ON APOCRYPHAL/DEUTEROCANONICAL BOOKS

In the course of my readings (Bible), I came across the Deuterocanonical books. I have read some information regarding them, and what I find intriguing and troubling is that Christians are divided as to whether such writings should be included in the Christian canon. I would like to know what is your Church’s stand concerning this debate about the books that for others they should be considered as Scriptures inspired by God?

           The Church of Christ upholds that the books and writings that comprise the body of literature termed as either Apocrypa or Deuterocanonicals should NOT be included among the books that comprise the Old Testament of the Holy Scriptures because:

          First, the Aprocryphal of Deuterocanonical books are not included in the body of writings from which Christ quoted. Christ enumerated such writings when He said, “These are the very things I told you about while I was still with you; everything written about me in the Law of Moses, the writings of the prophets, and the Psalms” (Lk. 24:44, TEV). The body of writing that consist of the Law of Moses, the writings of the prophets, and the Psalms, which Christ was referring to, is the Hebrew canon or the sacred scriptures of the Jews. The Church of Christ firmly believes that the books that should comprise the Old Testament should be identical content-wise with the scared Scriptures of the Jews because the Jews themselves were the ones entrusted with God’s words before the Christians dispensation (Rom. 3:1-2, NIV; 9:4, TEV). As attested by biblical scholars, none of the Aprocryphal of Deuterocanonical writings is included in the Hebrew canon of the Holy Scriptures (“Introduction to the Aprocryphal/Deuterocanonical Books” from the New Oxford Annotated Bible; An Ecumenical Study Bible, iii AP).

      Second, the Aprocrypha or Deuterocanonicals mention doctrines that violates God’s teachings contained in those writings Christ and the apostles recognized and quoted from. For example, what is written in Maccabees 12:43-45 clearly contradicts a biblical teaching. The passage from the Aprocryphal writing of II Maccabees speaks of Judas Maccabeus collecting two thousand drachmas of silver and sending it to Jerusalem as “atonement for the dead, so that they might be delivered from their sin.” However, the biblical teaching expressed in Ecclesiastes 9:5-6 that the dead cannot benefit from the deeds done in their behalf by the living because dead “don’t know anything … and will never share in the things that happen on earth” (Easy-to-read-Version) is blatantly violated. Let us bear in mind that God’s teachings written in the Bible do not contradict one another (I Cor. 2:13, NKJV).

          Therefore, the Aprocrypha or the Deuterocanonicals should not be considered as writings inspired by God, and so they should not be included in the Holy Scriptures. An as for the Church of Christ, the Bible, the Scriptures inspired by God, is composed of the Old and New Testaments, with the latter consisting of 27 books and the former consisting of 39 books that are the same in content with the sacred Scriptures of the Jews.

THE SPIRITUAL ROCK

“… that spiritual Rock that followed them”

In the way others interpret verse I Corinthians 10:1-4, (King James Version), it seems that they believe that Jesus Christ was the very rock in Moses’ time from which he drew water for the thirsty Israelites. If this were true, it would indeed appear then that Christ had existence prior to His birth of Mary.

However, if we look more closely, it isn’t the case. Notice that Apostle Paul in the verses was reminding His fellow Christians about the experiences of ancient Israelites when they were wayfarers in the desert. Indeed, the children of Israel had seen the “cloud” which showed them the way  (Exod. 13:21), had been brought through the midst of the Read Sea (Exod. 14:19-31), had eaten of the manna (Exod. 16:11-15) and had really drunk the water Moses drew from the rock (Num. 20:1-11). Let us quote the last part of the incident when Moses drew water from the rock:

“And Moses and Aaron gathered the assembly together before the rock; and he said to them, ‘Hear now, you rebels! Must we bring water for you out of this rock?’ Then Moses lifted his hand and struck the rock twice with his rod; and the water came out abundantly, and the congregation and their animals drank.” (Num. 20:10-11, New King James Version, emphasis ours)

Notice that Moses “struck the rock twice” with his rod. To insist therefore that Christ was that very rock is to claim that Moses struck twice with his rod the Lord Jesus Christ whom you believe to be God. This is very unlikely for we know that ancient Israelites were required to have great reverence for God so much so that just using the name of God in vain was considered major sin (Exo. 20:7). They claim therefore that that very rock in Moses’ time was Christ Himself is an absurdity that renders void the belief in His alleged pre-existence and deity.

