The apocrypha used to be used centuries ago. Interesting stuff for sure. I got questions. Did God hide it from us for a while or did man try to get rid of it for his own lustful purposes? Or was it something Satan wanted to hide from man? Why did Constantine take it out ? And why is it back again? Why are so many questioning the validity or lack thereof? Anybody else got questions about the apocrypha and Nag Hamadi, dead sea scrolls etc? Any theories?
Apocrypha .centuries ago] Used to be used . what changed?
- Thread starter Het
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
If you read the book of Enoch (which is part of the Apocrypha) you will notice man sins against fish, birds, reptiles, and plants.
Prior to the 21st century, the concept would be that this sinning was sexual in nature.
Today, however, we can see this sin referrring to genetic modification.
Additionally, the book of Enoch describes giants being 3000 ells in stature who after consuming all mankind has to produce, then turns on man and starts to consume mankind.
An ell being approximately 2 ft. in length, 3 ells is then approximately 6 feet, about an average human height.
3000 ells would therefore be equal to about 1000 humans in stature.
Today we call some people giants in industry who earn 1000 times what an average individual earns, and who are therefore considered being 1000 times greater in stature.
In Revelation chapter 9, there comes a point when the earth due to the system of the beast can no longer provide sustenance to all mankind. The worlds leaders (its giants) are then influenced to initiate a global genocide that will claim the lives of 1/3 of earths populace. This is the consumption of mankind by the giants spoken of in the book of Enoch.
You can see, however, how someone back in the sixteenth century would have seen the giants as being a literal 6000 feet tall, and therefore dismissed the book of Enoch as fantasy.
Prior to the 21st century, the concept would be that this sinning was sexual in nature.
Today, however, we can see this sin referrring to genetic modification.
Additionally, the book of Enoch describes giants being 3000 ells in stature who after consuming all mankind has to produce, then turns on man and starts to consume mankind.
An ell being approximately 2 ft. in length, 3 ells is then approximately 6 feet, about an average human height.
3000 ells would therefore be equal to about 1000 humans in stature.
Today we call some people giants in industry who earn 1000 times what an average individual earns, and who are therefore considered being 1000 times greater in stature.
In Revelation chapter 9, there comes a point when the earth due to the system of the beast can no longer provide sustenance to all mankind. The worlds leaders (its giants) are then influenced to initiate a global genocide that will claim the lives of 1/3 of earths populace. This is the consumption of mankind by the giants spoken of in the book of Enoch.
You can see, however, how someone back in the sixteenth century would have seen the giants as being a literal 6000 feet tall, and therefore dismissed the book of Enoch as fantasy.
Can you sort out your question a little?
1. Deuterocanonical books (like Sirach or Wisdom of Salomon or Suzanna) are not apocrypha and are continuously used by the majority of Christianity.
They were only removed from some protestant Bibles in 19th century.
2. Apocrypha (books never used by church) like the Gospel of Thomas are not connected to Christianity in any way.
3. Dead Sea Scrolls are writings collected by early Jewish sects, they are not connected to Christianity.
They are relevant for Christianity, because some Old Testament books are also there, so that we can compare how our Old testament text changed or did not change over centuries.
1. Deuterocanonical books (like Sirach or Wisdom of Salomon or Suzanna) are not apocrypha and are continuously used by the majority of Christianity.
They were only removed from some protestant Bibles in 19th century.
2. Apocrypha (books never used by church) like the Gospel of Thomas are not connected to Christianity in any way.
3. Dead Sea Scrolls are writings collected by early Jewish sects, they are not connected to Christianity.
They are relevant for Christianity, because some Old Testament books are also there, so that we can compare how our Old testament text changed or did not change over centuries.
You probably mean deuterocanonical books, not apocrypha.
How did you get such idea?
"For the prophet speaks against Israel, themselves, saying, Let us bind the just one, because he is displeasing to us." (Wisdom 2:12)
Epistle of Barnabas (70-90 ad)
Clement of Alexandria (150-200) quotes Sirach, Tobit and Baruch as Scripture.
