Apocrypha (deuterocanonical) proof texts

As someone who has read the entire book cover to cover repeatedly, I’ve always wanted to provide an answer to the often repeated claim that the deuterocanonical books of the Bible were never quoted in the New Testament. People (you know who you are) are always like “muh unquoted by Jesus” or “inb4 apocrypha are canonical” every time you wanna bulk up your examples list of OT prayers for dead people. Not that it’s all that necessary (Right, Job? Right, Paul?)
But it’s pretty obvious unless you’ve cucked your own intellectual honesty, to draw some pretty strong parallels between things Jesus and his apostles said and the Apocrypha. Here are the examples I’ve always used as my proof texts. My current Bible is the Douay-Rheims, but the parallels are actually even stronger in the King James version (which I used almost exclusively for my first three read throughs).
(As such, a few of the OT verses might be numbered differently because D-R uses a different versing in some books than…like friggin’ everyone else because they had to be special snowflakes and use the Tanakh versing. I’ll try to add the modern verse numbers though too.)
Matthew 5:30~31

And if thy right hand scandalize thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is expedient for thee that one of thy members should perish, rather than that thy whole body be cast into hell.  And it hath been said, whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a bill of divorce.

Ecclesiasticus 25:35

If she walk not at thy hand, she will confound thee in the sight of thy enemies. Cut her off from thy flesh, lest she always abuse thee.


This one has parallel themes of divorce and cutting off from the body. The KJV is even more similar in that it includes the phrase “bill of divorce”.

“If she go not as thou wouldest have her, cut her off from thy flesh, and give her a bill of divorce, and let her go.” (Ecclesiasticus 25:26)
Those are many points of similarity for it to not be even a possible reference.
Matthew 6:6~8
But thou when thou shalt pray, […] if you will not forgive men, neither will your Father forgive you your offences.
Ecclesiasticus 28:2
Forgive thy neighbour if he hath hurt thee: and then shall thy sins be forgiven to thee when thou prayest.
I don’t think I need to explain this one
I Peter 3:17
For it is better doing well (if such be the will of God) to suffer, than doing ill.
Daniel 13:23 (Susanna 1:23)
But it is better for me to fall into your hands without doing it, than to sin in the sight of the Lord.
A bit of a paraphrase, but its the same gist.
Apocalypse (Revelation) 18:2
And he cried out with a strong voice, saying: Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen; and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every unclean spirit, and the hold of every unclean and hateful bird:
Baruch 4:35
For fire shall come upon her from the Eternal, long to endure, and she shall be inhabited by devils for a great time. 
Babylon is called a habitat for devils by Baruch and John. Isaiah also says it will be desolate and inhabited by a lot of things:

It shall no more be inhabited for ever, and it shall not be founded unto generation and generation: neither shall the Arabian pitch his tents there, nor shall shepherds rest there. But wild beasts shall rest there, and their houses shall be filled with serpents, and ostriches shall dwell there, and the hairy ones shall dance there: And owls shall answer one another there, in the houses thereof, and sirens in the temples of pleasure. (Isaias 13:20ff)

…But no mention of devils. I wonder which book John is referencing in his writing?

Protestants BTFO????

