APOCRYPHA: What is Wrong with the Hidden Books?
APOCRYPHA: “HIDDEN” WRITINGS
The word Apocrypha comes from the Greek term for “hidden.” It refers to a collection of Jewish writings that were never part of the official Jewish canon of Scripture, yet are accepted by some Christian groups as authoritative and included in certain versions of the Old Testament. Today, these books are often printed in Bibles between the Old and New Testaments.
The exact number of Apocryphal books varies depending on how they are classified—ranging from about 12 to 19 or more. Some traditions combine certain books, while others count them separately, which explains the differences in totals. The Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches also maintain slightly different lists, and other Christian groups recognize only a few of these writings. This lack of agreement shows that the precise contents of the Apocrypha remain unsettled.
After the Council of Trent in 1546 declared these writings part of the biblical canon, they were given the title Deuterocanonical, from the Greek deuteros, meaning “second.” But why were they never accepted among the recognized books of the Bible?
1. THE REJECTION FROM JESUS
Jesus recognized only the Jewish canon. When He referred to the Old Testament, He called it “the Law and the Prophets” (Matthew 5:17; Luke 16:16), “Moses and the Prophets” (Luke 19:29; 24:27), and “the Law of Moses, the Prophets, and the Psalms” (Luke 24:44). For Jesus, these were “all the Scriptures” (see Luke 24:27).
These titles were the common way of referring to the Jewish canon—the Hebrew Bible—known as the Tanakh (what we now call the Old Testament). Tanakh is an acronym for its three divisions: the Torah (the Law of Moses), the Neviim (the Prophets—both the Former, such as Joshua, Judges, 1–2 Samuel, 1–2 Kings, and the Latter, the major and minor prophets), and the Ketuvim (the Writings, such as Psalms, Proverbs, Job, and others). This shows that Jesus acknowledged as Scripture only what was included in the Jewish Tanakh used in His day.
Another clear indication of Jesus’ rejection of the Apocrypha appears in Matthew 23:35 and Luke 11:51, where He speaks of “the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah.” Jesus draws on two martyrdom accounts—Genesis 4:8 and 2 Chronicles 24:20. In the Hebrew Bible, Genesis is the first book and Chronicles the last. By citing these two, Jesus affirms the entire Old Testament—from its first book to its last—defining the boundaries of Scripture. There are many martyrdom stories in the Apocrypha, yet Jesus gives them no recognition.
2. NO QUOTATION FROM THE NEW TESTAMENT WRITERS
The New Testament writers never directly quote from the Apocrypha. They frequently cite nearly every book of the Old Testament with phrases such as “It is written…” or “The Scriptures say…,” demonstrating their recognition of its authority. Yet they never once use the Apocrypha, even though these books existed in their time.
There is also no evidence that the Apocrypha was part of the Septuagint—the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures—during the time of Jesus and the apostles. The earliest surviving manuscripts containing the Apocrypha date only from the fourth century AD, not the first century when Christ and the early church lived. Even if we suppose the Apocrypha had been included in the Septuagint earlier, neither Jesus nor His apostles ever referenced it, indicating they deliberately left these writings aside.
3. REJECTION OF THE JEWISH COMMUNITY
The Jewish people never accepted the Apocrypha as Scripture. This is confirmed by the writings of the Jewish historian Josephus around A.D. 90. According to his record, the Jews recognized twenty-two books as divinely inspired—the same content we now have in the thirty-nine Old Testament books (the difference is only in how the books were grouped and counted). Josephus wrote that no one dared to add to or remove from these books. He mentioned other writings—which correspond to the Apocrypha—but stated that the Jews did not regard them as sacred because they were not written by prophets. Likewise, the respected Jewish philosopher Philo never quoted from these books.
A Jewish council held at Jamnia (around A.D. 90) affirmed the long-established Hebrew canon, which had already been recognized for over five centuries. It is important to note that the council did not “close” the canon; rather, it confirmed the canon that had long been closed. They examined whether certain books—such as Esther, Ecclesiastes, and Song of Solomon—were truly inspired. After careful scrutiny, they affirmed these books as divine but did not include the Apocrypha. If anyone had the authority to identify the Scriptures recognized by the Jewish people, it was this community—and they did not recognize the Apocrypha.
4. UNINSPIRED AND FALLIBLE
Unlike the canonical books of the Bible, the Apocryphal writings never claim divine inspiration. Even their own authors did not present them as the Word of God. These books contain no predictive prophecy and no divinely attested miracles that would confirm their authority. In short, there is no internal evidence to support their inspiration.
The Apocrypha was written between about 250 B.C. and the first century A.D.—a period known as the “silent years,” beginning after 400 B.C., when no true prophecy was given and no God-sent prophets arose in Israel. This reality is acknowledged both by Josephus and in the Jewish Talmud (a collection of rabbinical writings). Even the Apocrypha itself admits there were no prophets during this time (see 1 Maccabees 9:27; 14:41). Because no divinely authorized prophets were writing, the Jewish people rightly refused to regard these books as Holy Scripture.
