I would like to know why Protestants decided to exclude the Apocrypha books while the Catholics included them to be part of the Bible.
I also want to know, I comment
The Protestants excluded them as they are not ALL the inspired Word of God and they cannot some errors. They were written between 200bc and 100ad.
They were never a part of the books accepted by the Apostles.
They were added by the Catholic church much later.
The apocrypha was considered second cannon and was decided to be included in the Catholic bible in council of Trent in 16th century. That’s 1500 years after Christ.
In the Bible we find prophets of God whose messages are ratified by miracles or prophecy that comes true, and whose message is immediately accepted by the people (Deut 31:26; Josh. 24:26; 1 Samuel 10:25; Daniel 9:2; Col. 4:16; 2 Peter 3:15-16). What we find in the apocrypha is just the opposite – no apocryphal book was written by a prophet. None of these books were included in the Hebrew Scriptures. There is no ratification of the authors of any apocryphal book. No apocryphal book is cited as authoritative by later Biblical writers. There is no fulfilled prophecy in any apocryphal book. Finally, Jesus, who quoted from every section of Old Testament Scripture, never once quoted from the apocrypha. Neither did any of His disciples.
Several reasons. A couple of those books have contradictions. They were all written in Greek. Many of them claiming to be from a time period where they should have been written in either Hebrew or Aramaic. Those that could have been from a time period that would make sense to be written in Greek still have far to much Greek style and culture in them to be fit into traditional Israeli writings. Two books in particular have additions added to them that were never found in the original writings. Esther and Daniel. These are some of the reasons they were considered not to be authentic. The final reason is they are not inspired by God. With that said, while not inspired, I think it is important to read at least one of the Maccabees to understand Israeli cultural shift between the old and new testament.
The Old Testament was essentially canonized around 400 BC. Around 300 BC the Septuagent was written, which is the Old Testament translated into Greek. The Approcrapha was written later, about 200 BC or so. It was not inspired by God and was never included as part of scripture. The New Testament was written around 50 to 95 AD. The Approcrapha contains many contradictions to the Old Testament so it was never accepted as scripture. Only the 66 books of the Bible, including the New Testament, were inspired by God and used in the church for teaching and worship. The catholic church began after 300 AD. The Catholics slipped the Aprocapha into the Bible some time after it came into existence after 300 AD.
For centuries the catholic church has kept the Word of God from the people, especially the common folk. And their teachings contradicted the doctrines of the Bible. Per catholic rules, only the priests could read the Bible. This is why when Martin Luther studied the Bible he found contradictions in the teachings of the catholic teachings. Thus the Protestants protest against the catholic church to bring proper teachings which was found in the church prior to the founding of the catholic church.
These books were never accepted as Canon by the Jews of Jesus day. They were historic in many ways but not “scripture” as understood by the Jews of that day. Even the Jews would tell you that they went that 400 years without a prophet. It was only when John the Baptizer came on the scene that people would reconsider. Then for the canonization of the NT, there was strict criteria down to either an eyewitness or a direct study and partner of an eyewitness (Luke, Mark).
More it’s not always better…
You know. . .Those Catholics always have do things bigger and better because they know how to promote things way better than those PR deficient Protestants.
I have read them for the heck of it and they are not scriptural at all. Have a go at it and see for yourself.
because early Christians put them on the side of the bible because they understood they were not canonical. Christian Jews knew that too and did not accepted them as canonical because they themselves don’t claim to be inspired by God, others outright tell you it’s their opinion, others have been found to be plagiarized. Also you can tell they match hieretical doctrines of the early church. Others you can tell they’re lying about the time of writing, others were written very very late etc. there’s plenty of reasons why they’re not canonical…best way to know is to read them lol
Apocryphal books are called deuterocanonicals meaning part of the second batch of books that are not incuded in the first canon, which are standards that was set to determine the worthy books of the new testament. Apocryphal books did not pass those standards. It was a latter addition so we evangelicals never accepted them.
After Malachi God was silent for about 400 Years.
So Malachi is the last book in the OT as Revelations is the last book of the NT.
Then came John The Baptist and then Jesus.
The canonization of the Bible was a very organic scripture. Most New Testament books were canonized by way of cross referencing and popular use. Very few were argued to be put in or excluded. By the year 350 (roughly I think) the 27 New Testament books were widely accepted. The two books that took the greatest debate were Jude and Revelation but mostly due to lack of inclusion in organic lists, we know that this was because of apocalyptic cults that would twist and pervert the scriptures and so it was always less about the authority and more about whether or not it was too problematic.
That’s New Testament though, the apocryphal texts are texts that were written in the 400 years between OT and NT and as others have stated the official canonization for Catholics didn’t happen until the council of Trent, and even then many Catholics rejected the books as canonical due to a lack of harmonization with the rest of scripture as well as a lack of cross references from other well respected canonical books.
The deuterocanonical texts aren’t the entirety of the apocrypha, just a portion.
Because they are not inspired by God
This question is why we should study Church History along with cultural history of the times. The writings of the Apocrypha were not accepted in either of these.
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.