Warning: session_start(): open(/var/lib/lsphp/session/lsphp80/sess_g1oip5pqlgstq6sdvgbp4ummtf, O_RDWR) failed: No space left on device (28) in /home/kjv.site/public_html/Christian-Questions-Answers/thread.php on line 2
Warning: session_start(): Failed to read session data: files (path: /var/lib/lsphp/session/lsphp80) in /home/kjv.site/public_html/Christian-Questions-Answers/thread.php on line 2 CHRISTIAN QUESTIONS & ANSWERS 194786
Bible translators and scholars have selected the 66 books in the Bible (KJV) to constitute the complete Bible and the Apocrypha is not in the best translations.
Apparently; as this site indicates the King James Bible did include the Apocrypha at least in 1611. The simple answer is that in the form we see today none of this is equal to the authority of the 66 books of the Bible. It may be better phrased that parts of it may be part of scripture in the original text; which the example of the book of Enoch shows as quoted in Jude. Unless specifically indicated in the accepted Canon today; we cannot be sure of it's veracity. The determining factors which even Catholic commentaries mention when including it in their version often point to mythical or fanciful accounts; and also prayers for the dead (necromancy) are mentioned in part of Maccabees which in other ways is one of the best intertestamental historical accounts of the victory of the Jews over Antiochus Epiphanies. The Catholic commentaries will also honestly assess that these writings are not on the level with the rest of scripture. As with any other texts from the Bible there are repeated themes (such as in 1 Esdras about Nebuchadnezzar) or God's righteousness which are similar or virtually the same as found in other O.T. scriptures in particular. What is missing in big part is a "thus saith the Lord" quotation in these books. There are other books outside the Apocrypha which are supporting gnosticism and other spurious sects. As this site mentions Martin Luther stated that the works were interesting information but not Holy Writ. If we are able to not be drawn into the dangers of mysticism or "hidden knowledge" the best we can do with such writings is supplement certain specific individuals or details that are missing from the Bible. Such is the case; of course with any secular historical document that can be proven accurate. As for the accepted Canon; copies were meticulously made of source texts; and if even ONE letter was off in the total order or count that copy was destroyed and they started again from scratch in writing a new scroll.
The Apocrypha are books that were written after the Old Testament and before the New Testament, between 300 B.C. and 100 A.D. These were accepted into the Bible by the Roman Catholic Church in 1546 at the Council of Trent. They were included in the 1560 Geneva Bible, 1611 King James Bible, among others.
The word apocrypha means "hidden," while the word deuterocanonical referred to by Catholics means a "second canon."
Three of the apocryphal books were found among the Dead Sea Scrolls Qumran caves according to the Israel Antiquities Authority. These included Ecclesiasticus, Tobit, and Letter of Jeremiah.
Some believe that Jesus, apostles, and others in the New Testament never quoted or referred to the Apocrypha, but some believe they did. The following are some verses found in the apocrypha that appear similar to verses later written in the New Testament.
The word apocrypha means "hidden," while the word deuterocanonical referred to by Catholics means a "second canon."
Three of the apocryphal books were found among the Dead Sea Scrolls Qumran caves according to the Israel Antiquities Authority. These included Ecclesiasticus, Tobit, and Letter of Jeremiah.
Some believe that Jesus, apostles, and others in the New Testament never quoted or referred to the Apocrypha, but some believe they did. The following are some verses found in the apocrypha that appear similar to verses later written in the New Testament.
2 Esdras 1:30
Matthew 23:37
2 Esdras 1:33
Matthew 23:38
2 Esdras 7:28-29
Philippians 3:3
Wisdom of Solomon 2:18
Matthew 27:43
Sirach 24:21
John 6:35
Sirach 29:10-11
Matthew 6:19-20
James 5:3
Wisdom of Solomon 15:7
Romans 9:21
Wisdom of Solomon 5:17-20
Ephesians 6:13-17
Judith 16:17
Isaiah 66:24
Baruch 4:7
1 Corinthians 10:20
Baruch 4:36-37
Luke 13:29
Related: Link
A seed is not the tree indeed the wheat .
But the nature of a seed is that it has everything that is needed and nothing that is not needed to reproduce the fruit .
If you add to it you destroy its ability to reproduce ,if you take from it ,likewise.
You can mix a donkey with a horse and you will get a mule ,but a mule cannot reproduce another mule . Ou need another horse and another donkey .
You can mix truth with error and you will get something. But it has no life in it to reproduce the fruit .
We have many ' versions' now of the Word of God each in different ways and p,aces have added or omitted or changed the seed that is the Word of God .
It shows .
Would you like to add an answer?
Please Sign In or Register to post comments...
Report Comment
Which best represents the problem with the comment?