Apocrypha - Recipe for imitation "Bible"
Start with a pinch of Homer, add two cups of scriptural interpretation, slowly pour in some secret ingredients and blend with copious amounts of wild imagination. Chop into 11 parts (more depending on your appetite), cook on low heat, and let simmer for 1500 years. Serve along with Scripture.
This recipe for imitation Bible is known as the Apocrypha. The Roman Catholic Church serves it as main fare in their version of the Scriptures. Before you indulge in this literary concoction, first consider the ingredients. Apocrypha means “things hidden or concealed.” It is from the Greek word apokryphos and it concerns writings that at first were not read publicly. Later, Apocrypha came to be understood as spurious and uncanonical writings.
In common usage, Apocrypha refers to the 11 books (some say 14) made a part of some Bibles by the Roman Catholic Church at the Council of Trent in 1546. This council itself dropped three of the apocryphal books that had been admitted at the Council of Carthage in 397. Those dropped were Prayer of Manasses and 1 and 2 Esdras. All three had appeared for 1,100 years in the Latin Vulgate version of the Bible, completed by Jerome in 405.
The Apocrypha was written between the third and first centuries B.C.E. in the period between the Old and New Testaments. Because of that, some Bibles place the Apocrypha between their Old and New Testament pages.
The books generally recognized as constituting the Apocrypha are: 1, 2 Maccabees; Prayer of Manasses; 1, 2 Esdras; Tobit; Judith; Wisdom; Ecclesiasticus (a.k.a. Sirach); Baruch and Epistle of Jeremy; supplements to Esther and three additions to Daniel include: The Song of the Three Children, Susanna and the Elders, the
Destruction of Bel and the Dragon; and the Letters of Jeremiah.
Jews Rejected Apocrypha
The trend toward including these works as part of the Scriptures was initiated by Augustine in 354 to 430. Although acknowledging some of the historical values of the books, Augustine admitted there was a definite difference between these “outside books” and the Inspired Word.
These spurious works were found in the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament. This fact alone gives no credence to the argument that the Apocrypha was part of the inspired canon, because no original copies of the Septuagint exist to support such a position. In fact, the Jewish Council of Jamnia in 90 C.E. specifically excluded the Apocrypha from the Hebrew canon of Inspired Scripture.
It was the Jews who were entrusted with preserving the Old Testament Bible. Paul testified to that fact, “What advantage then has the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision? Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of Yahweh,” Romans 3:1-2. By oracles Paul meant the actual words of Yahweh, given to Moses and the prophets, Acts 7:38.
No other literary work has been preserved better through the ages than the Bible. The Scribes were meticulous in their dedication to transcribe Scripture exactly. If there were any authenticity to the Apocrypha the Jews would have recognized it. On the contrary. They rejected it.
Neither was any stamp of approval given by Josephus, the first century historian. He said, “For there are not with us myriads of books, discordant and discrepant, but only two and twenty (equivalent to the 39 books of Hebrew Scripture), comprising the history of all time, which are justly accredited.”
Josephus acknowledged that the Hebrew Canon was complete following the books of Nehemiah and Malachi in the 5th century B.C.E. He wrote, “From the time of Artaxerxes up to our own everything has been recorded, but the records have not accounted equally worthy of credit with those written before them, because the exact succession of prophets ceased.” The Bible itself is testimony to the great lengths Yahweh went to preserve the Scriptures.
Jeremiah had been prophesying for 23 years in the 36th chapter of his book. Yahweh commanded him to write his prophecies in a book to be read in the synagogue. When King Jehoiakim heard some of the prophecies he threw the scroll into a fire. With the help of a scribe, Jeremiah rewrote the entire book through Yahweh’s inspiration. If the apocryphal books were to be part of the Hebrew Canon, why is not a single one of them quoted in the New Testament? There are hundreds of quotations of the Old Testament included in the New, yet not one original quotation from one of the apocryphal books is found.
Books with Flaws
The Bible contains no errors. Any mistakes found in modern translations are by translators or editors. Most did not have a grasp of Yahweh’s entire plan of salvation and didn’t understand how the Bible complements itself. The mere historical and literary accuracy of Scripture is testimony to holy inspiration.
The same is not true of the Apocrypha. The best evidence for the bogus nature of the Apocrypha is found in the books themselves. Two of the writers imply that the works are not inspired. In the prologue to Ecclesiasticus (Sirach), we find, ”...my grandfather Jesus, after devoting himself especially to the reading of the law and the prophets and the other books of our fathers, and after acquiring considerable proficiency in them, was himself led to write wisdom...” We get the idea of a cut-and- paste job in the books of Maccabees. From 2 Maccabees 2:25 and 28 we discover this admission, “We have aimed to please those who wish to read, to make it easy for those who are inclined to memorize, and to profit all readers...leaving the responsibility for exact details to the compiler, while devoting our effort to arriving at the outlines of condensation.”
Lacking a prophetic element, the Apocrypha at times contradict the Bible and even themselves. They are full of historical and geological inaccuracies as well as errors in fact and mistakes in time. Each of these mistakes is witness to the fallible men who wrote them.
