Descent, Of Jesus – Deutero-Canonical, Books

Descent, Of Jesus

de-sent'.

See APOCRYPHAL GOSPELS.

Describe

de-skrib': This verb, now obsolete, in the sense used in Joshua 18:4,Joshua 18:6,Joshua 18:8,Joshua 18:9 and Judges 8:14, is a translation of kathabh, usually rendered "to write" or "inscribe." But in the above passages it has the Old English meaning of dividing into parts or into lots, as for example: "Walk through the land, and describe it according to their inheritance" (Joshua 18:4); that is, describe in writing the location and size of the several parcels of land thus portioned out. In Judges 8:14 "described" should be translated "wrote down a list of." "Describe" occurs twice in the King James Version of the New Testament (Romans 4:6, Romans 10:5), where lego, and grapho, are both rendered "describeth." the Revised Version (British and American) corrects both, and substitutes "pronounceth" in the first and "writeth" in the second passage.

Description = "list" (1 Esdras 5:39).

W. W. Davies

Descry

de-skri': This word like "describe" came into the English through the French descrire (Latin, describere); it occurs only in the King James Version of Judges 1:23: "And the house of Joseph sent to Bethel." tur the verb thus translated, signifies "to explore" or "examine," and the Revised Version (British and American) correctly renders "sent to spy out."

Desert

dez'-ert midhbar, chorbah, yeshimon, `arabhah, tsiyah, tohu; eremos, eremia: Midhbar, the commonest word for "desert," more often rendered "wilderness," is perhaps from the root dabhar, in the sense of "to drive," i.e. a place for driving or pasturing flocks. Yeshimon is from yasham, "to be empty", chorbah (compare Arabic kharib, "to lie waste"; khirbah, "a ruin"; kharab, "devastation"), from charabh "to be dry"; compare also `arabh, "to be dry," and `arabhah, "a desert" or "the Arabah" (see CHAMPAIGN). For 'erets tsiyah (Psalms 63:1; Isaiah 41:18), "a dry land," compare tsiyim, "wild beasts of the desert" (Isaiah 13:21, etc.). Tohu, variously rendered "without form" (Genesis 1:2 the King James Version), "empty space," the King James Version "empty place" (Job 26:7), "waste," the King James Version "nothing" (Job 6:18), "confusion," the Revised Version, margin, "wasteness" (Isaiah 24:10 the English Revised Version), may be compared with Arabic tah, "to go astray" at-Tih, "the desert of the wandering." In the New Testament we find eremos and eremia: "The child (John) .... was in the deserts till the day of his showing unto Israel" (Luke 1:80); "Our fathers did eat manna in the desert" (John 6:31 the King James Version).

The desert as known to the Israelites was not a waste of sand, as those are apt to imagine who have in mind the pictures of the Sahara. Great expanses of sand, it is true, are found in Arabia, but the nearest one, an-Nufud, was several days' journey distant from the farthest southeast reached by the Israelites in their wanderings. Most of the desert of Sinai and of Palestine is land that needs only water to make it fruitful. East of the Jordan, the line between "the desert" and "the sown" lies about along the line of the Chijaz railway. To the West there is barely enough water to support the crops of wheat; to the East there is too little. Near the line of demarcation, the yield of wheat depends strictly upon the rainfall. A few inches more or less of rain in the year determines whether the grain can reach maturity or not. The latent fertility of the desert lands is demonstrated by the season of scant rains, when they become carpeted with herbage and flowers. It is marvelous, too, how the camels, sheep and goats, even in the dry season, will find something to crop where the traveler sees nothing but absolute barrenness. The long wandering of the Israelites in "the desert" was made possible by the existence of food for their flocks and herds. Compare Psalms 65:11,Psalms 65:12: "Thou crownest the year with thy goodness; And thy paths drop fatness. They drop upon the pastures of the Wilderness. And the hills are girded with joy"; and also Joel 2:22: "The pastures of the wilderness do spring."

"The desert" or "the wilderness" (ha-midhbar) usually signifies the desert of the wandering, or the northern part of the Sinaitic Peninsula. Compare Exodus 3:1 King James Version: "MOSES .... led theflock (of Jethro) to the backside of the desert"; Exodus 5:3 King James Version: "Let us go .... three days' journey into the desert"; Exodus 19:2 King James Version: "They .... were come to the desert of Sinai"; Exodus 23:31 King James Version: "I will set thy bounds from the Red Sea even unto the sea of the Philistines, and from the desert unto the river" (Euphrates). Other uncultivated or pasture regions are known as Wilderness of Beersheba (Genesis 21:14), West of Judah (Judges 1:16), West of En-gedi (1 Samuel 24:1), West of Gibeon (2 Samuel 2:24), West of Maon (1 Samuel 23:24), West of Damascus; compare Arabic Badiyet-ush-Sham (1 Kings 19:15), etc. Midhbar yam, "the wilderness of the sea" (Isaiah 21:1), may perhaps be that part of Arabia bordering upon the Persian Gulf.

