Apocrypha

==Christianity==

===Intertestamental books===
[[File:Apocriefe_boeken_Lutherbijbel.jpg|thumb|350px|Copies of the [[Luther Bible]] include the deuterocanonical books as an intertestamental section between the Old Testament and New Testament; they are termed the "[[Biblical apocrypha|Apocrypha]]" in Christian Churches having their origins in the Reformation.]] 
[[File:KJV 1769 Oxford Edition, vol. 1.djvu|page=21|thumb|The contents page in a complete 80 book [[King James Bible]], listing "The Books of the Old Testament", "The Books called Apocrypha", and "The Books of the New Testament".]]

{{see also|Biblical apocrypha|Intertestamental period|Development of the Old Testament canon}}
{{further|List of books of the King James Version}}
During the [[Christianity in the 1st century#Apostolic Age|Apostolic Age]] many Jewish texts of Hellenistic origin existed within Judaism and were frequently used by Christians. Patristic authorities frequently recognized these books as important to the emergence of Christianity, but the inspired authority and value of the apocrypha remained widely disputed.{{citation needed|date=April 2021}} Christians included several of these books in the canons of the [[Christian Bible]]s, calling them the "apocrypha" or the "hidden books".{{citation needed|date=April 2021}}

In the sixteenth century, during the Protestant [[Reformation]], the canonical validity of the intertestamental books was challenged and [[List of books of the King James Version#Apocrypha|fourteen books]] were classed in 80 book Protestant Bibles as an intertestamental section called the Apocrypha, which straddles the Old Testament and New Testament. Prior to 1629, all English-language Protestant Bibles included the Old Testament, Apocrypha, and New Testament; examples include the "[[Matthew's Bible]] (1537), the [[Great Bible]] (1539), the [[Geneva Bible]] (1560), the [[Bishop's Bible]] (1568), and the [[King James Bible]] (1611)".<ref name="Ewert">{{cite book|author-last=Ewert |author-first=David |title=A General Introduction to the Bible: From Ancient Tablets to Modern Translations |date=11 May 2010 |publisher=[[Zondervan]] |isbn=9780310872436 |page=104 |quote=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.}}</ref>

[[List of books of the King James Version#Apocrypha|Fourteen out of eighty biblical books]] comprise the Protestant Apocrypha, first published as such in Luther's Bible (1534). Many of these texts are considered [[Biblical canon|canonical]] Old Testament books by the Catholic Church, affirmed by the [[Council of Rome]] (AD 382) and later reaffirmed by the [[Council of Trent]] (1545–63); all of the books of the Protestant Apocrypha are considered canonical by the Eastern Orthodox Church and are referred to as [[Biblical Apocrypha#Anagignoskomena|''anagignoskomena'']] per the [[Synod of Jerusalem (1672)|Synod of Jerusalem]] (1672). To this date, [[Lection|scripture readings]] from the Apocrypha are included in the [[lectionary|lectionaries]] of the Lutheran Churches and the Anglican Churches.<ref>{{cite book|title=Readings from the Apocrypha |year=1981 |publisher=Forward Movement Publications |page=5}}</ref>

[[Anabaptists]] use the [[Luther Bible]], which contains the intertestamental books; [[Amish]] wedding ceremonies include "the retelling of the marriage of Tobias and Sarah in the Apocrypha".<ref name="Wesner">{{cite web |author-last1=Wesner |author-first1=Erik J. |title=The Bible |date=8 April 2015 |url=https://amishamerica.com/bible/#apocrypha |publisher=Amish America |access-date=23 May 2021 |language=English}}</ref> The [[Anglican Communion]] accepts the Protestant Apocrypha "for instruction in life and manners, but not for the establishment of doctrine (Article VI in the [[Thirty-Nine Articles]])",<ref name="Ewert2010">{{cite book|author-last=Ewert |author-first=David |title=A General Introduction to the Bible: From Ancient Tablets to Modern Translations |date=11 May 2010 |publisher=[[Zondervan]] |isbn=9780310872436 |page=104}}</ref> and many "lectionary readings in [[The Book of Common Prayer]] are taken from the Apocrypha", with these lessons being "read in the same ways as those from the Old Testament".<ref name="ThomasWondra2002">{{cite book|author-last1=Thomas |author-first1=Owen C. |author-last2=Wondra |author-first2=Ellen K. |author-link2=Ellen Wondra |title=Introduction to Theology |edition=3rd |date=1 July 2002 |publisher=Church Publishing, Inc. |isbn=9780819218971 |page=56}}</ref>

