Apocrypha

{{short description|Works of unknown authorship or of doubtful origin}}
{{about|the general concept of apocryphal literature|the section found in some Bibles called Apocrypha|Biblical apocrypha|other uses}}
[[File:Notes et extraits pour servir à l'histoire des croisades au XVe siècle, pp. 126-127 (Jorga, 1915).jpg|thumb|right|upright=1.4|The apocryphal letter of Sultan [[Mehmed II]] to the Pope ({{lang|fr|Notes et extraits pour servir à l'histoire des croisades au XVe siècle}}), published by [[Nicolae Iorga]]. Series 4: 1453–1476, Paris; Bucarest, 1915, pages 126–127]]
'''Apocrypha''' are biblical or related writings not forming part of the accepted canon of Scripture. While some might be of doubtful authorship or authenticity,<ref>{{Cite OED|Apocrypha|id=9256}}</ref> in [[Christianity]], the word ''apocryphal'' (ἀπόκρυφος) was first applied to writings which were to be read privately rather than in the public context of church services. Apocrypha were edifying Christian works that were not considered [[Biblical canon|canonical]] [[scripture]]. It was not until well after the [[Protestant Reformation]] that the word ''apocrypha'' was used by some [[wiktionary:ecclesiastics|ecclesiastics]] to mean "false," "spurious," "bad," or "heretical."

From a Protestant point of view, [[biblical apocrypha]] are a set of texts included in the [[Septuagint]] (the Hebrew Bible in Greek), used for over two-hundred years by Jews and by early Christians. After the fall of Jerusalem, the Jews restored the Hebrew language to their Bible. The books which were included in the Septuagint but not in the original Hebrew Bible were set apart and remained in Greek. Later, when [[Jerome]] translated the Canon of Scripture and produced the [[Latin Vulgate]], he labelled those books as Apocrypha. [[Catholic Church|Catholic]] and [[Eastern Orthodox Church|Orthodox Churches]] consider them to be canonical, some [[Protestant]]s consider them apocryphal, that is, non-canonical books that are useful for instruction.<ref name="Wells1911">{{cite book |author-last1=Wells |author-first1=Preston B. |title=The Story of the English Bible |date=1911 |publisher=Pentecostal Publishing Company |page=41 |language=English |quote=Fourteen books and parts of books are considered ''Apocryphal'' by Protestants. Three of these are recognized by Roman Catholics also as ''Apocryphal''.}}</ref><ref name="FUP1970"/> [[Luther's Bible]] placed them in a separate section in between the Old Testament and New Testament called the Apocrypha, a convention followed by subsequent [[Protestant Bibles]].<ref>{{cite book |last=Ewert |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> Some non-canonical apocryphal texts are called [[pseudepigrapha]], a term that means "[[false attribution]]".<ref name="ISBE">{{Cite encyclopedia |editor-first=Geoffrey William |editor-last = Bromley |title=Apocrypha |encyclopedia=The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia |edition=2 |publisher=W.B. Eerdmans |location=Grand Rapids, Michigan |date= 2009}}</ref>

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.<ref>{{Cite OED|apocryphal|id=9258}}</ref>

==Etymology==
The word's origin is the [[Medieval Latin]] adjective {{Lang|la-x-medieval|apocryphus}} (secret, or non-canonical) from the [[Greek language|Greek]] adjective {{lang|grc|ἀπόκρυφος}}, {{transliteration|grc|apokryphos}}, (private) from the verb {{lang|grc|ἀποκρύπτειν}}, {{transliteration|grc|apokryptein}} (to hide away).<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/apocrypha |title=Apocrypha - Definition |work=merriam-webster.com}}</ref>

It comes from [[Greek language|Greek]] and is formed from the combination of {{transliteration|grc|apo}} (away) and {{transliteration|grc|kryptein}} (hide or conceal).<ref name="978-1-59955-384-9">{{cite book|author-last=Webb |author-first=Diana Barton |title=Forgotten women of God |date=2010 |publisher=Bonneville Books |isbn=978-1-59955-384-9 |oclc=704859621}}</ref>

