The Apocrypha: Lost Books or Forgotten Scripture?

The Apocrypha: Lost Books or Forgotten Scripture?

Why do some Bibles have more books than others?

It’s a question many Christians never consider until they pick up a Catholic or Orthodox Bible and notice that the Old Testament is significantly longer. Books like Tobit, Judith, Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach, Baruch, and 1–2 Maccabees appear seamlessly in their pages. Open most Protestant Bibles today, and these books are missing entirely.

Their absence raises natural questions:

Were these books added later? Were they removed? Are they Scripture, or simply ancient Jewish literature? And perhaps most importantly: what did Jesus and the apostles think of them?

To answer that, we must go back—not to the Reformation, but to the Scriptures used by ancient Judaism, the early Church, and Jesus Himself.

What Is the Apocrypha?

The word Apocrypha means “hidden,” but historically it refers to a specific collection of Jewish writings preserved in the Greek Old Testament—the Septuagint (LXX)—but not in the later Hebrew Masoretic Text.¹

Catholic and Orthodox traditions refer to these works as the Deuterocanonical Books (“second canon”), meaning they are still considered inspired Scripture, though the terminology reflects the order of recognition, not a lesser quality.²

This collection includes Tobit, Judith, Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach (Ecclesiasticus), Baruch (with the Letter of Jeremiah), 1–4 Maccabees, and the additions to Esther and Daniel (The Prayer of Azariah, Susanna, Bel and the Dragon). Far from being obscure, these writings formed a significant part of the Jewish and Christian Scriptural world for centuries.

The Septuagint: Scripture for Jesus and the Apostles

The story begins with the Septuagint, a Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures produced between the third and second centuries BC for Jews living throughout the Greek-speaking world. Long before Protestant or Catholic canons existed, the Septuagint was the Bible for the Jewish diaspora and, later, for the early Church.

Its significance cannot be overstated.

The Septuagint included the Apocryphal books as part of the Old Testament. They were not separated or treated as secondary.

Many New Testament quotations—especially in Paul’s letters, Hebrews, and Revelation—follow the Septuagint’s wording rather than the Masoretic Text.³⁴ This strongly suggests that the Septuagint was the primary Scriptural source for the apostles and the earliest Christian communities.

This alone undercuts the modern claim that these books were “added later.” They were already in the Scriptures read by Jesus and the apostles.

The Early Church and the Apocrypha

Early Christian writers did not treat these books with suspicion; they treated them as Scripture. Clement of Rome, Polycarp, Irenaeus, Cyprian, Athanasius, and many others cite them naturally for theology, ethics, and encouragement.

Augustine explicitly called these books “Scripture” and included them in the canon lists affirmed at the regional Councils of Hippo (393) and Carthage (397).⁵ Though these were not ecumenical councils, their influence on the Western Church was enormous.

Jerome, despite preferring the Hebrew text, ultimately included the Apocrypha in the Latin Vulgate, acknowledging that the Church’s received canon should guide him.⁶

The manuscript evidence confirms this continuity. The earliest complete Christian Bibles—Codex Vaticanus, Codex Sinaiticus, and Codex Alexandrinus—all include these books within their Old Testament collections.⁷ They were not added later. They were already there.

The King James Version Originally Included the Apocrypha

Modern readers are often surprised to learn that the 1611 King James Version included the entire Apocrypha. It was placed between the Old and New Testaments, not hidden away or segregated as optional reading.

The translators wrote in their preface:

“The Church doth read for example of life and instruction of manners… though not applied to establish doctrine.”⁸

The KJV translators saw the Apocrypha as profitable for Christian life—even if doctrinal disputes were not to rely solely upon them. The idea that these books are dangerous or unreliable is a modern development, not a biblical or historical one.

When the Apocrypha Was Removed

The removal of the Apocrypha did not occur in the early Church. The shift began only during the Reformation, and even then, the Reformers disagreed:

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

• Calvin took a more cautious stance.

• Zwingli rejected them entirely.

The Westminster Confession of Faith (1647) made the first widespread, formal rejection, declaring the Apocrypha “not of divine inspiration.”

Yet most Protestants still printed the Apocrypha for another 150+ years.

The turning point came in 1826, when the British and Foreign Bible Society stopped funding Bibles containing the Apocrypha, largely for financial and political reasons.⁹ This effectively erased the books from most Protestant editions.

This was not an apostolic decision.

Not a patristic decision.

Not a conciliar decision.

It was a nineteenth-century publishing policy.

How Christians View the Apocrypha Today

Across Christian traditions, three major perspectives remain:

1. Catholic & Orthodox:

   The books are inspired Scripture and fully canonical.

   
   

2. Historic Protestant (Reformation–1700s):

   The books are valuable for teaching and history, though not equal to the Hebrew canon.

   
   

3. Modern Evangelical (1800s–present):

   The books are largely rejected—often unread and unfamiliar.

Historically, only the first view dominated Christian usage for over 1,500 years.

The second emerged in the 1500s.

The third is recent—and has no roots in the early Church.

Why It Matters

Understanding the Apocrypha is not mere trivia; it goes to the heart of biblical honesty and historical awareness.

If Jesus and the apostles used the Septuagint—and the Septuagint contained these books—then dismissing them without reading them is not a sign of discernment but of unfamiliarity with the early Christian Scriptures.

Books like Wisdom of Solomon deeply shaped early Christian theology.

Sirach reads like Proverbs with pastoral clarity.

Tobit and Judith offer profound examples of faith under pressure.

1–2 Maccabees provide the critical historical bridge between Malachi and Matthew, including the origins of Hanukkah (John 10:22).

If you have never read these books, you have never fully read the Scriptures that shaped the world of Jesus and the earliest Christians.

Conclusion: Not Apocryphal—Foundational

The writings commonly called “Apocrypha” were not late additions to Scripture. They were integral to the faith of ancient Judaism, carried forward by the early Church, affirmed by major Fathers such as Augustine, copied into our oldest biblical manuscripts, and included in Christian Bibles for nearly eighteen centuries.

You do not need to treat them as equal to the Hebrew canon to treat them with respect.

You do not need to elevate them above Scripture to acknowledge that the earliest Christians considered them part of Scripture.

But you do owe them a fair reading—not a reaction.

The Apocrypha is not a threat to your faith. It is a window into the Scriptures that shaped the world of Jesus and the imagination of the early Church.

Read it.

Weigh it.

And remember:

“The water is purest at the source.”

ENDNOTES

¹ Greek apokrypha, “hidden.” Refers to books preserved in the Septuagint but later omitted from the Hebrew Masoretic Text.

² “Deuterocanonical” means “second canon” chronologically, not theologically; they are considered inspired Scripture in Catholic and Orthodox traditions.

³ Septuagint usage is widespread among diaspora Jews and early Christians.

⁴ NT quotations (especially in Paul, Hebrews, Revelation) frequently align with the LXX over the MT.

⁵ Augustine, On Christian Doctrine 2.8.12–13; the Councils of Hippo (393) and Carthage (397) list the Deuterocanonical books.

⁶ Jerome’s letters (esp. Ep. 71–75) document his initial preference for Hebrew texts but his submission to the Church’s canon.

⁷ Codex Vaticanus, Sinaiticus, and Alexandrinus include the Apocrypha within the OT corpus.

⁸ KJV Preface, “Translators to the Reader.”

⁹ The British and Foreign Bible Society ceased funding Apocrypha-containing Bibles in 1826.