When the books in The Bible were decided by the Early Church there were many books that, because of their reliability were decided to be included unanimously by all Christian leaders. These are what all Christian denominations regard as the Bible today (eg the Old Testament, four gospels and Acts, Paul's letters etc.). Similarly, there were some books that were regarded as not reliable enough, either in their historicity or authorship, to be included in the 'canon of scripture'.
However, there were a collection of books that, while not in themselves heretical or unhistorical, were nevertheless not regarded as fully reliable by some in the early church. Therefore, these books were either included by a majority vote, or rejected. Those included by a majority included the Letter to the Hebrews and Revelation. Those which were rejected included Tobit and other books (like 1 and 2 Maccabees, Baruch, Bel and the Dragon and so on).
Since then some church denominations have included some of these books in their bible (such as the Orthodox Church, the Roman Catholic Church and others). However, the King James Version of the Bible was commissioned by the Protestant "Church of England", and these 'marginal' books were omitted. Instead, the King James Version sometimes includes them in a separate section called 'the Apocrypha' and bibles can be purchased with this section if you wish to read it - or you can red the Apocrypha online. The 'official line' on these books by the Church of England can be seen in Article 6 of the 39 Articles of Faith:"And the other Books (as Hierome saith) the Church doth read for example of life and instruction of manners; but yet doth it not apply them to establish any doctrine; such are these following:
The Third Book of Esdras, The rest of the Book of Esther,
The Fourth Book of Esdras, The Book of Wisdom,
The Book of Tobit, Jesus the Son of Sirach,
The Book of Judith, Baruch the Prophet,
The Song of the Three Children, The Prayer of Manasses,
The Story of Susanna, The First Book of Maccabees,
Of Bel and the Dragon, The Second Book of Maccabees."
In other words, Anglicans regard Tobit and the other books as useful to read but does not base doctrine or belief on them.
Tobit is a book in the Catholic bible.
No, King James was the English king who had the bible translated from latin to english... hence, the King James' version of the bible.
The King James Bible was adapted in 1611.
The Bible was written long before King James. And his version was not originally called the King James Bible.
King James I of England had the Bible translated into English.
Tobit is a book in the Catholic bible.
No, King James was the English king who had the bible translated from latin to english... hence, the King James' version of the bible.
It is Tobit.
As it is part of the bible , I do not think it will be there in Tobit.
The King James Bible was adapted in 1611.
The Bible was written long before King James. And his version was not originally called the King James Bible.
King James I of England had the Bible translated into English.
King James 1st was responsible for ordering the creation of the King James Version of the Bible which was completed in 1611.
The King James Version of the bible was commisioned by King James of England back in the 1600's.
King James authorized the Bible to be written.
The King James Bible was originally published in 1611 under the order of King James of England. There are 783,137 words in this version of the Bible.
No but he authorised it.