The first [[Methodist]] liturgical book, ''[[The Sunday Service of the Methodists]]'', employs verses from the Apocrypha, such as in the Eucharistic liturgy.<ref name="Wesley1825">{{cite book|title=The Sunday Service of the Methodists; With Other Occasional Services |year=1825 |publisher=J. Kershaw |language=en |page=136 |author-first=John |author-last=Wesley |title-link=The Sunday Service of the Methodists; With Other Occasional Services |author-link=John Wesley}}</ref> The Protestant Apocrypha contains three books (1 Esdras, 2 Esdras and the Prayer of Manasseh) that are accepted by many Eastern Orthodox Churches and Oriental Orthodox Churches as canonical, but are regarded as non-canonical by the Catholic Church and are therefore not included in modern Catholic Bibles.<ref name="HenzeBoccaccini2013">{{cite book|author-last1=Henze |author-first1=Matthias |author-last2=Boccaccini |author-first2=Gabriele |title=Fourth Ezra and Second Baruch: Reconstruction after the Fall |date=20 November 2013 |publisher=[[Brill Publishing|Brill]] |isbn=9789004258815 |page=383 |quote=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).}}</ref>

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.<ref name="Anderson2003">{{cite book|author-last=Anderson |author-first=Charles R. |title=Puzzles and Essays from "The Exchange": Tricky Reference Questions |year=2003 |publisher=Psychology Press |isbn=9780789017628 |page=[https://archive.org/details/puzzlesessaysfro00ande/page/123 123] |quote=Paper and printing were expensive and early publishers were able to hold down costs by eliminating the Apocrypha once it was deemed secondary material.|url-access=registration |url=https://archive.org/details/puzzlesessaysfro00ande/page/123}}</ref><ref name="McGrath2008">{{cite book|author-last=McGrath |author-first=Alister |title=In the Beginning: The Story of the King James Bible and How It Changed a Nation, a Language, and a Culture |date=10 December 2008 |publisher=Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group |language=en |isbn=9780307486226 |page=298}}</ref>

In the present-day, "English Bibles with the Apocrypha are becoming more popular again", usually being printed as [[Intertestamental period|intertestamental books]].<ref name="Ewert"/> The [[Revised Common Lectionary]], in use by most mainline Protestants including Methodists and Moravians, lists readings from the Apocrypha in the [[liturgical calendar]], although alternate Old Testament [[scripture lesson]]s are provided.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.commontexts.org/rcl/rcl_introduction_web.pdf |title=The Revised Common Lectionary |year=1992 |publisher=Consultation on Common Texts |access-date=19 August 2015 |quote=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. |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150701230910/http://www.commontexts.org/rcl/RCL_Introduction_Web.pdf |archive-date=1 July 2015 |df=dmy }}</ref>

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.<ref name="Kimbrough">{{cite book|author-first=S.T. |author-last=Kimbrough |title=Orthodox And Wesleyan Scriptural Understanding And Practice |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=q-vhwjamOioC&pg=PA23 |year=2005 |publisher=St Vladimir's Seminary Press |isbn=978-0-88141-301-4 |page=23 }}.</ref> Some authorities began using term ''[[deuterocanonical]]'' to refer to this traditional intertestamental collection as books of "the second canon".<ref>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.</ref> These books are often seen as helping to explain the theological and cultural transitions which took place between the Old and New Testaments. They are also sometimes called "intertestamental" by religious groups who do not recognize [[Hellenistic Judaism]] as belonging with either Jewish or Christian testaments.{{citation needed|date=April 2021}}

Slightly varying collections of apocryphal, deuterocanonical or intertestamental books of the Bible form part of the [[Catholic Church|Catholic]], [[Eastern Orthodox Church|Eastern Orthodox]] and [[Oriental Orthodox Church|Oriental Orthodox]] canons. The deuterocanonical or intertestamental books of the Catholic Church include Tobit, Judith, Baruch, Sirach, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, Wisdom and additions to Esther, Daniel, and Baruch.

