The Acceptance of The LXX and the "Apocrypha" booksin First Century Judea

It is not uncommon to hear the the Protestant argument:

"The Septuagint and the "Apocrypha" books were never accepted or used by the first Century Jews in Judea."

Portions of the LXX were found in Judea among the Dead Sea Scrolls… which dated to before 70 A.D. Some examples are those found in Cave 4, 119LXXLev. 120papLXX Lev. 121LXXNum. 122LXXDuet. And then there is Q9 [a unidentified Greek LXX text], found in Cave Nine.

In addition to these fragments, is the Greek papyrus fragment found in Cave 7, LXXExod. Qumran cave 7 has also produced many smaller Greek [LXX] fragments, the identifications of which are still debated or unclassified. Dr Emanuel Tov suggests the following  identifications for some of these First  century B.C. Greek fragments:

7Q4 Numbers 14.23-24
7Q5 Exodus 36.10-11; Numbers 22.38
7Q6.1 Psalm 34.28; Proverbs 7.12-13
7Q6.2 Isaiah 18.2
7Q8 Zechariah 8.8; Isaiah 1.29-30; Psalm 18.14-15; Daniel 2.43; Qohelet 6.3 

Among these portions of the LXX were found partial scrolls of what some term the "Apocrapha" books:

4Q478 [Tobit] 4Q383 7QLXXEpJer. [Epistle Jeremiah] to list a few.

It is important to note that in the caves of the Qumran [the "Dead sea scrolls" findings] was found copy [scroll 2QSir] a of the book of Ecclesiasticus (The Wisdom of ben Sira) in the Hebrew . Also A fragment [scroll 4Q551] The Story of Susanna [ch. 13 of the book of Dan.] in the Hebrew. And in cave four of the Qumran. fragments of the "apocrypha" book of Tobit were  found in Cave four. These fragments of the book of Tobit are in Aramaic [scrolls 4Q196-9] as well as Hebrew [scroll 4Q200].

It should be noted that the Qumran caves are not the only place in Judea were some of the "Apocrypha" books have been found. Another example is the copy of the book of Ecclesiasticus (The Wisdom of ben Sira) in the Hebrew was also found in the ruins of Masada. This scroll fragment dates from the early first century BC.

There are some who will try to argue That:

"The Essenes or Quaran sect were a strange group anyway and not really a part of main stream Judaism."

Through the Dead Sea Scrolls we are learning of 'Essene and the impact of Qumran's beliefs and practices on the early Church. Many scholars suggest that the Essenes influenced the preaching of John the Baptizer and the ministry of. Jesus himself. There are also several significant features of organization and structure common to Qumran and the early Church, especially the community's Overseer and the Council of the Twelve. The more we learn of the life and worship of the Essene community at Qumran, the more we will understand and appreciate the origins of Christianity.

If we read the New Testament we find that there was really no "main stream Judaism" as we think of it today, As the Protestant Scholar Dr Martin Abegg explains:

 "In modern Judaism and Christianity, a ‘sect’ is usually an offshoot of a larger religion and is frequently viewed as eccentric or deviant with respect to beliefs. But both scholars and laypeople would do well to remember that during the entire Qumran period, the Pharisees and Sadducees were as much ‘sects’ as the Essenes were! It was only from the second century CE [AD] onward that one type of Judaism— that of the Pharisees, the Rabbis—- became the standard for the Jewish People as a whole.

These issues are of less importance with respect to the biblical scrolls. For one thing, all scholars agree that none of the biblical texts ( such as Genesis or Isaiah) was actually composed at Qumran; on the contrary, they all originated before the Qumran period. It is also widely held that many or most of theses manuscripts were brought to Qumran from outside and were thus copied elsewhere. This means that the value of most biblical scrolls lies not in establishing precisely where they were written or copied, but rather in studying the textual forms they contain.[The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible, (C) 1999, pg. XVI]

We find a good example of the use of the LXX [which contained the "Apocrypha"] among the mainstream  Judean Jew's when we read in the Acts chapters 6,7. we read were St Stephen having been filled with the spirit [Acts 6:10] is dragged in before the Sanhedrin by a mob [Acts 6:12]. In the middle of his spirit filled address to the Jews St Stephen tells how Jacob brought his 75 descendants in to Egypt.

Acts 7:14-15 Then sent Joseph, and called his father Jacob to him, and all his kindred, threescore and fifteen souls. [seventy-five in all] So Jacob went down into Egypt, and died, he, and our fathers.

But, the Hebrew Manuscripts tell us Jacob brought his 70 descendants in to Egypt [Genesis 46:26-27 The Hebrew text also records "70" in   Deu.10:22 as well as Ex.1:5]. The Jewish Sanhedrin and Priests knew that Deuteronomy 4:2, 12:32; Psalm 12:6-7 and Proverbs 30:6 all forbid adding and subtracting from God's Word. So why were not the Jewish Sanhedrin and Priests outraged at St. Stephen claim of 75 descendants of Jacob? Why did they not look upon him as a "have looked upon him as a perverter of Scripture"? Yet when we read these verses we notice the Jews don’t even seem to blink at it. Never in any of these verse are there any suggestion whatever that their rage against St. Stephen in any way resulted from consternation over Stephen's having "perverted the Scriptures". They slew Stephen for confronting them with the person of the Lord Jesus - that He as Christ indeed and, rather than receive Him as such, they had murdered Him as their fathers had done to His predecessors, the prophets (Acts 7:51-53)!

The answer to this is simple, St Stephen quotes from a Greek LXX version of Genesis [46:26-27] in which five more names are listed [total of 75 names] than the Hebrew MT. The 5  names missing in the Hebrew text are preserved in the LXX at Genesis 46:20 where Machir, the son of Manasseh, and Machir's son Galaad (Hebrew = Gilead) are recorded along with Ephraim's two son's Taam (Hebrew = Tahan) and Sutalaam (Hebrew = Shuthelah) and his son Edom (Hebrew = Eran).

The Sanhedrin would not have contested Stephen’s statement if the LXX were in use and accepted among the Jews of Judea. The fact that the LXX was found among the dead sea scrolls shows this to be the case.

Do to the fact that both versions [LXX and the Hebrew] were in common use in the first century Judea, the Sanhedrin would not have been surprised or startled by Stephan’s statement. The question of "70" or "75" was not a point of major doctrine among the Jews, and apparently there were many Jews on either side of the issue.

If these books were gaining beginning to a wide acceptance by the Jew in Judea at the time of Christ, than why is it that the Jewish Rabbi at the counsel of Jamnia (90 A.D.) Rejected them?

We must Remember that much had changed in Judaism between the time of Christ and Jamnia in 90 A.D. Changes such as the spread of Christianity, the siege of Jerusalem, The decimation of the Essenes sect, the destruction of the Temple by the Romans, and end of the Jewish priesthood.

The dominate Jewish sect at the counsel of Jamnia were the Pharisees. The Pharisees were fanatically and vehemently opposed to ALL Hellenistic (Greek) influence on the Jewish  religion. Many of these books Protestants call "Apocrypha" were originally written in Greek, they were a accepted part of the Greek translation of the scriptures (LXX), and it was through the influence of this Alexandrian Greek translation that these books were achieving acceptance among the Jews in Judea.

Second the Pharisees apposed any canonical variations the Alexandrian LXX may have had with the older accepted listing of books. These variations include the "Apocrypha" books we are discussing.