What books of the Bible did Martin Luther remove?

Question

I have heard that Martin Luther removed books from the Bible, if so what books?

Answer 1

Luther did not remove any books from the bible.
" The Apocrypha refers to 14 or 15 books of doubtful authenticity and authority that the Roman Catholics decided belonged in the Bible sometime following the Protestant Reformation. The Catholic Council of Trent (1545-1563) canonized these books. This canonization took place largely as a result of the Protestant Reformation. Indeed, Luther had criticized the Catholics for not having scriptural support fur such doctrines as praying for the dead. By canonizing the Apocrypha (which offers support for praying for the dead in 2 Macabese 23:45-46), the Catholics suddenly had "scriptural" support for this and other distinctively Catholic doctrines.
Roman Catholics argue that the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament) contained the Apocrypha. As well, church fathers like Iranians, Tortellini, and Clement of Alexandria used the apocryphal books in public worship and accepted them as Scripture. Further, it is argued, St. Augustine viewed these books as inspired.
Protestants respond by pointing out that even though some of the Apocryphal books may have been alluded to in the New Testament, no New Testament writer EVER quoted from ANY of these books as holy Scripture or gave them the slightest authority as inspired books. Jesus and the disciples virtually ignored these books, something that wouldn't have been the case if they had considered them to be inspired.
Moreover, even though certain church fathers spoke approvingly of the Apocrypha, there were other early church fathers - notable Origin and Jerome - who denied their inspiration. Further, even though the early Augustine acknowledged the Apocrypha, in his later years he rejected these books as being outside the canon and considered them inferior to the Hebrew Scriptures.
The Jewish Council of Jamie, which met in A.D. 90, rejected the Apocrypha as Scripture. Combine all this with the fact that there are clear historical errors in the Apocrypha (especially those relating to Obit) and the fact that it contains unbiblical doctrines (like praying for the dead), and it is clear that these books do not belong in the Bible. In addition, unlike many of the biblical books, THERE IS NO CLAIM IN ANY APOCRYPHAL BOOK IN REGARD TO DIVINE INSPIRATION.

Answer 2

The ones known as the Apocrypha:

Tobit - an adventure story involving a young man collecting a debt for his blind father, a young woman with a curse and a disguised angel.

Judith - when the leaders of a Jewish city won't face a beseiging enemy, a woman of God acts alone.

Additions to Esther - which otherwise would have included no prayers or references to God.

Wisdom of Solomon - more proverbs

Sirach (or Ecclesiasticus) - more proverbs

Baruch - a prophetic book by Jeremiah's scribe

Additions to Daniel - a psalm-like prayer by the three young men in the furnace, plus detective stories about a wronged woman, a demon and some deceitful priests

1 Maccabees - the heroic exploits of the Maccabee brothers against Antiochus IV and the Greek invaders

2 Maccabees - another, more mystical approach to the uprising against the Greeks

Luther's priciple objection was to a passage in 2 Macc 12, in which the Jewish commander orders prayer and sacrifice on behalf of dead soldiers who were found to be wearing amulets of a false god under their tunics. This was incompatible with Luther's rejection of intercession for the dead, so he tossed the lot.

The reason the books were distinct from other bible books is the result of the Septuagint, a Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible in about 250 BCE. After the destruction of the Temple in 70 CE, a council of rabbis met to ultimately decide which books were inspired scripture and which were not. They decided that anything that looked like it was written after the time of Ezra (c. 400 BCE) would not be included. The analyses were not scientific. Ultimately it came down to books that were still available in the original Hebrew. The Septuagint books referenced above had no extant Hebrew counterparts, so they were excluded from the Jewish canon.

The Christians, however, had been raised on the Septuagint and didn't pay attention to Jewish council decisions anyway, so they acepted all the books. It wasn't until Jerome translated the Bible into the common Latin that anyone suspected a difference. When Jerome discovered the non-Hebrew books and portions in Hebrew scripture, he decided to separate them into a separate section in case it mattered to someone. This distinction provided Luther's excuse to remove them. The Roman church continued using them, referring to them as "deutero-canonical".

It is unarguable that the books were later additions, showing in their composition a more sophisticated theology, with some Greek philosophical and literary influences, and a willingness to engage deeper moral questions than the other scriptures. Many of these ideas seemed more "Christian" than Jewish. But the Christian debate over their inspirational authority didn't, perhaps couldn't, arise until the time of the Reformation.

Answer 3

I am not sure it is fair to say he removed any books. He had a low opinion of the Apocrypha. He also had a low opinion of the general epistles, especially James.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_canon

Protestant Reformation: begun by Martin Luther, who proposed removing the books of Hebrews, James, Jude and Revelation from the canon (echoing the consensus of several Catholics, also labeled Christian Humanists — such as Cardinal Ximenez, Cardinal Cajetan, and Erasmus — and partially because they were perceived to go against certain Protestant doctrines such as sola gratia and sola fide), but this was not generally accepted among his followers. However, these books are ordered last in the German-language Luther Bible to this day.

See the rest of this portion of the article.

Answer 4

There are several books in the Catholic bible that do not appear in the Protestant bible, but I have not heard that Luther was involved in their removal. Comparison of a copy of each will prove interesting.

Answer 5

You heard wrong. The only books omitted from the modern Bible that most of us use is the books of the apocrypha. These books contained false doctrine, and were deemed to have no place in the Scriptures. Except, of course, for the catholics. Imagine that.

Answer 6

The Vatican have a way of reversing the truth. Martin Luther found a lot of changes that the Vatican have been doing. He wanted to keep the original texts intact and no changes must be made. When he rebelled against it, the Vatican found a way to make it appear he is the one who did the changes.
Do not believe what you hear. There are secrets within the vaults of the Vatican which no one is allowed to make inquiry. There were also a lot of truthful manuscripts that has been burned.

Answer 7

hard to say, history is written by the winners or dominant ones