Changes

==Historical development==

==Historical development==

The [[Samaritans]], centered at Mount Gerizim in Israel to this day, hold as inspired and authoritative only the ''Five Books of Moses'' as represented in the Samaritan Pentateuch,<ref>[http://www.academia.edu/4050972/A_Critical_editio_maior_of_the_Samaritan_Pentateuch_State_of_Research_Principles_and_Problems_2013_  Stefan Schorch, A Critical ''editio maior'' of the Samaritan Pentateuch:State of Research, Principles, and Problems]</ref> and exclude all other writings in the [[Old Testament]] as the works of men which have been falsely added to the sacred scriptures in direct violation of [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=deuteronomy%204:1-2&version=KJV Deuteronomy 4:1-2;] [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=deuteronomy%2012:32&version=KJV 12:32].

The [[Samaritans]], centered at Mount Gerizim in Israel to this day, hold as inspired and authoritative only the ''Five Books of Moses'' as represented in the Samaritan Pentateuch,<ref>[https://www.academia.edu/4050972/A_Critical_editio_maior_of_the_Samaritan_Pentateuch_State_of_Research_Principles_and_Problems_2013_  Stefan Schorch, A Critical ''editio maior'' of the Samaritan Pentateuch:State of Research, Principles, and Problems]</ref> and exclude all other writings in the [[Old Testament]] as the works of men which have been falsely added to the sacred scriptures in direct violation of [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=deuteronomy%204:1-2&version=KJV Deuteronomy 4:1-2;] [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=deuteronomy%2012:32&version=KJV 12:32].

The first [[Christian]]s used the Greek translation of the [[Old Testament]] known as the [[Septuagint]] which was written and read by Jews as the Greek language generally replaced Hebrew as the language of the people. In response to the rise of the Christian sect and the destruction of the Temple in A.D. 70, Jewish rabbis at the [[Council of Jamnia]] in A.D. 90 discussed rejecting the Septuagint in favor of selected Hebrew language scriptural texts, omitting certain books such as [[Book of Baruch|Baruch]], [[Judith]], [[Maccabees]], [[Book of Sirach|Sirach]], and [[Book of Tobit|Tobit]] (some of these originally written in Hebrew and/or Aramaic <ref>"some of these originally written in Hebrew and/or Aramaic". Discoveries of Hebrew and Aramaic manucripts of [[Book of Tobit|Tobit]], [[Book of Sirach|ben Sira (Sirach, or Ecclesiasticus)]], [[Epistle of Jeremiah]] in the caves at [[Qumran]] near the [[Dead Sea]], the "[[Dead Sea Scrolls]]", demonstrate that a Hebrew or Aramaic origin of a text included in the Greek translation of the Jewish scriptures in the Septuagint accepted by Christians was not the sole criterion for inclusion or exclusion in the Hebrew canon, but included consideration of evidence of content which supported Christian doctrine. Linguistic evidence shows that other Septuagint books which were excluded by rabbinical authority after A.D. 90 certainly had an original Hebrew or Aramaic text. See

The first [[Christian]]s used the Greek translation of the [[Old Testament]] known as the [[Septuagint]] which was written and read by Jews as the Greek language generally replaced Hebrew as the language of the people. In response to the rise of the Christian sect and the destruction of the Temple in A.D. 70, Jewish rabbis at the [[Council of Jamnia]] in A.D. 90 discussed rejecting the Septuagint in favor of selected Hebrew language scriptural texts, omitting certain books such as [[Book of Baruch|Baruch]], [[Judith]], [[Maccabees]], [[Book of Sirach|Sirach]], and [[Book of Tobit|Tobit]] (some of these originally written in Hebrew and/or Aramaic <ref>"some of these originally written in Hebrew and/or Aramaic". Discoveries of Hebrew and Aramaic manucripts of [[Book of Tobit|Tobit]], [[Book of Sirach|ben Sira (Sirach, or Ecclesiasticus)]], [[Epistle of Jeremiah]] in the caves at [[Qumran]] near the [[Dead Sea]], the "[[Dead Sea Scrolls]]", demonstrate that a Hebrew or Aramaic origin of a text included in the Greek translation of the Jewish scriptures in the Septuagint accepted by Christians was not the sole criterion for inclusion or exclusion in the Hebrew canon, but included consideration of evidence of content which supported Christian doctrine. Linguistic evidence shows that other Septuagint books which were excluded by rabbinical authority after A.D. 90 certainly had an original Hebrew or Aramaic text. See