The [[Book of Enoch]] is included in the biblical canon of the [[Oriental Orthodox]] churches of Ethiopia and Eritrea. The [[Epistle of Jude]] alludes to a story in the book of Enoch, and some believe the use of this book also appears in the four gospels and [[1 Peter]].<ref>{{cite book|author-last1=Clontz |author-first1=T.E. |author-last2=Clontz |author-first2=J. |title=The Comprehensive New Testament |publisher=Cornerstone Publications |date=2008 |isbn=978-0-9778737-1-5}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.accordancebible.com/Comprehensive-Crossreferences |title=New Release: Comprehensive Bible Cross References |author=Accordance Bible Software |website=Accordance Bible Software |date=December 2011 |access-date=21 April 2018}}</ref> However, while [[Jesus]] and his disciples sometimes used phrases also featured in some of the Apocryphal books,<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.scripturecatholic.com/deuterocanonical-books-new-testament/ |title=References to the Apocrypha in the New Testament|date=7 August 2017 }}</ref>{{Dubious|date=November 2022}} the Book of Enoch was never referenced by Jesus. The genuineness and inspiration of Enoch were believed in by the writer of the [[Epistle of Barnabas]], [[Irenaeus]], [[Tertullian]] and [[Clement of Alexandria]]<ref name=EB1911 /> and many others of the [[early church]].{{cn|date=November 2022}} The [[Epistles of Paul]] and the [[Gospels]] also show influences from the [[Book of Jubilees]],{{cn|date=November 2022}} which is part of the Ethiopian canon, as well as the [[Assumption of Moses]] and the [[Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs]],{{cn|date=November 2022}} which are included in no biblical canon.

===Canonicity===
{{Main|Biblical apocrypha|Christian biblical canons}}
The establishment of a largely settled uniform [[Development of the Christian biblical canon|canon]] was a process of centuries, and what the term ''[[Biblical canon|canon]]'' (as well as ''apocrypha'') precisely meant also saw development. The canonical process took place with believers recognizing writings as being [[biblical inspiration|inspired by God]] from known or accepted origins, subsequently being followed by official affirmation of what had become largely established through the study and debate of the writings.<ref name="McDonald"/>

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.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://taylormarshall.com/2008/08/decree-of-council-of-rome-ad-382-on.html |title=Decree of Council of Rome (AD 382) on the Biblical Canon |date=19 August 2008 |website=Taylor Marshall |access-date=1 December 2019}}</ref> [[Martin Luther]], like [[Jerome]], favored the [[Masoretic Text|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.<ref>{{cite book|author-last1=Coogan |author-first1=Michael David |title=The New Oxford Annotated Bible with the Apocryphal/Deuterocanonical Books |date=2007 |publisher=[[Oxford University Press]] |location=Oxford, United Kingdom |page=457}}</ref> 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."<ref>{{cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=rl3lcbLkHV0C&q=luther+%22are+useful+and+good+to+read%22&pg=PA521 |title=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 |author-first=Herbert Lockwood |author-last=Willett |year=1910 |publisher=Howard-Severance Company |access-date=21 April 2018 |via=Google Books}}</ref>

The [[Eastern Orthodox]] Church accepts four other books into its canon than what are contained in the Catholic canon: [[Psalm 151]], the [[Prayer of Manasseh]], [[3 Maccabees]], and [[1 Esdras]].<ref>S. T. Kimbrough (2005). Orthodox And Wesleyan Scriptural Understanding And Practice. St Vladimir's Seminary Press. p. 23. ISBN 978-0881413014.</ref>