If that rock was not Christ, why then did Apostle Paul say “our fathers … drank the same spiritual drink … [f]or they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them, and that Rock was Christ”? To understand what it means, let us refer to what our Lord Jesus Christ Himself taught concerning how we can “drink” (and eat) of Him:

“Then Jesus said to them, ‘Most assuredly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you’. ‘Whoever eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day’. ‘Most assuredly, I say to you, he who believes in Me has everlasting life’”. (John 6:53-54, 47, NKJV, emphasis ours)

To eat and drink of Christ therefore is to believe in Him and by doing so, we will have the “eternal life” He promised. Remember that the coming of Jesus the Messiah and Savior had been promised by God as early as the time of Adam and Eve. (Gen. 3:15). Therefore, by saying that “our fathers … drank of that spiritual Rock … and that Rock was Christ,” what Apostle Paul meant was that their ancestors, especially Moses believed in the “promised Christ” and looked forward to the “great reward” or the eternal life He brings.

“It was by faith that Moses, when he grew up, refused to be treated as the grandson of the king, but chose to share ill-treatment with God’s people instead of enjoying the fleeting pleasures of sin. He thought that it was better to suffer for the promised Christ than to own all the treasures of Egypt, for he was looking forward to the great reward that God would give him.”

Further proof that I Corinthians 10:1-4 offer no evidence that Christ had pre-existence and that He is God is indicated in the part of the verse 4 that says, “…For they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them, and that Rock was Christ.” Indeed, chronologically speaking, Christ “followed” the Israelites ancestors. He came and exist long after, not before, the time of  Moses.

Regarding who the true God is, our Lord Jesus Christ and the apostles clearly taught:

“ ‘And this is the eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God’, …

“ ‘Jesus spoke this words, lifted up His eyes to heaven, and said: ‘Father’ …” (John 17:3,1, NKJV, emphasis ours)

“… There is no other God but one. For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as there are many gods and many lords), yet for us there is one God, the Father …” (I Cor. 8:4-6, Ibid. emphasis ours).

It is in the light of this fundamental biblical truth that everyone should evaluate his or her faith in God.

FAITH ALONE CONCEPT

FAITH THAT WORKS

Ruben D. Aromin

DOKTRINANG TRINIDAD KAILAN NABUO?

SI CRISTO AY NASA LANGIT NA AT MATAGAL NG PATAY ANG MGA APOSTOL NANG MABUO ANG DOKTRINANG TRINIDAD
Greg F. Nonato

Ang The Catholic Encyclopedia ay nagsasabing:

            “For nowhere in the Old Testament do we find any clear indication of a Third Person.” (vol. XV. P. 49)

Sa Pilipino:

            “Sapagkat saan man sa Matandang Tipan ay di tayo makakasumpong ng malinaw na palatandaan na may ikatlong Persona.”

            Ang alinmang bahagi ng buong Biblia ay hindi nagpapatunay na may ikatlong Persona. Wala ring mababasa na ang Espiritu Santo ay isang Persona na tinatawag na Trinidad. Wala ring katibayan mula sa Biblia na ang Espiritu Santo ay isang Diyos o kapantay ng Diyos. Kaya, ang Trinidad ay hindi matatagpuan sa Biblia.

            Kung ang Trinidad ay hindi aral ng Biblia, paano nagkaroon ng aral ukol dito? Ang Encyclopedia Britannica, Micropaedia, ay nagpapahayag na:

            “The doctrine developed gradually over several centuries and through many controversies.”  (Vol. X, p. 126).