*[http://archive.churchsociety.org/crossway/documents/Cway_102_ApocryphaBackground.pdf BACKGROUND AND HISTORY TO THE APOCRYPHA, By David Phillips] Article reprinted from Cross†Way Issue Autumn 2006 No. 102 (archive.churchsociety.org)

*[http://archive.churchsociety.org/crossway/documents/Cway_102_ApocryphaBackground.pdf BACKGROUND AND HISTORY TO THE APOCRYPHA, By David Phillips] Article reprinted from Cross†Way Issue Autumn 2006 No. 102 (archive.churchsociety.org)

*[http://churchsociety.org/issues_new/doctrine/misc/apocrypha/iss_doctrine_misc_apocrypha_origin.asp The Origin of the Apocrypha]

*[http://churchsociety.org/issues_new/doctrine/misc/apocrypha/iss_doctrine_misc_apocrypha_origin.asp The Origin of the Apocrypha]

*[https://books.google.com/books?id=dtlDAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA203&lpg=PA203&dq=apocryphal+books+having+evidence+of+hebrew+or+aramaic+origin&source=bl&ots=CkMPwQMciG&sig=y6w4tnI_wvIqyzCWqCoN3xo8mvQ&hl=en&sa=X&ei=VGGcVP2RH4r2yQT7toKYAw&ved=0CFMQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=apocryphal%20books%20having%20evidence%20of%20hebrew%20or%20aramaic%20origin&f=false The Apocrypha of the Old Testament: With Historical Introductions, a Revised Translation, and Notes Critical and Explanatory, by Edwin Cone Bissell. Scribner, 1890. 680 pages], page 208ff, citing evidence that the "additions to Esther" were also translated from the Hebrew. (Google eBook)</ref> which were relatively recent Jewish contributions of the 3rd through the 1st centuries before Christ) which had become part of Jewish culture; and they simultaneously excluded as condemned and false the writings of the "heretics" (the ''minim'', including Christians, called nozrim, no§rim, "Nazarenes"), and cursed Christians in a synagogue service "benediction" against them and others. Palestinian texts of the Eighteen Benedictions from the Cairo Genizah <ref>[http://www.newyorker.com/books/page-turner/treasures-in-the-wall The New Yorker: Page-Turner. March 1, 2013 Treasures in the Wall, by Emily Greenhouse] (newyorker.com)<br/>[http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/Genizah.html Jewish Virtual Library: Modern Jewish History: The Cairo Genizah, by Alden Oreck]</ref> present a text of the benediction which identifies the minim:<blockquote>"''For the apostates may there be no hope unless they return to Your Torah. As for the no§rim and the minim, may they perish immediately. Speedily may they be erased from the Book of Life, and may they not be registered among the righteous.  Blessed are You, O Lord, Who subdues the wicked.''"</blockquote>While other specimens of the Palestinian liturgy show slight variation, the no§rim, (usually translated “Christians”) and minim are included in the best texts of this benediction. The fact remains that the no§rim were included with apostates and heretics and the wicked in the Genizah documents.<ref>[http://lawrenceschiffman.com/?s=the+benediction+against+the+minim Professor Lawrence H. Schiffman: The Benediction Against the Minim] (lawrenceschiffman.com)<br/>[http://www.defendingthebride.com/bb/curse.html DEFENDING  THE  BRIDE. THE  CURSE  AGAINST  CHRISTIANS  AT  JAMNIA  ABOUT  90 AD] (defendingthebride.com)<br/>[http://www.academia.edu/6811953/The_Jewish_Council_of_Jamnia_and_Its_Impact_on_the_Old_Testament_Canon_and_New_Testament_Studies The Jewish “Council” of Jamnia and Its Impact on the Old Testament Canon and New Testament Studies, Tim Gordon October 20, 2007] (academia.edu/6811953)</ref> Martin Luther and the leaders of the [[Reformation]] cite as authoritative and determinative the canon of the Hebrew Bible as defined by rabbinical authorities who excluded and condemned as false the entire New Testament scriptures and Jesus as the Messiah <ref name=Luther>Luther rejected the seven books of the Old Testament, citing the Palestinian Canon as his authority. Clearly his reasons were doctrinal. However, his decision poses serious difficulties. What authority from God would Jews have in the Christian era to determine which books of the Old Testament were or were not divinely inspired? In 1529, Luther proposed adoption of the 39-book canon of rabbinic Judaism as the Old Testament canon of the Christian Bible. He justified his decision to exclude seven books from the Old Testament canon of 46 books by an appeal to precedent, citing Jerome who, around A.D. 400 had expressed concerns also voiced by his rabbinical sources that these books in Greek had no Hebrew counterparts. Research into the Dead Sea Scrolls found at Qumran has discovered Hebrew copies of some of the disputed books, which makes their rejection on this ground unsupportable. Luther's principal reason for opposing these Old Testament books seems to be that they contain textual support for doctrines he had rejected, such as praying for the dead (2 Maccabees 12:42-45).<br/>See [http://www.totustuus.com/luther Luther and the Canon of the Bible, by Jim Seghers]<br/>[http://www.olswahiawa.org/uploads/2/1/8/4/21845996/session_3.pdf The Canon of the Bible]<br/>[http://catholicdefense.blogspot.com/2011/07/can-protestants-rely-upon-council-of.html Wednesday, July 20, 2011. Can Protestants Rely Upon the "Council of Jamnia" for Their Bible?]</ref> because "''unto them were committed the oracles of God.''" (see [http://biblehub.com/multi/romans/3-2.htm Romans 3:2]). This is an historical fact. But if the Jews have been so entrusted with the word of God that they had therefore been given the divine authority to determine the canon of sacred scripture, as Luther and the Reformation Protestants maintain, then the whole New Testament is excluded from the canon of the holy Bible because it does not meet established rabbinical criteria for what is sacred inspired scripture.