Their Errors Are Legion
Let’s take a look at a few of the Apocryphal books and discover why they are classified as uninspired.
The Book of Tobit or Tobias is about a pious Jew who is deported to Nineveh. Blinded by bird dung, he sends his son Tobias to collect a debt. During the journey Tobias acquires the gall of a fish that restores his father’s sight.
Estimated to be from the third century B.C.E., Tobit has a serious chronological flaw, among other problems. It says Tobit saw the revolt of the northern tribes (997 B.C.E.) and was on the scene when the tribe of Naphtali was deported to Ninevah (740 B.C.E.). That would mean he lived more than 257 years. But Tobit 14:1-3 gives his age as 102 when he died.
The fact of two authors brings confusion to the Book of Baruch. The first five chapters are made to look as if Baruch wrote them. The sixth chapter is presented as a letter written by Jeremiah. Baruch is said to live in Babylon (1:1, 2) although the Bible says he went to Egypt. In his preface to the Book of Jeremiah, Jerome said, “I have not thought it worthwhile to translate the Book of Baruch.”
In Judith events are said to have occurred during the reign of Nebuchadnezzar who is called the king “who reigned over the Assyrians in the great city of Ninevah,” Judith 1:1, 7. The fact is that Nebuchadnezzar was king of Babylon and never reigned in Ninevah because Ninevah was destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar’s father, Nabopolassar. Furthermore, the introduction to the Jerusalem Bible notes that the itinerary of officer Holofernes is a “geographical impossibility.”
A case of mistaken authorship is found in Wisdom. Certain texts in this book present Solomon as its author (9:7, 8, 12). The Jerusalem Bible states that this is a “literary device,” because Wisdom cites passages of Scripture written centuries after Solomon died. Also in Wisdom are advanced the erroneous doctrines of the immortality of the soul (2:23; 3:2, 4) as well as the preexistence of human souls, 8:19, 20 and 9:15. Wisdom of Solomon (11:17) states that G-d “created the world out of formless matter.” Tobit and Judith contain many historical, chronological, and geographical errors.
Perhaps the most valuable of the Old Testament Apocrypha are I and II Maccabees. These two books arebasically historical accounts of the Jewish struggle for independence during the second century B.C.E. They concern the exploits of a priest named Mattathias and his five sons who revolted against Antiochus Epiphanes in his attempt to destroy the Jews and their religion. The works are characteristically written from the human standpoint and did not form part of the inspired Canon.
New Forgeries Flourish
With the advent of the New Testament, new apocryphal works popped up like blossoms in April. There are about 50 spurious “gospels” besides many apocryphal Acts and Epistles. Written mostly beginning in the second century, these works imitated the Evangels, Acts, Letters of Paul and Revelation.
They were partly an attempt to fill in the gaps purposely left open by the inspired New Testament writers. For example, two books purport to detail the events of Yahshua’s youth, information the Bible is purposely silent on. They picture Him as a capricious child performing miracles at whim with supernatural powers.
Of the later apocryphal works, The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible says, “Many of them are trivial, some are highly theatrical, some are disgusting, even loathsome.” These imitation works were excluded from the New Testament writings in the same way the Hebrew Canon was kept pure of the older Apocrypha.
The Apocrypha are the source of some of the dogmas of the Roman Catholic Church. Here is a glimpse of some of the spurious works appearing after the New Testament’s advent:
• Gospel of Nicodemus. A purely imaginary report on the trial of Yahshua to the emperor Tiberius (2nd or 5th century).
• Passing of Mary. Silly miracles, ending with the removal of her “spotless and precious body” to Paradise. Written in the 4th century with the rise of virgin worship.
• Nativity of Mary. Deliberate forgery of the 6th century to further worship of the Virgin Mary. Stories about daily visits of angels to Mary. Immensely popular as papacy grew.
• The Gospel of the Egyptians. Imaginary conversations between Yahshua and Salome (130-150)
• Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew. (note the name!) A 5th century forged translation of Matthew, abounding with the supposed childhood miracles of Yahshua.
• Gospel of Thomas. A 2nd century work on Yahshua’s life from the 5th to the 12th year. Makes him a miracle worker to satisfy his boyish whims.
• Apocalypse of Peter. Purported visions of heaven and hell granted to Peter. Called spurious by Eusebius.
Bible’s Truth Preserved
With all the attempts to imitate the Bible, the holy inspiration of Scripture is borne out time after time. With each archaeological discovery, the Bible and its authenticity stand durable. The Psalmist wrote, “The statutes of Yahweh are right, rejoicing the heart; the commandment of Yahweh is pure, enlightening the eyes. The fear of Yahweh is clean, enduring forever: the judgments of Yahweh are true and righteous altogether,” Psalm 19:8 and 9.