Aside from the towns and fields, practically all the land was midhbar or "desert," for this term included mountain, plain and valley. The terms, "desert of En-gedi," "desert of Maon," etc., do not indicate circumscribed areas, but are applied in a general way to the lands about these places. To obtain water, the shepherds with their flocks traverse long distances to the wells, springs or streams, usually arranging to reach the water about the middle of the day and rest about it for an hour or so, taking shelter from the sun in the shadows of the rocks, perhaps under some overhanging ledge.

Alfred Ely Day

Desire

de-zir': The verb "to desire" in the Scriptures usually means "to long for," "to ask for," "to demand," and may be used in a good or bad sense (compare Deuteronomy 7:25 the King James Version). the Revised Version (British and American) frequently renders the more literal meaning of the Hebrew. Compare Job 20:20, "delight"; Proverbs 21:20, "precious"; Psalms 40:6, "delight"; aiteo (except Colossians 1:9), and erotao (except Luke 7:36) are rendered "to ask" and zeteo, "to seek" (compare Luke 9:9 et. al.). The Hebrew kacaph, literally, "to lose in value," is translated (Zephaniah 2:1) by "hath no shame" (the Revised Version, margin "longing," the King James Version "not desired"). The literal translation "to lose in value," "to degenerate," would be more in harmony with the context than the translations offered. The Hebrew chemdah (2 Chronicles 21:20, "without being desired"), means according to the Arabic "to praise," "to give thanks." The context brings in contrast the burial of the king Jehoram with that of his fathers. In the latter case there was "burning," i.e. recognition and praise, but when Jehoram died, there was no chemdah, i.e. there was no praise for his services rendered to the kingdom. For "desire" in Ecclesiastes 12:5, see CAPERBERRY.

A. L. Breslich

Desire Of All Nations

This phrase occurs only in Haggai 2:7 (King James Version, the English Revised Version "desirable things," the American Revised Version, margin "things desired"), and is commonly applied to the Messiah.

At the erection of the temple in Ezra's time, the older men who had seen the more magnificent house of Solomon were disappointed and distressed at the comparison. The prophet, therefore, is directed to encourage them by the assurance that Yahweh is with them nevertheless, and in a little while will shake the heavens, the earth, the sea, the dry land and the nations, and "the desire of all nations" shall come, and the house shall be filled with glory, so that "the later glory of this house shall be greater than the former."

(1) Many expositors refer the prophecy to the first advent of Christ. The shaking of the heavens, the earth, the sea and the dry land is the figurative setting of the shaking of the nations, while this latter expression refers to those changes of earthly dominion coincident with the overthrow of the Persians by the Greeks, the Greeks by the Romans, and so on down to the beginning of our era. The house then in process of construction was filled with glory by the later presence of the Messiah, which glory was greater than the Shekinah of Solomon's time. Objections are presented to this view as follows: First, there is the element of time. Five centuries, more or less, elapsed between the building of Ezra's temple and the first advent of Christ, and the men of Ezra's time needed comfort for the present. Then there is the difficulty of associating the physical phenomena with any shaking of the nations occurring atthe first advent. Furthermore, in what sense, it is asked, could Christ, when He came, be said to be the desire of all nations? And finally, what comfort would a Jew find in this magnifying of the Gentiles?