*[https://books.google.com/books?id=dtlDAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA203&lpg=PA203&dq=apocryphal+books+having+evidence+of+hebrew+or+aramaic+origin&source=bl&ots=CkMPwQMciG&sig=y6w4tnI_wvIqyzCWqCoN3xo8mvQ&hl=en&sa=X&ei=VGGcVP2RH4r2yQT7toKYAw&ved=0CFMQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=apocryphal%20books%20having%20evidence%20of%20hebrew%20or%20aramaic%20origin&f=false The Apocrypha of the Old Testament: With Historical Introductions, a Revised Translation, and Notes Critical and Explanatory, by Edwin Cone Bissell. Scribner, 1890. 680 pages], page 208ff, citing evidence that the "additions to Esther" were also translated from the Hebrew. (Google eBook)</ref> which were relatively recent Jewish contributions of the 3rd through the 1st centuries before Christ) which had become part of Jewish culture; and they simultaneously excluded as condemned and false the writings of the "heretics" (the ''minim'', including Christians, called nozrim, no§rim, "Nazarenes"), and cursed Christians in a synagogue service "benediction" against them and others. Palestinian texts of the Eighteen Benedictions from the Cairo Genizah <ref>[http://www.newyorker.com/books/page-turner/treasures-in-the-wall The New Yorker: Page-Turner. March 1, 2013 Treasures in the Wall, by Emily Greenhouse] (newyorker.com)<br/>[http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/Genizah.html Jewish Virtual Library: Modern Jewish History: The Cairo Genizah, by Alden Oreck]</ref> present a text of the benediction which identifies the minim:<blockquote>"''For the apostates may there be no hope unless they return to Your Torah. As for the no§rim and the minim, may they perish immediately. Speedily may they be erased from the Book of Life, and may they not be registered among the righteous.  Blessed are You, O Lord, Who subdues the wicked.''"</blockquote>While other specimens of the Palestinian liturgy show slight variation, the no§rim, (usually translated “Christians”) and minim are included in the best texts of this benediction. The fact remains that the no§rim were included with apostates and heretics and the wicked in the Genizah documents.<ref>[http://lawrenceschiffman.com/?s=the+benediction+against+the+minim Professor Lawrence H. Schiffman: The Benediction Against the Minim] (lawrenceschiffman.com)<br/>[http://www.defendingthebride.com/bb/curse.html DEFENDING  THE  BRIDE. THE  CURSE  AGAINST  CHRISTIANS  AT  JAMNIA  ABOUT  90 AD] (defendingthebride.com)<br/>[https://www.academia.edu/6811953/The_Jewish_Council_of_Jamnia_and_Its_Impact_on_the_Old_Testament_Canon_and_New_Testament_Studies The Jewish “Council” of Jamnia and Its Impact on the Old Testament Canon and New Testament Studies, Tim Gordon October 20, 2007] (academia.edu/6811953)</ref> Martin Luther and the leaders of the [[Reformation]] cite as authoritative and determinative the canon of the Hebrew Bible as defined by rabbinical authorities who excluded and condemned as false the entire New Testament scriptures and Jesus as the Messiah <ref name=Luther>Luther rejected the seven books of the Old Testament, citing the Palestinian Canon as his authority. Clearly his reasons were doctrinal. However, his decision poses serious difficulties. What authority from God would Jews have in the Christian era to determine which books of the Old Testament were or were not divinely inspired? In 1529, Luther proposed adoption of the 39-book canon of rabbinic Judaism as the Old Testament canon of the Christian Bible. He justified his decision to exclude seven books from the Old Testament canon of 46 books by an appeal to precedent, citing Jerome who, around A.D. 400 had expressed concerns also voiced by his rabbinical sources that these books in Greek had no Hebrew counterparts. Research into the Dead Sea Scrolls found at Qumran has discovered Hebrew copies of some of the disputed books, which makes their rejection on this ground unsupportable. Luther's principal reason for opposing these Old Testament books seems to be that they contain textual support for doctrines he had rejected, such as praying for the dead (2 Maccabees 12:42-45).<br/>See [http://www.totustuus.com/luther Luther and the Canon of the Bible, by Jim Seghers]<br/>[http://www.olswahiawa.org/uploads/2/1/8/4/21845996/session_3.pdf The Canon of the Bible]<br/>[http://catholicdefense.blogspot.com/2011/07/can-protestants-rely-upon-council-of.html Wednesday, July 20, 2011. Can Protestants Rely Upon the "Council of Jamnia" for Their Bible?]</ref> because "''unto them were committed the oracles of God.''" (see [http://biblehub.com/multi/romans/3-2.htm Romans 3:2]). This is an historical fact. But if the Jews have been so entrusted with the word of God that they had therefore been given the divine authority to determine the canon of sacred scripture, as Luther and the Reformation Protestants maintain, then the whole New Testament is excluded from the canon of the holy Bible because it does not meet established rabbinical criteria for what is sacred inspired scripture.

