John Lawton Jeffcoat III–an expert authority on rare and antique Bibles — brings an interesting issue to the table: the Apocrypha and how it was taken out of the Protestant Bible. Many Protestants say, “Oh, the Apocrypha, that’s just a Catholic thing.”
John, who is a very conservative Protestant, disagrees — and that surprises many people he talks to.
This is part two of a very intense, in-depth interview that Rocking God’s House completed with John about The Topic of Rare, Antique Bibles — and anything and everything related to that topic.
Before we present the interview and hear John’s thoughts about the Apocrypha, we’d like to extend an invitation: after you read the interview, please comment with your opinion on the topic! We want to hear what you think. Should Christians study the Apocrypha? Please let us know what you think. (Note: We will only publish comments that are relevant to the discussion.)
And, to be clear, John is not saying that the Apocrypha is the inspired Word of God. Also, Rocking God’s House is not necessarily endorsing John’s viewpoint or the viewpoints of those commenting. We’re simply hoping to facilitate a discussion. [Editor’s Update 4/10: And it looks like there’s already a lively discussion developing! Thanks for keeping the conversation respectful and civil everyone, even when there are disagreements.]
Also, because this interview picks up where we left off in part one, this will require some introduction. John is taking us through the history of the Protestant Bible. And he begins below by discussing the Geneva Bible. In case you need a refresher, here is a quick overview of the Geneva Bible and its importance in history. According to Wikipedia:
The Geneva Bible is one of the most historically significant translations of the Bible into English, preceding the King James translation by 51 years. It was the primary Bible of 16th century Protestantism and was the Bible used by William Shakespeare, Oliver Cromwell, John Knox, John Donne, and John Bunyan, author of Pilgrim’s Progress. It was one of the Bibles taken to America on the Mayflower, it was used by many English Dissenters, and it was still respected by Oliver Cromwell’s soldiers at the time of the English Civil War in the booklet Cromwell’s Soldiers’ Pocket Bible.
Why did people love the Geneva Bible so much?
A lot of people loved their Geneva Bible because it was a no-nonsense Bible of the time. When we read it today a lot of people would say, “What are you talking about, that’s in a very old Elizabethan dialect.” Well, yeah, it is by our standards today, but it was a little bit easier for people to understand at the time.
So King James comes out with his Bible, which has one thing in common with all ancient Bibles before it — the Geneva, the Coverdale, the Matthew, the Tyndale, the taverner’s, all of them. It is an 80 book Bible, not a 66 book Bible. It contains the Apocrypha. The Apocrypha has 14 books, and it comes after the Old Testament, but before the New Testament. It has books with names like first and second Maccabees, Judith, Tobit, etc.
Now today, 99 out of 100 Protestants look at that and they say, “That’s not part of my Bible. That’s those Roman Catholic books.” Now where does that myth come from that there’s something Roman Catholic about the Apocrypha?
It comes from a fallacy of logic. We’re all familiar with logic. If A equals B, and B equals C, then A equals C — different properties of logic, transitive and associative properties of logic. The basic fundamentals of our brain should work, but it kind of got derailed with the Apocrypha. People say, “Well, my Catholic friends have the Apocrypha in their Bible.” They actually don’t. They have 12 of the 14 Apocrypha books, not quite all of it. But anyway, my Catholic friends have the Apocrypha in the Bible, my Protestant and Anglican friends do not. And it’s been that way for over a century. Therefore the Apocrypha is Catholic. Well, what utter nonsense! What a narrow view of history.
The Apocrypha was written 400 years before Christ. 400 years before Christianity. Hundreds and hundreds of years before Roman Catholicism. Over 1000 years before what we call Protestantism. It can’t be Christian! It can’t be Catholic! It can’t be Protestant! It was written 400 BC. It is Jewish. It’s Jewish. It’s like the Old Testament that was written BC — before Christ — it’s Jewish. And so it documents the history of what happened to the Jewish people just before Christ came. And it was part of the scrolls, and the temple. It was part of Jesus’ bible. When He walked the earth as a human, He went into the temple to read from the scrolls. He would have had the Old Testament and the Apocrypha. Obviously He wouldn’t have had the New Testament because it was written about Him, after he died and rose and ascended into Heaven.
So what happened? Where did the Apocrypha go? Why was it taken from the Protestant Bible?
Well, the Apocrypha was a part of every Jew’s Bible, if you will, if I can use that term in the looser sense. It was part of every Jew’s Bible, but it was also a part of every Christian’s Bible all the way up to 1881. In 1881, due to the influence of wildly liberal textual critics, Westcott and Hort, the Apocrypha was removed from non- Catholic Bibles. The Catholics ignored Westcott and Hort, but the Protestants and the Anglicans fell into line, and when the influence of the popular textual critics said, “Well, this should not be in the Bible,” amazingly, everybody just fell like dominoes. And starting in 1881, Bibles that are Protestant or Anglican don’t have the Apocrypha.
Now that’s really modern times. We had electricity in 1881. We had some crude automobiles and internal combustion engines. I mean this is somewhat modern times! The dawn of the Industrial Revolution. We’re not talking about some ancient time or the Crusades or the Dark Ages. This is modern day. Removal of 14 books from God’s Word!
Now, when I encounter a lot of Christians and say, “How many books are in your Bible?” Well, I got 39 books in the Old Testament, 27 books in the New Testament. We don’t have that Apocrypha, that’s Catholic. And I tell them no it’s not Catholic! The Catholics have nothing to do with it. It was robbed from your Bible. It’s not even something that supports Catholic theology. They say, “Well, hmmm, I’ll have to look into that.”
But that’s one of the great mysteries of Christianity today. Particularly, again getting back to the fallacy of logic thing. When I ask most mainline Christians “Why are you not, for example, a Mormon?” And I’m not specifically picking on Mormons, I’m just using them as an example of a more modern type of faith. Something that didn’t exist until a couple hundred years ago. It’s not ancient like Judaism, Christianity, or even Islam. It’s a very, very new religion. “Why are you not a Mormon?” They’ll look at me and they’ll say “Well, because Mormonism originated in 1800s with the teachings of Joseph Smith. I don’t believe in that. My faith does not rest on the foundation of something that is not even 200 years old.”
And I say, “I respect that,” and by the way that’s also why I’m not a Mormon. But are you telling me then that you do not abide by alleged major changes in God’s will for humanity that originated within the past 200 years? You don’t go for that? You says that’s a cult. “Yeah, that’s right.” Okay, well great. Well then, why do you accept that the Apocrypha was taken out of your Bible for the first time in over 2000 years; it was taken out in 1881. That’s more recent than Joseph Smith. That’s far more recent than the birth of the Mormon Church. They were birthed in the early 1800s. This is the late 1800s. So if you apply logic, it doesn’t make any sense. So when you look at the Bibles that we sell, because we deal exclusively in Bibles that were printed before 1850 — in fact, most of what we deal in is from the 1500s and 1600s — almost 100% of our Bibles contain the inter-testament books, the deuterocanonical books, the Apocrypha, and there’s nothing Catholic about them.
As a final point of logic, I will mention one more thing about the Geneva Bible, the most fiercely anti-Catholic Bible ever put to press — a Bible that, in its commentary notes, proclaims the pope an antichrist. That Bible of the Protestant Reformation contains the Apocrypha. So one of the things that we try to communicate to people is, “Hey buddy, your Bible’s missing 14 books.”
Now there are a lot of people out there that say, “Well, the Apocrypha, there’s a reason was separated off. Wasn’t the Apocrypha a series of books that contains things that contradict the rest of the Scripture? Isn’t that why it was removed?” And you know there are Christians today who believe the Apocrypha is the Word of God. There are Christians today who say, “It’s not the Word of God; it’s profitable for Christian reading.”
But the argument is not, “Is the Apocrypha the Word of God?” I’m not here today to tell you the Apocrypha is the Word of God; that’s not what I’m saying. I’m saying the Apocrypha was a part of the Bible up until 1881. There are a number of things in the Bible that are not the Word of God. For example, the table of contents page is not the Word of God. The concordance in the back is not the Word of God. The maps of Paul’s missionary journeys are not the Word of God. And if you have any popular commentary Bibles out there — “The Men’s Study Bible,” “The Woman’s Study Bible,” “The New Life Bible,” “The Reformation Bible,” “The Recovery Bible,” “The Teen Bible” — there are all these target demographic Bibles that have commentary notes in them — all those commentary notes are not the Word of God.
So we are not people who shun pages that are not the Word of God. No, it’s okay if it’s between the pages of the Bible if it doesn’t contradict God’s Word and it helps you to study and understand. That’s considered acceptable. So the issue then is what’s going on that’s causing that controversy? We have to understand there are two types of literature in the Bible. There are a lot of different types of literature, but all that actually falls into two categories. It is either descriptive or prescriptive. Descriptive literature describes something, it is descriptive. It’s describing. Prescriptive literature prescribes a course of action for you the reader.
So for example, when we read in the Bible that Cain murdered Able. That is descriptive. It is not telling you to go kill your brother; it is telling you a story about someone who went and killed their brother. When we read that David committed adultery with Bathsheba and was responsible for her husband’s murder, it’s not telling you to go commit adultery with your neighbor and have her husband killed. It’s telling you a story about someone who did that. That’s descriptive. Prescriptive on the other hand is thou shalt not commit adultery. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain. Honor your father and your mother. And, of course, much of what Jesus said is prescriptive — particularly His Sermon on the Mount. He is speaking to you the reader. It is saying, “Hey buddy, I’m not telling you a story. I’m telling you the reader, ‘You need to do this or don’t do this.'”
So when we read the Apocrypha we have to read it as we read the rest of the Bible. We have to read it with an understanding of what portions of it are descriptive, and what portions of it are prescriptive. So if you come across something in the Apocrypha, and it’s about prayers for the dead, maybe instead of saying, “Oh, this is promoting prayers for the dead; that seems to contradict the rest of Scripture, I’m going to throw this out.” Hey, maybe it’s telling a story about people who were praying for the dead. Maybe it’s not prescribing that you should do that.
I’m not a liberal. I’m very conservative. I believe the Bible is the Word of God. So I’m not some liberal textual critic like Westcott and Hort trying to draw people away from the truth. I believe in the Virgin Birth, I believe in the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. So I’m not saying these things as a liberal; I’m very conservative.
Do you believe the Apocrypha is the inspired Word of God?
Well, you know, I don’t have a firm opinion on the matter. Part of me says, “Why is it that this was part of the Bible for over 2000 years?” God kept these books within His Word. He preserved them for over 2000 years. That seems to be an argument that we should consider, “Hey, is this the Word of God?”
