Why do biblical Christians and churches reject the Apocrypha as being inspired of God?:<quoted text>
1. If your using historical inaccuracies for your measuring stick, then you'll need to remove a few more books than the deuterocanonical texts.
2. They teach doctrine that is false? Says who?.
3. Says who?
4. Not to me. I get inspired from reading Sirach and the last two chapters of Daniel. If 'feeling' good is your litmus test for inspired books, then I presume Forest Gump is in your canon?
5. No they don't.
I'm curious to know you these "non catholic authorities" are who reject the Apocrypha.
1. These books existed before New Testament times, yet there is not one single quotation from the Apocrypha is in the New Testament. Jesus quoted from twenty four of the Old Testament books, and the New Testament quotes from thirty four books of the Old Testament. Introductory phrases like "it is written" or "thus says the Lord" are totally absent from the books and therefore the books themselves do not claim to be inspired of God.
The books of 1st and 2nd Maccabees have historical significance, but when they are compared to the Bible they shown to not be the inspired Word of God. Even though they have some historical value these books are clouded by the contradictions found in their text. For example, in 1st and 2nd Maccabees, Antiochus Epiphanes is made to die three different deaths in as many different places.
2. Although some of the early church fathers quoted from these writings, and even accepted them as inspired, this does not mean they were inspired. The majority of the early church writers rejected these books as being inspired. Clearly in the Second Century and afterward there were many false teachers and heretics. It is important to know that Jesus nor any of the Apostles quoted from or mention any of these books.