Why Did The Vatican Remove 14 Books From The Bible in 1684?

By: choiceandtruth

The Vatican church, or the Roman Catholic church, has a long history of corruption and deception. Aside from literally committing acts of outright genocide several centuries ago against the Cathars, to sexually abusing children in more modern times, it is certainly one of the most corrupt organizations in history.

In the year 1611 the Bible was translated from Latin into English. Back then the Bible contained a total of 80 books and the last 14 books, which today have been excluded, made up the end of the Old Testament and were as follows:

  • 1 Esdras
  • 2 Esdras
  • Tobit
  • Judith
  • The rest of Esther
  • The Wisdom of Solomon
  • Ecclesiasticus
  • Baruch with the epistle Jeremiah
  • The Songs of the 3 Holy children
  • The history of Susana
  • bel and the dragon
  • The prayer for Manasses
  • 1 Maccabees
  • 2 Maccabees

In 1684 all of these books were removed from all versions except for a 1611 edition, which was the very first edition translated into English.

In this first edition you will also actually find that Jesus’ name is spelled IESUS and pronounced Yahashua. So why then does everyone continue to call him Jesus, when the letter J did not even being used at the time?

One of these books that is particularly interesting, is the “Wisdom of Solomon”. For those who don’t know Solomon is one of the most legendary characters from the Bible. He was the son of David and is alleged to be the wisest man that has ever lived. He is painted largely as a benevolent figure. But what you read in this book will make you question everything you were told to believe about him.

Observe the following excerpt;

Wisdom of Solomon 2:1-24

1 For the ungodly said reasoning with them selves, but not aright, our life is short and tedious and in death of a man there is no remedy: neither was there any man known to have returned from the grave.
2 For we are born at all adventure: and we shall be hereafter as though we had never been: for the breath of our nostrils is as smoke, and the little spark in the moving of our heart
3 Which being extinguished, our body shall be turned into ashes, and our spirit shall vanish as the soft air,
4 And our name shall be forgotten in time, and no man shall have our works in remembrance, and our life shall pass away as the trace of a cloud, and shall be dispersed as a mist, that is driven away, with the beams of the sun, and overcome with the heat thereof.
5 For our time is very shadow that passeth away; and after our end there is no returning: for it is fast sealed, so that no man cometh again.
6 Come on there for let us enjoy the good things that are present: and let us speedily use the creatures like as in youth.
7 Let us fill ourselves with costly wine and ointments: and let no flower of the Spring pass by us.
8 Let us crown ourselves with rosebuds, before they be withered:
9 Let none of us go without his part of our voluptuousness: let us leave tokens of our joyfulness in every place: for this is our portion and our lot is this.
10 Let us oppress the poor righteous man, let us not spare the widow, nor reverence the ancient gray hairs of the aged.
11 Let our strength be  the law of justice: for that which is feeble is found to be nothing worth.
12 Therefore let us lie in wait for the righteous; because HE is not of our turn, and HE is clean contrary to our doings. He upbraideth  us with our offending of the law, and ojecteth to our infamy the transgression of our education.
13 HE professeth to have the knowledge of the MOST HIGH, and calleth HIS self the child of the LORD.
14 HE was made to reprove our thoughts
15 HE is grievous unto us even to behold, for HIS life is not like other men’s, HIS ways are of another fashion.
16 We are esteemed of HIM as counterfeits: HE abstaineth from our ways as from filthiness: HE pronounceth the end of the just to be blessed, and maketh HIS boast that GOD is HIS father.
17 Let us see if HIS words be true: and let us prove what shall happen in the end of HIM.
18 For if the just man be the Son of THE MOST HIGH, HE will help HIM and deliver HIM from the hands of HIS enemies.
19 Let us examine HIM with despitefulness and torture, that we may know HIS meekness and prove HIS patience.
20 Let us condemn HIM with a shameful death: for by HIS own mouth HE shall be respected…..

This raises a number of important questions

  • Who is Solomon speaking of killing with a “shameful death”?
  • Why did the Vatican vote to have these 14 books removed from the Bible?
  • Why did Solomon sound so crazy and evil in this book?

