The "Inconvenient Tale" of the Original King James Bible

Handsonapologetics ^ | Gary Michuta

[GonzoII]

Don't get me wrong I love the (complete) KJV.

I just ordered this baby last week!

I'll be adding the cross-references to and from the Deuterocanonicals that are not contained in it. -There are quite a few in this version.

I "looked inside this book" at Amazon and it has one of
my favorite references to Revelations from Tobit:

TOBIT 12:15: “I am Raphael, one of the seven holy angels, which present the prayers of the saints, and which go in and out before the glory of the Holy One.”

>Rev 8:2-4: “And I saw the seven angels which stood before God; and to them were given seven trumpets. 3. And another angel came and stood at the altar, having a golden censer; and there was given unto him much incense, that he should offer it with the prayers of all saints upon the golden altar which was before the throne. 4. And the smoke of the incense, which came with the prayers of the saints, ascended up before God out of the angel's hand.”

>Lk 1:19: “And the angel answering said unto him, I am Gabriel, that stand in the presence of God; and am sent to speak unto thee, and to shew thee these glad tidings.”

[GonzoII]

" What trow ye makes these men so angry with Ecclesiasticus ?"

I know not me Lord, to the tower with 'em??

[LetMarch]

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” John 1:1)

“And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.” (John 1:14)

“It is the Spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.” (John 6:63)

“Being confident of this very thing,that He that hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ:” (Philippians 1:6)

“But He[God] hath made Him[Jesus] to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him.” (2 Corinthians 5:21)

“Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth forever.” (1 Peter 1:23)

[SuzyQue]

Somewhat of a frustrating article. It keeps stating that the “Catholic” Bible is better than the “Protestant” Bible because it does contain much of the Apocrypha and that the Apocrypha is important, but it doesn’t say why it is important.

[gusty]

The KJV was good enough for George Washington, than it is good enough for me.

[Pollster1]

The KJV was good enough for George Washington, than it is good enough for me.

A much better sentiment than one I heard years ago in song: "The King James Bible . . . it was good enough for Moses, and it's good enough for me." I love the Bible and don't particularly like it when others make fun of religious people or religion gratuitously, but we have to laugh at ourselves when it is justified.

[Ruy Dias de Bivar]

As I have posted on other threads, the KJV and the Geneva bibles are available with the Apocrypha. Everyone should read these books at least once to see why they are irrelevant.

My copy of the Catholic NAB says that TOBIT and JUDITH are religious NOVELs. Who would base their salvation and beliefs on a NOVEL! Even I won’t read modern Christian prophetic fiction from a bookstore.

The Apocrypha should be placed in the same category as THE SHEPHERD OF HERMAS, which for many years was considered, by some, as Sacred Scripture. Even JEROME wanted them out of his translation of the scripture but the Pope wanted them in, so they are in.

It should be noted that the great Protestant Writer JOHN BUNYAN found comfort in some of the Apocrypha (GRACE ABOUNDING to the CHIEF OF SINNERS). I believe it was in Eccleasticus.

You have a CAMBRIDGE bible! That is what I use. I get mine from http://www.bibles-direct.co.uk/

I also have an English OXFORD bible, not one of those US printed versions with lots of “footnotes” which detract from what is written.

[sigzero]

There is a reason it is called the “Apocrypha”. It will always be contested.

By the way, there was a KJV called “the naughty Bible” too because when it was printed the commandment said “Thou shalt commit adultery”.

[GonzoII]

"but it doesn’t say why it is important."

If the Septuagint, which contains the Deuterocanonicals in question, was quoted 2/3 of the time in the New Testament when referring to the Old Testament I think they should deserve a hearing.

I as Catholic of course hold them as inspired because the Church says they are. ;0)

[taxcontrol]

Further, it does not state why the Protestants choose not to value either the Apocrypha or the Pseudepigrapha and not rising to the level of scripture or cannon.

At the core of the Protestant resistance to the Apocrypha are two basic issues; 1) The works are of unknown authorship and 2) There are practices that are in variance to the teachings of the New Testament

One of the major reasons that the Protestants do not accept the Pseudepigrapha is because there is a claim of authorship that is false.

[Natural Law]

"There is a reason it is called the “Apocrypha”."

What would that be since the proper term is the "Deuterocanonical books".

[GonzoII]

"My copy of the Catholic NAB says that TOBIT and JUDITH are religious NOVELs."

I'll leave it experts to decide what kind of literary genre these books were written in and that of course comes from the commentary.

If God inspired someone to write a "novel" to convey religious truth then praise the Lord. It would still be God's novel and I'll read it.

[Mr Rogers]

“Here we close our commentaries on the historical books of the Old Testament. For the rest (that is, Judith, Tobit, and the books of Maccabees) are counted by St Jerome out of the canonical books, and are placed amongst the Apocrypha, along with Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus, as is plain from the Prologus Galeatus.

Nor be thou disturbed, like a raw scholar, if thou shouldest find anywhere, either in the sacred councils or the sacred doctors, these books reckoned as canonical. For the words as well of councils as of doctors are to be reduced to the correction of Jerome. Now, according to his judgment, in the epistle to the bishops Chromatius and Heliodorus, these books (and any other like books in the canon of the bible) are not canonical, that is, not in the nature of a rule for confirming matters of faith.

Yet, they may be called canonical, that is, in the nature of a rule for the edification of the faithful, as being received and authorised in the canon of the bible for that purpose. By the help of this distinction thou mayest see thy way clearly through that which Augustine says, and what is written in the provincial council of Carthage.”

-Cardinal Cajetan (16th century)

[arthurus]

The story of Noah has been placed in the category of “novel” as well.

[Mr Rogers]

“If the Septuagint, which contains the Deuterocanonicals in question, was quoted 2/3 of the time in the New Testament when referring to the Old Testament I think they should deserve a hearing.”

The Apocrypha is never cited as the word of God in the NT.

[GonzoII]

"You have a CAMBRIDGE bible!"

It's on the way and at a good price!

[ntnychik]

Bump

[catroina54]

By no ways or means am i even near the scholarly level of the author but I do know that the deliberate removal of the Books led to division and sometimes outright ridicule of Catholic and Orthodox Christians Scriptural based practices and beliefs as in praying for the dead—
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2+Maccabees+12%3A41-46&version=DRA

[GonzoII]

"The story of Noah has been placed in the category of “novel” as well."

I and others more educated than myself are no fans of the NAB Bible..it has problems.

[narses]

+

Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:

Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.