PART 3: The Apocrypha and Other Illegitimate Documents.

The Roman Catholics contend that they are the exclusive preservers of the Bible, with the authority to determine which books should be in the O.T. or N.T., and the order in which they are to be placed. They also acknowledge that they have exercised due authority by adding the seven books of the Apocrypha and portions of three others to the O.T.

Some Catholic translations contain the following books, called the Apocrypha: Tobit, Judith, Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, and I and II Maccabees.

Besides these books, one portion is inserted in the middle of Daniel 3:1-30, titled, “Song of the Three Holy Children.” At the end of Daniel is an added chapter (13) called “Susana and the Elders.” Then is chapter 14, called “Bel and the Dragon.”

The word Apocrypha comes from the Greek and means “hidden” or “secret in origin.” In English, synonyms for apocryphal include words such as “unauthentic” and “ungenuine.” The very name of these books verifies their lack of authenticity!

The Apocryphal writings come from a mysterious beginning with a secret origin. With this in mind, notice the following comments in regard to the sharp contrast between the canonized Scriptures and apocryphal writings:

“Christianity as it springs from its Founder had no secret or esoteric teaching. It was essentially the revelation or manifestation of the truth of God.” The Apocryphal writings are further defined as “inconsistent elements existing side by side with the essential truths of Christianity” (Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th edit., Vol. 2, p. 176).

Actually, there are hundreds of other apocryphal writings, such as the “Gospel According to the Egyptians,” “Gospel of the Birth of Mary,” “The Apocalypse of the Virgin,” and on and on.

Most all the oldest known versions of apocryphal writing differ from each other. It is very rare to find any two that are identical.
Between 200 B.C. and A.D. 100, many apocryphal writings appeared among the Essene Jews. One of the most notorious of these spurious documents was the book of Enoch.

It should be noted that Jude 14 does not mention this book, but rather is quoting a prophecy by Enoch handed down by God’s servants from before the time of Noah.

The document called the Book of Enoch made an attempt to discredit God’s Sacred Calendar in the first century. It was summarily rejected by Jude and all the other apostles.

Another interesting fact pertaining to the book of Enoch is that even the Catholics reject it! In spite of such a questionable track record, some continue to wonder whether such apocryphal works might be inspired, as were the canonized Scriptures. The best solution to this issue is to ask: Did Christ and the apostles ever recognize them or quote from any books of the Apocrypha? Did they ever show any approval of them?

To answer this, there are 263 direct quotations of the O.T. found in the N.T. Beside this, there are 370 statements found in the N.T. which are references to passages in the O.T. In both the O.T. and N.T., there are no quotes and no allusions to any of the writings of the Apocrypha!

It is well documented that Essene Jews originated many apocryphal writings. It would be beneficial to learn more about the nature of the beliefs of these Jews.

The Encyclopedia Britannica informs us: “The Essenes were an exclusive society, distinguished from the rest of the Jewish nation in Palestine by an organization peculiar to themselves…They had fixed rules…and regulations for the conduct of their daily life even in its minutest details.

“Their membership could only be recruited from the outside world, as marriage and…[all association] with women were absolutely renounced…the tenets of the society were kept a profound secret, it is perfectly clear from the concurrent testimony of Philo and Josephus that they cultivated a kind of speculation, which not only accounts for their spiritual asceticism, but indicates a great deviation from the normal development of Judaism, and a profound sympathy with Greek philosophy, and probably also with Oriental ideas [emphasis ours]” (11th edit., Vol. 9, p. 779).

It is also interesting that this same article continues on the subject of the Essenes: “Their office-bearers were elected” (Ibid., p. 780).

Remember that I Timothy 4:1-3 categorizes forbidding to marry with doctrines of demons. The Essenes resorted to the fabrication of fictitious documents to justify the many doctrines of demons they adopted.

The Record of History

The Apocrypha is traced from the Vulgate of the Roman Catholic Church after the fifth century. From there, it was traced back to the Septuagint and on to Alexandrian influences—originating from a mixture of hybrid sources such as Samaritan and Essene writings.

The more devout Jews of the Dispersion accepted no other canon than the very Scriptures accepted by the Jews of Jerusalem and Judea. The following quote illustrates the exalted position of the canonized Scriptures even outside the area of Judea.

Philo, the Jewish philosopher of Alexandria (Egypt) explained why he “makes no quotations from the Apocrypha, and he gives not the slightest ground for the supposition that the Jews of Alexandria of his time were disposed to accept any of the books of the Apocrypha in their Canon of ‘Holy Scripture’” (Philo in Holy Scripture, Ryle, p. 33).

The law portion of the Greek Septuagint version of Alexandria (Egypt) was translated from the Samaritan Pentateuch rather than the official Jewish Version. This can be categorically proven by the existence of 2,000 places where the Septuagint disagrees with the official Jewish Version, but agrees perfectly with the Samaritan Pentateuch.

The Jews used in translating the Septuagint were “Samaritan Jews.” As late as the early A.D. 300s, the Apocrypha was not yet added to the Septuagint. These apocryphal writings were later added to the Septuagint version, which was already corrupted before these unwarranted additions.

In the fourth century (300s A.D.), at the Council of Laodicea, the Apocrypha was still excluded from the Scriptures (Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th edit., Vol. 16, p. 189).

In the year A.D. 384, renowned Roman Catholic scholar, Jerome, began translating the Latin Vulgate. He made his translation directly from the Hebrew (Ibid., Vol. 3, p. 881). This translation from the Hebrew excluded the Apocrypha, as Jerome had rejected it as being false.

Shortly afterward, at the Council of Carthage, Augustine, the Canaanite Bishop from Hippo, North Africa, led the way for the approval of the seven Apocryphal books. This was the first official “acceptance” of these questionable writings still rejected by many Roman Catholic scholars.

It was not until the Council of Trent (1563) that the Roman Catholics declared the Apocrypha to be “equal” with any of the books of the Bible. The Catholics intended to alienate the Protestants with this ruling and did so by declaring anyone who rejected the Apocrypha to be “anathema of Christ.”

Next Part Lost Books of the Bible?.

Back to How We Got the Bible

Back to By David C. Pack