Apocrypha
Apocrypha are biblical or related writings not forming part of the accepted canon of Scripture. While some might be of doubtful authorship or authenticity,
From a Protestant point of view,
The modern English adjective "apocryphal" is often used to indicate that a writing on any topic is of doubtful authenticity; spurious, fictitious, false; fabulous or mythical.[6]
Etymology
The word's origin is the Medieval Latin adjective apocryphus (secret, or non-canonical) from the Greek adjective ἀπόκρυφος, apokryphos, (private) from the verb ἀποκρύπτειν, apokryptein (to hide away).[7]
It comes from Greek and is formed from the combination of apo (away) and kryptein (hide or conceal).[8]
The word apocrypha has undergone a major change in meaning throughout the centuries. The word apocrypha in its ancient Christian usage originally meant a text read in private, rather than in public church settings. In English, it later came to have a sense of the esoteric, suspicious, or heretical, largely because of the Protestant interpretation of the usefulness of non-canonical texts.
Esoteric writings and objects
The word apocryphal (ἀπόκρυφος) was first applied to writings which were kept secret
Sinologist Anna Seidel refers to texts and even items produced by ancient Chinese sages as apocryphal and studied their uses during Six Dynasties China (A.D. 220 to 589). These artifacts were used as symbols legitimizing and guaranteeing the Emperor's Heavenly Mandate. Examples of these include talismans, charts, writs, tallies, and registers. The first examples were stones, jade pieces, bronze vessels and weapons, but came to include talismans and magic diagrams.[11]
From their roots in
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. The early Christian theologian Origen, in his 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 in the common and published books on one hand [and] actually found in the secret ones on the other).[12] 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.[10]
Spurious writings
In general use, the word apocrypha came to mean "of doubtful authenticity".[13] This meaning also appears in Origen's prologue to his commentary on the Song of Songs, of which only the Latin translation survives:
De scripturis his, quae appellantur apocriphae, pro eo quod multa in iis corrupta et contra fidem veram inveniuntur a maioribus tradita non placuit iis dari locum nec admitti ad auctoritatem.[10]
"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."
Other
The
Origen stated that "the canonical books, as the Hebrews have handed them down, are twenty-two".[14] Clement and others cited some apocryphal books as "scripture", "divine scripture", "inspired", and the like. Teachers connected with Palestine and familiar with the Hebrew canon (the protocanon) 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. A third view was that the books were not as valuable as the canonical scriptures of the Hebrew collection, 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.[10]
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.[10]
The Protestants, in comparison, were diverse in their opinion of the deuterocanon early on. Some considered them divinely inspired, others rejected them. Lutherans and Anglicans retained the books as Christian intertestamental readings and a part of the Bible (in a section called "Apocrypha"), but no doctrine should be based on them.[15] 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."[10] Nevertheless, his translation of the Bible included the apocrypha and the Epistle of the Laodiceans.[16]
Martin Luther did not class apocryphal books as being scripture, but in the German
In
Generally, Anabaptists and magisterial Protestants recognize the fourteen books of the Apocrypha as being non-canonical, but useful for reading "for example of life and instruction of manners": a view that continues today throughout the
According to the
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.[23]
Though Protestant Bibles historically include
Metaphorical usage
The adjective apocryphal is commonly used in modern English to refer to any text or story considered to be of dubious veracity or authority, although it may contain some moral truth. In this broader metaphorical sense, the word suggests a claim that is in the nature of folklore, factoid or urban legend.
