The truth about the Apocrypha..maybe…probably!!!

The truth about the Apocrypha..maybe…probably!!!…..to be updated.

 

I’m sure that most people have heard of the debate regarding the inclusion or exclusion of the Apocrypha books in or from holy scripture.

It’s pretty simple really, most Catholics accept the Apocrypha books and most Protestants who are not Catholics reject them.

The main argument for the inclusion of the Apocrypha seems to be simple. The Catholic church decreed them as scripture at the Council of Trent in 1546. Yes some 1500 years AFTER Jesus. Until this date although used by much of the Catholic church they were not officially decreed as scripture. After the council of Trent anyone who rejected the Apocrypha as holy scripture decreed by the church would be anathematised. This was in response to the reformation. 

We have to decide whether it is the evidence for or against the inclusion of the Apocrypha,  or the authoritative decree of the Catholic church by which we determine what is or isn’t scripture.

If the Catholic church is the sole authority then the evidence for or against the inclusion of the Apocrypha is actually irrelevant. There would, in fact, be no need to even investigate the evidence. The Apocrypha are to be considered holy scripture because the Catholic church has spoken and declared them to be so. There is no argument. There is no debate.  But this ultimately boils down to the authority that you give the Catholic church over scripture. If you accept the Catholic church as the supreme authoritative body, and that gives the Catholic church full authority over you, then the Apocrypha regardless of any contrasting evidence, is scripture, decreed as such by the Catholic church.

But for those that do not simply jump when the Catholic church says jump, let’s have a look at some of the evidence against the inclusion of the Apocrypha.

 

Before we delve into the apocrypha we should just take a moment to acknowledge the uniformity of scripture. We are dealing with the differences in this study but we should also note that there is no dispute over the 66 books found in the Protestant Bible. This is important in terms of the reliability and authority of these books, something that is often brought up by those that wish to attack the Bible. All 66 of these books are considered scripture. There is no contention between these. There is no doubt at all in Christianity that these are scripture and always have been. Differences do occurre, we have different readings in places, debates about the authority of verses, but we also need to stand firm on where the unity lies because there are far more agreements, there is so much scripture that is not in doubt. 


The 39 books found in the protestant Bible are also accepted by the Catholic Church, Eastern Orthodox church, Coptic Church, Armenian Church and Syrian Church and Jews all accept these books as scripture. 

This then gives us a strong basis that it is only the differences that we need to worry about. These 39 books of the Old Testament are scripture. 

The debate then is about the extra books, are they canon, not the 39 books which are all agreed upon. What we will see is that there is no uniformity of agreement on which of these books are canonical, even amongst the Catholic Church itself. 

Evidence

Firstly, we know that the Old Testament scriptures, the Tanakh,  the Jewish Bible, was given to the Jewish people, the Israelites.

This is attested to in the New Testament.

In the book of Romans Paul asks the question what advantage has the Jew?

Romans 3:1 What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?

Paul answers his own question by stating that, “unto them were committed the oracles of God”.

Romans 3:2 Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.

What are the oracles of God? Oracles is the Greek λόγιον logion meaning divine communication

Committed is the Greek word πιστεύω pisteuó which means entrusted with

So the Jews were entrusted with the divine communications of God.

The same word for committed is used in 1 Thessalonians where Paul talks about the apostles being put in trust (entrusted) with the gospel.

1 Thessalonians 2:4 But as we were allowed of God to be put in trust with the gospel, even so we speak; not as pleasing men, but God, which trieth our hearts.

We must assume that the Apostles who were entrusted by God with the gospel, knew what the gospel was that they had been entrusted by God with.

Likewise, it would be reasonable to assume that if the Jews had been entrusted with the scriptures, the Tanakh, the oracles of God,  that they would have known as to what those scriptures were that they had been entrusted by God with. They would have known which books were holy scripture and which books were not.

It is then, of great significance to note, that the Apocrypha books were never accepted as part of that scripture that was entrusted by God to the Jews, by the Jews themselves.

 

Josephus talked about the practice of laying up the scrolls of the scriptures in the temples.

Antiquities 3-1.7  4 -8 44

5 -1 – 17

The Apocrypha books were not “laid up” in the temples, in Palastine or anywhere else.

Josephus stated that there were 22 books that were “justly believed to be divine”

“We have not an innumerable multitude of books among us, disagreeing from and contradicting one another, but only twenty-two books, which contain the records of all the past times; which are justly believed to be divine” (Against Apion 1.8).

The rejection of the Apocrypha by Josephus is significant seeing he was himself a Pharisaical Jew. As a Jew he was aware of the scriptures that the Jews held as holy. Josephus gave the exact number of the Jewish canon and even broke them down.

(8) And of them five belong to Moses: which contain his laws, and the traditions of the origin of mankind, till his death. This interval of time was little short of three thousand years. But as to the time from the death of Moses, till the reign of Artaxerxes, King of Persia, who reigned after Xerxes, the Prophets, who were after Moses, wrote down what was done in their times, in thirteen books. The remaining four books contain hymns to God; and precepts for the conduct of human life.

The Apocrypha books are not mentioned by Josephus as scripture. Josephus mentioning 22 books should not be understood to be different than the 39 books held in the Protestant Old Testament, the Jews simply had a different way of ordering their books. 1 and 2 Kings for instance were considered one book rather than 2. 

Josephus also does not tell us what these 22 books are, it is assumed that these 22 books are known. The only way that these 22 books could be known without naming them is if there is already a set agreed upon list of 22 books. If I said the 10 commandments, I would only need to list what those 10 commandments are to someone who does not know the 10 commandments or if there are other lists of 10 commandments that would be different and could be confused with the 10 commandments that I refer to. If I am talking to or writing to a Christian and I say 10 commandments it is assumed that they know what they are. The clarification is only required if there is no set specific list of 10 commandments. 

This would at least infer that at the time of Josephus in the 1st Century this list was of 22 books was known to the audience of Josephus.  

