Announcements

Salvation History – Lesson learned.

God is initiating and loves man.

God is:

Character Because He is… If He were not…

Creator

All-powerful

All-knowing

Above Creation

Able to work things out

for our good

Ying-Yang – Star Wars

Watchmaker – Deist

Atheist

Moral

Just

Good/Holy

There is good and evil

There are universal

standards

Relativism.

(story of UCLA test)

Multi-culturalism

Hitler’s death camps

Personal

Loving

Given us choice

God has pursued us

throughout history

God pursues you

personally

Salvation through

relationship (John

3:16), not works

Unique among all other

religions

Buddhist – God is nature,

God is a force without

personality.

Muslim – God is not loving

but terrifying.

Jew – God is not Abba.

Compare and Contrast Different Beliefs

Where would you run into folks like these?

Character Christian Atheist Muslim Mormon Hindu Buddhist

God is the

Creator

Yes No Yes Yes No Not

relevant

God is Moral Yes No Yes Yes No Not

Relevant

God is Personal Yes No No No No Not

relevant

References: Intelligent Design articles.

Up to now, it has been head knowledge. What about heart knowledge? How does study

about God’s character directly affect me personally?

1. God is the Creator – God is big enough to take care of you. When things don’t go our

way, can we have faith that God will take care of us?

And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have

been called according to his purpose. (Rom 8:28)

(Story of my daughter Esther’s burst appendix)

How big is your God? Do you trust him?

2. God is moral

Because God is good, I want to be good. I wish to hear someday God telling me “Good

and faithful servant.”

God’s conviction can be seen as an act of love. God cares enough to correct us for our

own good. The worst thing that can happen is if God stops convicting me with I do

wrong. ROM 1

Are you sensitive to God’s voice? Do you obey? Do you believe that God convicts

because He loves you.

3 God is personal

If God were only a just and good God, he would be is a scary God as well because I know

that I fall short in goodness and justice. But there is so much more because God is

personal

I Tim 1:12-17 – Paul knew how bad he screwed up. In his zeal to follow God, he hurt

God’s people. He was the worst of sinners. God forgave Him. He was eternally grateful.

(My cult story)

Is there some sin in your life that you find it hard to believe that God forgives you?

Is there regret in your life?

Who is God

Salvation History

God is:

Character Because He is… If He were not…

Compare and Contrast Different Beliefs

Character Christian Atheist Muslim Mormon Hindu Buddhist

God is the

Creator

God is Moral

God is

Personal

References: Intelligent Design articles.

1. God is the Creator – God is ________________ to take care of you.

“And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love

him, who have been called according to his purpose. “(Rom 8:28)

How big is your God? Do you trust him?

2. God is moral

God ____________enough to correct us. The worst thing that can

happen is if God _________________ us. ROM 1

Are you sensitive to God’s voice? Do you obey? Do you believe that God

convicts because He loves you?

3. God is personal

I Tim 1:12-17 – Paul knew how badly he ______________. Paul was

eternally ____________ that God forgave Him.

Is there some screw up in your life that you find it hard to believe that

God forgives you?

1

Background History of Presbyterian Movement Summary from A History of Christianity, Vol 2 by Kenneth Latourette. Chap 32-33

Martin Luther

Martin Luther was the chief pioneer of Protestantism. He was a product of the Roman Catholic Christianity of the Middle Ages. He was born in Eisleben, November 10, 1483. Martin became a monk in 1505 and for several years he was a disappointed, tortured soul. He sought by the means set forth by the Church and the monastic tradition to make himself acceptable to God and to earn the salvation of his soul. He mortified his body. He fasted, sometimes for days on end and without a morsel of food. He gave himself to prayers and vigils beyond those required by the rule of his order. He went to confession, often daily and for hours at a time. Yet assurance of God's favor and inward peace did not come and the periods of depression were acute. In the autumn of 1515, he lectured on Paul’s Letter to the Romans and the phrase “the just shall live by faith” brought him the illumination by which he was there after to live. To Luther, faith was not primarily intellectual but rather the grateful whole-hearted response of one’s entire being to the love of God in Christ. Luther further believed that justification was by faith alone. He did not discount good works but to his mind they do not earn justification but are the fruits of faith. The moral laxity and corruption of the Church disturbed Luther. In 1517, he posted on the door of the castle church, a kind of university bulletin board ninety-five theses, which he prepared to debate against Indulgences. People would pay for Indulgence with the belief that the Pope had the power to release souls from purgatory. To Luther’s surprise, the ninety-five theses created an immense sensation. Within a few months, they were printed across Germany. As a result, Luther was drawn into controversy. Although a the outset he had no thought of breaking with the Pope or the Church of Rome, he was not one to draw back, and prudence and guarded speech were alien to his nature. In the course of the debate he was led on step by step until he had declared that both Popes and general councils of the Church could err, that only the Scriptures are authoritative, and that he would concede that he was in error only if convinced that what he held was contrary to the Bible and to sound reason. In 1520, he boldly stated his position in five tracts that were widely circulated. In them, 1. He attacked the superiority of Popes, bishops, priest, and monks over the laity – princes,

lords, artisans, and peasants. 2. He attacked the Papal claim to exclusive right to interpret Scripture. 3. He attacked the claim that only the Pope could summon a council and confirm its acts. 4. He would leave priests free to marry and would have each town elect a ‘pious learned

citizen’ form the congregation and charge him with the office of minister. 5. He advocated the sacrament of communion to all rather than just the priests. Luther

believed in transubstantiation. The wine and bread are the ‘real flesh and blood of Christ.’ 6. Luther valued baptism and did not deny it to infants. 7. Luther insisted that no ground exists in the Scripture for the other five of seven sacraments.

2

8. Luther attacked the idea of ordination and found no grounds for the vows of perpetual poverty, chastity and obedience taken by the monks and nuns.

Through these tracts were set forth the conviction which became distinctive features of Protestantism – justification by faith alone, the priesthood of all believers, the authority of the word of God as contained in the Scriptures, and the right and duty of each Christian to interpret the Scriptures. In April 1521, the conflict came to a head with Luther being summoned to defend himself at Worms before the Emperor. He refused to repudiate what he had said in his writings unless he were convinced of error from the prophets and the Gospel. On a further question he repeated that his conscience was captive to the word of God and that unless he were convicted by Scripture and plain reason, for he did not accept the authority of Popes and councils since they had contradicted one another, he would not recant anything. To do so would be neither right nor safe. He added, God help me. Amen." Another version of his closing words, which may be accurate, has him say: "Here I stand. I cannot do otherwise." He spoke in German and, on being asked, repeated his statement in Latin. It was a dramatic hour. A humble monk and university professor of peasant stock dared to set himself against the weight of constituted authority in Church and state. He did so at the risk of his life. German princes sympathetic to his cause protected Luther. Luther spent the next year translating the Bible to German. In 1522, he returned to Wittenberg and openly resumed leadership of the movement. His basic principle was religious, justification by faith, and arose from his own experience. He gave primacy to the word of God and wished it to be presented in all its purity as he understood it. He held to the priesthood of all believers. He would have faith govern the entire conduct of all Christians and, since he contended that the distinction between sacred and secular was contrary to the Gospel, he wished them to carry on their occupations as vocations, callings of God. Luther made much of music. He seems to have been responsible for the musical settings of some of his hymns. Because of the high value that he placed on the Bible and its study by the ordinary believer, he was eager that the music in public worship should enable the words of Scripture to be clearly understood by the congregation. To Luther the sermon was of first rate importance and he preached regularly. Luther believed in education and emphasized the family. He helped arrange marriages for nuns and he himself married one. Luther died February 18,1546. His later year had been marked by a complication of various physical illnesses. Some of his best writing and most moving religious insights were in the closing period of his life.