(2) These difficulties, though not insuperable, lead others to apply the prophecy to the second advent of Christ. The Jews are to be restored to Jerusalem, and another temple is to be built (Eze 40-48). The shaking of the nations and the physical phenomena find their fulfillment in the "Great Tribulation" so often spoken of in the Old Testament and Revelation, and which is followed by the coming of Christ in glory to set up His kingdom (Malachi 3:1; Matthew 24:29,Matthew 24:30 and other places). Some of the difficulties spoken of in the first instance apply here also, but not all of them, while others are common to both interpretations. One such common difficulty is that Ezra's temple can hardly be identified with that of the time of Herod and Christ, and certainly not with that of Ezekiel; which is met, however, by saying that all the temples, including Solomon's, are treated as but one "house"--the house of the Lord, in the religious sense, at least, if not architecturally. Another such difficulty touches the question of time, which, whether it includes five centuries or twenty, is met by the principle that to the prophets, "ascending in heart to God and the eternity of God, all times and all things of this world are only a mere point." When the precise time of particular events is not revealed, they sometimes describe them as continuous, and sometimes blend two events together, having a near or partial, and also a remote or complete fulfillment. "They saw the future in space rather than in time, or the perspective rather than the actual distance." It is noted that the Lord Jesus so blends together the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus, AD 70, and the days of the anti-Christ at the end of this age, that it is difficult to separate them, and to say which belongs exclusively to either (Matthew 24:1–51). That the words may have an ultimate fulfillment in the second advent of Christ receives strength from a comparison of Haggai 2:21,Haggai 2:22 with Hebrews 12:26,Hebrews 12:27. The writer of that epistle condenses the two passages in Haggai 2:6,Haggai 2:7 and Haggai 2:21,Haggai 2:22, implying that it was one and the same shaking, of which the former verses denote the beginning, and the latter the end. The shaking, in other words, began introductory to the first advent and will be finished at the second. Concerning the former, compare Matthew 3:17; Matthew 27:51; Matthew 28:2; Acts 2:2; Acts 4:31, and concerning the latter, Matthew 24:7; Revelation 16:20; Revelation 20:11 (Bengel, quoted by Canon Faussett).

(3) Other expositors seek to cut the Gordian knot by altogether denying the application to the Messiah, and translating "the desire of all nations" by "the beauty," or "the desirable things of all nations," i.e. their precious gifts (see Isaiah 60:5,Isaiah 60:11; Isaiah 61:6). This application is defended in the following way:

(a) The Hebrew word means the quality and not the thing desired;

(b) the Messiah was not desired by all the nations when He came;

(c) the verb "shall come" is plural, which requires the noun to be understood in the plural, whereas if the Messiah be intended, the noun is singular;

(d) "The silver is mine," etc. (Haggai 2:8) accords with the translation "the desirable things of all nations";

(e) the agreement of the Septuagint and Syriac versions with such rendering.

All these arguments, however, can be fairly met by counter-arguments, leaving the reader still in doubt.

(a) An abstract noun is often put for the concrete;

(b) the result shows that while the Jews rejected Christ, the Gentiles received and hence, desired Him;

(c) where two nouns stand together after the manner of "the desire" and "nations," the verb agrees in number sometimes with the latter, even though the former be its nominative;

(d) the 8th verse of the prophecy can be harmonized about as easily with one view as the other;

(e) the King James Version is sustained by the Vulgate (Jerome's Latin Bible, 390-405 A. D.) and early Jewish rabbis.

James M. Gray

Desolate

des'-o-lat (very frequently in the Old Testament for shamem, and its derivatives; less frequently, charebh, and its derivatives, and other words. In the New Testament it stands for eremos (Matthew 23:38; Acts 1:20; Galatians 4:27) eremoo (Revelation 17:16), and monoo (1 Timothy 5:5)): From Latin de, intens., solus, alone. Several shades of meaning can be distinguished:

(1) Its primary sense is "left lonely," "forlorn," e. g. Psalms 25:16, "Have mercy upon me; for I am desolate" (Hebrew yachidh, "alone"); 1 Timothy 5:5, "she that is a widow indeed, and desolate" (Greek memonomene, "left alone").

(2) In the sense of "laid waste," "destitute of inhabitants," e. g. Jeremiah 4:7, "to make thy land desolate, that thy cities be laid waste, without inhabitant."

(3) With the meaning "comfortless," "afflicted," e. g. Psalms 143:4, "My heart within me is desolate."

(4) In the sense of "barren," "childless," "unfruitful," e. g. Job 15:34; Isaiah 49:21 (Hebrew galmudh).

D. Miall Edwards

Desolation, Abomination Of

See ABOMINATION OF DESOLATION.

Despair

de-spar': The substantive only in 2 Corinthians 4:8, "perplexed, but not in (the Revised Version (British and American) "yet not unto") despair," literally, "being at a loss, but not utterly at a loss." "Unto despair" here conveys the force of the Greek prefix ex ("utterly," "out and out"). Desperate, in Job 6:26; Isaiah 17:11. In the latter instance, the Hebrew adjective is derived from a verb = "to be sick," and the literally, rendering would be "incurable" (compare Job 34:6, "my wound is incurable"). Desperately in Jeremiah 17:9 the King James Version, where the heart is said to be "desperately (i.e. incurably) wicked" or "sick."