However, in another work by Josephus he again mentions the twenty two books 

It therefore naturally, or rather necessarily, follows The tweniy-(seeing that with us it is not open to everybody to ofScriptine.write the records, and that there is no discrepancy
in what is written ; seeing that, on the contrary, the prophets alone had this privilege, obtaining their
knowledge of the most remote and ancient history
through the inspiration which they owed to God, and
committing to WTiting a clear account of the events
of their own time just as they occurred)—it follow^s,
I say, that (8) we do not possess myriads of inconsistent books, conflicting with each other. Our books,
those which are justly accredited, are but two and
twenty, and contain the record of all time.
Of these, five are the books of Moses, comprising
the laws and the traditional history from the birth
of man down to the death of the lawgiver. This
period falls only a little short of three thousand years.
From the death of Moses until Artaxerxes,** who
succeeded Xerxes as king of Persia, the prophets
subsequent to Moses WTote the history of the events
of their own times in thirteen ^ books. The remaining four ^ books contain hymns to God and precepts for the conduct of human life.
From Artaxerxes to our own time the complete .’ history has been written, but has not been deemed worthy of equal credit with the earlier records,
because of the failure of the exact succession of the
prophets. We have given practical proof of our reverence for ^ Jews’
our own Scriptures. For, although such long ages fo”thdr°”have now passed, no one has ventured either to add or to remove,” or to alter a syllable ; and it is an
instinct with every Jew, from the day of his birth, to
regard them as the decrees of God, to abide by them,
and, if need be, cheerfully to die for them.
Against Apion 1 

Jesus himself referred to the law, prophets and psalms

Luke 24:44 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.

A very clear indication that there was a set of books already set that spoke of Jesus.

This is how the Jews recorded their books, the Law, then the prophets and then the Psalms (writings) . 

Jerome who translated the Hebrew scriptures into Latin did not believe that the Apocrypha were to be included as Holy scripture.

Jerome confirmed the 22 books of scripture

“As, then, there are twenty-two elementary characters by means of which we write in Hebrew all we say, and the human voice is comprehended within their limits, so we reckon twenty-two books, by which, as by the alphabet of the doctrine of God, a righteous man is instructed in tender infancy, and, as it were, while still at the breast.”

Jerome even named the books

The first of these books is called Bresith, to which we give the name Genesis. The second, Elle Smoth, which bears the name Exodus; the third, Vaiecra, that is Leviticus; the fourth, Vaiedabber, which we call Numbers; the fifth, Elle Addabarim, which is entitled Deuteronomy. These are the five books of Moses, which they properly call Thorath, that is, ‘Law.

The second class is composed of the Prophets, and they begin with Jesus the son of Nave, which among them is called Joshua ben Nun. Next in the series is Sophtim, that is the book of Judges; and in the same book they include Ruth, because the events narrated occurred in the days of the Judges. Then comes Samuel, which we call First and Second Kings. The fourth is Malachim, that is, Kings, which is contained in the third and fourth volumes of Kings. And it is far better to say Malachim, that is Kings, than Malachoth, that is Kingdoms. For the author does not describe the Kingdoms of many nations, but that of one people, the people of Israel, which is comprised in the twelve tribes. The fifth is Isaiah; the sixth, Jeremiah; the seventh, Ezekiel; and the eighth is the book of the Twelve Prophets, which is called among them Thare Asra.

To the third class belong the Hagiographa, of which the first book begins with Job; the second with David, whose writings they divide into five parts and comprise in one volume of Psalms. The third is Solomon, in three books: Proverbs, which they call Parables, that is Masaloth; Ecclesiastes, that is Coeleth; and the Song of Songs, which they denote by the title Sir Assirim. The sixth is Daniel; the seventh, Dabre Aiamim, that is, Words of Days, which we may more descriptively call a chronicle of the whole of the sacred history, the book that amongst us is called First and Second Paralipomenon [Chronicles]. The eighth is Ezra, which itself is likewise divided amongst Greeks and Latins into two books; the ninth is Esther.

And so there are also twenty-two books of the Old Law; that is, five of Moses, eight of the prophets, nine of the Hagiographa, though some include Ruth and Kinoth (Lamentations) amongst the Hagiographa, and think that these books ought to be reckoned separately; we should thus have twenty-four books of the ancient Law.

The Apocrypha books were not included.

Jerome further named certain Apocrypha books that he states are not canon.

This preface to the Scriptures may serve as a helmeted [i.e. defensive] introduction to all the books which we turn from Hebrew into Latin, so that we may be assured that what is outside of them must be placed aside among the Apocryphal writings. Wisdom, therefore, which generally bears the name of Solomon, and the book of Jesus the Son of Sirach, and Judith, and Tobias, and the Shepherd [of Hermes?] are not in the canon. The first book of Maccabees is found in Hebrew, but the second is Greek, as can be proved from the very style.

As for the additions Jerome stated that they were not in the Hebrew in his preface to Daniel even calling Bel and the Dragon a fable.

“I say this to show you how hard it is to master the book of Daniel, which in Hebrew contains neither the history of Susanna, nor the hymn of the three youths, nor the fables of Bel and the Dragon; because, however, they are to be found everywhere, we have formed them into an appendix, prefixing to them an obelus, and thus making an end of them, so as not to seem to the uninformed to have cut off a large portion of the volume.”

Philo of Alexandria

Philo is an interesting witness as he is very early, he was alive at the same time as Jesus. He was an Alexandrian Jew. Philo does not quote the Apocrypha in his vast writings. There are scholars who say he had thematic overlaps with the Wisdom of Solomon but he certainly does not quote it as scripture. 


Our first Christian list of the Old Testament books comes from around the middle of the 2nd Century by Melito of Sardis 

The Catholic Encyclopedia recognises this fact. 