Buddhism
Apocryphal
Within the Pali tradition, the apocryphal Jatakas of later composition (some dated even to the 19th century) are treated as a separate category of literature from the "official" Jataka stories that have been more-or-less formally canonized from at least the 5th century—as attested to in ample epigraphic and archaeological evidence, such as extant illustrations in
Judaism
The Jewish apocrypha, known in Hebrew as הספרים החיצונים (Sefarim Hachizonim: "the external books"), are books written in large part by Jews, especially during the Second Temple period, not accepted as sacred manuscripts when the Hebrew Bible was canonized. Some of these books are considered sacred by some Christians, and are included in their versions of the Old Testament. The Jewish apocrypha is distinctive from the New Testament apocrypha and biblical apocrypha as it is the only one of these collections which works within a Jewish theological framework.[30]
Although
Other traditions maintained different customs regarding canonicity.
Christianity
Intertestamental books
During the
In the sixteenth century, during the Protestant
The first
In the 1800s, the British and Foreign Bible Society did not regularly publish the intertestamental section in its Bibles, citing the cost of printing the Apocrypha in addition to the Old Testament and New Testament as a major factor; this legacy came to characterize English-language Bibles in Great Britain and the Americas, unlike in Europe where Protestant Bibles are printed with 80 books in three sections: the Old Testament, Apocrypha, and New Testament.[40][41]
In the present-day, "English Bibles with the Apocrypha are becoming more popular again", usually being printed as
The status of the deuterocanonicals remains unchanged in Catholic and Orthodox Christianity, though there is a difference in number of these books between these two branches of Christianity.
Slightly varying collections of apocryphal, deuterocanonical or intertestamental books of the Bible form part of the
The
Canonicity
The establishment of a largely settled uniform
The first ecclesiastical decree on the Catholic Church's canonical books of the Sacred Scriptures is attributed to the Council of Rome (382), and is correspondent to that of Trent.[48] Martin Luther, like Jerome, favored the Masoretic canon for the Old Testament, excluding apocryphal books in the Luther Bible as unworthy to be properly called scripture, but included most of them in a separate section.[49] Luther did not include the deuterocanonical books in his Old Testament, terming them "Apocrypha, that are books which are not considered equal to the Holy Scriptures, but are useful and good to read."[50]
The
Disputes
The status of the books which the Catholic Church terms Deuterocanonicals (second canon) and Protestantism refers to as Apocrypha has been an issue of disagreement which preceded the Reformation. Many believe that the pre-Christian-era Jewish translation (into Greek) of holy scriptures known as the Septuagint, a Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures originally compiled around 280 BC, originally included the apocryphal writings in dispute, with little distinction made between them and the rest of the Old Testament. Others argue that the Septuagint of the first century did not contain these books but they were added later by Christians.[52][53]
The earliest extant manuscripts of the Septuagint are from the fourth century, and suffer greatly from a lack of uniformity as regards containing apocryphal books,[54][55][56] and some also contain books classed as pseudepigrapha, from which texts were cited by some early writers in the second and later centuries as being scripture.[19]
While a few scholars conclude that the Jewish canon was the achievement of the Hasmonean dynasty,[57] it is generally considered not to have been finalized until about 100 AD[58] or somewhat later, at which time considerations of Greek language and beginnings of Christian acceptance of the Septuagint weighed against some of the texts. Some were not accepted by the Jews as part of the Hebrew Bible canon and the Apocrypha is not part of the historical Jewish canon[clarification needed].
Early church fathers such as
In the Latin Church, all through the Middle Ages [5th century to the 15th century] we find evidence of hesitation about the character of the deuterocanonicals. There is a current friendly to them, another one distinctly unfavourable to their authority and sacredness, while wavering between the two are a number of writers whose veneration for these books is tempered by some perplexity as to their exact standing, and among those we note St. Thomas Aquinas. Few are found to unequivocally acknowledge their canonicity.
