Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 1999 :: November ::
Re: Apocrypha
The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 10.1891  Thursday, 4 November 1999.

[1]     From:   Carl Fortunato <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Wednesday, 3 Nov 1999 11:37:47 EST
        Subj:   Re: SHK 10.1879 Re: Apocrypha

[2]     From:   David Evett <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Wednesday, 03 Nov 1999 14:32:06 -0500
        Subj:   Re: SHK 10.1879 Re: Apocrypha

[3]     From:   Mike Jensen <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Wednesday, 03 Nov 1999 17:00:38 -0800
        Subj:   SHK 10.1879 Re: Apocrypha

[4]     From:   Hardy M. Cook <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
        Date:   Thursday, November 04, 1999
        Subj:   SHK 10.1879 Re: Apocrypha


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Carl Fortunato <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Wednesday, 3 Nov 1999 11:37:47 EST
Subject: 10.1879 Re: Apocrypha
Comment:        Re: SHK 10.1879 Re: Apocrypha

>Small picky point, but ...
>
>All of these posts refer to the OLD TESTAMENT Apochrypha.  There was
>(is) a NT Apocrypha as well.  Raises different issues, but ...

They are very different things.  The Old Testament Apocrypha are called
"Deuterocanonicals" by Roman Catholics, and they find the term Apocrypha
to be slightly offensive, since the word implies that they are
inauthentic.  In reality, I don't think there was any edition of the
Bible that did NOT include them until the 1600's.  The New Testament
Apocrypha would be the equivalent of the Old Testament Pseudepigrapha -
works that were pretty much never used by any church, at least not since
the 4th Century.

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           David Evett <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Wednesday, 03 Nov 1999 14:32:06 -0500
Subject: 10.1879 Re: Apocrypha
Comment:        Re: SHK 10.1879 Re: Apocrypha

Robin Hamilton rightly reminds us that "There was (is) a NT Apocrypha as
well.  Raises different issues, but ...".  Because the apocryphal
gospels and other early Christian texts raise doctrinal questions in
ways the OT material does not, they were precisely not made part of the
vernacular Bibles, and were (and remain) much more difficult to get
access to.

Dave Evett

[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Mike Jensen <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Wednesday, 03 Nov 1999 17:00:38 -0800
Subject: Re: Apocrypha
Comment:        SHK 10.1879 Re: Apocrypha

>All of these posts refer to the OLD TESTAMENT Apochrypha.
>There was (is) a NT Apocrypha as well.  Raises different issues, but ...

True, and a fascinating set of texts they are.  Most available today
were not known in Shakespeare's time, of course.  I am not aware of
Shakespeare ever quoting or referring to Second Clement or any of the
others.  Am I wrong about that, or does Professor Hamilton have another
point?

(Hope that doesn't sound sarcastic.  I'm very impressed by most of Robin
Hamilton's posts and hope my question is read as respectful.)

Best,
Mike Jensen

[4]-------------------------------------------------------------
From:           Hardy M. Cook <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date:           Thursday, November 04, 1999
Subject: Re: Apocrypha
Comment:        SHK 10.1879 Re: Apocrypha

This morning, I had intended to pick up some of my books containing some
of the so-called New Testament Apocrypha, but I forgot. I would add,
though, that the Gospel of Thomas was included by Robert W. Funk, Roy W.
Hoover, and members of the Jesus Seminar in their fascinating edition
*The Five Gospels : The Search for the Authentic Words of Jesus : New
Translation and Commentary*, New York :  Macmillan Pub. Co., 1993.
 

©2011 Hardy Cook. All rights reserved.