John Calvin

Biography - The reformed Church took from Martin Luther and continued further. They differed in subtle ways. Doctrinally, Luther believed in transubstantiation. The reformers tended to see the Lord’s Supper ask more symbolic. Politically, Luther tended to be pessimistic about the possibility of bringing human society to the conformity of God will. The reformers were more hopeful that the labors of the faithful could approximate God kingdom on earth. We can see this trend in the life of John Calvin. John Calvin was born on July 10, 1509 at Noyon in Picardy, about 60 miles northeast of Paris. As a lad of 14, he went to the University of Paris. By 25, he had a sudden conversion through some

3

of the influences of the Protestants. At the age of 26, Calvin finished and published what was probably the most influential single book of the Protestant Reformation, The Institutes of Christian Religion. He worked it over and over again and enlarged it during his lifetime. The Institutes did not owe their prominence to the originality of the ideas but because of the clarity, the orderly arrangement of their thought, and their comprehensiveness. They were the most inclusive and systematic presentation of the Christian faith as held by Protestants which had thus far appeared. They set forth the entire cosmic drama of creation, sin, and redemption under the sovereign will of God as Calvin believed that it was taught in the Scriptures. He prized the Scriptures as the authoritative record of God’s dealings with the universe and man. Calvin stressed the sovereignty of God and the submission to His will. Calvin, in his late twenties, was induced by Farel to help him with the Reformation in Geneva. The two worked closely together and sought to make a model community, organized in such fashion that Church and state worked together in harmony. After a little less than two years, they were banished for refusing compliance with what they regarded as improper interference of the civil authorities in the Church’s sphere. Calvin found refuge in Strassburg and became pastor to the French refugees and built up a congregation organized and disciplined in accordance with his principles and with a liturgy which became a model for public worship in the Reformed Churches elsewhere. It was here that he married. After three years, the political situation in Geneva had change and he was asked back. From his return in 1541 until his death in 1564, he was the dominant figure in the city. Under his leadership, close cooperation between Church and state was carried through. He had the discipline of community morals enforced by civil law. He did much to develop commerce and a weaving industry. He encouraged the lending of money, but only believed in fair interest. He thus contributed to a new industrial and commercial economy. Calvin encouraged education and founded the University of Geneva. He preached, taught, wrote, carried on an enormous correspondence, and advised in matters of legislation, law enforcement, and administration. His commentaries covered most of the Bible. Under Calvin, Geneva became a haven for oppressed Protestants from many lands. In it, men were trained who went back to their native countries to further the Reformation. Calvin died May 27, 1564. Few were close to him, but these few had for him an unshakable affection. Calvin's writings http://www.theopedia.com/John_Calvin

The Institutes - John Calvin was a prolific writer of theology. His most notable work was the Institutes of the Christian Religion, the first edition of which was published in 1536 in Latin when he was twenty-six years old. Calvin revised the Institutes several times. The first edition, intended to be a catechism for French Protestants, was a short work consisting of six chapters dealing with the law, the Apostles' Creed, the Lord's Prayer, the sacraments, false sacraments, and Christian liberty (i.e. freedom). Calvin then produced a Latin edition in 1539 that was three times as long, and that same year he translated this second edition into French for those who could not read Latin. Another expanded edition was published in 1543 in Latin, with another French translation to follow in 1545. A fourth Latin edition appeared in 1550, while the final edition was published in 1559. The final edition differed radically from the original 1536 edition as it was no longer merely a manual for new believers. Instead, it had grown into a thorough systematic theology comprising four books (or "volumes") and dealt with more doctrines of the Christian faith.

4

Commentaries/Sermons - Calvin also published commentaries on twenty-three of the Old Testament books and all of the New Testament books except 2-3 John and Revelation. Calvin had a strong conviction that commentaries should be clear and brief. Thus, his Institutes received more of the doctrinal discussions, however, doctrinal matters still found their way into his commentaries at times. The commentaries were published in both Latin and French. Calvin was not an ivory-tower theologian. While he often revised and expanded his Institutes, he was also a very committed preacher. From 1541 onwards, Calvin conducted services on a daily basis. During the week he would give attention to the OT, while he would preach Sunday mornings from the NT and Sunday afternoons from a psalm. His sermons began to be recorded in 1549 so that they could be printed. Those sermons preserved in manuscript form are published in the Supplementa Calviniana.

Calvin's theology

God - Calvin said that there could be no knowledge of self without knowledge of God. All men have a natural awareness of divinity, which is both planted in their minds and made evident through creation. However, man has suppressed or corrupted this knowledge, and confused the creation with the Creator. It is only when men contemplate the greatness of God that they can come to realize their own inadequacy. God is providentially in control of all things that come to pass, including evil things, but this does not make him the author of evil.

Man - Man is created in the image of God. This image has been marred by the Fall, though not destroyed. Before the Fall, man's will was truly free; however, now it is corrupt and enslaved to sin. Man is totally unable to seek or choose God unless God chooses him first.

Jesus Christ - The person of Christ, the God-man, provides the solution to this moral dilemma. Christ is the only possible bridge between God and men. In the Incarnation, God and man were joined inseparably in one person, yet not in such a way that the divine and human were confused. The relationship between Christ's human and divine natures is paradigmatic for Calvin's theology whenever the divine touches upon the human. Calvin was the first person to describe the work of Christ in terms of the threefold offices of prophet, priest, and king. As prophet, Christ's teachings are proclaimed by the apostles for the purpose of our salvation. As priest, Christ's sacrifice of himself and his mediation before the Father secures the salvation of men. As king, Christ rules the Church spiritually in the hearts of its members.

The Holy Spirit - The Holy Spirit unites men to Christ when Christ is apprehended through faith in the promises of Scripture. The Spirit leads men to Christ; without him, saving faith is impossible.

Justification by faith - Justification by faith is the material principle of the Reformation. It is based upon the mercy of God, not the merits of humanity. Although the doctrines of election and predestination are linked with Calvin's name, the doctrine of election actually plays a relatively minor part of Calvin's theology. As a second-generation Reformer, his primary concern was with the government and organization of the church rather than theology. Nonetheless, Calvin believed in unconditional election.

5

Sacraments - Calvin taught two sacraments: baptism and the Lord's supper. He differed from sacramentalists who believed that the sacraments were a means of receiving justifying grace. Rather, they are the badges, or marks, of Christian profession, testifying to God's grace. Calvin was a paedobaptist, believing that infants were the proper objects of baptism. He differed from Catholic and Lutheran paedobaptists in arguing that baptism did not regenerate infants. Rather, it symbolized entrance into the New Covenant, just as circumcision did for the Old Covenant. His argument for infant baptism draws many parallels between the two signs. Whereas Luther and the Catholic church believed that Christ's body was literally present in the Eucharist, and Zwingli taught that the Lord's Supper was a mere memorial, Calvin took a middle ground between the two positions. The elements were a symbol and therefore could not be the thing they signified; the doctrines of transubstantiation and consubstantiation confused the symbol and the substance. On the other hand, Zwingli's memorialism divorced symbol and substance completely. Calvin taught that when one receives the bread and wine, which are literal food and drink, in a spiritual sense he receives the spiritual food and drink of the Christian. Christ is spiritually present when the Eucharist is received by faith.

