Facts about the Bible Facts about the Bible Facts about the Bible Facts about the Bible The following list is not designed to discuss doctrine, or provide in-depth teaching. It is merely a resource center for factual information on the Bible. Many of these questions have been addressed in various locations throughout our website; however, as many people do not have the time to comb through the entire website to find the answers they are looking for, we have compiled the following list. How many books are in the Bible? The Bible contains 66 books, divided among the Old and New Testaments. How many books are in the Old Testament? There are 39 books in the Old Testament. How many books are in the New Testament? There are 27 books in the New Testament. What does "testament" mean? Testament means "covenant" or "contract." Who wrote the Bible? The Bible was written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit by over 40 different authors from all walks of life: shepherds, farmers, tent-makers, physicians, fishermen, priests, philosophers and kings. Despite these differences in occupation and the span of years it took to write it, the Bible is an extremely cohesive and unified book.

Which single author contributed the most books to the Old Testament? Moses. He wrote the first five books of the Bible, referred to as the Pentateuch; the foundation of the Bible. Which single author contributed the most books to the New Testament? The Apostle Paul, who wrote 14 books (over half) of the New Testament. When was the Bible written? It was written over a period of some 1,500 years, from around 1450 B.C. (the time of Moses) to about 100 A.D. (following the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ). What is the oldest book in the Old Testament? Many scholars agree that Job is the oldest book in the Bible, written by an unknown Israelite about 1500 B.C. Others hold that the Pentateuch (the first five books of the Bible) are the oldest books in the Bible, written between 1446 and 1406 B.C. What is the youngest book in the Old Testament? The book of Malachi, written about 400 B.C. What is the oldest book of the New Testament? Probably the book of James, written as early as A.D. 45.

What is the youngest book in the New Testament? The Book of Revelation is the youngest book of the New Testament, written about 95 A.D. What languages was the Bible written in? The Bible was written in three languages: Hebrew, Aramaic, and Koine Greek. When was the Bible canonized? The entire New Testament as we know it today, was canonized before the year 375 A.D. The Old Testament had previously been canonized long before the advent of Christ. What does "canon" mean? "Canon" is derived front the Greek word "Kanon," signifying a measuring rod. Thus, to have the Bible "canonized" meant that it had been measured by the standard or test of divine inspiration and authority. It became the collection of books or writings accepted by the apostles and leadership of the early Christian church as a basis for Christian belief. It is the standard by which all Christians throughout the ages live and worship. When was the first translation of the Bible made into English? 1382 A.D., by John Wycliffe. When was the Bible printed? The Bible was printed in 1454 A.D.

by Johannes Gutenberg who invented the "type mold" for the printing press. It was the first book ever printed. What is the oldest almost-complete manuscript of the Bible now in existence? The Codex Vaticanus, which dates from the first half of the fourth Century. It is located in the library of the Vatican in Rome. There are older fragments of the Bible that are still preserved however-- the oldest being a tiny scrap of the Gospel of John was found in Egypt, dating back to the beginning of the second century. (It is currently in the Rayland's Library in Manchester, England). What is the longest book in the Bible? The book of Psalms. What is the shortest book in the Bible? 2 John. What is the longest chapter in the Bible? Psalm 119 What is the shortest chapter in the Bible? Psalm 117 What is the longest verse in the Bible? Esther 8:9 What is the shortest verse in the Bible? John 11:35 Which book in the Bible does not mention the word "God?" The book of Esther. Who was the oldest man that ever lived?

Methuselah who lived to be 969 years old (Genesis 5:27). Who were the two men in the Bible who never died but were caught up to heaven? Enoch, who walked with God and was no more (Genesis 5:22-24). Elijah, who was caught up by a whirlwind into heaven (II Kings 2:11). Who does the Bible say was the meekest man in the Bible (not including Jesus)? Moses (Numbers 12:3). How many languages has the Bible been translated into? The Holy Bible has been translated into 2,018 languages, with countless more partial translations, and audio translations (for unwritten languages). (This is an enormous amount of translations. In comparison, Shakespeare, considered by many to be the master writer of the English language, has only been translated into 50 languages.) Is the Bible still the best-selling book in the world? Yes, indeed! How Many Books Are in the Bible? | Bible.org How Many Books Are in the Bible? The Doctrines That Divide 1 Erwin W.

Lutzer Even the most casual Bible student knows that there are more books in the Catholic Bible than in the one used by Protestants. Where did these differences originate? On what basis were some books selected to be in the Bible, and why were others rejected? Upon reflection, we could expect that there would be some dispute regarding these matters. After all, the Bible did not come down from heaven bound in beautiful leather and adorned with gold gilded pages. It is a very human book that reflects the styles of the writers and the cultural setting of the times. Yet, it is also a divine book, inspired by God, and therefore free from error in the original manuscripts. Like Christ who was truly God and truly man, so the Bible has a dual authorship. Questions about which books meet this criterion are to be expected. The word canon comes from the Greek word kanon which means a ruler or measuring rod. In a metaphorical sense, it came to refer to the standard by which various books of the Bible were judged as worthy of being called the Word of God. Within time, the word kanon was applied to the books themselves; Athanasius is the first one known to have used “canon” in such a context.

How the Books Were Collected Some of the Old Testament books were immediately recognized as authoritative. Moses, after he wrote a book, put it in the Ark of the Covenant (Deut. 31:24-26). After the temple was built, the sacred writings were kept there (2 Kings 22:18). Early on, God commanded the kings to write for themselves a copy of the law. “And he shall read it all the days of his life, that he may learn to fear the Lord his God” (Deut. 17:19). As the prophets spoke God’s word, saying, “Thus saith the Lord,” they also recognized that their message had to be recorded for future generations. The Jews realized that special revelation ceased with the prophet Malachi (c. 400 B.C.). In the Talmud (a handbook of Jewish traditions) we read, “Up to this point [the time of Alexander the Great] the prophets prophesied through the Holy Spirit; from this time onward incline thine ear and listen to the sayings of the wise.” But what determined whether a book was considered part of the canon?

