What are the Apocrypha and should they be in the Bible?
The books commonly known as the Apocrypha are a collection of writings composed during the intertestamental period—the roughly 400 years between the Old and New Testaments. While these books hold historical and theological value for understanding this era, their status as inspired Scripture has been a subject of long-standing debate within Christianity. Protestants, Roman Catholics, and Eastern Orthodox Christians hold different views on which of these books, if any, belong in the Bible, stemming from their unique understanding of the biblical canon.
The Apocrypha are intertestamental books whose canonicity is debated among Christians, with Protestants rejecting them as Scripture while Catholics and Orthodox accept some or all.
What are the Apocrypha?
The term "Apocrypha" literally means "hidden things" or "secret things." These books were written primarily in Greek between the Old and New Testaments, roughly from 200 BC to AD 100. They include historical narratives (like 1 and 2 Maccabees), wisdom literature (like Wisdom of Solomon and Sirach), expanded versions of existing biblical books (like additions to Daniel and Esther), and moral stories (like Tobit and Judith). While not part of the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh), many of these books were included in the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament widely used by Jews in the diaspora and by early Christians. This inclusion in the Septuagint is a significant part of the historical discussion surrounding their canonicity.
Why are the Apocrypha not in the Protestant Bible?
Protestants generally do not accept the Apocrypha as canonical Scripture. This decision aligns with the Jewish tradition, which solidified its canon—the 39 books of the Old Testament—by the end of the first century AD, explicitly excluding these intertestamental writings. While early Christian writers, such as Athanasius and Jerome, acknowledged the Apocrypha's value for instruction, they distinguished them from the canonical books. Jerome, who translated the Latin Vulgate, separated the Apocrypha into a distinct section, noting that they were "read for edification but not for establishing doctrine."
During the Protestant Reformation, reformers like Martin Luther affirmed the shorter Hebrew canon. They argued that the Apocrypha, while useful for historical and moral reading, lack the same level of divine inspiration as the Old and New Testaments. Arguments against their canonicity often include a perceived lack of prophetic authority, historical inaccuracies, theological inconsistencies with other biblical teachings, and the absence of clear endorsement by Jesus or the New Testament apostles as Scripture. For example, the New Testament quotes extensively from the Old Testament as authoritative, but never directly quotes any book from the Apocrypha as Scripture (see 2 Timothy 3:16 for the authority of "all Scripture," which Protestants understand to refer to the books of the Hebrew canon and the emerging New Testament).
Why do Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox include the Apocrypha?
Roman Catholicism includes certain books of the Apocrypha, which they refer to as "deuterocanonical" (meaning "second canon"), as part of their Old Testament. This decision was formally affirmed at the Council of Trent in 1546 in response to the Protestant Reformation. The Catholic Church relies on the long-standing tradition of these books being included in the Septuagint and having been used in Christian liturgy and teaching for centuries. They believe these books convey true revelation from God and offer valuable insight into salvation history. The Deuterocanonical books include Tobit, Judith, 1 and 2 Maccabees, Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach (Ecclesiasticus), Baruch, and additions to Esther and Daniel.
Eastern Orthodox Churches also accept a broader canon, generally including all the Roman Catholic deuterocanonical books, plus additional books such as 3 Maccabees, 4 Maccabees (in some traditions), and Psalm 151. Their acceptance is also largely based on their inclusion in the Septuagint and their continuous use in the Church's liturgical and theological traditions. For both Roman Catholics and Orthodox, tradition plays a significant role in determining the biblical canon, alongside biblical scholarship. They understand the inspiration of these books to be on par with the other books of the Old Testament, providing a fuller understanding of God's progressive revelation.
Conclusion
Ultimately, the question of whether the Apocrypha "should be in the Bible" depends on one's understanding of biblical authority, theological tradition, and the historical development of the canon. Protestants adhere to the narrower Hebrew canon, emphasizing the absence of these books from the Hebrew Bible and the lack of New Testament affirmation. Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox Christians maintain a broader canon, citing the Septuagint, ancient church usage, and tradition as justification for their inclusion as inspired Scripture. While Christians on all sides value the Apocrypha for historical context and moral lessons, their place in the authoritative canon remains a key distinction between denominational traditions.