The [[Orthodox Church|Eastern Christian churches]] continued to use the Greek Septuagint from the 1st century to this day. The Western Church of [[Catholicism]] commissioned a Latin translation from [[Saint Jerome]] in the early 5th century which came to be known as the [[Vulgate]].  It remains the official Roman Catholic (Latin Rite) Bible, and as a translation of the Hebrew is an important witness to earlier readings of the pre-Masoretic Hebrew text.<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=wfwq-9gaZFcC&pg=PT13&lpg=PT13&dq=Vulgat+witness+to+Hebrew+text&source=bl&ots=B4YaN19NkF&sig=Cktx0t4xtMerH3AHA2TDFLcqR-k&hl=en&sa=X&ei=3Y-cVNabAYuAygSFtYGYAw&ved=0CDgQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=Vulgat%20witness%20to%20Hebrew%20text&f=false Exploring the Origins of the Bible (Acadia Studies in Bible and Theology): Canon Formation in Historical, Literary, and Theological Perspective Craig A. Evans, Emanuel Tov, Baker Academic, Oct 1, 2008. 272 pages] (Google eBook)<br/>[http://www.academia.edu/3596676/Short_Notes_on_LXX_and_Vulgate_Lam_1_1 Gideon Kotzé (University of Stellenbosch) SHORT NOTES ON THE VALUE OF THE SEPTUAGINT AND VULGATE FOR THE INTERPRETATION OF LAMENTATIONS 1:1] Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages 36/1 (2010), pp.77-93 75.</ref>

The [[Orthodox Church|Eastern Christian churches]] continued to use the Greek Septuagint from the 1st century to this day. The Western Church of [[Catholicism]] commissioned a Latin translation from [[Saint Jerome]] in the early 5th century which came to be known as the [[Vulgate]].  It remains the official Roman Catholic (Latin Rite) Bible, and as a translation of the Hebrew is an important witness to earlier readings of the pre-Masoretic Hebrew text.<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=wfwq-9gaZFcC&pg=PT13&lpg=PT13&dq=Vulgat+witness+to+Hebrew+text&source=bl&ots=B4YaN19NkF&sig=Cktx0t4xtMerH3AHA2TDFLcqR-k&hl=en&sa=X&ei=3Y-cVNabAYuAygSFtYGYAw&ved=0CDgQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=Vulgat%20witness%20to%20Hebrew%20text&f=false Exploring the Origins of the Bible (Acadia Studies in Bible and Theology): Canon Formation in Historical, Literary, and Theological Perspective Craig A. Evans, Emanuel Tov, Baker Academic, Oct 1, 2008. 272 pages] (Google eBook)<br/>[https://www.academia.edu/3596676/Short_Notes_on_LXX_and_Vulgate_Lam_1_1 Gideon Kotzé (University of Stellenbosch) SHORT NOTES ON THE VALUE OF THE SEPTUAGINT AND VULGATE FOR THE INTERPRETATION OF LAMENTATIONS 1:1] Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages 36/1 (2010), pp.77-93 75.</ref>