Henry Halley, in his Bible Handbook, sums up the Bible’s veracity beautifully: “If you assume that the Bible is just what it appears to be, accept the books as we have them in the Bible as units, study them to know their contents, you will find there a unity of thought indicating that one mind inspired the writing and compilation of the whole series of books. That it bears on its face the stamp of its author. [Yahweh] Himself superintended and directed and dictated the writing of the Bible books, with the human authors so completely under His control that the writing was [Yahweh’s] writing. The Bible is [Yahweh’s] Word, in a sense that no other book in the world is [Yahweh’s] Word.”
Eight Reasons Why the Apocrypha
Are Not Inspired Scripture
• Unlike other Scriptures, none of the apocryphal writers claims to be inspired.
• Unlike the Old Testament, the Apocrypha are nowhere quoted in the New.
• The Apocrypha are tainted with errors in fact and time, exposing non-inspiration.
• The Apocrypha contain fabulous statements which not only contradict the “canonical” scriptures but also themselves. For example, in the two Books of Maccabees, Antiochus Epiphanes is made to die three different deaths in three different places.
• The Apocrypha include doctrines in variance with the Bible, such as prayers for the dead, sinless perfection, and immortality of the soul.
• The apocryphal books were never acknowledged as sacred scriptures by the Jews, custodians of the Hebrew Scriptures. In fact, the Jewish people rejected and destroyed the Apocrypha after the overthrow of Jerusalem in 70 CE.
• Not one of the apocryphal books is written in the Hebrew language, which was used by all the inspired writers of the Old Testament. All apocryphal books are in Greek, except one which exists only in Latin.
• The apocryphal books were not permitted among the sacred books during the first four centuries of the common era.
www.yrm.org
Apocrypha - as found in Wikipedia:
For the section found in some bibles called Apocrypha, see Biblical apocrypha. For the X-Files episode, see Apocrypha (The X-Files)."apocryphal" redirects here. For the adjective, see wiktionary:apocryphal.The term apocrypha is used with various meanings, including "hidden", "esoteric", "spurious", "of questionable authenticity", and "Christian texts that are not canonical".
The word is originally Greek (ἀπόκρυφα) and means "those having been hidden away". Specifically, ἀπόκρυφα is the neuter plural of ἀπόκρυφος, a participle derived from the verb ἀποκρύπτω [infinitive: ἀποκρύπτειν], "to hide something away."[1]
The general term is usually applied to the books that the Christian Church considered useful but not divinely inspired. As such, it is misleading to refer to the Gospel according to the Hebrews or Gnosticwritings as apocryphal, because they would not be classified in the same category by orthodox believers. Non-canonical books are texts of uncertain authenticity, or writings where the work is seriously questioned. Given that different denominations have different beliefs about what constitutes canonical scripture, there are several versions of the apocrypha.
During 16th-century controversies about the biblical canon, the word acquired a negative connotation, and has become a synonym for "spurious" or "false". This usage usually involves fictitious or legendary accounts that are plausible enough to be commonly considered true. For example, Laozi's alleged authorship of the Tao Te Ching, Napoleon Bonaparte's self-coronation rather than at the hands of Pope Pius VII, and the Parson Weems account of George Washington and the cherry tree, are all considered apocryphal.
There is disagreement about how to depict a modern equivalent term to the ancient word apocrypha. Some would argue that it was like "top secret government files". Thus, in ancient China, "the divine chapters and esoteric charts are certainly to be held in the Metal Bound Box and stored in the Stone Room ... never been recorded in formal documents":[2] "The description indicates that these esoteric ... apocryphal writings were well-kept in the Southern Qi imperial library without publication in a common catalogue."[3] (Their not being mentioned in the public catalogue would indicate their being accessible only to government agents having a "top secret" security-clearance.)
However, although some would like to promote conspiracy, the word simply refers to the author or authenticity which has not been substantiated and so is hidden.
