Published: 10.11.2021.
The German creationist Dr.-Ing. Werner Gitt is an interesting person. He wrote several German language books on the subject of creationism. His main idea, which has been widely disseminated, is that information can only come from information. Information is not material, but spiritual and must have an intelligent origin.
The purpose of this article is not to criticize Gitt’s main ideas. What interests me here is this: Gitt has set forth in his book Questions: I Have Always Wanted to Ask arguments that he believes argue against the seven deuterocanonical books being part of the canon, and I believe that his statements are quite characteristic of people who use a 66-book Bible (Protestant Bible) rather than the 73-book Bible (Catholic Bible). (p. 113-114 in the Hungarian translation)
Note: The Catholic Bible has 72 books, if one counts the Letter of Jeremiah as the 6th chapter of Baruch and 73, if one counts it as a separate book.
Here is an analysis and response to his statements.
“1. They contain some teachings that contradict the Bible […] Such as forgiving sins through almsgiving (Tob. 12:9), advocating magical practices (Tob. 6:9) obtaining forgiveness of sins for the dead through the prayers of the living (2 Macc. 12:44).”
Let’s take these in order.
Tob 12:9: “For almsgiving delivers from death, and it will purge away every sin. Those who perform deeds of charity and of righteousness will have fulness of life;” This is biblical, for in Daniel 4:27 Daniel tells King Nebuchadnezzar: “Therefore, O king, let my counsel be acceptable to you; break off your sins by practicing righteousness, and your iniquities by showing mercy to the oppressed, that there may perhaps be a lengthening of your tranquility.”
Tobit 6:8: “And as for the gall, anoint with it a man who has white films on his eyes, and he will be cured.“ If these are “magical practices”, why not this scene from John’s Gospel chapter 9 when Jesus heals a blind man. “As he said this, he spat on the ground and made clay of the spittle and anointed the man’s eyes with the clay, saying to him, ‘Go, wash in the pool of Silo’am‘ (which means Sent). So he went and washed and came back seeing.” (John 9:6-7) God can perform miracles immediately or use created objects. There is no conflict here between Tobit and the rest of the Bible, and Tobit contains no false teachings.
The Second Book of Maccabees chapter 12 was the reason why Martin Luther wanted to remove the 7 deuterocanonical books from the canon. The chapter is about the leader of the Jewish independence army, Judas Maccabeus (or Judah Maccabee; different spellings are available), fighting to free his country from the Seleucids. The last part of the chapter, 12:32-45, describes a battle “against Gor’gias, the governor of Idume’a” (12:32) Some of Judas Maccabee’s soldiers fell in the battle. After the end of the battle, Judas’ soldiers discovered that the fallen wore “sacred tokens of the idols of Jam’nia” (12:40) So: “[…] they [Judas and his soldiers] turned to prayer, beseeching that the sin which had been committed might be wholly blotted out” (12:42) And the text adds: “He also took up a collection, man by man, to the amount of two thousand drachmas of silver, and sent it to Jerusalem to provide for a sin offering. In doing this he acted very well and honorably, taking into account the resurrection. For if he were not expecting that those who had fallen would rise again, it would have been superfluous and foolish to pray for the dead. But if he was looking to the splendid reward that is laid up for those who fall asleep in godliness, it was a holy and pious thought. Therefore he made atonement for the dead, that they might be delivered from their sin.” (12:43-45) This happened in the Old Testament, where there was no purgatory yet, but it was also clear to the Jews in the 2nd century BC that one can pray for the dead to atone for the so-called temporal punishment of sin. Luther did not like this idea and threw out the 2nd Book of Maccabees and the six other deuterocanonical books.
“2. They never formed part of the Jewish canon because they are later additions.”
The Jews have no authority over the Christian Bible, since they reject the entire New Testament. Besides, what if a couple of rabbis declared tomorrow that, for example, the Song of Songs was not part of the Bible? Would we follow that?
“The Apocrypha has always been a subject of debate.”
The canon of the Bible was the subject of debate for the first four centuries of the Church, until the Church resolved that by the Decree of Damasus (Pope Damasus I.), the local councils of Hippo and Carthage, and the decree of Gelasius (Pope Gelasius I.). Before these decisions, there were Christians (!) who thought, for example, that the First and Second Epistles of John or the Epistle of Jude were not part of the Bible. Others thought that e.g. the Shepherd of Hermas or the Epistle of Barnabas were part of the Bible. But they were wrong because the Catholic Church finally decided the canon of the Bible.
“According to the dogma of the Catholic Church established at the Council of Trent – in 1546 – in response to the Reformation, the Apocrypha are of equal rank with the Old and New Testaments.”
Correct. In response to the Reformation, which challenged the canon of the Bible for the first time in over 1000 years, the Church repeated this ancient teaching, which had long since been decided in at the above councils and decrees.
“According to the dogma of the Catholic Church established at the Council of Trent – in 1546 – in response to the Reformation, the Apocrypha are of equal rank with the Old and New Testaments.”
Correct. In response to the Reformation, which challenged the canon of the Bible for the first time in over 1000 years, the Church repeated this ancient teaching, which had long since been decided in at the above councils and decrees.
“3. No New Testament author cites these books, although the New Testament, with the exception of four short writings, invokes all the Old Testament books.”
First, nowhere in the Bible is there a principle that only those books are part of the Old Testament canon that are cited in the New Testament.
Second, 2 Samuel 1:19-27 is a quotation from the “Book of Jashar”. The Epistle of Jude verse 9 quotes 1. Enoch 1:9, both of which are quotes from non-biblical books. Third, the New Testament does not quote 11 books of the Old Testament, not 4. (Song of Songs, Ecclesiastes, Esther, Obadiah, Zephaniah, Judges, 1st Book of Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Lamentations, and Nahum).
Third, the New Testament does not quote 11 books of the Old Testament, not 4. (Song of Songs, Ecclesiastes, Esther, Obadiah, Zephaniah, Judges, 1st Book of Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Lamentations, and Nahum).
“4. The Apocryphal Writings do not consider themselves infallible. In the preface to the Book of Jesus Sirach we read, ‘You are urged therefore to read with good will and attention, and to be indulgent in cases where, despite our diligent labor in translating, we may seem to have rendered some phrases imperfectly.’ “
The preface is not part of the Book of Jesus Sirach and not part of the canon. Moreover, in the passage quoted, the translator does not consider himself an infallible translator.
Resources
Decree of Damasus: iteadthomam.blogspot.com/2009/12/decrees-of-st-damasus-i-ad-366-384.html
Decree of Gelasius: https://www.tertullian.org/decretum_eng.htm