The Case for the so-called Apocrypha w/ Dr.Edith Humphrey

Рет қаралды 3,092

Күн бұрын

Пікірлер: 50

@TheTransfiguredLife 3 ай бұрын

Dr.Edith's website can be found here ⬇️ edithmhumphrey.com/category/a-lamp-for-today/ And her books can be found here ⬇️ www.amazon.com/stores/author/B004A6HJ8G

@BornAgainRN 2 ай бұрын

I left a comment below and tagged your name. Did you get a chance to see it?

@BrianBrenon 3 ай бұрын

For anyone wondering, the quotation from St. Justin Martyr at 49:42 is the first sentence in Chapter 71 of his "Dialogue with Trypho."

@Nsfwpodcastofficial 3 ай бұрын

I'm a Protestant and love your channel. Its really informative on Orthodoxy… keep the videos coming

@TheTransfiguredLife 3 ай бұрын

@@Nsfwpodcastofficial Thanks for this comment. We appreciate you! ☦️

@DeanBurrito 3 ай бұрын

It’s obvious Dr Humphrey loves what she does 😊 This was edifying & a lot of fun thank you & God bless you all!

@TheTransfiguredLife 3 ай бұрын

Thanks brother. She's fantastic we love her.

@BornAgainRN 3 ай бұрын

@@TheTransfiguredLife I am a friend of Dr. Tony Costa from Toronto Apologetics, who informed me of this discussion on the canon, and I have been interviewed on his channel several times, as well as on "The Line of Fire" with Dr. Michael Brown & several others. I wrote a book on the canon, "Why Protestant Bibles Are Smaller," in response to Gary Michuta who is a Catholic apologist & author on the canon, who I debated, as well as Trent Horn from Catholic Answers & several others such as Dr. Robert Sungenis. I would like to have an online discussion on your channel on the canon, specifically the Old Testament, as there were several points I believe were not 100% representative of the arguments being made. Just so you know, I was raised & educated Catholic up through college, and later converted to being a Protestant. I have an entire playlist on the canon on my KZbin channel, but I would be delighted to have a discussion with you about it. Blessings & grace to you, Steve Christie.

@feeble_stirrings 3 ай бұрын

Excellent conversation! Always a joy to hear from Dr. Humphrey.

@doubtingthomas9117 3 ай бұрын

As an Anglican who has a high regard for the ‘Apocrypha’ (or the ‘ecclesial books’) I really enjoyed this video. It’s interesting to see the similarities in how the Eastern Orthodox and the early Anglican reformers had regarding these “readable” books. To this day we still having readings from these in our lectionary and canticles in the BCP Morning Prayer service which comes from the Song of the Three Holy Children.

@JustJordan126 3 ай бұрын

If the first protestants didn't remove these books but just added them to an appendix then they would have to concede to the point that these books were always scripture prior to the printing press.

@shawnpatrick1877 3 ай бұрын

Dr. Edith M Humphrey is a great guest. I always enjoy learning from her.

@Orthodoxy33-wo7rt 2 ай бұрын

It's great that right off the bat you highlighted her response to the whole "Martin Luther took books out of the Bible" thing. I highly appreciate Dr. Humphry being fair and clarifying that he didn't remove them, he just stuck them between the Testaments. It's really important that as we explore these topics, we are fair and accurate in our assessment and criticisms of other traditions and avoid stereotypes, hearsay, and strawman positions. Bravo!

@JacquelineRPrice 3 ай бұрын

Justin Martyr's quote is from the Dialogue with Trypho, chapter LXXI

@TheTransfiguredLife 3 ай бұрын

You came in clutch with that fam! Thanks for the citation! ☦️🔥🔥

@Dwell.within 3 ай бұрын

Very stoked for this one! I really enjoyed the first episode with Dr Edith and glad to see her back on 🙌💯☦️

@TheTransfiguredLife 3 ай бұрын

@@Dwell.within Thanks brother. Yes, she's amazing. We love her!

