The Apocrypha: Reading Between the Testament an Overview
Author: Bobby Valentine | Filed under: Apocrypha, Bible, Books, Church History, Exegesis, Jewish Backgrounds, King James Version, Septuagint
I post this to fulfill a favor for a friend … the image to the left is of the table of contents for a real King James Version … the one from 1611.
I. What is the Apocrypha?
For many the Apocrypha is a collection of books that have been added to the Bible because (it is assumed) these books support some sort of false doctrine. Such a perspective, however is not balanced.
Far from being a threat to our faith, the Apocrypha is a witness to the faith of God’s People living in the third and second centuries before Jesus. The works called “Apocrypha” come from Palestine or Egypt. The language of the Apocrypha is mostly Hebrew with some being written in Greek (Wisdom of Solomon) and some possibly in Aramaic.
What Works Are in the “Apocrypha?”
Traditionally, the word “Apocrypha” refers to a very specific group of writings that were part of the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible called the Septuagint (LXX). The LXX began to be translated around 250 BC and extends down to at least the time of Greek Esther in 114 BC. A list of the Apocrypha and a one line “snap shot” (from David deSilva) of their theme follows:
1) Tobit: Better is Almsgiving with Justice
2) Judith: God saves Israel through an unlikely way – a Widow
3) Additions to Esther: The Aid of the All-Seeing God and Savior
4) Wisdom of Solomon: The Righteous will live Forever
5) Sirach/Ben Sira: All Wisdom come from Doing the Word of God
6) Baruch: Return with Tenfold Zeal to the Lord
7) Letter of Jeremiah: They are Idols, not Gods, Do not Fear Them
8) Additions to Daniel: Let Them Know That You Alone are God
9) 1 Maccabees: The Family through Which Deliverance Was Given
10) 2 Maccabees: There is Some Power of God about this Place
11) 1 Esdras: Leave to us a Root and a Name
12) Prayer of Manasseh: The God of those who Repent, The God of Mercy
13) Psalm 151: He Made Me Shepherd of His Flock
14) 3 Maccabees: Blessed Be the Deliverer of Israel
15) 2 Esdras: The Mighty One Has Not Forgotten Us
16) 4 Maccabees: Noble is the Contest
Works such a 1 Enoch are among a group of writings called “The Pseudepigrapha” and are not to be confused with “the Apocrypha.” Further works such as the Gospel of Thomas have nothing to do with the Apocrypha. The Apocrypha are all Jewish writings all but one (2 Esdras/4 Esra) predate the advent of Christianity and all are “orthodox” in the sense that they proclaim the same basic theological worldview that we find in the Protestant canonical Old Testament.
II. Value in Studying the Apocrypha
Whether we accept the Apocrypha as canonical Scripture is almost to miss the point in the value of this body of literature. Of course millions of Christians around the world, and down through the ages, certainly regard these texts as holy Scripture. This is simply a fact of history. Others (after the Protestant Reformation, 1517-1560) have rejected the Scriptural status of these books but remained unwilling to cast them aside as “ordinary” or “mundane” or “useless.” Rather many of these texts remained part of the devotional life of Protestant Christians and even part of worship. What follow are four “good” reasons for reading the Apocrypha as a Christian.
The first reason that motivates us to study these books is that they shed considerable light on the faith of God’s People “Between the Testaments.” This was a period of intense growth intellectually and spiritually for God’s People and it was also a time of intense hardship. Lots of questions, lots of thinking, lots of theology was fashioned during this time that has a direct impact on our understanding of Jesus and the early Church. The exaltation of the Torah was in many ways a result of persecution and 1 and 2 Maccabees floods the Gospels (as well as Galatians) with light. The development of notions about demons, angels, afterlife (both heaven and hell) is seen in the Apocrypha. The personification of Wisdom (which provides John and the early Church with language to talk about the Son’s relationship to the Father) is greatly developed in this literature. Much more could be said here.
A second compelling reason for studying the Apocrypha is that the authors of the NT are themselves familiar with these texts and thus our knowledge of them enhances our understanding of the NT. This will come as a shock to some however. But the NT authors refer to these writings in a variety of ways just like they do the Hebrew Bible. They make allusions through themes and stories. They borrow words and phrases and at times they directly quote these materials. An example of the latter would be Jude verse 14 quoting the Apocryphal writing 1 Enoch 1.10.
