The Answer Book, was written
by Dr. Samuel Gipp in response to the dozens of questions used by critics
of the King James Bible. The following excerpt is question number 34 and
QUESTION: Didn't the King James Bible, when first printed, contain
EXPLANATION: Many critics of the perfect Bible like to point out
that the original King James had the Apocrypha in it as though that fact
compromises its integrity. But several things must be examined to get
the factual picture.
First, in the days in which our Bible was translated, the Apocrypha was
accepted reading based on its historical value, though not accepted as
Scripture by anyone outside of the Catholic church. The King James
translators therefore placed it between the Old and New Testaments for
its historical benefit to its readers. They did not integrate it into the Old
Testament text as do the corrupt Alexandrian manuscripts.
That they rejected the Apocrypha as divine is very obvious by the seven
reasons which they gave for not incorporating it into the text. They are as
- Not one of them is in the Hebrew language, which was alone used by
the inspired historians and poets of the Old Testament.
- Not one of the writers lays any claim to inspiration.
- These books were never acknowledged as sacred Scriptures by the Jewish
Church, and therefore were never sanctioned by our Lord.
- They were not allowed a place among the sacred books, during the first
four centuries of the Christian Church.
- They contain fabulous statements, and statements which contradict
not only the canonical Scriptures, but themselves; as when, in the two Books
of Maccabees, Antiochus Epiphanes is made to die three different deaths
in as many different places.
- It inculcates doctrines at variance with the Bible, such as prayers
for the dead and sinless perfection.
- It teaches immoral practices, such as lying, suicide, assassination and
If having the Apocrypha between the Testaments disqualifies it as
authoritative, then the corrupt Vaticanus and Sinaiticus manuscripts from
Alexandria, Egypt must be totally worthless since their authors obviously
didn't have the conviction of the King James translators and incorporated
its books into the text of the Old Testament thus giving it authority with
©1989 by Dr. Samuel C. Gipp.