====Disputes====
The status of the books which the Catholic Church terms ''[[deuterocanonical books|Deuterocanonicals]]'' (second canon) and Protestantism refers to as ''[[biblical apocrypha|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.<ref name="Wegner"/><ref>{{cite book|author-last1=Beckwith |author-first1=Roger T. |title=The Canon of the Old Testament |date=1 November 2008 |publisher=Wipf & Stock Pub |location=Eugene, OR |isbn=978-1606082492 |pages=62, 382–283 |url=http://biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/ejt/apocrypha_blocher.pdf |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221009/http://biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/ejt/apocrypha_blocher.pdf |archive-date=2022-10-09 |url-status=live |access-date=23 November 2015}}</ref>

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,<ref>{{cite book|author-last1=Ellis |author-first1=E. E. |title=The Old Testament in Early Christianity |date=1992 |publisher=Baker |location=Ada, MI |pages=34–35}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|author-last1=Archer, Jr |author-first1=Gleason |title=A survey of Old Testament introduction |date=2007 |publisher=Moody Press |location=Chicago, IL |isbn=978-0802484345 |pages=75–86 |edition=[Rev. and expanded].}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|author-last1=Biddle |author-first1=Martin Hengel |others=Roland Deines; introd. by Robert Hanhart; transl. by Mark E. |title=The Septuagint as Christian Scripture : its prehistory and the problem of its canon |date=2004 |publisher=Baker Academic |location=Grand Rapids |isbn=080102790X |pages=57–59 |edition=North American paperback}}</ref> 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.<ref name="McDonald" />

While a few scholars conclude that the Jewish canon was the achievement of the Hasmonean dynasty,<ref>{{cite book|author-last1=Davies |author-first1=Philip R. |title=Rethinking Biblical Scholarship: Changing Perspectives 4 |date=1 September 2013 |publisher=[[Routledge]] |isbn=978-1844657278 |page=225}}</ref> it is generally considered not to have been finalized until about 100 AD<ref>{{cite web|author-last1=Newman |author-first1=Robert C. |title=THE COUNCIL OF JAMNIA AND THE OLD TESTAMENT CANON |url=http://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/ted_hildebrandt/OTeSources/00-Introduction/Text/Articles/Newman-CanonJamnia-WTJ.pdf |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221009/http://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/ted_hildebrandt/OTeSources/00-Introduction/Text/Articles/Newman-CanonJamnia-WTJ.pdf |archive-date=2022-10-09 |url-status=live |website=Gordon Faculty Online |publisher=Gordon College |access-date=23 November 2015}}</ref> 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{{Clarify|reason=The second clause is redundant, contradicts the first clause, and is unsourced.|date=May 2019}}.

Early church fathers such as [[Athanasius]], [[Melito of Sardis|Melito]], [[Origen]], and [[Cyril of Jerusalem]], spoke against the canonicity of much or all of the apocrypha,<ref name="Wegner">{{cite book|author-last1=Wegner |author-first1=Paul D. |title=The Journey from Texts to Translations: The Origin and Development of the Bible |date=2004 |publisher=Baker Academic |isbn=978-0801027994 |page=14 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=kkVFOTsBOAEC}}</ref> but the most weighty opposition was the fourth century Catholic scholar [[Jerome]] who preferred the Hebrew canon, whereas Augustine and others preferred the wider (Greek) canon,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.bible-researcher.com/vulgate2.html |title=Correspondence of Augustine and Jerome concerning the Latin Translation of the Scriptures |work=bible-researcher.com}}</ref> with both having followers in the generations that followed. The ''Catholic Encyclopedia'' states as regards the Middle Ages,
{{Blockquote|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.<ref>{{cite web|author-last1=Knight |author-first1=Kevin |title=Canon of the Old Testament |url=http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03267a.htm |website=New Advent |publisher=The Catholic Encyclopedia |access-date=26 November 2015}}</ref>
 