 St. Melito, Bishop of Sardis (c. 170), first drew up a list of the canonical books of the Old Testament. While maintaining the familiar arrangement of the Septuagint, he says that he verified his catalogue by inquiry among Jews; Jewry by that time had everywhere discarded the Alexandrian books, and Melito’s Canon consists exclusively of the protocanonicals minus Esther.
https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03267a.htm

Notice that the Catholic Encyclopedia states that Melito ONLY included the protocanonical books….not the apocrypha (minus Esther). 

 

Eusebius records some of the works of Melitio, where Eusebius gives a list of the books listed by Melito. 

This is where we see attempts at trying to insert the apocrypha book the Wisdom of Solomon. 

Lets look at this translation of Eusebius done by Alistair Stewart-Sykes

“In the Extracts which he wrote the same author in his preface begins by listing the recognized books of the old covenant. These we must also give here. He writes as follows: ‘Melito, to his brother Onesimus greetings. Since you have often asked, in view of your great zeal for the word, that I should make for you extracts from the law and the prophets concerning the savior and the whole of our faith, and have further desired to learn the truth about the ancient books, especially with regard to their number and the manner in which they are arranged, I have been keen to do such a thing, knowing your devotion to the faith and love of learning concerning the word and especially given that, as you strive for eternal salvation, you examine these matters more than any others which pertain to God. And so, going to the east, where these matters were spoken and performed, I learned there the books of the old covenant with accuracy. Now I send you my treatise. These are their names. There are five books of Moses: Genesis Exodus, Numbers, Leviticus, Deuteronomy. Joshua the son of Nave, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kingdoms, two books of Omissions, the Psalms of David, the Proverbs and the Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiastes, the Song of Songs, Job, and among the prophets Isaiah and Jeremiah. There are twelve prophets in one book, and Daniel, Ezekiel and Esdras. From these I have made my extracts, which are divided into six books
On Pascha—With the Fragments of Melito and Other Material Related to the Quartodecimans, translated, introduced, and annotated by Alistair Stewart-Sykes (Crestwood, New York: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 2016).

Notice that he has “the Proverbs and the Wisdom of Solomon”. This makes this look like 2 separate book, proverbs and Wisdom. 

However, this is not what is recorded by Eusebius. Alistair Sykes in his introduction to his book, he makes reference to the critical text that he used for his own translation. The text that he used was from Stuart Hall. 

The text employed is that of Hall, who also provides an excellent translation; my debt to Hall’s work will be manifest on every page and those requiring an apparatus and accuracy at every point should turn to Hall, rather than to the present work”
Introduction to On Pascha Alistair Stweart Sykes. 

What is interesting is that the text of Stuart Hall, that Sykes appeals to as his source text and says should be tuned to,  does not have 2 separate books, but rather he states that Proverbs is also called Wsidom. Not 2 books but rather 2 names for the same book. 

“of Solomon, Proverbs (also called Wisdom)”
Melito of Sardis On Pascha and Fragments, Texts and Translations edited by Stuart George Hall, Oxford University Press, 1979, page 67n15.

Rendering this as two books is incorrect and is either due to an accidental mistranslation or a  deliberate attempt to make it seem like two books are in reference. Either way this should be corrected. 

Roberts and Donaldson also translated this as one book which is called by two names. 

“the Proverbs of Solomon, also called the Book of Wisdom”.
Roberts-Donaldson, Fragments of Melito of Sardis.

We can look to Moses Staurt who explains why this is to be rendered as two different names for the same book, rather than two books 

“The Romish church will find…in this almost primitive father, but a very slender support, (indeed none at all, but the contrary), for their deutero-canon. If it be said, (as it has been), that the clause in Melito Σαλομωνοσ Παροιμιαι η και σοφια means the Proverbs of Solomon, and also Wisdom, (i.e. the Wisdom of Solomon, one of the Apocryphal books), the reply to this suggestion is easy. ‘Nearly all the ancients’, remarks Valesius on this passage, ‘called the Proverbs of Solomon Wisdom, and sometimes Σοφιαν πανειρετον.’ Accordingly Dionysius of Alexandria, calls the book of Proverbs η σοφη βιβλοσ; Cap. 28, Catena in Jobum. The author of the Jerusalem Itinerary, speaking of a certain chamber in Jerusalem, says that, “Solomon sat there, and there he wrote Sapientiam,’ i.e. the book of Proverbs. Melito means then merely to say, that the work of Solomon called παιροιμιαι, had also the name of σοφια. The pronoun η also imports this. We cannot alter the accentuation and make it an article; for to a title of a book the article in such a case does not belong.”
Stuart, ibid., page 259.


Remember, the Catholic Encyclopedia states that Melito ONLY listed those books of the protocanon not the apocryphal books. Any attempt to render this as two books goes against the evidence. 

Why Melito includes Leviticus between numbers and Deuteronomy is not really known. It is the only list of such that does so. 

It should be noted that Eusebius refers to the text of the Old covenant….this shows that this was not just the books accepted by the Jews, they would not have referred to their books as the Old Covenant. Eusebius look ing back at the list is saying that Malito gave the list of books that were the Old Coevent for Christians and thus this is a list for Christians to use as the Old Covenant. 




Cyril of Jerusalem. 4th Century

Cyril of Jerusalem is an excellent witness to the exclusion of the Apocrypha as he is considered a saint in the Catholic and Eastern orthodox faiths. 

Cyril stated that the Apocrypha was not to be read. 