It seems that Solomon was speaking of Jesus. But Jesus was born roughly 900 years after his death. Could he have prophesied Jesus’ coming? Let’s consider why this could be who Solomon was talking about;

  • They killed the SON with a shameful death
  • The SON’s actions or fashions were different from everyone else’s
  • HE claims to be and IS the child of The MOST HIGH
  • He was a righteous poor man who would look at Solomon and others like him as “counterfeits”.
  • HE professeth to have knowledge of The MOST HIGH

Then listen to what Solomon has to say:

  •  HE was made to reprove (criticize) our thoughts
  • We are esteemed of HIM as counterfeits: HE abstaineth from our ways as from filthiness: HE pronounceth the end of the just to be blessed, and maketh HIS boast that GOD is HIS father
  • For if the just man be the Son of THE MOST HIGH, HE will help HIM and deliver HIM from the hands of HIS enemies.

And one last thing I would like to point out is when Solomon says;

  •  Let us oppress the poor righteous man, let us not spare the widow, nor reverence the ancient gray hairs of the aged.

This really disrupts everything we thought we knew. Solomon really and truly sounds evil. He is also alleged to be the wisest man in history.

Interestingly, Solomon is a man who was engulfed in the occult, he worshiped multiple gods and was weak for women. And the famous Temple of Solomon is considered to be the spiritual birth place of Freemasonry, a movement that is (at the highest levels) associated with pulling the strings of major global events and argued to be the true controlling power of our world.

Whatever is really going on here, we should certainly research it further.


The views and opinions expressed on Anonymous are solely those of the original authors and our contributors. These views and opinions do not necessarily represent Anonymous or Staff.



  1. LibertyAddict

    August 28, 2016 at 7:59 pm

    Um. I’m sorry but you’re a moron. The Church has done much more good than evil in its day and it was PROTESTANTS who removed these books, not the vatican. We Catholics stI’ll have them.

    • HumansSuck

      August 28, 2016 at 11:18 pm

      No religion has a clean history. Not sure why you call the Anon member a moron for simply sharing a youtube vid’.

      the books were gathered from the biggest ‘tribes’ around the world and combined into a belief system just like a BS or ISO only some of the information that could be preceived as underminding or enlightenting from the intended picture were simply held back. like tellling someone only your side of the story.

      you speak of the church in a defensive manor.The church is man made as are the books that go with it. god is he, he is god… be one as we are one.(do some homework then query a preist then do much more homework = enlightenment not just see a one sided version called the Catholic bible.) it’s funny sensed and felt how you would feel reading this whilst I was typing. sorry for that.

      • Randy

        September 1, 2016 at 5:10 am

        How can he be called a moron?…..easily. the Catholic has several of these books. 1st and 2nd Maccabees, Tobit, Wisdom……the Protestants took out seven books. His opening is all wrong, so I don’t even need to go any further.

    • nicbigdik

      August 29, 2016 at 3:58 am

      troll post but i’ll respond anyway. all religions suck dick.

      • Right bib down

        August 29, 2016 at 10:39 am

        Funny that, so does your mother and your granny…slurp!

      • Flip Flop

        August 29, 2016 at 10:42 am

        Funny that, so does your mother and your granny…slurp!

      • Randy

        September 1, 2016 at 5:13 am

        Hi religions, how are you?

    • Nasir Khan

      August 29, 2016 at 5:19 am

      Remember, the Books you now have as the Bible contain word of God but mixed with word of men and so not entirely reliable. The original Hebrew Torah, Psalms and the Gosoel to Jesus are lost fin antiquity. Today’s Judeo-Christianity was made up after Jesus and still continue with new amendments, revisions and newer findings! And, ‘ Trinity Christianity’ in particular was founded in 325 AD by Paul under Roman emperor Constantine. It does not represent Jesus at all as he truly was. It is in polytheism and a form of idolatry as preached to Gentiles, and forbidden by Jesus and those verses are still contained in the Bible even today to prove to unbelievers.