Furthermore, the Apocrypha contains clear historical inaccuracies that disqualify it as infallible. For example, Tobit 1:15 claims that Sennacherib was the son of Shalmaneser, yet historically Sargon II was Sennacherib’s father. Judith 1:1 describes Nebuchadnezzar as the king of Assyria, when in fact he was king of Babylon. Such errors demonstrate that these writings cannot be considered the inerrant Word of God.
5. TESTIMONY OF THE EARLY CHURCH FATHERS
Most early Church Fathers during the first four centuries did not regard the Apocrypha as inspired Scripture. Melito of Sardis (d. c. 180 AD) left the Apocrypha out of his list of Old Testament books. Athanasius of Alexandria (d. 373 AD) clearly stated that these writings were not part of the canon. Jerome (d. 420 AD), the great scholar and translator who rendered the Apocrypha into Latin, likewise denied their canonicity. Augustine of Hippo (d. c. 430 AD) initially accepted the Apocrypha but later considered it inferior to the rest of Scripture. These are just a few of many early Christian leaders who did not view the Apocrypha as inspired on the same level as the Old Testament.
Early believers certainly knew of these writings, and some leaders even quoted from them, but quotation does not equal inspiration. Paul himself quoted Greek poets in Acts 17:28 without elevating their words to Scripture. While a few Fathers such as Clement of Alexandria and Irenaeus treated the Apocrypha with respect, their occasional use of these books does not place them on par with the Word of God.
What about church councils? The Councils of Hippo (393 AD) and Carthage (397 AD) included the Apocrypha in their lists, yet their decisions are not binding for several reasons. No qualified Hebrew scholars were present, and these councils had no authority to determine the Hebrew canon. The Council of Trent (1546 AD) later reaffirmed the Apocrypha, but this came sixteen centuries after the Old Testament was already recognized, and it was partly a reaction to the Protestant Reformation—revealing an agenda rather than a discovery of divine truth. The Church can only recognize God’s Word; it cannot confer inspiration. Even if certain councils listed the Apocrypha, they could not transform these writings into the Word of God.
6. THEOLOGICAL ISSUES
Several teachings in the Apocrypha conflict with the rest of Scripture.
Second Maccabees 12:43-45 promotes prayers and offerings for the dead to cleanse their sins—a text the Roman Catholic Church cites in support of purgatory. Yet the Bible is clear that after death comes immediate judgment: “It is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment” (Hebrews 9:27). There is no second chance for salvation and no human effort that can secure forgiveness after death. Other passages—such as Tobit 4:11; 12:9 and Sirach 3:3, 30—seem to teach salvation by works, contradicting the consistent biblical message of salvation by God’s grace.
Wisdom 8:19-20 claims, “I was a witty child and had received a good soul… I came to a body undefiled,” suggesting humans are born pure. This stands against the biblical doctrine of original sin taught in Psalm 51:5 (“Surely I was sinful at birth”) and affirmed in Romans 3:10 and 5:18-19. These and other problematic texts highlight why the Apocrypha cannot be treated as divinely inspired Scripture.
Reading the Apocrypha is not inherently wrong. These books can provide valuable historical and cultural insights about the period between the Old and New Testaments. They contain occasional “nuggets of truth” that can help us understand the background of biblical times. However, they cannot serve as the foundation for faith or doctrine and must never be placed on equal footing with the inspired Word of God. Stay Curious.
Sources and Studies:
Geisler, N. (2003). What did Jesus say about the completeness of the Old Testament? In N. Geisler et al., Who Wade God?. Zondervan.
Geisler, N. (2003). What did the early Christians say about the completeness of the Old Testament? In N. Geisler et al., Who Made God?. Zondervan.
Geisler, N. (2003). Did the Roman Catholic Church add books to the Jewish Old Testament? In N. Geisler et al., Who Made God?. Zondervan.
Elliot, M., & Travis, S. (1999). Deuterocanonical books. In The Lion Handbook to the Bible. Lion Hudson/OMF Literature Inc.
Rhodes, R. (2010). The Apocrypha. In 5-minute Apologetics for Today. Harvest House Publishers.
Willmington, H. L. (2011). The Canon. In Willmington’s guide to the Bible. Tyndale House Publishers.
Harris, R. L. (2001). The Apocrypha. In Exploring the Bible. Crossway Books.
Stewart, D. (n.d.). Why were the books of the Old Testament Apocrypha rejected as Holy Scripture by the Protestants? Blue Letter Bible. https://www.blueletterbible.org/…/don_stewart_395.cfm
Slick, M. (2009, October 13). Reasons why the Apocrypha does not belong in the Bible. Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry (CARM). https://carm.org/…/reasons-why-the-apocrypha-does-not…/
GotQuestions Ministries. (n.d.). What are the Apocrypha / Deuterocanonical books? GotQuestions.org. https://www.gotquestions.org/apocrypha-deuterocanonical.html
Comments
Post a Comment