Should Protestants read the Apocrypha?

[GodLovesCats]

People are saying different things about the chapters that do not exist in most Bibles.

If the Aprocrypha was only removed to save money on printing, why do Protestants say it isn't authentic text from God?

If the Apocrypha is not known to be God's Word, why do Catholics still read about half of it?

 

[Albion]

It has always been in question whether the Apocrypha is to be considered God-given scripture or not.

That is true whether anyone accepts it as part of the Bible or rejects it.

However, these books are quite unlike the rest of the Bible books in content, and no essential doctrines are based upon them, so it is reasonable to think that they are not inspired, since the Bible is a moving account of things, has continuity, and the parts lead to the next developments.

The Apocryphal books are basically morality tales and do not fit the Biblical pattern, although some of the largest Protestant bodies do still say that they are good to read for their information, but just not as infallible Scripture.

 

[Jonaitis]

People are saying different things about the chapters that do not exist in most Bibles.

If the Aprocrypha was only removed to save money on printing, why do Protestants say it isn't authentic text from God?

If the Apocrypha is not known to be God's Word, why do Catholics still read about half of it?

Even if we do not consider them divinely inspired, it isn't wrong to read them. As other human writings do, they give *some* insight to the background of the text.

 

[Rubiks]

Protestantism originally understood the apocrypha as useful to read, but should not be used as a source for religious dogma.

Slowly over time, this shifted from "useful to read" to "heretical/blasphemous"

 

[mark kennedy]

People are saying different things about the chapters that do not exist in most Bibles.

If the Aprocrypha was only removed to save money on printing, why do Protestants say it isn't authentic text from God?

If the Apocrypha is not known to be God's Word, why do Catholics still read about half of it?

I highly recommended 1 and 2 Maccabees. Its' an important history with a narrative that, if true, can only be described as miraculous. The other ones arr just collections of pithy sayings, they are a lot like the Proverbs.

 

[Albion]

Protestantism originally understood the apocrypha as useful to read, but should not be used as a source for religious dogma.

Slowly over time, this shifted from "useful to read" to "heretical/blasphemous"

That may be true for some Protestants, but certainly not for all. In Lutheran churches, for example, selections are appointed to be read during the worship service (on occasion). And for Anglicans, there is a directive about reading the Apocrypha written right into the basic statement of belief, the Thirty-nine Articles of Religion. In both cases, though, these books aren't considered to be Bible books.

 

[Athanasius377]

People are saying different things about the chapters that do not exist in most Bibles.

If the Aprocrypha was only removed to save money on printing, why do Protestants say it isn't authentic text from God?

If the Apocrypha is not known to be God's Word, why do Catholics still read about half of it?

There are varying opinions amoungst protestant bodies on whether the Apocrypha should be read or included in the printing of the Bible. As @Albion pointed out, Anglicans, Lutherans have readings in the Lectionary or assigned readings for the year. So yes, it would be helpful for christians to read the apocrypha. Martin Luther following the in the footsteps of Jerome, Athanasius and other fathers denied the apocrypha was scripture and therefore removed the apocrypha from the bible proper and placed in an appendix at the back of the bible. Modern Printings that include the apocrypha have in as an appendix of the OT.

To answer your second question, why don't we believe that the books are divinely inspired? First, read them yourself. They contain false doctrine, historical errors and are not quoted in the NT as scripture. Second, they are historically denied the place of scripture. This is true of Jews and at least in some of the early church fathers. The more a ECF knew about Hebrew and Jewish culture the more likely he was to reject the apocrypha as scripture. Even Luther's opponent Cardinal Carjetan agreed with Luther on this point. Lastly, the cost of printing was from the 19th century British Bible Societies. Prior to the 19th century the KJV of the Bible was printed with the apocrypha as an appendix. In order to save money, and probably because of doctrinal concerns as well the apocrypha was removed from subsequent printings and something American printers have maintained.

 

[com7fy8]

If I remember right, Apocryphal readings were used during Wednesday communion at an Episcopal place where I was visiting.

Also > I have been told that the Protestant Apocrypha can be different than the Catholic.

Also, I have been told that Catholics do not consider scriptures in English, at least, to be absolutely guaranteed infallible, but the official Catholic Bible/s is/are without doctrinal or moral error.

 

[Albion]

Also > I have been told that the Protestant Apocrypha can be different than the Catholic.

That may owe to the fact that, during the 16th century, it wasn't just Protestants but the Roman Catholic Church also which eliminated some of the Apocrypha.

Catholics either don't know this or else won't mention it when criticizing Luther for concluding that the Apocrypha should not be included as part the Bible.

 

[Hazelelponi]

I don't read the apocryphal books. As they aren't scripture I don't imagine they are useful any more than a random novel would be useful to my walk with Christ.

Some disagree, I am not worried about that... it's my walk with Christ and ill only feed it scripture. If I want a work of fiction I can always go to Barnes and Nobel.

The reason I feel this way is because these books aren't scriptural and have been found so, while people attempt or have attempted to pass them off as divinely inspired.

In this situation it's different than learning from a Pastor or an elder who is using scripture as their guide. It's letting false teachers known to be false teach you, and that never ends well.

 

[Shane R]

Absolutely. There is much of the NT narrative that is hard to decipher if one has not read the Apocryphal books. Also, the wisdom literature of the Apocrypha is equal to that of the Protestant OT.

 

[GodLovesCats]

Absolutely. There is much of the NT narrative that is hard to decipher if one has not read the Apocryphal books. Also, the wisdom literature of the Apocrypha is equal to that of the Protestant OT.

If this is true, why don't all Anglican churches read the Apocryha?

 

[Albion]

If this is true, why don't all Anglican churches read the Apocryha?

They are expected to do so, but I cannot vouch for the practices of all the Anglican churches in the world.

 

[Heavenhome]

I don't read the apocryphal books. As they aren't scripture I don't imagine they are useful any more than a random novel would be useful to my walk with Christ.

Some disagree, I am not worried about that... it's my walk with Christ and ill only feed it scripture. If I want a work of fiction I can always go to Barnes and Nobel.

The reason I feel this way is because these books aren't scriptural and have been found so, while people attempt or have attempted to pass them off as divinely inspired.

In this situation it's different than learning from a Pastor or an elder who is using scripture as their guide. It's letting false teachers known to be false teach you, and that never ends well.

Hazelelponi I am in total agreement with you.
I have more than enough to read and study in the Scriptures.