Apocalypse 8:4
And the smoke of the incense of the prayers of the saints ascended up before God from the hand of the angel.
Tobit 12:12 & 15
When thou didst pray with tears, and didst bury the dead, and didst leave thy dinner, and hide the dead by day in thy house, and bury them by night, I offered thy prayer to the Lord […} For I am the angel Raphael, one of the seven, who stand before the Lord.
And here again is another instance of the Protestant KJV rendering of a deuterocanonical reference being closer to the NT verse quoting it.
“I am Raphael, one of the seven holy angels, which present the prayers of the saints, and which go in and out before the glory of the Holy One.” (Tobit 12:15 KJV)
Or at least it’s more succinct.
And this one is kinda big too, because not only is this quoting a string of words, but also a theological concept. Revelation (both the book ..and God’s tbh) is referring to a doctrine, illustrated in a book that Protestant’s don’t recognize, and that being not only closely quoted, but also fully illustrated when the quoted verse is read in its context.
The angel is saying that it brings the prayers of the saints before God. Clearly if John is referencing this passage and concept, then he was giving a nod of authority to the book it came from (which was basically just an illustration of this concept of angels and their personal work in the prayer life of humans).
I wonder why this would bother anyone???
Luke 1:28
And the angel being come in, said unto her: Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.
Judith 13:23
And Ozias the prince of the people of Israel, said to her: Blessed art thou, O daughter, by the Lord the most high God, above all women upon the earth. 
It’s common knowledge that this is said about lots of women in the Old Testament.
That doesn’t delegitimize the use in Judith though.
John 10:22
And it was the feast of the dedication at Jerusalem: and it was winter.
I Maccabees 4:59
And Judas, and his brethren, and all the church of Israel decreed, that the day of the dedication of the altar should be kept in its season from year to year for eight days, from the five and twentieth day of the month of Casleu, with joy and gladness.
Wait, Jesus observed a holiday from a “noncanonical” charlatan book?
(This is Chanukah by the way…[or Hanukkah if you don’t like the letter C.} )
John 3:12
If I have spoken to you earthly things, and you believe not; how will you believe, if I shall speak to you heavenly things?
Wisdom 9:16
And hardly do we guess aright at things that are upon earth: and with labour do we find the things that are before us. But the things that are in heaven, who shall search out?
Wait, Jesus quoted a noncanonical charlatan book that wasn’t even written by Solomon?
The worst part is that he didn’t quote his source.
It’s almost as if the book of Wisdom was mutually understood as authoritative by both him and Nicodemus.
Romans 1:20~25
For the invisible things of him, from the creation of the world, are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made; his eternal power also, and divinity: so that they are inexcusable […] Who changed the truth of God into a lie; and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
Wisdom 13:5
For by the greatness of the beauty, and of the creature, the creator of them may be seen, so as to be known thereby.
And yet again we have a New Testament writer not simply parroting a verse, but referencing an idea that came from a deuterocanonical book. It’s almost as if the bible doesn’t think it needs to say, “hey we got this from Wisdom because its divinely inspired”. Almost as if it would’ve been redundant to do so…
Paul’s idea is basically an elaboration on the concept established by Wisdom.
Finally this one is a bit less of a full on reference (though in the literary sense, it is clear that there is one), but to me has always shone more as an Old Testament prophecy, in the vein of Psalm 22 or Isaiah 53.
Wisdom 2:12~20

He boasteth that he hath the knowledge of God, and calleth himself the son of God.  He is become a censurer of our thoughts. He is grievous unto us, even to behold: for his life is not like other men’s, and his ways are very different. We are esteemed by him as triflers, and he abstaineth from our ways as from filthiness, and he preferreth the latter end of the just, and glorieth that he hath God for his father. Let us see then if his words be true, and let us prove what shall happen to him, and we shall know what his end shall be. For if he be the true son of God, he will defend him, and will deliver him from the hands of his enemies. Let us examine him by outrages and tortures, that we may know his meekness and try his patience. Let us condemn him to a most shameful death: for there shall be respect had unto him by his words.

