BC < > AD Deuterocanonicals 〣 Timeline of Inclusion & Exclusion

Profitable 'only'

Profitable 'only'
Separate, but same weight
as Heb, Jam, Jud & Rev
100%
Books
Published 15

Profitable 'only', but pushed hard

in Bibles 75% Written
14 14 14 14
or 13 13 13 13 13 13 13
12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12

Not written on special Bible parchment

Considered 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11

Profitable 'only'
Canonical 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9

Profitable 'only'

Treated as Scripture
by Individuals
8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8
33% Written

7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6
5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Apocrypha Read in Churches / ≤ 95% Inclusion in Bibles

No / Minor Influence ~ 50% Inclusion in Bibles Exclusion
Pushed by Scholars (Time of Reformation)
║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║ ║
) D D D ) . ) . .
BC BC BC D D D D D D D
BC . A 0 A . A 0 A 0 AD 0 A 0 A 0 A . AD . A 0 A 0 A AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD th C AD on AD AD h C AD th C AD AD . AD AD AD AD AD D D D D D D D D D D D D D AD
5 0 4 0 4 0 1 1 c 4 1 c 7 8 9 0 5 c 2 c 6 7 4 0 2 4 2 5 5 0 6 0 6 0 6 0 6 0 0 6 7 7 0 8 0 8 0 8 5 0 4 8 2 a n 9 7 0 5 5 t 0 5 5 3 0 30 2c 30 42 5 5 17 24 A 34 A 37 A 38 A 46 A 60 A 61 A 68 A 71 A 69 A 92 A 11 A 26 A 85
1 - 5 14 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 1 6
-2 - -1 150 RS, C- ct), ter s, ~ ia, C-1 0-1 2-4 rly - 1 o, 1 n, 2 , ~3 ), 3 , ~3 ~3 ~3 , ~3 ~3 ~35 , ~3 , ~3 , ~3 , ~3 , ~3 3 ), , 3 t C , 3 , 4 4- , 4 ), ~7 11 , 1 13 14 18 18
2 82 300 250 ~ TE 0
B e af u n B 10 ( ea yr, lit e ea ed m m, rs, ri us, a, ria at ns us us ) , ~ s (B on) tan age t I n), ate s (A s, r, ~ ria a, ~ l), l e, ble, le, le, le, le, c), le, ts), le, s), le, te, ble, d, ble,
, S , h m d g s a h n u o a r a b i b b b b
i Bi Bi Bi ol i is i ca ib lg Bi b b n a i n
, ~ ), ~ , ~ n) RI , 2 s ( ra ep Ja 00 , ~ u st, art Me Ori sar or sale nha itie gli anz dice nd Gre no chi ani lep anu Can tes rth oce itio ulg rinu asc ict din Ly nic Bi B la i
ot es B
-5 ks -39 itte W dria roll f Ez Jos l of , ~2 uila alm s Li M a e nd u te Po Ca zi o xa e Ca ilo ph A i c ic ro Ca nn os s V d m t V Or of e r g lot ch B er 's le ath va B lvin 's B gli ra B Vu es c
1 C e e el f r a
a L le t ic h h i ( t l P f I p e' n a n m e g r t e i h w a C e a o p n l e e m S
s oo 6 r NT an Sc o ci n) Aq / T io tin f s a s b d f m
ok t B oks s W ES, lex ea pse un etio xt kh enn Jus s of ith' of J Ch y o er o f N of f A sil tol mp Ep icu x V tho ist / cil o pe nal om lexa of D Sai ssa ola Ecu ten Poly Zü Lu tth ver an Gen n-C ish s (A -Va ntin g Ja y o g Ja
o s k o u d l a r f o i l o a s A i t e a o o r A f l o h ( u ' s a o m a B l e a e n t n
B ir o o L A d S ly C pl Te na ry bi Ju yri il ci y c s B o a d C in n P rs Je x hn o G ic ce G ian gli M s C Ro i ic n Ki ocie Ki
X, 5 F T, B Bo CIP of ea oca m tic Ta B se ut ' C H Lu gor un siu St. Ap S in Co an alv Cou pe de Jo ug
h N en s in le t ( st
in rt Rei lem
X
L a ( O e r S l o D Ap
o
C re u
E ,b e o
Gr (C han
a x m C e ( o o r n
te Zw y n u A C eS
ek ph eek r th DI Phi s, aso n t o de ( Ro ic & m
C H
f Fl lu M re
T A ug 39 i bl
e S k o l o p ( B
y
Gr ocr Gr 6 Fu , HI o n A C us o Je
r lo om of n l
p + T Bo o-M o
ca as ath n ci C c il s io o na
( 4 t m C i
A a IS + o (n a o(
Co
u un es t
ph CHR h a ( Pr ea e Dipp Co o nf Na
y a p C
oc
r yp Ni
c Po f H ic
cr lg
Ap o o f e o e
OT Ap il in B
OT u nc u st
Co g
Au

