Changing the word of God

It may be necessary to pursue serious issues with several Bibles. Sometimes the KJV for a more poetic understanding and at other times plain English versions. A Greek interlineal Bible for quick reference and also The Hebraic-Roots Version (HRV) or the Hebraic-Roots Bible (HRB) can sometimes help.

Ultimately however, it will be an act of faith.

It means that what you consider “taken away” was not originally part of Scripture. Therefore it was not actually “taken away.”

He knew what I was saying.

I see. Thank you for your kind explanation, I now understand what was meant, whereas I did not before.

Martin Luther removed the non-canon books (deutrocanon). He did not remove anything that was canon and considered inspired works.

And it is possible that some of the Orally transmitted stories existed in a different language prior to Hebrew

the 66 Books are what God ordained to be. the 66 books have a thin red line from GEN to REV = CHrist

God created man for HIS own pleasure

Man sinned and was cut off from the presence of a holy God
God Love for man caused God to Come and do for us what only HE could do
Save his most precious creation and restore the broken relationship.

The other books are not built on Christ. therefore they are substandard to Christ who is the word of God.

Humans decided what books made it into the Bible.

A church council around 399 defined the NT canon. The LXX shows us that an OT canon existed then. Some Historical Churches included the "extra books" that were removed by us Protestants.

The canon of Scripture was not "chosen", but rather "recognized". There's a huge difference.

Geesscch....isn't the Bible enough on the subject?

God gives us His word as a road map to get from this earthly life to our eternal salvation status. He gave it to us as we have it. We don't need more.
Remember....all we need to know from scripture is;
1) Repentance
2) Baptism
3)Righteous living per God's commandments.

We have that.

Further most of us do not make it a schedule to properly study what we have...why do we need more?

Um... the Bible does not say anthing about the apocryphal books, specifically, as to why they aren't in the canon.

We must always remember the Bible is only understood by the Holy Spirit, no matter in what language it is being read.

Martin Luther removed 1 and 2 Peter, James, Jude and incredibly Revelation!! there was an other but I can't remember which at present. Where would Christian Chat be if Revelation hadn't been put back after his death!!

During the time of Jesus there was no fixed cannon of scripture. After the Jewish War the Sanhedrin in
exile met and decided which books were considered to be scripture and which were not. Their main aim
was to prevent Christian writings from being included although Esther had a narrow escape from being banned by them, because there is no mention of God in the Hebrew version. It was included because it was read during the festival of Purim which was very popular in the Jewish community.

That is incorrect. Please take note:

LUKE 24: THE ESTABLISHED CANON CONFIRMED BY CHRIST HIMSELF

1. "MOSES AND ALL THE PROPHETS" = THE HEBREW TANAKH (OT)
25 Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken: 26 Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory? 27And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself...

2. "THE SCRIPTURES" = THE TANAKH
30 And it came to pass, as he sat at meat with them, he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them. 31 And their eyes were opened, and they knew him; and he vanished out of their sight. 32 And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the Scriptures?...

3. "THE LAW OF MOSES, THE PROPHETS, AND THE PSALMS = THE TANAKH
44 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the Prophets, and in the Psalms, concerning me...

4. "THE SCRIPTURES" = THE TANAKH
45 Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the Scriptures...

So Christ was in fact referring to the Hebrew canon, and both the apostles and Christ's enemies agreed that this was the Word of God.

Since about 400 B.C. the Hebrew canon had been established in Israel, and consisted on only 24 books (equivalent to our 39 books in the OT). They were grouped differently, but here is how they have stood in the Hebrew Tanakh.

TORAH = The Law of Moses = 5 books
NEVIIM (NEBIIM) = The Prophets = 8 books
KETUVIM (KETHUBIM) = The Psalms or the Writings = 11 books

Samuel, Kings, Chronicles, and Ezra-Nehemiah are single books. All twelve minor prophets are just one book.

I didn't say that the books we now have were not accepted as scripture or that Jesus did not
accept them as such. What I did say was that there were other books not included in the bible
that were quoted by various groups living at that time. The book of Enoch is a prime example
Several copies of this book were found among the dead sea scrolls along with others that are not included. The Sadducees only considered the Torah (the five books of Moses} as being the
direct word of God. What I am saying is that there was no formal hard and fast collection of
books accepted by every group. Also the Septuagint (the Greek version of the Scriptures) was
compiled and in circulation a couple of hundred years before Jesus and that includes what we
call the Apocrypha. Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches base their bibles on this
version.

When reading various prophecies of the Word it is true and faithful to understand this? speculation will only lead to hypocrisy.

I see 66 books in my bible. I've never bought or seen a full bible without 66 books . I know certain cults and Catholics have different things going on ,but that's a whole different topic .

Do you have a scholarly source for that claim?