Expert: Glenn Hansen - 7/22/2008

Question
In some bibles we find scriptures like TOBIT, MACCABEES, BARUCH, SIRACH and etc but in most common used bible we don't find these scriptures:WHY? Are they not important or they don't form part of the bible? I once read few sentences from one of these scriptures and found it very relevant with the OLD TESTAMENT teachings of the holy bible but I don't understand why they are excluded in most bibles?

Answer
"The word Apocrypha, which means "secret/hidden," is an inexact description for the Biblical material more properly referred to as the deutero-canonical (or second canon) books.

Bibles used most commonly by Roman Catholics contain seven such books, as well as additions to the Old Testament books of Esther and Daniel. Those Bibles generally referred to by Lutherans sometimes include these as a section inserted between the Old and New Testaments, called the Apocrypha.

"Roman Catholic Bibles" place the books of Tobit and Judith between Nehemiah and Esther and 1 and 2 Maccabees after Esther. The books of Wisdom (or Wisdom of Solomon) and Sirach (or Ecclesiasticus) are similar to the Book of Proverbs and are placed after the Song of Songs. The book of Baruch follows Lamentations. Eastern Orthodox scripture includes these books, too, and some Orthodox Bibles contain still others such as the Prayer of Manasseh, Psalm 151, 1 Esdras, and 3 Maccabees (with 4 Maccabees as an appendix).

These books were not part of Hebrew scripture, but were included in all Christian Bibles until The 16th Century Reformation. The Reformers chose the shorter Old Testament of the Hebrew Bible (39 Books), thus paralleling the thought of Martin Luther who considered these other books "not equal to the Sacred Scriptures, but useful and good for reading."

Written during the three centuries before Jesus’ birth, they help fill out the story of the Jewish community during that time, and Luther, in his prefaces to several of the books, affirms that they are "useful" reading and can help to increase one's faith."

"About The Bible," Terence E. Fretheim, Augsburg Fortress, Publishers, 1999

Courtesy of the ELCA website [Lutheran]

http://www.elca.org/What-We-Believe/New-or-Returning-to-Church/Dig-Deeper/The-Ap...


Angel Rodriguez, on the SDA Biblical Research Institute website, offers the following:

"2. The Apocrypha and the Christian Church: It used to be believed that Christians took as their Bible the larger Jewish Alexandrian canon that included the Apocrypha. That idea has been totally discredited. In the early centuries of the Christian era there was some debate among Christians concerning those books. The most-well-known case is that of Jerome (A.D. 345-420). He decided to translate the Old Testament into Latin using the Septuagint, which then already included most of the apocryphal books. But he decided to base his translation on the Hebrew text of the Old Testament.  Although he included the Apocrypha in his translation, he made it clear that those books should not be considered part of the inspired canon and should not be used to establish Christian beliefs. His canon was the short Hebrew canon. Nevertheless, he considered the Apocrypha worth reading.
      Augustine argued that a Latin translation of the Bible should be based on the Septuagint so as to contribute to the unity of the church in both the east, where Greek was used, and in the west, where Latin was used. He argued for regarding the Apocrypha as inspired, and his views prevailed. The Latin Bible (the Vulgate) became the official Bible of the Christian church."

http://www.adventistbiblicalresearch.org/Biblequestions/whatabout%20the%20apocry...