Despite; Despiteful

de-spit', de-spit'-fool: "Despite" is from Latin despectus, "a looking down upon." As a noun (= "contempt") it is now generally used in its shortened form, "spite," while the longer form is used as a preposition (= "in spite of"). In English Versions of the Bible it is always a noun. In the Old Testament it translates Hebrew she'aT, in Ezekiel 25:6, and in the Revised Version (British and American) Ezekiel 25:15; Ezekiel 36:5 ("with despite of soul"). In Hebrews 10:29 ("hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace") it stands for Greek enubrizo, "to treat with contempt."

The adjective "despiteful" occurs in the King James Version Ezekiel 25:15; Ezekiel 36:5; Sirach 31:31 ("despiteful words," the Revised Version (British and American) "a word of reproach"); Romans 1:30 (the Revised Version (British and American) "insolent" = Greek hubristes, from huper, "above"; compare English "uppish").

D. Miall Edwards

Dessau

des'-o, des'-a-u (Dessaou (2 Macc 14:16)): the Revised Version (British and American) LESSAU (which see).

Destiny, (Meni)

des'-ti-ni: A god of Good Luck, possibly the Pleiades.

See ASTROLOGY, 10; MENI.

Destroyer

de-stroi'-er: In several passages the word designates a supernatural agent of destruction, or destroying angel, executing Divine judgment.

(1) In Exodus 12:23, of the "destroyer" who smote the first-born in Egypt, again referred to under the same title in Hebrews 11:28 the Revised Version (British and American) (the King James Version "he that destroyed").

(2) In Job 33:22, "the destroyers" (literally, "they that cause to die") = the angels of death that are ready to take away a man's life during severe illness. No exact parallel to this is found in the Old Testament. The nearest approach is "the angel that destroyed the people" by pestilence (2 Samuel 24:16,2 Samuel 24:17 parallel 1 Chronicles 21:15,1 Chronicles 21:16); the angel that smote the Assyrians (2 Kings 19:35 = Isaiah 37:36 parallel 2 Chronicles 32:21); "angels of evil" (Psalms 78:49).

(3) In the Apocrypha, "the destroyer" is once referred to as "the minister of punishment" (Revised Version; literally, "him who was punishing"), who brought death into the world (The Wisdom of Solomon 18:22-25).

(4) In 1 Corinthians 10:10, "the destroyer" is the angelic agent to whose instrumentality Paul attributes the plague of Numbers 16:46–49.

In later Jewish theology (the Targums and Midrash), the "destroyer" or "angel of death" appears under the name Sammael (i.e. the poison of God), who was once an arch-angel before the throne of God, and who caused the serpent to tempt Eve. According to Weber, he is not to be distinguished from Satan. The chief distinction between the "destroyer" of early thought and the Sammael of later Judaism is that the former was regarded as the emissary of Yahweh, and subservient to His will, and sometimes was not clearly distinguished from Yahweh Himself, whereas the latter was regarded as a perfectly distinct individuality, acting in independence or semi-independence, and from purely malicious and evil motives. The change was largely due to the influence of Persian dualism, which made good and evil to be independent powers.

D. Miall Edwards

Destruction

de-struk'-shun: In the King James Version this word translates over 30 Hebrew words in the Old Testament, and 4 words in the New Testament. Of these the most interesting, as having a technical sense, is 'abhaddon (from verb 'abhadh, "to be lost," "to perish"). It is found 6 times in the Wisdom Literature, and nowhere else in the Old Testament; compare Revelation 9:11. See ABADDON.

Destruction, City Of Heliopolis Or City Of The Sun

(Isaiah 19:18). See ASTRONOMY, sec. I, 2; IR-HA-HERES; ON.

Determinate

de-tur'-mi-nat (horismenos, "determined," "fixed"): Only in Acts 2:23, "by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of. God," Greek horismenos, from horizo, "to set boundaries," "determine," "settle" (compare English word "horizon"--literally, "that which bounds"). It is remarkable that Peter in one and the same sentence speaks of the death of Christ from two quite distinct points of view.

(1) From the historical standpoint, it was a crime perpetrated by men who were morally responsible for their deed ("him .... ye by the hand of lawless men did crucify and slay").

