Apocrypha

[dryburgh]

Having been trying to deepen my study of scritptures, combined with recent visits to various different Churches to 'find the right one' for me, I wondered what people thought about the writings in the Apocrypha - this is something rather new to me! I have pretty much read the NIV most of my life (with the Good News version being something that started me off, and a spell with the King James) but after some recent visits to the Scottish Episcopal Church (scots version of the anglican church) I discovered that there was a whole new 'section' used called the Apocrypha - now it is stated as the books in the Apocrypha did not receive "Canonal approval", they are not to be considered the "word of God" however are still used in general teaching and study by the Episcopal, anglican and catholic churches.

I was wondering what people thought about these - it kind of confused me a little if complete honesty takes hold - I never really considered that the Bible I had been known since I was younger suddenly had a new bit - or the Bible I was using had a bit missing - I always considered the Bible to be the .....well the Bible!

Does anyone else use the Apocrypha, as found in versions of the Bible such as the New Resvised Standard Version etc? What is peoples opinion on this - I am really eager to hear some more opinions on it.

Thanks you and Gods blessing on you all!

Peter

 

[ladylovesJesus]

I would steer clear of this one as it is not the living active Word of God. The Bible is complete and is not to be added to or have anything taken from it.
It is Gods love letter to us inspired by God.

I found this information online.

Biblical apocrypha
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The biblical apocrypha includes texts written in the Jewish and Christian religious traditions that either

* were accepted into the biblical canon by some, but not all, Christian faiths, or
* are frequently printed in Bibles despite their non-canonical status.

A comparative list can be found in the article on books of the Bible. For other works sometimes referred to as "apocrypha," see the article on apocrypha.

The biblical apocrypha are sometimes referred to as the Apocrypha. Although the term apocrypha simply means hidden, this usage is sometimes considered pejorative by those who consider such works to be canonical parts of their scripture.

You would be wise to find a Bible teaching spirit filled Church not one that uses extras that are not found in every Bible.

God bless :rainbow: :rose:

 

[kenwyn]

There has been quite a bit of controversy over the apocrypha. It was Martin Luther who wanted to remove these books from the canon. He said

"Apocrypha, that is, books which are not held equal to the sacred scriptures, and nevertheless are useful and good to read."​

The Catholic and Orthodox traditions continue to keep the apocrypha in the canon.

Unless you are an academic with specialist interest in these matters, I don't see that there is too much to get worked up about. These books bridge the gap in history between the last of the Old Testament writings and the birth of Christ, and so can help build our understanding of New Testament times.

As far as I know, the debate is about authority, not about value. All parties agree that the Apocrypha has great value, and there can be little harm in studying it. Not everybody agrees that it is the authoritative word of God.

 

[dryburgh]

thank you so much for your feedback folks - very much appreciated!!

ladylovesJesus - i had started to think along these lines after much prayer - but I wanted to sound some other views too - thank you for helping with this!

kenwyn - thanks for your input too - I have managed to look a little further into some of the stuff online - thanks for this!

Blessings to you both

Peter

 

[Janette]

Apocrypha 101

Everything you need is in the Bible as it's come down to us. The 16 books (really bits...some are not books) of the Apocrypha are an interesting read, but they don't add any "great truth" that's missing from the rest of the Bible.

If you're going to study the Apocrypha, you need to realize there's two separate categories

1) The deutrocanonical apocrypha

These 16 books/bits were once an accepted part of the Bible. Most of them were removed by Jerome because he felt that in order to be certain of their veracity, there should be Hebrew copies in existence. But the Hebrew for these books had been lost, and only the Greek translations in the Septuagint remained.

It should be noted that the findings at the Qumran library has lent a greater credibility to these books in recent years. Anyway the books are as follows:

1 Esdras, 2 Esdras, Additions to Esther, 1 Macabees, 2 Macabees, Tobias, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, Baruch, Epistle of Jeremiah, Susanna, Prayer of Azariah, Prayer of Manasseh, Bel and the Dragon, Epistle of Paul to the Laodiceans. (All but the last is placed in or just after the Old Testiment)

These works are pretty much in harmony with accepted scripture, but God probably had a reason for allowing them to be wholly dropped from the most widely circulated versions of the Bible in the world. I do think Luther was right when he said these works had some merit.

2) the pseudepigraphical books...

These books deal with Biblical themes and purport to have been written by Biblical authors. But these books lack a certain something to give them credibility and were never a part of canon in either the Eastern or Western Roman Chruch (from which our Bible was developed). Some of them read like "rough drafts" of books you already know. Others read a bit more like "fish stories" where it seems someone felt "inspired" to add all sorts of additional and questionable detail.

These works are too numerous to list, and the list changes as this or that document is "uncovered." Some of these works are in basic harmony with known scripture. Others are not. Some are simply a bit controversial and a few could pretty easily be called heretical.

I recommend reading these with extreme caution because if you're just trying to put together your understanding of God's Word, they could offer a rather confusing picture.

 

[dryburgh]

Thanks you so much Jannette

I have been praying about this matter a fair bit recently as it had caused me some confusion, I really value your input - it has really opened up a deeper thought pattern around it - the main reason I was looking further into the Apocrypha is I was looking at various churches in my area, to find one that suited or really to find the one God was leading me to and I kinda came to two different chrurches where I valued the teachings and community - one Church is with the Church of Scotland (no use of Apocrypha - mostly use of NIV) and the other is the Scottish Episcopalian Church which uses the Apocrypha in general readings, liturgy and in the daily common Prayer sytem.

I am now begining to feel that the Church of Scotland is the one I shall be sticking with - which doesnt use the Apocrypha at all - but I guess having something new like that planted in my life by poeple who hold is very dearly - this is where the confusion came from.

Thanks for your input

Peter