What Are the Apocryphal Books, and Why Were They Excluded from the Canon of Scripture?

The Term “Apocrypha” and Its Meaning in Scripture

The term Apocrypha comes from the Greek word a·poʹkry·phos, which means “hidden” or “concealed.” This word appears in the New Testament, including in Mark 4:22, Luke 8:17, and Colossians 2:3, where it refers to things that are hidden or not fully revealed. In early Christian usage, apocryphal writings referred to texts that were hidden from public reading, implying that they lacked divine authority. Over time, the term came to denote spurious or uncanonical writings, especially those that were included in some Bible manuscripts but were never accepted as part of the Hebrew or Christian canon.

Today, the term Apocrypha is most often associated with a set of writings that were added to the Bible canon by the Roman Catholic Church during the Council of Trent in 1546. Catholic scholars refer to these books as “deuterocanonical,” meaning they belong to a secondary canon, distinct from the earlier, universally accepted canon known as “protocanonical.”

These books include:

• Tobit
• Judith
• Wisdom of Solomon
• Ecclesiasticus (not to be confused with Ecclesiastes)
• Baruch
• 1 and 2 Maccabees
• Additions to Esther
• Additions to Daniel (The Song of the Three Holy Children, Susanna and the Elders, and The Destruction of Bel and the Dragon)

The dating of these books is uncertain, though most scholars agree that they were written between the second and third centuries B.C.E., much later than the canonical books of the Hebrew Bible.

Why Are These Books Not Considered Canonical?

The key question to address is why these writings were excluded from the recognized canon of Scripture. Several factors contribute to this conclusion, both from a historical and theological perspective.

The Closing of the Hebrew Canon

The Hebrew canon of Scripture was closed after the writing of the books of Ezra, Nehemiah, and Malachi in the fifth century B.C.E. There is no record of any additional writings being accepted into the Jewish canon after this period. The Apocryphal books, written centuries later, were never recognized as divinely inspired by the Jewish community and have never been part of the Hebrew canon.

The first-century Jewish historian, Josephus, provides valuable insight into the Jewish understanding of the canon in his work Against Apion. He writes:

“We do not possess myriads of inconsistent books, conflicting with each other. Our books, those which are justly accredited, are but two and twenty [the equivalent of the 39 books of the Hebrew Scriptures according to modern division], and contain the record of all time.”

Josephus explicitly rejects the inclusion of later writings in the canon, stating:

“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.”

This statement reflects the Jewish belief that the prophetic period had ended, and no further inspired writings were to be added to Scripture. The Apocryphal books were thus excluded.

The Septuagint and the Apocrypha

One of the most common arguments in favor of the Apocryphal books is their inclusion in certain versions of the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures. However, this argument is not as convincing as it might first appear.

The Septuagint was translated around 280 B.C.E. in Egypt for Greek-speaking Jews. While some copies of the Septuagint included the Apocryphal books, this does not necessarily mean that these books were part of the original Hebrew texts. In fact, many of the Apocryphal books were written after the Septuagint translation began, making it impossible for them to have been part of the original Hebrew Scriptures that were translated into Greek.

Furthermore, while the Jews of Alexandria (in Egypt) may have accepted these writings as part of an expanded canon, they were never included in the Palestinian or Jerusalem canon. The Jewish Council of Jamnia, held around 90 C.E., reaffirmed the exclusion of these writings from the canon, reinforcing the Jewish community’s longstanding position on the matter.

The New Testament’s Silence on the Apocrypha

Another significant reason the Apocryphal books are not considered canonical is the fact that none of the New Testament writers quoted from them. While this is not a definitive argument, since certain canonical books (such as Esther and Ecclesiastes) are also not quoted in the New Testament, the complete absence of Apocryphal references cannot be ignored. Not a single Apocryphal book is directly quoted or alluded to by the apostles or by Jesus himself, which suggests that they were not viewed as authoritative Scripture by the early Christian community.

The Church Fathers and Early Christian Testimony

Many early Christian leaders, such as Origen, Athanasius, and Jerome, distinguished between the canonical books and the Apocryphal writings. Origen, a third-century scholar, made it clear that the Apocryphal books were secondary and did not belong to the true canon. Athanasius, the fourth-century bishop of Alexandria, prepared a list of canonical books that aligned with the Hebrew Scriptures, and he either ignored the Apocrypha or classified these books as noncanonical.