Church government - Calvin is the founder of the Presbyterian system of church government. At the local level, Calvin's system consisted of a council of pastors representing the local assembly, and responsible for teaching and shepherding the churches. The Consistory, a larger council comprising pastors and lay elders elected according to district, was responsible for maintaining church discipline and watching over the moral lives of church members. At the regional level is the presbytery, then above this a provincial synod and a national synod. Church government is closely tied to church discipline. Discipline is the ordering of church life in obedience to Christ in response to the teaching of Scripture. It has a threefold aim: the glory of God, purity of the Church, and correction of the offender. The power of the Church to punish offenders was limited to excommunication. Typically, this meant denying them the Lord's Supper, baptism for them or their children, or marriage. Although in Calvin's day the Consistory could recommend civil punishment to the city authorities which was often heeded.

Calvin and Calvinism - Calvinism is most noted for its understanding of soteriology which was codified at the Synod of Dort in 1618-19 in the so-called Five Points of Calvinism. There is some debate as to whether Calvin himself would have affirmed all five points as such. In his writings, he explicitly affirms total depravity, unconditional election, irresistible grace, and the perseverance of the saints. However, his affirmation of limited atonement is implicit at best. Some scholars, such as Norman Geisler, deny that Calvin would have endorsed limited atonement; others, such as Roger Nicole, say that his theology affirms all five points.[3]

Separation of church and state - Calvin believed that the church should not be subject to the state, or vice versa. While both church and state are subject to God's law, they both have their own God-ordained spheres of influence. For example, the church does not have the authority to impose penalties for civil offenses, although it can call on the civil authorities to punish them. Conversely, the state is not to intrude on the operations of the church. However, it has a duty to protect the church and its ability to function as the church. As a magisterial reformer, Calvin thought of the State as a Christian nation rather than a secular government. He did not advocate religious freedom in the same sense as the Baptists later would, for example. However, his ecclesiology sowed the seeds of the modern secular democracy.

6

Missiology - Geneva became a safe haven for Protestant refugees, not only from France, but all over Europe. Calvin founded a school to instruct men in Reformed theology and then train them to return home, preach the Gospel, and plant churches. The city therefore became the nucleus of missionary activity; for example, in 1561, 140 missionaries are recorded as having left Geneva. [4] The missionary influence of Calvin extended not only to his native France, but also to Scotland (home of the Presbyterian Church), England, northern Italy, the Netherlands, and even Poland. Calvin also sent out the first two overseas missionaries in the history of Protestantism: an expedition to Brazil in 1556.

The Protestant work ethic - Calvin repudiated the distinction between "sacred" and "secular" duty and the prevailing notion that work is a necessary evil. Rather, he taught, work is a calling from God. Therefore, one glorifies God in his work by working diligently and joyfully. Calvin did not invent capitalism, but he did teach that one of the rewards of hard work is wealth. His philosophy of work allowed capitalism to flourish where it was practiced.

John Knox

Web Article By Gordan Runyan (http://reformed-theology.org/html/issue10/knox.htm)

Biography - John Knox was born to peasant parents between 1505 and 1515 AD, at or near Haddington, Scotland. To put this in historical context, that’s just a handful of years before Martin Luther’s "Hammer Heard Round the World" nailed up his 95 Theses and put the Reformation in gear.

Despite beginning in poverty, Knox came to be educated at St. Andrew’s University. He was ordained a Catholic priest.

Sometime after this, he came into contact with the ministry of George Wishart. Wishart was some sort of itinerate preacher, probably of a Lutheran flavor. This man lived a life of self-imposed poverty, and placed great emphasis on ministry to the poor. Wishart was also a prophet after the Biblical model. (At least he thought he was and so, apparently, did Knox.)

The two men became friends. It might not be going too far to say that Knox became Wishart’s disciple. Knox definitely became something of a bodyguard. He was known to brandish a sword when he accompanied his teacher. It was during this time that John Knox the Catholic priest became John Knox the fiery Protestant. Or John Knox, the virulent anti-papist. According to Knox’s personal writings, this change happened quite suddenly, with his reading of John 17.

In reading Jesus’s "High-Priestly Prayer", Knox came to this passage: "I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are mine." (John 17:9, KJV) Something clicked for Knox in this. Jesus was praying for His own people, but not for the world. Jesus was making a distinction. So this verse was a key for Knox, through which he came to believe that Wishart’s doctrine of Election was true.

John Knox did not yet renounce his Catholic priesthood, though. One wonders if he retained a Luther-like hope that this recovery of Biblical truth could be made the doctrine of the Roman Church without requiring schism and fracture.

At this point in history, Scotland was something of a political brass ring; both England and France were intent on possessing her. It should also be remembered that the events that follow

7

took place in a world some two hundred years away from the appearance of the concept of "separation of Church and State". To an alarming extent, political history was church history, and vice versa.

Therefore, any Protestant reformation was inextricably linked to national independence from both France and England. Knox was to become a leader on both fronts.

In 1546, Cardinal Beaton was in authority in Scotland. (By now, all over northern Europe, the Protestant Reformation is taking hold, stripping papal power and authority.) Beaton had George Wishart arrested. Knox was at his side, ready to fight for him, but Wishart went willingly. Wishart was tried for his heresy and burned. It is this instance which finally prompted Knox to renounce his own priesthood.

Twenty-seven days later, Cardinal Beaton himself was murdered. One source suggests the motivation for his murder was split between revenge over the death of Wishart and retribution for Beaton’s sympathies with the French. There is no evidence of any involvement in Beaton’s death by Knox himself.

Beaton’s killers, though, holed up in Saint Andrew’s castle, waiting for Catholic/French retaliation. John Knox became the pastor of these men. There is no indication of the size of the force attempting to repel the French here, but, whatever its number, it fell. The French subdued St. Andrew’s.

Thus began one of the lowest periods of Knox’s life. He spent 19 months as a slave on a French galley. The cruelty of that existence, chained beside the worst criminals and murderers, threatened always by exposure, starvation, and exhaustion, must have been unspeakable. We will never know. Knox did not speak or write of this time in much detail. When he did mention it in some personal correspondence, he offered praise to God. He knew that his Lord had both ordained that time, and had used it to do much work in molding and shaping his heart.

After Knox’s release, under the reign of Protestant King Edward VI of England, Knox became a royal chaplain. Then, in 1554 came the ascension of Mary, of French/Catholic heritage. Knox was forced to flee to Reformation-friendly Germany. There, he became pastor of a congregation of English-speaking exiles in Frankfurt.

But Protestantism has never come in one flavor only. Knox got into trouble over his criticisms of the Edwardean (read: Anglican) Prayer book. It was too Catholic for his tastes. The larger portion of his Frankfurt church was English and wanted to use the book in the conduct of services. Knox would not. He finally received the "Left Foot of Fellowship" and was removed from his position.

Released from his duties, Knox took the opportunity to visit Geneva, Switzerland, where he met and studied under John Calvin for some time. There, Knox worked on the Genevan version of the English Bible.

Some sources make passing reference to a sort of uneasy tension between the two great Reformers. The stereotypical Scotsman is one who, when he decides what is right, plunges into it with a sort of reckless abandon. The modern word, "berserk," may descend to us from an old description of this tendency.

8

Calvin might’ve seen this brand of Scot in John Knox. The Genevan would have preferred to proceed in a cautious, calculated manner, but this was not John Knox. Knox’s heart never left his homeland, and his passion for her independence produced a zeal that made Calvin nervous.