The other argument is that it has been removed from almost 100% of non-Catholic Bibles for the past almost century and a half. So what’s going on there? Again, that’s a bit of a mystery to me. What I’m curious about is why has our Lord preserved these 14 books within His Word for two millennia and then not preserved them for a century and a half? That’s a bit of a quandary to me. I would say, well, just from a standpoint of logic, if this is the Word of God and God preserves His Word, shouldn’t it still be in the Bible?
[Editor’s Note: A previous version of this article had the year 1881 in the title as the year the books were removed. This was an error and was removed from the title.]
Quick note for C. S. Lewis fans and music lovers before the article begins:
When life’s sorrows bring us into shadowlands, we need the joy of Christ to restore our strength. We tap into this joy by nurturing a deeper longing for God. Shadowlands and Songs of Light: An Epic Journey into Joy and Healing takes you on a quest for joy and a life-changing longing for God.
Written by a C. S. Lewis expert and a skilled composer, the book explores 18 beloved C. S. Lewis classics, from Narnia to Mere Christianity, and 13 spiritual principles behind the art of songwriting–all to answer one question: how do we experience deeper joy in our relationship with Christ during times of sorrow and trial?
Shadowlands is available to pre-order at Amazon or ChristianBooks.com. If you pre-order a copy, the author will personally email you with a thank-you note and a copy of his upcoming e-book devotional “Devotions with Tolkien,” which uses J. R. R. Tolkien’s epic “The Lord of the Rings” and Scripture. (This is all on the honor system: simply pre-order Shadowlands, and then send an email to shadowlands2016 (at) gmail (dot) com letting the author (Kevin Ott) know you’ve ordered it, and he will contact you.)
Text LIGHT to 54900 to get a preview of Shadowlands and Songs of Light.
***
Abbie… I enjoyed our interview.
If any of your readers would like to sign up for our Email Newsletter, they will receive about two emails per month, with special sales and free bonus offers only available to our Email Newsletter subscribers.
It’s easy to sign-up, right here:
http://www.greatsite.com/signup.html
If I can be of further service to you, call me any time.
John L. Jeffcoat
The Bible Museum – GREATSITE.COM
Where do I get a copy of the original Apocrypha and the original Bible before it changed
You can order The Orthodox Study Bible, and you will have them
I love Yahshua/Word of God/YAHWEH our Righteousness”Need complete Bible”which one to get that has 80 books that I’ve read a little when growing up” Was saved in Jesus’s name but I know it’s because I believed in the Son of God and IAM that I am honored it despite Jesus is a transliteration (wrong)of His birth name and wasn’t in the original KJV “Any information about the name Jesus would be awesome either way He’s called The Word(mind/idea)of God
I just found one at an estate sale from 1817. It is completely intact. I have started reading the apocrypha. I am shocked by the fact that it was removed a little over 100 years ago. There are so many lies about it. I have read that it never says “Thus Says the Lord”, so it can’t be inspired. But this am I just read 2 Essays and that phrase is everywhere. People stop believing everything the world tells you and do some research and read your bible yourself! We will all stand before the Lord and we aren’t going to be able to blame others for our own ignorance and laziness. Don’t cool yourself. God will not be mocked.
Sorry, 2 Esdras not essays.
You can order the Orthodox Study Bible from Thomas Nelson Publishers. It is available on Amazon. Com
http://www.googleadservices.com/pagead/aclk?sa=L&ai=DChcSEwjg6PGo9v3OAhXNWoYKHYSLBzkYABAA&ohost=www.google.com&cid=CAESIuD2IiOqnSt1sBXZXRGnRXu8puNIvoF5yyg05Xc7sD6KhVw&sig=AOD64_3es_saQIUk1Z7-4G5K-xOZyOSF8A&q=&ved=0ahUKEwiq1Oyo9v3OAhXJ9h4KHaOICq0Q0QwIHA&adurl=
You’ll find the complete Old Testament translated from the Greek Septuigent in the covers. Check it out.
How can I get one
The Orthodox Study Bible is an excellent source of the teachings of the ancient church:
https://www.amazon.com/Orthodox-Study-Bible-Hardcover-Christianity/dp/0718003594/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1482947928&sr=1-1&keywords=orthodox+study+bible
King James 1611 is a version
with both old and new testaments as well as the Apocrypha.
these books weren’t separated until the 1800’s
At this time there was no one alive with the
authority to legitimately remove any of these books from the Holy scriptures as all of the writers had long since past.
So yes they are an original part and should be studied.NO man Had the right to remove them.
A free bible software has it. The Sword of the Lord can be found under e-sword here is the web site: https://e-sword.net/downloads.html
download is free everything is free Greek, Hebrew and English bibles, some exception where copywrite is involved. I have used it for years it is the best on the market.
Just received my 1611 original King James Bible and am so excited. I bought a Catholic Bible a few years ago out of curiosity. I am a Protestant. Well, a few months ago I ran across a table with other Catholic Bibles at a Hospice Thrift Shop and compared the books in them. A few were missing from the later edition. One was from the 60s and the other from the 70s. I wondered if other books were removed and how many. Were the books removed gradually through many decades and what were they? So, I googled “original King James Bible” and was surprised that there were 14 more books in the original edition! I downloaded it and began reading it on line and wanted my own copy. I love the Maccabbees. It has inspired me to truly know the scriptures ever deeply. It reports horrible persecution of the Jews. They died standing for the Law that so many of us think is void and neutered because of the sacrifice of our Lord. What laws are we to obey? He was our lamb sacrifice, but there are many other teachings in the Torah. So, I am fine combing scriptures. I don’t want to misunderstand doctrine as the blind leading the blind and follow the traditions of Christian beliefs, instead of digging in and searching for myself the truth and then, knowing what truth that is so essential to die for. These believers were killed for circumcising their little boys. They died for not eating pork. They died for obeying Yehweh’s Laws, which are Yeshua’s laws, because Yeshua or Jesus was, is, Jewish. He went to synagogue. He taught teachings of synagogue beliefs. The truth shall set us free. And there are more scrolls found in the Quran caves that we are free to examine and pray about, so we can stand strong in wisdom and His faith and knowledge. I am stoked! So happy I search for Him… He said if I searched Him, He would find me. Yay!
Point of order: the caves are called Qumran. Other than that, you’re spot on
Oops, i often twist my letters, hehe. But, in the positive, this could be connected with my ease of reading the 1611 Bible.
So much respect for another believer who pursues truth, doesn’t just live by the regurgitation of others (which can be false doctrine)! It is heartbreaking to me that some organizations aim to keep believers dependent on their leadership and interpretation of the Word, as if we ourselves do not have direct access and entry into the mysteries.
Like you, I’m also enjoying the wild discovery of seeking to “rightly divide the word of truth” and “discern for ourselves what is right”. I at times have concepts, ideas, even exact phrases which I’ve never heard, revealed to me internally and the next day my googling leads me to find the same teaching, verbatim, in scriptures I’d never known of.
To me this this is validation of the scripture I only just this morning discovered:
“But as for you, Christ has poured out his Spirit on you. As long as his Spirit remains in you, you do not need anyone to teach you. For his Spirit teaches you about everything, and what he teaches is true, not false. Obey the Spirit’s teaching, then, and remain in union with Christ.”
1 John 2:27
I downloaded a Jewish linear bible you can check out. You can download this free at: scripture4all.org
Hi I live in London how can I receive the complete bible?
Hello John,
For the Apocrypha to have been removed from the Holy Bible, you would naturally have to presume that it was in it to begin with. However, the Jews never considered part of the Old Testament canon. As for the New Testament, Jesus Himself denied the Apocrypha as inspired. Do you want proof for that? Then, please read… http://maverickchristians.com/the-holy-bible
Wow, very much enjoyed this article. I am so interested in the Apocrypha, what is in it and why it was removed. I agree that if these books we’re in Jesus’s bible and the Geneva bible that the pilgrims brought with them to America we should at least be able to read them in our bibles and if we want to not read them at least they are they if we ever so desire to study them. Thank you so much for this new knowledge I have been blessed with.
Darrell,
I’m in the same boat as you. This interview came about as a side product of an interview about antique bibles. John asked me if I’d ever heard of the Apocrypha… that started this interview. I am dying to read these books. Thanks for the comment and God Bless my friend!
Darrell Stewart: I’m glad you enjoyed this article.
It is almost impossible today to find a non-Catholic Bible that contains the Apocrypha. They are rarely published today.
If you go to our website at GREATSITE.COM and click on “Facsimile Reproductions”, you can see several affordable 80-Book-Bibles, which are Protestant or Anglican Bibles (not Catholic), containing the 39 Old Testament Books, the 14 Apocrypha Books, and the 27 New Testament Books.
– John Jeffcoat
The Bible Museum
GREATSITE.COM
Thank you so much for this artical! One thing that stood out specifically was the comment about the 14 books not being preserved and if you think about it they actually are because they still are out there they’re just not in his word is preserved because we still have access to it!
I too would love to get my hands on the best Bible possible and study the truth!
I do have friends that had the Eth-cepher? If you’ve ever heard of it?
Thank you again! I really appreciated the knowledge that you have gained to the wisdom of God to share what you did in your article it helped me very much and strengthen to my face and raise my hope in my walk & search 4 the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth!
Kari
In my opinion, it should absolutely not be in the Bible as the inspired Word of God or be included in any way in the standard Biblical canon — though, to be clear, I realize you weren’t trying to advocate the Apocrypha as being the inspired Word of God, but I think the case against it is actually very clear and strong and not ambiguous.
Here are a few reasons why:
1) Jesus implicitly rejects the Apocrypha as inspired Scripture in Luke 11:51 when He says, “From the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah, who was killed between the altar and the house of God, yes, I tell you, it shall be charged against this generation.” In Jesus’ time, the Old Testament books were arranged differently — just as they are still arranged differently today in the Torah. The first book of the Hebrew Canon is obviously Genesis (“blood of Abel”) but actually the last book of the Torah’s arrangement is 2 Chronicles (which has the account of “blood of Zechariah”). So the fact that Jesus defines the Hebrew Scriptures in a sweeping statement that mentions the books in that bookend order, from Genesis to 2 Chronicles, like saying “from the beginning to the end” — and the fact that His bookend statement does not include the Apocrypha — shows that Jesus did not consider the Apocrypha to be a part of the inspired Hebrew Scriptures.
