Written by Robert Jones

Acworth, Georgia

Introduction

Apocrypha Quiz

Historical Background

The Great Debate – authoritative or not?

Books of the Apocrypha

Summary

Other Christian History & Theology courses

I’ve taught the Methodist “Disciples” Bible study three times (and have started on #4). One of the things that has been evident in all of my Disciples sessions is the somewhat jarring note presented by the sudden end of the Old Testament (around 430 B.C), and the beginning of the New Testament (around 4 B.C.) After spending many months studying the history and theology of the Jews before Christ, suddenly the students are expected to make a 400-year jump, with no context. Some examples of the perplexity that this can cause might include:

• There is nothing about the Maccabean Revolt in the Old or New Testament. As such, it would be difficult (for example) for Jews to explain the meaning of Hanukkah to their Christian brethren
• There is nothing about Alexander the Great (356 - 323 B.C.) and his impact on Palestine in the Old or New Testaments
• The Old Testament mentions very little about Satan, demons, or hell. Yet, those topics are common in the New Testament – what changed in those 400 years?
• The Old Testament doesn’t really discuss the concept of the resurrection of the dead, yet the Pharisees believe in this doctrine in the New Testament. Where did this doctrine come from?

However, there is a set of Jewish documents that add to our understanding of the historical and theological background of the Inter-Testamental period – the Apocrypha. The Apocrypha is, in general terms, the set of books that appear in the Greek Septuagint, but not in the Hebrew manuscripts of the Old Testament. Most of these books were written in the aforementioned Inter-Testamental period (although some claim to have been written earlier.) While many of these books appear in the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Bibles (referred to by the Roman Catholics as “deuterocanonical”), many Protestants (especially those from a Reformed Church background) are not even aware that these books exist, and may be a bit shocked when they attend a Catholic service, and hear readings from the Book of Sirach, or Tobit!

There have been arguments for 2,000 years as to whether the Apocryphal books should be considered “authoritative” – i.e. of the same authority as the Old and New Testament. Some have argued for their equal authority (Saint Augustine), some have argued for their inclusion in the Bible, but in an appendix (Martin Luther), and some have argued vehemently against their inclusion in the Bible in any form (the views of 17^th century English Calvinists that still impact most Protestant Bible today.) However, whether one accepts these books as authoritative or not, the Apocrypha (along with the Dead Sea Scrolls) provides valuable historical and theological background to our understanding of the First Century A.D. Christian movement.

This primary focus of this booklet will be to examine the Apocrypha from the point of view of its help in illuminating the Jewish roots of Christianity. Three areas of special interest will be considered:

1. The valuable historical background provided in the Apocrypha for the Inter-Testamental period, especially the Maccabean Revolt
2. The development of certain theological viewpoints in the Inter-Testamental period that would later flourish under Christianity, such as resurrection of the dead, belief in the devil, demons, and hell, a focus on the end times, belief in a divine Messiah, and a highly developed “angel-ology”
3. The great debate over the years in Christian circles as to whether the Apocrypha should be considered authoritative

The term “apocrypha” comes from a Greek word meaning “hidden”, or “things hidden away”. In modern parlance, the word is often used to describe things that are spurious, or of questionable authority. The term “Apocrypha” (capital “A”) refers to a collection of books written in the Inter-Testamental period (and into the 1^st century). In general, these books (2 Esdras and Prayer of Manasseh are exceptions) appeared in the Greek translation of the Old Testament known as the Septuagint, but not in Hebrew versions of the Old Testament. For the sake of this study, I’ll be using the list of books included in the NRSV Apocrypha, which include:

• Tobit
• Judith
• Esther (Greek version)
• Wisdom of Solomon
• Sirach (or Ecclesiasticus)
• Baruch
• Letter of Jeremiah
• Prayer of Azariah and the Song of the Three Jews
• Susanna (Chapter 13 of the Greek Daniel)
• Bel & the Dragon (Chapter 14 of the Greek Daniel)
• 1 Maccabees
• 2 Maccabees
• 1 Esdras
• Prayer of Manasseh
• Psalm 151
• 3 Maccabees
• 2 Esdras
• 4 Maccabees

I am also including (perhaps somewhat arbitrarily) one other book in this study – 1 Enoch. I’m including this book because 1) it is the only Apocryphal book quoted in the New Testament (Jude 14/15) and 2) some 20 copies of 1 Enoch have been found among the Dead Sea Scrolls, perhaps arguing for the idea that at least one Jewish sect (Essenes) viewed the work as authoritative.

