OT Apocrypha - Revision history

Gabriele Boccaccini: Redirected page to Category:OT Apocrypha (subject)

2013-05-16T19:31:13Z

Redirected page to Category:OT Apocrypha (subject)

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:31, 16 May 2013
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~The '''Old Testament Apocrypha''', or '''Deutocanonici''' is a Christian corpus generated in the 16th century to denote a certain group of Second Temple Texts not included in the~~ [[~~Hebrew Bible]] and in the Protestant Canon but deemed "canonical" by the Roman Catholic Church.~~		#REDIRECT [[:Category:OT Apocrypha (subject)]]

	~~<Tobit, Judith, Ben Sira, Wisdom of Solomon, 1-2 Maccabees, Baruch, plus the additions to Daniel and Esther) + [[4 Ezra]] >~~

	~~==Overview ==~~

	The corpus of the OT Apocrypha or Deuterocanici (Tobit, Judith, Ben Sira, Wisdom of Solomon, 1-2 Maccabees, Baruch, plus the additions to Daniel and Esther) owes its existence to the polemics of the Reformation era and was sanctioned by the Council of Trent in 1546.

	The Protestant reformers adopted [[Jerome]]’s principle of ''Hebraica veritas'', and acknowledged only the books also found in the Rabbinic Canon or [[Hebrew Bible]] as inspired scripture in the Old Testament. The Council of Trent reacted by affirming the larger canon of the traditional Roman Catholic Church, based on the Latin [[Vulgate]]: “If any one receive not, as sacred and canonical, the said books entire with all their parts, as they have been used to be read in the Catholic Church and as they are contained in the old Latin Vulgate . . . let him be anathema.”

	The Tridentine canon was identical to the list issued by the Council of Hippo (339 CE), except that the Council Fathers appear to have misunderstood the meaning of 1 and 2 Esdras, which they identified as the proto-canonical books of Ezra and Nehemiah with the exclusion of 2 Esdras (=4 Ezra).

	~~This different approach resulted in a different treatment of the material within the Protestant and the Catholic tradition.~~

	The first Protestant collection of '''OT Apocrypha''' by Taverner in 1549 published as a separated corpus texts originally printed as part of the Old Testament (from the 1939 [[Taverner's Bible]]) and included the apocalyptic [[4 Ezra]]

	On the other hand, the major Roman Catholic commentary of the 16th century, the [[Biblioteca Magna]] by [[Sisto of Siena\|Sixtus of Siena]] included these texts (with the exception of [[4 Ezra]]) in the Old Testament, only by giving them the label of ''deuterocanonici'' in recognition of the fact that their canonicity was disputed.

	While the Protestant tradition downplayed the religious importance of the OT Apocrypha, the Catholic tradition saw in them the canonical foundation of some distinctive Catholic doctrines such as the legitimacy of Church's property (see [[Expulsion of Heliodorus from the Temple]]) or the practice of intercession for the dead (see [[Judas' Prayer for the Dead]]).

	~~This distinction in the treatment of the material within the Protestant and Catholic traditions has shaped the foundations of modern research; see [[~~OT Apocrypha ~~Studies]].~~

	~~One of the first major consequences of the birth of the corpus of the [[OT Apocrypha]] / Deuterocanonici was the gradual emergence~~ (~~since the beginning of the 18th century~~) ~~of the companion corpus of the [[OT Pseudepigrapha~~]] (which Catholics called ''OT Apocrypha'') to collect all the many other ancient books that before the 16th century had shared with the OT Apocryphal texts the same destiny of being at the fringes of the ancient Jewish and Christian canons.

	~~==== The Canonical Status OT Apocryphal Texts before the 16th century ====~~

	Before the 16th century the OT Apocrypha or Deutocanonici did not exist as a distinctive corpus, but were part of a "gray area" made of a larger amount of books that were more or less authoritative, or authoritative for some Second Temple Jews but not for others, and then for some Christians but not for others. Like many other texts now in the [[OT Pseudepigrapha]], the texts now in the [[OT Apocrypha]] were at the fringes of ancient Jewish and Christian canons, sometimes being considered authoritative, sometimes rejected. As they did not exist as a distinctive group any discussion must be