Obviously, there were other books in existence that did not merit classification with the sacred writings. Examples are “The Book of the Wars of the Lord” (Num. 21:14) and “The Book of Jashar” (Josh. 10:13). The criterion was, first, that the book had to agree with the Torah, the first five books of Moses. But this was not the only test. Some books that agreed with the Torah were also excluded. For example, Elijah wrote a book that likely met this standard; yet it was not a part of the canon. And, of course, we must ask how the Torah itself became accepted. Second, and most important, these books were accepted because they were believed to be inspired by God. In other words, they were selected because they were recognized as having divine authority. This is not to say that the Jews gave these books their authority; these books were believed to have inherent authority. If a book is inspired by God, it would have authority whether men recognized it or not. A jeweler may recognize an authentic diamond, but his recognition does not make it so. We must guard against the notion that the church has a right to make a book canonical.

But at best the nation Israel or church body can only recognize a book as authoritative because it is inspired of God. The Discovery of Canonicity But how was canonicity discovered? First, the books had the ring of self-vindicating authority. Moses claimed to be the mouthpiece of God. The Old Testament prophets repeatedly said, “And the word of the Lord came to me.” The lives of the prophets and the strong affirmation that their message came from God was accepted by the Jewish nation. This explains why the canonicity of the Book of Esther was, for a time, in doubt. Since the name of God does not appear in the book, some thought it lacked self-vindicating authority. But closer inspection showed that the providence of God was so evident in the story that it had the authenticity that gave it acceptance. A second test was that of authorship. it had to have been written by a man of God. Was the author, they asked, a spokesman for “redemptive revelation,” either a prophet in the Old Testament times or an apostle in the new?

For example, Paul in the New Testament argued that his message was authoritative because he was an apostle, “not sent from men, nor through the agency of man, but through Jesus Christ, and God the Father” (Gal. 1:1). The Book of 2 Peter was disputed in the early church because some doubted that it had been written by Peter. The writing style appeared different from 1 Peter, hence the doubt. But within time the church was convinced that Peter the apostle was the author, therefore the book was accepted. Yet in other instances the identity of the author was not always determinative. For example, the authorship of the Book of Hebrews is unknown, but the book was accepted without serious questioning because it bears the unmistakable stamp of the transforming power of God. Of course, the book had to be consistent with previous revelation. Martin Luther thought that James taught salvation by works so he questioned its position in the canon. Later, when he revised his preface to the book, he dropped his criticism. A closer reading indicates that James does not contradict Paul’s teaching of salvation by faith. The early church was quite correct in receiving it as authoritative. There is evidence that when an inspired book was written, it enjoyed immediate acceptance.

For example, Peter accepted the epistles of Paul as being worthy of recognition as inspired Scripture (2 Pet. 3:16). Thus, the canon of the New Testament formed gradually as the books were written. Because communication was cumbersome in biblical times, it is understandable that the complete list of authoritative books was not agreed upon until a few centuries had passed. The Books of Revelation and 3 John were not immediately accepted, in part because they were unknown in some parts of the New Testament world. As their circulation grew, so did the recognition that they had the marks of divine inspiration. The bottom line, of course, is that the books of the Bible were recognized as authoritative by the people of God. There is little doubt that we must exercise faith that God superintended his Word so that only inspired books were chosen to be in the canon. Equally important is the fact that the final list of books was not chosen by a synod or council of the church. These met to ratify the books that the people of God had already chosen. The Apocrypha Both the Roman Catholic and Protestant Bibles have thirty-nine books in the Old Testament and twenty-seven in the New.

The difference is that a Roman Catholic Bible has an additional eleven books inserted between the Testaments. Where did these books come from? To begin, we must realize that both branches of Christendom acknowledge the existence of books that are false writings that have never laid serious claim to canonicity. The Book of Enoch and The Assumption of Moses are known to have existed, but all agree that they lack the stamp of inspiration. In the New Testament the Shepherd of Hermas was thought by some to be authoritative, so it hovered around the canon for sometime before it was dismissed as a forgery But there was another group of books that are accepted by the Roman Catholic church but rejected by Protestants. These books originated in a canon in Alexandria in Egypt. It was in this city in 250 B.C. that the Old Testament was translated into Greek and called the Septuagint, meaning “seventy.” (Allegedly the translation was made in seventy days utilizing seventy scholars.) This explains why some of the earliest manuscripts of the Septuagint that exist today (dating back to the fourth century) contain these additional books.

These books, commonly called the Apocrypha (the word means “hidden”), are interwoven among the books of the Old Testament. In all, there are fifteen books, eleven of which are accepted as canonical by the Roman Catholic church. But because four of the eleven are combined with Old Testament books, the Douay Version contains only seven additional books in its table of contents. There are several reasons why the Roman Catholic church considers the wider Alexandrian list of books to be canonical. Briefly, they are (1) the New Testament quotes mostly from the Septuagint, which contained the Apocrypha. Then, (2) some of the early church fathers accepted the Apocrypha as canonical—Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Clement of Alexandria for example. Also, (3) Augustine and the great councils of Hippo and Carthage, which he led, are said to have accepted them. Finally, (4) the Council of Trent called to respond to the inroads of the Reformation pronounced them canonical in A.D. 1546.

