THE MASKED ANGEL:
Resuming my bashing of CARM and showing they don't know what they're talking about, this post will focus on the following article:
http://carm.org/errors-apocrypha
The apocrypha (απόκρυφα means "hidden") is a set of books written between approximately 400 B.C. and the time of Christ.
[Wrong. First, the correct term is Septuagint. Second, though some
authorship years are disputed, none of them were written after the first
century BC.]
that is rejected by the Protestants and officially accepted by the
Roman Catholic Church in 1546 as being inspired.
[Wrong. They
were deemed inspired at the Council of Carthage in 397.]
These books are Tobit Judith, 1 and 2 Maccabees, Wisdom of Solomon,
Sirach (also known as Ecclesiasticus), and Baruch.
[as well as an
extra material in Daniel and Esther.]
But if the Apocrypha is a Scripture, then it should not have any
errors. But since it does have errors, as will be demonstrated below,
[Nope. These
are not errors, no matter how much CARM wants them to be.]
this puts into question whether or not the Roman Catholic Church
has properly used its self-proclaimed position as the teaching authority of the
Christian Church.
[More like this
begs the question of where CARM got its reasoning skills from.]
If it can error in such
an important manner as what is Scripture, can it be trusted to properly teach
the Christian Church? The following references can be verified at http://www.newadvent.org/bible.
[Misleading
statement. Though the verses presented are from the site, the little notes
underneath are not. ]
Problems in the Apocrypha
When we look into the apocrypha itself, we find numerous problems.
For example, we see it advocating magic where the smoke of a fish heart on a
fire drives away devils.
Condones the use of magic
Tobit 6:5-7, "Then the angel said to
him: Take out the entrails of this fish, and lay up his heart, and his gall,
and his liver for thee: for these are necessary for useful medicines. 6 And
when he had done so, he roasted the flesh thereof, and they took it with them
in the way: the rest they salted as much as might serve them, till they came to
Rages the city of the Medes. 7 Then Tobias asked the angel, and said to him: I
beseech thee, brother Azarias, tell me what remedies are these things good for,
which thou hast bid me keep of the fish? 8 And the angel, answering, said to
him: If thou put a little piece of its heart upon coals, the smoke thereof
driveth away all kind of devils, either from man or from woman, so that they
come no more to them."
Is it true that the smoke from a fish's heart, when burned,
drives away evil spirits? Of course not. Such a superstitious
teaching has no place in the word of God.
[If that’s what they were for but they’re not. This was actually a common medical practice at the time, no different than burning incense. I could very well ask CARM if they honestly think putting mud on a blind man’s eyes will restore his sight.]
Teaches that forgiveness of sins is by human effort.
Salvation by works:
•
Tobit 4:11, "For alms deliver from all
sin, and from death, and will not suffer the soul to go into
darkness."
•
Tobit 12:9, "For alms delivereth from
death, and the same is that which purgeth away sins, and maketh to find mercy
and life everlasting."
We know from Scripture that alms (money or food, given to the
poor or needy as charity) does not purge our sins. The blood of Christ is
what cleanses us, not money or food given to poor people. "but if we
walk in the light as He Himself is in the light, we have fellowship with one
another, and the blood of Jesus His Son cleanses us from all sin," (1 John 1:7).
[This is a bogus conclusion, not helped by CARM’s selective verse
picking. First off, the John quote ignores Paul’s teaching that we must
complete what is lacking in Christ’s sufferings (Col 1:24). Next, let’s look at the first verse in context:
[7] Give alms out of thy substance, and turn not away thy face
from any poor person: for so it shall come to pass that the face of the Lord
shall not be turned from thee. [8] According to thy ability be merciful. [9] If thou have much give abundantly: if thou have a little,
take care even so to bestow willingly a little. [10] For thus thou storest up to thyself a good reward for the
day of necessity.[11] For alms deliver from all sin, and from death, and will not
suffer the soul to go into darkness. [12] Alms shall be a great confidence before the most high God,
to all them that give it.
