Protestant Apocrypha: why differences?

[lak611]

Why are the books in the Apocrypha different in the KJV and the RSV? My KJV has the following books in the Apocrypha: 1 & 2 Esdras, Tobit, Judith, the rest of Esther, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, Song the the Three Holy Children, Susanna, Bel and the Dragon, Prayer of Manasseh, 1 & 2 Maccabees. My RSV has those books plus Psalm 151, 3 & 4 Maccabees. Do any Protestants know why the Apocrypha is different in these two translations?

 

[NewAbdalMaseeh]

Also note that Luther’s “Apocrypha” section at least lacked 2 Esdras (and perhaps 1 Esdras as well?). I think a lot of this is based on the translator’s conception of Christian usage. But this is a real grey area, because, for example, the Ethiopians employ at least Jubilees, and perhaps other texts as well. Also, Wyclif’s Bible included the epistle to Laodiceans.

 

[Ootlet]

Psalm 151 and 3/4 Maccabees are part of the Orthodox canon. The RSV was an ecumenical translation, so it included them. The KJV was an Anglican/Puritan translation (mostly Anglican), so it only included the deuterocanon and apocrypha inherited from Catholicism.

 

[lak611]

Psalm 151 and 3/4 Maccabees are part of the Orthodox canon. The RSV was an ecumenical translation, so it included them. The KJV was an Anglican/Puritan translation (mostly Anglican), so it only included the deuterocanon and apocrypha inherited from Catholicism.

Then why are 1 & 2 Esdras in the KJV Apocrypha? They are not found in any Catholic Bibles.

 

[NewAbdalMaseeh]

Then why are 1 & 2 Esdras in the KJV Apocrypha? They are not found in any Catholic Bibles.

Note that Ootlet referred to the deuterocanon AND apocrypha of Catholicism. Note that 2 Esdras (AKA IV Ezra) appeared in Jerome’s Vulgate. Furthermore, though Wyclif was a heretic, in some sense we can consider him representing views held by some within Catholicism, and his Bible also included those books. Also, those books appeared as part of the Apocrypha section of the Vulgate put forth by Pope Sixtus V and Clement VIII in 1861

 

[lak611]

Note that Ootlet referred to the deuterocanon AND apocrypha of Catholicism. Note that 2 Esdras (AKA IV Ezra) appeared in Jerome’s Vulgate. Furthermore, though Wyclif was a heretic, in some sense we can consider him representing views held by some within Catholicism, and his Bible also included those books. Also, those books appeared as part of the Apocrypha section of the Vulgate put forth by Pope Sixtus V and Clement VIII in 1861

That’s interesting, because I have a D-R, and it does not include this Apocrypha section.

 

[NewAbdalMaseeh]

Though I am not certain, I think the issue is that after Trent, Catholic Bibles stopped including 1 and 2 Esdras (AKA 3 and 4 Ezra). The 1861 Vulgate of Sixtus V and Clement VIII has an introduction to its Apocrypha section, at the top of page 817, just before the oration of Manassa and 3rd Ezra, which basically states that the texts found therein were not explicity approved by the Tridentine synod, but are included in that Apocrypha section so they do not disappear in entirety.

 

[NewAbdalMaseeh]

Even more interesting, I have read online that the Douay Rheims itself originally had an Apocryphal section in the form of an appendix at the end of the Old Testament. The following site…

gutenberg.org/etext/1610

…claims to reproduce the text. Looking at that text, it places the prayer of Manassa, and 3 and 4 Ezra in the appendix, as well as Obadiah!!! Does anyone else know anything about this? I’m totally mystified…

 

[Ootlet]

I took half an hour and wrote a really long reply to this, copying chunks out of books and doing research on at least five other websites, but catholic.com logged me out when I hit submit, and did something so that the reply editing page no longer shows up in my history. I have one or two websites that log you out if you take too long to write a reply (as if written communication should be slapdash and haphazard!), but I have never seen a site that forces a reload when you try to go back to your editing window. Or maybe Konqueror did the reload by itself, but I doubt it. This makes me angry.

Suffice to say, there’s no way I’m going to write all that again.

 

[NewAbdalMaseeh]

Ootlet. That has happened to me as well. I am sorry to read that we missed a lot. In the future, when you write a long and important post, copy and paste it into a text file on your desktop or something (that’s what I do).

Also, please re-consider, some time in the future, writing part or all of that post again. Some of us are sincerely interested, and can benefit. Or at least give a summary and direct us to the sources you employed?

 

[lak611]

I took half an hour and wrote a really long reply to this, copying chunks out of books and doing research on at least five other websites, but catholic.com logged me out when I hit submit, and did something so that the reply editing page no longer shows up in my history. I have one or two websites that log you out if you take too long to write a reply (as if written communication should be slapdash and haphazard!), but I have never seen a site that forces a reload when you try to go back to your editing window. Or maybe Konqueror did the reload by itself, but I doubt it. This makes me angry.

Suffice to say, there’s no way I’m going to write all that again.

Ootlet. That has happened to me as well. I am sorry to read that we missed a lot. In the future, when you write a long and important post, copy and paste it into a text file on your desktop or something (that’s what I do).

Also, please re-consider, some time in the future, writing part or all of that post again. Some of us are sincerely interested, and can benefit. Or at least give a summary and direct us to the sources you employed?

Ootlet, I really would be interested in reading the information that you found. I’m sorry that you had difficulties due to the nature of the Forums. Would you kindly repost the information if you get a chance? Thank you.