Jerome, one of the most important early Christian scholars, played a critical role in the development of the Latin Vulgate, a translation of the Bible into Latin. Jerome was a renowned Hebrew scholar, and in his prologue to the books of Samuel and Kings, he listed the 22 canonical books of the Hebrew Scriptures and excluded the Apocryphal writings. Jerome was also the first to use the term Apocrypha in the modern sense, referring to these books as noncanonical. He advised against reading the Apocryphal books for doctrinal teaching, warning that they were not divinely inspired.

In a letter to a lady named Laeta regarding the education of her daughter, Jerome wrote:

“Let her avoid all the Apocryphal books, and if she ever wishes to read them, not for the truth of their doctrines but out of respect for their wondrous tales.”

Differing Catholic Views on the Apocrypha

The inclusion of the Apocryphal books in the Roman Catholic Bible was not universally accepted within the Catholic Church. Theologians such as Jerome opposed their inclusion, and it was not until the Council of Trent in 1546, more than 1,100 years after Jerome, that the Roman Catholic Church officially declared these books to be canonical. This decision was made in response to the Protestant Reformation, during which Reformers like Martin Luther challenged the inclusion of the Apocryphal books.

It is also noteworthy that the Council of Trent did not accept all the Apocryphal writings. The Prayer of Manasses, 1 Esdras, and 2 Esdras were excluded, despite being part of the Latin Vulgate for over a millennium. This selective inclusion of certain books while excluding others raises questions about the criteria used for determining canonicity.

Internal Evidence Against the Apocrypha

In addition to historical testimony, the internal evidence of the Apocryphal books provides strong reasons for their exclusion from the canon. These writings lack the prophetic authority that characterizes the canonical Scriptures, and they contain numerous historical, theological, and moral errors.

For example, the book of Tobit includes a fantastical story about a man named Tobit who is blinded when bird droppings fall into his eyes. The narrative is filled with superstition, including the use of fish gall to heal Tobit’s blindness. Such elements are completely foreign to the biblical portrayal of divine healing and contradict the sober and realistic nature of the inspired Scriptures.

The book of Judith is another example of historical inaccuracies. The book states that Nebuchadnezzar, the king of Babylon, ruled over the Assyrians from Nineveh. However, this is a blatant error, as Nineveh had already been destroyed before Nebuchadnezzar’s reign, and Nebuchadnezzar was king of Babylon, not Assyria. This historical inaccuracy demonstrates that the book of Judith is not a reliable or inspired text.

The Apocryphal books also introduce doctrinal concepts that are inconsistent with the rest of Scripture. For instance, the book of Wisdom promotes the immortality of the soul, a concept influenced by Greek philosophy. This teaching is in direct opposition to the biblical view that the soul is mortal and that immortality is a gift from God, granted to believers at the resurrection (1 Corinthians 15:53-54).

Furthermore, 2 Maccabees introduces the idea of prayers for the dead, a practice that has no basis in the canonical Scriptures. The Bible clearly teaches that a person’s eternal destiny is sealed at death (Hebrews 9:27), and there is no scriptural support for the idea that the dead can be aided by the prayers of the living.

An Examination of Specific Apocryphal Books

Now, we will turn to an examination of each of the Apocryphal books, considering their content and the reasons they were excluded from the canon.

Tobit

The book of Tobit tells the story of a pious Jew named Tobit, who is blinded by bird droppings and sends his son Tobias on a journey to recover a debt. Along the way, Tobias encounters the angel Raphael, who helps him defeat a demon and heal his father’s blindness with fish gall.

Why Tobit Is Not Canonical: The book of Tobit is filled with superstition and exaggeration, including the use of magic-like remedies (e.g., fish gall) to heal blindness. Additionally, the historical context is highly problematic, as Tobit claims to have lived for over 257 years. The errors and fantastical elements in Tobit clearly mark it as a work of fiction rather than divine revelation.

Judith

The book of Judith recounts how a Jewish widow named Judith saves her people by beheading the Assyrian general Holofernes after pretending to ally with him.

Why Judith Is Not Canonical: Judith contains serious historical inaccuracies, such as its claim that Nebuchadnezzar was king of Assyria, a kingdom that had already fallen before his reign. The book also depicts implausible military campaigns and geography. These errors disqualify Judith from being considered divinely inspired.