	< Categories: OT Apocrypha Translations -- OT Apocrypha Intro -- Bible, with OT Apocrypha -- -- Book of Tobit -- Book of Judith -- Esther Additions -- Wisdom of Solomon -- Book of Sirach -- 1 Baruch and the Letter of Jeremiah -- Daniel Additions (Prayer of Azariah and Song of the Children; Susanna; Bel and the Dragon) -- 1 Maccabees -- 2 Maccabees -- 3 Ezra (1 Esdras) -- Prayer of Manasseh -- Psalm 151 -- 3 Maccabees -- 4 Ezra (2 Esdras) >




	[[Category:Index]]		[[Category:Index]]
			[[Category:Topics]]
			[[Category:Texts]]

Gabriele Boccaccini: /* Overview */

2013-05-16T10:28:54Z

Overview

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:28, 16 May 2013
Line 7:		Line 7:
	The corpus of the OT Apocrypha or Deuterocanici (Tobit, Judith, Ben Sira, Wisdom of Solomon, 1-2 Maccabees, Baruch, plus the additions to Daniel and Esther) owes its existence to the polemics of the Reformation era and was sanctioned by the Council of Trent in 1546.		The corpus of the OT Apocrypha or Deuterocanici (Tobit, Judith, Ben Sira, Wisdom of Solomon, 1-2 Maccabees, Baruch, plus the additions to Daniel and Esther) owes its existence to the polemics of the Reformation era and was sanctioned by the Council of Trent in 1546.

	The Protestant reformers ~~had~~ adopted [[Jerome]]’s principle of ''Hebraica veritas'', and acknowledged only the books also found in the Rabbinic Canon or [[Hebrew Bible]] as inspired scripture in the Old Testament. The Council of Trent reacted by affirming the larger canon of the traditional Roman Catholic Church, based on the Latin [[Vulgate]]: “If any one receive not, as sacred and canonical, the said books entire with all their parts, as they have been used to be read in the Catholic Church and as they are contained in the old Latin Vulgate . . . let him be anathema.”		The Protestant reformers adopted [[Jerome]]’s principle of ''Hebraica veritas'', and acknowledged only the books also found in the Rabbinic Canon or [[Hebrew Bible]] as inspired scripture in the Old Testament. The Council of Trent reacted by affirming the larger canon of the traditional Roman Catholic Church, based on the Latin [[Vulgate]]: “If any one receive not, as sacred and canonical, the said books entire with all their parts, as they have been used to be read in the Catholic Church and as they are contained in the old Latin Vulgate . . . let him be anathema.”

	The Tridentine canon was identical to the list issued by the Council of Hippo (339 CE), except that the Council Fathers appear to have misunderstood the meaning of 1 and 2 Esdras, which they identified as the proto-canonical books of Ezra and Nehemiah with the exclusion of 2 Esdras (=4 Ezra).		The Tridentine canon was identical to the list issued by the Council of Hippo (339 CE), except that the Council Fathers appear to have misunderstood the meaning of 1 and 2 Esdras, which they identified as the proto-canonical books of Ezra and Nehemiah with the exclusion of 2 Esdras (=4 Ezra).
Line 19:		Line 19:
	While the Protestant tradition downplayed the religious importance of the OT Apocrypha, the Catholic tradition saw in them the canonical foundation of some distinctive Catholic doctrines such as the legitimacy of Church's property (see [[Expulsion of Heliodorus from the Temple]]) or the practice of intercession for the dead (see [[Judas' Prayer for the Dead]]).		While the Protestant tradition downplayed the religious importance of the OT Apocrypha, the Catholic tradition saw in them the canonical foundation of some distinctive Catholic doctrines such as the legitimacy of Church's property (see [[Expulsion of Heliodorus from the Temple]]) or the practice of intercession for the dead (see [[Judas' Prayer for the Dead]]).

	This distinction in the treatment of the material within the Protestant and Catholic traditions has shaped the modern research; see [[OT Apocrypha Studies]].		This distinction in the treatment of the material within the Protestant and Catholic traditions has shaped the foundations of modern research; see [[OT Apocrypha Studies]].

