Apocrypha

The Apocrypha: Lost Books or Forgotten Scripture?

Introduction: Why Do Some Bibles Have More Books Than Others?

If you’ve ever picked up a Catholic or Orthodox Bible and compared it to most Protestant editions, you’ve probably noticed something strange—there are more books. Not in the New Testament, but in the Old. Books like Tobit, Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach, Baruch, and 1–2 Maccabees are there. In your average Protestant Bible? They're completely gone.

For many modern Christians, this raises serious questions:

• Were these books added later?

• Are they Scripture—or just interesting history?

• Why were they in early Bibles but removed from today’s?

• And perhaps most importantly: What did Jesus and the apostles think of them?

To answer that, we need to go back—before the Reformation, before the printing press, and even before Christ—to the world of the Septuagint, the early Church, and the Bible of the first Christians.

What Is the Apocrypha?

The word “Apocrypha” means hidden in Greek. But in this context, it refers to a group of ancient Jewish writings included in the Greek Old Testament—the Septuagint (LXX)—but later excluded from the Hebrew Masoretic Text.

These books are also known as the Deuterocanonical Books (literally, “second canon”), especially in Catholic and Orthodox circles, where they are considered fully inspired Scripture.

The core group includes:

• Tobit

• Judith

• Wisdom of Solomon

• Sirach (also called Ecclesiasticus)

• Baruch (including the Letter of Jeremiah)

• 1 Maccabees

• 2 Maccabees

• 3 Maccabees

• 4 Maccabees

• Additions to Esther

• Additions to Daniel (The Prayer of Azariah, Susanna, Bel and the Dragon)

The Septuagint: The Bible of Jesus and the Apostles

Long before there was a “Protestant Bible,” there was the Septuagint (LXX)—a Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures produced in the 3rd–2nd centuries BC for Jews living in Alexandria, Egypt.

This was the version most commonly used by:

• Greek-speaking Jews in the diaspora

• The writers of the New Testament

• And likely even Jesus Himself when speaking in synagogues or quoting Scripture

The Septuagint included the Apocryphal books—not in a separate section, but interwoven with the other Scriptures. This is a critical point: The early Church read the Septuagint, not the later Hebrew Masoretic version.

Many of the Old Testament quotations in the New Testament match the Septuagint word-for-word—especially in Paul, Hebrews, and Revelation.

This alone should shatter the myth that these books were “added later.” They were already present in the Old Testament that Jesus and the apostles used.

The Early Church and the Apocrypha

The early Church didn't just tolerate these books—they quoted them, taught from them, and affirmed them as Scripture. A few examples:

• The Epistle of Barnabas and Clement of Rome quote Wisdom, Sirach, and Tobit.

• Origen, Athanasius, Irenaeus, and Cyprian all cite them alongside canonical books.

• Augustine called them “Scripture” and helped affirm their status at the Council of Hippo (393 AD) and Carthage (397 AD).

• Jerome originally hesitated, preferring the Hebrew text, but even he included them in the Latin Vulgate under pressure from the Church—and admitted that the Church's judgment should rule.

The earliest Christian Bibles—Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus, both from the 4th century—include the Apocryphal books without apology. These were not marginal notes or extra devotionals. They were treated as inspired Scripture.

The King James Version Had the Apocrypha

Perhaps the most surprising fact to modern Protestants is this:

The original 1611 King James Bible included the full Apocrypha.

It wasn’t buried in a footnote. It had its own section—between the Old and New Testaments—and was meant to be read and respected. Here's what the translators said in the KJV Preface:

“The Church doth read for example of life and instruction of manners… though not applied to establish doctrine.”

That’s important: while some debated whether the books were equally authoritative, they were still meant to be read—and were never considered dangerous or uninspired until centuries later.

When and Why Were They Removed?

So what changed?

The answer lies not in early Church history, but in post-Reformation Protestant politics and economics.

1. The Reformers split:

   • Luther included the Apocrypha in his Bible, calling them “useful and good to read.”

   • But he did reorder the canon, placing them in a separate section.

   • Calvin was more suspicious, and Zwingli rejected them outright.

2. The Westminster Confession of Faith (1647) officially rejected the Apocrypha:

   • Declared them “not of divine inspiration” and not to be read in churches.

   • This marked a turning point in English-speaking Protestantism.

3. The 1800s sealed their fate:

   • The British and Foreign Bible Society, under pressure to cut printing costs and please evangelical readers, stopped funding Bibles that included the Apocrypha.

   • From that point on, the Apocrypha quietly vanished from most Protestant Bibles.

It wasn’t doctrine that removed them. It was money and modern controversy.

How Should Christians View the Apocrypha Today?

There are three primary views:

1. Catholic and Orthodox: The Apocrypha (Deuterocanon) is Scripture, authoritative and inspired.

2. Historic Protestant: The Apocrypha is valuable for instruction and historical background, but not equal to canonical Scripture.

3. Modern Evangelical: The Apocrypha is rejected entirely—often without ever having been read.

The first two views dominated for over 1,800 years. The third is new, reactionary, and disconnected from Church history.

Why It Matters

This isn’t about trivia. It’s about authority, honesty, and spiritual inheritance.

• Do we trust the Bible of the apostles—or a redacted version shaped by recent tradition?

• Do we reject books simply because we were taught to?

• Are we willing to let Scripture interpret Scripture—even when it surprises us?

Books like Wisdom of Solomon profoundly shaped early Christology. Sirach teaches Proverbs-like godliness. Tobit and Judith demonstrate faith in exile. 1–2 Maccabees fill the historical gap between Malachi and Matthew and introduce the feast of Hanukkah (John 10:22).

If you’ve never read them, you haven’t read the Bible Jesus grew up with—or the one the early Church died for.

Conclusion: Not Apocryphal—Foundational

The books called “Apocrypha” weren’t late additions. They were early foundations. They filled the scrolls of synagogue worship. They were copied into codices by persecuted Christians. They were read by Church Fathers and quoted in councils. And they remained in the Bible for nearly two millennia—until politics, printing costs, and theological retrenchment pushed them aside.

You don’t have to treat them as doctrine to treat them with reverence. You don’t have to elevate them above Scripture to recognize they once were counted among it. But you do owe them a reading, not just a reaction.

The Apocrypha isn’t a threat to your faith. It’s a window into the Bible that shaped the early Church.

Read it. Weigh it. And remember:

“The water is purest at the source.”