Tertullian (160-230) quotes Wisdom and Baruch as Scriptures.
Athanasius (300-370) quotes Wisdom.
Augustin explicitly names the book of canon and includes all deuterocanonical books.
etc, etc.
Reformers as Luther, Calvin, Komenský, Hus and others quoted deuterocanonical books as Scripture.
---
British Bible society decided in 19th century that they will not publish these books anymore, thats why the English speaking world does not have them in printed Bibles.
How did you get such idea?
"For the prophet speaks against Israel, themselves, saying, Let us bind the just one, because he is displeasing to us." (Wisdom 2:12)
Epistle of Barnabas (70-90 ad)
Clement of Alexandria (150-200) quotes Sirach, Tobit and Baruch as Scripture.
Tertullian (160-230) quotes Wisdom and Baruch as Scriptures.
Athanasius (300-370) quotes Wisdom.
Augustin explicitly names the book of canon and includes all deuterocanonical books.
etc, etc.
Reformers as Luther, Calvin, Komenský, Hus and others quoted deuterocanonical books as Scripture.
---
British Bible society decided in 19th century that they will not publish these books anymore, thats why the English speaking world does not have them in printed Bibles.
Special as in that which rises above other portions of scripture ?
There is no book of Enoch prophesied. There are words that God gave him in respect to saints coming.. But we cannot speculate there were more that we have. We have the perfect .
Why would anyone want to go above that which is written .Are there laws missing by which we could know him more adequately? He prophesied the the sayings we do have found in Jude.There is nothing missing.
Jude 1:14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,
No one knows what else he said and if it was inspired by God as prophecy.
There is no book of Enoch prophesied. There are words that God gave him in respect to saints coming.. But we cannot speculate there were more that we have. We have the perfect .
Why would anyone want to go above that which is written .Are there laws missing by which we could know him more adequately? He prophesied the the sayings we do have found in Jude.There is nothing missing.
Jude 1:14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,
No one knows what else he said and if it was inspired by God as prophecy.
Sadly It took some time for some protestants to remove these uninspired books which where not recognised as inspired by the early church.. But today we have the 66 books in the Holy Bible 
And British Bible society is not any representantive of protestants.
I said "special category", meaning it falls neither into deuterocanonical books, nor into apocrypha never used by church nor into biblical canon of Jews (and later adopted by protestants).
It stands alone, in a way. It was used by church, it was even in some local canons (in Ethiopia, for example), but never received general acceptance.
It stands alone, in a way. It was used by church, it was even in some local canons (in Ethiopia, for example), but never received general acceptance.
There are a number of books that were used by he early church that never made it into the Bible we have now. Up until the time of Constantine there was no fixed new NT cannon of Scriptures. The OT cannon used by Protestant churches was fixed by a council of Rabbis in the second century which to me is rather curious seeing that they descended from the Pharisees and
one reason for the council was to prevent NT writings being recognized as scripture!
The Apocrypha is a mixed bag of writings that were included in the Septuagint a Greek translation of the OT which was widely used by the early Christians and is still used by the RC and Orthodox Church. There are a number of reasons that it was rejected by Protestants a major one being the promotion of the idea of Purgatory in Maccabees. On the other hand in the later half of Tobit you can find a description of the New Jerusalem which is very similar to the one in Revelation!
The Dead Sea Scrolls are dated between 200 BC and the first century AD and are believed to have been collected and written by a sect known as the Essenes. Broadly speaking they can be divided into copies of the Biblical and Apocryphal books and writings produced by the Essene community. They were first discovered in 1947 but some writings were known before then.
