stumbling block.”—Prov. 3:1, 2; Ps. 119:165.

19. How only may those who love peace and contentment be assured of enjoying it forever and ever?

¹⁹ All persons everywhere who are of good will and who love peace and unity, if you want to share in the all-surpassing happiness and live in everlasting peace and contentment in a paradise garden under the rule by God’s kingdom, then quickly associate yourselves with Jehovah’s peace-loving witnesses, and together with them be mild-tempered, calm, lovingly patient, self-controlled. Continue to obey the divine will, which includes Psalm 37: “Do not show yourself heated up because of the evildoers. . . . For like grass they will speedily wither . . . Let anger alone and leave rage . . . For evildoers themselves will be cut off, but those hoping in Jehovah are the ones that will possess the earth. And just a little while longer and the wicked one will be no more, and you will certainly give attention to his place and he will not be. But the meek ones [the mild-tempered ones] themselves will possess the earth and they will indeed find their exquisite delight in the abundance of peace.”—Ps. 37:1, 2, 8-11.

The Apocrypha—of God or of Men?

IS THE Apocrypha of God or of men? Is it part of “all Scripture [that] is inspired of God” and beneficial for our being “fully competent, completely equipped for every good work”? Or does it belong to “the tradition of men,” to “the elementary things of the world,” against which the apostle Paul warned Christians? What are the facts?—2 Tim. 3:16, 17; Col. 2:8.

The original meaning of the term “apocrypha” is made clear from Jesus’ use of it: “For there is nothing hidden that will not become manifest, neither anything carefully concealed that will never become known.” In time, however, the term took on the unfavorable connotation of “writings or statements of doubtful authorship or authority.” As most commonly used today, “The Apocrypha” refers to the eleven additional writings declared canonical by the Roman Catholic Church in her Council of Trent (1546), but which are challenged by others.—Luke 8:17.

These eleven additional writings are Tobit, Judith, Wisdom (of Solomon), Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, 1 and 2 Maccabees, a supplement to Esther and three additions to Daniel: The Song of the Three Holy Children, Susanna and the Elders, and The Destruction of Bel and the Dragon. Catholic writers refer to these books as deuterocanonical, meaning “of the second (or later) canon,” as distinguished from protocanonical.

HISTORY OF THE APOCRYPHA

There is little information as to when and by whom the various books of the Apocrypha were written. What evidence there is points to the second and first centuries B.C. The Greek Septuagint Version was produced without the Apocrypha, those writings being added to it later. They became part of the Catholic Bible because Jerome used the Septuagint as a basis for his Latin Vulgate translation.

The writings of the Apocrypha had been placed in the Septuagint wherever they seemed to fit best and there they remained until the time of the Reformation. Luther, due to the influence of able Bible scholar and radical reformer Karlstadt, gathered the Apocrypha in one place, between the Hebrew and Christian Greek Scriptures, and at the same time noted that these did not have the same weight of authority as did the rest of the Bible.

More than a century previous the Bible lover Wycliffe left the Apocrypha entirely out of his translation. Coverdale, however, who in 1535 produced the first English Bible in print, brought the Apocrypha back into the Bible. The King James Version of 1611 also contained the Apocrypha. In fact, Archbishop of Canterbury George Abbott decreed a year’s imprisonment for anyone who dared to publish a Bible without the Apocrypha! Incidentally, it should be mentioned that the Apocrypha of these Protestant English Bibles contained fourteen writings, the Roman Catholic Church having seen fit, in its Council of Trent, to drop three of those found in the Vulgate. These three were the Prayer of Manasses and 1 and 2 Esdras (also known in the Septuagint as 3 and 4 Esdras, as in that version 1 and 2 Esdras refers to Ezra [Esdras] and Nehemiah).

But the Apocrypha was not to remain in the English Protestant Bible. Those zealots, the Puritans, so opposed its presence that they have been accused of “persecuting the Apocrypha.” A like zeal was displayed by the Scottish Protestants, who felt so strongly about the matter that they gave the British Bible Societies an ultimatum: Cut out the Apocrypha or we will cut out our financial support!

At present the Apocrypha is growing in popularity. Liberal and modernist Bible scholars and theologians claim that the Apocrypha influenced the forming of the Christian religion and that therefore to understand it fully one must be familiar with the Apocrypha. They claim that no Bible is complete without it and that it should be more widely read and taken more seriously. Thus one asks, What advantage has Ecclesiastes over Wisdom and Baruch? Why should Esther be a part of the Bible canon and not Judith? Why are 1 and 2 Chronicles a part of the Bible and not 1 and 2 Maccabees?

Thus we have two opposite opinions today regarding the Apocrypha, with the same result: The liberals and modernists, believing that there is no such thing as divine inspiration or revelation, hold that the Apocrypha is every bit as good as the Bible. The Roman Catholic theologians, believing the Apocrypha to be inspired, hold that the Apocrypha is every bit as good as the Bible and, in fact, a part of it. However, the facts will show both to be mistaken.

EXTERNAL EVIDENCE AGAINST THE APOCRYPHA

Since the authenticity of the Bible has been demonstrated repeatedly in the columns of this magazine by such lines of evidence as fulfillment of prophecy, archaeological discoveries, harmony and candor of the writers, and so forth, the discussion here will proceed with the external and internal evidence showing that the Apocrypha could not possibly have been inspired. Chief external evidence is the