APOCRYPHA BOOKS--- ARE THEY INSPIRED?

Apocrypha Books?

Are they Inspired?

SHOULD THEY BE CONSIDERED INSPIRED SCRIPTURE?        THE ROMAN CATHOLIC BIBLE CONTAINS SOME OF THEM!      The word apocrypha can mean, simply, a work of fiction or a far-fetched tale. When applied to books that are often mentioned alongside those in the Bible, however, apocrypha has a different connotation - that of "hidden" or "spurious."      The history of the term indicates that it sometimes referred to a body of religious, mystical, or philosophical teachings or practices with a private or secret meaning or purpose. It was considered difficult to understand except by those receiving the necessary knowledge or training. OLD TESTAMENT APOCRYPHA      In biblical literature, Apocrypha most often refers to writings judged by Protestants to be outside the accepted canon of Scripture. These 14 books (1 and 2 Esdras; Tobit, Judith, the rest of Esther, the Wisdom of Solomon; Ecclesiasticus; Baruch, with the Epistle of Jeremiah; the Song of the Three Holy Children; the History of Susannah; Bel and the Dragon; the Prayer of Manasses; 1 and 2 Maccabees) cover a wide variety of Jewish topics from the period between the Bible's Old and New Testaments. Written between 300 B.C. and A.D.100, they were at first prized, later tolerated, and finally excluded from the accepted canon of Scripture. The Douay, or Roman Catholic, Version of the Bible does induce them.      The OT apocryphal texts, originating mostly before the rise of Christianity, were regarded as canonical in the early church but contain no Christian passages. As the Gnostic and Hellenistic movements left the early church to pursue their own theology, those who adhered strictly to the truth of Christ and the apostles rejected the apocryphal writings and preserved the integrity of the sacred Scriptures for all who would follow in the truth of God's Word.      The Apocrypha, per se, is outside the Canon and considered neither divinely inspired nor as reliable as the canonical writings. It is, however, regarded worthy of study by the faithful and may fill in some historical gaps between Malachi and Matthew. Martin Luther wrote that, the apocryphal writings, while not sacred Scripture, are useful and good for reading.      When Greek was the common language in the Mediterranean region, the Hebrew Bible was beyond understanding for most of the population. For this reason, Jewish scholars produced a Greek translation of the Hebrew and Aramaic Old Testament. It came to be called the Septuagint.      That version incorporated a number of works, including the Apocrypha, that later the non-Hellenistic Jewish scholarship at the Council of Jamnia (A.D.90) identified as being outside the Hebrew canon.      In modern usage, Apocrypha is the term for Jewish books that are canonical for Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches but are not part of the authentic Hebrew Bible. When the Protestant churches returned to the Jewish canon (Hebrew Old Testament) during the Reformation (16th century), the Roman Catholic works became for the Protestants apocryphal, or non- canonical. On April 8, 1546, at the Council of Trent, the Roman Catholic Church declared most of the Apocrypha to be canonical and included it in its version of the Bible based on the Latin Vulgate text. NEW TESTAMENT APOCRYPHA      Just as a number of older Hebrew and Jewish writings were not included in the Old Testament canon, so it is with many books and letters of interest to Christians shortly after the time of Christ. Indeed, the church was invaded with numerous gospels, histories, epistles, and apocalypses beyond the 27 that were inspired and endorsed by the Spirit and gladly adopted by most believers in the first four centuries of the common era.      Canonicity refers to the eligibility of a writing to be included in the Bible.  The primary criteria for determining the New Testament canonicity for a writing in the first centuries of Christianity included 1) apostolicity, the quality of being produced by, or in the tradition of, one of the first apostles; genuine and authoritative; 2) true doctrine in harmony with other accepted books and letters; and 3) widespread geographical usage and acceptance. These criteria must all be satisfied together, then, for a book to be judged canonical and included in the Christian Scriptures.      Two factors were probably responsible for most of the writings not in the New Testament canon. First, there was understandable curiosity - the desire for Christians to have more data about the life of Jesus and the work of the apostles.      Second, there was the desire of those with heretical tendencies to foist their errors on believers with the supposed endorsement of Christ or His apostles. For this reason, movements such as Gnosticism and Montanism gave birth to a great body of spurious works allegedly written by a biblical figure. In the early days of the Christian faith, no orthodoxy had been established, and various parties, or factions, were vying for authoritative recognition in the young church. All sought through their writings, as through their preaching and missions, to win believers. Most of these works arose from sects that had been or would be declared heretical.      Most, but not all, of the New Testament apocryphal writings are either fraudulent or of obviously inferior or frivolous quality when compared to the 27 books regarded as New Testament canon. Pastor Jerry Morgan, Tulsa, OK                               ............... WHY NOT REGARD THE APOCRYPHA AS PART OF INSPIRED CANON?      1. While most of the 39 Old Testament books are quoted from repeatedly by Jesus and the apostles, the Apocrypha is not directly quoted in the New Testament.      2. The New Testament links itself directly with the end of the Old Testament prophets and does not lead us to look for other inspired writings to intervene between the two.      3. There is absence of inherent power and beauty in the Apocrypha compared to canonical writings. Apocryphal writers do not claim that the word of the Lord came to them, as do Moses and the prophets.      4. Unscriptural fables and doctrinal errors are found in the Apocrypha (prayers for the dead etc.). THE CANON OF SCRIPTURE      The word "canon" means simply a "straight rod" or "ruler" by which anything is measured. In the context of Scripture, the word refers to the collection of writings that forms the original and authoritative rule of faith and practice for the Christian church.            The Canon, then, is the set of books that becomes the rule of the church and the rule of truth for those who believe....is a study all its own. Here we can only summarize by saying that it happened under the direction of God to reveal and preserve His Word.....                               ............... The above article was published by the Bible Advocate magazine (December 2004). A publication of the Church of God (7th Day), Denver, CO. USA, website www.cog7.org                                .............. POST SCRIPT The idea and teaching by the Roman Catholic Church that it was THEY who canonized the New Testament, and only after many centuries of debate on the matter, is TOTALLY A FALSE DOCTRINE!! The late Dr. Ernest Martin wrote and published a book in 1984 called "THE ORIGINAL BIBLE RESTORED" which clearly shows from the New Testament itself that the canonizing of the books of the New Testament was already finalized and completed by the time John the apostle was writing and adding the book of Revelation to the other already accepted canonized books that are the true Scriptures of the New Testament.       Dr. Martin also shows in great detail how the canon of the Old Testament came to be what is today the Old Testament of the Jewish and Protestant world. I highly recommend this book by Dr. Ernest Martin if it is still being published. It was originally published by "FBR PUBLICATIONS" - Foundation for Biblical Research. I have no idea if they and Martin's books are still in existence Keith Hunt (January 2005)