The prevailing attitude of Western medieval authors is substantially that of the Greek Fathers.[60]
The wider Christian canon accepted by Augustine became the more established canon in the western Church
Nevertheless, none of these constituted indisputable definitions, and significant scholarly doubts and disagreements about the nature of the Apocrypha continued for centuries and even into Trent,
In the 16th century, the Protestant reformers challenged the canonicity of the books and partial-books found in the surviving Septuagint but not in the Masoretic Text. In response to this challenge, after the death of Martin Luther (February 8, 1546) the ecumenical Council of Trent officially ("infallibly") declared these books (called "deuterocanonical" by Catholics) to be part of the canon in April, 1546 A.D.[69] While the Protestant Reformers rejected the parts of the canon that were not part of the Hebrew Bible, they included the four New Testament books Luther considered of doubtful canonicity along with the Apocrypha in his non-binding Luther's canon (although most were separately included in his Bible,[19] as they were in some editions of the KJV bible until 1947).[70]
Protestantism therefore established a 66 book canon with the 39 books based on the ancient Hebrew canon, along with the traditional 27 books of the New Testament. Protestants also rejected the Catholic term "deuterocanonical" for these writings, preferring to apply the term "apocryphal" which was already in use for other early and disputed writings. As today (but along with other reasons),
Explaining the
The East already differed from the West in not considering every question of canon yet settled, and it subsequently adopted a few more books into its Old Testament. It also allowed consideration of yet a few more to continue not fully decided, which led in some cases to adoption in one or more jurisdictions, but not all. Thus, there are today a few remaining differences of canon among Orthodox, and all Orthodox accept a few more books than appear in the Catholic canon. The
Eastern Orthodoxy uses a different definition than the Roman Catholic Church does for the books of its canon that it calls deuterocanonical, referring to them as a class of books with less authority than other books of the Old Testament.[72][73] In contrast, the Catholic Church uses this term to refer to a class of books that were added to its canon later than the other books in its Old Testament canon, considering them all of equal authority.
New Testament apocrypha
New Testament apocrypha—books similar to those in the
Before the fifth century, the Christian writings that were then under discussion for inclusion in the canon but had not yet been accepted were classified in a group known as the ancient
Some Christians, in an extension of the meaning, might also consider the non-heretical books to be "apocryphal" along the manner of Martin Luther: not canon, but useful to read. This category includes books such as the Epistle of Barnabas, the Didache, and The Shepherd of Hermas which are sometimes referred to as the Apostolic Fathers. The Gnostic tradition was a prolific source of apocryphal gospels.[10]
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, Eastern Orthodox, and Protestants all agree on the canon of the
List of Sixty
The List of Sixty, dating to around the 7th century, lists the sixty books of the Bible. The unknown author also lists many apocryphal books that are not included amongst the sixty. These books are:[5]
- Adam
- Enoch
- Lamech
- Twelve Patriarchs
- Prayer of Joseph
- Eldad and Modad
- Testament of Moses
- Assumption of Moses
- Psalms of Solomon
- Apocalypse of Elijah
- Ascension of Isaiah
- Apocalypse of Zephaniah
- Apocalypse of Zechariah
- Apocalyptic Ezra
- History of James
- Apocalypse of Peter
- Itinerary and Teaching of the Apostles
- Epistle of Barnabas
- Acts of Paul
- Apocalypse of Paul
- Didascalia of Clement
- Didascalia of Ignatius
- Didascalia of Polycarp
- Gospel According to Barnabas[a]
- Gospel According to Matthew[b]
Taoism
Prophetic texts called the Ch'an-wei were written by
The Ch'an-wei are texts written by Han scholars about the Zhou royal treasures, only they were not written to record history for its own sake, but for legitimizing the current imperial reign. These texts took the form of stories about texts and objects being conferred upon the Emperors by Heaven and comprising these ancient sage-king's (this is how the Zhou emperors were referred to by this time, about 500 years after their peak) royal regalia.[11] The desired effect was to confirm the Han emperor's Heavenly Mandate through the continuity offered by his possession of these same sacred talismans.
It is because of this politicized recording of their history that it is difficult to retrace the exact origins of these objects. What is known is that these texts were most likely produced by a class of literati called the
See also
Notes
- ^ See also Gospel of Barnabas
- ^ See also Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew
References
Citations
- ^ "Apocrypha". Oxford English Dictionary (Online ed.). Oxford University Press. (Subscription or participating institution membership required.)