(2) From the standpoint of Divine teleology, it was part of an eternal plan ("by the determinate," etc.). No effort is made to demonstrate the logical consistency of the two ideas. They represent two aspects of the one fact. The same Greek word is used in Luke 22:22, where Christ speaks of His betrayal as taking place "as it was (the Revised Version (British and American) "hath been") determined" (kata to horismenon). Compare Luke 24:26.

D. Miall Edwards

Determine

de-tur'-min:

(1) "To resolve," "decide." This is the primary meaning of the word and it is also the one that is the most common. In the New Testament the Greek word krino, is translated "determine," and it has the above meaning (Acts 20:16; Acts 25:25; 1 Corinthians 2:2). The word occurs frequently in the Old Testament with this meaning (see Exodus 21:22; 1 Samuel 20:7,1 Samuel 20:9,1 Samuel 20:33).

(2) "To decree," "ordain," "mark out." The Greek word that is rendered "determine" with this meaning is horizo. See DETERMINATE.

The Hebrew term charats is translated "determine" with the above meaning; as "his days are determined" (Job 14:5); "a destruction is determined" (Isaiah 10:22); "desolations are determined" (Daniel 9:26). The Hebrew term mishpaT, which means "judgment" or "sentence," is translated "determination" in Zechariah 3:8.

A. W. Fortune.

Detestable, Things

de-tes'-ta-b'-l, (shiqquts; sheqets, synonymous with to`ebhah, "abomination," "abominable thing"): The translation of shiqqutsim in Jeremiah 16:18; Ezekiel 5:11; Ezekiel 7:20; Ezekiel 11:18,Ezekiel 11:21; Ezekiel 37:23; a term always applied to idol-worship or to objects connected with idolatry; often also translated "abomination," as in 1 Kings 11:5,1 Kings 11:7 (bis); Jeremiah 4:1; Ezekiel 20:7,Ezekiel 20:8,Ezekiel 20:30. Sheqets, translated "abomination," is applied in the Scriptures to that which is ceremonially unclean (Leviticus 7:21), creatures forbidden as food, as water animals without fins or scales in Leviticus 11:10–12, birds of prey and the like (verse 18), winged creeping things (verses 20,23), creeping vermin (verses 41 f). Compare also Isaiah 66:17. By partaking of the food of the animals in question one makes himself detestable (Leviticus 11:43; Leviticus 20:25). Similarly the idolatrous appurtenances are to be held in detestation; nothing of the kind should be appropriated for private use (Deuteronomy 7:26). See ABOMINATION.

Max L. Margolis

Deuel

du'-el, de-u'-el de`u'el, ("knowledge of God"): A Gadite, the father of Eliasaph, the representative of the tribe of Gad in the census-taking (Numbers 1:14), in making the offering of the tribe at the dedication of the altar (Numbers 7:42,Numbers 7:47), and as leader of the host of the tribe of the children of Gad in the wilderness (Numbers 10:20). Called Reuel in Numbers 2:14, daleth (d) being confused with resh (r).

Deutero-Canonical, Books

du-ter-o-ka-non'-i-kal: A term sometimes used to designate certain books, which by the Council of Trent were included in the Old Testament, but which the Protestant churches designated as apocryphal (see APOCRYPHA), and also certain books of the New Testament which for a long time were not accepted by the whole church as Scripture. Webster says the term pertains to "a second Canon or ecclesiastical writing of inferior authority," and the history of these books shows that they were all at times regarded by a part of the church as being inferior to the others and some of them are so regarded today. This second Canon includes Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Ecclusiasticus, 2 Esdras, 1 Maccabees and 2 Maccabees of the Old Testament, and Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, 2 John, 3 John, Jude, and Revelation of the New Testament.

