[simon]

Yeah, although it pretty much depends on how you define bible.

The Catholics use the KJV with the Apocrypha inserted between the OT and NT. Most of the denominational churches (loosely what you referred to as Protestants) use similar bibles unless you want to be picky over their use of different translations or get into which original manuscript they were translated from. And that's just getting warmed up. I'm into this stuff.

[jemfinch]

Catholics don't use the KJV. King James was a Protestant. The contemporaneous parallel to the KJV used within the Catholic Church is the Douay-Rheims, but even that isn't approved for liturgical use in English; only the Revised Standard Version (RSV) and New American Bible (NAB) are.

The term "apocrypha" is one only used by Protestants, as a pejorative term for the books Luther excised from the Septuagint, the Old Testament used by Jesus and the Apostles. The non-pejorative term is "deuterocanonicals", so-called because they were canonized later than the Old Testament books Luther accepted. Notably, Luther also excluded four New Testament books from his canon: Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, and Revelation. I suppose he found sola fide a lot easier to defend when he didn't have to contend with James' "So you see that a man is justified by works, not by faith." The Reformation didn't follow Luther's lead on the New Testament, though, and that's why Protestant Bibles have 66 books, not 62.

I'd suggest a little more warm up :) Some of us were really into this stuff before departing the faith.

[simon]

Thank you for the pointers, I shall read some more on this.

Sorry you departed the faith. Perhaps, you should have been really, really into this stuff? :-)

[jemfinch]

Being "really, really into this stuff" is why I lost my faith. The deeper I dug, the more I found that none of the meaningful Christian beliefs that I held stood up to the epistemic bar I'd adopted as an adult.

You can read more details at http:?/epistemicfaithcrisis.wordpress.com/ if you're interested.