Open a Catholic Bible at the book of Daniel and you will find a surprise. Daniel does not stop at chapter 12. It keeps going.
In chapter 13, two respected judges try to force a young wife into sin. When she says no, they accuse her of adultery, and she is sentenced to death. In chapter 14, Daniel kills a dragon by feeding it cakes of tar, fat and hair—and the dragon bursts open. Then an angel picks up the prophet Habakkuk by the hair of his head and carries him hundreds of kilometres to Babylon, just to bring Daniel his lunch.
Now open a Protestant Bible. None of this is there. So here is the hard question: did Protestants cut two chapters out of God’s Word—or did someone else add them in?
This is not a small question. If these chapters are God’s Word, millions of Christians have ignored Scripture for 500 years. If they are not, millions of others are treating human stories as the voice of God. Both cannot be right. Let us put the additions to Daniel through five simple tests—and see where the evidence points.
KEY WORDS USED IN THIS POST
- Canon: the complete list of books that God inspired. The word means “measuring rod”.
- Inspired: “breathed out by God” (2 Timothy 3:16).
- Apocrypha: from a Greek word meaning “hidden”. Protestants use it for Jewish books written between the Testaments that are not part of the canon.
- Deuterocanonical: “belonging to the second canon”. This is the Roman Catholic name for the same books.
- Septuagint: the Greek translation of the Old Testament, made by Jews in Egypt about 250–100 BC.
- Hebrew–Aramaic text: Daniel was written partly in Hebrew and partly in Aramaic, the language of Babylon (Daniel 2:4–7:28 is in Aramaic).
What Are the Additions to Daniel?
The additions to Daniel are three pieces of writing found in Greek copies of Daniel but not in the Hebrew–Aramaic book. Catholic and Orthodox Bibles include them. Most Protestant Bibles do not.
Table 1: The three additions to Daniel at a glance
| ADDITION | WHERE CATHOLIC BIBLES PLACE IT | WHAT HAPPENS IN THE STORY | LIKELY FIRST LANGUAGE |
|---|---|---|---|
| Prayer of Azariah and Song of the Three Young Men | Inside Daniel 3, between verses 23 and 24 (adding 67 verses) | In the fiery furnace, Azariah (Abednego) confesses Israel’s sins. Then the three friends sing a long song calling all creation to praise God. | Possibly Hebrew |
| Susanna | Daniel 13 | Two elders falsely accuse a godly wife of adultery after she refuses them. Young Daniel questions them one by one and exposes their lie. | Probably Greek |
| Bel and the Dragon | Daniel 14 | Daniel proves the idol Bel eats nothing, kills a “dragon” the Babylonians worship, and survives six days with lions. | Possibly Hebrew or Aramaic |
Daniel lived in the sixth century BC. Most scholars date the additions to the last two or three centuries before Christ—hundreds of years after Daniel died.
Test 1: They Are Missing From the Original Daniel
Jewish scribes copied Daniel with great care, letter by letter. Every Hebrew–Aramaic copy we have contains 12 chapters—and none of the additions.
“Perhaps the Jews removed them later,” someone may say. We can check. Between 1947 and 1956, ancient scrolls were found in caves at Qumran, near the Dead Sea. These Dead Sea Scrolls were copied before the time of Jesus, and they include eight copies of Daniel.
None shows any sign of the additions. One scroll, called 1QDanb, even preserves the very spot in Daniel 3 where the Prayer of Azariah should sit. Verse 24 simply follows verse 23.
WHY THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS MATTER HERE
These scrolls were hidden before Christianity spread. So no one can say Jews cut the additions out to win arguments against Christians. The oldest copies of Daniel never had them.
Test 2: The Stories Give Themselves Away
Experts spot a fake painting by clues—a paint not yet invented, a brushstroke that does not match. The additions contain clues like these.
- A joke that only works in Greek. In Susanna, Daniel questions the two lying elders one at a time. He asks each, “Under what tree did you see her?” The first says, “Under a mastic tree” (Greek schinos). Daniel replies that God’s angel will “cut” (schisei) him in two. The second says, “Under an oak” (prinos). Daniel replies that the angel will “saw” (prisai) him in two. The tree and the punishment sound alike in Greek, but not in Hebrew. The story was almost certainly first written in Greek.
- A story that cannot find its home. In the Greek version by Theodotion, Susanna comes before Daniel 1. In the oldest Greek papyrus of Daniel (Papyrus 967), it comes at the very end, after Bel. In the Latin Bible, it becomes chapter 13. These stories moved around like guests looking for a room.