@untoages 3 ай бұрын

I like that bit at the beginning here, I'm all for more unhinged Fr. Jonathan moments 😂

@TheTransfiguredLife 3 ай бұрын

@@untoages 😂😂😂☦️🔥🔥

@NavelOrangeGazer 3 ай бұрын

Dr. Edith back again, nice! Esther's prayer! Its so sad so many have never heard/read it. Edit: please clip what Dr. Edith says at about 19 mins about taking the teaching in total. So important for the western heretodox to understand. The fixation on scripture sliced into miniscule pieces has done so much spiritual harm. Entire sects built around this.

@bezbek9437 3 ай бұрын

I am an Ethiopian Orthodox Church member and you bring interesting topics of dicussion. Keep it up... btw Our Church Biblical Canon is the broad canon having 81 books specifically having peciular books than that of Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholics commonly accepted books such as Books of Enoch, Books of Jubilees and Macbbenes books are also different than that of other churches.

@iddodomingo6118 3 ай бұрын

Looking forward to this ❤

@rx88088 3 ай бұрын

Great content as usual! ❤

@TheMhouk2 3 ай бұрын

looking forward to this!

@TheTransfiguredLife 3 ай бұрын

@@TheMhouk2 ☦️🔥🔥

@friendsofsaintanthony 3 ай бұрын

Great discussion!!!

@jpb5385 3 ай бұрын

This is excellent! Thank you!

@WilliamPotting 3 ай бұрын

This might be my favorite episode. 👏🏻 Wondering what her thoughts are on the Gospel of Nicodemus. Also, is there a list of readable books like Nicodemus, Enoch, Protoevangelium of James, etc. that are readable? And what are the books that should NOT be read (Gospel of Thomas, etc)?

@edithmhumphrey2254 3 ай бұрын

Friend, the term "Readable Books" applies specifically to those Old Testament books that Protestants call Apocrypha and Catholics call Deuterocanonical. It doesn't refer to books written after the New Testament, though I think it is good to acknowledge that early Christians highly esteemed the Didache, the Shepherd of Hermas, and other works. 1 Enoch is part of the collection called The Pseudepigrapha, though placed in the canon by Ethiopic Christians: I find it fascinating, but worry about the great interest currently shown in it, because if we aren't careful, our imaginations might turn towards speculation rather than fastening upon those things that are central to the faith. Anything can be read with prophet (including Thomas) if we ask the right questions, but some are good for scholarly interest and not for our instruction in theology or piety. NIcodemus was known, so far as we know by no Church father, and has a Gnostic flavor, as does Thomas. Protevangelion of James reflects some of our understanding of the Theotokos, but is not authoritative like the gospels. THe point is that Christians came to a consensus about the NT canon that did NOT include these boooks (and others) which you are mentioning, whereas the ancient Greek OT DID include the Readable Books. Anything not included in the NT canon should be read for historical understanding, but with caution. These are not "readable" in liturgy the way the OT extra books are.

@DrMichaelChristian 3 ай бұрын

I can’t speak to a specific “list,” but Fr. Stephen De Young’s book “Apocrypha: An Introduction to Extra-Biblical Literature” is probably the exact resource you are looking for in terms of learning the delineations between the apocrypha (properly defined) & heretical works.

@WilliamPotting 3 ай бұрын

@@DrMichaelChristian Thank you!

@JaredChacon 3 ай бұрын

Sorry, one pet peeve here. It is incorrect to say there are different versions of the LXX. This opinion probably comes from Protestant scholars trying to discredit the LXX and prop up the MT. The fathers talk about one original copy of the Septuagint in the library of Alexandria. Some, such as St. Justin Martyr, would have seen it himself when he was in Alexandria. If she means the translations of Aquila, Symmachus and Theodotion, these are not versions of the LXX. These are new translations from different Hebrew texts from the Proto-Masoretic text family. Aquila and Symmachus are more like Greek versions of the Vulgate than versions of the Septuagint.

