the apocryphal books are generally left out of modern
translations, as they are non canonical (by Christians faith -
don't ever get into a discussion on this point, if you still want
to argue, by protestant faith), so is 66
Plus, that statement means that you had superficial knowledge in
the translations of bible,
There are critical text, majority text, textus receptus and
varied versions of bible manuscripts, i shall not say which is
translated from which, if you wanna know, please seach up the net,
it is quite interesting
No need to argue when history can speak for itself on this.
If you look up any Bible in the first 1500 years of
Christianity, they all have 73 books as the church has
always held the 7 deuterocanonical (apocryphal) books to be
canonical throughout the ages. For example, the Codex Sinaiticus,
one of the oldest Bibles in existence today, contains most of these
books although granted that its list of books show that the church
at that time was still finalising the canon.
Then after the reformation in the 16th century, the 7 books have
been gradually sidelined or taken out altogether in
some Bibles for goodness knows what reason. So what was
considered canonical for about 1500 years are now not anymore?
Who are we to make that call?