The OP has raised several valid questions about the "Jewish oral traditions" colloquially known as the Apocrypha:
Is it possible that the Bible leaves the door open for us to consider what is written in the Apocrypha?
What is meant by “scripture”?
why in many Christian Bibles is special mention given to just the Apocrypha?
Why was the Apocrypha plucked from among those writings when editions of the Bible were assembled for publication?
WARNING: A super intelligent yet extremely subtle creature remains actively involved in a full blown deception of which the
Apocrypha is integral. The following is a shocking exposé of a diabolical plot.
The Apocrypha is not inspired, while many continue to point to the inclusion of the Apocryphal Old Testament books in Bibles. All pure Bibles viewed these books as non-canonical and said so in their preface.
The Wycliffe Bible warned in its
Prologue that only those books written in Hebrew were canonical. Others, it said,
“...shall be set among Apocrypha, that is, without authority of belief...[that] be not of the authority of bible ancient Hebrew...
[R]eceiveth not them among holy Scripture...that be not ancient Hebrew and be not of the number of holy writ;
[T]hey aught to be cast far away...for me doubteth the truth thereof” (
Prologue, pp. 1, 2).
Wycliffe said that when the “Word of God is not heard, spiritual death broods over all” (Schaff-Herzog, s.v. Wyclif, pp. 464, 466).
“[H]e designated the Bible as the one authority for believers, and so teaching, traditions, bulls, symbols, and censures go by the board as far as they do not rest on Scripture.”
Tyndale and Coverdale did not approve of the Apocrypha. King James, himself did not approve of it.
Tyndale would not translate the Apocrypha. Coverdale removed the Apocrypha from the Old Testament scriptures. He prefaced his intertestamental section saying, these books “are not reckoned to be of like authority with the other books of the Bible neither are they found in the Canon of the Hebrew...[and] are not judged among the doctors to be of like reputation with the other scripture...And the chief cause thereof is this: there be many places in them, that seem to be repugnant unto the open and manifest truth in the other books of the Bible” (Dore, 2nd ed., p. 110).
Rogers’ Thomas Matthew’s Bible said, “the books called Apocrypha...are not found in the Hebrew nor in the Chaldee” (Dore, 2nd ed., p. 116).
Samuel Ward was among a few who were assigned the task of translating the
Apocrypha. King James I said:
“As to the Apocryphal books, I omit them because I am no papist.” (
Basilikon Doron ).
Most Christians shared the King’s desire for a Bible without the bulky Apocrypha. As early as 1612 printers (London: Barker), anxious to supply the large demand, printed Bibles without the appendage of the unnecessary Apocrypha. They were following the pattern of the quarto edition of the Great Bible (ed. 1549), some copies of the 1599 Geneva, a quarto edition of the Bishops’ Bible, dated 1577, and many personal hand-sized earlier Bibles. Antiquarian booksellers today offer for sale numerous
early copies of the KJV without the
Apocrypha (e.g. 1612, 1629 (Norton and Bill “Printers to the King’s Most Excellent Majesty”), 1637, 1653, 1662, 1682; Peter Cresswell,
Antiquarian Bibles, South Humberside, England: Humber Books, Catalogue 23 et al,; TBS, No. 31).
The Apocrypha is a series of books, written between B.C. 250 and B.C. 100, which exemplify the “superstitious” “traditions,” “imaginations,” and “commandments of men” which Jesus and Paul warned against (Acts 17:22, Matt. 15:9, Rom. 1:21, Gal. 1:14). The
Apocrypha characterizes the “cultural, ethical, and religious background” which surrounded the time of Christ. Even Princeton’s Bruce Metzger writes:
“This body of literature also supplies important information regarding the life and thoughts of the Jewish people during a significant period of their history, namely the period just prior to the emergence of Christianity. By becoming acquainted with these books, therefore, one will be better able to understand the political, ethical, and religious background of the contemporaries of Jesus Christ” (Bruce Metzger,
An Introduction to the Apocrypha, NY: Oxford University Press, 1957, p. viii).
For the same reason, current Study Bibles, like the
Scofield Reference Bible (“From Malachi to Matthew”) and
Dake’s Annotated Reference Bible (“Between the Testaments”) include a section between the Old Testament and the New Testament, explaining the events, history and beliefs of the intertestamental period. The KJV translators, like early Bibles, simply included the real thing. No one today thinks that Scofield’s notes are
a part of the Bible, just as no true Christian in 1611 thought that the
Apocrypha was a part of the Bible. Bible
Prologues stated ‘up front’ that the
Apocrypha was not scripture. The Great Bible’s
Prologue stated that the Apocrypha was not “found in the Hebrew” Bible. Wycliffe’s
Prologue said that the Apocrypha “is, without authority.” Luther’s Bible (1534 ed.) stated that the
Apocrypha is “not to be considered as equal to Holy Scriptures.” The early
Westminster Confession of Faith stated that the
Apocrypha is “no part of the Canon of Scripture; and therefore are of no authority in the church of God; nor to be any otherwise approved, or made use of, than other human writings.” The KJV translators said that the Apocrypha was not scripture because it was not written in Hebrew, nor ever accepted by the Jews or early Christians, nor ever mentioned by Jesus Christ -- because it detailed those “superstitious” “traditions” which Jesus and Paul warned about.
Early Bibles, including the KJV, placed numerous non-Biblical items within the binding of the Bibles for practical reasons. They included things like calendars, genealogies, maps, gazetteers, metrical Psalms for singing, and the
Apocrypha (which shed light on just exactly what “superstitions” and “traditions” were being followed by the Jews). Even today Bibles include concordances, dictionaries, notes, histories, commentaries, and cross references. No one mistakes these for being equal to the scriptures. In 1611 and before,
few people had a collection of books, most owned only
one book, the Bible. Binding other materials within it served a practical need. Even today it is less expensive to print and purchase one book of 1200 pages, than two books each having 600 pages.
Unlike pure early English Bibles, such as the KJV, 1611, which
separated the
Apocrypha from the Bible, the corrupt Catholic bibles (e.g.
New Jerusalem Bible) and their manuscripts (e.g.
Vaticanus from which the TNIV, ESV, HCSB NIV, and NASB are translated) intersperse these corrupt books
among those of the Bible. Rather than including them as a warning of exactly
what “commandments of men” Jesus was warning about, these corrupt versions placed Tobit, Judith, 1 and 2 Maccabees after the book of Nehemiah; they placed Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus following the Song of Solomon and Baruch following Lamentations. The Song of Azariah, Susanna, and Bel and the Dragon are included
in the book of Daniel. Why? The Catholic church has adopted the “traditions of men” expounded in these books. Some of the heresies included in these books include the following taken from the
New Jerusalem Bible:
1.) “[A]lmsgiving expiates sins” and “almsgiving saves from death and purges every kind of sin” (Ecclesiasticus 3:30, Tobit 12:9).
2.) Purgatory, and prayers for the dead (2 Maccabees 12:39-45).
3.) “[T]orments and the rack...irons” for the “disobedient” (Ecclesiasticus 33:24-29).
4.) The immaculate conception of Mary; reincarnation and transmigration of souls for New Agers and Hindus (Wisdom 8:19, 20).
5.) Monism and pantheism. “For your imperishable spirit is in everything!” (Wisdom 12:1). Even new versions changes, like the NKJV’s “God is spirit” (John 4:24) echo the New Age concept that god is in “everything.”
Since Catholic bibles include the Apocrypha as scripture, it becomes vital that Bibles no longer include it, even as history.
