The 80 books of Scripture

[YADA]

So, was this problem of adding words to the Scripture confined to non-English translations?

my cmment was specific to Martin Luther’s translation. One reason he never submitted his translation to his bishop was becasue of the changes he made, one specifically was the addition of the word “alone” in Romans, which clearly changed the meaning of St Pauls’ point.

There are problems with very translation. Some are perhaps minor, others of grater import. Some might be accidental while others ar deliberate. There are also problems inherent with the [same language] copies. Consider yourself sitting down at your table with the original bible in front of you in addition to reams of paper and an ink pen with the instructions to carefully and accurate make a handwritten copy of the bible.

Do you think you could produce a perfect copy? Now consider your copy is handed off o another who is instructed to faithfully copy it and so on for 1400 years until a printing press is invented…

We have good biblical scholarship, archeology, language studies, etc currently by which to test and verify our biblical translations. We are better able to identify ‘faithful’ translations than at any other time in history. We do not have any original manuscripts of any of the biblical texts, old or new.

 

[Zooey]

I was under the impression that Luther simply placed those books in the back of the bible in a sort of appendix. I might be completly wrong, though.

Your’re right!!!:yup:

There’s not much difference between “Removing” and “moving to an appendix” - if “moving to an appendix” means denying the canonicity of the Apocrypha. He may as well have replaced them with the Sunday comics once he denied their canonicity.

.

I respectfully disagree…As long as the books are in the Bible, people will read them, & as long as they read them, they are going to learn from them.
Having been a small (but reading) child in a world of Bibles without the Apocrypha/Deuterocanonical books, I can assure you that when I finally found & read them, I was amazed. Why? Because they are so obviously not what I had imagined them to be…I had heard of weird stories about Jesus changing toys into living birds as a boy; about Solomaon marrying the Queen of Sheba, about far wilder notions than these, even.
I had fundamentalist family members who, though they had never laid eyes on the Apocrypha themselves, “just knew” what was in them…Only, you see, none of that is there! What is there is plainly part & parcel of the Bible. They are being quoted all over the NT, for one thing!!
I am no fan of Luther, but:nope: let’s not go so far as to think that his putting some of the Bible books in a different order, is in any sense as radical as eliminating them! I lived with that second, & it is a whole different world…

 

[lak611]

Your’re right!!!:yup:

I respectfully disagree…As long as the books are in the Bible, people will read them, & as long as they read them, they are going to learn from them.
Having been a small (but reading) child in a world of Bibles without the Apocrypha/Deuterocanonical books, I can assure you that when I finally found & read them, I was amazed. Why? Because they are so obviously not what I had imagined them to be…I had heard of weird stories about Jesus changing toys into living birds as a boy; about Solomaon marrying the Queen of Sheba, about far wilder notions than these, even.
I had fundamentalist family members who, though they had never laid eyes on the Apocrypha themselves, “just knew” what was in them…Only, you see, none of that is there! What is there is plainly part & parcel of the Bible. They are being quoted all over the NT, for one thing!!
I am no fan of Luther, but:nope: let’s not go so far as to think that his putting some of the Bible books in a different order, is in any sense as radical as eliminating them! I lived with that second, & it is a whole different world…

I had a similar experience. I never read the books that the Orthodox have and Catholics do not until I bought a KJV with Apocrypha. The Prayer of Manasseh isn’t considered canonical by Catholics, but I love it. Even though my church says it really isn’t part of the Bible, I still use it as a prayer. After all, unless I’m praying the Psalms or the Lord’s Prayer, my prayers are not straight out of the Bible anyway.