2) The Jews actually rejected the Apocrypha from their canon. Romans 3:2 says that the “oracles of God” were given to the Jews, but we see a pattern that the Jews clearly rejected the Apocrypha. The Jewish Essene community did not regard them highly, as no mention was found in the Dead Sea scrolls. Josephus explicitly rejected the Apocrypha, listing the Hebrew Canon to the same as we have it today.
3) Also, I would respectfully disagree with your statement that the Apocryphal texts had been a part of the canon of the Bible continuously until 1881. As I mentioned, the Jews never accepted it as canon, and, in Christian history, the Apocrypha was not accepted into the Bible until the Catholic Church added it in a council in 1546. (And you can even argue that this action was a counter-reaction to the Protestant Reformation.)
Early church fathers agree that the Apocrypha was not the inspired Word of God: Jerome, Origen, Cyril of Jerusalem, and Athanasius.
Perhaps even more telling that the Apocrypha should not be considered inspired canon are the errors found in these books. The early church only canonized books if they met a certain criteria, such as being historically accurate and supernaturally confirmed by containing predictive prophecies — just to name a couple examples (though the criteria is more involved than that). The Apocrypha, however, doesn’t meet the criteria. Its books are riddled with false teachings and flat out wrong historical details. Tobit 6:4-7 commands people to use magic (and I would argue that its context is prescriptive). Tobit 4:11 speaks of the forgiveness of sins by almsgiving and 2 Maccabees 12:43-45 says you can offer money for the sins of the dead.
It makes serious historical errors. The book of Judith incorrectly says that Nebuchadnezzar was the king of the Assyrians (he was king of the Babylonians). Baruch 6:2 says that the Jews would serve in Babylon for seven generations while the true prophet correctly declared in Jeremiah 25:11 that it was for 70 years.
Apocrypha translates to “hidden” and that’s how they should stay, in my honest opinion — at least when it comes to the question of including them as the inspired Word of God and in the accepted canon of the Bible. I realize you weren’t trying to advocate that they are the inspired Word of God necessarily, but I think it is less ambiguous and that there is actually a very strong case against the Apocrypha.
that first quote’s interpretation seemed twisted. Be careful about traditional interpretations. Just sayin as a sister in the Lord. Be open to Spirit and be on guard about being a blind follower. <3
listing Genesis to Chronicles does not mention the apocrypha either way so is irrelevant.
Nebuchadnezzar having conquered Assyria would have been thereby king of the Assyrians as well as king of the Babylonians.
Lydia: You have said many things, and with a stance of authority and detail… but much of what you have said is simply a matter of stretched interpretations, and not objective fact.
Your explanation that 2 Chronicles was supposedly the last book of the Torah, because Jesus spoke of the blood of “Abel to Zachariah” is an extremely weak argument for such a claim. It’s a wildly outlandish stretch to equate those two things. Indeed, having sold many ancient Torahs, I’ve never seen one ending with, or even including 1st or 2nd Chronicles.
Your reference to Romans 3 is similarly an observation upon one scripture that is not related to your conclusion.
Your claim that Tobit 6: 4-7 “command people to use magic” is simply flat-out wrong. It does not such thing. It tells a descriptive narrative, and nothing more. By your definition, one could argue that when Jesus made mud of spit and dirt, and put it upon the blind man’s eyes to heal him… this is similarly the Bible admonishing us to use “magic”. That is not an objectively acceptable interpretation.
One thing upon which we do agree, is that I am not advocating that all Christians accept the Apocrypha as inspired canon. That’s right. I’m not.
I’m merely pointing out that the Apocrypha has been part of about 99% of all Bibles printed (including Protestant and Anglican Bibles) from the first printed Bible in the mid 1400’s… to the first Protestant printed Bibles of the early 1500’s… all the way up until the 1880’s. That historical fact begs the question: Why?
Indeed, why is it that the Apocrypha, if it is indeed so contemptible, was not rejected and removed from Protestant Bibles until as recently as just over a century ago? Was there new revelation from God in 1881 concerning the makeup of the Bible? These are hard questions to answer, regardless of one’s personal interpretation of the Apocrypha, and regardless of one’s beliefs regarding its canonicity, or lack therefor, in whole, or in part.
This is a fascinating discussion and topic — wow. Thanks, everyone, for participating in the comments; and thanks, John, for interacting with our readers. It’s very interesting to explore this topic; which, frankly, I’ve never really explored in much detail until now.
It was rejected by the Jews as the word of God long before it was removed. These books that are no longer in the Bible were not written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit or God and that is why they are not in the Bible
Do you agree or disagree that the books refer to living beings as aliens from the very start, and that we are in fact disregarding the reality that other life forms as in Ezekiel, are in fact the living god of the heavens? And the angels as well would be their children. Also would their not be two kinds of them as in Mathew 12 verse 27 where Jesus spoke of Beelzebub, and said that he is the king of the devils, and if he is the king of the devils than are their not many of them out there in the universe.
Kevin: Yes, it is a hot topic. I noticed that the Rockin’ God’s House Twitter Page has already received over 2,600 Tweet Favorites, and over 1,800 Re-Tweets for their Tweet about this Apocrypha Article…. and it has only been published for just one day. With the exception of Part One of this same Interview Series, which also got a lot of Twitter response, I think that may be a record-breaking Twitter response for this website. I’ve also posted a Tweet on our company’s Twitter Page, and we have also received thousands of Re-Tweets already at:
https://twitter.com/GreatsiteDotCom
Many people are very interested in The Apocrypha.
– John Jeffcoat
The Bible Museum
GREATSITE.COM
What is good is that these books should be available for anyone to read and have the freedom to decide for themselves what category to place them. Some are doggedly against these books. That is fine. Others wish to read them. Even for historical information they are valuable. Maccabees inspire me. Reading Maccabees showed me how I wish we could design our American military. It gave clues on how we could win wars: not by might but by purity and faith. It also included some troubling incidences of martyrdom that was chronicled. Such courage and strength is inspirational. I am looking forward to continuing in the maccabees and reading other books. I am well grounded in the Scriptures and can test each spirit as Scripture teaches. 😀
In the Anglican “Articles of Religion” contained in their book of common prayer (*of which these men subscribed*) it states (in part): Of the Sufficiency of the Holy Scriptures for Salvation. . . . . . “And the other Books (as Hierome saith) the Church doth read for example of life and instruction of manners; but yet doth it not apply them to establish any doctrine; such are these following:” & then lists the Apocrypha. That said, I have recently (last 2 yrs) added them to my bible reading plan along with the AV translators to the reader. I agree that we’re not to glean our doctrine from these books but devotional & historical. So, can I say Bible-yes; Scripture-no?
FLAwtha: I think many people would agree with your assessment of The Apocrypha as being, exactly as you put it: “Biblical – Yes… Scripture – No”. That seems to be the view of most educated Christians.
There is of course, also a large number of Christians who simply take a knee-jerk attitude of immediate offense at the very name “Apocrypha”, and continue to insist that these books were “added by the Catholics” or other such nonsense… when these books were written 400+ years before the New Testament was written, (circa 400 BC), and they have been part of almost every Bible printed up until their removal in 1885.
If I may say something here, I have read and taken into account both side of the discussions. If i were to simply close the topic it would be with this, from Genesis to Revelation; everything in the bible has two things that no one can contradict. First would be its Author “GOD”, through divine inspiration was the bible written and number is the purpose for which is was written “Salvation” for all those who believe. From the beginning until the end of the bible its purpose from GOD was to offer a gift of Salvation, quote “that who so ever shall believe in him will not perish but have everlasting life”. If the Apocrypha was to be in the bible in these last 160 years then GOD would allow it, and like he used men through out the age’s to accomplish his purpose he can still do it today. The Apocrypha is not in our bibles today for a purpose in which GOD knows and “no one can say him nay”. As interesting as it does sound that there are books missing from our bible that were in Hebrew it was just simply not allowed by GOD to continue, and he can change that very quickly. Note: I am al for finding the truth of the “WORD OF GOD” in the original language of Hebrew and Greek as it was given through GOD himself, but to be bound looking for things that GOD simply just didn’t allow would closely be to try and reverse time; which is completely impossible for us human’s. If it is the will of GOD no one can stand in front of it and prevail, if it is man’s will then it will be forgotten. GOD BLESS YOU ALL !
I am a 47 year old woman and only discovered that the apocrypha was taken out of the bible about 7 years ago when i bought a English bible. it wasn’t in there and i was wondering to someone about that, and she simply had never even heard of it. I grew up German and my parents bible always had the apocrypha, i read them when i was still in school and they have inspired me immensely. The word magic has never come to my mind in any of the books, all it ever have thought me is how to live by faith. I don’t see how anyone can think that God comanded too take it out if it has been part of the bible from long before Christ was born. Just my opinion!
This is however the problem, if the true bible the first state had the apocrypha, then how is that man with consent would remove it, if it was from god in the first place?
Jason: No, your statement is not going to “close the topic”. Your argument is not really logical, if you look at the “Big Picture” of time over the past 2,000+ years. Your argument is essentially appealing to the idea that if GOD chose to allow the liberal, apostate, Non-Christian academic textual critics Wescott & Hort to remove the Apocrypha in 1881… and the majority of Protestant Christians went along with it without protest (due to ignorance or apathy… not due to actual support of the decision itself), then that fact somehow JUSTIFIES the Apocrypha’s removal. In other words, Jason, you are saying: “Hey, if God allowed it to happen, then it must be God’s Will”. That is a weak argument, and it is one not supported by scripture at all. I would point out that God’s Word in its entirety was removed from public access by all non-Latin-readers, and access to copies of His Word was a capital crime punishable by death, for many, many centuries… up until the mid-1500’s. That is a LOT longer than the mere 134-years that our Bibles have been without The Apocrypha (1881 to 2015). Yet, surely you would NOT dare to say “Well, if God allowed His Word to be forbidden and inaccessible for several centuries during the Dark Ages, then that must have been His Will… so I guess that was the right thing to do, to prevent access to His Word.” Can you see the fallacy of your logic? The action of Mankind must never be used to discern the Will of God. It is also important to understand that there are two forms of God’s Will, from a theological perspective: God’s Ideal Will (for example: God’s Ideal Will is that you NOT commit murder or adultery)… and God’s Permitted Will (for example: God obviously PERMITS people to commit murder and adultery on this planet every day… He does not intervene to stop them, nor does He kill them on the spot). Simply because God permits something to happen… and continue to happen for centuries… does NOT mean that he likes it, tolerates it, or that it reflects His Will. Also: God has not removed the Apocrypha from the world. It is still a part of millions of Bibles being printed today. It is just not part of over 99% of Western Protestant Bibles printed today… such as those coming out of the Big Bible Printers of Nashville, Tennessee. So again Jason, to summarize, what you are saying has two problems: one is that you are putting forth a simple fallacy of logic, and the other is that you are putting forth a fallacy of basic systematic theology regarding God’s Nature and Devine Will as balanced by his long-suffering grace and mercy toward a Creation that violates His Will continuously.