Additions to the Book of Esther

The canonical book of Esther is well-known for its account of how Esther, the Jewish queen of Persia, saved her people from annihilation through her courage and faith. However, several additional sections were later appended to this narrative. These additions, found in various Greek and Latin translations, consist of six passages that expand upon the original story. These include:

• A dream by Mordecai
• Additional prayers by Mordecai and Esther
• Various royal decrees
• Interpretations of dreams

These sections do not appear in the Hebrew text of Esther and were likely added during the Greek period to enhance the narrative.

Why the Additions to Esther Are Not Canonical: The additions to Esther introduce several contradictions to the original text. For instance, in one of the additions, Mordecai is said to have been among the captives taken by Nebuchadnezzar in 617 B.C.E. and then held a prominent position in the second year of the reign of Ahasuerus (Artaxerxes). However, this directly contradicts the timeline presented in the canonical Esther, as these events would have spanned over 100 years, an impossible time frame for a single individual to have played such a role. Moreover, these additions were likely penned by later authors who attempted to embellish the original story, but their work is clearly inconsistent with the inspired text.

Wisdom (of Solomon)

The book of Wisdom, attributed to Solomon, extols the virtues of wisdom and includes philosophical reflections on life and morality.

Why Wisdom Is Not Canonical: Wisdom incorporates Greek philosophical ideas, such as the immortality of the soul and the preexistence of souls, which are foreign to Hebrew thought. These pagan influences make it clear that this book is not inspired Scripture.

Ecclesiasticus (Wisdom of Sirach)

Ecclesiasticus is a collection of wise sayings and practical advice, written by Jesus ben-Sirach in the second century B.C.E.

Why Ecclesiasticus Is Not Canonical: While Ecclesiasticus offers some valuable moral instruction, it also contains doctrinal errors. For example, it blames women for the fall into sin (Ecclesiasticus 25:24), contradicting Paul’s teaching that Adam bears responsibility for original sin (Romans 5:12-19).

Baruch (Including the Epistle of Jeremias)

Baruch is a collection of prayers and reflections, purportedly written by Jeremiah’s scribe, Baruch. The Epistle of Jeremias is included as a separate chapter.

Why Baruch Is Not Canonical: There is no evidence that Baruch ever went to Babylon, as the book claims. In fact, the canonical account places him in Egypt with Jeremiah. Additionally, Baruch contains historical errors, such as claiming that the Babylonian exile would last seven generations, contradicting the biblical 70-year prophecy (Jeremiah 25:11-12).

The Song of the Three Holy Children

This is an additional section inserted into the book of Daniel after Daniel 3:23. It includes a prayer supposedly offered by Azariah (Abednego) while in the fiery furnace, as well as a hymn of praise sung by the three Hebrews in the furnace. It also describes an angel extinguishing the flames to protect the three men.

Why The Song of the Three Holy Children Is Not Canonical: While the hymn is reminiscent of Psalm 148 in some respects, the references to the temple, cherubim, and the style of worship presented are inconsistent with the historical context of the Babylonian exile. Furthermore, the Song’s account of angelic intervention does not fit with the timeline and narrative of Daniel as recorded in the canonical text. These literary embellishments, while dramatic, are not in keeping with the inspired narrative of the Hebrew Scriptures.

Additions to Daniel (The Song of the Three Holy Children, Susanna and the Elders, and The Destruction of Bel and the Dragon)

These three stories were added to the book of Daniel in the Septuagint but are absent from the Hebrew text.

Why These Additions Are Not Canonical: These stories contain fanciful and legendary elements that do not align with the historical and prophetic style of Daniel. For example, The Destruction of Bel and the Dragon includes an episode where the prophet Habakkuk is miraculously transported by an angel to bring food to Daniel in the lions’ den. Such embellishments indicate that these additions are later legends, not inspired Scripture.

Susanna and the Elders

This story, an addition to the book of Daniel, recounts how a young woman named Susanna is falsely accused of adultery by two elders. She is condemned to death but is vindicated when the young Daniel, through astute questioning, exposes the false testimony of the elders. Susanna’s innocence is proven, and the elders are punished for their deception.