Josephus mentions the sect in his history. Some of their beliefs are remarkably similar to the Church. They believed they were part of the New Covenant (see Jeremiah), they practiced Baptism and had ceremonial meal of Bread and Wine and the community was governed by twelve people. They expected an apocalyptic war between the Sons of Light and the Sons of Darkness. They hated the Kittim (Romans) and considered the Temple and its Priests to be corrupt. They also mention a mysterious figure
called the Teacher of Righteousness who was killed by a wicked Priest. Some believe that John the Baptist was connected
to them. It is possible that some members of the early church were ex Essenes'
The Nag Hammedi Scriptures are believed to have belonged to a group of Egyptian Gnostics and are dated to around 200AD
The most well known among them is the Gospel of Thomas. There are sayings included that seem to be versions of some of those found in the Gospels. On the other hand there are others that seem very strange. In one place the Disciples ask Jesus
who they should go to to hear the truth. He advises them to go to James for whom the world was created. In another place
they complain about Mary Madeleine being with them. Jesus replies that he could make her become Male! Who said Trans Gender was new!
one reason for the council was to prevent NT writings being recognized as scripture!
The Apocrypha is a mixed bag of writings that were included in the Septuagint a Greek translation of the OT which was widely used by the early Christians and is still used by the RC and Orthodox Church. There are a number of reasons that it was rejected by Protestants a major one being the promotion of the idea of Purgatory in Maccabees. On the other hand in the later half of Tobit you can find a description of the New Jerusalem which is very similar to the one in Revelation!
The Dead Sea Scrolls are dated between 200 BC and the first century AD and are believed to have been collected and written by a sect known as the Essenes. Broadly speaking they can be divided into copies of the Biblical and Apocryphal books and writings produced by the Essene community. They were first discovered in 1947 but some writings were known before then.
Josephus mentions the sect in his history. Some of their beliefs are remarkably similar to the Church. They believed they were part of the New Covenant (see Jeremiah), they practiced Baptism and had ceremonial meal of Bread and Wine and the community was governed by twelve people. They expected an apocalyptic war between the Sons of Light and the Sons of Darkness. They hated the Kittim (Romans) and considered the Temple and its Priests to be corrupt. They also mention a mysterious figure
called the Teacher of Righteousness who was killed by a wicked Priest. Some believe that John the Baptist was connected
to them. It is possible that some members of the early church were ex Essenes'
The Nag Hammedi Scriptures are believed to have belonged to a group of Egyptian Gnostics and are dated to around 200AD
The most well known among them is the Gospel of Thomas. There are sayings included that seem to be versions of some of those found in the Gospels. On the other hand there are others that seem very strange. In one place the Disciples ask Jesus
who they should go to to hear the truth. He advises them to go to James for whom the world was created. In another place
they complain about Mary Madeleine being with them. Jesus replies that he could make her become Male! Who said Trans Gender was new!
There's no need for any theories. The Lord Jesus Christ Himself is the final authority as to which books are Scripture and which are not. And according to Him, only the 24 books in the Hebrew Tanakh (what we call the Old Testament) are Scripture.
The translators of the Hebrew Bible into Greek produced the Septuagint, and added all these NON-CANONICAL books to their LXX. They also corrupted the Hebrew Bible. Therefore Christians should not accept the Apocrypha as "Scripture".
The translators of the Hebrew Bible into Greek produced the Septuagint, and added all these NON-CANONICAL books to their LXX. They also corrupted the Hebrew Bible. Therefore Christians should not accept the Apocrypha as "Scripture".
Trofimus, Protestants call the “Deuto-canonical” books the Apocrypha. That is what I learned, and I will continue to call them that.
I have read the Apocrypha, it was our first assignment for NT Survey in Seminary. They are found in Catholic Bibles, I have the NAB, which is a pretty good translation, just don’t read the explanatory “footnotes” which attempt to explain away all the contraditions to Catholic dogma, I admit it had me laughing in the NT, the explanations were so flimsy.
So why read the Apocrypha in a Bible believing seminary? A few reasons!