The apocrypha have no benefit whatsoever to a true Christian,choose to belive or not that’s your call,the truth has been served! I pray that God (YAHWEH) grants us all direction,and rescues us from deception. 1st timothy 4:1
J. Chilufya: Your comment is the type of hit-and-run ranting comment, which is based upon emotion and religious fervor and preconceived ideas, but with no basis in fact, or logic, or sound systematic theology, and certainly no cited scriptural proof, and no explanatory justification whatsoever. This type of comment adds nothing to an otherwise intelligent discussion.
It just interject a quick-jab of groundless slander upon the Old-Testament-Era deuterocanonical books (the “Apocrypha”) which have been embraced as part of the Bible by every single denomination and sect of both Judaism and Christianity from 400 B.C. until their removal from Protestant & Anglican Bibles in 1881… just 134 years ago, as though some “new revelation” came down from our Lord, regarding His Word, in 1881.
Jumping into a discussion to say essentially “I don’t like the Apocrypha because I think it is deception, though I will offer NO examples of how this slanderous claim is true… oh and on a totally unrelated note, let me say that God’s only acceptable name is ‘YAHWEH’… uh… yeah… go team!” … that’s just not adding anything to our discussion here.
Your personal prejudices are not the issue being discussed here. The nature of the Apocrypha is the topic of discussion here. If you have something of substance to add… with scriptural backing, or even historical backing, please do so. Otherwise, let’s try to keep it “on-topic”. Thanks.
John Jeffcoat
The Bible Museum
GREATSITE.COM
I have read just a little bit and felt the convict up n & judgement of GOD, so I stopped reading it. It has no benefits like the bretheren saids.
I feel like I’m talking with little children here.
Here is another comment from someone (“jason”) who apparently “read just a little bit” and then suddenly had a personal divine experience of feeling
“convict up n (conviction?) & judgement of GOD”
warning him to stop reading these Biblical books immediately, least damnation fall upon him. (!)
Seriously?
After reading a only a few words of the text, and having the Lord God Himself come upon him with conviction and judgement for the mere act of reading it… he has summarily pronounced sentence upon the entire text as such:
“It has no benefits like the brethren saids (sic)”
Good grief! This is just ridiculous.
Not one person here has quoted anything within the Apocrypha that is a truly prescriptive (not descriptive) command that contradicts New Testament scripture.
Indeed, every posting here that has been anti-Apocryphal has been backed only by how the reader “feels” or what he has “heard” … or in this latest case… amazingly, what God Himself personally told the reader about the Apocrypha.
The only with exception being “Lydia” who admittedly made a very weak attempt to address the text itself … but I will give her credit for at least trying and for being literate and being on-topic.
I am on the same page with you, John. I encourage you to keep seeking Him. Perceive “who” is closing minds so shut and stubborn. I admire your openness to Truth. Your discussions are intelligent and I believe God never desires for us to leave our brains at the doorway of Faith. A red flag is raised when I read illogical arguments as are written here.
I’ve been reading up on this,i copied and pasted this
There are two major approaches towards study of, and commentary on, the Tanakh. In the Jewish community, the classical approach is religious study of the Bible, where it is assumed that the Bible is divinely inspired. Another approach is to study the Bible as a human creation. In this approach, Biblical studies can be considered as a sub-field of religious studies. The later practice, when applied to the Torah, is considered heresy by the Orthodox Jewish community. As such, much modern day Bible commentary written by non-Orthodox authors is considered forbidden by rabbis teaching in Orthodox yeshivas. Some classical rabbinic commentators, such as Abraham Ibn Ezra, Gersonides, and Maimonides, used many elements of contemporary biblical criticism, including their knowledge of history, science, and philology. Their use of historical and scientific analysis of the Bible was considered acceptable by historic Judaism due to the author’s faith commitment to the idea that God revealed the Torah to Moses on Mount Sinai.
The Modern Orthodox Jewish community allows for a wider array of biblical criticism to be used for biblical books outside of the Torah, and a few Orthodox commentaries now incorporate many of the techniques previously found in the academic world, e.g. the Da’at Miqra series. Non-Orthodox Jews, including those affiliated with Conservative Judaism and Reform Judaism, accept both traditional and secular approaches to Bible studies. “Jewish commentaries on the Bible”, discusses Jewish Tanakh commentaries from the Targums to classical rabbinic literature, the midrash literature, the classical medieval commentators, and modern day commentari
Interesting survey on how the Jewish community approaches their texts. Definitely learned some things — thanks, Tammy.
I am having trouble understanding how this latest comment from Tammy is topically relevant to the discussion of the Apocrypha being included (pre-1881) and excluded (post-1881) from CHRISTIAN BIBLES.
This latest comment discusses the fact that JEWISH communities are split between those that consider ALL scriptural texts, including the Old Testament, to be Divinely Inspired, and those who consider ALL scriptural texts, including the Old Testament, to be merely the work of human beings, (though I don’t know how the later group could possibly be considered Jewish by any definition, if the reject the idea of Divine inspiration of ANY scriptures).
This posting also discusses some of the historical Jewish writings that are not part of the Old Testament and also not part of the Apocrypha, and what Jewish communities think about those totally-non-Biblical works.
So… that’s all well and good… I don’t dispute any of that… but that really has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the topic of discussion here.
It’s really hard to listen to this man (John) express his OPINIONS when he is so critical of everyone else’s opinions. When in fact he has little explanation to even answer the question.
Seriously… this is just getting ridiculous. I feel like nearly everyone responding on this forum is just very childlike.
Nobody here is offering any FACTS, except me.
Everyone is just spouting off opinions with nothing to substantiate their opinions.
Now, ironically, “REMY” is accusing ME of doing specifically what NEARLY EVERYONE ELSE HERE is doing… and I alone am NOT doing (sporting off unsubstantiated opinions, with no explanation to back them up).
This forum is increasingly revealing itself to simply not be the foundation of meaning adult discussion, where intelligent people come to discuss the facts in a civil discussion or debate.
& welcome to Laodicea. (Ats.26.24)
Amen! A studied and legitimate understanding of Christian History, or for that matter a studied and legitimate understanding of sound Biblical theology, is either disdained or cast-aside as useless by most of the undereducated masses of Christendom in America today.
So many would rather hear the positive-thinking, feel-good, experiential, false Gospels of Televangelists like Joel Osteen or any of the apostate Trinity Broadcast Network Crew… rather than to receive sound Biblical and Christian Historical teaching from theological titans like Dr. R.C. Sproul or Dr. John MacArthur.
We are left not only “tossed to and fro on every wind of doctrine”, but likewise tossed to and fro on every false teaching or misunderstanding regarding the history of the Bible itself, and the accurate history of the Christian Church.
Indeed, few in our churches even grasp basic world history, or American history. Most even believe that Thomas Jefferson was a Christian!
I doubt that one Christian in a hundred in the USA understands for example, that the Apocrypha was part of the Bible 400 years before the New Testament Books were even written… and therefore the idea that the Apocrypha is books “added by the Roman Catholic Church” is the height of absurdity. There was no Catholic Church, or Christian Church of any kind, in 400 BC. The Apocrypha is, of course, Jewish literature.
– John Lawton Jeffcoat III
The Bible Museum
GREATSITE.COM
I’m reading your interview and subsequent comments and find the topic very interesting. Without any research on the matter thus far in my personal journey, I’ve briefly stopped to inquire why you feel that Joel Osteen and Tbn crew are apostate?, as well as Sproul and MacArthur are considered spiritual Titans ?
correct: John a whole lot of people today don’t know who we are much less, care where they came from, and their-for, ignore the others as heretics or worse when we all came from the same two parents,Adam and Eve.
Thanks for this article and your responses to those commenting. I have had questions about this very topic, but never asked because I would get similar responses above. To be honest, I trusted what others said more than actually researching myself. I’m currently a PhD History student and it’s so crazy how I can relate to needing people to back up their stances with sources. I assumed studying to be approved only included the Bible. Plus, I was never encouraged to read other texts, outside of other biblical translations and study bibles. I really appreciate how you are transparent about everything. I’m definitely going to read the two authors you mentioned above. Could you recommend other theologians? Also, what is your take on the Apologetic Bible? Thank you.
B. Dix – Yes, many people formulate their beliefs, views, or understandings based upon trusting what other people have said, without taking the time to research a bit to verify what they have said. Often, as little as five minutes of doing a Google Search, or reading a Wikipedia Article is all that is needed to see that long-held assumptions about history, are in fact, totally wrong.
Historical facts are black-and-white and objective (like mathematics) in most cases. Theological understanding, however, is far more subjective (like art or music).
As you have asked for a list of Theological and Biblical / Church History reference books that we recommend, I am happy to provide you with that list. including direct-links to where they can each be purchased on Amazon. That list is found on our Pinterest Board, here: https://www.pinterest.com/GreatsiteDotCom/recommended-books-on-theology-church-history/
Also I will say, for the record, that my business partners and I are all Protestant, Evangelical, Conservative, Bible-Believing Christians.
– John Lawton Jeffcoat III
The Bible Museum
GREATSITE.COM
I think it’s all wrong I think all the books should be in the Bible it doesn’t matter the Bible is supposed to be left intact whatever books were written those should be in there God gives us a choice to believe or not to believe that is why God gave us free will people took the Bible back in the olden days and put in what they wanted to put in and left out things that they didn’t understand and to me that’s wrong it should be up to the individual Christian to determine whether it is right or wrong
Shawn: I agree with your opening statement, regarding the fact that the removal of these 14 Apocryphal Books just a century ago is “all wrong” as you said. You are correct.
However, your reasoning regarding the defense of that statement, (true, though it is), as you elaborate upon in the following sentences of your posting… is somewhat confused. In other words… I think you are right… but I don’t quite agree with your reasoning (free will, etc.) for the defense of your position. It’s not “up to the individual Christian to determine” which books should be in the Bible. If we did that… there would be many, many deferent claimed sets of canonical scripture… each appealing to a deferent Christian’s mindset and preferences.
Wow, I’m a Catholic and I loved this article, thank you John, Sometimes I like to give myself study time, as I work and don’t have much time, today I sat down at my computer and prayed that I read today, truth and understanding and prayed that God would give me what I needed to read etc. this article plus your video clip gave me insight, i am also a very logical person and the logic in all that you have said has been very apparent.
