Septuagint Apocrypha Irejected Scriptures

Recall, the Apocrypha was included in the original King James of 1611 and was in virtually all Protestant Bibles until nearly the end of the nineteenth century. Afterward, the Apocrypha was omitted for cost and convenience reasons – not theological. THREE – The Septuagint Should Be Rejected Because It’s an Alexandrian Text. However, the order found in the Septuagint, once you remove the books of the Apocrypha, is the Law, the Psalms, and then the Prophets. So again, Jesus wasn't quoting from the Septuagint; he was reciting the three divisions of the Old Testament as found in the Hebrew Scriptures and notthe Greek Septuagint.

Books and eBooks by the Director

This page provides a review of a reference work that was consulted while working on the Analytical-Literal Translation of the New Testament (ALT). To purchase a copy of the third edition, click here.

The Septuagint with Apocrypha: Greek and English

By L. C. L., Sir Brenton

Authoritative in the early Church, so it is worthy of our study today

This book contains the entire Greek text of the Septuagint, including the Apocrypha, along with an English translation. For those who don’t know, the Septuagint is a Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament from the third century B.C. It is abbreviated as “LXX.” The name and abbreviation are based on the tradition that 70 or 72 Jewish scholars worked on the translation, six from each of the twelve tribes of Israel.

The format of this book is in two columns, with the Greek text taking about 3/5s of the page and the English translation the other 2/5s. The print size of the Greek text is decent sized, but the English translation is in smaller print (about Times 8). It’s small, but readable. It should also be noted that this translation was done in 1851, so there is some archaic language (e.g., thee, thou, thy, art, walkedst, gavest, wast, etc.).

The English translation would best be classified as a formal equivalence translation, about the literalness of the NASB. At some places where it deviates from a literal translation there are footnotes indicating a more literal translation. Words added for clarity are sometimes italicized, but not always. This is especially the case with the definitive article (“the”). It is often added without being indicated as such. Forms of the verb “to be” are also sometimes added without being italicized. I would have preferred more consistency in this regard, as I discuss in my book Differences Between Bible Versions.

I referred to this volume when working on my Analytical-Literal Translation of the New Testament: Third Edition (ALT3). I used it for studying whether the New Testament writer was quoting from the Hebrew text of the OT or from the Septuagint. I then used notations to indicate which in my NT. It is apparent that the NT writers were familiar with both the Hebrew text and with the LXX, and they freely quoted from either of these.

This use of the LXX by the New Testament writers shows that the LXX was held in high regard by the early Church. In fact, the Preface to this volume states that the LXX “.. became the ‘Bible’ of Greek-speaking Jews and then later of the early Christians.”

The reason for was simply that by the time of Christ, many Jews, especially those living outside of Judea, did not know Hebrew, and once the Christian Church moved outside of Judea, most converts did not know Hebrew as well. Moreover, the New Testament authors were intimately familiar with the LXX, and its language is reflected in their writings. So a study of the LXX will enable one to better understand the NT.

The order of the OT books as found in Christian Bibles today reflects the order of books in the LXX rather than the Hebrew order of books. Moreover, the inclusion of the apocryphal books in the LXX is the main reason the Roman Catholic and Greek Orthodox Churches accepts them as Scripture.

Yet, it is incredibly useful for anyone who has an idea for a video and wants to conceptualize it. Imovie software download. Click Edit and the iMovie app will automatically launch your already-imported videos. Simply select the video or videos you want to edit on the Photos app. To put it simply, it is a lifesaver for creative ideas, especially in the eyes of professional video editors. Once you have started creating your movie on the app, it will be uploaded on iCloud and you will be able to work across various Apple devices.Another perk of having the app version in your iPhone or iPad is that you can create productions like daily video diaries and vlogs in a snap.

Personally, I do not agree with this assessment. However, I do think these books are worth reading. They were written during the time period between the Old and New Testaments. So they help to fill in this historical gap, and they provide background to the NT. The NT writers never quote directly from any of the apocryphal books (which is one reason I do not accept them as Scripture), but there are many allusions to these books in the NT. So the thought of the NT writers was influenced by these books. As such, it is good the apocryphal books are included in this volume, but it is also good that they are included together at the end of the book and numbered separately from the rest of the text rather than interspersed among the canonical OT books as is done in Catholic Bibles

All of this is not to say that the LXX translation is an infallible, God-breathed document. That level of inspiration only applies to the Hebrew text. However, the LXX was considered to be authoritative in the early Church, so it is worthy of our study today.