      • Tomes Lore

        August 29, 2016 at 9:47 am

        Every antique books need to interpret the meaning.
        What we call new and revision is the new interpretation, new application, new understanding about our new complex life and standard of value.
        At the time the script was written, maybe it’s oke to eliminate enemy, because there was no standar value of law accepted by all tribes or nations.
        Now, in our time, when people understand his/her equal values as human with other people, regardless of his/her race, gender, social stats, even his/her religion/faith, it’s violating law to genocide entire tribe of the enemy.
        The script doesn’t change, but our value does. Then, we need to reinterpret the script according to our new standard value, not follows those verses blindly.
        Some fundamentalists insist on following literrally, which makes a lot of conflicts.
        Some unbelievers want everyone to abandon all idea in the script, but doesn’t offer better system values (teachers of the values such as the priest, or rabbis or imams).
        Unbelievers should know that other people also need to learn how the value of the unbelievers, not just the critique about the believers or critique about the “old fashioned” value.
        Maybe the unbelievers assune that other people should know or understand it by him/herself. Well, they’re not.
        Every religions teach and don’t assume people understand by him/herself.
        Maybe the unbelievers should also teach (and write books) seriously and in intelligent way, not sarcastically, so that people attract to be unbeliever.

      • Tomes Lore

        August 29, 2016 at 10:05 am

        In Abrahamaic religions, God called himself as plural being. Wether in Antique Hebrew, or in Arab language.
        God teach himself as polypersons.
        Unless you can prove that the language consistently point of singular being, then you may proceed with your claim.
        Elohim is plural word for Elaha, which is God.
        And the script of Old Testaments older than 300CE, wrote Yhvh is Elohim.
        In arabs, God call himself “We”, which clearly states polypersons.
        The believers tried to interpret it somehow as singular being, so that they can match it with monotheism concept.
        So, when your thought was agree with monotheism concept, you ignore the plural words and you became sensitive to those that didn’t agree with your concept. Such as Christianity.
        You ignore that Christianity taught One God (monotheism) in three persons. You insisted that they taught polytheism or Multiple Gods.

    • Cage

      August 30, 2016 at 4:38 am

      Supporting ‘Manifest Destiny’, is the lowest form of genocide to a continent, but is considered as the highest form of civil progress to a oppressive nation! Indeed Church has been the spearhead of may aggression’s, towards peaceful happy societies that are aligned with god!

    • mikemiler123

      August 31, 2016 at 1:58 am

      holy shit I was about to write that until i scrolled down and saw your comment haha 😛

    • Enrique

      September 7, 2016 at 10:35 pm

      Yes, Protestants removed them. The premise of this whole article was wrong.

  2. Heather

    August 28, 2016 at 8:00 pm

    #1 Starts with “and the ungodly said…..” – it seems to me that he is recounting all of the things that the ungodly believe, not what he believes…..

    • ReShar Coleman

      August 29, 2016 at 2:43 am

      Heather is the shit. I totally overlooked that part Heather as I’m sure others did. Nice catch indeed.

    • Stephen

      August 29, 2016 at 12:10 pm

      This was gonna be my reply,

      Thanks for being wise. This is such a disappointing article, laughable almost.

      It starts by saying the ungodly said this, even goes on to say that they were leaning in their own understanding and we’re not right. So yh, it was a recount of what was said by the ungodly.

    • Jerry Stone

      August 29, 2016 at 1:15 pm

      Exactly right! The only thing that might be added is that, after “…and the ungodly said….”, Solomon (if he indeed wrote these words) continues, “…reasoning with themselves, BUT NOT ARIGHT,….” (emphasis added) Clearly the writer did not agree with the quoted approach to life.
      Isn’t it funny how those who hate religion will twist the scriptures, almost as much as professed believers all too often do?

    • Henrik L

      August 29, 2016 at 3:40 pm

      Exactly. This “investigation” is only meant as a hit-piece on the Bible and it´s authenticity.
      Just because the Protestants(not rome) removed the 14 books of the apocrypha, even tough it was still in the 1611 King James bible, don´t mean they can´t be autentic.
      Solomon did really create a havoc in Israel trough his marriages with foreign women, wich brought with them their idols and traditions… wich corrupted the people. A little leaven will corrupt the whole bread. Even so, he was given wisdom by God to rule correctly. And the Masons have corrupted his wisdom into their Gnostic/newage/luciferian teachings.

      Peace and blessings.

    • Skeet webster

      September 3, 2016 at 12:33 am

      Bingo! I was hoping someone would say it!

  3. Mike

    August 28, 2016 at 8:06 pm

    Ummm… Did you even read the beginning of the chapter lol? I am pretty sure he was describing how the unrightious reason within themselves not exspressing his own view of life.