Thank you
Cherrie: Thanks for the positive feedback and the words of encouragement. If you would like to learn more about the history of God’s Word, just go to GREATSITE.COM and click on the green button at the top which says “English Bible History”.
John,
I am curious where you stand on the idea of Ideal Will vs. Permitted Will as it relates to changes made to the Bible.
For example, I often see Ideal vs. Permitted Will used in discussions of why God does not prevent murder, war, etc.
It would seem to contradict God’s “hands off” policy as it pertains to what is Ideal vs. what is Permitted for him to specifically exempt the Bible from changes, either well-intentioned or ill-intentioned, would it not?
Just trying to understand. For example, a co-worker and I disagree on the Biblical prohibitions on certain foods — he maintains that some foods are still unclean, whereas my Bible states that Jesus made all foods clean at some point. Those differences both being allowed to stand in a modern, published Bible would seem to make a big prescriptive difference.
Derek: That is a great question, and a very difficult one to answer. God’s Ideal Will versus his Permitted Will has kept theologians far more qualified and more published than I am, arguing for centuries! As this pertains to the removal of the 14 Apocryphal Books circa 1881 due primarily to the influence of liberal non-Christian textual critics Westcott & Hort… we must remember that this is not a unique occurrence of God’s Word SEEMINGLY not being preserved, when in fact it is.
It has “only” been 135 years that Protestant & Anglican Bibles have been without the Apocrypha. If we compare that to the approximately ONE THOUSAND years of the Dark Ages / Middle Ages from around 300-400 AD… up until around 1300-1400 AD, we see an entire millennia during which God’s Word SEEMED to be almost completely lost and completely unpreserved for posterity. During this 1,000 years, Bibles were only available in Latin, and only the most educated 1% of European Society (plus the Roman Catholic Priesthood) could read Latin… and even at that, the Latin had been corrupted and was no longer the accurate translation of Jerone.
Where was God’s Ideal Will during that 1,000 years that almost nobody could obtain a Bible that they could read?
I cannot answer this, except to say that God’s ways are not our ways, and God’s thoughts are not our thoughts, and the ways in which He moves and executes His plans for His Kingdom are mysterious to human minds.
Also, we have not lost the Apocrypha… nor is it virtually inaccessible to us today (as the entire scriptures were virtually inaccessible for the thousand years leading up to just before 1400 AD, and the onset of The Reformation and The Enlightenment). Anyone who wants a copy can easily obtain it.
Also, keep in mind… I am NOT claiming that The Apocrypha is inspired canon. Protestants have always debated the idea of Apocryphal Canonicity for centuries. I am merely pointing out the one simple and startling fact that The Apocrypha was part of 99% of printed Bibles (Protestant and Anglican Bibles… not just Catholic Bibles) all the way up until circa 1881. I am furthermore presenting the question: By what authority was it removed form the Bible?
On the unrelated topic of your “Judaizer” or “Theonomist” co-worker who is trying to impose Old Covenant Ceremonial dietary restrictions upon Christians… he is clearly wrong, and you are clearly right. God presented Peter, in a vision, with all manner of “unclean” foods, and told him “Arise Peter, kill and eat, and do not call anything I have made unclean”. That is not just a metaphor regarding sharing the Gospel with “unclean” Gentiles… it is also a literal command regarding food.
John, it would seem then that God’s distinction between Ideal and Permitted would be logically intact — although ideally people would have unfettered access to the Word throughout time, in reality, in a fallen world, there might be periods in which this access would be restricted/changed/removed and this would be Permitted because God does not interfere until the return of Christ, etc.
Your questions about why it was removed are interesting to me and have been since I was a boy in Lutheran Sunday School and somehow learned about the Apocrypha.
I would say that the depleted conditions of such original Bibles as the Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus would point as well to the “Permitted Will” being that sometimes things would get lost, garbled, or disappear along the way, and not be miraculously intervened and “fixed.”
With the contradictions in the Bible I have often grappled with the more Fundamentalist idea of “YOU HAVE TO BELIEVE EVERY WORD JUST AS IT’S WRITTEN OR YOU’LL BURN” vs. my more laid-back Lutheran background which was not so literalist. That, I think, was the genesis of my question.
Furthermore, as a final point to your comment about the unclean/clean foods — as an amateur foodie myself, when I overlay the list of “unclean” foods from the nomadic/Judaic period vs. foods that we know today require precise preparation to avoid potentially lethal consequences, it always made such beautiful sense to me that God, speaking to people who likely had little access to reliable ovens, etc., would caution them to stay away from the exact foods that we can eat today with impunity since we know about the various diseases that can be communicated by improper preparation. Further evidence to me of God’s great design. “Don’t eat these things because they are unclean” = literally, can make you sick. Further, advances in animal husbandry and vaccines have virtually eliminated things like trichinosis in pork which were of great concern for many thousands of years.
Derek: I do not believe that God has any “hands-off” or “non-interference” policy that He imposes upon Himself until Christ’s Return. That’s not my view. God is always 100% sovereign and 100% involved in His creation.
That being said, there is obviously some distinction between God’s Ideal Will (perfect righteousness and holiness) versus that which God willing to allow (evil, murders, wars, diseases, mentally retarded babies)… as quick look at the world can easily confirm. Trying to determine the exact nature of the dividing line between these two things is beyond human ability… it is among the secret things of God.
We should not come away from this discussion with any idea that God wants us to take a “laid-back” approach to His Word. We are to take His Word very seriously and seek to follow it precisely. That being said… of course every word in the Bible is not meant “literally”, as the scriptures to do make use of hyperbolic statements.
For example the Gospel’s statement: “I suppose the whole world would not be big enough to contain a transcript of all the miracles Jesus performed” … clearly is not literally true, as a minute-by-minute transcript of any 33-year-lifespan, (which is just 12,000 days), nicely bound in 12,000 volumes – a whole book for every day of the Lord’s earthly life, would fit neatly into the Library of Congress in Washington DC, with no need for the rest of the world’s storage space.
The Bible also uses metaphor that is not literal, such as a dragon with a tail so large that it could knock stars out of the sky… when we know stars are trillions of miles apart.
That being said… we must not confuse the idea that the Bible uses hyperbole and metaphor as library devices, with the unrelated and incorrect idea that the Bible’s commands are not to be taken literally or that we can have a “laid back” approach to God’s Word. That’s not right. Those are two unrelated observations.
John,
Yes, the Bible does use a lot of hyperbole and metaphor. I didn’t mean to say “laid back” referring to our obligation to attempt to follow God’s Word; rather, I felt growing up Lutheran a much more all-encompassing feeling of God’s love and message of HOPE as opposed to the more recent Fundamentalist messages. I have been privileged to know a number of Fundamentalists and they all seemed quite on-edge about the Bible and God vs. my own feelings about them which are very positive.
One example of this is the literalist interpretation of the Creation story. I see no problem with the concept that a “day” to God might not be 24 Earth hours, and that dinosaurs, etc., could have existed prior to man.
My Fundamentalist friends insist that Earth is EXACTLY 5,700 +/- years old, that man and dinosaurs walked together, and even in some cases I have read of folks who believe fossils were placed in the Earth by God to deceive the weak in faith as to the veracity and infallibility of the Bible.
I feel as though I have quite a personal relationship with God in a positive way. I could be wrong. My Fundamentalist friends always seem to come off as though God is a constantly ticked-off stepdad vs. a loving Father who wants the best for all his children.
Derek: Again, I am concerned that you may be equating two things which are legitimate observations in and of themselves independently… but they are not to be equated to each other, as though they were the same thing. Your “feelings” about God and the extent to which He is loving versus the extent to which He is wrathful and demanding of holiness are not to be equated with the degree to which one is flexible in their interpretation of scripture, literally or otherwise. Those are two unrelated things… each valid… but not the same discussion.
A “Fundamentalist” is one who believes in the fundamental teachings of scripture. Every true Christian is a “Fundamentalist”. I think what you are trying to identify or categorize is what is more accurately called a “Legalist” or a “Dogmatist”. These are the people who insist that the world is only 6,000 years old and insist that the 6 days of Creation must be six twenty-four-hour periods. These people are wrong in insisting that THEIR interpretation is the only legitimate or acceptable interpretation in these controversial matters. These people are also wrong in accusing all who disagree with their narrow-minded views of being “liberals” or “heretics” because they disagree with them. They are simply wrong in this behavior.
Specific to your example: the Bible absolutely does not state that the universe was created in six 24-hour-periods. It does leave that possibility open… it certainly could have happened that way… God is powerful enough to do it that way… but the Bible does not expressly state that this is the only way to interpret that. The Hebrew Word “Yom” does not always mean 24 hours. It can mean other things, like the “Day” of Judgement or the “Day” of Atonement… it is the same Hebrew word, “Yom” used in both contexts in scripture.
Also, just because you believe that the universe may be much older than 6,000 years, DOES NOT mean that you are there an ungodly evolutionist who thinks we all evolved from monkeys. Those again, and two unrelated arguments, which Legalists and Dogmatists like to lump together in their “Straw Man” arguments which are riddled with fallacies of logic, and a judgmental spirit. I share your rejection of these people’s behavior in this regard.
John, Again as has been the case through our discussion here you have the more expressive religious vocabulary; however, I have come to realize we are talking about the same thing. I am using the term “Fundamentalist” as the only term I know for what you have called “Legalists/Dogmatists.” Please forgive me for the misuse of the term. So, I think we’re on the same page there.
As regards to my statement about the loving vs. angry God, I don’t think I expressed it very well the first time. I guess what I am suggesting is that the Dogmatists tend to focus on the negative/wrathful God rather than the loving/savior God.
I shall never forget attending church with my ex-wife at her grandparents’ church, a Church of Christ, one Easter. Instead of a message of joy and absolute wonder at the sacrifice God had made in his Son Jesus on that day, the pastor chose to focus the entire lecture on sin, complete with an animated Powerpoint of a ship, labelled “sin,” sinking repeatedly for most of the sermon.
I left with the feeling that the forest was not being seen for the trees that day. Yes, God can absolutely be wrathful, as the Old Testament shows us to great effect. And yes, some focus does need to be made on sin, etc. But most of the Dogmatists I have known have been focused on the punishment, not the crime or how to be absolved from it, and I have always felt that the gift of Salvation and Grace was a more important takeaway message.
The other observation I have made about most of the Dogmatists I’ve known is that they seem focused in a very childlike way on condemning others as a way of making themselves look good, while completely missing the message of how to “love others as Christ loved us.”
A great example is an old boss of mine in college who, (usually just as you were clocking out for the night) would present you with a no-win question: “If you died tonight, would you go to Heaven or Hell?”