Now these the divinely-inspired Scriptures of both the Old and the New Testament teach us. For the God of the two Testaments is One, Who in the Old Testament foretold the Christ Who appeared in the New; Who by the Law and the Prophets led us to Christ’s school. For before faith came, we were kept in ward under the law, and, the law has been our tutor to bring us unto Christ. And if ever thou hear any of the heretics speaking evil of the Law or the Prophets, answer in the sound of the Saviour’s voice, saying, Jesus came not to destroy the Law, but to fulfil it. Matthew 5:17 Learn also diligently, and from the Church, what are the books of the Old Testament, and what those of the New. And, pray, read none of the apocryphal writings : for why do you, who know not those which are acknowledged among all, trouble yourself in vain about those which are disputed? Read the Divine Scriptures, the twenty-two books of the Old Testament, these that have been translated by the Seventy-two Interpreters.
Cyril of Alexandria Lecture 4:33 

 Of these read the two and twenty books, but have nothing to do with the apocryphal writings. Study earnestly these only which we read openly in the Church. Far wiser and more pious than yourself were the Apostles, and the bishops of old time, the presidents of the Church who handed down these books. Being therefore a child of the Church, trench thou not upon its statutes. And of the Old Testament, as we have said, study the two and twenty books, which, if you are desirous of learning, strive to remember by name, as I recite them. For of the Law the books of Moses are the first five, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy. And next, Joshua the son of Nave , and the book of Judges, including Ruth, counted as seventh. And of the other historical books, the first and second books of the Kings are among the Hebrews one book; also the third and fourth one book. And in like manner, the first and second of Chronicles are with them one book; and the first and second of Esdras are counted one. Esther is the twelfth book; and these are the Historical writings. But those which are written in verses are five, Job, and the book of Psalms, and Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs, which is the seventeenth book. And after these come the five Prophetic books: of the Twelve Prophets one book, of Isaiah one, of Jeremiah one, including Baruch and Lamentations and the Epistle ; then Ezekiel, and the Book of Daniel, the twenty-second of the Old Testament.
Cyril of Jerusalem Lecture 4:35 

It should be noted that Cyril does include Baruch 


Rufinus 4th Century Monk. 

Of the Old Testament, therefore, first of all there have been handed down five books of Moses, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy; Then Jesus Nave, (Joshua the Son of Nun), The Book of Judges together with Ruth; then four books of Kings (Reigns), which the Hebrews reckon two; the Book of Omissions, which is entitled the Book of Days (Chronicles), and two books of Ezra (Ezra and Nehemiah), which the Hebrews reckon one, and Esther; of the Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel; moreover of the twelve (minor) Prophets, one book; Job also and the Psalms of David, each one book. Solomon gave three books to the Churches, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Canticles. These comprise the books of the Old Testament…….

But it should be known that there are also other books which our fathers call not Canonical but Ecclesiastical: that is to say, Wisdom, called the Wisdom of Solomon, and another Wisdom, called the Wisdom of the Son of Syrach, which last-mentioned the Latins called by the general title Ecclesiasticus, designating not the author of the book, but the character of the writing. To the same class belong the Book of Tobit, and the Book of Judith, and the Books of the Maccabees. In the New Testament the little book which is called the Book of the Pastor of Hermas, [and that] which is called The Two Ways, or the Judgment of Peter; all of which they would have read in the Churches, but not appealed to for the confirmation of doctrine. The other writings they have named Apocrypha. These they would not have read in the Churches.

These are the traditions which the Fathers have handed down to us, which, as I said, I have thought it opportune to set forth in this place, for the instruction of those who are being taught the first elements of the Church and of the Faith, that they may know from what fountains of the Word of God their draughts must be taken.
Rufinius commentary on the Apostles Creed 37and 38 

 

Epihanius in his describing the production of the Septuagint states there are 27 books which he explains is actually 22 and names those 22 books. He does not include the Apocrypha 

To every pair one book was given. That is to say, the book of the Genesis of the Avorld to one pair, the Exodus of the Israelites to another pair, that of Leviticus to another, and the next book in order to the next; and thus were translated the twenty-seven {49a} recognized canonical books, but twenty-two when counted according to the letters of the alphabet of the Hebrews. |19 

4. For the names of the letters are twenty-two. But there are five of them that have a double form, for k has a double form, and m and n and p and s.⁴² Therefore in this manner the books also are counted as twenty-two; but there are twenty-seven, because five of them are double. For Ruth is joined to Judges, and they are counted among the Hebrews (as) one book. The first (book) of Kingdoms ⁴³ is joined to the second and called one book; the third is joined to the fourth and becomes one book. First Paraleipomena is joined to Second and called one book. The first book of Ezra is joined to the second and becomes one book.⁴⁴ So in this way the books are grouped into four “pentateuchs,” and there are two others left over, so that the books of the (Old) Testament are as follows: the five of the Law—- {49b} Genesis,⁴⁵ Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy—-this is the Pentateuch, otherwise the code of law; and five in verse—-the book of Job, then of the Psalms, the Proverbs of Solomon, Koheleth, the Song of Songs. Then another “pentateuch” (of books) which are called the Writings, and by some the Hagiographa, which are as follows: Joshua the (son) of Nun, the book of Judges with Ruth, First and Second Paraleipomena, First and Second Kingdoms, Third and Fourth Kingdoms; and this is a third “pentateuch.” Another “pentateuch” is the books of the prophets—-the Twelve Prophets (forming) one ⁴⁶ book,⁴⁶ Isaiah one,⁴⁶ Jeremiah one,⁴⁶ Ezekiel one,⁴⁶ Daniel one ⁴⁶—-and again the prophetic “pentateuch” is filled up.⁴⁷ But there remain two other books, which are (one of them) the two³⁰ of Ezra that are counted as one, and the other the book of Esther. So twenty-two books are completed according to the number of the twenty-two {49c} letters of the Hebrews. For there are two (other) poetical books, that by Solomon called “Most Excellent,” ⁴⁸ and that by Jesus the son of Sirach and grandson of Jesus—-⁴⁹ for his grandfather was named Jesus ⁴⁹ (and was) he who composed Wisdom in Hebrew, which his grandson, |20 translating, wrote in Greek—-which also are helpful and useful, but are not included in the number of the recognized; and therefore they were not ⁵⁰ kept in the chest, that is, in the ark of the covenant.
Epiphanius on Weights and measures 4 

 

Athenasius 

 

“Continuing, I must without hesitation mention the scriptures of the New Testament; they are the following: the four Gospels according to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, after them the Acts of the Apostles and the seven so-called catholic epistles of the apostles — namely, one of James, two of Peter, then three of John and after these one of Jude. In addition there are fourteen epistles of the apostle Paul written in the following order: the first to the Romans, then two to the Corinthians and then after these the one to the Galatians, following it the one to the Ephesians, thereafter the one to the Philippians and the one to the Colossians and two to the Thessalonians and the epistle to the Hebrews and then immediately two to Timothy , one to Titus and lastly the one to Philemon. Yet further the Revelation of John

These are the springs of salvation, in order that he who is thirsty may fully refresh himself with the words contained in them. In them alone is the doctrine of piety proclaimed. Let no one add anything to them or take anything away from them…

 

He also continues on and mentions the books that were NOT considered scripture and not in the CANON ( a very clear attestation to the canon which already existed before the synod of Hippo and the council of Carthage.