see next page

 A P O C R Y P H A / E C C L E S I A S T I C A L B O O K S
2 · T i m e l i n e O f I n c l u s i o n & E x c l u s i o n

Timeline Bible / Actor Count Survey

Old Testament Apocrypha, only counted if part of the 15 deuterocanonical books

Old Testament Canon (22, modern count 39 books) 22 + 15 (Psalm 151 and additions to Esther not counted as book; 1&2 Clement added).
BC It is not always clear if Nehemiah & Ezra are counted as 1 or 2 books called Esdras.

~282-250 BC · Greek Pentateuch 5 + 0 Apocrypha not yet written. The 70 elders translated only Source
(Septuagint, 70, LXX) the Pentateuch (five books of the Torah / Law).
~300-140 BC · Apocrypha (Part I / III) - 5 5 Books written during the completion of the Greek OT: Source

(Letter of Jeremiah ~300 BC, Psalm 151 ~300-200 BC,

Sirach ~180-175 BC, Tobit ~225-164 BC, Wisdom of
Solomon ~150 BC, 1 Esdras ~200-140 BC)
~250-140 BC · Greek Old Testament 22 + 0 Further, unknown translators amongst the Alexandrian Source

Jews translated the remaining 17 books of the OT. What

some coined 'Septuagintal Plus' (=Apocrypha) and many
still erroneously consider integral part of the Septuagint, Source

would not even be finished until 240 years after (!) the
Greek OT had been fully translated in 140 BC.
1c. BC · Jews of Alexandria - 0 All groups except the Samaritans (and naturally certain Source

and of Palestine sects) had the same canon, although not specified as
such.
150-1 BC · Apocrypha (Part II / III) - 11 6 Books written after the completion of the Greek OT: Source

(2 Maccabees ~150-120 BC, 1 Maccabees ~135-103 BC,

Judith ~150-100 BC, Additions to Daniel ~100 BC,
3 Maccabees ~ 100-50 BC, Esther-Additions ~100-1 BC)

1c. AD · Christ, His disciples and - 0 Christ and His disciples read and quoted from one Source

AD NT writers canon, from the Greek and Aramaic / Hebrew OT. Jesus
and the NT writers not even once quoted the Apocrypha,
Source
although there are hundreds of quotes and references
to almost all of the canonical books of the OT.

20 BC-40 AD · Philo of Alexandria - 0 He quoted the OT extensively, but he never quoted Source
(Hellenistic Jewish Phil.) from the Apocrypha as being inspired.
No / Minor Influence

1c. AD · Dead Sea Scrolls 21 + 3 Apocrypha included in the collection of biblical and Source
(Written 3c. BC - 1c. AD) extra biblical books (3 books), but not written on
Source
the special parchment reserved for the Bible.
after 70 AD · Apocalypse of Ezra 24 + 0 Considered dozens of other books, but excluded Source

those upon a 'special revelation' from THEOS to

consider only the 24 books (22 books + ?).

~80 AD · Josephus 22 + 0 Apocrypha thoroughly rejected. He frequently used Flavius

Josephus,
(Roman-Jewish historian) the Greek OT. He specifically mentioned 22 OT books Against
and also used the Septuagint 5500 BC timeline. Apion 1:8

~90 AD · Council of Jamnia - - Some sources state that they did not recognize the Source

Apocrypha, while others say that this council was

Source
not about the canon at all.