For these reasons, I recently started reading the OT using this volume, going back and forth between the Greek and English texts. And this volume is very useful for such a study of the Greek of the LXX and even for just reading the English translation of the LXX.

But it should be noted that the parallel column format is not as easy to use as an interlinear. This is especially so with this volume as the verse numbers for the English text are superscripted at the beginning of each verse as is commonly done, but the verse numbers are just in the margins for the Greek text. So if you don’t know Greek very well, it could be difficult to find your place when going back and forth between the Greek and English texts.

Review of The Septuagint with Apocrypha: Greek and English. Copyright (c) 2008 by Gary F. Zeolla.

ALT: Reviews of Reference Works Consulted
Analytical-Literal Translation: Main Page

Text SearchContact Information
Subject IndexAlphabetical List of Pages

Darkness to Light Home Page


Click Here for Books and eBooks by Gary F. Zeolla

Septuagint Apocrypha

Roman Catholics may tell you, 'You Protestants are missing part of the Bible. We have the rest of it.' [Note: These people's leaders (popes, priests, etc.) have led them astray to this wrong belief.] This comment about missing books can throw people off, but it no longer has to. These popish additions to the Bible are commonly called the Apocrypha or sometimes the Deuterocanonical books. This is a short treatise on WHY these books are not in the Bible.

What is the Apocrypha anyway?

The Apocrypha is a collection of uninspired, spurious books written by various individuals. The Catholic religion considers these books as scripture just like a Bible-believer believes that the 66 books in the Authorized Version of 1611 of the Bible are the word of God, i.e., Genesis to Revelation. We are going to examine some verses from the Apocrypha later in our discussion.

At the Council of Trent (1546) the Roman Catholic institution pronounced the following apocryphal books sacred. They asserted that the apocryphal books together with unwritten tradition are of God and are to be received and venerated as the Word of God. So now you have the Bible, the Apocrypha and Catholic Tradition as co-equal sources of truth for the Catholic. In reality, it seems obvious that the Bible is the last source of truth for Catholics. Roman Catholic doctrine comes primarily from tradition stuck together with a few Bible names. In my reading of Catholic materials, I find notes like this: 'You have to keep the Bible in perspective.' Catholics have been deceived into not believing that the Bible is God's complete revelation for man [but they can come out of these deceptions in an instant if they will only believe the Bible as it is written].

The Roman Catholic Apocrypha

First and Second Maccabees
Additions to Esther and Daniel

Septuagint Online

Apocryphal Books rejected by the Catholic Religion:

First and Second Esdras
Prayer of Manasses

*A reader says: 'Susanna is in the Roman Catholic canon. It is Daniel 13.'

Why the Apocrypha Isn't in the Bible.

  1. Not one of the apocryphal books is written in the Hebrew language (the Old Testament was written in Hebrew). All Apocryphal books are in Greek, except one which is extant only in Latin.
  2. None of the apocryphal writers laid claim to inspiration.
  3. The apocryphal books were never acknowledged as sacred scriptures by the Jews, custodians of the Hebrew scriptures (the apocrypha was written prior to the New Testament). In fact, the Jewish people rejected and destroyed the apocrypha after the overthow of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.
  4. The apocryphal books were not permitted among the sacred books during the first four centuries of the real Christian church (I'm certainly not talking about the Catholic religion. The Roman Catholic 'Church' is not Christian).
  5. The Apocrypha contains fabulous statements which not only contradict the 'canonical' scriptures but themselves. For example, in the two Books of Maccabees, Antiochus Epiphanes is made to die three different deaths in three different places.
  6. The Apocrypha includes doctrines in variance with the Bible, such as prayers for the dead and sinless perfection. The following verses are taken from the Apocrypha translation by Ronald Knox dated 1954:

    Basis for the doctrine of purgatory:

    2 Maccabees 12:43-45, 2.000 pieces of silver were sent to Jerusalem for a sin-offering..Whereupon he made reconciliation for the dead, that they might be delivered from sin.

    Salvation by works:

    Ecclesiasticus 3:30, Water will quench a flaming fire, and alms maketh atonement for sin.

    Tobit 12:8-9, 17, It is better to give alms than to lay up gold; for alms doth deliver from death, and shall purge away all sin.


    Tobit 6:5-8, If the Devil, or an evil spirit troubles anyone, they can be driven away by making a smoke of the heart, liver, and gall of a fish..and the Devil will smell it, and flee away, and never come again anymore.