 

But for the sake of greater accuracy I add, being constrained to write, that there are also other books besides these, which have not indeed been put in the canon, but have been appointed by the Fathers as reading-matter for those who have just come forward and which to be instructed in the doctrine of piety: the Wisdom of Solomon, the Wisdom of Sirach, Esther, Judith, Tobias, the so-called Teaching [Didache] of the Apostles, and the Shepherd. And although, beloved, the former are in the canon and the latter serve as reading matter, yet mention is nowhere made of the apocrypha; rather they are a fabrication of the heretics, who write them down when it pleases them and generously assign to them an early date of composition in order that they may be able to draw upon them as supposedly ancient writings and have in them occasion to deceive the guileless.
Athenasius Festal letters 39 -6 -7

Pope Gregory the Great (Pope Gregory 1st)  Stated that the Apocrypha book 1st Maccabees was not a Canonical book, but was read for the edifying of the church. 

With reference to which particular we are not acting irregularly, if from the books, though not Canonical  yet brought out for the edifying of the Church, we bring forward testimony.  Thus Eleazar in the battle smote and brought down an elephant, but fell under the very beast that he killed. [1 Macc. 6, 46] 

THE BOOKS OF THE MORALS OF 1 GREGORY THE POPE,

OR AN EXPOSITION ON THE BOOK OF BLESSED JOB. VOLUME II – THE FOURTH PART. BOOK XIX. chapter 34

 

The Apocrypha books, excluding Baruch and the letter to Jeremiah (Beruch chapter 6), do not start to be included in canon lists until the middle of the 4th Century. Until this point they are excluded from Canon lists. 

I won’t go into too much detail here but it was thought by the early church that Jeremiah had written Baruch would likely influenced certain parts of the church to consider it authoritative scripture. 


Dead sea Scrolls. 

Some of the Apocrypha books were found at Qumran, including Tobit and Sirach. Not all the books were found in the dead sea scrolls.  Books not found include Judith, Wisdom of Solomon and 2 Maccabees. 

No commentaries were found on Apocrypha books. This is a fact, but it should also be noted that there were only commentaries of 6 of the canonical books, Micah, Zephaniah, Psalms, Isaiah, Hosea and Nahum. So the argument is probably not as strong as it may first appear. The lack of commentary while does support the position does have its weaknesses. 6 of 39 books is not the strong evidence that some would assert and it is mainly an argument from silence. However, as we are looking into the evidence for these apocrypha books combined with other evidence it should not simply be ignored. If this was the evidence on which the argument was based then it certainly would not be strong enough to prove the case, but when we take it along with the other evidence then it is worthy of note. 

I will also here take time to state that many of these arguments, if taken alone would not suffice to prove the argument against the apocryphal books being scripture, however, to simply show each one of the arguments as being weaker in isolation is to take away from the overall combined evidence. A point is often not proven by a single piece of evidence but rather by its combined weight in comparison to the weight of evidence for the counter argument.  It is when we look at the overall evidence that we can see each point, while not conclusive in of itself, when considered along with all other points becomes stronger and points us to a conclusion. 


(There were no Apoctyphal books found in the script or on special parchment. Which indicates a different treatment of the Apocryphal books. ( This needs to be further investigated to confirm the validity of the claim.) 


Targums. 
There are no Jewish Targums for the Apocrypha.  This is strong evidence for the non acceptence of the Apocrypha books. 

It should also be noted here that the Babylonian Talmud (the Bavli) lists the books of the Old Testament.  In the Baba Bathra written around 200AD we find the list as follows. 

Jesus held the Jews accountable to the scriptures.

It must be asked how can Jesus hold the Jews accountable to the scriptures if the Jews did not know what was or wasn’t classed as scripture that they were being held accountable to.

Jesus, although he corrected the Jews many times on their interpretation, understanding and application of the scriptures, never corrected them on which scriptures they interpreted and held as inspired. Neither was there there any disagreement between Jesus, the Apostles and any of the religious leaders over what was considered as scripture. The religious leaders had many arguments and discussions with Jesus and the Apostles but this was never debated.  Clearly when Jesus made reference to or quoted scripture, the Jews, knew which scriptures Jesus referred to and accepted those scriptures as holy inspired scripture given by God that they were entrusted to keep. Jesus never quoted the Apocrypha. 

Jesus said that the scriptures spoke of him

John 5:39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

Paul reasoned from the scriptures

Acts 17:2 And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures,

Again a clear indication that there were clear understood set scriptures. 

Jesus makes a rather telling statement regarding Abel in the book of Genesis and Zacharias in 2 Chronicles .

Luke 11:51 From the blood of Abel unto the blood of Zacharias, which perished between the altar and the temple: verily I say unto you, It shall be required of this generation.

Matthew 23-35 That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.

At first this may seem like a strange statement, maybe even one that simply passes by without any real notice of it’s value or meaning. There are no verses that have no meaning in the Bible.

2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

When we understand the Jewish canon the statement makes a lot more sense, and actually supports the fact that the Jews did indeed have a canon of scripture before the time of Jesus. The Jewish order of books differed from the order that we have today.

Able was the first person killed in the Hebrew Bible and Zacharias although not chronologically the last, was the last prophet martyred in the Hebrew Old Testament due to the order in which the books were placed. Jesus then very clearly attested to the canon and the order of the Jewish Tanakh.