The council said that if anyone does not receive these books in all of their parts, “let him be anathema.” Reasons to Reject the Apocrypha Protestants give numerous reasons for rejecting these additional books: 2 1. Though there are some allusions to the apocryphal books by New Testament writers (Hebrews 11:35 compares with 2 Maccabees 7, 12) there is no direct quote from them. Also, no New Testament writer ever refers to any of these fourteen or fifteen books as authoritative. Quotes from the accepted books are usually introduced by the phrase, “It is written,” or the passage is quoted to prove a point. But never do the New Testament writers quote the Apocrypha in this way. 2. There is no evidence that the books were in the Septuagint as early as the time of Christ. Remember, the earliest manuscripts that have them date back to the fourth century A.D. Even if they were in the Septuagint at this early date, it is noteworthy that neither Christ nor the apostles ever quoted from them. 3.

Though some of the early leaders of the church accepted them, many did not—Athanasius, Origen, and Jerome, to name a few. 4. The evidence that Augustine accepted the Apocrypha is at best ambiguous. For one thing, he omits Baruch and includes 1 Esdras, thus accepting one and rejecting another in contrast to the Council of Trent. For another, he seemed to change his mind later about the validity of the Apocrypha. Jerome, while making a Latin translation of the Bible, disputed with Augustine about the value of these additional books. Though Jerome did not want to translate them, he eventually made a hurried translation of them but kept them separate from his translation of the Bible. However, after his death, these books were brought into his Latin translation. Augustine, as mentioned, argued in favor of the Apocrypha, though he later seemed to give them a kind of secondary canonicity. His testimony, though important, is not entirely clear. 5. Even the Roman Catholic church made a distinction between the Apocrypha and the other books of the Bible prior to the Reformation.

For example, Cardinal Cajetan, who opposed Luther at Augsburg, in 1518 published A Commentary on all the Authentic Historical Books of the Old Testament. His commentary, however, did not include the Apocrypha. 6. The first official council of the Roman Catholic church to ratify these books was at the Council of Trent in 1546, only twenty-nine years after Luther posted his ninety-five theses on the door of the church at Wittenberg. The acceptance of these books at this time was convenient since the books were being quoted against Luther. For example, 2 Maccabees speaks of prayers for the dead (2 Macc. 12:45-46) and another book teaches salvation by works (Tob. 12:19). Even so, the Roman church accepted only eleven of the fifteen books; we naturally would expect that these books, since they were together for so many centuries, would be either accepted or rejected together. 7. The content of the Apocrypha is sub-biblical. Some of the stories are clearly fanciful.

Bel and the Dragon, Tobit, and Judith have the earmarks of legend; the authors of these books even give hints along the way that the stories are not to be taken seriously. What is more, these books have historical errors. It is claimed that Tobit was alive when the Assyrians conquered Israel in 722 B.C. and also when Jeroboam revolted against Judah in 931 B.C., which would make him at least 209 years old; yet according to the account, he died when he was only 158 years. The Book of Judith speaks of Nebuchadnezzar reigning in Nineveh instead of Babylon. These inaccuracies are inconsistent with the doctrine of inspiration which teaches that when God inspires a book it is free from all errors. 8. Finally, and most important, we must remember that the Apocrypha was never part of the Old Testament Hebrew canon. When Christ was on earth, he frequently quoted from the Old Testament but never from the Apocryphal books because they were never a part of the Hebrew canon.

In Christ’s time, there were twenty-two books in the Old Testament, but the content was identical to the thirty-nine books in our present Old Testament (several of the books in the Hebrew Bible were combined, which accounts for the different figure). Genesis was the first book in the Hebrew canon and 2 Chronicles was the last. On at least one occasion, Christ referred specifically to the content of the Hebrew canon when he said: Therefore, behold, I am sending you prophets and wise men and scribes; some of them you will kill and crucify, and some of them you will scourge in your synagogues, and persecute from city to city, that upon you may fall the guilt of all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah, the son of Berechiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar (Matt. 23:34-35) In the Hebrew canon, the first book of the Bible was Genesis, where the death of Abel is recorded, and the last book was 2 Chronicles where near the end of the book the murder of Zechariah is described (24:21).

In between these two events lay the entire content of the Old Testament. He assumed it ended with the Hebrew Scriptures and not the Apocrypha. The Apocryphal books were written in Greek after the close of the Old Testament canon. Jewish scholars agree that chronologically Malachi was the last book of the Old Testament canon. The books of the Apocrypha were evidently written about 200 B.C. and occur only in Greek manuscripts of the Old Testament. Since Christ accepted only the books we have in our Old Testament today, we have no reason to add to their number. The Lost Books Occasionally we hear references to the so-called lost books of the Bible, books that some people think have been hidden from the general populace. In 1979, Bell Publishing Company of New York came out with a book entitled The Lost Books of the Bible. On the flyleaf it says that these books were not among those chosen to comprise the Bible, and “They were suppressed by the church, and for over fifteen hundred years were shrouded in secrecy.” 3 These books are not really as secret as the authors imply.

New Testament scholars have been well aware of their existence throughout the centuries, though perhaps these books were not accessible to the common man. Their credibility is rejected by both Catholics and Protestants. These books include stories about the birth of Mary and of Christ. Also there are a dozen or more stories that took place during Christ’s lifetime. Three or four purport to relate to events in the Old Testament. These books never even vied for a place in the canon. Unlike some other books that were actually disputed (the Shepherd of Hermas, for example), these books were recognized as legends from the beginning. These “forgotten books” are so obviously inferior to those in our Bible that they cannot be taken seriously. Indeed, in the preface, Dr. Frank Crane admitted the point by saying that legends and apocryphal stories surround all great men such as Napoleon, Charlemagne, and Julius Caesar, so we can also expect that tales would grow up around Christ. He went on to say that Christ appealed to the “fictional minds” of his day. These writers, Crane admitted, do not pretend to write down what is strictly true, but tinge all events with their imagination.