1. They are a good example of intertestamental literature. So, what happened between Malachi and Matthew? Read the Apocrypha. BUT:
2. When you read it for historical interest, which is what it is good for, realize that not only are they not inspired, in many places they are simply wrong, or complete fiction. (Judith, Tobit??). 1 Maccabees is a pretty accurate rendering of the War of the Maccabees, not inspired, but of historical interest. 2 Maccabees, not so much. (In other words, they contradict every other source!)
3. Even the fiction stories are interesting from the point of view of “What were the Jews thinking in that long 400 year gap?” Remember, there were no prophets in this period, Israel was dry and far from God. This is one of the few records of their society, and can be read to see where the culture was at.
4. Interesting precisely because there ARE wrong things, resulting in wrong doctrines. Why did they take up praying for the dead, when it is no where recorded to do that in the OT? Why did the Jews invent a purgatory? That was not in the OT, either? Perhaps a metaphor for the fact that under foreign rulers, they felt like they were in a kind of hell on earth? Other?
But always remember that the Apocrypha are not accurate, and they cannot be used for doctrine. God did not inspire those books, and as someone else pointed out, they are used to support wrong doctrine by the Catholic and Orthodox Church. After all, prayers for the dead, for masses, are big money for those organizations!
I have read the Apocrypha, it was our first assignment for NT Survey in Seminary. They are found in Catholic Bibles, I have the NAB, which is a pretty good translation, just don’t read the explanatory “footnotes” which attempt to explain away all the contraditions to Catholic dogma, I admit it had me laughing in the NT, the explanations were so flimsy.
So why read the Apocrypha in a Bible believing seminary? A few reasons!
1. They are a good example of intertestamental literature. So, what happened between Malachi and Matthew? Read the Apocrypha. BUT:
2. When you read it for historical interest, which is what it is good for, realize that not only are they not inspired, in many places they are simply wrong, or complete fiction. (Judith, Tobit??). 1 Maccabees is a pretty accurate rendering of the War of the Maccabees, not inspired, but of historical interest. 2 Maccabees, not so much. (In other words, they contradict every other source!)
3. Even the fiction stories are interesting from the point of view of “What were the Jews thinking in that long 400 year gap?” Remember, there were no prophets in this period, Israel was dry and far from God. This is one of the few records of their society, and can be read to see where the culture was at.
4. Interesting precisely because there ARE wrong things, resulting in wrong doctrines. Why did they take up praying for the dead, when it is no where recorded to do that in the OT? Why did the Jews invent a purgatory? That was not in the OT, either? Perhaps a metaphor for the fact that under foreign rulers, they felt like they were in a kind of hell on earth? Other?
But always remember that the Apocrypha are not accurate, and they cannot be used for doctrine. God did not inspire those books, and as someone else pointed out, they are used to support wrong doctrine by the Catholic and Orthodox Church. After all, prayers for the dead, for masses, are big money for those organizations!
Sorry, I missed touching the later books, like the Gospel of Thomas, Mary, Peter etc. First, they were not eye witnesses! They were written well after the generation that walked with Christ had died. Second, third or fourth hand material is otherwise known as “gossip.”
Second, they were written by gnostics. They were completely wrong in just about everything. They believed matter was evil, that you needed “secret” knowledge or initiation to come to “god” knowledge. They were looking to get off the earth, rather than the resurrection of the body. (So many people today believe that, don’t they/0 Really the basis for the New Age Movement.
So, they contradict the entire OT and NT. My opinion is if you want to read 2nd century or later material, try the early church fathers. Some have some weird ideas. But they do stick to quoting the Bible. Although we translated some of the Didache in Greek, and some was just a paraphrase of Scripture, but some was totally not in the Bible, although some good ideas. Like traveling evangelists who stay for more than 3 days are false prophets. And don’t give them any money.
I wish today’s money grubbing TV evangelists had to abide by those words!
Second, they were written by gnostics. They were completely wrong in just about everything. They believed matter was evil, that you needed “secret” knowledge or initiation to come to “god” knowledge. They were looking to get off the earth, rather than the resurrection of the body. (So many people today believe that, don’t they/0 Really the basis for the New Age Movement.
