For follow-up discussion and general commentary on the topic. Comments are sorted chronologically.
digheyseus dj alimo
I do already understand S. Michael Houdmann's (as well as Mr. Mercado's) explanation of the reformed church adherents' views viz-a-viz the Roman and Eastern Churches views on those texts as well. What I really wanted to ask was whether we as evangelicals are looking at Rome, Anglicans & The Eastern Orthodox individuals as lost souls or as brothers, albeit on shaky ground. I know that when the KJV was translated in the earlier editions the apocrypha was included. It was not included as having the same level of Inspiration was involved headed down this road. I just read an awful lot and I seem to remember being surprised that that the apocrypha was ever in the KJV at all.
But I digress. What I'm really concerned about is the status of Romans, Anglicans & The Eastern Orthodox folks as they adhere to their respective churches statements of faith. Are they anathema in their present condition? Or are they saved is my basic question. Please R.S.V.P. and please do not hesitate to correct any misconceptions I may have about anything I write. I desire constructive criticism. It is the only way to grow. Believe me, I grew up in Brooklyn, NY; I've had worse things than my ego bruised.
God Bless You & Your Minintry,
~ digheyseus
Colin Wong
Hi Digheyseus. Perhaps this question will provide clues to the answer you're looking for.
Will Catholics go to heaven?
W P
A lot of people don't realize this but even the KJV originally had the Apocrypha, until later revisions took it back out again.
Raymond Aviles
W P: inclusion doesn't equate acceptance. For instance, Jerome "included" the apocryphal books in the Vulgate, but only for its ecclesiastical value and his prefaces to these books stated this clearly. Yet, Jerome never accepted them as part of the canon and was adamant all the way to the grave. So, again, including the books doesn't mean the books were included as inspired scripture.