Finally, Crane said the common man can now make his own decision as to whether the early church did right in rejecting these books. He did not hesitate to say that common sense itself will show the superiority of the accepted canonical books. I agree. Should there be any doubt about the accepted books, the best solution would be to read these so-called lost books. And for that matter, one should also read those books that laid more serious claim to canonicity. They also are so inferior to the books of the New Testament that we become convinced that the early church did not err. In the upper room, Christ promised that the Holy Spirit would help them recall his teachings. “When the Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, that is the Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the Father, He Will bear witness of Me” (John 15:26). That was a tacit confirmation of the New Testament that still needed to be written. The early believers recognized those writings that were either written by an apostle or by someone personally acquainted with one. After the apostolic period, no more books could claim the stamp of divine authority.

The Book of Revelation ends with a warning: I testify to everyone who bears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to then; God shall add to him the plagues which are written in this book, and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book (Rev. 22.18-19) Although these words refer specifically to the Book of Revelation and not to the New Testament as a whole (there were still questions as to which books were properly in the New Testament when Revelation was penned), yet they are a warning to the many false cults who have claimed to add to God’s Word. In our present New Testament we have the final word from God until our Lord returns and the Bible as we know it will no longer be necessary. 1 “How Many Books Are in the Bible?” is chapter 8 from Erwin Lutzer’s book, The Doctrines That Divide and is used by permission of the publisher. No additional use of this material may be made without written permission of Kregel Publications, Grand Rapids, MI.

2 Norman Geisler and William Nix, A General Introduction to the Bible (Chicago: Moody Press, 1986). 170-177. 3 The Lost Books of the Bible (New York: Bell Publishing Co., 1979). Biblical Studies Foundation has received so many questions concerning the number of books in the Bible that we are delighted to have been given permission to use chapter 8 in Erwin Lutzer’s book, The Doctrines That Divide: A Fresh Look at the Historic Doctrines That Separate Christians (Kregel Publications: Grand Rapids, 1998). Other chapters in this excellent book cover questions such as: Is Christ Truly God? Was Mary the Mother of God? Was Peter the First Pope? Justification: By Faith, Sacraments, or Both? Why Can’t We Agree about the Lord’s Supper? Why Can’t We Agree about Baptism? Predestination or Free Will? Can a Saved Person Ever Be Lost?

Doctrines That Divide may be purchased at any Christian bookstore, on-line bookseller, or from: Kregel Publications Catholic & Protestant Bibles - Catholic Bible Study Catholic And Protestant Bibles The Old Testament The Protestant Old Testament omits several entire books and parts of two other books. To explain how this came about, it is necessary that we go back to the ancient Jewish Scriptures. The Hebrew Bible contained only the Old Testament and from its Old Testament it excluded seven entire books - namely, Tobias, Judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, First and Second Machabees - and parts of Esther (10:14 to 16:14) and Daniel (3:24- 90; 13; 14). These books which are missing in the Jewish Bible came to the Catholic Church with the Septuagint, a pre-Christian Greek translation of the Old Testament. In the Septuagint Version they are placed among and given equal rank with the other Old Testament books as in our Catholic Bible today.

Since the Hebrew is older than the Septuagint Bible, the list of books in the former is called the first canon or collection while the catalog of books in the latter is called the second canon or collection. The seven additional books are found only in the second collection and always associated with it. Jewish opposition to the additional books of the second collection was due to the circumstances in which the Jews lived and to the spirit of the times. During the last centuries which preceded the coming of Christ the Jews - because of the captivities, persecutions and antagonisms from outside nations became more and more conservative and looked with increasing suspicion on anything that was new. Since the additional books were of comparatively recent origin and since some of them were written in Greek - the language of paganism - they naturally aroused the opposition of the Jews. The fact, too, that the early Christians used the Septuagint in their controversies with the Jews only served to confirm the latter in their opposition to this translation of the Old Testament. The Protestants of the sixteenth century objected to the additional books because of the doctrinal teachings of these books.

The Second Book of Machabees, for example, contains the doctrine of purgatory, of prayers and sacrifices for the dead (12:39-46). The book of Tobias teaches the importance in the eyes of God of good works. The Protestants could not reject some without excluding all of the additional books. Hence, in drawing up their list of Old Testament books they went back to the first collection of Biblical books of the Palestinian Jews. They removed the additional books, which had been in the Bible up till 1517 and placed them at the end of the Bible in a special appendix. In addition, they labelled them as "apocryphal" (spurious, uninspired), a designation which helped to lower them in the estimation of Protestant readers. The Lutheran and Anglican Bibles still carry these books in the appendix or give them at least a secondary place. But the other Protestant churches reject them entirely. In 1827 the British and Foreign Bible Society decided not to print or handle Bibles that contained the additional books and not to aid financially companies that published Bibles containing them. As a result these books have practically disappeared from Protestant Bibles.

The Catholic Church has always considered these books as inspired and of the same rank as the other Old Testament books. Her attitude is based upon the following facts: 1) The Apostles and New Testament writers quoted principally the Septuagint. In fact, of the three hundred and fifty Old Testament quotations found in the New Testament, about three hundred are taken from the Septuagint. 2) Some of the New Testament writers made use of the additional books themselves, particularly of the Book of Wisdom, which seems to have been St. Paul's favorite volume. The Epistle of St. James - to take another example - shows an acquaintance with the Book of Ecclesiasticus. If the Apostles and New Testament writers used some of the additional books, did they not thereby approve the entire Septuagint collection? 3) The additional books were accepted in the Church from the beginning. The Epistle of Pope Clement, written before the end of the first century, makes use of Ecclesiasticus and Wisdom, gives an analysis of the book of Judith, and quotes from the additional sections of the book of Esther. The same is true of other early Christian writers.