Why Susanna and the Elders Is Not Canonical: This narrative, while morally instructive, is generally regarded as a work of fiction or legend. It is absent from the Hebrew text of Daniel and was likely added later by Greek-speaking Jews. The story’s fictional style, combined with its lack of any prophetic or doctrinal significance, makes it clear that it was not inspired by God. Moreover, it bears no relationship to the greater prophetic message of the book of Daniel.

The Destruction of Bel and the Dragon

This story is yet another addition to the book of Daniel, commonly found as its 14th chapter in the Greek and Latin versions. In this account, Daniel exposes the false worship of the Babylonian god Bel by proving that the food offerings left for the idol are actually consumed by the priests. He also kills a living dragon that the Babylonians worship as a god. As a result, Daniel is thrown into the lions’ den, but once again, he is miraculously delivered by God.

Why The Destruction of Bel and the Dragon Is Not Canonical: This story is filled with legendary elements that are not consistent with the historical narrative of Daniel. For example, the miraculous transportation of the prophet Habakkuk by an angel to bring food to Daniel in the lions’ den is highly exaggerated and belongs more to the realm of myth than to biblical prophecy. Such embellishments disqualify the story from being included in the canon of inspired Scripture.

1 and 2 Maccabees

First Maccabees

First Maccabees is a historical account of the Jewish revolt against the Seleucid Empire, particularly focusing on the actions of Judas Maccabeus and his brothers as they fought to liberate Israel from Hellenistic oppression. It provides a detailed account of the Jewish struggle for independence, covering events from the rise of Antiochus Epiphanes in 175 B.C.E. to the death of Simon Maccabeus in 134 B.C.E.

Why First Maccabees Is Not Canonical: While First Maccabees is a valuable historical document, it does not claim to be divinely inspired. It is written from a purely historical perspective, recounting military victories and the political struggles of the Jewish people. The text lacks the prophetic or theological elements that characterize canonical Scripture. Its historical value, while significant, does not elevate it to the level of inspired Scripture.

Second Maccabees

Second Maccabees covers much of the same period as First Maccabees but from a different perspective. It focuses on the persecution of the Jews under Antiochus Epiphanes and the rededication of the temple following its desecration. It includes accounts of martyrdom, miraculous events, and the importance of observing the Jewish faith in the face of persecution.

Why Second Maccabees Is Not Canonical: Second Maccabees contains several theological elements that are incompatible with the rest of Scripture. For example, it promotes the practice of praying for the dead, as seen in 2 Maccabees 12:45-46, where Judas Maccabeus offers sacrifices for the sins of the dead. This concept contradicts the biblical teaching that judgment follows death (Hebrews 9:27), and there is no opportunity for post-mortem redemption. Additionally, the style of the book is more in line with Hellenistic historiography, filled with rhetorical flourishes and embellishments. The writer explicitly states that he is summarizing the work of a certain Jason of Cyrene, which again disqualifies it from being considered inspired Scripture.

Internal and Theological Issues with the Apocrypha

While each of the Apocryphal books has its own unique content and style, they all share common issues that disqualify them from being included in the canon of Scripture. One of the primary issues is the lack of prophetic authority. Unlike the canonical books, which were written by prophets or those closely associated with prophetic figures, the Apocryphal books were written much later, during a time when the prophetic voice had ceased within Israel.

Additionally, many of the Apocryphal books contain theological errors or contradictions with the rest of Scripture. For example:

• The book of Tobit promotes superstition and magical remedies, such as using fish gall to heal blindness.
• The book of Wisdom introduces the idea of the immortality of the soul and the preexistence of souls, concepts derived from Greek philosophy rather than Hebrew tradition.
• 2 Maccabees promotes prayers for the dead, a practice that is not supported by the rest of Scripture.

Furthermore, the Apocryphal books often contain historical inaccuracies and contradictions. The book of Judith, for instance, incorrectly places Nebuchadnezzar as king of Assyria, when he was in fact the king of Babylon. The additions to Esther and Daniel are filled with fanciful details and embellishments that are foreign to the sober historical accounts found in the canonical books.

You May Also Enjoy

The Old Testament and Its Canon: Origin, Recognition, and the Rejection of the Apocrypha

About the Author

CLICK LINKED IMAGE TO VISIT ONLINE STORE

CLICK TO SCROLL THROUGH OUR BOOKS