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'' ({{lang|grc|ἀπόκρυφος}}) was first applied to writings which were kept secret<ref>{{cite book|title=A Dictionary of the Bible: Volume I (Part I: A -- Cyrus) |author-last=Hastings |author-first=James |publisher=The Minerva Group, Inc. |year=2014 |isbn=9781410217226 |pages=116}}</ref> because they were the vehicles of [[esoteric]] knowledge considered too profound or too sacred to be disclosed to anyone other than the initiated. For example, the [[Apprenticeship|disciples]] of the [[Gnostic]] [[Prodicus]] boasted that they possessed the secret ({{lang|grc|ἀπόκρυφα}}) books of [[Zoroaster]]. The term in general enjoyed high consideration among the [[Gnostics]] (see [[Acts of Thomas]], pp.&nbsp;10, 27, 44).<ref name="EB1911">{{harvnb| Charles|1911}}</ref>

[[Sinology|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 [[Artifact (archaeology)|artifacts]] were used as symbols legitimizing and guaranteeing the Emperor's [[Mandate of Heaven|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.<ref name="SeidelAnna">{{cite book|author-last=Seidel |author-first=Anna |chapter=Imperial treasures and Taoist sacraments |editor-first=M. |editor-last=Strickmann |title=Tantric and Taoist Studies in Honor of Rolf A. Stein, II |location=Bruxelles |publisher=Institut belge des hautes etudes chinoises |pages=291–371}}</ref>

From their roots in [[Zhou Dynasty|Zhou]] era China (1066 to 256 BC), these items came to be surpassed in value by texts by the [[Han dynasty]] (206 BC to AD 220). Most of these texts have been destroyed as Emperors, particularly during the Han dynasty, collected these legitimizing objects and proscribed, forbade and burnt nearly all of them to prevent them from falling into the hands of political rivals.<ref name="SeidelAnna" />

==Writings of questionable value==<!-- This was originally part of the Esoteric writing section, but it does not seem to fit. It seems to be a separate topic-->
''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: {{lang|grc|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'').<ref>[http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1016.htm ''Commentaries on Matthew'', X. 18, XIII. 57]{{Nonspecific|date=March 2010}}</ref> The meaning of {{lang|grc|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.<ref name=EB1911 />

==Spurious writings==
In general use, the word ''apocrypha'' came to mean "of doubtful authenticity".<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/apocryphal |title=apocryphal - Definition |work=merriam-webster.com|date=20 February 2024 }}</ref> This meaning also appears in [[Origen]]'s prologue to his commentary on the [[Song of Songs]], of which only the [[Latin]] translation survives:
{{blockquote|{{lang|la|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.}}<ref name=EB1911 />
<br/>
"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==
{{Main|Deuterocanonical books}}
The [[Gelasian Decree]] (generally held now as being the work of an anonymous scholar between 519 and 553) refers to religious works by [[church fathers]] [[Eusebius]], [[Tertullian]] and [[Clement of Alexandria]] as apocrypha. [[Augustine of Hippo|Augustine]] defined the word as meaning simply "obscurity of origin", implying that any book of unknown authorship or questionable authenticity would be considered apocryphal. [[Jerome]] in ''[[Prologus Galeatus]]'' declared that all books outside the Hebrew canon were apocryphal. In practice, Jerome treated some books outside the Hebrew canon as if they were canonical, and the Western Church did not accept Jerome's definition of apocrypha, instead retaining the word's prior meaning.<ref name=EB1911 /> As a result, various church authorities labeled different books as apocrypha, treating them with varying levels of regard.
 
[[Origen]] stated that "the canonical books, as the Hebrews have handed them down, are twenty-two".<ref>{{cite web|title=Origen on the Canon |url=http://www.bible-researcher.com/origen.html |website=BibleResearcher.com |access-date=29 November 2015}}</ref> [[Clement of Alexandria|Clement]] and others cited some apocryphal books as "scripture", "divine scripture", "inspired", and the like. Teachers connected with [[Palestine (region)|Palestine]] and familiar with the Hebrew canon (the [[protocanonical books|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 [[Tyrannius Rufinus|Rufinus]].<ref name=EB1911 />