“Ang doktrina [Trinidad]unti-unting nabuo sa pagdaraan ng ilang siglo sa pamamagitan ng maraming pagtatalo.”

            Si Cristo ay matagal ng nasa langit at matagal nang patay ang mga Apostol nang mabuo ang doktrina ng Trinidad. Kaya, walang kinalaman si Cristo at ang mga Apostol sa pagkakabuo nito. Sa loob ng ilang siglo pagkatapos pumanaw ang mga Apostol naging paksa ng mga pagtatalo ang ukol sa kalagayan ni Cristo. Sa pangamba ng Emperador Constantino na ang mga pagtatalong ito ay magbunga ng pagkakahati ng kaniyang imperyo ay nagpasiyang tumawag ng isang kapulungan na ito ay ginanap sa Nicea noong 325 na dinaluhan ng mahigit na 300 mga obispo. Pinatutunayan ng halos lahat ng kasaysayan na si Constantino ang nangulo sa kapulungan o konsilyong ito sa Nicea at dito ipinasya na si Cristo ang tunay na Diyos. Pinatutunayan ito ng isang aklat Katoliko:

            “1. Unang Pangkalahatang Concilio ng Nicaea, 325

            “Ginanap sa Nicaea sa Asia Minor noong 325 ang unang pangkalahatang concilio. Ito ang mga panahong nahaharap ang simbahan sa suliranin ng arianismo o erehiyang Kristolohikal ni Arius. Dito’y itinuro ng Simbahan na si Kristo’y tunay na Diyos at tunay na tao at kaisa (homoousios) ng Ama.” (Ang Aral ni Kristo, p 646.)

            Dapat din nating bigyan ng pansin na sa Konsilyo ng Nicea ay walang binabanggit ukol sa Espiritu Santo. Hanggang sa panahong yaon ay hindi pa nabubuo ang doktrina ng Trinidad. Noon namang 381 A.D., si Emperador Teodosio ang nanawagan sa mga Obispo na nagpulong sa Constantinopla. Sa Konsilyo ng Constantinopla ipinahayag na ang Espiritu Santo ay kapantay ng Diyos at noon lamang nabuo ang doktrina Trinidad;

            “..Theodosius organized the Council of Constantinople in 381 to restore the Nicean position, the opposition had disintegrated. (The Council declared the Holy Ghost of the same substance as Father and Son and so completed the official trinity “one God in three person”).” (The Ancient History of Western Civilization, pp. 209-210)

            Nasa langit na si Cristo at matagal nang pumanaw ang mga Apostol nang mabuo ang doktrina ng Trinidad. Ang may kinalaman sa pagbuo ng doktrina Trinidad ay ang mga paganong emperador na sina Constantino at Teodosio. Mayroong kayang karapatan ang mga paganong ito sa pagbuo ng doktrina? Wala!

            Ang Trinidad gaya ng ating natunghayan ay walang saligan sa Biblia. Sa Trinidad, si Jesus at ang Espiritu Santo ay tunay na Diyos at kapantay ng Diyos. Ang aral na ito ng Trinidad ay ibang iba sa itinuturo ng Biblia. Ang Biblia ay nagtuturo na ang Diyos ay higit na dakila kaysa kay Cristo at sa Espiritu Santo. Dahil dito, ang doktrina ukol sa Trinidad ay hindi dapat paniwalaan.

TALATUNTUNAN

Hickerman, Elias and Morton Smith.

                The Ancient History of Western Civilization.

                Harper & Row Publishers, 1978

The Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. XV, New York:

                The Encylopedia Press, Inc. 1913.

The New Encyclopedia Britannica, vol. X

                Miropaedia, U.S.A.:Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc.,

Valenzuela, Bayani. Ang Aral ni Kristo:

                Isang Katesismong Katoliko, 1978

SABBATH: KANINO INIUTOS?