Knox, in fact, made several trips back to Scotland, conditioned upon swings in political power. And sometimes sparking those swings. His fiery preaching was legendary. But what concerned Mary Tutor, Mary of Guise, and Mary Queen of Scots was his political impact.

John Knox appeared no less than five times before the royal court to account for his preaching, which the succession of Mary’s found threatening. This was serious business indeed. Remember the context. Wishart had been executed by the Church/State in the same generation. If Knox had been found guilty of fomenting sedition, he would have met the same fate.

But Knox was a brilliant debater, to say the least, with an impressive command of Scripture. He escaped every time to the dismay of the Queen, who certainly thought she had him cornered on each occasion. She was so frustrated at one point that she stormed out of the room in tears, realizing that she could not put Knox to death as she had hoped.

Knox’s preaching had immense political implications during 1555-1556. He so inspired a group of Scottish nobles that they came together to form the "Lords of the Covenant", whose purpose it was to oppose the French to "establish the most blessed word of God and his Congregation."

The importance here is impossible to miss. The nobles were the landowners. Land equaled power. The Lords of the Covenant thus represented an organized, purposeful move toward independence. Scotland won her freedom shortly thereafter.

On August 17, 1560, the new Scottish Parliament adopted the Scots Confession as a national creed. Knox was the principle author. He and four unknown others (all named "John", oddly) wrote the Scots Confession in four days. Realizing Knox’s skills and dynamic nature, it is difficult to imagine that the Confession reflects anything other than his own thought. His influence is noted by historian Kenneth Scott Latourette, who observes that the Confession was "more Calvinistic than Lutheran or Zwinglian".

At the same time, Knox presented a book he had authored titled, The First Book of Discipline, described as an attempt "to apply the system worked out by Calvin to a whole kingdom." This book outlined procedures for discipline within the Church, as well as creative plans for national education and relief to the poor. It was controversial and ambitious. Too much so, in fact. The Parliament refused to enact it alongside the Scots Confession.

But what this highlights is a side to Knox that is often overlooked. Knox as Warrior and Preacher tends to crowd out Knox as Minister to the poor. From the time of his training with Wishart, though, this was a fundamental concern of his ministry. He saw it as the Church’s responsibility to provide the material things needed to lessen the devastating effects of poverty; and, to provide the education that would tend to solve poverty in the long-term.

Political tides continued to ebb and flow, endangering both Scotland and the new Church for which Knox fought all his life. John Knox died on November 24, 1572, having won some measure of lasting independence for both.

9

Knox’s Shadow? - Without question, John Knox was a dynamic, even pivotal player, not only in the history of Presbyterianism, but in the history of Christianity as a whole. He found himself radically confronted by the truth of God’s Word, and thus compelled to confront the world on the same basis.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Knox

Knox’s death was barely noticed at the time. Although his funeral was attended by the nobles of Scotland, no major politician or diplomat mentioned his death in their letters that survive. Mary, Queen of Scots made only two brief references to him in her letters. What the rulers feared, however, were Knox’s ideas more than Knox himself. He was a single minded and successful revolutionary and it was this revolutionary philosophy that had a great impact on the English Puritans. He contributed to the struggle for human freedom as he taught that people had the duty to fight against governments in order to bring about change.

Knox was notable not so much for the overthrow of Catholicism in Scotland, but for assuring the replacement of the old religion with Presbyterianism rather than Anglicanism. It was thanks to Knox that the Presbyterian polity was established. In that regard, Knox is considered the founder of the Presbyterian denomination whose members number millions worldwide.

Article on John Knox’s legacy

http://creideamh.blogspot.com/2008/09/will-real-john-knox-please-stand-up.html Author - Iain D Campbell, currently pastor of the Free Church of Scotland in Point on the Isle of Lewis in northwest Scotland. Rosalind Marshall concludes her recent biography of Knox with these words: ‘John Knox’s energy, eloquence, powerful convictions and moral certainty played a significant part in making Scotland and the Scots what they are today.’ It’s an interesting thesis, given the ways in which Knox has been vilified in Scottish literature. Why should this be? We have imbibed the caricature of Knox as the man who tried to browbeat a succession of young Scottish Queens into betraying their faith, a misogynist of the first order, who believed he should not be governed by a woman. The image of Knox marching down the Royal Mile to confront Mary in the Palace of Holyroodhouse makes him one of our great villains, not one of our great heroes. It is true that Knox confronted the Queen, and many more besides. He was nothing if not principled, and Rosalind Marshall’s work goes a long way to revealing the real passion in Knox’s religion: a passion for truth and for conviction. Like many of the Reformers, Knox began life within medieval Roman Catholicism. Indeed, the goal of the reformation was not to create a new church, but to reform and re-shape the church from within. Protestantism grew where the medieval church refused to reform, and it was always the argument of the reformers that they were the true guardians of the church’s tradition and message. Knox’s association with John Calvin undoubtedly shaped the course of his life and ministry. They

10

did not always agree on the details of how best to progress the reformation, and Calvin’s views sometimes disappointed Knox, but Knox still regarded Calvin’s Geneva as the most perfect school of Christ in the commonwealth. The values he had seen applied on the European continent he was keen to apply in his own native land. That meant, first, a commitment to Bible-based theology. This was not novel to Knox; before him Patrick Hamilton and George Wishart had been put to death for a commitment to the teaching of Scripture; and after him Andrew Melville became the catalyst for the Scottish Reformation. But Knox’s fearless proclamation of the Bible and its theology was undoubtedly the single most wholesomely divisive and disruptive aspect of sixteenth century Scottish life. Not that this was merely a theological position. The Scottish Reformation was not simply the re-writing of creeds and confessions. It was a return to sources: a return to patristic theology, which itself was rooted in apostolic Christianity and biblical truth. Knox found the Bible addressing situations not unlike those of the Scotland in his day, and he found himself standing in the tradition of dissenting prophets who were ready to challenge the establishment. Modern theologians might describe this as cultural engagement and critique. For Knox it was merely the blowing of the Gospel trumpet: a case of letting the Bible speak for itself. He believed that when that was allowed to happen, the structures of thought and practice both in church and state could not but be challenged. It meant, secondly, the altering of the shape of the church and its worship. Perhaps the most important legacy of Knox’s life was the Scots Confession of 1560, adopted and ratified by the Church of Scotland in its General Assembly that year. It paved the way for the adoption of the Westminster Confession of Faith some ninety years later, and although some theologians have tried to drive a wedge between the two confessions, they are essentially of the same spirit, committing the church to a particular theology in relation to God and his world. For Knox the Scottish church was to be a confessing church. It was not enough that individual ministers be evangelical, or that parishes be well administered. It was necessary for every onlooker to be able to identify the church for what she thought, taught and confessed. To lose this is to betray a key element of our Reformed heritage. The theology informed all the subsequent practice of the Reformer. It was in the light of Scripture that he declaimed the Mass as idolatry, as it was in the light of Scripture that he made the pulpit, and not the altar, central to the church’s worship. It was in the light of Scripture that he challenged the right of monarchs to assume absolute power, as it was in the light of Scripture that he pursued a ministry as the shepherd of an increasingly growing flock of Bible thinkers throughout Europe. It meant, thirdly, an application of biblical principles to social life and structures. Knox saw in his Bible a supremacy given to Jesus that was not being realized or appreciated either in church or state. The church’s spiritual independence, and the subsequent principles on which the Scottish church developed and grew, were in direct linear succession to Knox’s view of the supremacy of Christ. Long before Kuyper declared that Christ was Lord over every square inch of life, Knox was applying that principle ruthlessly and fearlessly.