- ^ Wells, Preston B. (1911). The Story of the English Bible. Pentecostal Publishing Company. p. 41.
Fourteen books and parts of books are considered Apocryphal by Protestants. Three of these are recognized by Roman Catholics also as Apocryphal.
- ^ a b c Quaker Life, Volume 11. Friends United Press. 1970. p. 141.
Even though they were not placed on the same level as the canonical books , still they were useful for instruction . ... These–and others that total fourteen or fifteen altogether-are the books known as the Apocrypha.
- ISBN 9780310872436.
English Bibles were patterned after those of the Continental Reformers by having the Apocrypha set off from the rest of the OT. Coverdale (1535) called them "Apocrypha". All English Bibles prior to 1629 contained the Apocrypha. Matthew's Bible (1537), the Great Bible (1539), the Geneva Bible (1560), the Bishop's Bible (1568), and the King James Bible (1611) contained the Apocrypha. Soon after the publication of the KJV, however, the English Bibles began to drop the Apocrypha and eventually they disappeared entirely. The first English Bible to be printed in America (1782–83) lacked the Apocrypha. In 1826 the British and Foreign Bible Society decided to no longer print them. Today the trend is in the opposite direction, and English Bibles with the Apocrypha are becoming more popular again.
- ^ a b Bromley, Geoffrey William, ed. (2009). "Apocrypha". The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia (2 ed.). Grand Rapids, Michigan: W.B. Eerdmans.
- ^ "apocryphal". Oxford English Dictionary (Online ed.). Oxford University Press. (Subscription or participating institution membership required.)
- ^ "Apocrypha - Definition". merriam-webster.com.
- OCLC 704859621.
- ISBN 9781410217226.
- ^ a b c d e f g h i j k Charles 1911
- ^ a b c d e f Seidel, Anna. "Imperial treasures and Taoist sacraments". In Strickmann, M. (ed.). Tantric and Taoist Studies in Honor of Rolf A. Stein, II. Bruxelles: Institut belge des hautes etudes chinoises. pp. 291–371.
- ^ Commentaries on Matthew, X. 18, XIII. 57[not specific enough to verify]
- ^ "apocryphal - Definition". merriam-webster.com. 20 February 2024.
- ^ "Origen on the Canon". BibleResearcher.com. Retrieved 29 November 2015.
- ISBN 978-0-8010-3875-4.
Lutherans and Anglicans used it only for ethical / devotional matters but did not consider it authoritative in matters of faith.
- ^ "John Wycliffe's Translation". nnu.edu.
- ^ a b Wesner, Erik J. (8 April 2015). "The Bible". Amish America. Retrieved 23 May 2021.
- ISBN 978-1-4934-1307-2.
- ^ ISBN 978-0664233570. Retrieved 24 November 2015.
- ^ a b "The Thirty-Nine Articles". Anglicans Online. Retrieved 8 May 2021.
- ^ The Sunday Service of the Methodists; With Other Occasional Services. J. Kershaw. p. 136.
- ISBN 978-0-8010-2319-4.
The author also promotes an ideology of marriage, revealed mainly in the prayer of 8:5–7 (which is an optional Old Testament reading in Catholic, Anglican, and United Methodist marriage services).
- ^ The Apocrypha, Bridge of the Testaments Archived August 9, 2007, at the Wayback Machine
- ^ ISBN 9780310872436.