The Biblical [[New Testament]] was taking shape by the end of the first century when the [[Gospels]] and the letters of [[Paul]] were already being circulated. The heretic [[Marcion]] attempted to remove some books around 140 A.D., showing that there was already a grouping of books that were accepted as authentic.<ref name=Marcion>[http://www.ntcanon.org/Marcion.shtml Marcion: Development of the New Testament Canon]</ref> Twenty of the 27 books of the New Testament were accepted early in the history of Christianity, while the other seven that make up the Scriptures were subjects of dispute by a minority of biblical scholars. Other writings of the late A.D. 1st century and of the 2nd century, by disciples of the apostles and others who were shepherds of the early church, such as Clement of Rome and Ignatius of Antioch, were highly esteemed, and many were regarded as scripture. They represent the ancient orthodox church as opposed to other elements of ancient Christianity such as [[Gnosticism]]. The most important of these are:

The Biblical [[New Testament]] was taking shape by the end of the first century when the [[Gospels]] and the letters of [[Paul]] were already being circulated. The heretic [[Marcion]] attempted to remove some books around 140 A.D., showing that there was already a grouping of books that were accepted as authentic.<ref name=Marcion>[http://www.ntcanon.org/Marcion.shtml Marcion: Development of the New Testament Canon]</ref> Twenty of the 27 books of the New Testament were accepted early in the history of Christianity, while the other seven that make up the Scriptures were subjects of dispute by a minority of biblical scholars. Other writings of the late A.D. 1st century and of the 2nd century, by disciples of the apostles and others who were shepherds of the early church, such as Clement of Rome and Ignatius of Antioch, were highly esteemed, and many were regarded as scripture. They represent the ancient orthodox church as opposed to other elements of ancient Christianity such as [[Gnosticism]]. The most important of these are:

The meaning of the term "deuterocanonical" is therefore not identical with "apocryphal".

The meaning of the term "deuterocanonical" is therefore not identical with "apocryphal".