- History that does not fit. Bel and the Dragon opens by saying that Cyrus received the kingdom when King Astyages died—as if Astyages had ruled Babylon. But Astyages was king of Media. Cyrus took Babylon from King Nabonidus and his son Belshazzar (Daniel 5). It also has Cyrus approving the destruction of Bel’s (Marduk’s) temple, yet the Cyrus Cylinder, Cyrus’ own clay record, shows him honouring Marduk.
- Details that read like legend. A dragon bursts after eating cakes of pitch, fat and hair. Seven hungry lions leave Daniel alone for six days. An angel flies Habakkuk from Judah by his hair to bring Daniel stew.
- They admit that prophecy had stopped. In the Prayer of Azariah, the speaker says that “at this time there is no prince, or prophet, or leader” (verse 15). But in the story’s own setting, Daniel and Ezekiel were both alive and prophesying. The words fit the later age when it was really written—the age 1 Maccabees describes, when “prophets ceased to appear among them” (1 Maccabees 9:27).
Table 2: Two lions’ den stories compared
| Detail | Daniel 6 (in the Bible) | Bel and the Dragon (an addition) |
|---|---|---|
| Which king? | Darius the Mede | Cyrus the Persian |
| Why is Daniel thrown in? | He keeps praying to God against the king’s new law | He kills the Babylonians’ dragon and destroys their idol |
| How long in the den? | One night | Six days |
| The lions | Not numbered | Seven lions, kept hungry |
| How is Daniel fed? | There is no need; he is out by morning | An angel flies Habakkuk in from Judah with stew |
| How does it end? | Daniel is safe; his accusers are thrown to the lions | The same ending |
The second story borrows Daniel 6’s outline and ending, then adds wonders—like a folk tale that grows with each retelling.
A FAIR POINT
Let us be honest. The additions are not full of false teaching. The Prayer of Azariah echoes the Psalms, and Susanna teaches purity. Our case rests not on what they teach but on where they come from. A beautiful human prayer is still a human prayer.
Test 3: The Bible Jesus Used
For Christians, the key question is: which Old Testament did Jesus accept?
- God gave the Old Testament to the Jews to keep. Paul writes: “To begin with, the Jews were entrusted with the oracles of God” (Romans 3:2). “Oracles” means God’s words. The Jews kept a 12-chapter Daniel, and Paul never accuses them of losing any of it.
- Jesus named the parts of the Hebrew Bible. After His resurrection, Jesus said “that everything written about me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled” (Luke 24:44). This matches the Hebrew Bible’s three sections: Law, Prophets and Writings, often named after their largest book, the Psalms.
- Jesus marked the first and last book. Jesus spoke of “all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah” (Matthew 23:35). Abel dies in Genesis 4; Zechariah in 2 Chronicles 24, the last book of the Hebrew Bible. It is like saying “from A to Z”.
- The New Testament uses Daniel—but never the additions. Jesus speaks of “the abomination of desolation spoken of by the prophet Daniel” (Matthew 24:15). Hebrews 11:33–34 praises believers who “stopped the mouths of lions” and “quenched the power of fire”—Daniel 6 and 3. No New Testament writer ever quotes the additions.
A JEWISH WITNESS FROM THE FIRST CENTURY
The Jewish historian Flavius Josephus (about AD 37–100) said the Jews had 22 fixed holy books, and later writings were not trusted in the same way:
It is true, our history hath been written since Artaxerxes very particularly, but hath not been esteemed of the like authority with the former by our forefathers, because there hath not been an exact succession of prophets since that time.
—Flavius Josephus, Against Apion 1.41 (William Whiston translation)
The Jews joined some books together (the twelve Minor Prophets were one), so their 22 books match the Protestant 39.
Francis Turretin, who taught in Geneva in the 1600s, drew these threads together: the Apocrypha was not written by prophets, not given in Hebrew, not entrusted to the Jews, and never cited by Christ or His apostles as Scripture.
Test 4: What the Church Said Through History
It is often said the Church always accepted these chapters. The record says otherwise.
Timeline: The Additions to Daniel Through Church History
- About AD 170—Melito of Sardis: after travelling to the Holy Land to check, this bishop lists the Old Testament books. His list includes none of the Apocrypha.
- About AD 240—Julius Africanus and Origen: Africanus tells Origen that Susanna’s Greek wordplay proves it a later story. Origen claims Jewish leaders hid it, without proof—yet his own Old Testament list follows the 22 Hebrew books.
- AD 367—Athanasius of Alexandria: he puts books such as Tobit and Judith in a group to be read, outside the canon.
- About AD 390–405—Jerome: translating into Latin, Jerome notes that the Hebrews lack Susanna, the hymn of the three young men and the “fables” of Bel and the Dragon. He keeps them only so readers will not think he shortened the book.
