- Jerome completed his version of the Bible, the Latin Vulgate, in 405.In the Middle Ages, the Vulgate became the de facto standard version of the Bible in the West.The Vulgate manuscripts included prologues, in which Jerome clearly identified certain books of the older Old Latin Old Testament version as apocryphal – or non-canonical – even though they might be read as scripture.
- Scripture attests to this view in that the OT is referred to as the Scriptures of the prophets. Specific references include (with emphases added): So we have the prophetic word made more sure, to which you do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star arises in your hearts.
Roman Catholics may tell you, 'You Protestants are missing part of the Bible. We have the rest of it.' [Note: These people's leaders (popes, priests, etc.) have led them astray to this wrong belief.] This comment about missing books can throw people off, but it no longer has to. These popish additions to the Bible are commonly called the Apocrypha or sometimes the Deuterocanonical books. This is a short treatise on WHY these books are not in the Bible.
Other articles where New Testament Apocrypha is discussed: biblical literature: New Testament Apocrypha: The title New Testament Apocrypha may suggest that the books thus classified have or had a status comparable to that of the Old Testament Apocrypha and have been recognized as canonical. In a few instances such has been the.
What is the Apocrypha anyway?
The Apocrypha is a collection of uninspired, spurious books written by various individuals. The Catholic religion considers these books as scripture just like a Bible-believer believes that the 66 books in the Authorized Version of 1611 of the Bible are the word of God, i.e., Genesis to Revelation. We are going to examine some verses from the Apocrypha later in our discussion.
At the Council of Trent (1546) the Roman Catholic institution pronounced the following apocryphal books sacred. They asserted that the apocryphal books together with unwritten tradition are of God and are to be received and venerated as the Word of God. So now you have the Bible, the Apocrypha and Catholic Tradition as co-equal sources of truth for the Catholic. In reality, it seems obvious that the Bible is the last source of truth for Catholics. Roman Catholic doctrine comes primarily from tradition stuck together with a few Bible names. In my reading of Catholic materials, I find notes like this: 'You have to keep the Bible in perspective.' Catholics have been deceived into not believing that the Bible is God's complete revelation for man [but they can come out of these deceptions in an instant if they will only believe the Bible as it is written].
The Roman Catholic ApocryphaTobit
Judith
Wisdom
Ecclesiasticus
Baruch
First and Second Maccabees
Additions to Esther and Daniel
Apocryphal Books rejected by the Catholic Religion:
First and Second Esdras
Prayer of Manasses
Susanna*
*A reader says: 'Susanna is in the Roman Catholic canon. It is Daniel 13.'
Why the Apocrypha Isn't in the Bible.
- Not one of the apocryphal books is written in the Hebrew language (the Old Testament was written in Hebrew). All Apocryphal books are in Greek, except one which is extant only in Latin.
- None of the apocryphal writers laid claim to inspiration.
- The apocryphal books were never acknowledged as sacred scriptures by the Jews, custodians of the Hebrew scriptures (the apocrypha was written prior to the New Testament). In fact, the Jewish people rejected and destroyed the apocrypha after the overthow of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.
- The apocryphal books were not permitted among the sacred books during the first four centuries of the real Christian church (I'm certainly not talking about the Catholic religion. The Roman Catholic 'Church' is not Christian).
- The Apocrypha contains fabulous statements which not only contradict the 'canonical' scriptures but themselves. For example, in the two Books of Maccabees, Antiochus Epiphanes is made to die three different deaths in three different places.
- The Apocrypha includes doctrines in variance with the Bible, such as prayers for the dead and sinless perfection. The following verses are taken from the Apocrypha translation by Ronald Knox dated 1954:
Basis for the doctrine of purgatory:
2 Maccabees 12:43-45, 2.000 pieces of silver were sent to Jerusalem for a sin-offering...Whereupon he made reconciliation for the dead, that they might be delivered from sin.
Salvation by works:
Ecclesiasticus 3:30, Water will quench a flaming fire, and alms maketh atonement for sin.
Tobit 12:8-9, 17, It is better to give alms than to lay up gold; for alms doth deliver from death, and shall purge away all sin.
Magic:
Tobit 6:5-8, If the Devil, or an evil spirit troubles anyone, they can be driven away by making a smoke of the heart, liver, and gall of a fish...and the Devil will smell it, and flee away, and never come again anymore.
Mary was born sinless (immaculate conception):
Wisdom 8:19-20, And I was a witty child and had received a good soul. And whereas I was more good, I came to a body undefiled.
- It teaches immoral practices, such as lying, suicide, assasination and magical incantation.
- No apocryphal book is referred to in the New Testament whereas the Old Testament is referred to hundreds of times.
- Because of these and other reasons, the apocryphal books are only valuable as ancient documents illustrative of the manners, language, opinions and history of the East.
Wasn't the Apocrypha in the King James?
The King James translators never considered the Apocrypha the word of God. As books of some historical value (e.g., details of the Maccabean revolt), the Apocrypha was sandwiched between the Old and New Testaments as an appendix of reference material. This followed the format that Luther had used. Luther prefaced the Apocrypha with a statement:
'Apocrypha--that is, books which are not regarded as equal to the holy Scriputres, and yet are profitable and good to read.'King James Version Defended page 98.
In 1599, TWELVE YEARS BEFORE the King James Bible was published, King James himself said this about the Apocrypha:
'As to the Apocriphe bookes, I OMIT THEM because I am no Papist (as I saidbefore)...'