The canon of Damasus, and the Synods of Rome, Hippo and Carthage, was reaffirmed at the [[Council of Florence]] of the (briefly reunited) Church of the east and west in 1442.<ref>[http://catholicdefense.blogspot.com/2013/10/the-council-of-florence-on-pope-church.html Saturday, October 26, 2013. The Council of Florence on the Pope, the Church and the Bible]<br/>[http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03267a.htm Catholic Encyclopedia (1915) Canon of the Old Testament] "''During the deliberations of the Council'' [of Trent] ''there never was any real question as to the reception of all the traditional Scripture. Neither--and this is remarkable--in the proceedings is there manifest any serious doubt of the canonicity of the disputed writings. In the mind of the Tridentine Fathers they had been virtually canonized, by the same decree of Florence, and the same Fathers felt especially bound by the action of the preceding ecumenical synod''" [of Florence]."<br/>[http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/hcc6.iii.iii.vii.html Christian Classics Ethereal Library. History of the Church, Vol. 6: § 18. The Council of Ferrara-Florence. 1438–1445.]<br/>[http://www.ewtn.com/library/COUNCILS/FLORENCE.HTM Canons of the ECUMENICAL COUNCIL OF FLORENCE (1438-1445)] (Basel/Ferrara/Florence/Rome)</ref> For the Catholic Church, a formal [[dogma]]tic proclamation was made at the [[Council of Trent]], that the Bible the Church had been using and the books it contained "with all their parts" was correct, in reaction to the [[Protestant Reformation]]'s rejection of 7 of the deuterocanonical works as [[apocrypha]], together with those parts of 2 other canonical books which had been long debated (parts of Esther and Daniel). However, [[1 Esdras]], [[2 Esdras]] and [[Prayer of Manasseh]] were not included in the canon of the Catholic Bible defined by the Council of Trent, although they were part of the Vulgate, but they were subsequently placed in an appendix to the definitive [[Clementine Vulgate]], "''lest they be lost altogether''". This definitively closed 1400 years of intermittant debate over the traditional canon of the Bible in the Catholic Church, and declared henceforth [http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/anathema ''anathema'' (cursed)] any one who persisted in holding any dissenting opinion in the matter <ref>"But if any one receive not, as sacred and canonical, the said books entire with all their parts, as they have been used to be read in the Catholic Church, and as they are contained in the old Latin vulgate edition; and knowingly and deliberately contemn the traditions aforesaid; let him be [[anathema]]."[http://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/ct04.html The Council of Trent. The Fourth Session. The canons and decrees of the sacred and oecumenical Council of Trent, Trans. J. Waterworth (London: Dolman, 1848), 17-21. <nowiki>[Page 17]</nowiki> SESSION THE FOURTH Celebrated on the eighth day of the month of April, in the year MDXLVI. DECREE CONCERNING THE CANONICAL SCRIPTURES]</ref> (''see'' [http://biblehub.com/multi/1_corinthians/16-22.htm 1 Corinthians 16:22]; [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=galatians%201:6-9&version=KJV Galatians 1:6-9]; [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=romans%2013:1-2&version=KJV Romans 13:1-2]; [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=hebrews%2013:17&version=KJV Hebrews 13:17]; [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2peter%201:20&version=KJV 2 Peter 1:20] and [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2peter%203:16-17&version=KJV 3:16-17]; [http://biblehub.com/multi/jude/1-8.htm Jude 8], [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=jude%201:16-19&version=KJV 16-19]; [http://biblehub.com/multi/revelation/22-19.htm  Revelation 22:19]). [[Martin Luther]] had initially placed 4 of the New Testament deuterocanonical books in an appendix after the New Testament of his German Bible, judging them to be unscriptural and hostile to the gospel of Christ: Hebrews, James, Jude and Revelation.<ref>[http://www.bible-researcher.com/antilegomena.html Luther's Treatment of the 'Disputed Books' of the New Testament] (bible-researcher.com/antilegomena)<br/>See [https://books.google.com/books?id=ZUAuAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA11&lpg=PA11&dq=Martin+Luther+on+the+Book+of+Tobit&source=bl&ots=o2f-ODSQ5i&sig=5akAGrPB7QUCRHbiEqqWxg5Egek&hl=en&sa=X&ei=hqmUVLrgM8_4yQS19IGgAw&ved=0CFYQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=Martin%20Luther%20on%20the%20Book%20of%20Tobit&f=false Martin Luther's Table Talk, by Martin Luther, translated by William Hazlitt, Alexander Chalmers. Bell & Daldy, 1872. pages 11-13] (books.google.com)</ref><ref name=Luther/> When [[Protestantism|Protestant leaders]] approached the leaders of the separated [[Orthodox Church]] with their revised canon of 66 books, they were rebuffed. [[Orthodox Church|Orthodoxy in the east]] was never confronted with a need to officially define the canon of the Bible and has continued to use the Septuagint as passed down from the time of the apostles of the ancient Church in the 1st century to the present day. The 1611 [[King James Bible]], put together after the [[Church of England]] had broken away from the Catholic Church under [[Henry VIII]] ([[Act of Supremacy]] 1534), included the 7 Old Testament deuterocanonical books and the deuterocanonical parts of the 2 other canonical books, but removed them from the Old Testament and placed them in a separate section, and the Church of England continued to use the deuterocanonicals in the liturgy until forbidden by the [[Long Parliament]] in 1644.<ref>[http://bcw-project.org/church-and-state/first-civil-war/oxford-parliament Oxford Parliament 1644-45] (bcw-project.org), <br/>[http://www.timetravel-britain.com/articles/christmas/ban.shtml The Puritan Ban on Christmas, by Martha Doe] (timetravel-britain.com), <br/>[http://www.sonlightclass.com/Notes/CanonOfScripture/2012-12-02.pdf Canon of Scripture] (sonlightclass.com/Notes/CanonOfScripture/2012-12-02)</ref> The Eastern Orthodox ''Synod of Jerusalem'' (1672), convened by [[Dositheos]], Patriarch of Jerusalem, purposely to reject the ''Confession of Orthodox Faith'' (1629), by Cyril Lucaris, which professed most of the major [[Calvinism|Calvinist]] doctrines, decreed that the Church and Scripture are equally infallible, that there are seven sacraments, and that the books of Tobit, Judith, Ecclesiasticus (Sirach), and Wisdom of Solomon are canonized books of the Bible.<ref>[http://www.britannica.com/event/Synod-of-Jerusalem Britannica online: Synod of Jerusalem (1672)]</ref> By the 1800s [[Protestant]] Bibles began to omit some of the deuterocanonical books altogether as ''The Apocrypha'', while retaining the other deuterocanonicals, Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, Jude and Revelation. In 1885 the Oxford University Press, pressured by Protestant groups, officially removed the Apocrypha, excluding it from all subsequent Oxford printed editions of the King James Version of the Bible, but still making it available as a separate collection in a separate volume.<ref>[http://www.handsonapologetics.com/King%20James%20Bible.html The "Inconvenient Tale" of the Original King James Bible, By Gary Michuta] (handsonapologetics.com)</ref> However, more recently (1973) Oxford began publishing some editions of the Oxford Annotated Bible which also include the apocryphal and deuterocanonical books used by the Roman Catholic Church and the Greek and Slavonic Orthodox Churches, as well as churches of the Anglican Communion (including The Episcopal Church); these editions are titled "''[New] Oxford Annotated Bible with the Apocrypha''"; also available are ''English Standard Version Bible with Apocrypha'' and ''The New English Bible: With the Apocrypha (Oxford Study Edition)''.<ref>See also [http://www.tyndalearchive.com/scriptures/index.htm Tyndale Archive: Index to English Translations of the Bible (more than 100 versions)]. This source lists the following Bibles with Apocrypha (listed here in chronological order):