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.<ref name=EB1911 />

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.<ref name="GeislerMacKenzie1995">{{cite book |author-last1=Geisler |author-first1=Norman L. |author-last2=MacKenzie |author-first2=Ralph E. |title=Roman Catholics and Evangelicals: Agreements and Differences |date=1995 |publisher=Baker Publishing Group |isbn=978-0-8010-3875-4 |page=171 |language=English |quote=Lutherans and Anglicans used it only for ethical / devotional matters but did not consider it authoritative in matters of faith.}}</ref> [[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."<ref name=EB1911 /> Nevertheless, his translation of the Bible included the [[Biblical apocrypha|apocrypha]] and the [[Epistle to the Laodiceans|Epistle of the Laodiceans]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://wesley.nnu.edu/biblical_studies/wycliffe/ |title=John Wycliffe's Translation |work=nnu.edu}}</ref>

Martin Luther did not class apocryphal books as being scripture, but in the German [[Luther Bible]] (1534) the apocrypha are published in a separate section from the other books, although the Lutheran and Anglican lists are different. [[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"/> The fathers of Anabaptism, such as [[Menno Simons]], quoted "them [the Apocrypha] with the same authority and nearly the same frequency as books of the Hebrew Bible" and the texts regarding the martyrdoms under Antiochus IV in [[1 Maccabees]] and [[2 Maccabees]] are held in high esteem by the Anabaptists, who faced persecution in their history.<ref name="deSilva2018">{{cite book |author-last1=deSilva |author-first1=David A. |title=Introducing the Apocrypha: Message, Context, and Significance |date=20 February 2018 |publisher=Baker Books |isbn=978-1-4934-1307-2 |language=English}}</ref>

In [[Reformed tradition|Reformed]] editions (like the Westminster), readers were warned that these books were not "to be any otherwise approved or made use of than other human writings". A milder distinction was expressed elsewhere, such as in the "argument" introducing them in the [[Geneva Bible]], and in the Sixth Article of the [[Church of England]], where it is said that "the other books the church doth read for example of life and instruction of manners," though not to establish doctrine.<ref name=EB1911 /> Among some [[Nonconformist (Protestantism)|Nonconformists]], the term ''apocryphal'' began to take on extra or altered connotations: not just of dubious authenticity, but having spurious or false content,<ref name="McDonald" /> Protestants, being diverse in theological views, were not unanimous in adopting those meanings.<ref name="The Thirty-Nine Articles">{{cite web |title=The Thirty-Nine Articles |url=http://anglicansonline.org/basics/thirty-nine_articles.html |publisher=Anglicans Online |access-date=8 May 2021 |language=English}}</ref><ref name="Wesley1825"/><ref name="FUP1970">{{cite book |title=Quaker Life, Volume 11 |date=1970 |publisher=Friends United Press |page=141 |language=English |quote=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.}}</ref>

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 [[Lutheran Church]], the worldwide [[Anglican Communion]], among many other denominations, such as the [[Methodist Church]]es and [[Quakerism|Quaker Yearly Meetings]].<ref name="The Thirty-Nine Articles"/><ref name="Wesley1825"/><ref name="FUP1970"/> Liturgically, the Catholic, Methodist and Anglican churches have a scripture reading from the Book of Tobit in services of Holy Matrimony.<ref>{{cite book |author-last1=DeSilva |author-first1=David Arthur |title=Introducing the Apocrypha: Message, Context, and Significance |date=2002 |publisher=Baker Academic |isbn=978-0-8010-2319-4 |page=76 |language=English |quote=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).}}</ref>

According to the [[Orthodox Anglican Church]]:
{{blockquote|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.<ref>[http://www.orthodoxanglican.net/downloads/apocrypha.PDF ''The Apocrypha, Bridge of the Testaments''] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070809124209/http://www.orthodoxanglican.net/downloads/apocrypha.PDF |date=August 9, 2007 }}</ref>}}
Though Protestant Bibles historically include [[List of books of the King James Version#Preliminary note|80 books]], 66 of these form the Protestant canon (such as listed in the [[Westminster Confession]] of 1646),<ref name="Ewert"/><ref>{{cite web|title=THE WESTMINSTER CONFESSION OF FAITH |url=http://www.bible-researcher.com/wescontext.html |website=BibleResearcher.com |access-date=29 November 2015}}</ref> which has been well established for centuries, with many today supporting the use of the Apocrypha and others contending against the Apocrypha using various arguments.<ref name="Ewert"/><ref>{{cite journal|author-last1=Blocher|author-first1=Henri |title=Helpful or Harmful? The "Apocrypha" and Evangelical Theology |journal=European Journal of Theology |volume=13 |date=2004 |issue=2 |pages=81–90}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|author-last1=Webster |author-first1=William |title=The Old Testament Canon and the Apocrypha Part 3 |url=http://www.christiantruth.com/articles/Apocrypha3.html |access-date=29 November 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151213013409/http://www.christiantruth.com/articles/Apocrypha3.html |archive-date=13 December 2015 |url-status = dead}}</ref>