Contents [hide][edit]Denotation and connotationApocrypha has evolved in meaning somewhat, and its associated implications have ranged from positive to pejorative. Apocrypha, according to Merriam-Webster Dictionary, means "books included in the Septuagint and Vulgate but excluded from the Jewish and Protestant canons of the Old Testament."[4]
[edit]Esoteric writingsThe word "apocryphal" (ἀπόκρυφος) was first applied, in a positive sense, to writings which were kept secret because they were the vehicles of esoteric knowledge considered too profound or too sacred to be disclosed to anyone other than the initiated. For example, it is used in this sense to describe A Holy and Secret Book of Moses, called Eighth, or Moyseos holy books citing esoteric eighth St (Μωυσέως ἱερὰ βίβλος ἀπόκρυφος ἐπικαλούμενη ὀγδόη ἢ ἁγία). This is a text taken from a Leiden papyrus of the third or fourth century AD. The text may be as old as the first century, but other proof of age has not been found. In a similar vein, the disciples of the Gnostic Prodicus boasted that they possessed the secret (ἀπόκρυφα) books of Zoroaster. The term in general enjoyed high consideration among theGnostics (see Acts of Thomas, 10, 27, 44).[5]
[edit]Writings of questionable value"Apocrypha" was also applied to writings that were hidden not because of their divinity but because of their questionable value to the church. Many in Protestant traditions cite Revelation 22:18-19 as a potential curse for those who attach any canonical authority to extra-biblical writings such as the Apocrypha. However, a strict exegesis of this text would indicate it was meant for only the Book of Revelation. Rv.22:18f. (TNIV) states: "I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this scroll: If any one of you adds anything to them, God will add to you the plagues described in this scroll. And if any one of you takes words away from this scroll of prophecy, God will take away from you your share in the tree of life and in the Holy City, which are described in this scroll." In this case, if one holds to a strict hermeneutic, the "words of the prophecy" do not refer to the Bible as a whole but to Jesus' Revelation to John. Origen, in Commentaries on Matthew, distinguishes between writings which were read by the churches and apocryphal writings: γραφὴ μὴ φερομένη μέν ἒν τοῖς κοινοῖς καὶ δεδημοσιευμένοις βιβλίοις εἰκὸς δ' ὅτι ἒν ἀποκρύφοις φερομένη (writing not found on the common and published books in one hand, actually found on the secret ones on the other).[6] The meaning of αποκρυφος is here practically equivalent to "excluded from the public use of the church", and prepares the way for an even less favourable use of the word.[5]
[edit]Spurious writingsIn general use, the word "apocrypha" came to mean "false, spurious, bad, or heretical." This meaning also appears in Origen's prologue to his commentary on the Song of Songs, of which only the Latintranslation survives: De scripturis his, quae appellantur apocryphae, pro eo quod multa in iis corrupta et contra fidem veram inveniuntur a majoribus tradita non placuit iis dari locum nec admitti ad auctoritatem.[5] "Concerning these scriptures, which are called apocryphal, for the reason that many things are found in them corrupt and against the true faith handed down by the elders, it has pleased them that they not be given a place nor be admitted to authority."
[edit]Other meaningsOther uses of apocrypha developed over the history of Western Christianity. The Gelasian Decree refers to religious works by church fathers Eusebius, Tertullian and Clement of Alexandria as apocrypha.Augustine defined the word as meaning simply "obscurity of origin," implying that any book of unknown authorship or questionable authenticity would be considered as apocrypha. On the other hand, Jerome(in Protogus Galeatus) declared that all books outside the Hebrew canon were apocryphal.[5] In practice, Jerome treated some books outside the Hebrew canon as if they were canonical, and the Western Church did not accept Jerome's definition of apocrypha, instead retaining the word's prior meaning (see: Deuterocanon). As a result, various church authorities labeled different books as apocrypha, treating them with varying levels of regard.
Some apocryphal books were included in the Septuagint with little distinction made between them and the rest of the Old Testament. Origen, Clement and others cited some apocryphal books as "scripture," "divine scripture," "inspired," and the like. On the other hand, teachers connected with Palestine and familiar with the Hebrew canon excluded from the canon all of the Old Testament not found there. This view is reflected in the canon of Melito of Sardis, and in the prefaces and letters of Jerome.[5] A third view was that the books were not as valuable as the canonical scriptures of the Hebrewcollection, but were of value for moral uses, as introductory texts for new converts from paganism, and to be read in congregations. They were referred to as "ecclesiastical" works by Rufinus.[5]
These three opinions regarding the apocryphal books prevailed until the Protestant Reformation, when the idea of what constitutes canon became a matter of primary concern for Roman Catholics andProtestants alike. In 1546 the Catholic Council of Trent reconfirmed the canon of Augustine, dating to the second and third centuries, declaring "He is also to be anathema who does not receive these entire books, with all their parts, as they have been accustomed to be read in the Catholic Church, and are found in the ancient editions of the Latin Vulgate, as sacred and canonical." The whole of the books in question, with the exception of 1 Esdras and 2 Esdras and the Prayer of Manasseh, were declared canonical at Trent.[5] The Protestants, in comparison, were diverse in their opinion of the deuterocanon. Some considered them divinely inspired, others rejected them. Anglicans took a position between the Catholic Church and the Protestant Churches; they kept them as Christian intertestamental readings and a part of the Bible, but no doctrine should be based on them. John Wycliffe, a 14th century Christian Humanist, had declared in his biblical translation that "whatever book is in the Old Testament besides these twenty-five shall be set among the apocrypha, that is, without authority or belief."[5] Nevertheless, his translation of the Bible included the apocrypha and the Epistle of the Loadiceans.[7]