So, they contradict the entire OT and NT. My opinion is if you want to read 2nd century or later material, try the early church fathers. Some have some weird ideas. But they do stick to quoting the Bible. Although we translated some of the Didache in Greek, and some was just a paraphrase of Scripture, but some was totally not in the Bible, although some good ideas. Like traveling evangelists who stay for more than 3 days are false prophets. And don’t give them any money.
I wish today’s money grubbing TV evangelists had to abide by those words!
"Apocrypha" means "hidden". Its about books hidden from general public, containing some secret teachings known just to few. Or long time lost book, discovered very late.
Gospel of Thomas, for example. Partly, Enoch (because he was long time lost).
But books like Sirach, Susanna, Wisdom of Salomon etc are deuterocanonical books (not present in Jewish canon), but how can they be apocrypha?
I know that some protestants call them so, but its technicaly wrong, imho. I suspect protestants began to call them so just to express their animosity towards those books, because they are still in orthodox and catholic canon. But I do not think its a good way.
Gospel of Thomas, for example. Partly, Enoch (because he was long time lost).
But books like Sirach, Susanna, Wisdom of Salomon etc are deuterocanonical books (not present in Jewish canon), but how can they be apocrypha?
I know that some protestants call them so, but its technicaly wrong, imho. I suspect protestants began to call them so just to express their animosity towards those books, because they are still in orthodox and catholic canon. But I do not think its a good way.
One of the deuterocanonical books attests that the period that comprised the writings of the deuterocanonical texts had no prophets. Those years are referred to as "silent" and "inter-testate" for a reason: there were no prophets of God to write inspired material.
The Apocryphal books do not share many of the characteristics of the Canonical books: they are not prophetic, there is no supernatural confirmation of any of the apocryphal writers works, there is no predictive prophecy, there is no new Messianic truth revealed, they are not cited as authoritative by any prophetic book written after them, and they even acknowledge that there were no prophets in Israel at their time.
And they laid up the stones in the mountain of the temple in a convenient place, till there should come a prophet, and give answer concerning them. (1 Maccabees 4:46)
And there was a great tribulation in Israel, such as was not since the day, that there was no prophet seen in Israel. (1 Maccabees 9:27)
And that the Jews, and their priests, had consented that he should be their prince, and high priest for ever, till there should arise a faithful prophet. (1 Maccabees 14:41)
And that the Jews, and their priests, had consented that he should be their prince, and high priest for ever, till there should arise a faithful prophet. (1 Maccabees 9:27)
Neither Jews nor even early Catholics accepted them as inspired. Josephus explicitly rejected the Apocrypha, as did Jerome, Origen, Cyril of Jerusalem, and Athanasius.
When Jesus cited the scope of Scripture, it did not include the apocrypha, either, encompassing “... the blood of Abel [Genesis 4:8] to the blood of Zechariah [2 Chron. 24:20], who was killed between the altar and the house of God; yes, I tell you, it shall be charged against this generation (Luke 11:51; Matthew. 23:35). (Chronicles was the last book according to the arrangement of the Jewish Scriptures.)
The Dead Sea Scrolls do not contain commentaries on the Apocrypha as they do for the Jewish Old Testament books, and they do not cite the Apocrypha authoritatively as scripture.
The Roman Catholic Church did not officially canonize the Apocrypha until the Council of Trent (1546 AD). This was in part because the Apocrypha contained material which supported certain Catholic doctrines, such as purgatory, praying for the dead, and the treasury of merit.
Not one of them is in the Hebrew language, which was alone used by the inspired historians and poets of the Old Testament.
Not one of the writers lays any claim to inspiration. These books were never acknowledged as sacred Scriptures by the Jewish Church, and therefore were never sanctioned by our Lord.
They were not allowed a place among the sacred books, during the first four centuries of the Christian Church.