  4. Kieran

    August 28, 2016 at 8:24 pm

    This was an interesting post and it provokes thought. I don’t know much about religion, never really caring for the rubbish the spoon fed us as kids. I would like to see more information on this if you are able to gather more information the subject, and I suspect that if there is more information, you’d get it.

  5. Joshua

    August 28, 2016 at 8:44 pm

    Interestingly, the only time the number 666 is mentioned in the Bible other than Revelation is when outlining the amount of gold coins Soloman was given yearly.
    Soloman is an interesting guy, but possibly not a good one. He broke the Jewish customs of a King constantly. He turned to the occult. Wisdom doesn’t always mean good.

  6. Stephen Nevans

    August 28, 2016 at 8:57 pm

    Poorly researched piece, sorry to say. The Wisdom of Solomon wasn’t written at the time of Solomon but followed the common practice of assigning a notable person to the writing to establish credence.

  7. Dave

    August 28, 2016 at 9:25 pm

    This person has no clue. Most of these are in the Catholic Bible and the ones that are not were never part of codified scripture to begin with. The Protestants removed 7. Get your facts straight.

  8. Mike

    August 28, 2016 at 9:32 pm

    Like the first person who left a comment said you are a moron. The Bible published in 1611 was the King James Version of the Bible in English for the Church of England or Anglican Church set up by Henry VIII after his split with Rome because they would not grant him a divorce. This Bible did not contain the books to which you refer. The first Catholic Bible in English from the Vatican was the Douay-Rheimes published in 1608 which does include all the books you have mentioned and misquoted. In 1684 the books of the Bible you are talking about were removed from the King James Version of the Bible which is the Bible used by the Church of England and the majority of Reformationists at the time. The Catholic Bibles have always, and still do, contain these books. It is disappointing to see such blatant missrepresetation from an organization that claims to stand for truth.

    • Josh

      August 28, 2016 at 9:53 pm

      I would like to know why we don’t have them in our Bibles today. I know the Catholics do but why not all other churches in America. I can see if denominations stemming from the Reformation not having them but then if it’s a part of the original Old Testament why doesn’t the Tanakh have it Jews r pretty meticulous about copying scripture so I wonder why those books have never made it into the Old Testament

      • Tomes Lore

        August 28, 2016 at 11:23 pm

        These 14 books are the Canon of Eastern Orthodox Church.
        Catholic Church (West Church) based her Canon on the Septuagint (LXX) which is Jewish Translation on Old Testaments made by Jewish 70 Rabbis about 4 centuries BC.
        The Septuagint contain some of the books mentioned above.
        After the emerge of Christianity, the Jewish Rabbis canonized their scriptures by removing all scripts that were not written in Hebrew.
        So to exclude the “Christian Sect” scripts from ‘poluting’ their sacred scripts.
        Unfortunatelly, some of the books from Septuagint also doesn’t have the Hebrew origins. Like the one mentioned above.
        The book of Maccabees interestingly records the story of Macabean revolt and the cleansing of the Solomon Temple. The act was since commemorated in the Jewish festival known as Hannukah.
        As you can read in the book of Esther is the origin of Purim festival.
        Some of the book enlisted above didn’t make to Catholic Canonization because Catholic Chirch based her list on the Septuagint.
        Why Orthodox Church includes those books, i don’t know. Maybe they have their own Holy Traditions.
        But the great schism of East and West Church occured at 8 or 10 CE, after the born of Islam and the fall of Eastern Constantinople (Alexandria, now Istanbul).
        Protestant Reformation distanced themself from Catholic at 16 CE and follows the Jewish Canon on their Old Testaments.
        That’s the story…

        • Shonna

          September 9, 2016 at 4:51 am

          Got some dates wrong….Islam came about in 610, the schism happened in 1054, the birth of the Protestant Reformation was October 31, 1517. Alexandria is in Egypt, and Istanbul was Constantinople; other than that pretty close….