Bible verses about apocrypha
"Every scripture inspired of God is also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction which is in righteousness:"
"What advantage then hath the Jew? or what is the profit of circumcision? Much every way: first of all, that they were intrusted with the oracles of God."
"And he said unto them, These are my words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must needs be fulfilled, which are written in the law of Moses, and the prophets, and the psalms, concerning me."
"God, having of old time spoken unto the fathers in the prophets by divers portions and in divers manners, hath at the end of these days spoken unto us in his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, through whom also he made the worlds;"
"And to these also Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied, saying, Behold, the Lord came with ten thousands of his holy ones, to execute judgment upon all, and to convict all the ungodly of all their works of ungodliness which they have ungodly wrought, and of all the hard things which ungodly sinners have spoken against him."
"that upon you may come all the righteous blood shed on the earth, from the blood of Abel the righteous unto the blood of Zachariah son of Barachiah, whom ye slew between the sanctuary and the altar."
""
Frequently asked
What is the Septuagint, and how does it relate to the Apocrypha?
The Septuagint is a Koine Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, produced in the centuries before Christ, primarily for Greek-speaking Jews. It included many of the books we now call the Apocrypha. This early and widely-used translation played a crucial role in the early church, and its broader collection of books influenced the canons adopted by Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox traditions. Protestants, however, emphasize that the Septuagint’s inclusion of these books does not equate to their canonical status within Jewish tradition or the early Christian consensus on inspired Scripture.
Did Jesus or the apostles quote from the Apocrypha?
While Jesus and the apostles frequently quoted from and alluded to the books of the Old Testament as authoritative Scripture, they did not directly quote from any of the Apocryphal books as Scripture. There are a few possible allusions or parallels in the New Testament to Apocryphal writings (e.g., Jude 1:14-15 references the Book of Enoch, an apocryphal work, but not as Scripture), but these are generally seen as drawing on common cultural or historical knowledge rather than affirming canonical status. Their silence on directly quoting the Apocrypha as divine revelation is a significant point for Protestants in determining their non-canonical status.
What is the origin of the different biblical canons?
The different biblical canons — the collections of books recognized as inspired Scripture — developed over time within Judaism and then Christianity. The Jewish canon of the Old Testament was largely settled by the end of the first century AD. Early Christians initially used the Septuagint, which contained the Apocrypha, but debates continued concerning which books truly carried divine authority. The Protestant canon for the Old Testament aligns with the Hebrew Bible, while the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox canons are broader, largely due to their reliance on the Septuagint and patristic tradition. The New Testament canon, consisting of 27 books, was recognized more widely by the fourth century AD across most Christian traditions.
Are specific doctrines found only in the Apocrypha?
Certain doctrines and practices are more explicitly developed or exclusively mentioned in the Apocrypha. For example, the practice of praying for the dead is supported in 2 Maccabees 12:43-45, and the concept of almsgiving atoning for sin is found in Tobit 4:10-11 and Sirach 3:30. These teachings are often cited by Roman Catholics as supporting their theological positions, while Protestants argue that such doctrines are not clearly taught in the protocanonical Old and New Testaments and may even contradict them. This difference in doctrinal content is a key reason for the divergence in canonical acceptance.
How do different Christian traditions use the Apocrypha today?
Protestant churches generally do not use the Apocrypha in their public worship or theological instruction, viewing them as historically interesting but not divinely inspired. Roman Catholic churches incorporate the deuterocanonical books into their lectionaries and theological teachings, seeing them as integral parts of the Old Testament. Eastern Orthodox churches also use their broader canon in liturgy and teaching, often holding these books in high regard. Even among those who do not consider them canonical, the Apocrypha are acknowledged for their historical value in understanding the intertestamental period and the cultural context of early Christianity.
Keep reading