They contain fabulous statements, and statements which contradict not only the canonical Scriptures, but themselves; as when, in the two Books of Maccabees, Antiochus Epiphanes is made to die three different deaths in as many different places.
The Apocrypha inculcates doctrines at variance with the Bible, such as prayers for the dead and sinless perfection.
The apocrypha contains offensive materials unbecoming of God's authorship.
Josephus rejected the apocryphal books as inspired and this reflected Jewish thought at the time of Jesus
"From Artexerxes to our own time the complete history has been written but has not been deemed worthy of equal credit with the earlier records because of the failure of the exact succession of the prophets.
" ... "We have not an innumerable multitude of books among us, disagreeing from and contradicting one another, but only twenty-two books, which contain the records of all the past times; which are justly believed to be divine..."
(Flavius Josephus, Against Apion 1:8)The Manual of Discipline in the Dead Sea Scrolls rejected the apocrypha as inspired.The Council of Jamnia held the same view rejected the apocrypha as inspired.
They debated the canonicity of a few books (e.g., Ecclesiastes), but they changed nothing and never proclaimed themselves to be authoritative determiners of the Old Testament canon.
The Apocryphal books do not share many of the characteristics of the Canonical books: they are not prophetic, there is no supernatural confirmation of any of the apocryphal writers works, there is no predictive prophecy, there is no new Messianic truth revealed, they are not cited as authoritative by any prophetic book written after them, and they even acknowledge that there were no prophets in Israel at their time.
And they laid up the stones in the mountain of the temple in a convenient place, till there should come a prophet, and give answer concerning them. (1 Maccabees 4:46)
And there was a great tribulation in Israel, such as was not since the day, that there was no prophet seen in Israel. (1 Maccabees 9:27)
And that the Jews, and their priests, had consented that he should be their prince, and high priest for ever, till there should arise a faithful prophet. (1 Maccabees 14:41)
And that the Jews, and their priests, had consented that he should be their prince, and high priest for ever, till there should arise a faithful prophet. (1 Maccabees 9:27)
Neither Jews nor even early Catholics accepted them as inspired. Josephus explicitly rejected the Apocrypha, as did Jerome, Origen, Cyril of Jerusalem, and Athanasius.
When Jesus cited the scope of Scripture, it did not include the apocrypha, either, encompassing “... the blood of Abel [Genesis 4:8] to the blood of Zechariah [2 Chron. 24:20], who was killed between the altar and the house of God; yes, I tell you, it shall be charged against this generation (Luke 11:51; Matthew. 23:35). (Chronicles was the last book according to the arrangement of the Jewish Scriptures.)
The Dead Sea Scrolls do not contain commentaries on the Apocrypha as they do for the Jewish Old Testament books, and they do not cite the Apocrypha authoritatively as scripture.
The Roman Catholic Church did not officially canonize the Apocrypha until the Council of Trent (1546 AD). This was in part because the Apocrypha contained material which supported certain Catholic doctrines, such as purgatory, praying for the dead, and the treasury of merit.
Not one of them is in the Hebrew language, which was alone used by the inspired historians and poets of the Old Testament.
Not one of the writers lays any claim to inspiration. These books were never acknowledged as sacred Scriptures by the Jewish Church, and therefore were never sanctioned by our Lord.
They were not allowed a place among the sacred books, during the first four centuries of the Christian Church.
They contain fabulous statements, and statements which contradict not only the canonical Scriptures, but themselves; as when, in the two Books of Maccabees, Antiochus Epiphanes is made to die three different deaths in as many different places.
The Apocrypha inculcates doctrines at variance with the Bible, such as prayers for the dead and sinless perfection.
The apocrypha contains offensive materials unbecoming of God's authorship.
Josephus rejected the apocryphal books as inspired and this reflected Jewish thought at the time of Jesus
"From Artexerxes to our own time the complete history has been written but has not been deemed worthy of equal credit with the earlier records because of the failure of the exact succession of the prophets.