4) The oldest Christian Bibles in existence (Codex Vaticanus, etc.) contain the additional books intermingled with the rest, just as we find them in the Catholic Bibles today. 5) The oldest Christian lists of Biblical books contain the additional books. In 382 Pope Damasus in a Roman Council issued a formal list of Old and New Testament books and the list contains the same books as we have in our Bibles. 6) Finally, Christian art of the first four centuries - especially that found in the catacombs and cemeteries - furnishes among others the following illustrations from the additional books: Tobias with the fish (Tobias 6), Susanna (Daniel 13), Daniel and the dragon (Daniel 14), the angel with the three children in the fiery furnace (Daniel 3:49), Habacuc and Daniel in the lion's den (Daniel 14:35). In conclusion, let us point out that since they follow the synagogue in their rejection of the additional books of the Old Testament, the Protestants should in all logic follow it in its rejection of the New Testament and of Christ Himself.

The Apocryphal Books The Protestants often designate as "apocryphal" those seven books and those sections which their Bibles omit from the Old Testament. The Catholics object to this title. These books are regarded by the Church as inspired. They formed a part of the Bible of united Christendom before the Protestant revolt, and Christian antiquity was practically unanimous in regarding them as of divine origin. But what, then, do Catholics mean by "apocryphal" books? The word "apocryphal" is derived from the Greek "apokryphos" and means something hidden or secret. The religious books of ancient pagans were called Apocrypha because they were kept carefully concealed in the temple and shown only to full-fledged members who were wholly initiated into the mysteries of religion. Books forged by magicians were also called Apocrypha because they were thought to contain hidden secrets. Gradually, however, the word "apocryphal" came to have a very specific meaning. It came to be applied to a class of books, which pretended to possess divine authority and Scriptural rank but which never succeeded in obtaining a place among the books of the Bible.

These Books were composed during the last two centuries before Christ or during the early centuries of the Christian era. The authors remained unknown or wrote under a fictitious name. Some of these books contain false and heretical doctrines, others aim at satisfying a foolish curiosity about Biblical personages, others strive to edify. Their value lies in setting forth, by contrast, the superior character of the inspired books and in furnishing to the Biblical scholar interesting information about the customs and conditions of the times. The apocryphal books are divided into two groups - into the Old and the New Testament apocrypha. a) The Old Testament apocrypha supplement the inspired Old Testament books with fictitious stories about some patriarch or prophet, forged Messianic prophecies, or pious exhortations and precepts. Examples of this group are the Assumption of Moses, Apocalypse of Abraham, Ascension of Isaias, etc. b) The New Testament apocrypha strive to supplement and amplify matters either briefly mentioned in the inspired books or omitted entirely. Their favorite topics are the Infancy of Our Lord and His sojourn on earth after the Resurrection. They contain much that is silly, legendary and dis-edifying.

The portrait of Our Lord contradicts in many respects that of the Gospel, and their accounts of Him contain much that is doctrinally unsound and heretical. As many as fifty Gospels, twenty- two Acts, and many Epistles and Apocalypses were known to have belonged to this group at one time. The New Testament The Protestant New Testament contains the same books as the Catholic New Testament. Although Luther showed great hostility to St. James's Epistle because of its doctrine of the necessity of good works and contemptuously called it an "epistle of straw," he clearly saw that he had no more reason for excluding that book than he had for rejecting the other books of the New Testament. The differences between the Protestant and Catholic New Testament arise from changes in specific passages in various books of the New Testament.

In the passage from I Corinthians 11:27, "Whosoever shall eat this bread OR drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of the Lord," the Authorized Version (AV) of King James replaced "or" by "and." Inspired by doctrinal and anti-Catholic bias, the editors purposely changed the text in order to remove the argument for communion under one kind. Today all Scriptural scholars agree that "OR drink the chalice" is the correct reading. Modern critical Protestant editions of the Bible - the Revised Version and the Standard Version - have rejected the reading of the Authorized Version and restored the old or Rheims-Douay reading. A further deliberate change in the interest of the Protestant doctrine on original sin is introduced into several passages. The Reformers, as we know, maintained that human nature was essentially corrupted by the Fall. Man's intellect is positively darkened and his free will destroyed.

In I Corinthians 7:9 where the Rheims-Douay Version reads: "If they do not contain themselves, let them marry"; the Authorized Version changed the passage to read: "But if they cannot contain, let them marry." The same Authorized Version changes "do not" to "cannot do" in Galatians 5:17: "For the flesh lusteth against the spirit, and the spirit against the flesh; for these are contrary to one another, so that you do not the things that you would." The aim of the editors in both instances was to introduce into the Scriptures the false Lutheran doctrine concerning the total depravity of human nature because of original sin. St. Paul is made to affirm that a Christian cannot lead a stainless virtuous life. The critical editions of the bible, however - the Revised and Standard Versions-refused to adopt this reading and returned to the reading of the Rheims-Douay. To the Lord's Prayer in Matthew 6:13, the Authorized Version adds the doxology or the long ending: "For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, forever.

Amen." The Revised Version, however, as well as all critical editions, omit this doxology - and correctly so. The doxology is not a part of the Lord's Prayer. It is not found in St. Luke's version of the Our Father. In St. Matthew's Gospel, the intimate connection between verses 13 and 14 shows that the original text had no clause between the two verses. The long ending is not found in two of the oldest extant Bibles - namely, the codex Sinaiticus and the codex Vaticanus. In the course of time, however, the doxology began to appear on the margin or was written in the text with red ink, until finally in some later manuscripts it becomes a part of the Bible. According to the almost unanimous opinion of scholars the doxology is an interpolation which worked its way into some Bibles from the early Christian liturgy. The King James Version (AV) also adopted the Protestant form of the Gloria in excelsis Deo in Luke 2:14.