@tuckerchisholm1005 2 ай бұрын

Ok but how could you then claim that the Orthodox canon was included in the first Septuagint ever written? If you're claiming that Justin Martyr saw that exact copy in Alexandria. Because the Septuagint was originally (divinely inspired) transcribed in the 3rd century BC but the events of Maccabees didn't happen until the 2nd century BC. So those books must have been added to later compilations/compositions of the LXX right?

@JaredChacon 2 ай бұрын

@@tuckerchisholm1005 Yes, the LXX was being produced at the same time as some deuterocanonical books were being written. For me that still doesn't constitute versions. I think what she is referring to is what many Protestant scholars do (as a dishonest slight of hand) and categorize Theodotion, Aquila and Symmachus together as "Septugints" only because they are in Greek. But the Septuagint is not just a Greek translation. It's the translation of the seventy. These other Greek translations were produced hundreds of years after the LXX was produced and they are from texts in the Masoretic family, not like the Hebrew behind the LXX. They are closer in nature to Greek-Vulgates, not "Septuagints". There is the Lucian Recention which some considerna version of the LXX. But again, it was produced hundreds of years later and it wasn't the original housed at the library in Alexandria.

@LupinGaius-ls1or 2 ай бұрын

What Dr. Humphrey describes as a “canon” sounds more like a creed. Dr. Gary Habermash has several talks on the early creeds in the NT available on this platform.

@Judge_Jon 3 ай бұрын

They were cannon for thousands of years. The reason some Bible scholars didn't think they were original was because some were in Greek and the scholars thought the originals would have been in Hebrew. They didn't know any better.

@xUncleA123x 3 ай бұрын

While the point on reading books in their genre is correct, the book of Judith is actually written in code. Jewish tradition has the same story of Judith in the Hanukkah midrashim but decoded. Nebuchadnezzar is Antiochus Epiphanies and Bethulia is Jerusalem. So Judith is coded Maccabean history along with the books of the Maccabees.

@joachim847 3 ай бұрын

ἑβδομήκοντα

@MaxwellBiggs 3 ай бұрын

What is the place of 4 Maccabees? What is the place of something in the appendix?

@BornAgainRN 2 ай бұрын

I left a comment and tagged your name a couple days ago. Did you get it? I am a former Catholic turned protestant, and I’d like to discuss the topic of the cannon with you, cause there’s a few things that were discussed that are entirely accurate. I have debated Gary Michuta and Trent Horn on the canon, and I debated Dr. Robert Sungenis on the Marian dogmas. Let me know if you are interested, I’d be happy to share with you some of my thoughts, since you said you’ll be reading all the comments and responding to some.

@TheTransfiguredLife 2 ай бұрын

@@BornAgainRN Hey! Thanks for your comment. Sure. What exactly would you like to discuss?

@TheRadChadDad 3 ай бұрын

☦️☦️☦️

@paperweight57 3 ай бұрын

✅ Subscribed

@ucheodozor4147 3 ай бұрын

Question: What's the meaning of "readables"? That sounds like indecision. Why consider these books as merely "readable" and at the same time acknowledge that these books had been in use and recognized since the early Church? It's either a book is canonical and part of scripture, or it's not. No middle ground here. If these books are not canonical, then why not put them aside as the Protestants have done since the last decade of the 19th century? Don't just sit on the fence and dub them "readables". Period. I think that the Catholic Church has taken the bull by the horns, and has done a better job by going all the way to treat these books as second canon of scripture, that is, "Deutrocanonicals", because, just like you rightly noted, these books contain important nuggets that act as pillars to the faith of the early Church.

@danielweinzierl710 3 ай бұрын

I think this comes from many books being read in church as part of the liturgy in the calendar year. There aren’t enough Sundays to go through all the books, or maybe some aren’t appropriate for that context, so they’re considered readable. The fact that we now have an extremely high literacy rate muddles that distinction.