A third reason (valued more by some than others) for studying these writings is that they were formative for early Christian theologians, preachers and ordinary folk. They constitute the shared “heritage” of Protestant, Catholic, Orthodox, Slovonic and Coptic branches of Christianity. The only exposure some of these Christians had to stories like Daniel or Esther were from the Septuagint (for centuries). Some of the “formative” influence I speak of can be demonstrated with Hebrews and the Wisdom of Solomon. Hebrews uses concepts drawn from Wisdom to elaborate on the identity of Jesus and his relationship to God the Father. The italicized words show the correspondence:
“In these last days [God] has spoken to us by a Son, whom he appointed heir
of all things, through whom he also created the worlds, He is the reflection of God’s glory and the exact imprint of God’s very being, and he sustains all things by his powerful word” (Hebrews 1.2-3).
Wisdom, the fashioner of all things, taught me . . .
[Wisdom] is a breath of the power of God, and a pure emanation of the glory of
the almighty . . .
She is a reflection of eternal light, a spotless mirror of God, and an image of his
Goodness . . .
She is an initiate in the knowledge of God
and an associate in his works.” (Wisdom 7.22, 25-26; 8.4)
The Hebrew Writer has “paraphrased” and reworded the description of Wisdom so it now describes the nature and work of the Son, not only as he was experienced in the flesh but also before the Incarnation. To close this section I will quote from David deSilva’s work on the Apocrypha on the value of reading these works:
“I would also emphasize at this point, however, that the value of the Old Testament Apocrypha is not merely historical. These texts have not only informed people of faith but also have inspired them throughout the millennia. . . . these texts add fuel to the fire in the soul sparked by God in the face of adversity, the commitment to choose obedience to God over succumbing to the passions or weaknesses of the flesh, the experience of God’s forgiveness and expectation of God’s deliverance – all these are strengthened by these texts, which one could approach with confidence at least as the best devotional literature to have withstood the test of time.” (Introducing the Apocrypha, pp. 40-41).
III. The Apocrypha in the History of the English Bible
In this section we can hardly trace the history of the English Bible with any satisfaction; but we would be remiss to overlook this material 
all together. The Apocrypha has been a part of almost every major English Bible since the first one in 1384. Here is a list of the translations and their date:
1) John Wycliff (1384). The first English Bible (based on Latin Vulgate)
2) Myles Coverdale. First complete printed Bible. Based largely on William Tyndale’s work and published in 1535.
3) John Rogers Bible known as “Matthew’s Bible” of 1537.
4) The Great Bible of 1539. This was the first “authorized” version.
5) The Geneva Bible of 1560. This is the Bible of Shakespeare and the “Pilgrims.” The Geneva Bible places “The Prayer of Manasseh” after Chronicles. Rarely in the history of English has there been an “anti-Catholic” work like the Geneva Bible, yet it contains these words about the Apocrypha:
“These books that follow in order after the Prophets unto the New Testament, are called Apocrypha; that is books, which were not received by common consent to be read and expounded in the Church, neither served to prove any point of Christian religion . . . but as books proceeding from godly men, were received to be read for advancement and furtherance of the knowledge of the history, and for the instruction of godly manners: which books declare that at all times God had an especial care of his Church and left them not utterly destitute of teachers and means to confirm them in the hope of the promised Messiah, and also witness that those calamities that God sent to his Church, were according to his providence . . .” (Preface to Apocrypha, quoted in Bruce M. Metzger, An Introduction to the Apocrypha, p. 187).
6) The Bishops Bible of 1568.
7) The King James Version of 1611. The KJV directs readers of the NT to the pages of the Apocrypha eleven times in its marginal notes:
Matt. 6.7 . . . . . . . . . . . . Sirach 7.16
Matt. 23.37 . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Esdras 1.30
Matt. 27.43 . . . . . . . . . . . .Wisdom 2.15, 16
Luke 6.31 . . . . . . . . . . . . .Tobit 4.16
Luke 14.13 . . . . . . . . . . . . Tobit 4.7
John 10.22 . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Maccabees 4.59
Romans 9.21 . . . . . . . . . . . .Wisdom 15.7
Romans 11.34 . . . . . . . . . . . Wisdom 9.13
2 Cor. 9.7 . . . . . . . . . . . . Sirach 35.9
Hebrews 1.3 . . . . . . . . . . . .Wisdom 7.26
Hebrews 11.35 . . . . . . . . . . 2 Maccabees 7.7
8) Revised Version/American Standard Version of 1881/1901
9) Revised Standard Version of 1946.
10) New Revised Standard Version of 1989.