The canon of Damasus, and the Synods of Rome, Hippo and Carthage, was reaffirmed at the [[Council of Florence]] of the (briefly reunited) Church of the east and west in 1442.<ref>[http://catholicdefense.blogspot.com/2013/10/the-council-of-florence-on-pope-church.html Saturday, October 26, 2013. The Council of Florence on the Pope, the Church and the Bible]<br/>[http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03267a.htm Catholic Encyclopedia (1915) Canon of the Old Testament] "''During the deliberations of the Council'' [of Trent] ''there never was any real question as to the reception of all the traditional Scripture. Neither--and this is remarkable--in the proceedings is there manifest any serious doubt of the canonicity of the disputed writings. In the mind of the Tridentine Fathers they had been virtually canonized, by the same decree of Florence, and the same Fathers felt especially bound by the action of the preceding ecumenical synod''" [of Florence]."<br/>[http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/hcc6.iii.iii.vii.html Christian Classics Ethereal Library. History of the Church, Vol. 6: § 18. The Council of Ferrara-Florence. 1438–1445.]<br/>[http://www.ewtn.com/library/COUNCILS/FLORENCE.HTM Canons of the ECUMENICAL COUNCIL OF FLORENCE (1438-1445)] (Basel/Ferrara/Florence/Rome)</ref> For the Catholic Church, a formal [[dogma]]tic proclamation was made at the [[Council of Trent]], that the Bible the Church had been using and the books it contained "with all their parts" was correct, in reaction to the [[Protestant Reformation]]'s rejection of 7 of the deuterocanonical works as [[apocrypha]], together with those parts of 2 other canonical books which had been long debated (parts of Esther and Daniel). However, [[1 Esdras]], [[2 Esdras]] and [[Prayer of Manasseh]] were not included in the canon of the Catholic Bible defined by the Council of Trent, although they were part of the Vulgate, but they were subsequently placed in an appendix to the definitive [[Clementine Vulgate]], "''lest they be lost altogether''". This definitively closed 1400 years of intermittant debate over the traditional canon of the Bible in the Catholic Church, and declared henceforth [http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/anathema ''anathema'' (cursed)] any one who persisted in holding any dissenting opinion in the matter <ref>"But if any one receive not, as sacred and canonical, the said books entire with all their parts, as they have been used to be read in the Catholic Church, and as they are contained in the old Latin vulgate edition; and knowingly and deliberately contemn the traditions aforesaid; let him be [[anathema]]."[http://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/ct04.html The Council of Trent. The Fourth Session. The canons and decrees of the sacred and oecumenical Council of Trent, Trans. J. Waterworth (London: Dolman, 1848), 17-21. <nowiki>[Page 17]</nowiki> SESSION THE FOURTH Celebrated on the eighth day of the month of April, in the year MDXLVI. DECREE CONCERNING THE CANONICAL SCRIPTURES]</ref> (''see'' [http://biblehub.com/multi/1_corinthians/16-22.htm 1 Corinthians 16:22]; [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=galatians%201:6-9&version=KJV Galatians 1:6-9]; [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=romans%2013:1-2&version=KJV Romans 13:1-2]; [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=hebrews%2013:17&version=KJV Hebrews 13:17]; [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2peter%201:20&version=KJV 2 Peter 1:20] and [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2peter%203:16-17&version=KJV 3:16-17]; [http://biblehub.com/multi/jude/1-8.htm Jude 8], [http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=jude%201:16-19&version=KJV 16-19]; [http://biblehub.com/multi/revelation/22-19.htm  Revelation 22:19]). [[Martin Luther]] had initially placed 4 of the New Testament deuterocanonical books in an appendix after the New Testament of his German Bible, judging them to be unscriptural and hostile to the gospel of Christ: Hebrews, James, Jude and Revelation.