The respect accorded to apocryphal books varied between Protestant denominations. In both the German (1534) and English (1535) translations of the Bible, the apocrypha are published in a separate section from the other books, although the Lutheran and Anglican lists are different. In some editions (like the Westminster), readers were warned that these books were not "to be any otherwise approved or made use of than other human writings." A milder distinction was expressed elsewhere, such as in the "argument" introducing them in the Geneva Bible, and in the Sixth Article of the Church of England, where it is said that "the other books the church doth read for example of life and instruction of manners," though not to establish doctrine.[5]
According to the Orthodox Anglican Church:
On the other hand, the Anglican Communion emphatically maintains that the Apocrypha is part of the Bible and is to be read with respect by her members. Two of the hymns used in the American Prayer Book office of Morning Prayer, the Benedictus es and Benedicite, are taken from the Apocrypha. One of the offertory sentences in Holy Communion comes from an apocryphal book (Tob. 4: 8-9). Lessons from the Apocrypha are regularly appointed to be read in the daily, Sunday, and special services of Morning and Evening Prayer. There are altogether 111 such lessons in the latest revised American Prayer Book Lectionary [The books used are: II Esdras, Tobit, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, Three Holy Children, and I Maccabees.] The position of the Church is best summarized in the words of Article Six of the Thirty-nine Articles: “In the name of Holy Scripture we do understand those canonical Books of the Old and New Testament, of whose authority there was never any doubt in the Church… And the other Books (as Hierome [St. Jerome] saith) the Church doth read for example of life and instruction of manners; but yet doth it not apply them to establish any doctrine…”—[citation needed][edit]Texts[edit]JudaismMain article: Jewish apocryphaAlthough traditional rabbinical Judaism insists on the exclusive canonization of the current 24 books in the Tanakh, it also claims to have an oral law handed down from Moses. The Sadducees - unlike thePharisees but like the Samaritans - seem to have maintained an earlier and smaller number of texts as canonical, preferring to hold to only what was written in the Law of Moses[8] (making most of the presently accepted canon, both Jewish and Christian, apocryphal in their eyes). Certain circles in Judaism, such as the Essenes in Judea and the Therapeutae in Egypt, were said to have a secret literature (see Dead Sea scrolls). Other traditions maintained different customs regarding canonicity.[9] The Ethiopic Jews, for instance, seem to have retained a spread of canonical texts similar to the EthiopianOrthodox Christians,[10] cf Encyclopaedia Judaica, Vol 6, p 1147. A large part of this literature consisted of the apocalypses. Based on prophecies, these apocalyptic books were not considered scripture by all, but rather part of a literary form that flourished from 200 BC to AD 100.[citation needed]
[edit]ChristianityMain article: Biblical apocryphaDuring the birth of Christianity, some of the Jewish apocrypha that dealt with the coming of the Messianic kingdom became popular in the rising Jewish-Christian communities. Occasionally these writings were changed or added to, but on the whole it was found sufficient to reinterpret them as conforming to a Christian viewpoint. Christianity eventually gave birth to new apocalyptic works, some of which were derived from traditional Jewish sources. Some of the Jewish apocrypha were part of the ordinary religious literature of the early Christians. This was not strange, as the large majority of Old Testament references in the New Testament are taken from the Greek Septuagint, which is the source of the deuterocanonical books[11] as well as most of the other biblical apocrypha.[12]
Slightly varying collections of additional Books (called deuterocanonical by the Roman Catholic Church) form part of the Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox canons.
The Book of Enoch is included in the biblical canon only of the Oriental Orthodox churches of Ethiopia and Eritrea. The Epistle of Jude quotes the book of Enoch, and some believe the use of this book also appears in the four gospels and 1 Peter. The genuineness and inspiration of Enoch were believed in by the writer of the Epistle of Barnabas, Irenaeus, Tertullian and Clement of Alexandria and much of the early church. The epistles of Paul and the gospels also show influences from the Book of Jubilees, which is part of the Ethiopian canon, as well as the Assumption of Moses and the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, which are included in no biblical canon.
The high position which some apocryphal books occupied in the first two centuries was undermined by a variety of influences in the Christian church. All claims to the possession of a secret tradition (as held by many Gnostic sects) were denied by the influential theologians like Irenaeus and Tertullian, the timeframe of true inspiration was limited to the apostolic age, and universal acceptance by the church was required as proof of apostolic authorship. As these principles gained currency, books deemed apocryphal tended to become regarded as spurious and heretical writings, though books now considered deuterocanonical have been used in liturgy and theology from the first century to the present.
[edit]GnosticismMain article: New Testament apocryphaNew Testament apocrypha—books similar to those in the New Testament but almost universally rejected by Catholics, Orthodox and Protestants—include several gospels and lives of apostles. Some were written by early Jewish Christians (see the Gospel according to the Hebrews). Others of these were produced by Gnostic authors or members of other groups later defined as heterodox. Many texts believed lost for centuries were unearthed in the 19th and 20th centuries, producing lively speculation about their importance in early Christianity among religious scholars, while many others survive only in the form of quotations from them in other writings; for some, no more than the title is known. Artists and theologians have drawn upon the New Testament apocrypha for such matters as the names of Dismas andGestas and details about the Three Wise Men. The first explicit mention of the perpetual virginity of Mary is found in the pseudepigraphical Infancy Gospel of James.
The Gnostic tradition was a prolific source of apocryphal gospels. While these writings borrowed the characteristic poetic features of apocalyptic literature from Judaism, Gnostic sects largely insisted on allegorical interpretations based on a secret apostolic tradition. With them, these apocryphal books were highly esteemed. A well-known Gnostic apocryphal book is the Gospel of Thomas, the only complete text of which was found in the Egyptian town of Nag Hammadi in 1945. The Gospel of Judas, a Gnostic gospel, also received much media attention when it was reconstructed in 2006.