11

Not the least part of this worldview was the idea that everyone should have the right to education. God revealed his mind to us in words, and everyone, therefore, should be able to read words. The desire to have everyone educated was not achieved or fully realized in Knox’s lifetime, but it is doubtful that the idea of the parish school could have developed without him. Perhaps his detractors should reflect on that more than they do. It meant, fourthly, an emphasis on individualism and on personal responsibility. The reformation saw a movement away from the concentration of power in a few ordained clerics and laid the foundation for the ideal of universal priesthood. Everyone had a ministry and a role to play. The foundations of modern democracy were laid in Knox’s focus on the importance of everyman. Scotland should be ashamed of its ignorance of Knox. Buried underneath the flagstones of the Royal Mile, he still casts a long shadow. Within yards of his grave, our Scottish Parliament continues to pursue a policy of toleration that does nothing to address our moral malaise, while the Scottish Kirk is embarrassed by its Protestant roots. This is no time to be forgetting John Knox

A Brief Introduction to the Canon and Ancient Versions of Scripture http://www.bible-researcher.com/canon1.html

by Michael Marlowe

Formation of the New Testament Canon

Gradual and independent definition of the canon by elders. In the year 367 an influential bishop named Athanasius published a list of books to be read in the churches under his care, which included precisely those books we have in our Bibles (with this exception — he admitted Baruch and omitted Esther in the Old Testament). Other such lists had been published by others, as early as the year 170, although they did not all agree. How did the men who published these lists decide which books should be called Scripture? Scholars who have studied this matter closely have concluded that the lists of books are merely ratifications of the decisions of the majority of churches from earliest days. We are able to prove this by examining the surviving works of Irenaeus (born 130), who lived in days before anyone felt it was necessary to list the approved books. He quotes as Scripture all of the books and only the books that appear in the list published on another continent and sixty years later by Origen.

It is evident that the elders of each congregation had approved certain writings and rejected others as they became available, and it turned out, by the grace of God, that most of the churches were by the year 170 in agreement, having approved the same books independently. Prominent teachers were also influential in this process. About that time bishops began to prevail in the Church, as governors of groups of churches, and they simply ratified with these lists the results thus arrived at. The approved books were then called the "canon" of Scripture, "canon" being a Greek word meaning "rod" or "ruler." These books constituted the standard rule of faith for all the churches. We must not imagine that the canon was imposed by ecclesiastical authorities. The canon grew up by many independent decisions of elders who were responsible for their congregations alone.

The elders received apostolic writings as authoritative. Then we must ask, how did the elders of the churches decide which writings should be read in church as authoritative? The answer is simple: They received the writings of the apostles and their closest companions, and the writings endorsed by them. The entire Old Testament was received by the implicit endorsement of the apostles. The Gospel of Matthew was written by an apostle. The Gospel of Mark was written by the Apostle Peter's closest disciple. The Gospel of Luke was written by the Apostle Paul's close companion. The Gospel of John was written by an apostle. The Acts of the Apostles was written by Paul's close companion. Thirteen letters were received from Paul. The epistle to the Hebrews was received as from Paul. The epistle of James comes from the brother of the Lord, who exercised authority in Jerusalem with the apostles. The epistle of Jude was from another brother of the Lord. The two epistles of Peter are from an apostle. The three epistles of John are from an apostle, who also wrote the Revelation. We may ask, How did they know that these writings were not forgeries? The churches did not receive them from strangers. These documents were hand-delivered by friends of the apostles to elders who also knew the apostles personally. Forgeries would be obvious, especially if the writing promoted strange doctrines.

Minor disagreements in earliest days. Some disagreements arose along with the rise of heresies. The elders of the churches became wary, and even began to doubt some of the writings they had formerly received as copies from other churches. Writings which came under question were Hebrews, James, Jude, 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, and the Revelation of John. The reasons for doubt were various. The author of Hebrews does not identify himself. James was not an apostle, and his message seemed to contradict Paul's message. Jude was not an apostle, and he quotes books which the churches did not receive as Scripture. 2 Peter, it seems, was not widely distributed at first. The author of 2 and 3 John does not identify himself plainly. The author of the Revelation identifies himself as John, but does not say that he is the apostle John, and the style of the book is different from the Gospel of John. Nevertheless, the majority of churches received and used these books without questioning them, while vigorously rejecting all others.

Universal agreement in modern times. Today we have no good reason for doubting the canon of the New Testament. It would be wrong for me to suggest that everyone needs to investigate these matters and decide for himself which books he will receive as Scripture, without any respect for the decisions of the early churches. We are not in such a position to judge as the early church was, and we are bound to respect the well-nigh unanimous opinion of so many Christians of the past. As Paul says to the Corinthian innovators, "What! Was it from you that the word of God went forth? Or came it unto you alone?" Against such presumption he

recommends that which is done "in all the churches of the saints." (14:33b-36). Recently some scholars have tried to promote strange doctrines by suggesting that some of our canonical writings are not genuine, and that other writings such as the Gospel of Thomas are equally valid "interpretations" of the life and teachings of Jesus Christ. I have studied their arguments, and I can assure you that they are not worth listening to.

Reception of the Old Testament in Greek

The Jewish use of versions. In the synagogue the Hebrew scripture itself was read from a scroll, followed by a translation into Aramaic or Greek given by the Methurgeman (translator). The translation was never read from a scroll, because the Jews were determined not to give any version such an illusion of authority; the translation had to be memorized or done extemporaneously. In the beginning the translations were not even written down. When they were eventually written down they were not made widely available, and were not "authorized" in any sense by the Rabbis.

The Greek version of the Old Testament, called the Septuagint. About two hundred years before the birth of Christ a Greek translation of the Pentateuch was committed to writing in Alexandria, where many Jews only knew Greek. This version was later called the Septuagint because legend has it that the translation was done by seventy (Latin septuaginta) men. Gradually the other books of the Old Testament were also put in Greek. The Septuagint gives a fairly accurate translation of the Pentateuch, which was read most closely by the Jews, but for the prophetical books like Isaiah and Jeremiah the translation is often quite loose and even erroneous, and in need of correction.

Apostolic use of the Septuagint. The quotations of the Old Testament in the New show that the apostles often used the Septuagint, because it was generally known to those in the Church and usually adequate for their purposes. Some people in looking at these quotations have been troubled by the fact that they are sometimes not very accurate translations of the Hebrew. Did the apostles not know their business? Of course they did. They did not concern themselves with corrections when the translation served well enough for their purpose, but when it did not they quietly offered their own translation of the Hebrew. Then they usually offered a better translation. The apostles did not see fit to produce a complete version of the Old Testament in Greek for the use of the churches.

Extra books of the Septuagint, called the Apocrypha. It is inaccurate to talk about the Septuagint as a single book in apostolic days: the various writings existed as separate scrolls, and were not bound in a single volume until the middle of the second century, when the codex or physical "book" as we know it was invented.

(1)

People did not have bookshelves, but cabinets or large cans full of these scrolls. The codex was adopted by Christians who wanted a more convenient way of referencing Scripture, and so the Greek Old Testament was one of the first collection of writings to be put in this form. When this was done, certain writings (called Apocryphal) which were highly regarded by the Greek-speaking Jews and often studied by them were bound in the same volume as the canonical books. The apostles never quote from these writings, and there is no reason to believe that they regarded them as Scripture, or would have approved of binding them with the other books in a codex.

