Why Are Catholic and Protestant Bibles Different?

Earlier this week I got this question via email:

Why does the version of the Bible we use exclude some books that are in the Catholic Bible? I have read online that there are different timeframes for when this happened, but no real answers for why it happened. What are your thoughts/opinions?

The Protestant and Catholic bibles both contain the same books of the Old and New Testaments. Where they differ is in what is called the "Intertestamental writings," a section of books written during the time between when the Old and New Testaments were created. These books include such works as "The Wisdom of Solomon," "Tobit," and "1 and 2 Macabees." Sometimes these books are referred to as the Apocrypha, which is Greek for "hidden away" or "withdrawn."

Unlike the works of the Old Testament which were written in Hebrew, the Apocryphal books were written in either Aramaic or Greek. They reflect a later time period and some feel they stand outside the prophetic tradition of the Old Testament. While they were used by many first century Jews as Scripture, in A.D. 70 a prominent council of rabbis met and permanently excluded them from the Jewish scriptures.

The Apocrypha influenced the thought of early Christians and was usually included in their copies of the Old Testament. However one of the most influential churchmen of the early Western church was Jerome, who translated the Bible from Hebrew and Greek into Latin about 400 A.D. His translation, called the Vulgate, was the standard Bible of the Western church until the Protestant Reformation in the 1500's. Jerome followed the Jewish rabbis and held the Apocrypha to be inferior to the Old Testament. In his translation he set the Apocrypha in a separate section. He believed that it was helpful but should not be seen as having the same authority as the Old and New Testaments. However the official position of the Roman Catholic church held that the Apocrypha had the same authority as the Old and New Testaments.

During the Protestant Reformation the two most influential shapers of the Protestant thought were Martin Luther in Germany and John Calvin in Geneva. They agreed with the ancient rabbis and Jerome that the Apocrypha was not Scripture and they did so for the same reasons: the works were written later, they often could not have been written by those they were ascribed to (for instance there is no way Solomon wrote "The Wisdom of Solomon") and they stood outside the prophetic tradition of the Old Testament. Since then Protestant Bibles have either put the Aporcrypha in its own section or left it out altogether. Catholics continue to see these books as Holy Scripture.

Personally speaking, I find some of the Apocryphal books interesting reading. The 1 and 2 Books of Macabees tell the story of the Jewish wars against the pagan Greek empire about 150 years before the time of Jesus. It's much easier to understand what the first century Jews expected Jesus to do after having read about the Macabees revolt.

But, like the rabbis, Jerome, Luther, and Calvin as I read them I just don't get the sense that they are Scripture. It just doesn't feel the same. There is something missing. They seem outside the redemptive stream of what God is doing through Israel and his Messiah. So I'll stay a good Protestant and read the Apocrypha as helpful rather than holy literature.

I hope that answers a few questions. Follow up questions are always welcome!