The wider Christian canon accepted by Augustine became the more established canon in the western Church<ref>{{cite book|author-last1=Lienhard |author-first1=Joseph |title=The Bible, the Church, and Authority |publisher=[[Fordham University]] |location=Collegeville, Minnesota |page=59}}</ref> after being promulgated for use in the Easter Letter of Athanasius (circa 372 A.D.), the Synod of Rome (382 A.D., but its [[Decretum Gelasianum]] is generally considered to be a much later addition<ref>{{cite web|author-last1=Burkitt |author-first1=F. C. |title=THE DECRETUM GELASIANUM. |url=http://www.tertullian.org/articles/burkitt_gelasianum.htm |website=tertullian.org |access-date=26 November 2015 |ref=Journal of Theological Studies}}</ref>) and the local councils of Carthage and Hippo in north Africa (391 and 393 A.D). Athanasius called canonical all books of the Hebrew Bible including Baruch, while excluding Esther. He adds that "there are certain books which the Fathers had appointed to be read to catechumens for edification and instruction; these are the Wisdom of Solomon, the Wisdom of Sirach (Ecclesiasticus), Esther, Judith, Tobias, the Didache, or Doctrine of the Apostles, and the Shepherd of Hermas. All others are apocrypha and the inventions of heretics (Festal Epistle for 367)".<ref>{{cite web|author=bible-researcher.com |title=Athanasius on the Canon|url=http://www.bible-researcher.com/athanasius.html |access-date=26 November 2015 |ref=Thirty-Ninth Festal Epistle, A.D. 367.}}</ref>

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,<ref>{{cite book|author-last1=Jedin |author-first1=Hubert |title=Papal Legate At The Council Of Trent |date=1947 |publisher=B. Herder Book Co |location=St Louis |pages=270–271}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|author-last1=Wicks |author-first1=Jared |title=Cajetan Responds: A Reader in Reformation Controversy |date=1978 |publisher=[[The Catholic University Press of America]] |location=Washington}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|author-last1=Metzger |author-first1=Bruce |title=An Introduction to the Apocrypha |date=1957 |publisher=Oxford |location=New York |page=180}}</ref> which provided the first infallible definition of the Catholic canon in 1546.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Catholic Encyclopedia |title=Canon of the Old Testament |date=1908 |publisher=Robert Appleton Company |location=New York}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|author-last1=Tavard |author-first1=George H. |title=Holy Writ or Holy Church |date=1959 |publisher=Burns & Oates |location=London |pages=16–17}}</ref> This canon came to see appropriately 1,000 years of nearly uniform use by the majority, even after the 11th-century schism that separated the church into the branches known as the [[Roman Catholic]] and [[Eastern Orthodox]] churches.

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.<ref>{{Cite book |title=Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent |publisher=George Routledge and Co. |year=1851 |location=London |pages=17-18 |language=en |translator-last=Buckley |translator-first=Theodore Alois}}</ref> 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,<ref name="McDonald">{{cite book|author-last1=McDonald |author-first1=Lee Martin |title=Forgotten Scriptures: The Selection and Rejection of Early Religious Writings |date=2009 |location=Louisville, KY |isbn=978-0664233570 |pages=11–33 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=n9U4T2aYQJ8C&q=Forgotten+Scriptures:+The+Selection+and+Rejection+of+Early+Religious+Writings+By+Lee+Martin+McDonald&pg=PR4 |publisher=Westminster John Knox Press |access-date=24 November 2015}}</ref> as they were in some editions of the KJV bible until 1947).<ref>{{cite book|author-last1=Hiers |author-first1=Richard H. |title=The Trinity Guide to the Bible |date=1 October 2001 |publisher=Trinity Press International |location=Norcross, GA |isbn=1563383403 |page=148 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=eKhBPOKzHkUC&q=luther+include+the+apocrypha+in+his+bible&pg=PA148 |access-date=23 November 2015}}</ref>

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),<ref name="Wegner"/> various reformers argued that those books contained doctrinal or other errors and thus should not have been added to the canon for that reason. The differences between canons can be seen under [[Biblical canon#Old Testament|Biblical canon]] and [[Development of the Christian biblical canon]].
 
