Unveiling the TRUE Meaning of the Apocrypha

Подписаться 3,6 тыс.

50% 1

Unveiling the Meaning of Apocrypha
Greetings, truth-seekers! Pastor G here, and today, we're diving into the enigmatic world of the Apocrypha. You've heard the term, but do you really know the truth behind these ancient biblical texts? Buckle up as we unveil the mysteries and question everything you thought you knew.
Apocrypha Decoded: Debunking Misconceptions:
Contrary to popular belief, the term "Apocrypha" doesn't denote something fake or hidden. Join me in debunking misconceptions surrounding these ancient texts. From the 150 BC Septuagint to the 19th-century King James Version, the Apocrypha played a crucial role in the Bible.
Deuterocanonical Insights:
In the religious context, Apocrypha signifies books deemed non-canonical, labeled as "Deuterocanonical" by our Orthodox and Catholic brethren. Uncover the nuances that led to their exclusion from the Protestant canon, where only authoritative books are considered canonical.
A 138-Year-Old Omission: A Shocking Revelation:
The truth is, these Apocryphal texts, once revered for over 1800 years, offer profound insights subtly referenced in the New Testament. Yet, they were removed from the Protestant canon just 138 years ago. Explore the reasons behind this historical omission and its impact.
Rediscovering the Untold Chapter:
When you hear "Apocrypha," think of it as an untold chapter in the grand story of the Bible. These texts, far from being hidden, contribute unique perspectives that enrich our understanding of biblical narratives. It's time to rediscover the Apocrypha and appreciate their enduring significance.
Subscribe for Biblical Revelations:
Ready to challenge your beliefs and explore the untold chapters of the Bible? Hit that subscribe button, join our community, and embark on a journey of rediscovery with me. The Apocrypha awaits-a hidden treasure trove of wisdom.
Visit my Website - gclmedia.org
My Favorite Biblical Resources - amzn.to/3PVb8yz
#Apocrypha #PastorG #BiblicalElucidations

Опубликовано:

14 янв 2024

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 111

@gclmedia Месяц назад

Check out my Apocrypha Playlist: ru-vid.com/group/PLDeCxlE5-BAPUfLvJDjCkmTXo-fXyL3h3

@n8vscience842 2 месяца назад

Can you do a LONG video on this please. Like a live or a study? Something where we can interact with you

@gclmedia Месяц назад

Sure thing. Ive been wanting to do something longer.

@nathanhoffman7688 2 месяца назад

This is good stuff 👍

@superfreak5192 4 месяца назад

Amén Brother

@BrownieMiyamoto 6 месяцев назад

Just because they chose to remove these books and deemed them non canon, does not mean they are my authority. I’m not under their dominion. I will believe what I want.

@PastorGreads 6 месяцев назад

Not at all! The God of the Bible is the Authority! 🤗

@MisterN0b0dy 4 месяца назад

This is simply rubbish. The Apocrypha was never in the Hebrew Old Testament and never referred to, let alone quoted by any New Testament writer. The New Testament quotes the Old Testament literally hundreds of times, yet not once from the Apocrypha. The Apocrypha teaches many things that are demonstrably false and historically inaccurate.

@gclmedia 4 месяца назад

It's rubbish that Martin Luther didn't remove the Apocrypha?! How can that be? Unfortunately, that is a fact which was easily by simply showing a Luther Bible. 🤷🏾‍♂️

@MisterN0b0dy 4 месяца назад

⁠@@gclmediait’s rubbish that they’re referenced throughout the New Testament. I repeat, the Apocrypha was never contained within the Hebrew Old Testament and never referred to, let alone quoted by any New Testament writer.

@gclmedia 4 месяца назад

@@MisterN0b0dy you can repeat as loud and as many times as you would like, Brother. It's still not going to change the fact that throughout history, the Bible included the Apocrypha. The original 1611 King James Version included the Apocrypha; the 1560 Geneva Bible included the Apocrypha; The 1539 Great Bible included the Apocrypha and labeled them Hagiographa, Holy Writings (Look it up); the 1535 Coverdale Bible included the Apocrypha; the 1534 Luther Bible included the Apocrypha; the 14th century Wycliffe Bible, included the Apocrypha; the 400 Latin Vulgate, and the 200 BC Septuagint, included these Deuterocanonical books. 🤷🏾‍♂️

@MisterN0b0dy 4 месяца назад

@@gclmediaAnd you can repeat as many times as you like the number of past Bible versions that included the Apocrypha, but that doesn’t even begin to address the fact that it was never in the Hebrew Old Testament and never referred to, let alone quoted by a New Testament writer. The very problem with your argument is that the Apocrypha’s inclusion in past Bible versions gives it a perception of authority and integrity its content doesn’t deserve; its inclusion in past Bible versions has caused confusion, distraction and deception to millions of people.

@gclmedia 4 месяца назад

@@MisterN0b0dy Regardless, I appreciate your perspective! And, I LOVE YOU! Ultimately, whether you accept the Deuterocanonical books or rejects the Apocrypha is a personal decision. BUT, personally, I believe the Bible explains its own ideas. The Apocrypha brings clarity to many concepts that might otherwise be obscure and enriches others in ways that I find remarkable. Are there any aspects of the Apocrypha that you find particularly illuminating or enriching in your understanding of biblical concepts?

@1611AuthorizedVersion 5 месяцев назад

There is NO pRoFoUnD insight of any kind in the apocrypha that would supercede the light from your authorized 1611 King James Bible. Stick with God breathed scripture. A little leaven, leavens the whole lump....

@NathanH83 3 месяца назад

The books called Apocrypha are God breathed scripture.

@1611AuthorizedVersion 3 месяца назад

@@NathanH83 The apocrypha is 100% NOT God breathed scripture.

@NathanH83 3 месяца назад

@@1611AuthorizedVersion Yes it is. Multiple early church councils declared books like Maccabees, Tobit, and Judith to be divine canonical scripture. They were in the original Hebrew before the Jews took them out.

@1611AuthorizedVersion 3 месяца назад

@@NathanH83 It was never in the original Hebrew, and those councils came long after the completion of the O.T. The apocrypha was added on later in history.

@NathanH83 3 месяца назад

@@1611AuthorizedVersion Yes, it was. The books and chapters that we call Apocrypha were in the original Hebrew, and were then translated into Greek called the Greek Septuagint. That's why the early church accepted them at the beginning of church history. It was after Christianity started when the Jews removed them. The Apocrypha was never added by Catholics. It was removed by Jews. But it was in the original Hebrew.