English Bibles were patterned after those of the Continental Reformers by having the Apocrypha set off from the rest of the OT. Coverdale (1535) called them "Apocrypha". All English Bibles prior to 1629 contained the Apocrypha. Matthew's Bible (1537), the Great Bible (1539), the Geneva Bible (1560), the Bishop's Bible (1568), and the King James Bible (1611) contained the Apocrypha. Soon after the publication of the KJV, however, the English Bibles began to drop the Apocrypha and eventually they disappeared entirely. The first English Bible to be printed in America (1782–83) lacked the Apocrypha. In 1826, the British and Foreign Bible Society decided to no longer print them. Today the trend is in the opposite direction, and English Bibles with the Apocrypha are becoming more popular again.
- ^ "THE WESTMINSTER CONFESSION OF FAITH". BibleResearcher.com. Retrieved 29 November 2015.
- ^ Blocher, Henri (2004). "Helpful or Harmful? The "Apocrypha" and Evangelical Theology". European Journal of Theology. 13 (2): 81–90.
- ^ Webster, William. "The Old Testament Canon and the Apocrypha Part 3". Archived from the original on 13 December 2015. Retrieved 29 November 2015.
- ISBN 9780896801745.
- ^ Sengpan Pannyawamsa (2007). "The Tham Vessantara-jAtaka: A Critical Study of the Tham Vessantara-jAtaka and its Influence on Kengtung Buddhism, Eastern Shan State, Burma." Archived 2018-10-04 at the Wayback Machine PhD Thesis.
- ^ "APOCRYPHA - JewishEncyclopedia.com". www.jewishencyclopedia.com. Retrieved 12 June 2020.
- ^ "SADDUCEES". jewishencyclopedia.com.
- )
- ^ The Old Testament Canon Archived December 6, 2007, at the Wayback Machine
- ^ Ethiopian Orthodox Old Testament Archived December 31, 2007, at the Wayback Machine
- ^ Encyclopaedia Judaica, Vol 6, p 1147.
- ^ Readings from the Apocrypha. Forward Movement Publications. 1981. p. 5.
- ISBN 9780310872436.
- ISBN 9780819218971.
- ISBN 9789004258815.
Why 3 and 4 Esdraas (called 1 and 2 Esdras in the NRSV Apocrypha) are pushed to the front of the list is not clear, but the motive may have been to distinguish the Anglican Apocrypha from the Roman Catholic canon affirmed at the fourth session of the Council of trent in 1546, which included all of the books in the Anglican Apocrypha list except 3 and 4 Esdras and the Prayer of Manasseh. These three texts were designated at Trent as Apocrypha and later included in an appendix to the Clementine Vulgate, first published in 1592 (and the standard Vulgate text until Vatican II).
- ISBN 9780789017628.
Paper and printing were expensive and early publishers were able to hold down costs by eliminating the Apocrypha once it was deemed secondary material.
- ISBN 9780307486226.
- ^ "The Revised Common Lectionary" (PDF). Consultation on Common Texts. 1992. Archived from the original (PDF) on 1 July 2015. Retrieved 19 August 2015.
In all places where a reading from the deuterocanonical books (The Apocrypha) is listed, an alternate reading from the canonical Scriptures has also been provided.
- ISBN 978-0-88141-301-4..
- ^ 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.
- ISBN 978-0-9778737-1-5.
- ^ Accordance Bible Software (December 2011). "New Release: Comprehensive Bible Cross References". Accordance Bible Software. Retrieved 21 April 2018.
- ^ "References to the Apocrypha in the New Testament". 7 August 2017.
- ^ "Decree of Council of Rome (AD 382) on the Biblical Canon". Taylor Marshall. 19 August 2008. Retrieved 1 December 2019.
- ^ Coogan, Michael David (2007). The New Oxford Annotated Bible with the Apocryphal/Deuterocanonical Books. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press. p. 457.
- ^ Willett, Herbert Lockwood (1910). The Popular and Critical Bible Encyclopædia and Scriptural Dictionary: Fully Defining and Explaining All Religious Terms, Including Biographical, Geographical, Historical, Archæological and Doctrinal Themes, Superbly Illustrated with Over 600 Maps and Engravings. Howard-Severance Company. Retrieved 21 April 2018 – via Google Books.