Status of the Apocrypha in the early Church. Eventually the Septuagint came to be regarded as a kind of inspired paraphrase by teachers in the churches, mainly because the apostles had used it, and partly because they suspected that the Jews had deliberately corrupted the Hebrew text in anti-Christian ways since it was translated. Then the additional books traditionally included in complete copies of the Septuagint also came to be regarded as Scripture by some, especially in the West. This was a mistake, but it did little harm, because not much attention was paid to these books. At first the churches would not possess copies of the entire Septuagint, nor even all books of the Old Testament, but perhaps only separate codices of Genesis, Isaiah, Psalms; and they would gradually collect all the books. Copies of the entire Septuagint were very expensive.

Reception of the Bible in Latin

The Old Latin version. Within two hundred years after the departure of the apostles there were many churches throughout the world in which the people did not understand Greek very well, and so new translations of both the Old and New Testaments were made into Syriac, Coptic, and Latin, for use in the churches. The Coptic and

Latin versions were not translated directly from the Hebrew, but from the Greek Septuagint, and the Syriac was soon "corrected" from the Septuagint.

The Vulgate. In western Europe the variety of Latin translations and copies created confusion, and a notable scholar named Jerome was asked to look into the matter and to make a trustworthy translation. Jerome wisely revised the Latin versions from the Hebrew itself, and expressed his opinion, shared by many, that it was a mistake to receive the Apocryphal books just because they happened to be included in copies of the Septuagint. There was some resistance to Jerome's version, and to his exclusion of the Apocrypha. Latin translations of the Apocryphal books were added to it, and in that form it became the version commonly used in the churches for a thousand years. This version came to be called the Vulgate, or "common" Bible.

Protestant vs. Catholic views of the Vulgate. When the Protestant reformers wrote biblical commentaries in Latin, they gave Latin translations of the biblical text, but in these translations they often departed from the Vulgate version. Luther and Calvin knew Hebrew and Greek, and they did not believe that the Vulgate should be regarded as an authoritative version. They also were aware of how the Apocryphal books came to be in the Vulgate, and so they rejected them. The Roman Catholics, on the other hand, declared that the Vulgate was an authoritative version and not to be departed from. This idea of a uniquely authoritative version (which has recurred in our own times with the rise of the "King James Only" movement) has created many problems in Church history.

Conclusion

Protestant vs. Catholic views of the canon. Protestant teachings concerning the canon are in general based upon the same principle which is employed by Protestant theologians in all sorts of questions about doctrine and church order: the clearly ancient teachings and practices are to be preferred over the medieval. In questions that are not answered by Scripture itself, we inquire into the earliest available evidence for the teachings and practices of the churches, and have little regard for traditions that cannot be traced back to the generation that immediately followed the Apostles.

(2) And so with respect to the canon, we are interested to know what the

earliest available sources have to say. That is why the resolution of this question partly depends upon an examination of the ancient canon lists. When these lists are examined, we find that the earlier ones omit the Apocrypha, and that the later ones (beginning at the end of the fourth century in the West) include it. The Apocrypha began to be put on the same level as our canonical books at about the same time as many other innovations entered into the Church.

Implications for the text of Scripture. A word may be added here concerning the text of Scripture, which is in a sense a question of canon also. The canonical text for Protestants is the original autographic text, in Hebrew and Greek. Our investigation of this text, as Protestants, can only proceed on the same principle adhered to in the investigation of the canon. There can be no authoritative medieval version, as in Catholicism, and the manuscript tradition cannot all be put on one level. Instead, we are bound to inquire, What do the earliest sources support? The idea which has gained some currency among conservative Protestants lately, namely, that the traditional medieval text upon which the King James Version is based is to be regarded as authoritative simply because it became traditional, involves the adoption of an essentially Catholic view of tradition and authority, foreign to the spirit of Protestantism. This approach is inconsistent with the rejection of the Apocrypha, and of all other corruptions which arose in the middle ages.

The New Testament Canon New Testament Books Treated as Traditional Scripture by Early Writers

Italic type indicates that the writer either does not mention the book or expressed some doubt about the status of the book.

Athanasius (b. 296)

Origen (b. 185)

Irenaeus (b. 130)

Marcion* (b. 85)

Matthew Matthew Matthew

Mark Mark Mark

Luke Luke Luke Luke

John John John

Acts Acts Acts

Romans Romans Romans Romans

1 Corinthians 1 Corinthians 1 Corinthians 1 Corinthians

2 Corinthians 2 Corinthians 2 Corinthians 2 Corinthians

Galatians Galatians Galatians Galatians

Ephesians Ephesians Ephesians Ephesians

Philippians Philippians Philippians Philippians

Colossians Colossians Colossians Colossians

1 Thessalonians 1 Thessalonians 1 Thessalonians 1 Thessalonians

2 Thessalonians 2 Thessalonians 2 Thessalonians 2 Thessalonians

1 Timothy 1 Timothy 1 Timothy

2 Timothy 2 Timothy 2 Timothy

Titus Titus Titus

Philemon Philemon Philemon Philemon

Hebrews Hebrews Hebrews

James James James

1 Peter 1 Peter 1 Peter

2 Peter 2 Peter 2 Peter

1 John 1 John 1 John

2 John 2 John 2 John

3 John 3 John 3 John

Jude Jude Jude

Revelation** Revelation Revelation

* Marcion's views were peculiar to his sect. He was aware of the fact that many of the other books were read as scripture in most churches.

** The Revelation of John was first received and then rejected by many churches in Asia Minor.

The Old Testament Canon and Apocrypha http://www.bible-researcher.com/canon2.html

The following table gives the names of books included in the Old Testament of the Hebrew Bible, the Greek Septuagint, the Latin Vulgate, and the King James Version (1611). Names of apocryphal books are italicized. The books enclosed in square brackets in the Septuagint column are books which appear in only some copies of that version.

Hebrew Bible Greek Septuagint Latin Vulgate King James Version

THE LAW Genesis Exodus Leviticus Numbers Deuteronomy THE PROPHETS Joshua Judges 1 Samuel 2 Samuel 1 Kings 2 Kings Isaiah Jeremiah Ezekiel Hosea Joel Amos Obadiah Jonah Micah Nahum Habakkuk Zephaniah Haggai Zechariah Malachi THE WRITINGS Psalms Proverbs Job Song of Songs Ruth Lamentations Ecclesiastes Esther Daniel Ezra Nehemiah 1 Chronicles 2 Chronicles

Genesis Exodus Leviticus Numbers Deuteronomy Joshua Judges Ruth 1 Samuel 2 Samuel 1 Kings 2 Kings 1 Chronicles 2 Chronicles [Prayer of Manasseh] 1 Esdras Ezra Nehemiah Tobit Judith Esther (with insertions)* 1 Maccabees 2 Maccabees [3 Maccabees] [4 Maccabees] Job Psalms [Psalm no. 151] [Odes] Proverbs Ecclesiastes Song of Songs Wisdom of Solomon Ecclesiasticus [Psalms of Solomon] Isaiah Jeremiah Lamentations Baruch Epistle of Jeremiah Ezekiel Daniel (with insertions)** Hosea Joel Amos Obadiah Jonah