" ... "We have not an innumerable multitude of books among us, disagreeing from and contradicting one another, but only twenty-two books, which contain the records of all the past times; which are justly believed to be divine..."
(Flavius Josephus, Against Apion 1:8)The Manual of Discipline in the Dead Sea Scrolls rejected the apocrypha as inspired.The Council of Jamnia held the same view rejected the apocrypha as inspired.
They debated the canonicity of a few books (e.g., Ecclesiastes), but they changed nothing and never proclaimed themselves to be authoritative determiners of the Old Testament canon.
"These bokes that follow in order after the Prophets unto the Newe testament, are called Apocrypha, that is bokes, which wer not recieved by a comune consent to be red and expounded publikely in the Church, neither yet serued to prove any point of Christian religion, save in asmuch as they had the consent of other Scriptures called Canonical to confirm the same, or rather whereon they were grounded: but as bokes proceding from godlie men, were recieved to be red for the advancement and furtherance of the knowledge of the historie, & for the instruction of godlie mnera: which bokes declare that at all times God had an especial care of his Church and left them not vtterl destitute of teachers and meanes to confirme them in the hope of the promised Messiah, and also witness tha those calamities that God sent to his Church, were according to his providence, whoi hd bothe so threatened by his Prophets, and so brought it to pass for the destruction of their enemies, and for the tryal of his children."
In other words, the Geneva 1560 translators were putting a disclaimer on these books, in the Reformation tradition of considering them (as Luther said) "useful and good for reading" but not equal to Scripture.
Certain detils of the KJV's presentation of these books agrees with the Geneva's. The KJV lacks a similar advisory to the Geneva's perhaps because by 1611 the average Bible reader coud be expected to have a fuller awareness of why these books were not true scripture than was the case when the Geneva first appeared. In the Geneva and KJV they were always designated "Apocrypha" to seperate them from what was believed to be the true canon of the Bible.
The Waldenses said "Here follow the Books Apocryphal, which are not received of the Hebrews. But we reade them (as faith St. Hierome in his Prologue to the Proverbs) for the inftruetion of the People, not to confirm the Authority of the Doctrine of the Church.
The Jews themselves do not consider the Apocrypha inspired because they believe by the time they were written the inspiration of the Prophets by God had ceased.
In his book Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics Norman Geisler says, "Prayers for the dead were much on the mind of the clerics at Trent, who convened their council just twenty-nine years after Luther posted his Ninety-Five Thesis against the sale of indulgences. Doctrines of indulgences, purgatory, and prayers for the dead stand or fall together." And that would be according to if the Apocrypha is truly inspired by God.
In other words, the Geneva 1560 translators were putting a disclaimer on these books, in the Reformation tradition of considering them (as Luther said) "useful and good for reading" but not equal to Scripture.
Certain detils of the KJV's presentation of these books agrees with the Geneva's. The KJV lacks a similar advisory to the Geneva's perhaps because by 1611 the average Bible reader coud be expected to have a fuller awareness of why these books were not true scripture than was the case when the Geneva first appeared. In the Geneva and KJV they were always designated "Apocrypha" to seperate them from what was believed to be the true canon of the Bible.
The Waldenses said "Here follow the Books Apocryphal, which are not received of the Hebrews. But we reade them (as faith St. Hierome in his Prologue to the Proverbs) for the inftruetion of the People, not to confirm the Authority of the Doctrine of the Church.
The Jews themselves do not consider the Apocrypha inspired because they believe by the time they were written the inspiration of the Prophets by God had ceased.
In his book Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics Norman Geisler says, "Prayers for the dead were much on the mind of the clerics at Trent, who convened their council just twenty-nine years after Luther posted his Ninety-Five Thesis against the sale of indulgences. Doctrines of indulgences, purgatory, and prayers for the dead stand or fall together." And that would be according to if the Apocrypha is truly inspired by God.