	One of the first major consequences of the birth of the corpus of the [[OT Apocrypha]] / Deuterocanonici was the gradual emergence (since the beginning of the 18th century) of the companion corpus of the [[OT Pseudepigrapha]] (which Catholics called ''OT Apocrypha'') to collect all the many other ancient books that before the 16th century had shared with the OT Apocryphal texts the same destiny of being at the fringes of the ancient Jewish and Christian canons.		One of the first major consequences of the birth of the corpus of the [[OT Apocrypha]] / Deuterocanonici was the gradual emergence (since the beginning of the 18th century) of the companion corpus of the [[OT Pseudepigrapha]] (which Catholics called ''OT Apocrypha'') to collect all the many other ancient books that before the 16th century had shared with the OT Apocryphal texts the same destiny of being at the fringes of the ancient Jewish and Christian canons.

Gabriele Boccaccini: /* Overview */

2013-05-16T10:25:49Z

Overview

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:25, 16 May 2013
Line 15:		Line 15:
	The first Protestant collection of '''OT Apocrypha''' by Taverner in 1549 published as a separated corpus texts originally printed as part of the Old Testament (from the 1939 [[Taverner's Bible]]) and included the apocalyptic [[4 Ezra]]		The first Protestant collection of '''OT Apocrypha''' by Taverner in 1549 published as a separated corpus texts originally printed as part of the Old Testament (from the 1939 [[Taverner's Bible]]) and included the apocalyptic [[4 Ezra]]

	On the other hand, the Roman Catholic commentary, [[Biblioteca Magna]] by [[Sisto of Siena\|Sixtus of Siena]] included these texts (with the exception of [[4 Ezra]]) in the Old Testament, only by giving them the label of ''deuterocanonici'' in recognition of the fact that their canonicity was disputed.		On the other hand, the major Roman Catholic commentary of the 16th century, the [[Biblioteca Magna]] by [[Sisto of Siena\|Sixtus of Siena]] included these texts (with the exception of [[4 Ezra]]) in the Old Testament, only by giving them the label of ''deuterocanonici'' in recognition of the fact that their canonicity was disputed.

			While the Protestant tradition downplayed the religious importance of the OT Apocrypha, the Catholic tradition saw in them the canonical foundation of some distinctive Catholic doctrines such as the legitimacy of Church's property (see [[Expulsion of Heliodorus from the Temple]]) or the practice of intercession for the dead (see [[Judas' Prayer for the Dead]]).

	This distinction in the treatment of the material within the Protestant and Catholic traditions has shaped the modern research; see [[OT Apocrypha Studies]].		This distinction in the treatment of the material within the Protestant and Catholic traditions has shaped the modern research; see [[OT Apocrypha Studies]].
Line 23:		Line 25:
	==== The Canonical Status OT Apocryphal Texts before the 16th century ====		==== The Canonical Status OT Apocryphal Texts before the 16th century ====

	Before the 16th century the OT Apocrypha or Deutocanonici did not exist as a distinctive corpus, but were part of a "gray area" made of a larger amount of books that were more or less authoritative, or authoritative for some Second Temple Jews but not for others, and then for some Christians but not for others.		Before the 16th century the OT Apocrypha or Deutocanonici did not exist as a distinctive corpus, but were part of a "gray area" made of a larger amount of books that were more or less authoritative, or authoritative for some Second Temple Jews but not for others, and then for some Christians but not for others. Like many other texts now in the [[OT Pseudepigrapha]], the texts now in the [[OT Apocrypha]] were at the fringes of ancient Jewish and Christian canons, sometimes being considered authoritative, sometimes rejected. As they did not exist as a distinctive group any discussion must be

Gabriele Boccaccini at 09:24, 16 May 2013

2013-05-16T09:24:21Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:24, 16 May 2013
Line 1:		Line 1:
	The '''Old Testament Apocrypha"'', or ''Deutocanonici''' is a Christian corpus generated in the 16th century to denote a certain group of Second Temple Texts not included in the [[Hebrew Bible]] and in the Protestant Canon but deemed "canonical" by the Roman Catholic Church.		The '''Old Testament Apocrypha''', or '''Deutocanonici''' is a Christian corpus generated in the 16th century to denote a certain group of Second Temple Texts not included in the [[Hebrew Bible]] and in the Protestant Canon but deemed "canonical" by the Roman Catholic Church.