I tried both answers and found that neither was satisfactory. If you said “I’m saved, I’d go to Heaven, I’m pretty sure,” he’d launch into a lecture about how no one but God knows if we’re saved, and how no one is righteous, no one deserves Grace, etc., etc. This would usually take you well past 1/2 hour of unpaid time at work after you were supposed to have left, LOL.
If you suggested that you thought you might go to Hell, you’d get almost the same lecture, except with the caveat that you needed to get saved, since time was running out.
My point there being: We didn’t have those kinds of discussion in church when I was younger. We had a fantastic pastor who had been to the Holy Land numerous times; who could read Greek and Hebrew and Aramaic; and who was interested in bringing you closer to God and his Word while enveloped in a climate of love, rather than fear. Yes, we discussed Hell and punishment etc., but the focus was definitely one of love and joy vs. fire and brimstone.
Your observation concerning how many religious people,
“seem focused in a very childlike way on condemning others as a way of making themselves look good” is a theme discussed in the New Testament as well. These people were referred to as “Pharisees” … very legalistic and religious people, and they are very strongly condemned in the scripture.
There are two extreme views, both of which are wrong, regarding one’s personal behavior as a Christian:
One extreme is called “Legalism”, and it obsesses over works and lists of things you are permitted to do and things you are not permitted to do and following very narrow interpretations of scripture with absolutely no allowance for deviating from those interpretations even slightly. Stereotypically, we often see some “old-school” Baptist, Charismatic / Pentecostal, and Non-Denominational Churches in very rural and under-educated areas of the South-Eastern USA filled with people who adopt this view. It masquerades as “faith” but it is actually just a lack of intellect and a lack of proper contextual scriptural understanding, coupled with a very black-and-white “us versus them” world view.
The other extreme is called “Antinomianism”, and it teaches that personal morality is not really important to God, as long as you don’t commit murder, rape, theft, or other crimes that are directly injuring to your neighbors. Antinomianism is an “anything goes” or “live and let live”, pro-abortion, pro-gay, kind of apostate view that is often found in very liberal churches, such as: United Methodist, PCUSA (not PCA or OPC) Presbyterian, ELCA (not MO Synod) Lutheran, Episcopalian, and also some non-denominational churches with trendy hip “seeker sensitive” marketing names like “The Rock Fellowship” or “Sunrise Church”, etc.
Keep in mind, what I am saying is stereotypical, and is not indicative of these churches 100% of the time… though it is true the vast majority of the time.
This is another interesting topic of discussion, and I thoroughly enjoy spiritually intellectual discussion concerning God, doctrines and believers opinions. As an educated southerner, a bible thumping Appalachian descendant, I have searched the identity of self , God and my identity and purpose within God and unto the world. The Apostle Paul addressed this scenario by his preaching goal to save others, some by fear, some by love. The identity of God’s severity to cut off branches that were engrafted into the Church, Romans, if they discontinue their belief is not a popular doctrine , as is true for His severity to blot out the names of those written in the lambs book of life for adding or taking away from the book of prophecy, and His judgments upon believers revealed in Revelation chapters two and three . The goodness tho, of God’s love is a daily continuance of ” dying ” and renewal , thus the Apostles continual pronouncement of His identity in Christ as Paul, not Saul which he performed daily. Our continuance of remembering whence we are fallen to stay in the Spirit of love til Jesus returns is our responsibility and to do so is wise( hearing and doing ) and is an example of love ( he that loves me is he that has my commandments and does them ) by which all men may know that we are His disciples . The Apostle clearly states that he continually presses forward to apprehend whom He is apprehended by , but is never boastful due to his many you revelations which he received to rest on his spiritual laurels but rather to remain in the fear of the Lord. A day, like God, is a circle of time which we are to look unto as we run the race of Life. God was/ is that perfect day which we have been provided to rest within His live, Jesus, and daily obtain mercy and grace to attain .. By our faith … which works by love … Which must go thru patience… Which works tribulation …. Experience… Before we attain exceeding great and precious promises to escape ( current troubles ) and eventually the blessed hope of eternal salvation. So bible thumping is commendable if needed, but should always go hand in hand with the message of grace , mercy and loving continuance in well doing to God and others…. Balance, stability is a must to arise, to stand and to walk naturally as well as spiritually . A two edged sword, we carry, merciful, correcting faith and love, and warnings of God’ wrath unto believers and unto unbelievers…. The goodness of God and His severity imho
Mr Jeffcoat, Antinomianism in the circle of which you describe points to me as an unbelieving presbyterian. The Lord Jesus has the most “narrow interpretations” (Ye MUST be born again). Our growth spurts after one is born again (You’re born rotten the 1st time!) will allow an “us vs them” as with THE LORD it is always an heart issue, wot? 🙂 We all go thru phariseeism – it all falls down to “do you believe my word or not?” (& in steps the yea hath God said society.) For me; sometimes yes, sometimes no. The antinom’s i have met are amoung the hyper-dispensationalist who teach that only the prison epistles are for the church. As to the legalists I’ve met; the calvinist who is really an arminian. (Work, work, work.)
Enjoying the banter.
Here’s my thoughts concerning Christ’s “narrow interpretations”… Christ was either the Son of God, or a brilliant lunatic. Christ is either all right, or all wrong. If he is was a lunatic, there would be many holes in His story. Jesus was predicted by the Old Testament, and fulfilled many predictions, not some. I remember the first time I read the words of the song “Amazing Grace,” I had a very bad reaction. However, after offering my life to His will, I realized what is truly meant by “Born Again.” Think about when you were a child taking instruction from someone who was attempting to educate you on your future mind set. As you became older, you’re perspective changed. Looking back with wisdom you understand.
That is what it is like to be born again. Things I reasoned as moral or common practice are not detestable and sinful. Christ changed me from the inside, I think more according to His word. The old me is no longer acceptable. The Lord’s prayer is how Christ taught us to pray… Your will be done! Very powerful. If you’re willing to take the journey with you heart attached to reason, be prepared for change to the point of a new you – Reborn!
God Bless
Abbie: Amen!
There is a sense in which we must remain “narrow” in our stand on Biblical principles, in a world where all manner of bad theology abounds. Indeed, narrow is the way that leads unto eternal life. In many liberal circles, simply believing in the miracle of the virgin birth, or believing that Jesus Christ is fully God and fully Man is too much for them… and as Christians we must stand firm, unwavering, and “narrow” on such basic tenants of our faith.
The extreme of being “too narrow” is manifested in the legalism of groups that, for example, insist that if you don’t believe the six days of Creation were 24-hour days… or if you baptize people by pouring water over their head rather than submerging them under water… or if your eschatological beliefs regarding “end time” events differ from their group’s favored position… that you are in danger of eternal hell fire for diverging from their group’s narrow doctrinal statements.
The worst example that I see very often is the KJV-Only Cult which actually teaches that if you read any translation other than the KJV you are not a true Christian. They even teach that people who don’t speak or read English (the majority of the world) must have their Bibles translated not from the original Biblical tongues, but rather, from the 1611 King James English Version – into their native tongue… or else they are not true Christians. This type of bigotry, ignorance, and indeed… insanity… is the narrowness which all Christians should condemn as being legalistic dogmatism.
Saint Augustine said: “In the essentials of the faith we must have unity. In the non-essentials we must have liberty. In all things we must have charity”. That’s great advice, but of course the only problem with trying to follow that advice is that we cannot all seem to agree on what exactly “the essentials of the faith” are. People whose list of “essentials” is too short are antinomians and liberals and heretics. People whose list of “essentials” is too long are dogmatic legalists like the Pharisees of old.
I am so glad I stumbled upon this article because, being a fairly new Christian, my ignorance has made me very gullible. I was told, by a non-christian, that there were books taken out of the Bible and that I should do my research. I went on Amazon and ordered “The Lost Books of the Bible Great Rejected Texts by Joseph B. Lumpkin.” After reading the “First Book of Adam and Eve”, and preparing to read the “Second Book of Adam and Eve” there was an inserted page saying: Like the First Book of Adam and Eve, the second book is also a part of the “Pseudepigrapha”, which is a collection of historical biblical works that are considered to be fiction. WHAT? My question to you is, does this mean the book I purchased with all these missing books of Enoch, Jubiliees, Jasper etc. are false books? And should I purchase a Geneva Bible?
Thank you for your consideration.
Raaxi Shah: This can be confusing for anyone. There are different types of “Apocrypha” or “Pseudepigrapha” or “Deutero-Canonical” ancient books. They are not all in the same category. They are not all equally respected.
The “Lost Books of the Bible” and “Rejected Texts” are generally NOT reliable books, and NOT to be considered seriously be Christians. These are mostly books that were TOTALY REJECTED by all the early Christian Churches nearly 2,000 years ago, and they often contain material that contradicts canonical scripture, and NO Christian denomination anywhere today accepts any of these books as being Biblical.
In stark contrast to that, the regular “Apocrypha” contains books that were ACCEPTED AND EMBRACED as part of the Jewish Bible and part of the Christian Bible, for thousands of years… all the way up until 1881, when they were removed… just 135 years ago.
If you would like to see which books are part of the regular and accepted Apocrypha… just go to:
BIBLES-ONLINE.NET
and click to view the 1611 King James Bible, or ANY of the older English Bibles of the 1500’s… ALL of which contained the regular Apocrypha, which you can view quickly on their “Table of Contents” page if you just want a list of the names of the Apocrypha Books, and then you can actually read the full text of the scripture there on that same website, if you wish.
To answer your second question… yes, you can buy an affordable copy of the 1560 Geneva Bible or the 1611 King James Bible WITH THE APOCRYPHA as they were both originally printed with the Apocrypha. We offer these two books very affordably (under $100 each) at GREATSITE.COM if you go there and click on “Facsimile Reproductions”, and then scroll down and select the Bible of your choice from the list of a dozen ancient Bibles available there.
While you are there, I would recommend also reading the “English Bible History” page of GREATSITE.COM to give yourself a good general background on how we got God’s Word in the English Language.
Thank you so much John Lawton Jeffcoat III for your incredible knowledge and helpful recommendations on this subject. I will be visiting both websites you suggested, and will read the “English Bible History.”
Should I have other questions (and am sure I will) may I contact you and/or your business partner(s) on your website?
Thank you again for clarification.
God Bless.
Raaxi Shah: Yes, you may feel free to contact me via the “Contact Us” page of our Bible Museum website at GREATSITE.COM
You will find my direct email and telephone listed there.