Well, this sounds like
Jesus’ advise to the rich young man, doesn’t it? [Matt 19:16-23]In addition, compare Tobit
4:10 to Matt 6:20:
But lay up to yourselves treasures in
heaven: where neither the rust nor moth doth consume, and where thieves do not
break through, nor steal.
As for the second verse,
why object to that when Dan 4:24 says the same thing?
Wherefore, O king, let my counsel be
acceptable to thee, and redeem thou thy sins with alms, and thy iniquities with
works of mercy to the poor: perhaps he will forgive thy offences.]
Money as an offering for the sins of the dead:
2 Maccabbees 12:43,
"And making a gathering, he sent twelve thousand drachms of silver to
Jerusalem for sacrifice to be offered for the sins of the dead, thinking well
and religiously concerning the resurrection."
Can anyone truly accept
that money isn't offering for the sins of dead people? Such a
superstitious and unbiblical concept has no place in Scripture.
[Unless the teaching has
roots in Hebrew, like this verse does. Again, let’s put it in context:
And they found under the coats of the
slain some of the donaries of the idols of Jamnia, which the law
forbiddeth to the Jews: so that all plainly saw, that for this cause they were
slain.Then they all blessed the just judgment of the Lord, who had discovered
the things that were hidden. [42] And so betaking themselves to prayers, they besought him,
that the sin which had been committed might be forgotten. But the most valiant
Judas exhorted the people to keep themselves from sin, forasmuch as they saw
before their eyes what had happened, because of the sins of those that were
slain. [43] And making a gathering, he sent twelve thousand drachms of
silver to Jerusalem for sacrifice to be offered for the sins of the dead,
thinking well and religiously concerning the resurrection, [44] (For if he had not hoped that they that were slain should
rise again, it would have seemed superfluous and vain to pray for the dead,) [45] And because he considered that they who had fallen asleep with godliness, had great grace laid
up for them.
So Judas wasn’t offering money for the
sake of gathering money; he was sacrificing it on behalf of the soldiers who
died fighting for God but at the same time violated one of God's commandments. CARM just misrepresented what the verse stated.]
Historical Errors
Wrong historical facts:
• Judith 1:5,
"Now in the twelfth year of his reign, Nabuchodonosor, king of the
Assyrians, who reigned in Ninive the great city, fought against Arphaxad and
overcame him."
• Baruch 6:2,
"And when you are come into Babylon, you shall be there many years, and
for a long time, even to seven generations: and after that I will bring you
away from thence with peace."
The book of Judith
incorrectly says that Nebuchadnezzar was the king of the Assyrians when he was
the king of the Babylonians.
[Actually, this is not talking about
the more famous Nebuchannezzar, but rather a different ruler by the same name,
the clue in verse being him reigning in Ninive. In addition, by the time this
other Nebuchannezzar reigned, Assyria was part of Babylon so yes, he can be
called king of the Assyrians.]
Baruch 6:2 says the Jews would serve in Babylon for seven generations
where Jer. 25:11 says it was for 70 years. "And this whole land shall
be a desolation and a horror, and these nations shall serve the king of Babylon
seventy years."
[Did CARM suddenly lose
the ability to read a sentence? It says “up to seven generations; that doesn’t
mean it will be seven generations.]
Conclusion
Obviously the apocrypha
has serious problems.
[Nope. Just CARM’s thinking.]
From magic, to salvation by works, to money as
an offering for the sins of the dead, and blatant incorrect historical facts,
it is full of false and unbiblical teachings.
[Is CARM talking about the
books or itself?]
It isn't inspired of God. Likewise,
neither is the Roman Catholic Church, which has stated the Apocrypha is
inspired.
[I ask again: is CARM talking
about itself?]
This shows the Roman
Catholic Church is not the means by which God is communicating his truth to his
people, that the Magisterium has erred greatly, and that it is infested with
man's false tradition, rather than God's absolute truth.
[It shows nothing of the
sort. If anything, CARM is willing to settle for the most bogus research
possible.]
No comments:
Post a Comment