    Mary was born sinless (immaculate conception):

    Wisdom 8:19-20, And I was a witty child and had received a good soul. And whereas I was more good, I came to a body undefiled.
  7. It teaches immoral practices, such as lying, suicide, assasination and magical incantation.
  8. No apocryphal book is referred to in the New Testament whereas the Old Testament is referred to hundreds of times.
  9. Because of these and other reasons, the apocryphal books are only valuable as ancient documents illustrative of the manners, language, opinions and history of the East.

Wasn't the Apocrypha in the King James?

The King James translators never considered the Apocrypha the word of God. As books of some historical value (e.g., details of the Maccabean revolt), the Apocrypha was sandwiched between the Old and New Testaments as an appendix of reference material. This followed the format that Luther had used. Luther prefaced the Apocrypha with a statement:

'Apocrypha--that is, books which are not regarded as equal to the holy Scriputres, and yet are profitable and good to read.'
King James Version Defended page 98.

In 1599, TWELVE YEARS BEFORE the King James Bible was published, King James himself said this about the Apocrypha:

'As to the Apocriphe bookes, I OMIT THEM because I am no Papist (as I saidbefore)..'
King James Charles Stewart
Basilicon Doron, page 13

In his, 'A Premonition to All Most Mightie Monarches,'--found in his Workes (a collection of the king's writings)--King James said this--

'..Is it a small corrupting of the Scriptures to make all, or the most part of the Apocrypha of equall faith with the canonicall Scriptures..?'

Not only this, but the sixth article of the Thirty-nine Articles of the Church ofEngland (1571 edition. The Church of England published the Authorized King James Version) states that

(1) the Old and New Testaments are the Bible--

In the name of the Holy, we do vnderstande those canonical bookes of the olde and newe Testament, of whose authoritie was never any doubt in the Churche..

(2) the apocrypha is not the Bible--

And the other bookes, (as Hierome sayeth), the ChurcheSeptuagint Apocrypha Irejected Scriptures doth reade for example of life and instruction of manners: but yet doth it not applie them to establish any doctrene.

Philip Schaff, Creeds of Christendom. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1977, Vol. III, pp.489-491.

The Hampton Court Document came as a result of the famous Hampton Court Conference of 1604 when King James specially commanded the translation of the Bible that would one day bear his name. Concerning the apocrypha and the Church of England, it states--

The Apocrypha, that hath some repugnancy to the canonical scriptures,

The Septuagint With Apocrypha Pdf

shall not be read..

Select Statutes and Other Constitutional Documents Illustrative of the Reigns of Elizabeth and James I,
edited by G.W. Prothero, Fellow of King's College, Cambridge, 1894, p. 416

The Apocrypha began to be omitted from the Authorized Version in 1629. Puritans and Presbyterians lobbied for the complete removal of the Apocrypha from the Bible and in 1825 the British and Foreign Bible Society agreed. From that time on, the Apocrypha has been eliminated from practically all English Bibles--Catholic Bibles and some pulpit Bibles excepted.

Not even all Catholic 'Church Fathers' believed the Apocrypha was scripture.

Not that this really means anything. The truth is not validated by the false. Nevertheless, this may be of interest to some.. Jerome (340-420) rejected the Apocrypha:

'As the Church reads the books of Judith and Tobit and Maccabees but does not receive them among the canonical Scriptures, so also it reads Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus for the edification of the people, not for the authoritative confirmation of doctrine.'
Jerome's preface to the books of Solomon

According to Edward Hills in The King James Version Defended p. 98 other famous Catholics with this viewpoint include Augustine (354-430 who at first defended the Apocrypha as canonical), Pope Gregory the Great (540-604), Cardinal Ximenes, and Cardinal Cajetan.

There are other spurious books.

Septuagint Bible Pdf

These include the Pseudepigrapha which contains Enoch, Michael the Archangel, and Jannes and Jambres. Many spurious books falsely claim to have been written by various Old Testament patriarchs. They were composed between 200 B.C. and 100 A.D. There are lots of these spurious books like The Assumption of Moses, Apocalypse of Elijah, and Ascension of Isaiah.

Septuagint With Apocrypha Brenton

Concerning the Dead Sea Scrolls, there may be some information in them that parallels the Masoretic Text, but there are fables in them, too. I went to see the scrolls a few years ago with great expectation but found a bunch of fables. The best defense against error in any form (unauthorized Bibles and religions) is a solid knowledge of the AUTHORIZED (King James) Version of 1611 of the Bible. If you read it, forgeries become readily apparent.

Septuagint Apocrypha I Rejected Scriptures Verse

Those that are unsaved may wish to read our article entitled, How to Get to Heaven.