John Lawton Jeffcoat III
The Bible Museum
GREATSITE.COM
John,
I saw the site you recommended. Could you please recommend one Bible with the Apocrypha still in it please? Also, are there any bibles with the Apocrypha and the non-canonical gospels (Thomas, etc)? Thanks,
hello john, 1. THE BIBLE IS THE INSPIRED WORD OF GOD …..2 TIM, 3;16 2. IN YOUR OPENING STATEMENT, IT SAYS AND TO BE CLEAR, JOHN IS NOT SAYING THAT THE APOCRYPHA IS THE INSPIRED WORD OF GOD….YOU ARE RIGHT. IT HAS NO PLACE IN HOLY SCRIPTURE…..3. BECAUSE IT WAS WRITTEN BY JEWISH SCRIBES OF THE DAY…..BUT NOT INSPIRED BY GOD,SO IT HAS NO PLACE IN SCRIPTURE….4. WE DO KNOW THE OLD TESTAMENT WAS WRITTEN BY THE PROPHETS, LED BY THE HOLY SPIRIT….5. AND IN THE NEW TESTAMENT THE HOLY SPIRIT CAME UPON THE DISCIPLES TO WRITE…..THIS IS WHY THE HOLY BIBLE IS CALLED THE HOLY BIBLE….6.GOD TOLD JOHN IN REVELATIONS TO WRITE DOWN WHAT HE SEES IN REV. 1;11……GOD IS IN CONTROL OF HIS HOLY BOOK NOT MAN…..PLEASE MAKE SURE THE PEOPLE YOU ARE TALKING TO KNOW THAT YOU AGREE WITH ME, THAT THE APOCRYPHA, IS NOT THE INSPIRED WORD OF GOD….AND DOES NOT BELONG IN THE HOLY BIBLE……THANK YOU.
This has been an interesting read and I did not know of the extra scriptures so thankyou for the history lesson as to when they were written and when they were removed. I wonder if these extra books are available to study online ?
In my personal opinion, the new testament sums up quite clearly how a christian should live a worthy and acceptable life, but I am presently studying the old tester -ment scriptures and in particular Jerimiah through to Eizakel.The scripture mentions on more than one occasion about false prophets claiming to say the word of God but leading the people astray such as worshiping false idol worship. It therefore stands to reason that God has a very clear message about what is acceptable and whats not acceptable in his sight. The peoples were not punished for hearing what was told them but for acting a pon what they were told…why then did they not listen to Jerimiah ? Perhaps there was some material promise from the fault prophets. My point being that if we understand the message of the bible we should be able to get the jist of what is God’s word and what is not. The people of those times did not have as much hindsight as we do. Could it be that when they removed these books they did so with hindsight ? I don’t know personally what should or shouldn’t have been removed without reading…discriptive and prescription method as well as the overall tone of the bible…let’s face it, mortal man needs it drumming in in God’s view ! without reading such seemingly elusive scripts.
We are invited to test the scriptures as told us in the new testament. ..that is all the scriptures and one can ask the Lord to guide us in our reading and let’s do it in a good christian spirit 😊
Great article.me ND my mother been debating this for the longest but it’s hard to explain when I don’t know all the details.. this was definitely helpful.. I got some good points to show my mom..😃
Comment: WHY SHOULD SOME BOOKS BE REMOVED FROM THE BIBLE. JESUS DID NOT ASK ANYBODY TO REMOVE EITHER. THAT IS WHY HE STATED IN REV. 22: 18-19; THOU SHALL NOT ADD NOR SUBTRACT. THOSE THAT DOES THESE HAVOC TO CHRISTIANS ARE NOT SINCERE. PLS. FULL BI
Hello
Having never read the books of the apocrypha, I have a few questions;
Do they contain any aspect of Gods character or revelation that cannot be gleaned from the 66 book canon?
Do you believe that there was some dark & nefarious conspiratorial reason why Westcott & Hort removed them, or was it just clerical incompetence?
I have a personal interest in the study of the race of Giants/Nephilim, fallen angels tampering & mixing with human DNA and the possible connection with biblical prophetic & eschatological texts as well as the possible explanation (not that God has to be forthcoming with an explanation)of Gods judgment of doom on the antediluvian world (corrupted DNA) do the apocryphal books shed any light on these aspects?
Thanks, Simon.
Those books certainly weren’t thrown out by those two men but by the Holy Council. The Holy Council took many hours, days and months analyzing all books, each and every letter, every word, every historical event, every character in order to decide what books to keep and what books to throw out, it wasn’t an easy task at all. As i said, those books were thrown out because they contained sorcery, spiritism, prayers to the angels and saints instead of God and Jesus, Gnostic gospels and because the inaccuracy of historical events. I hope you get it now. This goes out to Muslims as well who keep saying that Bible has been tampered with, no and never, the Bible was never tampered with, throwing out false and heretical gospels isn’t tampering but cleansing. Imagine what it’s like to gather many Holy texts in one place, surely you won’t take them all, you can’t do that, first you gotta analyze which ones are true and which ones are false and throw them out. The Bible is crystal clean as a result of that
Was reading 1 Efdras and read some interesting discussion regarding what is the strongest. 3 men offered the answer. One answered wine. The next offered the king and the next said women, but also truth. I will offer it in quote, “womrn are the strongest, but aboue all things trueth beareth away the victory.” this is ch. 3 verse 12. Chapter 3 supports this view with great wisdom and dtail. I found it quite insightful. And this is only the first book of the apocryphal.:
Males might object to women being the strongest, but it explains this as in a woman’ s charms. Think king solomon and how his many wives weakened him. This just supported other passages and gave more ideas to think about. It ends in expressing the strength of truth. And when you think about it, it is truth that has power over evil. The truth sets us free over evil, etc. Yep, i think the apocryphal teachings may just have some merit. My Jewish friend Lou says they removed the apocryphal because they were too Jewish. He may have a point there to consider.
People, there is a reason those books were thrown out. They are either historically inaccurate, they don’t fit well into God’s Plan, or they contain heretical teachings. For example, there are parts which encourage spiritism (strictly forbidden by God) and prayers for the dead. And there are many more reasons. But I am gonna read those books anyway, simply because I have read The Bible and now I am bored without it, heheh, there’s nothing more to read, I’ve completed the mission, of course I’ll stay true to the Biblical teachings, nothing’s gonna change.
Nice article John! I finally found someone in the protestant/evangelical world that has the same concern than me and spent sometime thinking about it, if we are supposedly the Sola Scriptura people, we should investigate this matter with utmost respect, but, it seems to me that people have their own prejudices and versions of history and refuse to talk about it honestly.
What disturbs me also is that the scholars took so long to come to this decision… 1890. Wow. Before that, no one was spiritual enough to realize the evil in these books? Why didnt the Jews, our true spiritual Fathers, throw them out centuries before? Dang, so glad we could teach them a thing or two. 😄
Scripture was not canonized until the Second Council of Carthage in A.D. 398. They, by Spirit-led consensus, used the canonical list of St. Athanasius the Great (defender of Trinitarian Orthodoxy against Arianism). That list went basically unchallenged until Luther referred to the deuterocanonical list (Apocrypha to most Protestants) and a few New Testament books as having the quality of straw. Even then, they remained in Scripture until modern times.
Some make the argument that the deuterocanonical books aren’t in the Masoretic texts. That’s true, but they are in much older Hebrew texts that have recently been uncovered at Qumran and elsewhere. Their frequent quotation by Fathers of the Church testify to their acceptance among the Christians of the Apostolic and sub-Apostolic ages, too.
Must be careful about “spirit led”, which spirit? Test every spirit! That means I have examined these forbidden rejected books. Many are quoted within the accepted “cannonized” text. Just sayin…..
In light of a recent archeological find in Ethiopia, which carbon dated a Bible with 88 books to around the late 4th century I find this article necessary to discuss. Who had the authority to remove these books from what we as Orthodox call big “T” tradition? What does the Church Fathers (not Calvin and Luther) say about the books in Scripture and why did they call it all scripture.
There are some great discussions regarding these topics going on at orthodoxbridge.com
Thanks for a thoughtful post.
Travis, thanks for the quality link. Always nice to see how the conversation is happening elsewhere. (from the editor)
I will offer this link as a resource to the discussion: http://www.theorthodoxfaith.com/the-so-called-apocrypha/
Man removed it from the written Word of God but it never disappeared. Those who seek Him will eventially find it like manny of us here. The Word can only be studied accedemically but only come to life through the Holy spirit that dwells in us. He knows the whole Word and will break it open to those who seek after our devine trinity God.
God is not trinity or triune. Look at the youtube channel RestoredCOG relating to the trinity. Godbless
And in Hebrew manuscripts Holy Spirit or Ruach HaKodesh is female. Just sayin….Read about Wisdom in Proverbs… Referred to as “she” for example, plus many other references.
Reguardless of what reason the books were removed the truth remains. With the spirit of God, given freely to those who love and fear Him, much will be revealed. If anyone believes they are capable of understanding Gods awesome ways and ultimate plan they are deceived already. We are given scripture to study, that we may establish a relationship, and gain a clear understanding of his plan for us. Thinking in terms that man establishes leads us further away from truth (Jesus). I suggest checking out the youtube channel titled the RestoredCOG. Mr.Peck is very well learned and understandable.
After reading this interview and some of the comments, something comes to mind. Mind you I have not read any of the apocrypha books or had ever even looked into this matter, but would be interested to read just out of curiosity. I know the main question is by what authority were these books removed from the bible. The question that comes to mind is by what authority were they added in the first place, having known that the Hebrews did not consider them as part of Scripture. Maybe it was not God’s plan for it to be added as part of the Bible and men whoever they were made a huge mistake adding it, and took quite long to remove it. Maybe I’ll read it at some point, maybe not, but I rather stay with my bible as it is now as it is enough to last me my entire lifetime as I continue to read it over and over and God continues to reveal amazing new things over and over as time goes by. IF there is anything missing in the Holy Bible as it is now, I know my God is sovereign and loving and will fill those “missing” revelations into my life. God bless!
Interesting… Let me give you an example of why other books are important to consider… You have to agree that Enoch is an important person in Scripture? Yet, there is little said about this important man so special that he was taken up to the throne room alive! There are books about him. As a child I had a deep desire to know why he did not have to experience death. What made him special? When I found there were books written about him I was thrilled. In these books you learn about the Watchers and more about why Yahweh sent the flood and more about our Messiah. It is an amazing book! And the books of Jubilee and Jasher there is more historical information. We have 4 Gospels. Why not more books with more information to help us understand more accurately and clearly? Just sayin …. again…..
