The story of Bel and the Dragon seems disjointed and like a strangely put together fairy tale, yet most churches include it as apocryphal literature and others believe it to be canonical.

What were they thinking?

  • 2
    You are asking that backwards. Why did some churches remove it. The canon was larger before it was smaller. Secondly, what research have you done on the formation of the canon (before reduction)? Thirdly, what research have you done on the book of Daniel? Nov 30 '16 at 3:10
  • By asking the question in this way, it becomes too broad, and in any case it probably only invites an opinion, which makes it out of scope. On the other hand, a question something like this could be asked on our sister site BH.SEwhere we may be able to use hermeneutics methods to explain the history of Bel and the Dragon. Nov 30 '16 at 5:45

Bel and the Dragon is in Catholic and Orthodox Bibles because it was in the Septuagint's version of Daniel. It is not in the KJV because the translators used the Jewish Masoretic texts as the source for the Old Testament, which have a version of Daniel without Bel and the Dragon.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.