Rather than quote specific verses, I think it would be better to just point to the Gospel crucifixion narrative (as a whole): as in that context, each of the underlined pieces in the Wisdom passage take on a more specific meaning. It begins with what seems like just a blanket condemnation about slanderous nitpickers (*cough* MSM *cough*). But certain specific details,  make it almost seems like the crucifixion story itself was a reference to this passage as concerns the motives of those who put him to death. Combine it with Psalm 22 for the deed and setting while Jesus was being sacrificed, Isaiah 53 for the true identity of the one who was being condemned and it paints a really vivid picture of the death of Christ and what it was all for.
There are many proof texts that support the New Testament authors either flat out quoting the “apocrypha” or gently referencing it. I only included the ones that I felt were the strongest because they were the ones that convinced me.
I could continue on with evidence from patristic writers like Augustine, Jerome, Origen; the fact that Luther also quoted them; how they are used in things like the Imitation of Christ and the Divine Comedy and Christian art and culture, poetry, writing. and so on, but my only aim for this was to lay out quotations. I want to give an argument for the universal use of the deuterocanonicals by all Christians because without em, the Bible is incomplete. It’s mangled and deformed like the guy from Reservoir Dogs (not too clear because they all kinda were tbh ahaha…)
I hope I laid out my evidence in a clear manner. I tried to be concise but it didn’t work haha.

Where is he? Where am I?

To this day I continue to doubt and question even my basic belief in God’s existence, let alone that he hears me when I speak to him. I’ve always held a secret envy for the people who claim God speaks directly to them even though I feel nothing but cringe whenever someone says they “have a word” or “god told me to tell you blah blah”. But ridiculous or not, I always wished for that kind of blind certainty.

Faith isn’t something that comes easy to me. I pray, and I know I am heard, because I’ve concluded that the arguments for God are strong and they resonate with me, much better than the empty spergings of Youtube atheists and bandwagoning of edgy teenage nihilists. (Nietzche is an overrated philosopher btw. Regardless of scientific inaccuracy in natural sciences, read Aristotle or some other classical thinker. They understood humanity better than we do and were more human than the bitter cynics who think philosophy is about crapping on man instead of celebrating truth.)

I prop myself up with bible verses that celebrate the cerebral worship of God, but I always have to reconvince myself and remind myself of the reasons I think prayer is meaningful, and that I assent that the Sacraments are true, and why I believe the structure of the Church is divine. Nothing comes naturally to me when it comes to God, but I continue to believe in him anyway. I’ve tried to live as an atheist as a teenager and an agnostic for a year about three or four years ago. It never took.

I don’t understand why I don’t reject faith altogether. I’m moody, I’m irritable, I’m weak, but at my basic intellectual level, I’m convinced that there’s someone there. It’s the one thing I hold as irrefutable fact, even though it’s the one thing will never stop questioning.

There’s God there, and he is eternal. But so are my doubts.

Before you get too invested

And start thinking this will be a Catholic page that kowtows to the pontiff and mindlessly drones on about vacuous statements about love and beauty, I think it’s only fair to lay everything on the table.

Theologically, I am and always will be Catholic. After a long period of question and doubt and study, I came to the conclusion, based on history and scriptural analysis and…frankly, some general education, that the “right” Christianity is the Catholic church. I believed it could do no wrong in the first years after I was baptized, and was even taking the first steps toward discerning a vocation to the priesthood.

It was only a few years before I began to notice the unfortunate limp-wristedness of the clerics and how ready lay teachers were to treat traditional Catholic teaching and practice with contempt. I thought I was entering the same strong, intellectually invested church of Xavier, Aquinas, Jerome, and Chesterton, but the church seemed all too willing to sell out its own history, its own doctrine, and its own heritage to seem cool. It was pathetic.

Disillusioned, I left teaching, cut off any plans to become a priest, and gradually distanced myself from the Sacraments. Then Francis was elected, I rolled my eyes knowing how cucked Jesuits and Francis of Assisi enthusiasts are, and my lapsedness was sealed.

I still study the Bible and the catechisms and love Church history, literature, and the Rosary, but always from the outside of the true Church’s wall.

That said, this will be a Catholic blog about Catholic belief, history, and the Bible, so it will never be a safe space for weak-minded, weak-willed, empty, sappy spiritualisms. Also, my belief is that the institutions of the clergy and Pope are eternal and good, but the people occupying them right now are an embarrassment. I won’t be discussing current events though, so crapping on the clergy won’t be happening either…unless I make an exception.