Why Does the Roman Catholic Bible Contain the Apocrypha Books? Are These Books Inspired by God?

WHY DOES THE ROMAN CATHOLIC BIBLE CONTAIN THE APOCRYPHA BOOKS? ARE THESE BOOKS INSPIRED BY GOD? 

By Ezekiel Kimosop 

INTRODUCTION 

The seven extra canonical books collectively referred to as the Apocrypha are Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, Baruch, First Maccabees and Second Maccabees. 

Other Apocryphal additions include:

A) Additions to Esther (Vulgate Esther 10:4 - 16:24, see rather in NAB, a Catholic translation)

B) Additions to the Book of Daniel include: 

i) Prayer of Azariah and Song of the Three Holy Children (Daniel 3:24-90).

ii) Susanna (found in Daniel 13 under the Vulgate and the Septuagint prologue)

iii) Bell and the Dragon (Vulgate Daniel 14, Septuagint epilogue) 

These books have been the subject of considerable debates throughout the church ages that have pitted the Roman Catholic Church against the Protestant Church communions who resoundingly reject the additional books and accounts as uninspired and extra canonical literature which cannot be admitted into the canon of Scripture. 

The Bible canonization process took centuries to conclude. It started in the second century and was substantially concluded in the fourth century but not without its share of controversy. 

CANONIZATION PROCESS 

During the Councils of Hippo [393 AD] and Carthage [397 AD], the Church Fathers took time to prayerfully scrutinize all religious literature at their disposal including the Apocryphal books that were written during the 400 year gap between Malachi and Matthew. 

They unanimously arrived at the decision to consider these books as uninspired literature though some held them as mere wisdom books. 

They further determined that the apostolic writings and other New Testament literature should be added to the Old Testament Scripture to arrive at the the 66 Book canon of the Bible available to us today. 

The canonization process was not that simple. Sections of the early church theologians continued to question the inclusion of some of the Scripture books including the Book of Esther and the Letter of James while others held onto the Apocryphal books. 

Interestingly, the Book of Esther was questioned by some Reformation scholars on account of the absence of a single mention of God in the writings!

However its inclusion was defended on the basis that it revealed the working of God to preserve His people in Persia. The church fathers were not convinced that the criticism on Esther was legitimate. 

The Letter of James was also questioned by the Reformation scholars including Martin Luther who referred to it as a "canon destitute of straw".  

Luther insisted that the Letter of James taught salvation by works which contradicted Ephesians 2:8-9. Luther firmly believed in salvation by faith alone. 

This claim was however established to be devoid of theological substance because James primarily taught that true faith should be evidenced by good deeds. 

Most of the early church theologians supported the decision of the Church Fathers on sealing the Scripture canonization process. 

Among leading early church theologians who rejected the Apocrypha are Jerome, Athanasius [who was an Early Church African theologian from North Africa], Cyril of Jerusalem, and others. 

Before the Council of Carthage, there was no unified canon apart from the Old Testament writings which were available in the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament Scripture written in Alexandria. 

This canon was later translated into the Latin Vulgate by Jerome. 

The New Testament apostolic writings were available to the Church and were the key sources of Early Church doctrine. 

The Roman Catholic Church later returned the Apocryphal books into their canon but they were not officially accepted as books of instruction until the Reformation period in the 16th Century when the Catholic Church insisted that the books were equally inspired. This declaration only added to widening division between the Roman Catholic Church and the growing Protestant Reformation. 

Against all reason, the Roman Catholic Church have consistently rejected any attempts at questioning the inclusion of these books in their Catholic Bible despite the obvious flaws that they contain. 

They also introduced a series of unbiblical church traditions and practices into their liturgy and worship. 

This marked a radical departure from the position taken by the Early Church councils. 

The Roman Catholic Bible is therefore extra canonical to the extent that it includes the Apocryphal literature. 

GROUNDS ON WHICH THE APOCRYPHAL BOOKS ARE CONSIDERED UNINSPIRED AND EXTRA CANONICAL 

Let us now conclude by outlining some of the key grounds by which the Protestant community finds the Apocryphal books as extra canonical. 

1) The Church Fathers determined the period of their writing as falling into the "prophetic silence" era when there was no evidence that God sent any prophets among the Jews. It is theologically accepted by Protestant theologians that no prophet spoke the mind of God between Malachi and the coming of John the Baptist as predicted in Malachi. 

2) The Apocryphal literature contain several controversial accounts, some of which were not corroborated by independent authors of their time. The authors of some of these books are largely obscure. 

3) The teachings of the Apocrypha are irreconcilable with the Old Testament Scripture concerning the revelation of God. There is no consistent correlation between the Apocrypha and the Old Testament writings. Some of the accounts found in the Apocryphal writings are inconsistent with the corresponding passages of Scripture books. 

4) Some of the characters and events described in the Apocryphal writings cannot be authenticated and neither can their authors be independently acclaimed as speaking the mind of God. 

4) The Apocryphal books teach gross unbiblical doctrines such as the doctrine of Purgatory which is advanced by the Roman Catholic Church but which is totally and manifestly inconsistent with the revelation of Scripture regarding the after life (see 2 Maccabees 12:41-46).

5) The Apocryphal books teach that God hears the prayers of the dead (Baruch 3:4) and lay claim to the pre-existence of human souls (Wisdom 8:19, 20). Protestant theological scholars consider these doctrines as heretical.

6) The Book of Wisdom 11:17 rejects the biblical doctrine of creation Ex-nihilo, that God created everything from nothing. To deny this truth is to completely misrepresent the revelation of God in Genesis 1-2.

7) It is instructive that the Jews have consistently rejected the Apocryphal books as Scripture. Jesus never quoted from a single book of the Apocrypha and neither did He affirm any of their characters yet these writings were largely available during the time of His earthly ministry. 

Jesus mentioned several Old Testament characters such as Noah, Abraham, Solomon, Job, David, but made no single reference to any of the Apocryphal characters and neither even mentioned or taught from the passage of a single Apocryphal book. 

8) Finally, there is no evidence that the Apocryphal books were taught among the Jews at the time of Christ. No writers have ever cited these literature as authority for their works and this weakens their scholarly and theological standing as reference materials for biblical scholars. 

The apocrypha must therefore be relegated to the periphery. They should be understood as ordinary religious literature which are not inspired by God and should not inform Christian instruction or church doctrine. 

© Ezekiel Kimosop 2018 

[key online reference sources: www.blueletterbible.org/faq/don_stewart/don_stewart_395.cfm 

www.carm.org/early-church-fathers-canon]