>The protestants of the time decided that they were more qualified to design a bible than were the fathers of the church.<
That is an example of editing itself, but the details you left out or are ignorant of is that the “fathers” were not unified on the apocrypha, and while there was a general consensus there was no “infallible” canon until Trent provided it in the year Luther died (1546), and disagreement existed through the centuries and within Trent.
The RCs who doubted the apocrypha did not do so bcz it opposed their doctrine, but for scholarly reasons, as did Luther although doctrine was an issue with some, though 2 Macc 12 does not actually refer to purgatory, but supports praying for those who died in mortal sin, which there is no hope for in RCM.
Nor was an assuredly infallible magisterium (which Rome “infallibly” defines herself as having) necessary to establish writings as Scripture, as most of it was est. prior to Rome, and which is essentially due to its unique and enduring Heavenly qualities and effects of believing it, and other supernatural attestation, and conflation with that which had prior been manifest as being of God.
And which became the standard for obedience and testing truth claims. See prior links and commentary in red: http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/Bible/2Tim_3.html
In addition, it is those who hold Scripture as supreme and are committed to it that manifest greater conservatism than Roman Catholics overall: http://www.peacebyjesus.com/RC-Stats_vs._Evang.html
Now you are more informed, as your tag line asserts. Be back Tues.
This is a good treatise on the history of Biblical translations. Only some versions have left out the Apocryphal books and the current NKJV includes them.
Within the article there are many good links. This is a site which sells original manuscripts if you can afford them. http://greatsite.com/timeline-english-bible-history/index.html
Consider the following textual comparison of the earliest English translations of John 3:16, as shown in the English Hexapla Parallel New Testament:
1st Ed. King James (1611): “For God so loued the world, that he gaue his only begotten Sonne: that whosoeuer beleeueth in him, should not perish, but haue euerlasting life.”
Rheims (1582): “For so God loued the vvorld, that he gaue his only-begotten sonne: that euery one that beleeueth in him, perish not, but may haue life euerlasting”
Geneva (1560): “For God so loueth the world, that he hath geuen his only begotten Sonne: that none that beleue in him, should peryshe, but haue euerlasting lyfe.”
Great Bible (1539): “For God so loued the worlde, that he gaue his only begotten sonne, that whosoeuer beleueth in him, shulde not perisshe, but haue euerlasting lyfe.”
Tyndale (1534): “For God so loveth the worlde, that he hath geven his only sonne, that none that beleve in him, shuld perisshe: but shuld have everlastinge lyfe.”
Wycliff (1380): “for god loued so the world; that he gaf his oon bigetun sone, that eche man that bileueth in him perisch not: but haue euerlastynge liif,”
Anglo-Saxon Proto-English Manuscripts (995 AD): “God lufode middan-eard swa, dat he seade his an-cennedan sunu, dat nan ne forweorde de on hine gely ac habbe dat ece lif.”
A wonderful thread!