Explaining the [[Eastern Orthodox]] Church's canon is made difficult because of differences of perspective with the [[Roman Catholic]] church in the interpretation of how it was done. Those differences (in matters of jurisdictional authority) were contributing factors in the [[East-West Schism|separation of the Roman Catholics and Orthodox]] around 1054, but the formation of the canon which Trent would later officially definitively settle was largely complete by the fifth century, if not settled, six centuries before the separation.{{citation needed|date=November 2021}} In the eastern part of the church, it took much of the fifth century also to come to agreement, but in the end it was accomplished. The canonical books thus established by the undivided church became the predominant canon for what was later to become Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox alike.{{citation needed|date=November 2021}}

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 [[Psalms of Solomon]], [[3 Maccabees]], [[4 Maccabees]], the [[Epistle of Jeremiah]] the [[Book of Odes (Bible)|Book of Odes]], the [[Prayer of Manasseh]] and [[Psalm 151]] are included in some copies of the Septuagint,<ref>{{cite web|title=The Old Testament Canon and Apocrypha|url=http://www.bible-researcher.com/canon2.html |website=BibleResearcher |access-date=27 November 2015}}</ref> some of which are accepted as canonical by Eastern Orthodox and some other churches. Protestants accept none of these additional books as canon, but see them having roughly the same status as the other Apocrypha.{{citation needed|date=November 2021}}

[[Eastern Orthodoxy]] uses a different definition than the Roman Catholic Church does for the books of its canon that it calls [[Deuterocanonical books#In_Eastern_Orthodoxy|deuterocanonical]], referring to them as a class of books with less authority than other books of the Old Testament.<ref>[http://www.orthodoxanswers.org/answer/39/ Orthodox Answer To a Question About Apocrypha, Canon, Deuterocanonical – Answer #39] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120314205050/http://www.orthodoxanswers.org/answer/39/ |date=14 March 2012 }}</ref><ref>{{citation |url=http://www.crivoice.org/creeddositheus.html |title=The Confession of Dositheus (Eastern Orthodox, 1672) |others=Question 3 |editor=Dennis Bratcher |publisher=CRI / Voice, Institute}}</ref> 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===
{{Main|New Testament apocrypha}}
New 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 [[Gnosticism|Gnostic]] authors or members of other groups later defined as [[Heterodoxy|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,{{Citation needed|date=December 2014}} 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]] and [[Gestas]] 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]].

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 [[antilegomena]]e. These were all candidates for the New Testament and included several books which were eventually accepted, such as: [[The Epistle to the Hebrews]], [[2 Peter]], [[3 John]] and the [[Revelation of John]] (Apocalypse). None of those accepted books can be considered Apocryphal now, since all Christendom accepts them as canonical. Of the uncanonized ones, the Early Church considered some heretical but viewed others quite positively.<ref name=EB1911 />

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 [[Gnosticism|Gnostic tradition]] was a prolific source of apocryphal gospels.<ref name=EB1911 />

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 [[New Testament]].<ref>See [[Development of the New Testament canon]]</ref> The [[Ethiopian Orthodox]] have in the past also included [[Epistles of Clement (disambiguation)|I & II Clement]] and [[Shepherd of Hermas]] in their [[New Testament]] canon.

====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:<ref name=ISBE/>
{{div col|colwidth=23em}}
* [[Books of Adam|Adam]]
* [[Book of Enoch|Enoch]]
* [[Genesis Apocryphon|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]]
* [[Greek Apocalypse of Ezra|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{{efn|See also [[Gospel of Barnabas]]}}
* Gospel According to Matthew{{efn|See also [[Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew]]}}
{{div col end}}
Description	What you type	What you get
Italic	''Italic text''	Italic text
Bold	'''Bold text'''	Bold text
Bold & italic	'''''Bold & italic text'''''	*Bold & italic text*
Description	What you type	What you get
Reference	Page text.<ref>[https://www.example.org/ Link text], additional text.</ref>	Page text.^[1]
Named reference	Page text.<ref name="test">[https://www.example.org/ Link text]</ref>	Page text.^[2]
Additional use of the same reference	Page text.<ref name="test" />	Page text.^[2]
Display references	<references />	↑ Link text, additional text. ↑ Link text