  9. Josh

    August 28, 2016 at 9:45 pm

    Solomon starts off by basically saying this is what the ungodly are going to say so he pretty much prophesies about the coming of Messiah and his death. it’s pretty interesting how in a lot of the verses the topic was coming back from the dead which definitely relates to the work that Yahshua came to do

  10. Duane

    August 28, 2016 at 10:38 pm

    Actually, Rome has NOT stopped the counter-Reformation, and is behind the New World Order, have been since the Jesuits took over the Kirk through Napoleon Bonaparte. To say Rome has done more “good” than anyone else, as a commenter stated, is all a front to what they do behind the scenes. The Papacy is Antichrist, and will some time in the not too distant future just come out and say it, as they already are slowly and subtly doing. BUT, as for the Apocryphal Books…THEY ARE STILL IN THE ROMISH BIBLES!!

  11. Angie

    August 29, 2016 at 12:27 am

    King Solomon was known for performing alchemy experiments in his temple with the help of the Djinn. His wife, the Queen of Sheba was thought to be a Djinn. Djinn are looked at as evil, but I feel they are simply beings of another realm. People fear what they do not understand. I think King Solomon was a genius and like any wise person/scientist/philosopher, he was trying to push the envelope.

  12. Confused

    August 29, 2016 at 3:40 am

    Wait, what, there is more than one book of dribble?

  13. Gerry

    August 29, 2016 at 4:55 am

    Wow. Idiot. These books are all still in the Catholic Bible. It’s the Protestants who took them out of theirs.

  14. Nasir Khan

    August 29, 2016 at 7:01 am

    You see, the original Hebrew Books of God; Torah, Psalms and the Gospel to Jesus are lost in antiquity. Without them all your arguments are presumptions only and further away from truth. The ‘Old and the New Testaments’ contain word of God but mixed with word of men, so not entire reliable. Unless you follow the ‘Final Testament Qur’an’ for all mankind, these
    confusion will always persist. The Qur’an is the ‘only unaltered Book of God’ for 1400 years on earth and still the same as given to Muhammad! Behold the Qur’an!

    1.“Praise be to Allah, Lord of the Worlds, The Beneficent, the Merciful. Owner of the Day of Judgment, Thee alone we worship; Thee alone we ask for help. Show us the straight path; The path of those whom Thou hast favored; Not the path of those who earn Thine anger nor of those who go astray.” (1: 1-7)

    2. “Say: He is Allah, the One! Allah, the eternally besought of all! He begetteth not nor was begotten And there is nothing comparable to Him. (112: 1-4)

    3. “Say: We believe in Allah and that which is revealed unto us and that which was revealed unto Abraham, and Ishmael, and Isaac, and Jacob, and the tribes, and that which Moses and Jesus received, and that which all Prophets received from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them, and unto Him we have surrendered.” (2:136)

    4. “Say: ‘O People of the Scripture! Come to a common term as between us and you: That we shall worship none but Allah, and that we shall ascribe no partner unto Him, and that none of us shall take others for lords beside Allah. And if they turn away, then say: Bear witness that we are Muslims.” (2:136) should have a son. His is all in the heavens and in the earth. And Allah is sufficient as Defender.” (4: 171)

    5. “And [beware the Day] when Allah will say, “O Jesus, Son of Mary, did you say to the people, ‘Take me and my mother as deities besides Allah ?'” He will say, “Exalted are You! It was not for me to say that to which I have no right. If I had said it, You would have known it. You know what is within myself, and I do not know what is within Yourself. Indeed, it is You who is Knower of the unseen”. (5: 116-117)

    6. “And verily We gave Moses the Scripture and We caused a train of messengers to follow after him, and We gave unto Jesus, son of Mary, clear proofs, and We supported him with the holy Spirit. It is ever so, that, when cometh unto you messenger with that which ye yourselves desire not, ye grow arrogant, and
    some ye disbelieve and some ye slay? (2: 87)

    7. “And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah, and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah. That is their saying with their mouths. They imitate the sayings of those who disbelieved of old. Allah fights against them. How perverse are they!” (9: 30) “They have taken as lords besides Allah their rabbis and their monks and the Messiah son of Mary, when they were bidden to worship only One God. There is no god save Him. Be He glorified from all that they ascribe as partner unto Him.”(9:31)

    Solomon (Arabic سليمان Sulaymān) was, according to the Qur’an, a king of ancient Israel as well as the son of David. The Qur’an recognizes Solomon as a prophet and a divinely-appointed monarch. Islamic tradition generally holds that Solomon was the third king of Israel and was a just and wise ruler for the nation.[1]

