The Apocrypha is recongnized by the [cultic] catholic church as part of the Bible.
Why don't Christian religions do the same?

In between the books of Malachi and Matthew
some bibles have books that are called the Apocrypha.
What is the Apocrypha and why is it only in some bibles?

The Apocrypha are books that were written after the Canon of the Bible was complete - about 425 B.C. Although they were and are asserted by [cultic] catholics to be canonical (or, belonging to the books of the Bible officially accepted as Holy Scripture,) these books are rejected by authentic Christians and labeled as being fraudulent entries - not the Word of God. The principles of canonicity were reviewed when the Apocrypha was first introduced. The word "apocrypha" means hidden or secret. Due to their doubtful authenticity the word has come to mean spurious, fraudulent, or forged by scholars.....and thus "hidden away from" the genuine canonical Scriptures, or Sacred 66 (as some have called the entire Bible).

The Apocrypha is composed of fourteen books which are found in the Septuagint and the Vulgate (though Jerome vigorously objected to Apocrypha being inserted therein but was overruled by cultic-catholic-ecclesia bullyboys). Apocrypha was never in the Hebrew Canon (thus nowhere within Kittel's Biblia Hebraica edition of ben Asher's Masoretic Hebrew Old-Testament Text based on the famed Leningrad Manuscript).

Originally, apocryphal books were penned in the Greek language, except for Ecclesiasticus, First Maccabees, part of Judith and Tobit. So, why do reputable Christian authorities (mostly Protestant) reject the writings of the Apocrypha as being the actual, inspired words of God? Here are some of the reasons cited:

1. The Apocrypha was never in the Hebrew Canon.

Every card-indexing catalogue of the canon of Scripture from the ancient world listed only Jewish books of the Old Testament (thirty-nine as they are today.) The Apocrypha was ALWAYS excluded totally.

2. Neither Jesus Christ, nor any of the New Testament writers, ever quoted from the Apocrypha.

3. Josephus(a well-known historian from the Biblical era) excluded them from his list of sacred scripture. He felt they were lacking authenticity or validity in essence or origin. Even Origen refused to accept Apocrypha as bonafide Scripture, not to mention Polycarp. Augustine questioned the veracity of the apocryphal book Judith.

4. During the first four centuries there was no mention made of the Apocrypha in any catalogue or canonical book. They were believed to be slipped in during the fifth century, near the time of islamic-founder Mohammed and his deviant and needless plagiaristic rehashing and revisionism against Christian Scriptures. There are reputed to be 263 quotations and 370 allusions to the Old Testament in the New Testament and not one of them refers to the apocryphal writings.

5. The books of the Apocrypha were never asserted to be divinely inspired or to possess divine authority in their contents.

6. No prophets were connected with these writings. Each book of the Old Testament was written by a man who was a prophet.

7. These books are replete with historical, geographical and chronological errors. In order to accept the Apocrypha one would have to reject the Old Testament narratives.

8. The Apocryphal doctrines and practices are contrary to the Canon of Scripture. Some examples:

Prayers and Offerings for the Dead! II Maccabees 12:41-46, prayers are to be offered for the dead and monetary offerings are to be brought on their behalf. This is in disagreement with John 3:18, 36. According to the Canon of Scripture. Biblically, your destination is determined before you die, and no amount of prayer by your loved ones, or contributions to a church will change this.

Atonement and Salvation through Alms-Giving! Tobit 4:11 states that salvation can be purchased - "For alms deliver from all sin and from death, and will not suffer the soul to go into darkness."

Cruelty to Slaves Justified! In Ecclesiasticus 33:25-29 we read that the best way to treat a slave is to pile work on him. That is totally opposed to everything regarding treatment of workers in the Canon of Scripture.

Doctrine of Emanations! Presuming that the origin of life is other than Biblical-creation history, inferring that the world as an "outflowing" from One Absolute source, but not necessarily God.

There has always been a lot of debate among the confused and the divisive about the place that the writings of the Apocrypha should hold. Roman catholic, some orthodox, and a few episcopalian and anglican (plus the wayward ELCA) churches include the Apocrypha (except for the books of Esdras and the Prayer of Manesseh,) but refer to them as "deuterocanonical" (or, by definition, pertaining to a "second canon," or ecclesiastical writing of inferior authority). Saintly Protestants, however, refer to these same books as spurious writings, especially writings falsely attributed to Biblical characters or times).