Genesis Exodus Leviticus Numbers Deuteronomy Joshua Judges Ruth 1 Samuel 2 Samuel 1 Kings 2 Kings 1 Chronicles 2 Chronicles Prayer of Manasseh 1 Esdras 2 Esdras Ezra Nehemiah Tobit Judith Esther (with insertions)* 1 Maccabees 2 Maccabees Job Psalms Proverbs Ecclesiastes Song of Songs Wisdom of Solomon Ecclesiasticus Isaiah Jeremiah Lamentations Baruch Epistle of Jeremiah Ezekiel Daniel (with insertions)** Hosea Joel Amos Obadiah Jonah

Genesis Exodus Leviticus Numbers Deuteronomy Joshua Judges Ruth 1 Samuel 2 Samuel 1 Kings 2 Kings 1 Chronicles 2 Chronicles Ezra Nehemiah Esther (Hebrew)* Job Psalms Proverbs Ecclesiastes Song of Songs Isaiah Jeremiah Lamentations Ezekiel Daniel (Hebrew)** Hosea Joel Amos Obadiah Jonah Micah Nahum Habakkuk Zephaniah Haggai Zechariah Malachi APOCRYPHA 1 Esdras 2 Esdras Tobit Judith Additions to Esther* Wisdom of Solomon Ecclesiasticus

Micah Nahum Habakkuk Zephaniah Haggai Zechariah Malachi

Micah Nahum Habakkuk Zephaniah Haggai Zechariah Malachi

Baruch Epistle of Jeremiah Song of the Three Children** Story of Susanna** Bel and the Dragon** Prayer of Manasseh 1 Maccabees 2 Maccabees

*Esther in the Septuagint has six extra paragraphs inserted at various places. In the Vulgate these are all removed to the end of the book. English versions omit them entirely, or remove them to an Apocrypha section. **Daniel in the Septuagint has The Story of Susanna inserted at the beginning, the Song of the Three Children inserted in chapter 3, and the story of Bel and the Dragon added to the end. In the Vulgate Susanna is moved to before Bel. English versions omit them entirely, or remove them to an Apocrypha section.

The extra books which were eventually received as Scripture in the Greek Orthodox church and those received in the Roman Catholic church do not correspond exactly to the list of books commonly called "Apocrypha" by Protestants. The Protestant Apocrypha includes all of the books normally included in manuscripts of the Latin Vulgate. But three of these (1 and 2 Esdras and the Prayer of Manasseh) were omitted from the list published by the Council of Trent when it fixed the Roman Catholic canon. (Apparently these omissions were unintentional. The "Decree Concerning the Canonical Scriptures" specified that the books were to be recieved "as they are contained in the old Latin Vulgate.") The Eastern Orthodox churches (including the Greek, the Russian, the Ukrainian, the Bulgarian, the Serbian, the Armenian, and others) do not receive 2 Esdras because it was not in the Septuagint, and they receive some books which were present in many manuscripts of the Septuagint but not in the Vulgate (Psalm 151, 3 and 4 Maccabees).

Greek Orthodox Canon Protestant Apocrypha Roman Catholic Canon

1 Esdras Tobit Judith Additions to Esther Wisdom of Solomon Ecclesiasticus Baruch Epistle of Jeremiah Song of the Three Children Story of Susanna Bel and the Dragon Prayer of Manasseh 1 Maccabees 2 Maccabees 3 Maccabees 4 Maccabees Psalm 151

1 Esdras 2 Esdras Tobit Judith Additions to Esther Wisdom of Solomon Ecclesiasticus Baruch Epistle of Jeremiah Song of the Three Children Story of Susanna Bel and the Dragon Prayer of Manasseh 1 Maccabees 2 Maccabees

Tobit Judith Additions to Esther Wisdom of Solomon Ecclesiasticus Baruch Epistle of Jeremiah Song of the Three Children Story of Susanna Bel and the Dragon 1 Maccabees 2 Maccabees

The Apocryphal Books

Apocrypha is a Greek word meaning things hidden, and in ancient times this word was applied to religious writings esteemed almost as scripture by some, but which were not read to the unlearned in public. In modern Protestant usage the word "apocrypha" refers to all those writings which have wrongly been regarded as scripture by many in the church. Here is a brief descriptions of the Apocryphal Books:

First Esdras. This book is someone's attempt to revise the canonical book of Ezra, supplementing it with material from the last two chapters of 2 Chronicles and the last two chapters of Nehemiah, and with an entertaining tale

about three young courtiers who debate the question, "What is the strongest thing in the world?" The debate is held before the king of Persia, and the winner is to get a prize. The first maintains that it is wine; the second that it is the king himself; the third argues with some irony and humor that women are stronger than either wine or kings, but that "truth" and "the God of truth" are by far strongest. This last young man turns out to be none other than Zerubbabel, who for his prize receives generous help from the king in rebuilding Jerusalem.

Second Esdras. Also called the Ezra Apocalypse. This is a typical Jewish apocalypse, probably first written in Greek about A.D. 100. Some hold that it was originally written in Hebrew. It appears to be a composite work, compiled of two or three sources. Around A.D. 120 it was edited by an unknown Christian, and then translated into Latin. The Christian editor added some introductory and closing chapters in which reference is made to Christ, but the original Jewish composition was not changed in any important respect. This book was not included in Septuagint manuscripts, and so the Greek text has been lost. The most important witness to the original text is the Latin version, which was included in medieval manuscripts of the Vulgate. The book consists mostly of dialogues between Ezra and angels sent to him to answer his urgent theological questions about the problem of evil, and in particular the failures and afflictions of Israel. All of this is presented as if written long before by Ezra and hidden away. The book was obviously written as an encouragement to the Jews, who had recently suffered the destruction of Jerusalem (A.D. 70). It also includes some symbolical prophecies concerning the Roman empire, in which Rome is figured as a three-headed eagle that oppresses the world and is finally destroyed by a roaring lion (a figure of the Messiah). There is a fantastic story of how the Hebrew Scriptures were all destroyed in the Babylonian exile and then perfectly restored by the miraculous inspiration of Ezra as he dictated all of the books to five scribes over a period of forty days. Along with the canonical books, Ezra dictates 70 secret books that are to be reserved for the wise. Second Esdras is presented as being one of these secret books. Martin Luther omitted First and Second Esdras from the Apocrypha of his German Bible in 1534, and both books were also rejected by the Roman Catholics at the Council of Trent in 1546. Nevertheless, they were included in the Apocrypha of the King James version.

Tobit. This is a didactic and romantic tale written in Aramaic probably around 200 B.C., and afterwards translated into Greek. Fragments of the Aramaic text were found among the Dead Sea Scrolls. The story is of a Jewish family taken to Nineveh during the Babylonian captivity. Tobit, the blind father, sends his son Tobias on a journey to collect a debt. On his way Tobias is led by an angel in disguise (Raphael) to the house of a virgin who had been married seven times, but whose husbands were all slain by a demon on their wedding night. Tobias marries the girl and drives away the demon by burning the heart of a certain fish in the bedroom, and with the help of Raphael. He returns home with the money and his bride, and then heals his father's eyes with the fish's gall. The story is sprinkled with pious observations and exhortations, and concludes with Tobias' departure from Nineveh, which, after the natural death of Tobit, is destroyed in judgment.

Judith. Written in Hebrew about 150 B.C., and soon translated into Greek. The Hebrew text is lost. It is a story about a beautiful young widow named Judith (meaning "Jewess") who saves her city from a military siege. She goes out to the enemy commander's camp, allures him, gets him drunk, and then cuts off his head while he sleeps in his tent. She returns with his head and shows it to her people, exhorting the men to go forth and rout the enemy, which they do. Throughout this story she is presented as a woman who is very keen to observe the Law of Moses.