Although the books were arranged in a different order in the Hebrew Bible they included all 39 books that are included in the KJV today. The Jewish bible combined books that have since been separated.

Jesus and the apostles most assuredly would have known which scriptures were inspired, yet neither Jesus or any of the new testament writers quoted from the books of the  Apocrypha. If the Jews were not using the Apocrypha yet they were to be classed as inspired scripture it is a reasonable assumption that at least one of the writers of the New testament and or Jesus would have made it clear that they were in fact scripture.

 

Interesting quotations in the NT regarding the writings of the Old Testament. 

Jesus refers to the “Law” but actually quotes from Psalm 82. This shows that the Law could refer to other books than simply the Torah. 

John 10:34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? 35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; 

Psalm 82:6 I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.

Jesus refers to the law and the prophets which spoke of him. 

Luke 24:27 And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.

He then in the same discussion extends this to the law, prophets and Psalms. 

Luke 24:44 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.


Paul quotes from Isaiah and says it is written in the law. 

1 Corinthians 14:21 In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.

Isaiah 18:11 For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people. 12 To whom he said, This is the rest wherewith ye may cause the weary to rest; and this is the refreshing: yet they would not hear.

Paul quotes the Psalsm in Romans 3:10-19 where he refers to the law. 


They were interchangeable words. 


Does the New Testament quote the Apocrypha? 

Those who claim the Apocrypha is inspired scripture will often say that Jesus and the New testament writers did in fact quote from the Apocrypha.

There are a whole list of these “quotes” on  the website www.Scripturecatholic.com

Matt. 2:16 – Herod’s decree of slaying innocent children was prophesied in Wis. 11:7 – slaying the holy innocents.

Matt. 6:19-20 – Jesus’ statement about laying up for yourselves treasure in heaven follows Sirach 29:11 – lay up your treasure.

Matt.. 7:12 – Jesus’ golden rule “do unto others” is the converse of Tobit 4:15 – what you hate, do not do to others.

Matt. 7:16,20 – Jesus’ statement “you will know them by their fruits” follows Sirach 27:6 – the fruit discloses the cultivation.

Matt. 9:36 – the people were “like sheep without a shepherd” is same as Judith 11:19 – sheep without a shepherd.

Matt. 11:25 – Jesus’ description “Lord of heaven and earth” is the same as Tobit 7:18 – Lord of heaven and earth.

Matt. 22:25; Mark 12:20; Luke 20:29 – Gospel writers refer to the canonicity of Tobit 3:8 and 7:11 regarding the seven brothers.

Matt. 24:15 – the “desolating sacrilege” Jesus refers to is also taken from 1 Macc. 1:54 and 2 Macc. 8:17.

Matt. 24:16 – let those “flee to the mountains” is taken from 1 Macc. 2:28.

Matt. 27:43 – if He is God’s Son, let God deliver him from His adversaries follows Wisdom 2:18.

Mark 4:5,16-17 – Jesus’ description of seeds falling on rocky ground and having no root follows Sirach 40:15.

Mark 9:48 – description of hell where their worm does not die and the fire is not quenched references Judith 16:17.

Luke 1:42 – Elizabeth’s declaration of Mary’s blessedness above all women follows Uzziah’s declaration in Judith 13:18.

Luke 1:52 – Mary’s magnificat addressing the mighty falling from their thrones and replaced by lowly follows Sirach 10:14.

Luke 2:29 – Simeon’s declaration that he is ready to die after seeing the Child Jesus follows Tobit 11:9.

Luke 13:29 – the Lord’s description of men coming from east and west to rejoice in God follows Baruch 4:37.

However, there really is not one single actual quote. The “quotes” are so vague they can’t honestly be classified by anyone who views the information objectively and without bias, as quotes. The best that can be reasonably argued is that there are allusions to, attestations and possible similarities. There is nothing that can in any true honesty be construed as an actual quotation.

It must also be noted that there is not one single reference to “thus saith the lord” or “as it is written”, anywhere, in any book of the Apocrypha. Nor is there any appeal in the New Testament to where it is written or as the scriptures say which is then followed by an Apocrypha “quotation”. 

It must also be stated, citation would not by itself prove canonicity. Paul for instance quotes non scripture on a number of occasions. 

There are many historical errors in the Apocrypha. I shall just reference one as I have yet to find an actual answer to it on any Catholic apologetics site. It most certainly requires an answer as the true word of God cannot have such an error.

In the book of Judith there is a blatant historical error where people were bowing to the temple a century before the 2nd temple had in fact been built

Judith 4:9. And the priests put on haircloths, and they caused the little children to lie prostrate before the temple of the Lord, and the altar of the Lord they covered with haircloth

The book of Judith has the temple having been rebuilt one century too early.

 

There are many teachings in the Apocrypha that support Catholic Doctrines that cannot themselves be supported via scripture included in the other 66 books of the Catholic  Bible, and that actually contradict the Biblical teachings found in those 66 books. While I do think this is probably the weakest of the arguments for the exclusion of the Apocrypha books they at least need to be highlighted.

Some of the apparent doctrines supported by the Apocrypha are but not limited to.

Alms for the forgiveness of sins

For almsgiving saves from death and purges away every sin. Those who give alms will enjoy a full life (Tobit 12:9).

So now, my children see what almsgiving accomplishes, and what injustice does it brings death! (Tobit 14:11).

Purgatory

So they all blessed the ways of the Lord, the righteous judge, who reveals the things that are hidden; and they turned to supplication, praying that the sin that had been committed might be wholly blotted out. The noble Judas exhorted the people to keep themselves free from sin, for they had seen with their own eyes what had happened as the result of the sin of those who had fallen. He also took up a collection, man by man, to the amount of two thousand drachmas of silver, and sent it to Jerusalem to provide for a sin offering. In doing this he acted very well and honorably, taking account of the resurrection. For if he were not expecting that those who had fallen would rise again, it would have been superfluous and foolish to pray for the dead. But if he was looking to the splendid reward that is laid up for those who fall asleep in godliness, it was a holy and pious thought. Therefore he made atonement for the dead, so that they might be delivered from their sin (Second Maccabees 12:41-45).