Before considering the intrinsic merits of this reading, let us compare it with the reading in the Revised Version (RV) and Standard Version (SV) and in the Rheims-Douay Version (RD): AV - "Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, goodwill toward men." RV and SV - "Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among men in whom He is well pleased." RD - "Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace to men of good will." These quotations show that the reading of the Revised and Standard Versions and that of the Catholic Bible are substantially the same. Hence we need consider only the AV reading and the RD reading. The Protestant version of the Angelic hymn consists of three clauses, the Catholic version of two clauses. The Catholic version is better attested because it is found in the oldest and best extant Bibles. Internal reasons likewise favor the RD reading. In the Protestant version we should expect ant "and" before the third clause. The RD version gives us two parallel clauses, each containing three ideas parallel to the other: In the highest . . . glory . . . to God. On earth. . . peace . . .

to men of good will. Opinions are divergent as to the interpretation of the phrase, "men of good will." Does "good will" signify a disposition or quality of the soul? If it does, the angel announces his tidings of peace to the well-disposed among men. This view is open to two objections: first, nowhere in the New Testament is the Greek original of "good will" used to signify the state of men's will in relation to God; second, this interpretation robs the message of its grand, comprehensive mercy. Christ died for all men and sent a message of peace to all men. God by the giving of His Son has shown His mercy to the whole world. The good will of God as it proceeds from God is universal, for He wishes all men to be saved. In every sense, therefore, the message of peace was to all men. Men are called "men of goodwill" in the sense that they are. men enjoying the benevolence of God, the objects of God's redeeming will, or of His will - to save them all. Discussion Aids Set I 1. What seven books, and parts of two others, were not found in the Hebrew Old Testament? 2.

When were these seven books added to the Greek Old Testament? 3. Why were the Jews opposed to these seven books? 4. Why did the Protestants of the sixteenth century object to these books? 5. When did these books definitely disappear from Protestant Bibles? 6. Give five reasons why the Catholic Church accepts these books. Set II 1. Were the Protestants justified in labelling these books as "Apocryphal"? 2. What was the meaning of the word "Apocryphal"? a) in ancient times? b) in the last two centuries before Christ? 3. Discuss the author, purpose and value of the apocrypha. 4. Describe the Old Testament apocrypha; New Testament apocrypha. 5. When is the term "apocryphal" used in an objectional manner? Set III 1. Why was Luther opposed to St. James's Epistle? 2. What change did the King James Bible introduce into I Corinthians 11:27? 3. What changes introduced by the King James Bible were inspired by the Reformers' doctrine on original sin? 4.

Was the long ending, which Protestants today add to the Lord's Prayer, contained in the first and oldest Bibles? 5. What is the correct division and interpretation of the Angelic Hymn, "Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace to men of good will"? Religious Practices 1. I will always be grateful to the Catholic Church for preserving for me the priceless treasures of truth contained in the additional books of the Old Testament. 2. I will imitate Tobias by manifesting outwardly through good works the faith that is within me. 3. I will heed the lesson of II Machabees 13:46 and pray frequently for the dead. How many books are there in the Bible? - Learn More About The Bible - This Is Your Bible How many books are there in the Bible? How many in the Old Testament and how many in the New Testament? Thanks for asking a question on � thisisyourbible.com . � There are 66 books in the Bible - 39 in the Old Testament and 27 in the New Testament. � Here are links to items on the website which you might find interesting in regard to the question you asked.

� What is a gospel, and how many gospels are there in the Catholic Bible? - Christianity Stack Exchange What is a gospel, and how many gospels are there in the Catholic Bible? It would be difficult to have Gospels in the Old Testament, or even between the Old Tetament and New Tetament, since the New Testament gets its name from the fact that Jesus Christ is God's new covanent with/new testament to humanity. And it would be hard to have a book of the Bible about the life of Jesus before the life of Jesus :) – Flimzy Aug 29 '13 at 5:01 Its also crucial to understand how the Bible became the Bible. olvrc.com/history/WhereWeGotTheBible.pdf – user5286 Aug 29 '13 at 17:36 up vote 15 down vote How many gospels are there in the Roman Catholic Bible? The quantity of gospels are the same in both the Catholic and Protestant Bibles. There are only four, in the same order, at the beginning of the New Testament. Are there only gospels in the New Testament?

No, the New Testament contains other books, including: "Acts of the Apostles" (also known as "Acts," "Book of Acts"), which is a chronicle of the acts and ministry which the apostles and disciples of the Lord Jesus Christ performed after his resurrection and ascension. It is commonly attributed to the physician, Luke.

twenty-one epistles (an epistle is a letter) thirteen epistles written by the apostle Paul Epistle to the Romans (also known as "Romans") First Epistle to the Corinthians (also known as "1 Corinthians") Second Epistle to the Corinthians (also known as "2 Corinthians") Epistle to the Galatians (also known as "Galatians") Epistle to the Ephesians (also known as "Ephesians") Epistle to the Philippians (also known as "Philippians") Epistle to the Colossians (also known as "Colossians") First Epistle to the Thessalonians (also known as "1 Thessalonians") Second Epistle to the Thessalonians (also known as "2 Thessalonians") First Epistle to Timothy (also known as "1 Timothy") Second Epistle to Timothy (also known as "2 Timothy") Epistle to Titus (also known as "Titus") Epistle to Philemon (also known as "Philemon") one epistle written to the Jewish believers in the Lord Jesus Christ (i.e., the Hebrews), sometimes attributed to the apostle Paul, but whose author is otherwise considered

 to be unknown Epistle to the Hebrews (also known as "Hebrews") one epistle written by James, the brother of the Lord Jesus Christ Epistle of James (also known as "James") two epistles written by the apostle Peter First Epistle of Peter (also known as "1 Peter") Second Epistle of Peter (also known as "2 Peter") three epistles supposedly written by a John, perhaps the same author as the Gospel of John First Epistle of John (also known as "1 John") Second Epistle of John (also known as "2 John") Third Epistle of John (also known as "3 John") one epistle written by Jude, another brother of the Lord Jesus Christ Epistle of Jude (also known as "Jude") the Book of Revelation (formerly known as "the Apocalypse"; also known as "Revelation") What are the names of gospels?