Roman Catholics and Orthodox Christians as well as Protestants generally agree on the canon of the New Testament. The Ethiopian Orthodox have in the past also included I & II Clement, and Shepherd of Hermas in their New Testament canon.
[edit]See also
The word is originally Greek (ἀπόκρυφα) and means "those having been hidden away". Specifically, ἀπόκρυφα is the neuter plural of ἀπόκρυφος, a participle derived from the verb ἀποκρύπτω [infinitive: ἀποκρύπτειν], "to hide something away."[1]
The general term is usually applied to the books that the Christian Church considered useful but not divinely inspired. As such, it is misleading to refer to the Gospel according to the Hebrews or Gnosticwritings as apocryphal, because they would not be classified in the same category by orthodox believers. Non-canonical books are texts of uncertain authenticity, or writings where the work is seriously questioned. Given that different denominations have different beliefs about what constitutes canonical scripture, there are several versions of the apocrypha.
During 16th-century controversies about the biblical canon, the word acquired a negative connotation, and has become a synonym for "spurious" or "false". This usage usually involves fictitious or legendary accounts that are plausible enough to be commonly considered true. For example, Laozi's alleged authorship of the Tao Te Ching, Napoleon Bonaparte's self-coronation rather than at the hands of Pope Pius VII, and the Parson Weems account of George Washington and the cherry tree, are all considered apocryphal.
There is disagreement about how to depict a modern equivalent term to the ancient word apocrypha. Some would argue that it was like "top secret government files". Thus, in ancient China, "the divine chapters and esoteric charts are certainly to be held in the Metal Bound Box and stored in the Stone Room ... never been recorded in formal documents":[2] "The description indicates that these esoteric ... apocryphal writings were well-kept in the Southern Qi imperial library without publication in a common catalogue."[3] (Their not being mentioned in the public catalogue would indicate their being accessible only to government agents having a "top secret" security-clearance.)
However, although some would like to promote conspiracy, the word simply refers to the author or authenticity which has not been substantiated and so is hidden.
Contents [hide][edit]Denotation and connotationApocrypha has evolved in meaning somewhat, and its associated implications have ranged from positive to pejorative. Apocrypha, according to Merriam-Webster Dictionary, means "books included in the Septuagint and Vulgate but excluded from the Jewish and Protestant canons of the Old Testament."[4]
[edit]Esoteric writingsThe word "apocryphal" (ἀπόκρυφος) was first applied, in a positive sense, to writings which were kept secret because they were the vehicles of esoteric knowledge considered too profound or too sacred to be disclosed to anyone other than the initiated. For example, it is used in this sense to describe A Holy and Secret Book of Moses, called Eighth, or Moyseos holy books citing esoteric eighth St (Μωυσέως ἱερὰ βίβλος ἀπόκρυφος ἐπικαλούμενη ὀγδόη ἢ ἁγία). This is a text taken from a Leiden papyrus of the third or fourth century AD. The text may be as old as the first century, but other proof of age has not been found. In a similar vein, the disciples of the Gnostic Prodicus boasted that they possessed the secret (ἀπόκρυφα) books of Zoroaster. The term in general enjoyed high consideration among theGnostics (see Acts of Thomas, 10, 27, 44).[5]
[edit]Writings of questionable value"Apocrypha" was also applied to writings that were hidden not because of their divinity but because of their questionable value to the church. Many in Protestant traditions cite Revelation 22:18-19 as a potential curse for those who attach any canonical authority to extra-biblical writings such as the Apocrypha. However, a strict exegesis of this text would indicate it was meant for only the Book of Revelation. Rv.22:18f. (TNIV) states: "I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this scroll: If any one of you adds anything to them, God will add to you the plagues described in this scroll. And if any one of you takes words away from this scroll of prophecy, God will take away from you your share in the tree of life and in the Holy City, which are described in this scroll." In this case, if one holds to a strict hermeneutic, the "words of the prophecy" do not refer to the Bible as a whole but to Jesus' Revelation to John. Origen, in Commentaries on Matthew, distinguishes between writings which were read by the churches and apocryphal writings: γραφὴ μὴ φερομένη μέν ἒν τοῖς κοινοῖς καὶ δεδημοσιευμένοις βιβλίοις εἰκὸς δ' ὅτι ἒν ἀποκρύφοις φερομένη (writing not found on the common and published books in one hand, actually found on the secret ones on the other).[6] The meaning of αποκρυφος is here practically equivalent to "excluded from the public use of the church", and prepares the way for an even less favourable use of the word.[5]
[edit]Spurious writingsIn general use, the word "apocrypha" came to mean "false, spurious, bad, or heretical." This meaning also appears in Origen's prologue to his commentary on the Song of Songs, of which only the Latintranslation survives: De scripturis his, quae appellantur apocryphae, pro eo quod multa in iis corrupta et contra fidem veram inveniuntur a majoribus tradita non placuit iis dari locum nec admitti ad auctoritatem.[5] "Concerning these scriptures, which are called apocryphal, for the reason that many things are found in them corrupt and against the true faith handed down by the elders, it has pleased them that they not be given a place nor be admitted to authority."
