Questionable Decisions

In this week’s readings, we had to read a chapter from the book An Introduction to the Medieval Bible by Frans van Liere. In reading chapter 3 The Medieval Canon, Liere addresses how the medieval bible differs from the Christian bible. One of the interesting points that Liere brings up is that the medieval bible contains Old Testament apocrypha which are were never canonized. It’s interesting that some of these texts are non canonical, yet in the Greek translation called Septuagint (which is grouped with the Old Testament apocrypha), it has raised some debates because of the legend of its origin. This "legend eventually became a Christian argument for the superiority of the Greek biblical traditions over the Hebrew ones." (The Medieval Canon 62). However, the true origins of this scripture was that it was written for the diasporic Jews.  

Looking at the differences on the origin of how the Septuagint came into existence, why would Christians have these debates over Greek traditions and Hebrew ones. If the argument is being formulated based on the legend of how this scripture came into being, wouldn’t their argument collapse on itself because the legend in based on Jewish beliefs? Augustine was one who thought the Greeks traditions were better because of the Septuagint translation. I’m also having difficulty understanding why these texts were rejected by the Jewish communities. These scriptures were written for them. Liere states that “the canonicity of these texts among Christians in this ancient world may even have been a factor in the rejection of these texts from the Jewish canon” (Liere 63). Why would you reject a text that was made for you just because someone you don’t like likes it too? That’s like saying you don’t want to eat a hamburger because a person you hate wants a hamburger as well. The rejection of these texts, in my opinion, was immature of the Jewish community of that time.