrew or Aramaic, presenting this as an additional indication that they cannot be regarded as sacred inspired scripture.  
+
*[http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Apocrypha-Books/ Official King James Bible online: Apocrypha Books]</ref> Those who do comparative studies of Old Testament texts quoted in the New Testament have frequently been puzzled by the sometimes obvious discrepancies they have noticed, in particular the quotation cited in Hebrews 1:6 "And let all the angels of God worship him", a text not found anywhere in the Hebrew Masoretic text of the [[Tanakh]], but is found in the Septuagint in Deuteronomy 32:43, and which some scholars have proposed as a possibly inexact, rough parallel [[paraphrase]] of Psalm 97:7.<ref>See [http://biblehub.com/commentaries/hebrews/1-6.htm multiple commentaries on Hebrews 1:6].</ref> Protestant doctrine has traditionally affirmed that the books of the Apocrypha were not originally written in Hebrew or Aramaic, presenting this as an additional indication that they cannot be regarded as sacred inspired scripture.  
    
However, Biblical researchers in the 20th and 21st centuries have also discovered that most of the Apocrypha, except the Book of Wisdom (originally written in Greek?), were in fact originally written in Hebrew or Aramaic (Syriac) prior to the Christian era.<ref>[http://www.biblestudytools.com/dictionary/apocrypha/ Baker's Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology - Apocrypha] <br/>[http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/apocrypha.html The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha] (jewishvirtuallibrary.org)</ref><ref name=HebrewAramaic/> The New Testament quotes from all of the Old Testament Books except Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Solomon, and the New Testament books themselves were originally written in Greek.<ref>''The Gospel According to Matthew'' alone among the scriptures of the New Testament was probably originally written by Matthew in Hebrew or Aramaic, according to the earlier tradition cited by Eusebius Pamphilus in his ''Ecclesistical History'' (Book III, Chapter XXIV). —''The Ecclesiastical History Of Eusebius Pamphilus: Bishop Of Caesarea, In Palestine'', C. F. Cruse, 1874, London: George Bell and Sons, York Steet, Covent Garden. pages 97—98.</ref> This does not mean they are not inspired.
 
However, Biblical researchers in the 20th and 21st centuries have also discovered that most of the Apocrypha, except the Book of Wisdom (originally written in Greek?), were in fact originally written in Hebrew or Aramaic (Syriac) prior to the Christian era.<ref>[http://www.biblestudytools.com/dictionary/apocrypha/ Baker's Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology - Apocrypha] <br/>[http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/apocrypha.html The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha] (jewishvirtuallibrary.org)</ref><ref name=HebrewAramaic/> The New Testament quotes from all of the Old Testament Books except Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Solomon, and the New Testament books themselves were originally written in Greek.<ref>''The Gospel According to Matthew'' alone among the scriptures of the New Testament was probably originally written by Matthew in Hebrew or Aramaic, according to the earlier tradition cited by Eusebius Pamphilus in his ''Ecclesistical History'' (Book III, Chapter XXIV). —''The Ecclesiastical History Of Eusebius Pamphilus: Bishop Of Caesarea, In Palestine'', C. F. Cruse, 1874, London: George Bell and Sons, York Steet, Covent Garden. pages 97—98.</ref> This does not mean they are not inspired.
Block, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, edit, move, protect
30,891

edits

Navigation menu