	<Tobit, Judith, Ben Sira, Wisdom of Solomon, 1-2 Maccabees, Baruch, plus the additions to Daniel and Esther) + [[4 Ezra]] >		<Tobit, Judith, Ben Sira, Wisdom of Solomon, 1-2 Maccabees, Baruch, plus the additions to Daniel and Esther) + [[4 Ezra]] >
Line 11:		Line 11:
	The Tridentine canon was identical to the list issued by the Council of Hippo (339 CE), except that the Council Fathers appear to have misunderstood the meaning of 1 and 2 Esdras, which they identified as the proto-canonical books of Ezra and Nehemiah with the exclusion of 2 Esdras (=4 Ezra).		The Tridentine canon was identical to the list issued by the Council of Hippo (339 CE), except that the Council Fathers appear to have misunderstood the meaning of 1 and 2 Esdras, which they identified as the proto-canonical books of Ezra and Nehemiah with the exclusion of 2 Esdras (=4 Ezra).

	As a ~~result~~ the first Protestant collection of '''OT Apocrypha''' by Taverner in 1549 published as a separated corpus texts originally printed as part of the Old Testament (from the 1939 [[Taverner's Bible]]) and included the apocalyptic [[4 Ezra]]		This different approach resulted in a different treatment of the material within the Protestant and the Catholic tradition.

			The first Protestant collection of '''OT Apocrypha''' by Taverner in 1549 published as a separated corpus texts originally printed as part of the Old Testament (from the 1939 [[Taverner's Bible]]) and included the apocalyptic [[4 Ezra]]

	On the other hand, the Roman Catholic commentary, [[Biblioteca Magna]] by [[Sisto of Siena\|Sixtus of Siena]] included these texts (with the exception of [[4 Ezra]]) in the Old Testament, only by giving them the label of ''deuterocanonici'' in recognition of the fact that their canonicity was disputed.		On the other hand, the Roman Catholic commentary, [[Biblioteca Magna]] by [[Sisto of Siena\|Sixtus of Siena]] included these texts (with the exception of [[4 Ezra]]) in the Old Testament, only by giving them the label of ''deuterocanonici'' in recognition of the fact that their canonicity was disputed.

	This distinction in the treatment of the material within the Protestant and Catholic traditions has shaped the modern research; see [[OT Apocrypha Studies]].		This distinction in the treatment of the material within the Protestant and Catholic traditions has shaped the modern research; see [[OT Apocrypha Studies]].

			One of the first major consequences of the birth of the corpus of the [[OT Apocrypha]] / Deuterocanonici was the gradual emergence (since the beginning of the 18th century) of the companion corpus of the [[OT Pseudepigrapha]] (which Catholics called ''OT Apocrypha'') to collect all the many other ancient books that before the 16th century had shared with the OT Apocryphal texts the same destiny of being at the fringes of the ancient Jewish and Christian canons.

	==== The Canonical Status OT Apocryphal Texts before the 16th century ====		==== The Canonical Status OT Apocryphal Texts before the 16th century ====

	Before the 16th century the OT Apocrypha or Deutocanonici did not exist as a distinctive corpus, but were part ~~-- as Collins defines it --~~ of a "gray area" of a larger amount of books that were more or less authoritative, or authoritative for some Second Temple Jews but not for others, and then for some Christians but not for others.		Before the 16th century the OT Apocrypha or Deutocanonici did not exist as a distinctive corpus, but were part of a "gray area" made of a larger amount of books that were more or less authoritative, or authoritative for some Second Temple Jews but not for others, and then for some Christians but not for others.


	~~The designation “deutero-canonical” is attributed to Sixtus of Siena was (1520-1569), in recognition of the fact that their canonicity was disputed.~~

Gabriele Boccaccini at 09:03, 16 May 2013

2013-05-16T09:03:21Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:03, 16 May 2013
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~#REDIRECT~~ [[:~~Category:~~OT Apocrypha Studies]]		The '''Old Testament Apocrypha"'', or ''Deutocanonici''' is a Christian corpus generated in the 16th century to denote a certain group of Second Temple Texts not included in the [[Hebrew Bible]] and in the Protestant Canon but deemed "canonical" by the Roman Catholic Church.