9. Catholic scholar Erasmus, his contemporary Martin Luther, other reformers, plus Beza, Elzevir, Stephanus, and Scrivener rejected the Apocrypha as true Scripture. ............................................................................

Horton Davies pointed out that the Puritans took exception to the number of readings from the Apocrypha in the Book of Common Prayer "as implying a slight on the sufficiency of the canonical Scriptures."

Thomas Smith noted that one chief objection to the Common Prayer Book at a 1583 conference was "the appointment of certain apocryphal writings in the public worship of God, in which were several errors and false doctrines while many parts of the canonical writings, and the doctrine of the sacraments, were omitted."

Smith cited [the heretic] archbishop Whitgift as stating at a 1583 conference the following: "The books called apocrypha are indeed parts of the scriptures; they have been read in the church in ancient times, and ought to be still read amongst us." Several of the KJV translators who worked with, were taught by, or were associated with (and thus made ignorant by or under duress to) Whitgift might have held similar views, so as to include the Apocrypha between the KJV Old and New Testaments. Puritans among the KJV translators would have disagreed with regard for the Apocrypha. It was [heretic] archbishop Whitgift who presided over the crowning of James as King of England in July of 1603.

[Incidently, it is most interesting to note that the lectionary contained within the present 1928/1945-approved Book of Common Prayer used by some episcopalian and anglican sects....from which is derived the Old-Testament readings during Morning Prayer service before the Mass....always include selections from CANONICAL books of the Bible which a prudent parish bishop can have the lectors read - instead of the italicized apocryphal reference choices!] ............................................................................

Why the KJV Translators Did Not Accept the Apocrypha as Scripture

No TRUE Christian today accepts the Apocrypha as Scripture. The Apocrypha is a collection of several pagan writings which the cultic catholic church accepts as inspired deutercanonical scripture. The cultic-catholic Council of Trent (1546) pronounced a curse upon anyone who denied that these books were inspired. The King James translators did NOT consider the books to be inspired Scripture, nor did they include them in the canon as such. They merely placed the Apocryphal books between the Old and New Testament as a historical document - not as Scripture. Their reasons for NOT accepting the Apocrypha as Scripture are listed on page 185-186 of the book Translators Revived by Alexander McClure. The reasons are basically as follows:

1. Not one of them is in the Hebrew canon in contrast to the rest of the Old-Testament books.

2. Not one of the writers lays any claim to inspiration.

3. Apocryphal books were never acknowledged as sacred Scriptures by the Jewish church, and therefore were never approved by our Lord.

4. They were not allowed a place among the sacred books during the first four centuries of the Christian church.

5. They contain bizarre statements, and doctrinal assertions which contradict not only the canonical Scriptures, but themselves. For example, in the books of Maccabees alone, Antiochus Epiphanes dies three times in three places!

6. It inculcates doctrines at variance with the Bible, such as atonement by obedience to parents, prayers to change the destinies of the dead, and immoral practices, such as lying, suicide, assassination, and magical incantation.



The Farce of Manuscript Dating
Relating to Textual Accuracy

Obviously, the autographic New-Testament Text of and penned by The Original Twelve Apostles of Jesus Christ has been preserved by The Holy Spirit down to us in the beginning of the 21st century, since "the Word of the Lord abides forever."

It is not necessarily that the autographic papyrus or parchments upon which The Apostles wrote their gospels and epistles was destroyed, but might instead be hidden away and not yet discovered.

Clearly, precisely-accurate records and duplicates of That True and Inerrant New-Testament Text have been preserved throughout the early centuries of the Christian church, through the Middle Ages, through the Reformation, and which we now have presently in the form of Scrivener's Trinitarian Greek Text of the New Testament. The Greek and Latin manuscripts such was based upon do exist and are in the possession of what the Bible terms 'trustworthy men' instead of deceivers and liars and heretics who would not admit their existence nor veracity anyway even if they had access to them.