Hello Recent Convert, perhaps this will help. Historically, the KJV Bible was first printed in 1611, at the command of King James the First, for use in the Church of England
and not for anything else than to appease the Church of England who wanted a new translation that wasn't so calvinistic as the Geneva, and the Roman Catholics in England, because James wife was a Spanish Catholic. The reason now they reject the "Appocrypha" is that there is of course historical endorsment for them from the Fathers, who did quote from them, regardless of what they say, I've read them. And as they claim "the Bible alone" as one of their tennets of faith, cheerfully shred anything else, even if it agrees with them, case in point, the rapture and dispensationalism date from 1830, by John Nelson Darby, they attempt to place it with the Fathers, using vague and patchy syntax, at least in the mid-1800's, now they completly diregard it because better scholarship appeared of the Fathers, and since these doctrines are so well entrenched, people now beileve that they have always existed.They forget that the Anabaptists in thier early works quoted from the "Appocrypha" for doctrinal purposes, and that the only reason for there inclusion in the KJV origanil version was politically motivated, and to kept James' wife from causing a stir. However, today the protestants(of whom my denomination is included, no matter what they think) claim Jerome included them in his Vulgate, against his better judgement, since the Hebrew is more "original" than th Septuagint, they prefer to use that. So many of the KJVonlyer's really either don't know, or completly sidestep this issue, especailly of the Septuagint being used almost exclusivly by the early Church, they've even "found" or "discovered", documents dateing back to the 2nd centuary a.d. conclusivly proving that the KJV Bible was actually the one used then, just as we have it now. I think the link is in "the KJV store".com, but I'm not sure, I read this in a hard copy, and since I usually take KJVer's with a grain of salt, haven't looked further. Historically, the Bible we have as the KJV dates MSS from the 9th or 10th centurary, and at best only fair to good in there quality. This was not the fault of the translators, they also had some very strict and cramped rules that James required, they did the best they could, and not a single one, I'm sure, felt that they had a divine translation, just the God Directed work of translating. The lack of quotes from the "Appocryphal" books in the N.T. doesn't disallow the inclusion in the O.T. books, as Jude quotes from the Appocryphal work, the Book of Enoch, and no one in the KJVonlyer's camp seems to have a problem with it. This is coming from one who had many questions, when I first got "saved" since I didn't grow up in any church, and researched it completly, I was told that faith would be better, so don't study too hard?
I hope this helps.
Sorry for the length, I can really talk when I get started.