<ref>[http://www.bible-researcher.com/antilegomena.html Luther's Treatment of the 'Disputed Books' of the New Testament] (bible-researcher.com/antilegomena)<br/>See [https://books.google.com/books?id=ZUAuAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA11&lpg=PA11&dq=Martin+Luther+on+the+Book+of+Tobit&source=bl&ots=o2f-ODSQ5i&sig=5akAGrPB7QUCRHbiEqqWxg5Egek&hl=en&sa=X&ei=hqmUVLrgM8_4yQS19IGgAw&ved=0CFYQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=Martin%20Luther%20on%20the%20Book%20of%20Tobit&f=false Martin Luther's Table Talk, by Martin Luther, translated by William Hazlitt, Alexander Chalmers. Bell & Daldy, 1872. pages 11-13] (books.google.com)</ref><ref name=Luther/> When [[Protestantism|Protestant leaders]] approached the leaders of the separated [[Orthodox Church]] with their revised canon of 66 books, they were rebuffed. [[Orthodox Church|Orthodoxy in the east]] was never confronted with a need to officially define the canon of the Bible and has continued to use the Septuagint as passed down from the time of the apostles of the ancient Church in the 1st century to the present day. The 1611 [[King James Bible]], put together after the [[Church of England]] had broken away from the Catholic Church under [[Henry VIII]] ([[Act of Supremacy]] 1534), included the 7 Old Testament deuterocanonical books and the deuterocanonical parts of the 2 other canonical books, but removed them from the Old Testament and placed them in a separate section, and the Church of England continued to use the deuterocanonicals in the liturgy until forbidden by the [[Long Parliament]] in 1644.<ref>[http://bcw-project.org/church-and-state/first-civil-war/oxford-parliament Oxford Parliament 1644-45] (bcw-project.org), <br/>[http://www.timetravel-britain.com/articles/christmas/ban.shtml The Puritan Ban on Christmas, by Martha Doe] (timetravel-britain.com), <br/>[http://www.sonlightclass.com/Notes/CanonOfScripture/2012-12-02.pdf Canon of Scripture] (sonlightclass.com/Notes/CanonOfScripture/2012-12-02)</ref> The Eastern Orthodox ''Synod of Jerusalem'' (1672), convened by [[Dositheos]], Patriarch of Jerusalem, purposely to reject the ''Confession of Orthodox Faith'' (1629), by Cyril Lucaris, which professed most of the major [[Calvinism|Calvinist]] doctrines, decreed that the Church and Scripture are equally infallible, that there are seven sacraments, and that the books of Tobit, Judith, Ecclesiasticus (Sirach), and Wisdom of Solomon are canonized books of the Bible.<ref>[https://www.britannica.com/event/Synod-of-Jerusalem Britannica online: Synod of Jerusalem (1672)]</ref> By the 1800s [[Protestant]] Bibles began to omit some of the deuterocanonical books altogether as ''The Apocrypha'', while retaining the other deuterocanonicals, Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, Jude and Revelation. In 1885 the Oxford University Press, pressured by Protestant groups, officially removed the Apocrypha, excluding it from all subsequent Oxford printed editions of the King James Version of the Bible, but still making it available as a separate collection in a separate volume.<ref>[http://www.handsonapologetics.com/King%20James%20Bible.html The "Inconvenient Tale" of the Original King James Bible, By Gary Michuta] (handsonapologetics.com)</ref> However, more recently (1973) Oxford began publishing some editions of the Oxford Annotated Bible which also include the apocryphal and deuterocanonical books used by the Roman Catholic Church and the Greek and Slavonic Orthodox Churches, as well as churches of the Anglican Communion (including The Episcopal Church); these editions are titled "''[New] Oxford Annotated Bible with the Apocrypha''"; also available are ''English Standard Version Bible with Apocrypha'' and ''The New English Bible: With the Apocrypha (Oxford Study Edition)''.<ref>See also [http://www.tyndalearchive.com/scriptures/index.htm Tyndale Archive: Index to English Translations of the Bible (more than 100 versions)]. This source lists the following Bibles with Apocrypha (listed here in chronological order):

:c. 200 BC, Septuagint - LXX - the earliest version of the Old Testament scriptures, includes the Apocrypha

:c. 200 BC, Septuagint - LXX - the earliest version of the Old Testament scriptures, includes the Apocrypha

:1540, Coverdale Bible - TCB - includes the Apocrypha

:1540, Coverdale Bible - TCB - includes the Apocrypha