Should the Apocrypha be in the bible?

Totally appropriate to put it in a separate section -- as Roman Catholic translations have traditionally done -- & as is available in an edition of the RSV translation. What is being called "the Apocrypha" was a part of the Septuagint, afterall.

What is its value from a Divine perspective? There are some parts of it that are *truly* of the Holy Spirit -- parts which spell out the *nature* of the Holy Spirit & Her relationship with God. Specifically -- Wisdom of Solomon Chapter 7 (foremost... but more material is in Chapters 6 & 8) -- supplementing, expanding upon Proverbs Chapter 8. She also speaks for *Herself* in Ecclesiasticus/ Sirach Chapter 24 -- which expands even more fullsomely upon what She revealed about Herself in Proverbs..

These are some of the Most Important spiritual revelations *from* and *about* the Holy Spirit (Hochmah, Wisdom, Sophia, Shekinah) of all time -- & they've been *excluded* from the Christian canon by the Protestants, who clearly *lacked* the Holy Spirit in doing so -- & in *supporting* that decision!

"How does it actually stand as divine scripture when connected to the NT?"

Discern accurately, the role that Wisdom (Sophia, the Holy Spirit -- about Whom Jesus said, in the Gospel of the Hebrews, "My Mother, the Holy Spirit..." -- a gospel which Jerome, the Church Father who translated the Greek scriptures to become the Latin Vulgate, *also* translated -- & in his reference to it did not, in any sense, demean it!) plays in Her interaction with Father God.

Compare that to the first chapter of the Gospel According To John.

It is not very difficult to discern that the role given to Christ as "the Word" was *adapted* from (indeed *stolen* from) Hokhmah in Proverbs, in the Wisdom of Solomon & Sirach.

My brother, a JW, once told me, "Well, I always understood Wisdom, in Proverbs 8, as meaning Christ, who was with Father from the beginning, creating the universe!" But it was *Sophia* that was with Him from the beginning, according to the Hebrew texts! This theological misinterpretation can be understood, by the nature of the patriarchal theological position that's marginalized -- basically *editing out* our Divine Mother (the Holy Spirit, Sophia) of Whom we must be reborn to even inherit Eternal Life, according to what Jesus taught in John 3:5-6!

i might add that to *my* values The Gospel According To Thomas & The Gospel of Phillip *also* (spiritually-speaking) belong in the New Testament canon!

Jerome, upon the Apocrypha, said those books "were read for edification, but not for confirming the authority of church doctrine."

To *my* interpretation that pretty well "let the cat out of the bag" as to why *some* scriptures were made a part of the RC canon & others *weren't*. If they did not confirm the AUTHORITY of *Church Doctrine* (which certainly the Gospel According to Thomas & The Gospel of Philip did *not* -- indeed they *subverted* that authority) they were not allowed *in* to the canon. Being genuinely *of* the Holy Spirit & preserving more of Jesus's actual teachings was *not* the criterion being used.

Inasmuch as the further revelations about Sophia, the Holy Spirit, Jesus's Divine *Mother* (in Wisdom of Solomon & Ecclesiasticus) *subverted* doctrines of the Christian Church -- they have been marginalized & *removed* by those who owe their allegiance *foremost* to their false doctrines -- rather than serving, foremost, the Genuine Divine TRUTH!

It's even reached the point that when some Jehovah Witnesses knocked on the door of a friend of mine (basically stranded at home raising her 5 kids -- with *no* adults to have religious & spiritual discussions with) she *welcomed* them in -- and agreed to discuss their New World translation with them for *half* the time, but the *other* half of the time they had to agree to discuss what *she* was deeply into, at the time (which was the Apocrypha). They told her the Apocrypha came from *Satan" -- & *shunned* her house after that. i would say those particular Jehovah Witnesses were *genuinely* (however ignorantly) guilty of blaspheming the Holy Spirit! They (in their ignorance -- by their indoctrination into the teachings of whatever JW elders) actually called Direct Teachings of the Holy Spirit (Sirach 24) & inSpirited Teachings *about* the Holy Spirit (Wisdom of Solomon Chapter 7) the teachings of *Satan*! This extent of *ignorance* of genuine Divine Teachings is what has resulted from the *exclusion* of the Apocrypha from the Bible!

The Apocrypha is included in the Catholic Bible. This is a controversy that has gone on for hundreds if not over a thousand years.

There are Bibles that have it located between the Old and New Testaments.

I have read the Apocrypha a couple of times. It does have value in learning of some points of the standard 66 books included in the Bible but to me they are more like stories about the people in the Bible rather than actual scripture. I believe it can be useful in some few instances.

i think it was intended not to be. whether for heresy or Hidden teachings reasons, i don't know for sure. in LDS scriptures the Apochrypha was not translated because it is said to have been more correct. i prefer the doctrine and covenants but to each his own. i believe the people in charge of combining a bible took a few political detours with bias and later some with cruel intent chose to change parts of the scriptures.

Probably not, but the "Gnostic Gospels" of the Nag Hammadi Library definitely SHOULD!!!!

Including the gospels of Thomas and Philiip...very inspired and important works.

King James Version Bible

-----Validity of the Book of Jasher------

2 Samuel Chapter 1

18. (Also he bade them teach the children of Judah [the use of] the bow: behold, [it is] written in THE BOOK OF JASHER.)

Joshua Chapter 10

13. And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. [Is] not this written in THE BOOK OF JASHER? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day.

-----Validity of the Book of Jasher------

THE BOOK OF JASHER: CHAPTER 2

18. And she again conceived and bare a son, and called his name Jubal; and Zillah, her sister, was barren in those days and had no offspring.

19. For in those days the sons of men began to trespass against God, and to transgress the commandments which he had commanded to Adam, to be fruitful and multiply in the earth.

20. And some of the son of men caused their wives to drink a draught that would render them barren, in order that they might retain their figures and whereby their beautiful appearance might not fade.

21. And when the sons of men caused some of their wives to drink, Zillah drank with them.

22. And the child-bearing women appeared abominable in the sight of their husbands as widows, whilst their husbands lived, for to the barren ones only they were attached.

23. And in the end of days and years, when Zillah became old, the Lord opened her womb.

No, they are called the Apocrypha for a reason.

You either take the Catholic Pope's view or Pope Luther.

No, it is not inspired nor does it claim inspiration but as far as historical documents go it is useful for other things.

These were Hebrew scriptures accepted by the church.

That's why it isn't in the Bible and was chosen to be excluded...

It didn't support the overall story they wished to convey... that why the stories they chose are contradictory in many cases... there is no 'one' story...

Heavily illustrating the fact that it was man made.. in many ways...

IMHO