==Metaphorical usage==
{{anchor|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==
{{main|Buddhist apocrypha}}
Apocryphal [[Jataka tales|Jatakas]] of the [[Pāli Canon]], such as those belonging to the Paññāsajātaka collection, have been adapted to fit local culture in certain [[Southeast Asia]]n countries and have been retold with amendments to the plots to better reflect Buddhist morals.<ref>{{cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=xt3YAAAAMAAJ |title=The Tale of Prince Samuttakote |isbn=9780896801745 |author-last1=Hudak |author-first1=Thomas |year=1993|publisher=Ohio University Center for International Studies }}</ref><ref>Sengpan Pannyawamsa (2007). [http://www.khamkoo.com/uploads/9/0/0/4/9004485/the_tham_vessantara_jataka_-_a_critical_study_of_the_vj_and_its_influence_on_kengtung_buddhism_eastern_shan_state.pdf "The Tham Vessantara-jAtaka: A Critical Study of the Tham Vessantara-jAtaka and its Influence on Kengtung Buddhism, Eastern Shan State, Burma."] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181004201000/http://www.khamkoo.com/uploads/9/0/0/4/9004485/the_tham_vessantara_jataka_-_a_critical_study_of_the_vj_and_its_influence_on_kengtung_buddhism_eastern_shan_state.pdf |date=2018-10-04 }} PhD Thesis.</ref>

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 [[bas relief]] from ancient temple walls.

==Judaism==
{{Main|Jewish apocrypha|Development of the Hebrew Bible canon}}
The Jewish apocrypha, known in [[Hebrew language|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 [[Development of the Hebrew Bible canon|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.<ref>{{cite web|title=APOCRYPHA - JewishEncyclopedia.com |url=http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/1644-apocrypha |access-date=12 June 2020 |website=www.jewishencyclopedia.com}}</ref>

Although [[Orthodox Jews]] believe in the exclusive [[canonization]] of the current 24 books in the [[Hebrew Bible]], they also consider the [[Oral Torah]], which they believe was [[Law given to Moses at Sinai|handed down from Moses]], to be authoritative. Some argue that the [[Sadducees]], unlike the [[Pharisees]] but like the [[Samaritans]], seem to have maintained an earlier and smaller number of texts as canonical, preferring to hold to only what was written in the [[Law of Moses]] (the [[Torah]]),<ref>{{cite encyclopedia|url=http://jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=40&letter=S&search=Sadducees |title=SADDUCEES |encyclopedia=jewishencyclopedia.com}}</ref> making most of the presently accepted canon, both Jewish and Christian, apocryphal in their eyes.{{citation needed|date=April 2021}} Others believe that it is often mistakenly asserted that the [[Sadducees]] only accepted the [[Pentateuch]] (Torah).<ref name="Holman study bible">{{cite book|title=Holman study bible. |date=2013 |publisher=Holman Bible Pub |others=Howard, Jeremy Royal., Blum, Edwin., Stabnow, David K., Holman Bible Staff. |isbn=978-1-4336-0509-3 |edition=NKJV |location=Nashville, TN |oclc=828886896}}</ref> The [[Essene]]s in Judea and the [[Therapeutae]] in [[Egypt]] were said to have a secret literature (see [[Dead Sea scrolls]]).{{citation needed|date=April 2021}}