Additions to Esther. These consist of six long paragraphs inserted in the Septuagint version of Esther in several places, and are thought to be the work of an Egyptian Jew writing around 170 B.C. They are designed to provide the book with a more religious tone, and to make it clear that it was for the sake of their piety that the Jews were delivered from the evil designs of the Gentiles related in the canonical book. These additions were put at the end of the book by Jerome when he made his Latin translation because he accepted only the Hebrew text as canonical.

Wisdom of Solomon. Sometimes called simply Wisdom. This book is a collection of theological and devotional essays first written in Greek by an Alexandrian Jew about 100 B.C., but presented in such a way that they seem to be discourses of king Solomon. The author compares Jewish religion with Greek philosophy, and shows faith to be the highest form of wisdom. The book is edifying and worthy of much respect. It has often been quoted by Christian writers in the past.

Ecclesiasticus, originally called The Wisdom of Jesus son of Sirach, or simply Sirach. Written first in Hebrew about 200 B.C. by a wisdom teacher named Joshua Ben Sirach, and translated into Greek by his grandson around 135 B.C. The book consists mainly of proverbs and other wise sayings about common life, strung together in short discourses or organized in topical sections. It also contains longer discourses about religious life and faith, which are well worth reading. It came to be called Ecclesiasticus (the "churchly" book) because in early times it was often read in church services, being the most highly regarded of the apocryphal books. This book should not be confused with the canonical book of Ecclesiastes.

Baruch. A composite book of five chapters, in which there are exhortations against association with idolatry, celebration of the Law as God's "wisdom," and encouragements and promises to faithful Jews, collected together and edited probably about 150 B.C. The material is presented as if by Baruch, the disciple of Jeremiah, during the time of the Babylonian exile.

Epistle of Jeremiah. Often printed as chapter 6 of Baruch, this short work purports to be a letter from Jeremiah to the Jews in exile in Babylon, but this is generally regarded as an imposture, or a mere literary device used by an author writing around 200 B.C. It is essentially a short tract against pagan idolatry, and makes much use of ridicule and sarcasm.

Song of the Three Holy Children (including The Prayer of Azariah). An embellishment of the ordeal of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego recorded in the canonical book of Daniel, designed to be added after verse 23 of the third chapter. It consists of prayers and hymns of the sort which might have been offered to God by the three while in the furnace.

The Story of Susanna. A short story about how two lecherous old men tried to compel a beautiful and pious young wife, Susanna, to lie with them, and then publicly accused her of adultery when she refused. At a trial they give false testimony and she is condemned by the council of elders. But Daniel the prophet is divinely inspired to know the facts of the case, and he exposes the two men in a second trial, after which they are put to death. This story was inserted between chapters 12 and 14 in the Septuagint version of Daniel, and at the beginning of the book in Theodotion's version.

Bel and the Dragon. This is a combination of two stories which were also attached to Daniel in the Septuagint, at the end of the book. The story of Bel concerns a Babylonian idol of that name, to which Daniel refused to give an offering. When he was challenged he told the Persian king that the vain idol had no need of offerings because it could not eat anything. The king then required the priests of Bel to prove otherwise or die. The priests tried to deceive the king by entering the temple of Bel at night through a secret entrance and eating the food-offerings themselves, but they were exposed by Daniel, who had spread ashes on the temple floor, revealing their footprints. The priests of Bel were then slain and their temple destroyed. In the story of the Dragon Daniel refuses to worship an actual living "dragon," and accepts a challenge to slay the dragon without sword or staff. He feeds the dragon a concoction of pitch, fat, and hair, which causes it to burst open and die. Daniel's enemies then cause him to be thrown into the lion's den again, but the hungry lions are fed with abundant food brought from Israel by the prophet Habakkuk, who is transported to Babylon with the food by angels. Both of these stories were evidently written around 150-100 B.C.

The Prayer of Manasseh. This is a psalm of repentance, composed to suit the situation of Manasseh, the king of Judah who was carried captive to Babylon (see 2 Chronicles 33:11-13, where the psalm was probably intended for insertion in the Septuagint). This book was rejected by the Roman Catholics at the Council of Trent in 1546.

First Maccabees. This book was written in Hebrew about 100 B.C., and soon afterwards translated into Greek. The Hebrew text was seen by Jerome, but is now lost. It is a sober but stirring historical account of Jewish history from 175 B.C. to 135 B.C., during which time the Jews of Palestine fought for and gained national independence from their Greek overlords. It is highly regarded by historians as a source of accurate information.

Second Maccabees. This is not a sequel to First Maccabees, but a different account of many of the same events related in that book down to 161 B.C., combined with many fanciful and legendary additions. The writer's interests are religious rather than historical, and he uses the history as a backdrop for advancing religious ideas current among the Jews of Alexandria during the first century B.C. It is generally thought to be later than First

Maccabees, but earlier than A.D. 70. Some statements in this book support the Roman Catholic teachings on purgatory, prayers for the dead, and the intercessory work of glorified "saints."

Statements on the Apocrypha from Reformation Days

Luther Bible (1534). Title to Apocrypha section: "APOCRYPHA, Das sind Bücher, so der heiligen Schrift nicht gleich gehalten, und doch nützlich und gut zu lesen sind" ("APOCRYPHA, that is, Books which are not to be esteemed like the Holy Scriptures, and yet which are useful and good to read.")

Coverdale Bible (1535). Title to Apocrypha: "APOCRYPHA: The books and treatises which among the Fathers of old are not reckoned to be of like authority with the other books of the Bible, neither are they found in the Canon of Hebrew."

Geneva Bible (1560). Preface: "The books that follow in order after the Prophets unto the New Testament, are called Apocrypha, that is, books which were not received by a common consent to be read and expounded publicly in the Church, neither yet served to prove any point of Christian religion save in so much as they had the consent of the other scriptures called canonical to confirm the same, or rather whereon they were grounded: but as books proceeding from godly men they were received to be read for the advancement and furtherance of the knowledge of history and for the instruction of godly manners: which books declare that at all times God had an especial care of His Church, and left them not utterly destitute of teachers and means to confirm them in the hope of the promised Messiah, and also witness that those calamities that God sent to his Church were according to his providence, who had both so threatened by his prophets, and so brought it to pass, for the destruction of their enemies and for the trial of his children."

Decree of the Council of Trent (1546). "The holy ecumenical and general Council of Trent . . . following the example of the orthodox Fathers, receives and venerates all the books of the Old and New Testament . . . and also the traditions pertaining to faith and conduct . . . with an equal sense of devotion and reverence . . . If, however, any one receive not, as sacred and canonical, the said books entire with all their parts, as they have by custom been read in the Catholic Church, and as they are contained in the old Latin Vulgate, and knowingly and deliberately rejects the aforesaid traditions, let him be accursed."

Articles of Religion of the Church of England (1563). Sixth Article: "In the name of Holy Scripture we do understand those canonical books of the Old and New Testament, of whose authority was never any doubt in the Church. . . And the other books (as Jerome saith) the Church doth read for example of life and instruction of manners: but yet doth it not apply them to establish any doctrine."

Westminster Confession (1647). Chapter 1 § 3: "The books commonly called Apocrypha, not being of divine inspiration, are no part of the Canon of Scripture; and therefore are of no authority in the Church of God, nor to be any otherwise approved, or made use of, than other human writings.