The pre existence of the soul.

As a child I was naturally gifted, and a good soul fell to my lot; or rather, being good, I entered an undefiled body (Wisdom 8:19,20).

The world out of matter that already existed

For your all-powerful hand, which created the world out of formless matter, did not lack the means to send upon them a multitude of bears, or bold lions (Wisdom 11:17).

There are many others.

The book of Esther. 

The book of Esther is a book, found in the cannon today, including the Jewish Cannon. However, this book has had its critics over time questioning its authority as part of scripture. The main reason for this being it does not contain the word God (Elohim). This has mde some people doubt whether it was inspired scripture or not. 

The Catholic version of Esther is longer than the Protestant and Jewish version. 

The Catholic version contains about 6 extra chapters 

Addition	Where It Appears	Content
A	Before Esther 1:1	Mordecai’s dream and conspiracy
B	After 3:13	The king’s edict against the Jews
C	After 4:17	Mordecai and Esther’s prayers
D	After 5:1	Esther’s audience with the king
E	After 8:12	The king’s second edict
F	After 10:3	Interpretation of Mordecai’s dream

The interesting thing about this is that it contains the word Elohim, God over 50 times. 

This shows that these additions were not used by the Jews in their own cannon, as if they had used them, then they would not have doubted the authority of the book based on the lack of the usage of God. 

So if we do not simply take the Catholic church as the sole authority then there is actually plenty of evidence that would support the exclusion of the Apocrypha from holy scripture.

On a side note I must at this point though at least highlight the inconsistency of those that reject the Apocrypha but also accept “the” septuagint and believe that Jesus quoted from it. “The” septuagint included the Apocrypha. It would need to be explained as to why they give authority to “the” Septuagint but reject the apocrypha that it contained.  Please see my writing on “the” Septuagint.

Now obviously being KJV only it can be pointed out that the original KJV also included the Apocrypha.

This point is also used by the Hebrew Israelites who claim that the Apocrypha is part of scripture and will point to the fact, seeing most are KJV onlyists, like myself, that the original KJV “included” the Apocrypha. They use the apocrypha, a lot, in order to support many of their false teachings.

However, the argument that the original 1611 KJV included the Apocrypha therefore proof the KJV translators accepted the Apocrypha books as authorised scripture is actually a pretty weak and actually dishonest one.  It is true that the KJV translators, translated these books into English. It is also very true that the original 1611 KJV did include these books inside its covers.
They will often also point out that the Apocrypha was removed from the KJV in 1885, some 274 years after its inclusion.

The much more important “official” turning point for omission in mass Protestant publishing was 1826, when the British and Foreign Bible Society adopted a policy excluding the Apocrypha from the Bibles it would fund and circulate. That policy helped normalize KJV printings without the Apocrypha across the English-speaking Protestant world.

However, those who use these points while advocating the inclusion of the apocrypha as scripture, usually fail to mention some other rather important pieces of information that are themselves rather telling.

While it true that the Apocrypha was totally removed in 1885, although not for the often claimed reason of saving money or paper. The Apocrypha had actually already started to be removed from printings of the KJV as early as 1666 (and likely even earlier) .

In 1615 Archbishop George Abbot forbade the issuance of Bibles without the Apocrypha, but editions of the King James Version from 1630 on often omitted it from the bound copies. The Geneva Bible edition of 1640 was probably the first to be intentionally printed in England without the Apocrypha, followed in 1642 by the King James Version. In 1644 the Long Parliament actually forbade the public reading of these books, and three years later the Westminster Confession of the Presbyterians decreed them to be no part of the canon. 

We have physical evidence of a 1666 KJV without the Apocrypha within the bound book. This clearly shows that this KJv did not include the Apocrypha within the bound book itself. While this does prove that the KJV existed in bound form without the apocrypha as early as 1666, this doesnot prove that this was not a one off deliberate exclusion although this is highly unlikely that one single KJV would be bound in such a way. 

https://archive.org/details/bim_early-english-books-1641-1700_the-holy-bible-_bible-english_1666/page/n721/mode/2up

The Aitken Bible (Philadelphia, 1782)—the first complete English Bible printed in America—is described by multiple historical sources as omitting the Apocrypha. One summary states that Robert Aitken issued the KJV Old Testament in 1782, “omitting the Apocrypha,” and another says the completed 1782 American KJV Old and New Testaments also omitted it.
https://rarebooksdigest.com/2016/08/19/the-bible-of-the-revolution/?utm_source=chatgpt.com

Isaac Collins, of Trenton, New Jersey, and later of New York, had published two editions of the New Testament during the conflict with the British. In 1791 he published his first complete Bible, a quarto edition of five thousand copies. It was available with a variety of options and with or without the Apocrypha. 
https://byustudies.byu.edu/article/joseph-smiths-cooperstown-bible-the-historical-context-of-the-bible-used-in-the-joseph-smith-translation?utm_source=chatgpt.com

One of those who capitalized early on the Bible-publishing boom was the craftsman-scholar Isaiah Thomas. This self-educated printer, one of Paul Revere’s group of 1775 riders before the fighting began at Lexington and Concord, made himself the leading publisher and bookseller in the postwar years. He printed magazines, an almanac, the first dictionary in America, and what he hoped would be the first “completely correct” KJV. This he pursued by working from almost 30 KJV editions, imported from various printers. He also drafted pastors and scholars into the work of correction. Thomas printed KJVs for many markets, both with and without the Apocrypha, according to folks’ tastes.
https://christianhistoryinstitute.org/magazine/article/old-book-in-a-new-world?utm_source=chatgpt.com

We must note that King James himself stated that he omitted the Apocrypha, claiming he was not a Papist.