[edit]Other meaningsOther uses of apocrypha developed over the history of Western Christianity. The Gelasian Decree refers to religious works by church fathers Eusebius, Tertullian and Clement of Alexandria as apocrypha.Augustine defined the word as meaning simply "obscurity of origin," implying that any book of unknown authorship or questionable authenticity would be considered as apocrypha. On the other hand, Jerome(in Protogus Galeatus) declared that all books outside the Hebrew canon were apocryphal.[5] In practice, Jerome treated some books outside the Hebrew canon as if they were canonical, and the Western Church did not accept Jerome's definition of apocrypha, instead retaining the word's prior meaning (see: Deuterocanon). As a result, various church authorities labeled different books as apocrypha, treating them with varying levels of regard.
Some apocryphal books were included in the Septuagint with little distinction made between them and the rest of the Old Testament. Origen, Clement and others cited some apocryphal books as "scripture," "divine scripture," "inspired," and the like. On the other hand, teachers connected with Palestine and familiar with the Hebrew canon excluded from the canon all of the Old Testament not found there. This view is reflected in the canon of Melito of Sardis, and in the prefaces and letters of Jerome.[5] A third view was that the books were not as valuable as the canonical scriptures of the Hebrewcollection, but were of value for moral uses, as introductory texts for new converts from paganism, and to be read in congregations. They were referred to as "ecclesiastical" works by Rufinus.[5]
These three opinions regarding the apocryphal books prevailed until the Protestant Reformation, when the idea of what constitutes canon became a matter of primary concern for Roman Catholics andProtestants alike. In 1546 the Catholic Council of Trent reconfirmed the canon of Augustine, dating to the second and third centuries, declaring "He is also to be anathema who does not receive these entire books, with all their parts, as they have been accustomed to be read in the Catholic Church, and are found in the ancient editions of the Latin Vulgate, as sacred and canonical." The whole of the books in question, with the exception of 1 Esdras and 2 Esdras and the Prayer of Manasseh, were declared canonical at Trent.[5] The Protestants, in comparison, were diverse in their opinion of the deuterocanon. Some considered them divinely inspired, others rejected them. Anglicans took a position between the Catholic Church and the Protestant Churches; they kept them as Christian intertestamental readings and a part of the Bible, but no doctrine should be based on them. John Wycliffe, a 14th century Christian Humanist, had declared in his biblical translation that "whatever book is in the Old Testament besides these twenty-five shall be set among the apocrypha, that is, without authority or belief."[5] Nevertheless, his translation of the Bible included the apocrypha and the Epistle of the Loadiceans.[7]
The respect accorded to apocryphal books varied between Protestant denominations. In both the German (1534) and English (1535) translations of the Bible, the apocrypha are published in a separate section from the other books, although the Lutheran and Anglican lists are different. In some editions (like the Westminster), readers were warned that these books were not "to be any otherwise approved or made use of than other human writings." A milder distinction was expressed elsewhere, such as in the "argument" introducing them in the Geneva Bible, and in the Sixth Article of the Church of England, where it is said that "the other books the church doth read for example of life and instruction of manners," though not to establish doctrine.[5]
According to the Orthodox Anglican Church:
On the other hand, the Anglican Communion emphatically maintains that the Apocrypha is part of the Bible and is to be read with respect by her members. Two of the hymns used in the American Prayer Book office of Morning Prayer, the Benedictus es and Benedicite, are taken from the Apocrypha. One of the offertory sentences in Holy Communion comes from an apocryphal book (Tob. 4: 8-9). Lessons from the Apocrypha are regularly appointed to be read in the daily, Sunday, and special services of Morning and Evening Prayer. There are altogether 111 such lessons in the latest revised American Prayer Book Lectionary [The books used are: II Esdras, Tobit, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, Three Holy Children, and I Maccabees.] The position of the Church is best summarized in the words of Article Six of the Thirty-nine Articles: “In the name of Holy Scripture we do understand those canonical Books of the Old and New Testament, of whose authority there was never any doubt in the Church… And the other Books (as Hierome [St. Jerome] saith) the Church doth read for example of life and instruction of manners; but yet doth it not apply them to establish any doctrine…”—[citation needed][edit]Texts[edit]JudaismMain article: Jewish apocryphaAlthough traditional rabbinical Judaism insists on the exclusive canonization of the current 24 books in the Tanakh, it also claims to have an oral law handed down from Moses. The Sadducees - unlike thePharisees but like the Samaritans - seem to have maintained an earlier and smaller number of texts as canonical, preferring to hold to only what was written in the Law of Moses[8] (making most of the presently accepted canon, both Jewish and Christian, apocryphal in their eyes). Certain circles in Judaism, such as the Essenes in Judea and the Therapeutae in Egypt, were said to have a secret literature (see Dead Sea scrolls). Other traditions maintained different customs regarding canonicity.[9] The Ethiopic Jews, for instance, seem to have retained a spread of canonical texts similar to the EthiopianOrthodox Christians,[10] cf Encyclopaedia Judaica, Vol 6, p 1147. A large part of this literature consisted of the apocalypses. Based on prophecies, these apocalyptic books were not considered scripture by all, but rather part of a literary form that flourished from 200 BC to AD 100.[citation needed]
[edit]ChristianityMain article: Biblical apocryphaDuring the birth of Christianity, some of the Jewish apocrypha that dealt with the coming of the Messianic kingdom became popular in the rising Jewish-Christian communities. Occasionally these writings were changed or added to, but on the whole it was found sufficient to reinterpret them as conforming to a Christian viewpoint. Christianity eventually gave birth to new apocalyptic works, some of which were derived from traditional Jewish sources. Some of the Jewish apocrypha were part of the ordinary religious literature of the early Christians. This was not strange, as the large majority of Old Testament references in the New Testament are taken from the Greek Septuagint, which is the source of the deuterocanonical books[11] as well as most of the other biblical apocrypha.[12]
Slightly varying collections of additional Books (called deuterocanonical by the Roman Catholic Church) form part of the Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox canons.