			<Tobit, Judith, Ben Sira, Wisdom of Solomon, 1-2 Maccabees, Baruch, plus the additions to Daniel and Esther) + [[4 Ezra]] >

			==Overview ==

			The corpus of the OT Apocrypha or Deuterocanici (Tobit, Judith, Ben Sira, Wisdom of Solomon, 1-2 Maccabees, Baruch, plus the additions to Daniel and Esther) owes its existence to the polemics of the Reformation era and was sanctioned by the Council of Trent in 1546.

			The Protestant reformers had adopted [[Jerome]]’s principle of ''Hebraica veritas'', and acknowledged only the books also found in the Rabbinic Canon or [[Hebrew Bible]] as inspired scripture in the Old Testament. The Council of Trent reacted by affirming the larger canon of the traditional Roman Catholic Church, based on the Latin [[Vulgate]]: “If any one receive not, as sacred and canonical, the said books entire with all their parts, as they have been used to be read in the Catholic Church and as they are contained in the old Latin Vulgate . . . let him be anathema.”

			The Tridentine canon was identical to the list issued by the Council of Hippo (339 CE), except that the Council Fathers appear to have misunderstood the meaning of 1 and 2 Esdras, which they identified as the proto-canonical books of Ezra and Nehemiah with the exclusion of 2 Esdras (=4 Ezra).

			As a result the first Protestant collection of '''OT Apocrypha''' by Taverner in 1549 published as a separated corpus texts originally printed as part of the Old Testament (from the 1939 [[Taverner's Bible]]) and included the apocalyptic [[4 Ezra]]

			On the other hand, the Roman Catholic commentary, [[Biblioteca Magna]] by [[Sisto of Siena\|Sixtus of Siena]] included these texts (with the exception of [[4 Ezra]]) in the Old Testament, only by giving them the label of ''deuterocanonici'' in recognition of the fact that their canonicity was disputed.

			This distinction in the treatment of the material within the Protestant and Catholic traditions has shaped the modern research; see [[OT Apocrypha Studies]].

			==== The Canonical Status OT Apocryphal Texts before the 16th century ====

			Before the 16th century the OT Apocrypha or Deutocanonici did not exist as a distinctive corpus, but were part -- as Collins defines it -- of a "gray area" of a larger amount of books that were more or less authoritative, or authoritative for some Second Temple Jews but not for others, and then for some Christians but not for others.


			The designation “deutero-canonical” is attributed to Sixtus of Siena was (1520-1569), in recognition of the fact that their canonicity was disputed.



			< Categories: OT Apocrypha Translations -- OT Apocrypha Intro -- Bible, with OT Apocrypha -- -- Book of Tobit -- Book of Judith -- Esther Additions -- Wisdom of Solomon -- Book of Sirach -- 1 Baruch and the Letter of Jeremiah -- Daniel Additions (Prayer of Azariah and Song of the Children; Susanna; Bel and the Dragon) -- 1 Maccabees -- 2 Maccabees -- 3 Ezra (1 Esdras) -- Prayer of Manasseh -- Psalm 151 -- 3 Maccabees -- 4 Ezra (2 Esdras) >




	[[Category:Index]]		[[Category:Index]]

Gabriele Boccaccini: Redirected page to Category:OT Apocrypha Studies

2013-01-12T17:52:30Z

Redirected page to Category:OT Apocrypha Studies

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:52, 12 January 2013
Line 1:		Line 1:
	#REDIRECT [[:Category:OT Apocrypha ~~(subject)~~]]		#REDIRECT [[:Category:OT Apocrypha Studies]]


			[[Category:Index]]

Gabriele Boccaccini: Redirected page to Category:OT Apocrypha (subject)

2011-01-07T15:18:38Z

Redirected page to Category:OT Apocrypha (subject)

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:18, 7 January 2011
Line 1:		Line 1:
	#REDIRECT [[:Category:OT Apocrypha (~~text~~)]]		#REDIRECT [[:Category:OT Apocrypha (subject)]]

Gabriele Boccaccini: Redirected page to Category:OT Apocrypha (text)

2010-08-12T23:31:52Z

Redirected page to Category:OT Apocrypha (text)

New page

#REDIRECT [[:Category:OT Apocrypha (text)]]