1. The Old Testament Books:

The Old Testament books under consideration were not in the Hebrew Canon and they were originally designated as apocryphal. The Septuagint contained many of the apocrphyal books, and among these were most of those which we have designated deutero-canonical. The Septuagint was perhaps the Greek Bible of New Testament times and it continued to be the Old Testament of the early church, and hence, these books were widely distributed. It seems, however, that they did not continue to hold their place along with the other books, for Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria, in his Festal Epistle in 367 gave a list of the books of the Bible which were to be read, and at the close of this list he said: "There are also other books besides these, not canonized, yet set by the Fathers to be read to those who have just come up and who wish to be informed as to the word of godliness: Wisdom, Sirach, Esther, Judith, Tobit, the so-called Teaching of the Apes, and the Shepherd of Hermas." Jerome also made a distinction between the apocryphal books and the others. In his Preface, after enumerating the books contained in the Hebrew Canon, he adds: "This prologue I write as a preface to the books to be translated by us from the Hebrew into Latin, that we may know that all the books which are not of this number are apocrphyal; therefore Wisdom, which is commonly ascribed to Solomon as its author, and the book of Jesus the son of Sirach, Judith, Tobit and the Shepher are not in the Canon." Rufinus made the same distinction as did Jerome. He declared that "these books are not canonical, but have been called by our forefathers ecclesiastical." Augustine included these books in his list which he published in 397. He begins the list thus: "The entire canon of Scripture is comprised in these books." Then follows a list of the books which includes Tobit, Judith, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, 2 Esdras, Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus, and it closes with these words: "In these 44 books is comprised all the authority of the Old Testament." Inasmuch as these books were regarded by the church at large as ecclesiastical and helpful, and Augustine had given them canonical sanction, they rapidly gained in favor and most of them are found in the great manuscripts.

See CANON OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.

2. The New Testament Books:

It is not probable that there was any general council of the church in those early centuries that set apart the various books of the New Testament and canonized them as Scripture for the whole church. There was no single historical event which brought together the New Testament books which were everywhere to be regarded as Scripture. These books did not make the same progress in the various provinces and churches. A careful study of conditions reveals the fact that there was no uniform New Testament canon in the church during at least the first 3 centuries. The Ethiopic church, for example, had 35 books in its New Testament, while the Syrian church had only 22 books.

From an early date the churches were practically agreed on those books which are sometimes designated as the protocanonical, and which Eusebius designated as the homologoumena. They differed, however, in regard to the 7 disputed books which form a part of the so-called deutero-canon, and which Eusebius designated as the antilegomena. They also differed in regard to other ecclesiastical writings, for there was no fixed line between canonical and non-canonical books. While there was perhaps no council of the church that had passed on the books and declared them canonical, it is undoubtedly true that before the close of the 2nd century all the books that are in our New Testament, with the exception of those under consideration, had become recognized as Scripture in all orthodox churches.

The history of these seven books reveals the fact that although some of them were early used by the Fathers, they afterward fell into disfavor. That is especially true of Hebrews and Revelation. Generally speaking, it can be said that at the close of the 2nd century the 7 books under consideration had failed to receive any such general recognition as had the rest; however, all, with perhaps the exception of 2 Peter, had been used by some of the Fathers. He was freely attested by Clement of Rome and Justin Martyr; James by Hermas and probably by Clement of Rome; 2 John, 3 John and Jude by the Muratorian Fragment; Revelation by Hermas and Justin Martyr who names John as its author.

See CANON OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

Jerome, who prepared the Vulgate (Jerome's Latin Bible, 390-405 A. D.) in the closing years of the 4th century, accepted all 7 of the doubtful books, yet he held that 2 John and 3 John were written by the Presbyter, and he intimated that 2 Peter and Jude were still rejected by some, and he said the Latins did not receive He among the canonical Scriptures, neither did the Greek churches receive Augustine, who was one of the great leaders during the last part of the 4th century and the first part of the 5th, accepted without question the 7 disputed books. These books had gradually gained in favor and the position of Jerome and Augustine practically settled their canonicity for the orthodox churches. The Council of Carthage, held in 397, adopted the catalogue of Augustine. This catalogue contained all the disputed books both of the New Testament and the Old Testament.

Since the Reformation.

The Canon of Augustine became the Canon of the majority of the churches and the Old Testament books which he accepted were added to the Vulgate, but there were some who still held to the Canon of Jerome. The awakening of the Reformation inevitably led to a reinvestigation of the Canon, since the Bible was made the source of authority, and some of the disputed books of the New Testament were again questioned by the Reformers. The position given the Bible by the Reformers led the Roman church to reaffirm its sanction and definitely to fix the books that should be accepted. Accordingly the Council of Trent, which convened in 1546, made the Canon of Augustine, which included the 7 apocphyal books of the Old Testament, and the 7 disputed books of the New Testament, the Canon of the church, and it pronounced a curse upon those who did not receive these books. The Protestants at first followed the example of Rome and adopted these books which had long had the sanction of usage as their Bible. Gradually, however, the questioned books of the Old Testament were separated from the others. That was true in Coverdale's translation, and in Matthew's Bible they were not only separated from the others but they were prefaced with the words, "the volume of the book called Hagiographa." In Cranmer's Bible, Hagiographa was changed into Apocrypha, and this passed through the succeeding edition into the King James Version.

A. W. Fortune