- AD 393–419—Hippo and Carthage: local North African councils, guided by Augustine, list a wider canon.
- 1530s—Cardinal Thomas Cajetan: Luther’s Catholic opponent still follows Jerome: these books cannot prove doctrine.
- 1546—Council of Trent: Rome declares the books canonical, “entire with all their parts”—words aimed at additions like these—and curses all who disagree.
- 1561 and 1563—Belgic Confession and Thirty-Nine Articles: both name all three additions as Apocrypha.
- 1646—Westminster Confession of Faith: declares that the Apocrypha, “not being of divine inspiration”, is “no part of the canon of the Scripture”.
Rome made these chapters an article of faith only in 1546—1,500 years after Christ.
Test 5: Answering the Strongest Objections
- “The apostles used the Septuagint, and it includes these chapters.” The apostles quoted the Greek translation, as we quote English Bibles. But quoting a translation does not approve every book later bound with it. The Greek Bibles containing the additions, such as Codex Vaticanus, were copied by Christians in the 300s and 400s AD. Albert Sundberg showed there is no solid evidence for a Jewish “Greek canon” before Christ.
- “The Jews removed these chapters to fight Christians.” The Dead Sea Scrolls, copied before Christ, already lack them. And why would Jews remove stories honouring a Jewish hero? Jack P. Lewis showed that the supposed “Council of Jamnia” never closed the canon.
- “The early Church accepted them at Hippo and Carthage.” These were local councils. Augustine himself admitted the Jews rejected Maccabees (City of God 18.36), and Jerome disagreed.
- “Luther tore books out of the Bible.” Luther did not remove them. In his 1534 Bible, he placed them in a separate section with this heading: “Apocrypha: that is, books which are not held equal to the Holy Scriptures, and yet are profitable and good to read.”
THE CHURCH RECOGNISES SCRIPTURE—IT DOESN’T CREATE IT
Behind these objections lies a claim: that the Church decides what Scripture is. The Protestant Reformer John Calvin replied that asking how we know Scripture without the Church’s decree
is as if someone asked: Whence will we learn to distinguish light from darkness, white from black, sweet from bitter? Indeed, Scripture exhibits fully as clear evidence of its own truth as white and black things do of their colour, or sweet and bitter things do of their taste.
—John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion 1.7.2
Today, Michael J. Kruger argues the same: God’s books carry His marks, and His people recognise His voice. “My sheep hear my voice” (John 10:27).
Should Christians Read the Additions at All?
Yes—with care. The Belgic Confession of 1561 gives a balanced rule:
All which the Church may read and take instruction from, so far as they agree with the canonical books; but they are far from having such power and efficacy as that we may from their testimony confirm any point of faith or of the Christian religion.
Belgic Confession, Article 6
Calvin agreed. What troubled him was Rome giving them new authority:
I am not one of those, however, who would entirely disapprove the reading of those books; but in giving them an authority which they never before possessed, what end was sought but just to have the use of spurious paint in colouring their errors?
John Calvin, Antidote to the Council of Trent (1547)
“Spurious paint” means fake colouring—making unbiblical teaching look biblical. Read wisely, though, the additions have value:
- They show Jewish faith between the Testaments.
- The Song of the Three Young Men is still sung. Part of it, the Benedicite (“Bless the Lord”), has long been used in worship.
- Susanna shows wise justice. Separating the witnesses exposes them, and the liars receive the punishment they planned—as the Law commands (Deuteronomy 19:18–19).
- Bel is one of the world’s first detective stories. Ashes scattered on the temple floor reveal the footprints of priests secretly eating the idol’s food. Like Isaiah 44, it mocks idols.
Read them as you would a good book—never as the voice of God.
Why This Matters
Why argue about a few chapters? Because the canon decides what we must believe. Rome uses the Apocrypha to support prayer for the dead (2 Maccabees 12). If human writings can be added to Scripture, human teachings can be added to the gospel.
God warns, “Do not add to his words, lest he rebuke you and you be found a liar” (Proverbs 30:6).
There is comfort here too. God did not leave us guessing. When you hold a Bible with 12 chapters of Daniel, you hold the same Old Testament that Jesus held.
The Verdict: Five Tests, One Answer
| TEST | THE QUESTION WE ASKED | WHAT THE EVIDENCE SHOWS |
|---|---|---|
| 1. The original text | Are the additions in the Hebrew–Aramaic Daniel? | No—not even in the Dead Sea Scrolls. |
| 2. The stories themselves | Do they fit Daniel’s time, language and history? | No—Greek puns, historical errors, legends. |
| 3. Jesus and the apostles | Did they treat the additions as Scripture? | No—never quoted once. |
| 4. Church history | Did the Church always accept them? | No—doubted for centuries; official only in 1546. |
| 5. The objections | Do the counter-arguments stand? | No—each fails on the evidence. |
Daniel 13 and 14 are interesting old stories, but they are not God’s Word. Protestants did not cut them out of the Bible. They were never in it.
