# Lutheran Bible vs. King James? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [September 19, 2007, 1:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lutheran-bible-vs-king-james/419686 "2007-09-19T01:13:37Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 14\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Jinx](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/c6cbf5/32.png) [@Jinx](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jinx)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2007, 1:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lutheran-bible-vs-king-james/419686/1 "2007-09-19T01:13:37Z")
A friend of mine was explaining to me how the Lutheran Bible recognizes more books in “the New Testament” than, say, the Kings James version. If I understood him correctly, he says the additional books come from the (formerly lost) Dead Sea scrolls. I believe he called the collection of additional writings the Acry- or Acro-something or other? (What word is this?) If these additional writings come from the Dead Sea scrolls, then I am confused. Weren’t the Dead Sea scrolls only recently translated? (Maybe 20 years ago, tops?) What’s the SD on the Good Book? - Jinx ---
**Author:** ![SmackFu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/53a042/32.png) [@SmackFu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SmackFu)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2007, 1:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lutheran-bible-vs-king-james/419686/2 "2007-09-19T01:34:47Z")
Apocrypha. ---
**Author:** ![KneadToKnow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kneadtoknow/32/3999_2.png) [@KneadToKnow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KneadToKnow)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2007, 1:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lutheran-bible-vs-king-james/419686/3 "2007-09-19T01:38:14Z")
[Linkocrypha](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apocrypha) ---
**Author:** ![panamajack](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/47e85d/32.png) [@panamajack](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/panamajack)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2007, 1:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lutheran-bible-vs-king-james/419686/4 "2007-09-19T01:40:03Z")
There isn’t any particular “Lutheran Bible”. Most use the same English versions that other Protestants use (like the King James), and largely do _not_ include the Apocrypha (the term you’re looking for). Most Catholic churches that I’m aware of do use versions that include the Apocrypha. So either your friend was mistaken, or your friend was referring to the _Luther Bible_, which is the common name given to the version translated by Martin Luther. This does include the Apocrypha, at least mostly. Luther included them after the other books, and did not number them, since he felt they were less important. Of note, he did this to some of the New Testament books as well. Also, there were a few different versions published, and I think some of them may have been marked differently. Another possiblity - if your friend was German - the Luther Bible has about the same respect in German linguistically and religiously as the King James Bible in English, so there probably are or were some Lutherans using it as their primary Bible. edit : If the wikipedia Apocrypha article is to be believed, Luther must not have needed to translate, since the Bible was apparently written in German. :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![Derleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Derleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Derleth)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2007, 1:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lutheran-bible-vs-king-james/419686/5 "2007-09-19T01:52:34Z")
[QUOTE=SmackFu] Apocrypha. [/QUOTE] Chappecrypha. In other words, only the KJV contains the phrase “I’m King James, bitch!” scrawled in the margins of the Song of Solomon. ---
**Author:** ![Jinx](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/c6cbf5/32.png) [@Jinx](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jinx)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2007, 2:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lutheran-bible-vs-king-james/419686/6 "2007-09-19T02:04:27Z")
[QUOTE=panamajack] There isn’t any particular “Lutheran Bible”…[vs. Luther Bible] [/QUOTE] Oops! This is my mistake. I presumed that “Lutheran” is the adjective for “Luther”. Is this not correct? …Aren’t the two words related? - Jinx ---
**Author:** ![panamajack](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/47e85d/32.png) [@panamajack](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/panamajack)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2007, 2:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lutheran-bible-vs-king-james/419686/7 "2007-09-19T02:07:22Z")
The words are related, of course (Lutheran = follower of Luther, in some sense). Since Luther was primarily aiming for reform, not schism, he wasn’t writing a Bible specifically for a group. In fact, he would probably hate the term Lutheran. Lutherans tended to follow his ideas, and since he considered the Apocrypha non-scriptural, they use the same Bibles most other Protestants use. As for the Dead Sea Scrolls, they included some of the earliest versions of some of the books in the Apocrypha, along with other Jewish writings. They also included portions of the Tanakh (the ‘original’ Hebrew Bible — i.e., the same books used for the Protestant Old Testament). [Here’s some more information](http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/apocrypha.html). More on Luther’s Bible - the 1535 version section containing the Apocrypha says : > [@Martin Luther](#): > > Apocrypha > Das sind Bücher:so nicht der heiligen Schrifft gleich gehalten:und doch nützlich und gut zu lesen sind. (“Books that are not to be considered equal with the Holy Scriptures, but nevertheless are useful and good to read.”) The books he included in that section are : Judith Jesus Syrach (Ecclesiasticus) Tobias Baruch Maccabees (probably this is 1 & 2) Fragments of Esther Fragments of Daniel The books he separated out in the New Testament ( Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation) do not have the same disclaimer separating them (though there may be something in the notes about them). There are also a few psalms that are either apocryphal or in different positions in various Bibles, but I forget which ones. ---