Other traditions maintained different customs regarding canonicity.<ref>[http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/arch/sbrandt/canon.htm The Old Testament Canon] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071206105955/http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/arch/sbrandt/canon.htm |date=December 6, 2007 }}</ref> The [[Beta Israel|Ethiopian Jews]], for instance, seem to have retained a spread of canonical texts similar to the [[Ethiopian Orthodoxy|Ethiopian Orthodox Christians]].<ref>[http://gbgm-umc.org/UMW/BIBLE/ethold.stm Ethiopian Orthodox Old Testament] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071231095249/http://gbgm-umc.org/UMW/BIBLE/ethold.stm |date=December 31, 2007 }}</ref><ref>''Encyclopaedia Judaica'', Vol 6, p 1147.</ref>

==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}}

==Taoism==
Prophetic texts called the ''Ch'an-wei'' were written by [[Han Dynasty]] (206 BC to AD 220) [[Daoshi|Taoist priests]] to legitimize as well as curb imperial power.<ref name="SeidelAnna"/> They deal with treasure objects that were part of the [[Zhou dynasty|Zhou]] (1066 to 256 BC) royal treasures. Emerging from the instability of the [[Warring States period]] (476–221 BC), ancient Chinese scholars saw the centralized rule of the Zhou as an ideal model for the new Han empire to emulate.

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.<ref name="SeidelAnna"/> The desired effect was to confirm the Han emperor's [[Mandate of Heaven|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 ''[[fangshi]]''. These were a class of nobles who were not part of the state administration; they were considered specialists or occultists, for example diviners, astrologers, alchemists or healers.<ref name="SeidelAnna"/> It is from this class of nobles that the first [[Taoist]] priests are believed to have emerged. [[Seidel, Anna|Seidel]] points out however that the scarcity of sources relating to the formation of early [[Taoism]] make the exact link between the apocryphal texts and the Taoist beliefs unclear.<ref name="SeidelAnna"/>

==See also==
* [[List of Gospels]]
* [[Lost literary work|Lost work]]
* [[Occult]]

* [[Shakespeare apocrypha]]

* [[Fan fiction]]

== Notes ==
{{notelist}}

== References ==
=== Citations ===
{{Reflist}}

=== Sources ===
{{refbegin}}
* {{EB1911 |first = Robert Henry |last = Charles |wstitle = Apocryphal Literature |volume = 2 |pages = 175–183 }}
{{refend}}

==External links==
{{Wiktionary|apocrypha}}
{{wikiquote}}
{{Commons category|Apocrypha}}
* [http://alinsuciu.com/ Alin Suciu's blog on various Coptic apocrypha]
* [http://wn.elib.com/Library/Religious/AP/Apocry_index.html ''The Apocrypha''] is in the religion section at the e.Lib.
* [http://wesley.nnu.edu/biblical_studies/noncanon/index.htm Noncanonical Literature]
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20040614161145/http://www.comparative-religion.com/christianity/apocrypha/ Complete NT Apocrypha] Claims to be the largest collection of New Testament apocrypha online
* [http://st-takla.org/pub_Deuterocanon/Deuterocanon-Apocrypha_El-Asfar_El-Kanoneya_El-Tanya__0-index.html Deuterocanonical books] - Full text from Saint Takla Haymanot Church Website (also presents the full text in Arabic)
* [https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/bd/apocrypha LDS Bible Dictionary - Apocrypha] – Definition & LDS POV, including brief book descriptions.
* [https://archive.org/details/AldenicumTheTrilogy/ Aldenicum The Trilogy], an apocryphal view on life and reality around us.
* [http://www.lcms.org/ca/www/cyclopedia/02/display.asp?t1=a&word=APOCRYPHA Christian Cyclopedia article on Apocrypha]
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20071014070146/http://bombaxo.com/allusions.html New Testament Allusions to Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha]
* [http://www.biblestudymagazine.com/interactive/canon/ Canon Comparison Chart]
* {{Cite AmCyc |last=Schem |first=A. J. |author-link=A. J. Schem |wstitle=Apocrypha |short=x}}
* {{Cite NIE|wstitle=Apocrypha|year=1905 |short=x}}
* [http://www.earlychristianwritings.com EarlyChristianWritings.com] A chronological list of early Christian books and letters, both complete and incomplete works; [[Biblical canon|canonical]], apocryphal and [[Gnosticism|Gnostic]]. Many with links to English translations.
{{Historicity}}{{Books of the Bible}}
{{Authority control}}

[[Category:Apocrypha| ]]
[[Category:Christian terminology]]