    Islam views Solomon as one of the elect of God, who was bestowed upon with many God-given gifts, including the ability to speak to animals[2] and control jinn.[3] Muslims further maintain that Solomon remained faithful to a one and only God throughout his life;[4] constructed the Temple of Solomon, which became one of the key houses of worship; reigned justly over the whole of the Kingdom of Israel; was blessed with a level of kingship which was given to none after him or before him;[5] and fulfilled all of his commandments, being promised nearness to God in Heaven at the end of his life.[6] Solomon remains one of the most commemorated and popular holy figures in Islam. Muslim tradition further maintains that, along with David (Dāwūd) and Dhul-Qarnayn (Cyrus the sage-king, who freed Jews from Babylonian captivity), Solomon was one of three great monarchs of all time.[7]

    Please go to internet ‘Wikipedia, Solomon in Islam’ to get all there is to it. I thank you for your patience with me. May God bless you all and guide you to the right path. Ameen.

    • Glen H. Kippel

      September 10, 2016 at 2:24 am

      You claim that in the Qura’n, surah 9:30 says, “And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah. . .” Sorry, no Jew ever said that Ezra (Uzair) is the son of Allah, Yaweh, Elohim, Adonai or any such. Thus, the Qura’n has a lie in it right there and cannot be trusted.

  15. Nasir Khan

    August 29, 2016 at 7:09 am

    Correction to Qur’an Verse No. 4 above: “O People of the Scripture! Do not exaggerate in your religion nor utter aught concerning Allah save the truth. The Messiah, Jesus son of Mary was only a messenger of Allah, and His word which he conveyed unto Mary, and a spirit from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers, and say not “Three”—Cease! It is better for you! –Allah is only One God. Far it is removed from His transcendent majesty that He should have a son. His is all in the heavens and in the earth. And Allah is sufficient as Defender.” (4: 171)

  16. Gerald

    August 29, 2016 at 9:24 pm

    Those 14 books are called the Apocrypha meaning hidden books. They were rejected by Protestants because:

    1. They were not written by prophets or holy men of Orthodox Jews or Israelis. Orthodox Jews or Israelis do not accept or recognize these 14 books as inspired by God. God’s laws, oracles, and commands were entrusted to the nation of Israel – no other nations.

    2. They were written 400 years between the old testament book of the prophet Malachi and the prophet John the Baptist in the new testament books of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. During those 400 years there were no holy prophets according to Church History.

    3. Jesus never quoted anything from them.

  17. Sandro

    August 29, 2016 at 11:43 pm

    The word IESUS is correct. In slavic Jesus is always named as IESUS or Isus.

    Interesting article but way back in the 3th c ad the bible was translated from Aramean and Greek into Latin, the Pope gave this task to St Jerome. The point is what did he remove from the bible? What did the Pope not want in the bible?

  18. Richard

    August 30, 2016 at 1:05 am

    This is a very weird article. The King James Authorized translation of the Bible into English was published in 1611, but it was not the first English version of the Bible and it was not translated from Latin. The Old Testament used the Masoretic Text (Hebrew and Aramaic) and the New Testament was translated from Greek. The resulting translation was compared with many other translations, including the Latin Vulgate.

  19. Larry

    August 30, 2016 at 10:42 am

    You really do not know much about church history, Bible history, or the Scripture in general. This is not informative, but rather written to cast doubt or it is another attempt to troll. You would do well to consider Jesus for who He is, the Savior of the world. There is no other name under heaven given among men whereby you must be saved.

  20. Steve Sadler

    August 30, 2016 at 8:08 pm

    Now, your all talking like this i’s something really important, the Bible, just like the Quarantine and all other religious text were written, invented, made up by humans, basically fairy stories, so if a few chapters go missing who really gives a shit.

    To be fair it’s a boring book anyway, far too long so they did us a favour to be fair.

    But, if you scoundrels want to debate this load of old tosh then carry on wasting your precious lives ???

  21. Mitch

    August 30, 2016 at 9:07 pm

    Umm the very first verse here is Solomon saying ‘Thus say the UNGODLY:’ … Not ‘This is what I say.’