My son is 13 and a total history nerd(used in good fun). I just purchased him a copy of the 1611 from amazon. So excited to give it to him on Christmas. I was excited to see the Apcropha books in it. As a (not going to tell my age) woman, raised Southern baptist later joined non-denominational. I was appalled that at not only are these books completely left out but that outside of independent research (reading & documenties) I didn’t know these books exsisted. I knew of the catholic version and then of course Dead Sea scrolls. I feel like this should be an open discussion among anyone that is a Christian of any denomination. As I have told my son, we are always learning. I’ve given you your foundation and a place for your faith and I’m always here for counseling or debate but you must pray, read, study, pray some more, then you find where God leads your heart. No one has all the right answers. Not me a pastor, a priest. We must invite God to give us his wisdom and have faith. With that said I’m so excited to read these books. It will be interesting I believe.
I Believe As You Do John, As We Allowed Evil / Anti-Christ Men To Take The 14 Apocrypha Books Out Of Our American Bibles; We Were The Greatest & Strongest Nation In The World & When We Allowed 2 Evil Men To Change God’s Holy Bible For Us American Gentiles, It Became & Is Becoming A Testament / Historical Apocrypha Of Our Nation & Gives Men Everywhere A Plain & Clear View Why America Is Falling From God’s Goodness & Jesus’ Amazing Grace! Because We Stood By Complicate & Allowed 2 Anti-Christ Type Men To Do This Ungodly Act, Unto All Gentiles! This Is The Very Reason We: America & All Other Gentiles Nations Are Falling!
Where Can I Purchase A King James Bile With: God’s Old Testament, Jew’s Historical Apocrypha & Jesus’ New Testament, In The Same Bible? Does The 1679 King James Have All 3 In It?
I don’t refer to myself as gentile. I am part of Israel spiritually. We must leave Babylon and Egypt and become a child of Yahweh. The Torah is the foundation of our Judea Christian Beliefs. When you make the Torah your root of beliefs, you move into the same belief system as the early Disciples, as they moved into receiving Messiah as their Savior. The Church added paganism into the church, like changing our worship day to Sunday… thanks to Constantine, the sun worshiper who converted to Christianity on his death bed… Christians compromised by blending Christianity and false gods and created Christmas and Easter. Yahweh established Festivals and Holy Days in the Scriptures. We need to sit at His feet and restore these holidays back, as He said they were supposed to be observed forever and prophesies state they shall be celebrated in the 1,000 year reign! <3
The apocrypha was removed from the bible circa 400 a.d. at the Council of Nicea. Ostensibly to unify the edicts of Christianity.
Your headline is so wrong that I didn’t read the rest of your piece, so if you’re referring to something other than the “lost” gospels (Thomas, Mary Magdalen, etc.), apologies.
Our apologies for this error in the headline. That should have been caught. I’ve corrected it and made an editorial note at the bottom of the article noting the error and correction.
I just searching for the lost books of Bible as I got quench to know more about our God and the Bible, your article on this subject made me to understand more on this subject. Thank you.
thers are more books i think its 88 in the count Abrahams books 123 rd macabees Enoch books
The tribe of Hebrew Judah is NOT Khazar Ashkenazi modern Jew’s today.
Revelation 2:9 & 3:9 & John 8:44 said by Jesus & told us that.
Revelation 2:9 9I know your afflictions and your poverty-yet you are rich! I know about the slander of those who say they are Jews and are not, but are a synagogue of Satan.
As well, the modern Khazar Ashkenazi Jew’s are part of the NWO / Synagogue of Satan / the Beast ! The current Holy Bible have been corrupted. Research about Scofield, Darby, & the Oxford Press, none of those are “Holy” at all ! We need to find the original Hebrew, Aramaic, & the Greek scripts to find the Real Truth.
Also, Constantine 300 AD was in control & the Rome dynasty was over 1250 yrs. You don’t think that they influenced the Christianity over those hundreds of years ?? I read that He used the “current” Holy Bible with less than 20% of those. None of the rest was “cannonized”.
We Do need to research all of the “scribes” of the history, pro & con, but every war, only “Victor’s write History”.
forget the corrupted bible,just cosentrade on the Gospel (the Good News)that Jesus Christ has preach in 1 Cor. 3:16-17
Confusion about the Kingdom of God ? Not anymore.
John 12:49-50 Where did Christ’s message originate? They know Jesus preached a “gospel”— which comes from the Old English godspel , meaning “good news” or “good message”—but what is that message?
It’s clear from the Scriptures that Jesus’ teaching focused on the Kingdom of God.
And this Gospel of the kingdom,…. Which Christ himself preached, Jesus spoke only what His Father in heaven told Him to speak!
Christ said God the Father sent Him to proclaim this specific message (the Kingdom)
John 7:16 “My teaching is not My own,” Jesus replied. “It comes from Him who sent Me.
John 6:38
For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but to do the will of Him who sent Me.
As Luke recorded, in Luke 11:2 And he said unto them, When ye pray, say, Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so in earth. Now then, here we clearly asking God to have the Kingdom come here on earth.
Before Jesus Christ dead, He left The “Gospel” (the Good News of the Kingdom) at the Corinthians Congregation for them to continue to preach it to the world.
Read this verses from your own Bible: ( This is the Gospel ) Check this out.
1 Corinthians 3:16-17 16 Do you not know that you are a temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwells in you? 17 If any man destroys the temple of God, God will destroy him, for the temple of God is holy, and that is what you are. and
1 Corinthians 6:19 -20 19 Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and that you are not your own? 20 For you have been bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body.
Hebr 3:6 but Christ was faithful as a Son over His house—whose house we are, if we hold fast our confidence and the boast of our hope firm until the end.
If we are Gods Church and also His dwelling place, why should we go and insult Him (GOD) by going to another counterfeit Church Temple, Tabernacle, TV evangelists including your own or any place of worship ???
Has anyone ever told you about any of these verses? Almost certainly not. Yet, they are basic, and have been in the Bible for thousands of years!
Religions have misled us long enough
Jeremiah 14:14 Then the LORD said to me, “The prophets are prophesying lies in my name. I have not sent them or appointed them or spoken to them. They are prophesying to you false visions, divinations, idolatries and the delusions of their own minds.
Philippians 3:19 Their end is destruction, their god is their belly, and their glory is in their shame. Their minds are set on earthly things. ( Money ) In their greed they will make up clever lies to get hold of your money. But God condemned them long ago, and their destruction will not be delayed. These men are discontented grumblers, following after their own lusts; their mouths spew arrogance; they flatter others for their own advantage.
Hebrews 3:6 But Christ is faithful over God’s house as a son. And we are his house if indeed we hold fast our confidence and our boasting in our hope.
Romans 8:11 If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit who dwells in you. ( this strong statement is not to take it lightly to all who will heed )
1 John 4:13 And God has given us his Spirit as proof that we live in him and he in us.
This is a treason ?
*The most deadly danger facing anyone today is to insult the Spirit of God by refusing obedience to His conviction.
*I’ll tell you why: because the Holy Spirit is the only way God can reach an individual. There is no other way for God to save a person except through the Holy Spirit.
When any one hears the word of the kingdom and does not and will not understand it, the evil one comes and takes away the seed sown in his heart. And satan will control your life.
Make yourself understand that these are things God says HE will do.
The reader is left to decide whether he believes God, or the ministers of any religion. When anyone turns a deaf ear to the word of God, God will ‘give up’ on him and allow the devil to control his life.
If we fail to understand His central message, we will fail to grasp the whole point of His teachings, the reason for His coming and why He promises to come again to earth.
These are not fables , but Divine commands.
* Colossians 2:8 See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.
Proverbs 28:9 If one turns away his ear from hearing the law, even his prayer is an abomination.
Deuteronomy 18:19 And whoever will not listen to my words that he shall speak in my name, I myself will require it of him. [That means me ]
Please copy this and share it with your love ones and friends.
When correctly understood,This is a responsibility not to be taken lightly..
Who were the wildly liberal critics that Westcott and Holt folded to under their pressure? Was it the religious leaders of the times?
The 1881 book extractions should have been known to’ all Christians and there should have been a learned debate especially given the warnings in scripture about tampering with the same. Darwinism was in the ascendent and we may have been back pedaling against the critique of that age but surely it must be our own brothers and sisters inspired by the Holy Spirit that are at the cutting edge for addressing reliability and validity. Meanwhile the Ethiopian Church has 90 books not 66 or 73. The best way to pray for the dead is to be united to Christ’s redemptive work on our faith journey with all of the sentient beings that we must engage. May we sort the scripture and the non live it.
And then live it
Why when there wqere so many scholars at the time of christ did no one choose to write about him? It seems a little odd that this should happen and that we need to use books written years after his supposed death. We cannot not pass a simple phrase around a room of ten people how could these stories be passed down for hundreds of years and not be changed in this time frame.
I feel we should have a choice whether or not we own a bible with the 80 original books or the current 66 books of the bible. We have the choice of believing in Christ or not, so what is the problem. Is the NWO scared that we might get more truth in those 14 missing books?
I believe the Words of God are inspired through the Holy Spirit.
There are plenty of instances in the written word of the 66 books that are not inspired the author is giving reasons for traveling to another region, or is talking about certain individuals in light of certain activities, that is more like journal writing. But it is very clear when the words are inspired.
My concern has always been that when the canon decided in 325AD what is and what is not inspired and “belongs” in a bible how did they know?? If they themselves were not spirit filled how would they know?? There was a lot of secular Roman influence at the time which is extremely disturbing.
There were several false gospels or writings by jewish zealots trying to defame the apostles and Jesus. Those would be easy to through out but books like Enoch i’m not so sure. Someday this will all be understood, but sure would be nice to be aware of it now.
Other than jewish zealots defaming the Gospel it would seem like another way of throwing out certain books like Jubilees is the source of the message….angels. We know there are angels of light that are actually fallen angels. Therefore none can be counted trustworthy at the level of the Holy Spirit inspired words.
I recently purchased “The Founders’ Bible.” It has many interesting and wonderful essays by historian, David Barton. In The Founder’s Bible I learned that the Apocrypha was included every major Bible by a Protestant Reformer. Learning from David Barton how the Bible influenced the Founders of the United States has been very inspiring! But perhaps if the Apocrypha (with historical commentary) was included in “The Founders’ Bible” I would understand the framers of our country on an additional level.
I am speculating that George Washington, John Adams and most, if not all, of our founders were familiar with the Apocrypha. I supect the Apocrypha was included in their Bibles (Catholic Charles Carroll included) and I am wondering how the Apocrypha could have informed their decisions during the onset of the American Revolution!!