Are The Apocrypha Inspired Scripture?
Understanding the Apocrypha: Are These Books Inspired Scripture?
The question of whether the Apocrypha—those books found in some editions of the Old Testament but not in the Hebrew Bible—are inspired Scripture has been debated for centuries. This study will explore the historical background, scriptural testimony, and theological considerations, all with a commitment to the authority of the Bible.
What Are the Apocryphal Books?
The term “Apocrypha” refers to a collection of books written primarily between the Old and New Testament periods. Examples include 1 and 2 Maccabees, Tobit, Judith, Wisdom of Solomon, and others. These works appear in the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Old Testament) and are included in Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Bibles, but not in the Jewish or most Protestant canons.
Historical Background
During the Reformation, the status of the Apocrypha was a major point of contention. The Protestant Reformers argued for the canon as recognized by the Jewish community—the 39 books of the Old Testament—while the Roman Catholic Church affirmed the inclusion of the Apocrypha (calling them “Deuterocanonical books”) at the Council of Trent in 1546.
Scriptural Evidence: What Does the Bible Say?
The primary test of inspiration is whether the books themselves claim divine authority and whether Jesus and the apostles recognized them as Scripture.
- The Hebrew Canon: Jesus affirmed the Jewish Scriptures as authoritative. He spoke of "the law of Moses, and the prophets, and the psalms" (Luke 24:44 ASV), a threefold division identical to the Hebrew Bible, which does not include the Apocrypha.
-
New Testament References: While the New Testament occasionally alludes to ideas or events found in the Apocrypha, it never quotes them as Scripture. In contrast, there are hundreds of direct quotations from the Old Testament recognized by the Jews. For instance:
Every scripture inspired of God is also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction which is in righteousness. - 2 Timothy 3:16 ASV
Paul is referring to the recognized Scriptures, which did not include the Apocrypha. - Jewish Testimony: The Jewish historian Josephus (1st century AD) wrote that the Jews had only 22 books (corresponding to the 39 books in the Protestant Old Testament), and he explicitly stated that no other books were considered equally authoritative (Against Apion 1.8).
Theological Considerations
From a theological perspective, the marks of inspiration include prophetic authority, consistency with previously revealed truth, and fulfillment of prophecy. The Apocryphal books generally do not claim prophetic status, nor do they contain fulfilled prophecies. Some even contain historical or theological inconsistencies with the rest of Scripture.
For example, in 1 Maccabees it is stated: "So there was great distress in Israel, such as had not been since the time that prophets ceased to appear among them." This indicates the authors themselves did not view their writings as prophetic.
Value of the Apocrypha
While the Apocryphal books are not considered inspired Scripture, many Christians acknowledge their historical and literary value. They provide helpful background to the intertestamental period, and can be read for edification and understanding of Jewish history and thought, but not for establishing doctrine:
Add thou not unto his words, Lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar. - Proverbs 30:6 ASV
Summary and Mainstream Evangelical Position
The mainstream Evangelical position is that the Apocrypha are not inspired Scripture. The canon of the Old Testament is determined by the books recognized by Jesus and the apostles, and these do not include the Apocrypha. Salvation, doctrine, and the Christian life are to be based solely on the inspired, inerrant Word of God:
Sanctify them in the truth: thy word is truth. - John 17:17 ASV
Key Takeaways
- The Apocrypha are not included in the Hebrew Bible or quoted as Scripture in the New Testament.
- They do not claim prophetic inspiration and sometimes contain teachings inconsistent with the rest of Scripture.
- While valuable for historical insight, they are not authoritative for doctrine or salvation.