The names of the gospels in order are: Gospel of Matthew (also known as "Matthew") Gospel of Mark (also known as "Mark") Gospel of Luke (also known as "Luke") Gospel of John (also known as "John") Is there a difference between books and gospels? The smallest division of the Bible is a "verse." A collection of related verses (not necessarily composed by the same author) is a "book." The Protestant Bible contains 39 books in the Old Testament and 27 books in the New Testament. The Catholic Bible not only contains those books found in the Protestant Bible but additional books known as deuterocanonical books . (However, if you ask a Catholic, they would probably say that the Protestant Bible is missing these books.) A gospel is a book of the Bible. It is simply a different genre of literature than the other books of the Bible (e.g., epistles). I've read that there are 73 books in the Catholic Bible, but are all of these considered gospels? Or are there just 4 gospels in total, including: Matthew, Mark, Luke and John and no others between the Old and New Testament? The latter.

There are only four gospels in both Protestant and Catholic Bibles. There is absolutely no exception to this. Catholic Bible 101 - The Bible-73 or 66 Books The Bible-73 or 66 Books Eucharist T-Shirt The Bible - 73 or 66 Books? So why does the Catholic Bible have 73 books, while the Protestant Bible has only 66 books? Some protestants believe that the Catholic Church added 7 books to the Bible at the Council of Trent in response to Luther’s Reformation, but that couldn’t be further from the truth. In about 367 AD, St. Athanasius came up with a list of 73 books for the Bible that he believed to be divinely inspired. This list was finally approved by Pope Damasus I in 382 AD, and was formally approved by the Church Council of Rome in that same year. Later Councils at Hippo (393 AD) and Carthage (397 AD) ratified this list of 73 books.

In 405 AD, Pope Innocent I wrote a letter to the Bishop of Toulouse reaffirming this canon of 73 books. In 419 AD, the Council of Carthage reaffirmed this list, which Pope Boniface agreed to. The Council of Trent, in 1546, in response to the Reformation removing 7 books from the canon (canon is a Greek word meaning “standard”), reaffirmed the original St. Athanasius list of 73 books. So what happened? How come the King James Bible only has 66 books? Well, Martin Luther didn’t like 7 books of the Old Testament that disagreed with his personal view of theology, so he threw them out of his bible in the 16th Century. His reasoning was that the Jewish Council of Jamnia in 90 AD didn’t think they were canonical, so he didn’t either. The Jewish Council of Jamnia was a meeting of the remaining Jews from Palestine who survived the Roman persecution of Jerusalem in 70 AD. It seems that the Jews had never settled on an official canon of OT scripture before this.

The Sadducees only believed in the first 5 books of the Bible written by Moses (the Pentateuch), while the Pharisees believed in 34 other books of the Old Testament as well. However, there were other Jews around from the Diaspora, or the dispersion of the Jews from the Babylonian captivity, who believed that another 7 books were also divinely inspired. In fact, when Jesus addressed the Diaspora Jews (who spoke Greek) he quoted from the Septuagint version of the scriptures. The Septuagint was a Greek translation by 70 translators of the Hebrew Word. The Septuagint includes the disputed 7 books that Protestants do not recognize as scriptural. Initially, Luther wanted to kick out some New Testament Books as well, including James, Hebrews, Jude, and Revelation.

He actually said that he wanted to “throw Jimmy into the fire”, and that the book of James was “an epistle of straw.” What is strange is that Luther eventually accepted all 27 books of the New Testament that the Catholic Pope Damasus I had approved of in 382 AD, but didn’t accept his Old Testament list, preferring instead to agree with the Jews of 90 AD. Luther really didn’t care much for Jews , and wrote an encyclical advocating the burning of their synagogues, which seems like a dichotomy. Why trust them to come up with an accurate canon of scripture when you hate and distrust them so much? And why trust the Catholic Church which he called “the whore of Babylon” to come up with an accurate New Testament list? Can you imagine the outrage by non-Catholics today if the Pope started throwing books out of the Bible? But strangely, Luther gets a pass on doing that exact same thing.

For the record, Jesus took the Kingdom away from the Jews (Matthew 21:43), and gave it to Peter and His new Church (Matthew 16:18), so the Jewish Council of Jamnia had no Godly authority to decide anything in 90 AD. They used 4 criteria for deciding whether or not certain books were canonical – 1. The books had to conform to the Pentateuch (the first 5 books of the Bible- ......Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy); 2. They could not have been written after the time of Ezra (around 400 BC); 3. They had to be written in Hebrew; 4. They had to be written in Palestine. So this method employed by first century Jews would automatically exclude all of the Gospels, and the Epistles of the New Testament, which were also written in the first century. But there were other books written before Christ, after Ezra, and some in Greek as well. These 7 books were accepted by the Diaspora Jews (the Alexandrian Canon) who were not in Palestine.