Tough Questions, Honest Answers
Which Bibles include Daniel 13 and 14 today?
Roman Catholic Bibles, such as the New American Bible and the Jerusalem Bible, print Susanna as Daniel 13 and Bel and the Dragon as Daniel 14, with the Prayer of Azariah inside chapter 3. Eastern Orthodox Bibles include them too. Some Protestant publishers print editions “with Apocrypha”, such as the ESV with Apocrypha or the KJV with Apocrypha. In these, the additions sit in a separate section, not inside Daniel. This follows the old Protestant practice: the books may be read, but they are not Scripture. Standard editions of the ESV, NIV, NKJV and KJV end Daniel at chapter 12.
Why do Catholic Bibles have 73 books and Protestant Bibles 66?
Both have the same 27 New Testament books, so the difference is only in the Old Testament. Catholic Bibles add seven books—Tobit, Judith, 1 and 2 Maccabees, Wisdom, Sirach and Baruch—plus extra sections in Esther and Daniel. Protestant Bibles keep the 39 books that match the Hebrew Bible. The Jews count these as 22 or 24 books, but the content is the same. So the real question is not “Who has more?” but “Which books did God give to Israel?”—and Romans 3:2 points us to the Hebrew Scriptures.
What’s the difference between “Apocrypha” and “deuterocanonical”?
Both words describe the same books, but they reflect two different views. “Apocrypha” means “hidden”, and Jerome used it for books outside the Hebrew canon. “Deuterocanonical” means “second canon”. The term was first used by Sixtus of Siena, a Roman Catholic scholar, in 1566—twenty years after Trent. The word itself admits that these books entered the canon later than the rest. Protestants use a third word, “pseudepigrapha”, for books falsely written under famous names, such as 1 Enoch.
Did the original 1611 King James Bible include the additions to Daniel?
Yes, but not inside Daniel. The 1611 King James Bible printed the Apocrypha in a separate section between the Old and New Testaments. The Church of England followed its Thirty-Nine Articles, which said the Church reads these books “for example of life and instruction of manners” but does not use them “to establish any doctrine”. Over time, many Protestants saw that printing them inside the Bible confused ordinary readers. In 1826, the British and Foreign Bible Society decided to stop funding Bibles that included them, and most editions soon dropped them. The King James translators never treated them as Scripture.
Is the Susanna in Luke 8:3 the same woman as in Daniel 13?
No. They are two different women who share a common name meaning “lily”. The Susanna of Daniel 13 is a character in a story set in Babylon about 600 years before Christ. The Susanna of Luke 8 was a real follower of Jesus. Luke tells us that she, with Joanna “and many others”, “provided for them out of their means” (Luke 8:3). Her quiet faithfulness is recorded in inspired Scripture—a far greater honour than any legend.
Jude quotes 1 Enoch. Does that make books outside the canon Scripture?
Jude 14–15 does quote a prophecy also found in 1 Enoch. But quoting a true sentence from a book does not make the whole book inspired. Paul quotes pagan Greek poets in Acts 17:28 and Titus 1:12, and no one thinks those poems belong in the Bible. Even the Roman Catholic Church rejects 1 Enoch. And if quoting were the test, the additions to Daniel would fail anyway, because the New Testament never quotes them. The Holy Spirit led Jude to affirm one true statement, not a whole book.
Do Orthodox Bibles contain even more books than Catholic Bibles?
Yes. Eastern Orthodox Bibles usually add 1 Esdras, 3 Maccabees, the Prayer of Manasseh and Psalm 151, and some print 4 Maccabees as an appendix. The Ethiopian Orthodox Church goes further and includes 1 Enoch and Jubilees. These churches have never fully agreed with Rome, or with each other, on the exact list. This shows what happens once we step outside the Hebrew canon: there is no clear place to stop. The canon that Jesus received gives us one fixed and certain list.
Related Reads
- Letter of Jeremiah: Why Protestant Bibles Leave It Out
- Why Is Maccabees Not in the Bible? The Case Explained
- The Additions to Esther: Inspired Text or Later Edit?
- The Truth About Apocryphal Books: Why They’re Not in the Bible
- Historical Accuracy of Daniel: Validation from Archaeology
- Jesus in the Book of Daniel: A Chapter-by-Chapter Guide
- What Do the Dead Sea Scrolls Prove? The Case for Bible Reliability
