The basis for acceptance of the Canonical Books
The majority of Protestants blindly accepts a Regulation (Canon) that includes (only) the 66 Books of the Holy Bible, because SOMEONE TOLD THEM that those are the only Books that comprise the entire Holy Bible. They were “told” that there are the regulation (Canonical) Books and the secondary (Deuterocanonical) Books, and that only the 66 are Canonical, while the other 10 are apparently Deuterocanonical and therefore not “divinely inspired”. In fact, they have even confused the Deuterocanonical Books with the “Apocrypha”, which is an entirely different category of Books. We Christians on the other hand acknowledge the other 10 Books as Canonical Books and naturally we accept them as the product of a decision issued by an Ecumenical Synod, unlike the arbitrary Protestant acceptance.
In order to justify this arbitrary decision, Protestants have concocted a fake statement, which, out of ignorance, the followers have accepted without question. They claim that:
“The Lord and the Apostles completely disregarded the “Deuterocanonical” Books that the Orthodox have accepted, and did not use them as references. On the contrary, they make references only to the other Books that we have acknowledged, therefore those only are the books that are Divinely inspired and Canonical (regulation) Books.”
Of course this statement is not only unfounded, it is positively false. We shall immediately present here an example proving that the Apostles (and naturally the Lord) profusely referred to the so-called “Deuterocanonic” Books (which are actually Canonical). Our question is: When we prove this point, are Protestant believers willing to acknowledge these 10 other Books, just as the Apostles had acknowledged them?
We need not mention here the hundreds (perhaps even thousands) of examples found in the New Testament that are also mentioned in these ten, gravely misjudged Books. One, VERY CHARACTERISTIC example will be enough:
Let’s present just a few of the references that the Apostle Paul mentioned in his Epistle to Romans, and compare them (for instance) to the Book of Solomon’s Wisdom. (Imagine how many similar examples we can extract in the same way, from the entire New Testament!)
Solomon’s Wisdom 13:1: «They became defeated, through their own deliberations»
Romans 1:21: «They became defeated, through their own deliberations».
Solomon’s Wisdom 13: 5: «From the grandeur of the creations’ beauty, their creator is recognized»
Romans 1:18-32: «…since the creation of the world, invisible though they may be, they are comprehended and visible through the things that He created … ».
Solomon’s Wisdom 11:22: « who can withstand the might of Your arm ? »
Romans 9:19-23: « who has ever withstood His will? »
Solomon’s Wisdom 15:7: «doesn’t the potter create fine vessels as well as lesser ones from the same clay?»
Romans 9:21: « Doesn’t the clay potter have the authority to create (vessels), some of which are for ceremonial use and some for baser use?»
As you can see, the above selection of extracts is just a VERY SMALL example of how the Apostles not only accepted the Books of the Holy Bible that the Protestants have rejected, but they actually quoted from them. This fully proves that the Protestant claim that such verses were apparently “completely disregarded” by the Apostles, is altogether untrue.
But we would like to ask the Protestant believer the following: Why is it, that they have acknowledged (for example) the Book of Esther as a Canonical (regulation) Book of the Bible? Can they tell us exactly where the Lord or His Apostles have quoted references from this Book? Because, if they have considered it imperative that the New Testament refers to extracts in the Old Testament - in order for that Book to be acknowledged as a Canonical (regulation) Book - they must present an example of such a referencing from the Book of Esther, which they have claimed as Canonical. Therefore, we ask, exactly why has this Book been accepted as Canonical?
Could it be, that the “quoting of verses” by the New Testament has nothing to do with the Books being Canonical? Therefore, we ask again : On what grounds have the Protestants decided that the Books which have been acknowledged by them are truly Canonical (regulation) Books?