The Apocrypha is available today in the following modern English versions: New American Bible, Jerusalem Bible, New Jerusalem Bible, Today’s English Version, Revised English Bible, God’s Word, English Standard Version, as well as the classic King James Version.
Related Posts:
Apocryphal Myths: Great is the Truth and Mighty Above all Things
Judith, God Saves Through a Woman (another Legendary Woman on the Family Tree)
Susanna: Legendary Woman on the Family Tree
Praying with Romans and Manasseh
May 28th, 2011 at 2:36 pm
When was Enoch added to the Apocrypha? I don’t recall it being there and it’s not in your list. IIRC, it’s part of the collection called the Pseudographeia.
May 28th, 2011 at 3:53 pm
First Enoch was never part of “The” Apocrypha. It is however an apocryphal writing that is usually classified among the Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. These writings (not all of them though) are conveniently available in a 2 volume set edited by James H. Charlesworth.
Though the term apocrypha can be a wide ranging term – “The Apocrypha” is usually limited to those works associated with the Septuagint but not accepted into the Hebrew Bible.
I appealed to First Enoch for the sake of illustration.
May 28th, 2011 at 4:43 pm
GW: Good summary.
I taught a Wednesday night class a year ago where we read and discussed the entire apocrypha over a 5 month period.
Several of the elders in the class were incredibly interested and thankful that these materials were brought to light.
One person in the class asked “Why have I never heard of these books?”
Why indeed.
May 28th, 2011 at 5:31 pm
Gene I am so glad you did that at CH. I know the family was blessed. And I am honored that I could help in any small way.
May 30th, 2011 at 1:53 am
Can you give more information on purgatory, praying for the forgiveness of sins for the dead, paying for sin removal? I am in discussion with some Catholics who believe in the above, plus they believe if infants are not baptized and they die as infants, they will go to hell. They have given Matt 12:32 and 1 Corinthians 3:13-15 as purgatory evidenced in the New Testament. 2 Maccabees 12:43-45 as paying for sins. I appreciate any help you can offer me. Also, when and by whom was the Apocrypha removed from the KJV? Thanks Bobby!
Patricia W.
July 14th, 2011 at 9:05 pm
Bobby, I’m just now catching up with reading your postings on the Apocrypha and the several Apocryphal writings. For what its worth, maybe an anecdotal account will be of some interest.
I was 14 years when I initially saw the Apocryphal writings. I had accompanied my dad and a cousin on a genealogical research trip back into the hills of Jackson County, TN.
While my dad and his cousin were greeting and conversing with the persons we had gone to visit, I was engrossed in looking at the old family Bible that had belonged to my gr gr gr grandparents.
I had never previously seen a Bible so large. All of the old family inscriptions of births, marriages and deaths were fascinating. But what I recall most of all from that experience, was an existential moment of fright!!
Seeing books bearing the titles of “The Rest of Esther”, “1st Maccabees” , “2nd Maccabees” and the other books that were between the OT and NT compilations, and suddenly having the acute awareness that these were books that were not in the Bible that I had at home, was anxiety producing – very much so.
When it was convenient for me to point out my concern about the biblical books my ancestors had in their Bible – but were lacking in mine – I was also struck by how unconcerned the adults appeared to be regarding my question.
The principal response that I recall was that they were books that the Catholics had in their Bibles; but we didn’t need to have them.
My anxiety, of course, quickly subsided as I essentially trusted the adults in my life. However, that teen age event made an imprint upon my life.
I can date my interest in what has been a life long interest in exploring the processes of “scripture” and “canon” – and particularly their interplay through historical human actions and choices – to that teen-age experience when I initially held and viewed an old Family Bible and the Apocrypha for the initial time.
July 14th, 2011 at 9:18 pm
Paul thank you so much for sharing that bit of oral history. It highlights in a vivid way how Protestants have typically handled these materials: oh those are Catholic Books or Catholics have them in their bible.
That or similar statements were code for dont worry about it because anything and everything about Roman Catholicism is wrong. But that is simply a red herring. The books are not “Catholic” books and are in many Bibles besides Roman Catholic … being in Bibles long before there was anything like the Roman Catholic Church as we know it.
Thanks for sharing.
September 2nd, 2014 at 10:07 pm
Surely that should be “What are the Apocrypha”, or possibly the deutero-canon.
September 3rd, 2014 at 6:51 am
IMO, just as Israel, and Jesus both went to Egypt in times of persecution, so did the canon. When the rest of the world wanted Enoch to be lost, it was to them for a thousand years. But Enoch along with the Apocrypha survived in the canon of the Coptics.