• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

KJV revised ed.

Status
Not open for further replies.

TwinCrier

Double Blessed and spreading the gospel
Oct 11, 2002
6,069
617
55
Indiana
Visit site
✟32,278.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
It was removed because it's not scripture. Some people perfer not to have commentary in their bible to direct or prejudice their study. It was placed inbetween the scriptures as historical documents... and because the Council of Trent (1546) pronounced a CURSE upon anyone who denied that these books were inspired and to not include these in a book labeled as scripture carried a one year prison sentence.
 
Upvote 0

BBAS 64

Contributor
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
10,050
1,802
60
New England
✟616,777.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
TwinCrier said:
It was removed because it's not scripture. Some people perfer not to have commentary in their bible to direct or prejudice their study. It was placed inbetween the scriptures as historical documents... and because the Council of Trent (1546) pronounced a CURSE upon anyone who denied that these books were inspired and to not include these in a book labeled as scripture carried a one year prison sentence.
Good Day,TwinCrier

Thank you for your imput, I was not asking if the Apocrypha was Scripture. It is clear in the link that I posted the Apocrypha was included in the AV of the KJ 1611. It seems to have been removed in the 1830's by the Arch bishop of Cantabury {sp}. Would you know the reason/History why it was removed at this time and not earlier pre Trent?

Did the KJ translators consider them as Scripture or was it based on the Bishops Bible for their inclusion?

Would you be so kind as to cite the article of Trent if you could?

For His Glory Alone! :clap:

BBAS
 
Upvote 0

Jeffery

Active Member
Nov 15, 2003
70
0
58
✟22,690.00
Faith
Christian
No the KJV translators did not consider them equal with the Scriptures, but (as they have stated,somewhere i will find it) as useful reading and thus placed them between the Scriptures.

Here it is quoted by permission:
First, in the days in which our Bible was translated, the Apocrypha was accepted reading based on its historical value, though not accepted as Scripture by anyone outside of' the Catholic church. The King James translators therefore placed it between the Old and New Testaments for its historical benefit to its readers. They did not integrate it into the Old Testament text as do the corrupt Alexandrian manuscripts.
That they rejected the Apocrypha as divine is very obvious by the seven reasons which they gave for not incorporating it into the text. They are as follows:
1. Not one of them is in the Hebrew language, which was alone used by the inspired historians and poets of the Old Testament.
2. Not one of the writers lays any claim to inspiration.
3. These books were never acknowledged as sacred Scriptures by the Jewish Church, and therefore were never sanctioned by our Lord.
4. They were not allowed a place among the sacred books, during the first four centuries of the Christian Church.
5. 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.
6. It inculcates doctrines at variance with the Bible, such as prayers for the dead and sinless perfection.
7. It teaches immoral practices, such as lying, suicide, assassination and magical incantation.
 
Upvote 0

BBAS 64

Contributor
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
10,050
1,802
60
New England
✟616,777.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Jeffery said:
No the KJV translators did not consider them equal with the Scriptures, but (as they have stated,somewhere i will find it) as useful reading and thus placed them between the Scriptures.

Here it is quoted by permission:
First, in the days in which our Bible was translated, the Apocrypha was accepted reading based on its historical value, though not accepted as Scripture by anyone outside of' the Catholic church. The King James translators therefore placed it between the Old and New Testaments for its historical benefit to its readers. They did not integrate it into the Old Testament text as do the corrupt Alexandrian manuscripts.
That they rejected the Apocrypha as divine is very obvious by the seven reasons which they gave for not incorporating it into the text. They are as follows:
1. Not one of them is in the Hebrew language, which was alone used by the inspired historians and poets of the Old Testament.
2. Not one of the writers lays any claim to inspiration.
3. These books were never acknowledged as sacred Scriptures by the Jewish Church, and therefore were never sanctioned by our Lord.
4. They were not allowed a place among the sacred books, during the first four centuries of the Christian Church.
5. 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.
6. It inculcates doctrines at variance with the Bible, such as prayers for the dead and sinless perfection.
7. It teaches immoral practices, such as lying, suicide, assassination and magical incantation.
Jeffery

Thank you for this information, can you provide the primary source for this conclusion?


Thanks,

BBAS
 
Upvote 0

Philip

Orthodoxy: Old School, Hard Core Christianity
Jun 23, 2003
5,619
241
53
Orlando, FL
Visit site
✟7,106.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Jeffery said:
1. Not one of them is in the Hebrew language, which was alone used by the inspired historians and poets of the Old Testament.

Archaeology has since proven this incorrect.

2. Not one of the writers lays any claim tinspiration.

This is not correct. Both the books of Wisdom and Sirach claim inspiration.

3. These books were never acknowledged as sacred Scriptures by the Jewish Church, and therefore were never sanctioned by our Lord.

There are some serious flaws in this logic.

4. They were not allowed a place among the sacred books, during the first four centuries of the Christian Church.

Do you have proof of this? I can provide proof to the contrary.

5. 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.

There are "contradictions" within the Protocanon as well.

6. It inculcates doctrines at variance with the Bible, such as prayers for the dead and sinless perfection.

Are you sure the translators of the KJV said this? I find that odd since the Church of England to this day offers prayers for the departed. As for, the logic, it is flawed. This first assumes that the Deuterocanon is not part of Scriptures.

7. It teaches immoral practices, such as lying, suicide, assassination and magical incantation.

Describing and teaching are not the same. Doesn't the rest of the Old Testament contain similar descriptions?
 
Upvote 0

Oblio

Creed or Chaos
Jun 24, 2003
22,324
865
65
Georgia - USA
Visit site
✟27,610.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
No the KJV translators did not consider them equal with the Scriptures, but (as they have stated,somewhere i will find it) as useful reading and thus placed them between the Scriptures.

The translators were inspired men with the authority to do this ?
 
Upvote 0

Oblio

Creed or Chaos
Jun 24, 2003
22,324
865
65
Georgia - USA
Visit site
✟27,610.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Knight said:
I don't think this is the place to debate over the Apocrypha/Deuterocannon.


Agreed.
It was TwinCrier that threw down the gauntlet. The catholics were merely pointing out the unfounded accusations.
 
Upvote 0

Oblio

Creed or Chaos
Jun 24, 2003
22,324
865
65
Georgia - USA
Visit site
✟27,610.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Knight said:
Does it really matter who started it?

I understand what you are saying and I would probably feel the same way if the situation was reversed.

BTW, my post was directed at TC as well.

Your right, it doesn't matter :) We were quickly heading down that tired path ;) I didn't stop to think that you post was directed at all potential combatants, :sorry:
 
Upvote 0

Knight

Knight of the Cross
Apr 11, 2002
3,395
117
52
Indiana
Visit site
✟4,472.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Philip said:
Oblio and Knight,

You are both correct. Please excuse me.
You're excused I guess.... Just don't let it happen again!!!

(That was fun, I don't often get to chew out mods.:))

Seriously, it's far too easy to get wrapped up in these kind of arguments.

Think nothing of it.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.