  22. Rick Bzdok

    August 31, 2016 at 12:30 pm

    You do realize that most of those books are still in the Catholic Bibles. Protestants took out a bunch. Tobit is actually one of my favorite.

    God bless you, and keep you.

  23. Chandra Nugraha

    August 31, 2016 at 3:19 pm

    This is an extremely poorly researched articles, and that’s putting it in a good light already.

    It’s not the Catholic Church who removed those books. It’s the Protestants!

    Just read on Wikipedia if you don’t believe it. I can’t believe such a simple fact is gotten wrong. Might as well say UK used to be colonized by US. Unbelievable. You should retract this article and apologize to the world for making them more stupid after reading this article.

    And the last Wisdom of Solomon thing? It’s “the unjust” who said it. It’s a set of indirect sentences beginning with the word “The unjust said”. And don’t even start with the letter “J” or “I”. It’s an English development. It’s not like the Church manipulated it. Might as well say books were invented by the Church to make it easy to manipulate information.

    You know what? Before writing, read. Learn to read first. Then write. Otherwise what you write is a bunch of trash not worth reading. You just wasted 10 minutes of ever single person’s life who reads on this article. I can’t believe it.

  24. Buddy

    September 4, 2016 at 6:31 am

    All religions are cults.

  25. Jim Jones

    September 5, 2016 at 2:49 pm

  26. Alan Arnett

    September 9, 2016 at 11:37 am

    Lot’s of mistakes in this article. 7 of these books are still in the Catholic bible, including the book of Wisdom, as are 1 & 2 Maccabees, Tobit, Judith, Ecclesiasticus (now called Sirach, after it’s author, Joshua ben Sirach), Baruch and all of Esther. Wisdom for ages was thought to be authored by Solomon, but scholars today know it was written about 400 years before Christ (and about 600 years after Solomon). These books are all part of the Septuagint, or Alexandrine Canon of the Hebrew bible, which was in the library of Alexandria when it was torched by the Romans, but are left out of the Babylonian Canon (see below). Copies were saved by Jews in Alexandria, and were the choice of Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria when he finalized the Canon of the Proto-Catholic bible requested by Constantine in the 4th Century CE.

    In the 16th Century, Martin Luther, a Catholic Priest and Biblical Scholar at the Wittenberg University, chose to translate the bible from Hebrew and Greek into German, and chose to include the Hebrew Canon included in the Hebrew bible, which was the Canon the Rabbis chose in 70 CE after the fall of Jerusalem, and was the chosen list from the exile in Babylon, and was confirmed in 1947 CE upon the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls at Qumran. Protestant English bibles use Luther’s list of books.

    1 Esdras is now included as the Book of Ezra, and 2 Esdras is Nehemiah. Songs of the Holy Children, Bel and the Dragon. and Susannah are incorporated into Daniel where they belong. The prayer of Manasses is 15 verses included at the end of 2 Chronicles.

    This is not the first time that Jesus name was written using an I in front, as there is no J in either Greek or Latin. The Aramaic Yeshua becomes the Hebrew Joshua, and the Greek Jesus (Ἰησοῦς – Iesous).

  27. Glen H. Kippel

    September 9, 2016 at 11:01 pm

    Wow, there are so many errors in this article I hardly know where to begin! First off, the so-called “King James Bible” of 1611 was not the first Bible in English and it was not translated from the Latin Vulgate, but directly from the original Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic languages.

    It is true that the letter “J” was not in use in 1611, as the name “Iesus” was used, based on a Latin word usage. In Aramaic, the language used by most people in the Middle East in Jesus’ time, His name was Eshoo. And in Hebrew, Yeshua, not ever “Yahashua.” Languages change all the time.

    The 1611 version of the English Bible did contain the Apocrypha but these books were removed after the 1631 printing, due to the influence of the Protestant Reformation. And I have a copy of the Tenakh, from the Jewish Publication Society and it does not have the Apocryphal books in it. So any claim that the Apocrypha were removed from the original Bible is false. They were added to some Bibles later.

  28. George Loera

    September 30, 2016 at 7:49 am

    The ungodly are being described by Solomon, as per the first sentence in the first paragraph, For the ungodly said reasoning with them selves. The ungodly finish the last sentence number 20.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The Latest

To Top