200 BC · Apocrypha (Part III / III) - 15 4 Books finished after Christ (completing 15 books): Source

- 100 AD (Prayer of Manasseh ~200 BC-50 AD, 4 Maccabees ~18-

55 AD, Baruch ~200 BC-100 AD, 2 Esdras ~90-100 AD)
~120-160 AD · Proto-Masoretic Text 24 + 0 Apocrypha not included. Rabbi Akiva (died 135 AD; Source
(Basic text for most modern (39) the mastermind behind the OT manipulation and the
translations such as AMP,
heretical Talmud; hater of the Gospel; he proclaimed
ESV, KJV, NASB, NIV, NLT ...
For centuries erroneously Bar Kochba as 'messiah') was instrumental in draw-
ing up the canon of the Tanakh. He condemned the Source
thought to be the original
'Hebrew' text, and now only public-, but favored a private reading of the Apo-
reluctantly being admitted by
crypha; he even made frequent use Sirach.
scholars).

2-4c. AD · Tanakh / Talmud 24 + 0 Wisdom of Sirach (Ben Sira) was now quoted several Source

(39) times in the Talmud and was closest to an inclusion

in the canon. Considered as 'historically valuable':
1-2 Maccabees and Judith. Considered 'heretical':
3-4 Maccabees, Susanna, plus Enoch and Jubilees.
(early 2c. AD) · Bryennios List 22 - Apocrypha not included. Source

- 160 AD · Justin Martyr - - Apocrypha never mentioned in any of his works. Source
(Apologist & Philosopher)
170 AD · Melito 21 - Apocrypha not mentioned in his OT canon list. Source
(Bishop of Sardis)
1-3c. AD · Christian Church - ? Many Christians accepted Apocrypha / Ecclesiastical The Canon
of Scripture,
Books as 'profitable for reading'. It also became a part by F.F. Bruce
of the liturgy in many churches. Jerome

240 AD · Origen Adamantius 22 + 0 He saw the Christian canon as consisting of '22 books Ernst Rede-
penning,
(Scholar, Ascetic, Theologian) (7) of the Hebrews' (he included the Epistle of Jeremiah), page 237-
plus the Ecclesiastical books. But he used those apo- 238

cryphal books indiscriminately with those of Scripture

as sources for dogmatic proof texts, and cited as in- ▶ see also
spired / Scripture: Baruch, Judith, Maccabees (plural), the study
'Canon'
Tobit, Wisdom (of Solomon). He also defended Bel and
the Dragon, Sirach and Susanna. He only discriminated Source
the Pseudepigrapha, which he called in fact 'Apo-
crypha' in the sense of being hidden / secret.
~324 AD · Eusebius of Caesarea - 2 Apocrypha considered as 'profitable for reading', ▶ see also
the study
(Historian, Exegete) and 2 books considered as canonical. 'Canon'

325 AD · Council of Nicaea - 1 No definition of the biblical canon, but the Source
(Ecumenical Council) book of Judith was considered inspired.
~350 AD · Cyril of Jerusalem 22 + 2 Apocrypha considered as 'profitable for reading',
(Theologian, Bishop) and 2 books considered as canonical.
Read in Churches

▶ see also the

~360 AD · Cheltenham 22 + 4 Apocrypha considered canonical (4 books). study
'Canon'
(37) The list specifically mentions 22 OT books.
~360 AD · Hilary of Poitiers 22 + 0 Apocrypha considered as 'profitable for reading'. Judith,
(Bishop, Catholic Doctor of (5) Tobith considered canonical by some. He quoted Baruch References
the Church, Philosopher)
in one breath with Moses and Isaiah, quoted Wisdom to Baruch,
Maccabees,
and called Susanna 'blessed'. Susanna

