Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Apocrypha

I was reading about the history of the English language Christian Bible. In 1611, the King James version was printed with 80 books (NT and OT which included the Apocrypha), as did all the privious translations but in 1885 the Apocrypha was removed from the KJV leaving it with only 66 books. My question: Why? Why was the Apocrypha removed?

Answer Question
 
Amlimommy

Asked by Amlimommy at 6:32 PM on Dec. 5, 2009 in Religion & Beliefs

Level 1 (0 Credits)
Answers (11)
  • I have always heard that the KJV is the best because it was divinely guided in its translation..if so, where did human hands/minds interfere -- with the inclusion of the Apocrypha or with its removal? TY

    Amlimommy

    Answer by Amlimommy at 6:33 PM on Dec. 5, 2009

  • I'm not the best one to answer, but I know the bible was put together by the catholic church during a Council (I forget which). They chose the books/manuscripts which they considered to be authentic. They included Tobit and Macabees, which Martin Luther later removed. As for Apocrypha, that is where catholics and orthodox get alot of their traditions concerning Mary. But it's considered more literary, less narrative. But I'm not absolutely sure.

    shellbyrne

    Answer by shellbyrne at 6:37 PM on Dec. 5, 2009

  • The appocraphal books were found to be historically and theologically inaccurate. They have many conflicts within themselves and the rest of the books of the Bible.
    teamquinn

    Answer by teamquinn at 7:26 PM on Dec. 5, 2009

  • Actually, the men that decided which books to include had many many more to choose from. During the Counsel of Nicaea, I believe, they weighed in on a great number of rightings, including a second telling of the Revelation, other Gospels and the like. Many WERE just as credible as those that made the final cut, and others were less so. In most cases those books that didn't make the final bible were not included because of one or more of the following reasons... 1.) They proved to be a threat to the existing church by teaching a direct relationship with Jesus and God without a middle man (church) 2.) They could not be PROVEN to be historically accurate (just like many that did make it) 3.) The writings were duplicates of those already included...

    If this is honestly something you want answers to watch the "Banned From The Bible" Documentary. You can find it online!
    SabrinaMBowen

    Answer by SabrinaMBowen at 7:50 PM on Dec. 5, 2009

  • Thank you Sabrina for the info!


    Teamquinn, do you use the KJV/NKJV? Are you one who believes that the Bible as it is today is the literal, inerrant word of God? How do you explain a divine leading of the compilation of the Bible to have included inaccurate books? Maybe one they left out held more accurate information and is now lost to Christians today?

    Amlimommy

    Answer by Amlimommy at 7:59 PM on Dec. 5, 2009

  • From my research (as there no space here to go into any detail) I can only repeat what teamquinn has said already^^^.
    Be assured that Jehovah would never allow anything important to us, or to the vindication of his name, to be altered or destroyed. Jehovah is more than capable of protecting his own word.
    CosyMama

    Answer by CosyMama at 10:02 AM on Dec. 6, 2009

  • Look up deuterocanonical and apocryphal books on wikipedia, easy to read explanations there.
    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 2:02 PM on Dec. 6, 2009

  • It wasn't the Coucil of Nicea that determined which books would be included in the bible - it was a pretty long process but it was the Council of Rome in 382 CE that first decided upon a canon of 46 Old Testament books and 27 in the New Testament. This decision was ratified by the councils at Hippo (393), Carthage (397, 419), II Nicea (787), Florence (1442), and Trent (1546).

    eringobrough

    Answer by eringobrough at 2:10 PM on Dec. 6, 2009



  • See there was no static canon of Scripture for the Jews - they were open to further revelation. Their texts were basically divided into 3 parts - the law and the prophets (which were pretty set at the time of Jesus) and then the writings (which were open). Different sects used different sets of scripture. Like the Samaritans and Sadducees accepted the law but rejected the prophets and writings. The Pharisees accepted all three. Jesus, the apostles and the early Christians used a Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures called the Septuagint or LXX. The LXX included the apocrypha (or as Catholics call them the deuterocannonical) books.
    eringobrough

    Answer by eringobrough at 2:10 PM on Dec. 6, 2009

  • The appocraphal books were found to be historically and theologically inaccurate. They have many conflicts within themselves and the rest of the books of the Bible.


    No, not at all.  As I pointed out Jesus, the apostles and the early Christians used these books as Scripture.  The NT even makes numerous allusions to the deuterocanonical books.  Like in Hebrews 11:35: "Women received their dead by resurrection. Some were tortured, refusing to accept release that they might rise again to a better life." This story can't be found in the Protestant OT can this story be found - but it's in the Catholic bible 2 Maccabees 7.

    eringobrough

    Answer by eringobrough at 2:15 PM on Dec. 6, 2009

Join CafeMom now to contribute your answer and become part of our community. It's free and takes just a minute.