These 7 books are Tobit, Judith, Baruch, Wisdom, Sirach, First Maccabees, and Second Maccabees, as well as additional verses of Daniel and Esther. These books are called the “deuterocanon”, or second canon, by Catholics, and the “apocrypha”, or hidden/obscure, by Protestants (Christians who protest against the Catholic Church). There are several objections to these 7 books, besides not being approved at the Jewish Council Jamnia. Some say that since the New Testament never references these disputed books, then that proves that they are not canonical. But that isn’t right, because the non-disputed books of Ecclesiastes and Ezra aren’t mentioned in the New Testament at all, not even once. By this standard then, Ecclesiastes and Ezra aren’t canonical either. On the other hand, there are many references indeed from the deuterocanonicals in the New Testament.

Anybody who reads the book of Wisdom 2: 12-20 would immediately recognize that this is a direct reference to the Jews who were plotting against Jesus in Matthew 27:41-43: Wisdom 2:12-20: "Let us lie in wait for the righteous man, because he is inconvenient to us and opposes our actions; he reproaches us for sins against the law, and accuses us of sins against our training. He professes to have knowledge of God, and calls himself a child of the Lord. He became to us a reproof of our thoughts; the very sight of him is a burden to us, because his manner of life is unlike that of others, and his ways are strange. We are considered by him as something base, and he avoids our ways as unclean; he calls the last end of the righteous happy, and boasts that God is his father. Let us see if his words are true, and let us test what will happen at the end of his life; for if the righteous man is God's son, he will help him, and will deliver him from the hand of his adversaries.

Let us test him with insult and torture, that we may find out how gentle he is, and make trial of his forbearance. Let us condemn him to a shameful death, for, according to what he says, he will be protected." Matthew 27: 41-43: So also the chief priests, with the scribes and elders, mocked him, saying, "He saved others; he cannot save himself. He is the King of Israel; let him come down now from the cross, and we will believe in him. He trusts in God; let God deliver him now, if he desires him; for he said, `I am the Son of God.’” Another similar instance of this is Hebrews 11:35 being a direct reference to 2 Maccabees 7, where the mother and her 7 sons were slaughtered by the evil King for not forsaking the Jewish law. Romans 1:19-25 is also referenced in Wisdom 12-13. The clincher, of course, is that Jesus Himself observed the feast of Hannukah, or the Dedication of the Temple, in John 10.

This can be found in the Old Testament book of First Maccabees, Chapter 4, which is in the Catholic Bible, but not in the Protestant Bible. Additionally, there are some unscriptural books referenced in the New Testament, like Enoch and the Assumption of Moses (in the book of Jude), so if the standard is that books referenced in the New Testament are canonical, then Enoch and the Assumption of Moses would be in the Old Testament, but they are not. Some people object to these 7 books because they claim some of the early church fathers like St. Jerome didn’t think they were divinely inspired. While it’s great that all of a sudden so many non-Catholics start quoting the early Church Fathers, it’s not right to quote them on this and then not on the Eucharist, the papacy, or the supremacy of Rome, all which prove that the Catholic Church was the only Church around in those days. St. Jerome initially had some concerns about these books, saying that the Palestinian Jews didn’t consider them canonical, but St. Jerome was not infallible, and later agreed that they were. All of the early Church Fathers accepted these disputed books as divinely inspired.

Still others object to some of the disputed 7 books because of historical or geographical errors in them. And there are some, but it has to be remembered that not all stories in the Bible are historical. For instance, was there really a rich man who died and went to hell, and then saw his poor servant in the bosom of Abraham? Was there really a young man who sold his inheritance and went off to a faraway country and squandered it, and returned home as the prodigal son? Was there really a vineyard where the workers who showed up late got paid the same as the workers who worked all day? Or is it rather not more important that these parables teach important theological lessons than it is for them to be 100% historically accurate? In other words, books of fiction that relate Biblical truths can be divinely inspired. It’s important also to note that the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls included the book of Tobit and the book of Sirach, proving that the people back then thought them canonical, because they were found with the book of Isaiah and other Old Testament books. And you can check all of this out for yourself.

The first bible ever printed was the Gutenberg Bible, in the century BEFORE Luther started his Reformation. And the 7 books are indeed in that Bible. To see for yourself, click here . And an interesting numerology coincidence occurs here as well. In the bible, the number 7 denotes perfection (God rested on the 7th day, 7 spirits that minister to God, 7 sacraments), and the number 3 represents the Holy Trinity. On the other hand, the number 6 represents imperfection (as in 666). Therefore, 73 books sure sounds a lot better than 66 books! To check out a great list of all of the New Testament references to the deuterocanonicals by Catholic genius and all around good guy Jimmy Akin, click here. Some of the more interesting items in these 7 books are as follows: In 2 Maccabees 12:39-45, we learn how Judas Maccabees prayed for the dead and made atonement FOR THEM by sending money to the temple as a sin offering (purgatory).

In 2 Maccabees 6:12-14, we learn how God punishes nations. In 2 Maccabees 2:4-7, we learn the final resting place of the Ark of the Covenant and when it will be found (Sorry Indiana Jones!). In 2 Maccabees 15:12-17, we learn about how saints in heaven pray for us and help us out here on earth. In Wisdom 7, we see a biblical type of the Blessed Virgin Mary known as "wisdom." In Sirach 38:1-15, we learn about the role of the physician and how God uses him/her to cure us. In Tobit, we learn about the Archangel Raphael (a name which means God Heals), the only place in the entire bible where he is mentioned. We also learn about the anti-marriage demon Asmodeus. In Judith, we see a biblical type of Mary crushing the head of the serpent; Judith cuts off the head of the evil General Holofernes, and saves Israel.

Question: Conventionally how many books are in the Bible's New Testament?
Answer: Twenty-seven