~360 AD · Lucifer of Cagliari - 5 5 books considered as canonical. Source

(Catholic Bishop)
~360 AD · Gregory of Nazianzus 22 + 0 Apocrypha rejected. He counted 22 OT books. But he Source
(Catholic)
(Archbishop, Theologian) (4) taught from Baruch, Judith, Sirach and from Wisdom
of Solomon, and treated it rather as Scripture.
~363 AD · Council of Laodicea 22 + 2 Apocrypha considered as 'profitable for reading',
and 2 books considered as canonical. 22 OT books. ▶ see also the
study
~367 AD · Athanasius of Alexan- 22 + 4 Apocrypha considered as 'profitable for reading', 'Canon'
dria (Pope of Coptic Church) and 4 books considered as canonical. 22 OT books.
~370 AD · Basil the Great - 4 He quoted 4 books as Scripture: Baruch, Judith, Sirach, Source
(Catholic)
(Catholic Doctor, Bishop, Wisdom of Solomon.
Theologian)
~380 AD · Apostolic Canons 22 + 4 Apocrypha considered as 'profitable for reading',
(Syrian Church Order) (39) and 4 books considered as canonical. 22 OT books.
▶ see also the
~380 AD · Amphilochius 21 + 0 Apocrypha thoroughly rejected. study
(Bishop) 'Canon'
~385 AD · Epiphanius 22 + 2 Apocrypha considered as 'profitable for reading',
(Bishop) (27) and 2 books considered as canonical.
~350 AD · Sinaiticus (Aleph) - 6 Apocrypha included (6 books), only part of Source
Greek Old Testament the manuscript survived.
(Alexandrian text-type)
4th C. · Vaticanus (B) 39 + 7 Apocrypha included (7 books). Source
Greek Old Testament
(Alexandrian text-type)

382 AD · Pope Damasus / 39 + 6 Apocrypha partly legalized as canonical, through Source

Council of Rome his Council of Rome. Fully merged with biblical texts.
(Catholic Canon) Damasus then commissioned in 383 AD the Latin Vulgate
Source
edition of the Bible, which would prove instrumental in
the fixation of the canon in the West.
393 AD · Augustine of Hippo 39 + 7 The decisive link to legalize the Apocrypha as canonical Source
(3rd Catholic Doctor & for both 'Christians' and Roman Catholics, through his Source
Patriarch of Calvinism =
Council of Hippo. Most studies on the Canon intention- Source
significant conflict of
interest) ally conceal his role based on the significant conflict of
interest. Augustine frequently drew from the apocryphal
books in his writings. (He was also a former Manicha- ▶ see also
ean, Amillennialist, followed the 7 Catholic sacraments, the detailed
discernment
Genesis only myth, Infant Baptism, Purgatory, Ransom-
Theorist, et al.).
397 AD · Council of Carthage 39 + 7 Summary of the Council of Hippo, reconfirmed 419 AD, Source
(and 419 AD) therefore Apocrypha formalized as canonical. Source

405 AD · Pope Innocent I 39 + 7 Re-confirmation of the council of Hippo & Carthage, Source

therefore Apocrypha formalized as canonical.

4-5th C. · Jerome (of Stridon) 0 Apocrypha rejected (personal position). But he called Source
(Confessor, Historian, (7) Baruch a prophet, quoted from Bel and the Dragon,
Catholic Priest, Secre-
2 Maccabees, Sirach, Susannah, Tobit and Wisdom. Source
tary to Pope Damasus,
Theologian) He encouraged churches to read Wisdom of Solomon
and Eccesiasticus for their edification.
405 AD · Jerome's Vulgate 39 + 7 Jerome had now submitted to the decree of Rome of Source
Latin Old Testament / Maso- Pope St Damasus who had commissioned the Vulgate.
retic Text (Western text-type) Source
He included 7 books as canonical.
5th C. · Alexandrinus (A) 39 + 10 Apocrypha included (10 books), merged. The Canon
of Scripture,
Greek Old Testament
by F.F. Bruce
(Alexandrian text-type)
~590 AD · Pope Gregory the Great 39 + 3-7 Considered Sirach, Tobit and Wisdom explicitly as Source

Scripture. He probably accepted 7 books, with reser- 'Macc.'

vations on 1 Maccabees. He refers to the Apocrypha
'Tobit'
~37-40 times in the same way as to Scripture. He did
clearly -NOT- remove it from the codices. 'Wisdom'
Inclusion in Majority of Bibles

~730 AD · John of Damascus 22 + 7 Apocrypha considered as canonical (7 books; Source

