Should Christians Regard The Apocrypha As Legitimate?
The Greek term Apocrypha originally meant “hidden” or “mysterious.” Later it came to mean “spurious” or “heretical.” Hence it was applied to writings that were regarded as questionable in terms of inspiration or canonicity.
The term now is generally used to refer to those books not included in the Jewish and Protestant Old Testament which are, however, included in the Roman Catholic canon of the Old Testament.
The Old Testament Apocrypha consists of 14 or 15 books (seven of which have been included in the Roman Catholic Old Testament) mostly composed in the period from about 200 B.C. to A.D. 100. For unknown reasons, some of these books came to be included in the Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament known as the Septuagint; the work of Greek speaking Jews in Alexandria, Egypt. This translation was evidently spread over the last two or three centuries.
The New Testament teaching clearly shows that the Jews were given the custody of the Old Testament scriptures. Rom.3:1-2 states they were entrusted with the oracles of God.
John Gill’s Exposition On The Entire Bible says: “by which are meant the law of Moses, and the writings of the prophets, the institutions of the ceremonial law, and the prophecies of the Messiah and the Gospel church state; and in a word, all the books of the Old Testament, and whatsoever is contained in them; which are called so, because they are of divine inspiration…..for hereby they had a more clear and distinct knowledge of God than the Gentiles….
Acts 7:37-38 talks about the “lively” [or “living” ζῶντα zōnta] oracles given to them. Albert Barnes’ Notes On The Bible says: “The word “oracles” here means “commands” or “laws” of God….in this place it means that the commands were of such a nature, and given in such circumstances, as to secure attention; to produce obedience; to excite them to act for God - in opposition to laws which would fall powerless, and produce no effect.”
The Jews also sat in the seat of Moses (Matt.23:1-3), by which, says the Adam Clark Commentary, we are to understand their authority to teach the law. Moses was the great teacher of the Jewish people; and the scribes, etc., are here represented as his successors.
Why is this important? Because regardless of when the final decisions were made, the books later known as the Apocrypha were never included in the official Jewish canon of the Old Testament.
This situation is reflected in the statement of the first century Jewish historian Josephus, who wrote: “For we have not an innumerable multitude of books among us, disagreeing from and contradicting one another, as the Greeks have, but only 22 books, which contain the records of all the past times; which are justly believed to be divine (Against Apion, book I, section 8). From Josephus’ enumeration, it is hard to see how the seven apocryphal works could have been regarded by the Jews as divinely inspired in the first century.
Later, in the second to the fourth centuries A.D., it appears that some of the early fathers of the Catholic Church regarded certain Apocryphal books as cononical. Others however, did not. Forexample, Jerome, who tranlated the scriptures into Latin circa A.D. 400 (the Latin Vulgate), did not regard the Apocrypha as inspired: “He explicitly stated that the Old Testament Apocrypha might be read for edification, but not for confirming the authority of church dogmas” (Interpretor’s Dictionary of the Bible, article “Apocrypha).
However, later Catholic leaders such as Augustine accepted certain Apocryphal books as Scripture. During the Reformation, Protestant Old Testament scholars rejected these books as uncanonical and accepted only the Jewish Old Testament canon. In response to this, the (Catholic) council of Trent in 1546 declared them canonical and inspired. This was clearly the decision of the Catholic church alone, and cannot be proven inspired by God. The situation has remained basically the same until the present day.
According to the New Testament, Christians should accept as canonical Old Testament scripture only those books which have been officially accepted by the Jews. Those Apocryphal books generally included in the Catholic Old Testament would not therefore qualify as canonical Scripture.
The Apocrypha does contain valuable historical data of the intertestamental period as well as interesting and informative writings by Jewish religious thinkers of that day. Because they illustrate aspects of Jewish history and religious thought just preceding and during the time of Jesus, they may be read for educational purposes, but not as inspired text.
In addition to these, there are a number of early Christian writings sometimes referred to as “New Testament Apocrypha.” These consist of a great number of books of all kinds - gospels, acts, letters, apocalyptic literature, etc. Nearly all of these works are spurious embellishments of the contents of New Testament books. None of these books can be seriously regarded as having a claim to New Testament canonicity.
Filed under: Bible, Catholic Church