The Book of Enoch is included in the biblical canon only of the Oriental Orthodox churches of Ethiopia and Eritrea. The Epistle of Jude quotes the book of Enoch, and some believe the use of this book also appears in the four gospels and 1 Peter. The genuineness and inspiration of Enoch were believed in by the writer of the Epistle of Barnabas, Irenaeus, Tertullian and Clement of Alexandria and much of the early church. The epistles of Paul and the gospels also show influences from the Book of Jubilees, which is part of the Ethiopian canon, as well as the Assumption of Moses and the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, which are included in no biblical canon.
The high position which some apocryphal books occupied in the first two centuries was undermined by a variety of influences in the Christian church. All claims to the possession of a secret tradition (as held by many Gnostic sects) were denied by the influential theologians like Irenaeus and Tertullian, the timeframe of true inspiration was limited to the apostolic age, and universal acceptance by the church was required as proof of apostolic authorship. As these principles gained currency, books deemed apocryphal tended to become regarded as spurious and heretical writings, though books now considered deuterocanonical have been used in liturgy and theology from the first century to the present.
[edit]GnosticismMain article: New Testament apocryphaNew Testament apocrypha—books similar to those in the New Testament but almost universally rejected by Catholics, Orthodox and Protestants—include several gospels and lives of apostles. Some were written by early Jewish Christians (see the Gospel according to the Hebrews). Others of these were produced by Gnostic authors or members of other groups later defined as heterodox. Many texts believed lost for centuries were unearthed in the 19th and 20th centuries, producing lively speculation about their importance in early Christianity among religious scholars, while many others survive only in the form of quotations from them in other writings; for some, no more than the title is known. Artists and theologians have drawn upon the New Testament apocrypha for such matters as the names of Dismas andGestas and details about the Three Wise Men. The first explicit mention of the perpetual virginity of Mary is found in the pseudepigraphical Infancy Gospel of James.
The Gnostic tradition was a prolific source of apocryphal gospels. While these writings borrowed the characteristic poetic features of apocalyptic literature from Judaism, Gnostic sects largely insisted on allegorical interpretations based on a secret apostolic tradition. With them, these apocryphal books were highly esteemed. A well-known Gnostic apocryphal book is the Gospel of Thomas, the only complete text of which was found in the Egyptian town of Nag Hammadi in 1945. The Gospel of Judas, a Gnostic gospel, also received much media attention when it was reconstructed in 2006.
Roman Catholics and Orthodox Christians as well as Protestants generally agree on the canon of the New Testament. The Ethiopian Orthodox have in the past also included I & II Clement, and Shepherd of Hermas in their New Testament canon.
[edit]See also
- Table of books of Judeo-Christian Scripture
- Pseudepigraphy
- New Testament apocrypha
- Shakespeare Apocrypha
- ^ http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/apocrypha
- ^ Zhongli Lu : Power of the Words : Chen Prophecy in Chinese Politics AD 265-618. Peter Lang, Bern, 2003. p. 72, citing Nan Qi Shu 18.349
- ^ Zhongli 2003, p. 73
- ^ Apocrypha
- ^ a b c d e f g h i 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica
- ^ Commentaries on Matthew, X. 18, XIII. 57[not specific enough to verify]
- ^ Wyclif's Bible
- ^ Jewish Encyclopedia: Sadducees
- ^ The Old Testament Canon
- ^ Ethiopian Orthodox Old Testament
- ^ Deuterocanonical books literally means books of the second canon. The term was coined in the 16th century.
- ^ The Style Manual for the Society of Biblical Literature recommends the use of the term deuterocanonical literature instead of apocrypha in academic writing, although not all apocryphal books are properly deuterocanonical.
- This article incorporates text from the Encyclopædia Britannica, Eleventh Edition, a publication now in the public domain.
- Information concerning the Hellenist Jews was incorporated from the Catholic Encyclopedia at newadvent.com.