- ^ S. T. Kimbrough (2005). Orthodox And Wesleyan Scriptural Understanding And Practice. St Vladimir's Seminary Press. p. 23. ISBN 978-0881413014.
- ^ ISBN 978-0801027994.
- ISBN 978-1606082492. Archived(PDF) from the original on 2022-10-09. Retrieved 23 November 2015.
- ^ Ellis, E. E. (1992). The Old Testament in Early Christianity. Ada, MI: Baker. pp. 34–35.
- ISBN 978-0802484345.
- ISBN 080102790X.
- ISBN 978-1844657278.
- ^ Newman, Robert C. "THE COUNCIL OF JAMNIA AND THE OLD TESTAMENT CANON" (PDF). Gordon Faculty Online. Gordon College. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2022-10-09. Retrieved 23 November 2015.
- ^ "Correspondence of Augustine and Jerome concerning the Latin Translation of the Scriptures". bible-researcher.com.
- ^ Knight, Kevin. "Canon of the Old Testament". New Advent. The Catholic Encyclopedia. Retrieved 26 November 2015.
- ^ Lienhard, Joseph. The Bible, the Church, and Authority. Collegeville, Minnesota: Fordham University. p. 59.
- ^ Burkitt, F. C. "THE DECRETUM GELASIANUM". tertullian.org. Retrieved 26 November 2015.
- ^ bible-researcher.com. "Athanasius on the Canon". Retrieved 26 November 2015.
- ^ Jedin, Hubert (1947). Papal Legate At The Council Of Trent. St Louis: B. Herder Book Co. pp. 270–271.
- ^ Wicks, Jared (1978). Cajetan Responds: A Reader in Reformation Controversy. Washington: The Catholic University Press of America.
- ^ Metzger, Bruce (1957). An Introduction to the Apocrypha. New York: Oxford. p. 180.
- ^ Catholic Encyclopedia (1908). Canon of the Old Testament. New York: Robert Appleton Company.
- ^ Tavard, George H. (1959). Holy Writ or Holy Church. London: Burns & Oates. pp. 16–17.
- ^ Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent. Translated by Buckley, Theodore Alois. London: George Routledge and Co. 1851. pp. 17–18.
- ISBN 1563383403. Retrieved 23 November 2015.
- ^ "The Old Testament Canon and Apocrypha". BibleResearcher. Retrieved 27 November 2015.
- ^ Orthodox Answer To a Question About Apocrypha, Canon, Deuterocanonical – Answer #39 Archived 14 March 2012 at the Wayback Machine
- ^ Dennis Bratcher (ed.), The Confession of Dositheus (Eastern Orthodox, 1672), Question 3, CRI / Voice, Institute
- ^ See Development of the New Testament canon
Sources
- public domain: Charles, Robert Henry (1911). "Apocryphal Literature". In Chisholm, Hugh (ed.). Encyclopædia Britannica. Vol. 2 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. pp. 175–183. This article incorporates text from a publication now in the
External links
- Alin Suciu's blog on various Coptic apocrypha
- The Apocrypha is in the religion section at the e.Lib.
- Noncanonical Literature
- Complete NT Apocrypha Claims to be the largest collection of New Testament apocrypha online
- Deuterocanonical books - Full text from Saint Takla Haymanot Church Website (also presents the full text in Arabic)
- LDS Bible Dictionary - Apocrypha – Definition & LDS POV, including brief book descriptions.
- Aldenicum The Trilogy, an apocryphal view on life and reality around us.
- Christian Cyclopedia article on Apocrypha
- New Testament Allusions to Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha
- Canon Comparison Chart
- The American Cyclopædia.
- New International Encyclopedia. 1905.
.
- EarlyChristianWritings.com A chronological list of early Christian books and letters, both complete and incomplete works; canonical, apocryphal and Gnostic. Many with links to English translations.