(Apologist, Monk, Priest) disguised as content of the 'Apostolic Canons').
⋮ ⋮ ⋮
⋮
~1130 AD · Hugh of Saint Victor 22 + 0 Apocrypha considered as 'profitable for reading'.
(Mystic, Theologian) Source
(limited
12c. AD · Glossa Ordinaria 22 + 0 Apocrypha considered as 'profitable for reading'. credibility,
(Medieval Scholarly Bible) numerous
errors)
~1330 AD · Nicholas of Lyra 39 + 0 Apocrypha thoroughly rejected.
(Franciscan, former Jew)
⋮ ⋮ ⋮
⋮
1442 AD · Council of Florence 39 + 7 Apocrypha included (7 books), merged. Source
(Ecumenical Council)
~1450 AD · Antoninus of Florence 22 + 0 Apocrypha thoroughly rejected. Source
(Dominican Friar, Archbishop)
1455 AD · Gutenberg Bible 39 + 10 Apocrypha included (10 books), fully merged. Original
Bible
(First Mass-Produced Bible)
~1510 AD · Erasmus 22 ? Apocrypha considered as 'profitable for reading'. Source
(Catholic Theologian, (39) He indicated an acceptance of a wide Christian canon. Source
Philosopher)
1517 AD · Complutensian Polyglot - + 7 Apocrypha included (7 books), separate section. Source
(Franciscan)
1524 AD · Zwingli's Zürich Bible 39 + 10 Apocrypha included, fully merged (some say separate Original
Bible
(Reformed) section, but the original clearly shows it to be included
in between-, not at the end of the OT books)
1534 AD · Luther Bible 24 + 11 Apocrypha included (11 books), same weight as the Original
Bible
(Augustinian) (39) books of Hebrews, James, Jude and Revelation. He
badly disparaged the book of James. Also rejection Source
of Esther, while he regarded 1 Maccabees and Judith
as "not unworthy" to be reckoned among Holy Scrip-
Works of
ture. He cited Sirach (191x) and Wisdom of Solomon; Luther
in many quotes he treated those as 'Scripture'.
1537 AD · Matthew's Bible 39 + 14 Apocrypha included (14 books), separate section. Original
Source

1538 AD · Myles Coverdale Bible 39 + 12 Apocrypha included (12 books), separate section. Original
Bible
(Preacher, Theologian,
Augustinian > Puritan)
1546 AD · Council of Trent 39 + 7 Apocrypha included (7 books), merged. Source
(Roman Catholic) Formal confirmation of the Roman Catholic
canon set into practise some 1146 years earlier.
1560 AD · Geneva Bible 39 + 12 Apocrypha included (12 books), separate section. Original
Bible
(Presbyterian)
1561 AD · Belgic Confession 39 + 13 Rejected, but 13 books considered 'profitable for Source
(Augustinian-Calvinists) reading'.
1568 AD Bishop's Bible 39 + 13 Apocrypha included (13 books), separate section. Source

1569 AD · Reina-Valera Bible 39 + 14 Apocrypha included (14 books), merged. Separate sec- Source
(Spanish Bible) tion in second edition in 1602 AD, removed in 1862 AD.
1571 AD · 39 Articles 39 + 13 Rejected, but 13 books considered 'profitable for reading' Source
(Anglican) and read in their churches until today.
1592 AD · Clementine Vulgate 39 + 7 Apocrypha included (7 books), separate section. Source

1611 AD · King James Bible 39 + 14 Apocrypha included (14 books), separate section. Source
Source

1647 AD · Westminster CoF 39 + 0 Apocrypha thoroughly rejected. Source

(Augustinian)
Gradual Exclusion

1851 AD · Lancelot Brenton LXX 39 + 15 Apocrypha included (15 books), separate section. Source

1885 AD · King James Bible 39 + 0 Apocrypha excluded for reasons related to costs. The Source

National Bible Society of Scotland had successfully pe- Source

titioned in 1826 to not print anymore the Apocrypha.
If it would not have proven less costly to produce the
Bibles without it, we would most probably (!) still
have the Apocrypha in our common Bibles today.
1979 AD · Good News Bible 39 + 14 Apocrypha included (14 books), separate section. Original
Bible
(Reformed)

see next page

 A P O C R Y P H A / E C C L E S I A S T I C A L B O O K S
3 · C o n c l u s i o n s

Summarizing now the studies 'Biblical Canon · Comparison of 28 Resources & Historians', 'Bible · Introduction to Non-Canon-
Conclusions ical Writings' and 'Septuagint · Biblical Proof for Superiority over Masoretic Texts', we can conclude the following facts:

1. The 'Apocrypha' should rather be designated 'Ecclesiastical Books', because most are neither hidden Source
nor strictly heretical books and had been openly used in Jewish Synagogues and Christian churches.