“As to the Apocriphe bookes, I omit them because I am no Papist” (Book I:13, Basilicon Doron).

A Papist is a member of the Catholic church. It is obvious from this statement that King James understood the Apocrypha books to be an inclusion by the Catholic church.

King James elsewhere stated 

As for the Scriptures; no man doubteht I will beleeue them; But euenfor the Apocrypha;
I hold them in the same accompt that the Ancient did: They are still printed and bound
with our Bibles, and publikely read in our Churches: I reuerence them as the writings of
holy and good men: but since they are not found in the Canon, wee accompt them to bee
secunde lectionis, or ordinis and therefore not sufficient whereupon alone to gorund any
article of Faith, expect it be confirmed by some other place of Canonicall Scriptuere;”
Political works of King James I (page 123) 

“And it is a small corrupting of Scriptures to make all, or the most part of the Apocrypha
of equall faith with the Canonicall Scriptures, contrary to the Fathers opinions and
Decrees of ancient Councels?”
Political works of King James I (page 137) 

We have a couple of quotations from the KJV translators themselves. 

KJV translator Arthur Lake, “But we hold that which they confess, that the Word written in the Canonical books is undoubtedly signed with Thus saith the Lord of Hosts; as for the Apocryphal Scriptures, not only the Fathers, but their own men have branded them for Bastards, before ever we challenged them; therefore do not we recommend them to people further than they agree with the books Canonical.”

 

The Hebrew Israelites fully reject any authority of the Roman Catholic Church. So as it was the Roman Catholic church that gave the authority to these books, even though they were not actually canonised until the council of Trent in 1546. It does seem a little hypocritical that they would reject the Catholic Churches authority and then embrasse books that were never sanctioned by the Jews but rather sanctioned by the Church that they reject.

Furthermore The KJV NEVER actually included the Apocrypha as actual scripture. It was never given the same authoritative …..as the 66 books of the ……The Apocrypha was placed between the Old Testament and the New testament and VERY clearly highlighted as the Apocrypha. EVERY single page had the word Apocrypha at the top. At the end of the Apocrypha there is a page that states, THE END OF THE APOCRYPHA. It was never intermixed into scripture, unlike it is in the Catholic Bible.  

***The KJV translators themselves also gave 7 reasons why it should not have been included as scripture.

1. Not one of them is in the Hebrew language, which was alone used by the inspired historians and poets of the Old Testament.
2. Not one of the writers lays any claim to inspiration.
3. These books were never acknowledged as sacred Scriptures by the Jewish Church, and therefore were never sanctioned by our Lord.
4. They were not allowed a place among the sacred books, during the first four centuries of the Christian Church.
5. They contain fabulous statements, and statements which contradict not only the canonical Scriptures, but themselves; as when, in the two Books of Maccabees, Antiochus Epiphanes is made to die three different deaths in as many different places.
6. It inculcates doctrines at variance with the Bible, such as prayers for the dead and sinless perfection.
7. It teaches immoral practices, such as lying, suicide, assassination and magical incantation.
   
   ***This is found in Alexander McClure’s The Translators Revived (1853). However, it must be noted that there is no citation of where the translators (Cambridge ompany) are said to have made these statements, and I can find no first hand evidence for the claim. It MUST therefore be viewed as doubtful based on the lack of supporting evidence.
   
   It could be stated, McClure summarized standard Protestant reasons, probably drawing on earlier writers such as Thomas Hartwell Horne, An Introduction to the Critical Study and Knowledge of the Holy Scriptures.
   
   The Apocryphal books in those times were more read and accounted of than now, though by no means placed on a level with the canonical books of Scripture” (McClure, Translators Revived, p. 185)
   
   Alexander McClure was a biographer in the 19th Century/ 

So yes while it is true the books were in the original KJV and were removed in 1885 it is simply either disingenuous or a lack of study to make claim the translators of the KJV accepted the apocrypha as inspired text and that it was included in the KJV as such.  

Many Hebrew Israelites also rely on, or at least use  BlueletterBible.com as a source, often calling on this website when explaining the meaning a Greek or Hebrew word.

What is interesting regarding this website is that it also condemns the use of the Apocrypha.

It states “1. The Apocrypha Has Different Doctrine And Practices Than Holy Scripture”

The site actually gives 27 reasons why the Apocrypha is not and should not be accepted as Holy scripture.

 

Apocrypha in early Greek manuscripts. 

Here, it needs to be noted, especially for those who hold to a protestant faith and who also reject the Apocrypha as authoritative scripture. Modern versions of the Bible such as the NIV, ESV, NASB, NET Bible and the ERV are all based upon the same critical text, the NA/UBS text. This text is underlined predominantly by Codicies Vaticanus and Sinaiticus. It is interesting that the two manuscripts that are referred to as “oldest and best” by many both contain Apocryphal books within them. 

Codex Vaticanus contains:

3 Ezdras

Wisdom

Prologue to Ecclesiasticus

Ecclesiasticus (Sirach) 

Esther (with additions)

Judith

Tobit

Baruch

Epistle of Jeremiah

It also contains the story of Suzanna in Daniel. However, it does not contain the story in the actual text of Daniel. The story has been added to the Daniel in the surrounding margin. 

 

Codex Sinaiticus contains: 

Tobit

Judith

1 Maccabees

4 Maccabees

Wisdom of Solomon 

Sirach (Ecclesiaticus) 


Alexandrinus contains

Judith 

all 4 books of Maccabees

Tobit

Odes of Solomon

Wisdom of Solomon

Epistle of Jeremiah

 

 

If these manuscripts are so authoritative, why then are these books rejected as authoritative by those that hold to these manuscripts. This seems a bit disingenuous and certainly is cherry picking. 

 

 

Ultimately the choice of whether you accept the Apocrypha or reject it will come down to your own convictions. Hopefully it will be based on the evidence available and not because it is is required to support your doctrine or because you are simply told it is scripture.

Find out why the book of Enoch is not part of the Bible Here

Read my non christian blog here