**Author:** ![KneadToKnow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kneadtoknow/32/3999_2.png) [@KneadToKnow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KneadToKnow)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2007, 2:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lutheran-bible-vs-king-james/419686/8 "2007-09-19T02:12:11Z")
[QUOTE=panamajack] Fragments of Esther [/QUOTE] Wasn’t Katie Holmes in that[?](http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0311648/) ---
**Author:** ![panamajack](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/47e85d/32.png) [@panamajack](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/panamajack)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2007, 2:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lutheran-bible-vs-king-james/419686/9 "2007-09-19T02:18:04Z")
To clarify on the Lutheran/Luther thing : ‘Lutheran’ in English refers to the Protestant group (and the modern denomination) that formed around Luther during the Reformation. The ideas are primarily based on Luther’s writings, but are not necessarily the same. The term Lutheran generally is _not_ used as an adjective for ‘pertaining to Martin Luther’ to avoid confusion. Hence the slightly awkward “Luther Bible” (following the German form). ---
**Author:** ![sqweels](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f19dbf/32.png) [@sqweels](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sqweels)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2007, 2:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lutheran-bible-vs-king-james/419686/10 "2007-09-19T02:57:18Z")
[QUOTE=Derleth] Chappecrypha. In other words, only the KJV contains the phrase “I’m King James, bitch!” scrawled in the margins of the Song of Solomon. [/QUOTE] I think you could use a good Bible thumpin’. 😛 ---
**Author:** ![Spavined\_Gelding](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/958977/32.png) [@Spavined\_Gelding](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spavined_Gelding)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2007, 3:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lutheran-bible-vs-king-james/419686/11 "2007-09-19T03:38:53Z")
Well, there is a similarity between the two. Both set the standard for their language. The language, phrasing, grammar, and vocabulary of Luther’s Bible was ,or became, the standard German of the 16th Century just as the King James Bible was written in and became the standard English of the early 17th Century (think Shakespear). Modern “correct” German owes a lot to the form of German spoken in Saxon universities during Luther’s heyday and spread across Northern Germany by his Bible. Modern “correct” English likewise is derivative of academic English of the Midlands. It wasn’t the English spoken by James I of England and VI of Scotland – he spoke a broad Scotts dialect that was nearly unintelligible by his court officers and servants, but then he was a Lowland Scot so what would expect? ---
**Author:** ![FriarTed](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/friarted/32/1052_2.png) [@FriarTed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FriarTed)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2007, 2:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lutheran-bible-vs-king-james/419686/12 "2007-09-19T14:41:51Z")
Just a correction to the OP, any Apocryphal books are additions to the OLD Testament, not the New. ---
**Author:** ![APB](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/8e8cbc/32.png) [@APB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/APB)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2007, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lutheran-bible-vs-king-james/419686/13 "2007-09-19T15:10:24Z")
[QUOTE=Jinx] A friend of mine was explaining to me how the Lutheran Bible recognizes more books in “the New Testament” than, say, the Kings James version. [/QUOTE] That rather depends on the particular version of the ‘King James Version’. Until the nineteenth century, most editions of the KJV did include the Apocrypha, reflecting the non-canonical-but-interesting status accorded to them in Article VI of [the Thirty-Nine Articles](http://members.tripod.com/~gavvie/39articles/art1.html). ---
**Author:** ![garygnu](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/garygnu/32/2924_2.png) [@garygnu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/garygnu)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2007, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lutheran-bible-vs-king-james/419686/14 "2007-09-19T16:01:11Z")
[QUOTE=FriarTed] Just a correction to the OP, any Apocryphal books are additions to the OLD Testament, not the New. [/QUOTE] There are [New Testement apocryphal books](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Testament_apocrypha), you just have to make that first “a” lower case.