2. The 70 (72) elders exclusively translated the Pentateuch, while other Jews translated the remaining 17 books of Source
the Old Testament (Prophets and Writings) by about 140 BC, completing therefore 22 books (modern count 39).
At the time the translation of the Greek OT had been finalized in 140 BC, only 5 apocryphal books were written. 11
apocryphal books were completed until the time of Christ, while it took at least until 100 AD (2 Esdras possibly
until 300 AD) until the Apocrypha / Ecclesiastical Books were completed.

3. There is no evidence that the Alexandrian Jews ever promulgated a canon of Scripture. Source

4. It can be said with reasonable certainty that the Septuagint did not include the Apocrypha until the middle of see
previous
the second century AD. Christ and His disciples, the New Testament in itself, (the Apocalypse of Ezra), Josephus,
list
Bryennios List, Justin Martyr and Melito, all not mentioning or explicitly rejecting the Apocrypha, are sources of
too much of importance to be simply ignored. Even the authors of the Dead Sea Scrolls, who included Septuagint
texts, intentionally wrote the Apocrypha on normal parchment and not on parchment reserved for the Bible.

5. The oldest-surviving nearly-complete manuscripts of the Greek OT including parts of the Apocrypha are from Source
about 325-350 AD (about 600 years before the oldest Hebrew manuscript). We simply do not know at what
point between the middle of the second century AD and the creation of the mega codices the Apocrypha had
been included.

6. The complete Apocrypha is not found in any of the various codices that contain the Greek Old Testament. ▶ see also the
study 'Canon'

7. Although the Roman Catholic church can probably be blamed to have first formalized parts of the Apocrypha, it
has also to be said from a mature viewpoint, that their inclusion was preceded by the universal church having read -
those Ecclesiastical writings in their churches.

8. The first formal inclusion involved both the Roman Catholic church and Proto-Calvinism. Augustine, who was -
at the same time the third doctor of the RCC and the 'patriarch' of Calvinism quoted in Calvin's works 4,119 times
(Calvin: "Augustine is so wholly within me, that if I wished to write a confession of my faith, I could do so with all full-
ness and satisfaction to myself out of his writings."), were the responsible characters to canonize the Apocrypha.
This truth is also the main driver for the ongoing 'confusion' about the Apocrypha. Instead of taking responsi-
bility, the past is continually being left in the dark by both the RCC and Protestants. The vast majority of argu-
ments from both sides are biased and regularly leave uncomfortable details out.

9. As a matter of fairness, it must also be stated that the RCC and Augustine did 'only' include a fraction of the -
Apocrypha. The Reformation, although under the disguise of separating those books from the truly inspired
books, actually increased the quantity of books printed in Bibles, as clearly seen on page 1 of this study.
In nearly all discussions, we hear the unreflected argument that e.g. Luther separated those books, what usually
silences the listeners. But even the Roman Catholic Church made a distinction between the Apocrypha and the
other books of the Bible prior to the Protestant Reformation, a fact usually ignored.
Most importantly, we rarely reflect on what THEOS actually thinks about the matter - if He would be impressed
by such arguments. The very probable reality is, that it is entirely irrelevant in THEOS' eyes if those books are in
a separate section or merged. Everyone will be held responsible at the Great Judgment who added any word in
between the 2 covers of His Word. THEOS will not be impressed by human reasoning and excuses.
Every Writing [is] breathed by THEOS, and profitable for teaching, for conviction, for setting aright, for instruction that 2Tim
3:16-17
[is] in righteousness, that the man of THEOS may be fitted - for every good work having been completed.

> The Reformed Church should take the lead and acknowledge their complicity before THEOS and the universal church, namely to
have been responsible for having included up to 95% of the OT Apocrypha into nearly all our Bibles, from the time of Zwingli
(1524 AD) until the time the King James Version excluded it in 1885 AD. We as individual believers do not bear inter-genera-
tional guilt, but we have to take responsibility on an 'denominational' level, by openly reflecting and decidedly returning to
THEOS' Word alone. By the appearance of the Apocrypha in the Good News Bible (1979, having involved at least 28 Reformed
translators), it should be apparent that we are far from Sola Scriptura. Many popular Bible softwares in our day now include
without any further orientation the Apocrypha and it is only a question of time until people become once again all too familiar
with the Apocrypha.

Fit For Faith 〣 Your Christian Ministry. Visit the website for more Bible studies.

Please share ✓ No adaptions. www.fitforfaith.ca/bible