Basilicon Doron, page 13
In his, 'A Premonition to All Most Mightie Monarches,'--found in his Workes (a collection of the king's writings)--King James said this--
'...Is it a small corrupting of the Scriptures to make all, or the most part of the Apocrypha of equall faith with the canonicall Scriptures...?'
Not only this, but the sixth article of the Thirty-nine Articles of the Church ofEngland (1571 edition. The Church of England published the Authorized King James Version) states that
(1) the Old and New Testaments are the Bible--
In the name of the Holy, we do vnderstande those canonical bookes of the olde and newe Testament, of whose authoritie was never any doubt in the Churche...
(2) the apocrypha is not the Bible--
And the other bookes, (as Hierome sayeth), the Churche doth reade for example of life and instruction of manners: but yet doth it not applie them to establish any doctrene.Philip Schaff, Creeds of Christendom. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1977, Vol. III, pp.489-491.
The Hampton Court Document came as a result of the famous Hampton Court Conference of 1604 when King James specially commanded the translation of the Bible that would one day bear his name. Concerning the apocrypha and the Church of England, it states--
The Apocrypha, that hath some repugnancy to the canonical scriptures, shall not be read...Select Statutes and Other Constitutional Documents Illustrative of the Reigns of Elizabeth and James I,
edited by G.W. Prothero, Fellow of King's College, Cambridge, 1894, p. 416
The Apocrypha began to be omitted from the Authorized Version in 1629. Puritans and Presbyterians lobbied for the complete removal of the Apocrypha from the Bible and in 1825 the British and Foreign Bible Society agreed. From that time on, the Apocrypha has been eliminated from practically all English Bibles--Catholic Bibles and some pulpit Bibles excepted.
Not even all Catholic 'Church Fathers' believed the Apocrypha was scripture.
Not that this really means anything. The truth is not validated by the false. Nevertheless, this may be of interest to some... Jerome (340-420) rejected the Apocrypha:
'As the Church reads the books of Judith and Tobit and Maccabees but does not receive them among the canonical Scriptures, so also it reads Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus for the edification of the people, not for the authoritative confirmation of doctrine.'Jerome
Jerome's preface to the books of Solomon
According to Edward Hills in The King James Version Defended p. 98 other famous Catholics with this viewpoint include Augustine (354-430 who at first defended the Apocrypha as canonical), Pope Gregory the Great (540-604), Cardinal Ximenes, and Cardinal Cajetan.
There are other spurious books.
These include the Pseudepigrapha which contains Enoch, Michael the Archangel, and Jannes and Jambres. Many spurious books falsely claim to have been written by various Old Testament patriarchs. They were composed between 200 B.C. and 100 A.D. There are lots of these spurious books like The Assumption of Moses, Apocalypse of Elijah, and Ascension of Isaiah.
Concerning the Dead Sea Scrolls, there may be some information in them that parallels the Masoretic Text, but there are fables in them, too. I went to see the scrolls a few years ago with great expectation but found a bunch of fables. The best defense against error in any form (unauthorized Bibles and religions) is a solid knowledge of the AUTHORIZED (King James) Version of 1611 of the Bible. If you read it, forgeries become readily apparent.
Those that are unsaved may wish to read our article entitled, How to Get to Heaven.
The New Testament Canon consists of letters written by the apostles.The Apostles letters
Originally, the early church used the OT as the main tool for evangelism and direction. It soon became important for the apostles to communicate with the church in writing. These writings were recognized as God’s revelation and they were respected in kind.
These letters were written by many apostles, to many different churches..
Scrutiny
These letters were put under the same scrutiny as had the OT books. There was just as much care taken in deciding whether or not these writings were also the authoritative Word of God or not.
1. Factors that hastened the distinguishing the Canon
Gnosticism
The largest opposing religious teaching, Gnosticism teaches that we can transcend this physical existence to a higher spiritual existence as gods through freeing our minds with special knowledge. They used their own non-canonized writings intermingled with Christian writings. It was dangerous for them to be teaching partial truth.
Marcion’s Heresy
At about 140 A.D., Maricon dismembered and re-wrote the writings for the apostles in order to have a compilation of books on which to base his heretical doctrines.
Montanism
An unorthodox group from 170 A.D. The leader Montanus claimed to have fallen under a trance of the Holy Spirit, and began to speak tongues. Many writings came out of this movement, most prophetic in nature. When this movement was denounced by the Catholic Church, it created a lot of doubt in any prophetic material of the day. Even Hebrews and Revelations (which had previously been canonized) became disputed material.
Persecution
The NT Writings were preserved through much persecution, during which the scripture was being sought and destroyed. These early Christians would never protected writings so dearly unless they were considered true and authoritative.
2. Other testimony to Authority and validity
Church Fathers (220 A.D. – 405A.D.)
There were many church fathers in this time period that attested to the `canon of the NT. (Origen, Dionysius, Eusebius, etc)
- Synod of Hippo (393 A.D.) and Carthage (393 A.D.)
- Augustine - Yearly Regional meetings of the Orthodox Church in Africa which Augustine attended. He was very influential in the acceptance of all 27 books
- Jerome and the Latin Vulgate (380 A.D.) Jerome translated all 27 books into Latin. The Apocrypha NT books were translated into Latin later by different people. Jerome refused to translate the Apocryphal books.
3. Summary
Kjv Bible With Apocrypha Free
Apocrypha Books Of Bible
The NT Canon consists of letters written from the Apostles to the churches in order to declare God’s will to them. These hold just as much authority as previous scripture.