There are other apocryphal Jewish writings from the same period, often referred to collectively as the Pseudepigrapha, meaning that these works were often written under assumed names (the word means “with false subscriptions”). Some of the works (which will not be studied in this course) in this category include:

• Assumption of Moses (see Jude 9)
• Life of Adam and Eve
• Book of Jubilees
• Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs
• and many others...

Of course, some books in the Apocrypha are also written with “false subscriptions” – Baruch, Letter of Jeremiah, 2 Esdras, Wisdom of Solomon, etc., adding to some of the confusion surrounding what books are considered to be part of the Apocrypha, and what books are part of the Pseudepigrapha.

1. There are no references to Jewish apocryphal works in the New Testament T/F
2. The reason for the Maccabean Revolt in the 2^nd Century B.C. was to kick the Romans out of Palestine T/F
3. The reason it was called the Maccabean Revolt is because a family named Maccabeus led the fighting T/F
4. There was no concept of the resurrection of the dead in pre-Christian Jewish theology T/F
5. Martin Luther felt that the books of the Jewish apocrypha were heretical, and should not be read under any circumstances T/F
6. Out of the major Christian denominations in the world, only the Roman Catholic Church includes books from the Apocrypha in their Bibles T/F
7. One of the reasons that some people feel that the Apocryph is not authoritative is because there are geographical and historical errors in some of its books T/F
8. Most of the books of the Apocrypha were included in the Greek translation of the Old Testament known as the Septuagint T/F
9. Saint Augustine believed that the Septuagint translation was inspired by God, and is therefore of equal authority with the original Hebrew T/F
10. Possible Hebrew sources for the Septuagint have been found among the Dead Sea Scrolls T/F

One of the most significant historical events in the period between the Old and New Testaments is the rule of Alexander the Great (b. 356 B.C.; d. 323 B.C.) Alexander, a Macedonian by birth, was the first “world conqueror”. He conquered most of what would today be Greece, Egypt, Turkey, Syria, Palestine, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan and even parts of Northern India. Alexander brought Greek culture to the lands that he conquered, beginning a period of “Hellenization” in the conquered regions that would last for hundreds of years.

So how did all of this impact Palestine and the Jews? After the premature death of Alexander in June of 323 B.C., his kin and generals squabbled over who should control his vast empire. In time, three kingdoms would dominate the Mediterranean until the advent of the Roman Empire: Macedon, ruled by the Antigonids, Egypt, ruled by the Ptolemies, and Syria, ruled by the Seleucids. It is the last two that impact our story here, as Palestine was in the middle of these two great empires. While Palestine would change hands on more than one occasion between the competing kingdoms, it was ruled primarily by the Seleucids. The heavy handedness of one of their kings, Antiochus IV (ruled 175-163 B.C.) led to the Maccabean revolt, which eventually led to a period of independence for the Jews in Palestine.

1^st Maccabees, one of the great histories of the ancient world, describes the rule of Alexander the Great and the impact of the breakup of his empire on the Jews in its first chapter:

The Septuagint is a term applied to a Greek translation of the Old Testament, started in the 3^rd century B.C. The translation was necessary because, as a result of the Diaspora which occurred in the centuries preceding, Jews lived all through the Mediterranean, and had to adopt Greek (“Hellenized”) customs and language to survive as “strangers in a strange land”.

Legend has it that the translation of the Old Testament (or, at least, the Pentateuch) was done at the order of King Ptolemy II of Egypt (285-246 B.C.) The legend records that 72 Jewish scholars (or 70 in some accounts) produced 72 translations in 72 days – without a word of variation! (The word septuagint derives from “seventy”, and is sometimes represented as LXX). Early Church Father Justyn Martyr (c. 150 A.D.) recounts the legend, and makes it clear that he believes it is true:

The Septuagint held a place of special importance among the early Christians – the vast majority of quotations in the New Testament from the Old are taken from the Septuagint – and not the Masoretic Text (MT) which forms our modern day Old Testament. As there are significant differences between the LXX and MT, the natural inclination is to believe the “original” Hebrew text (MT), instead of the Greek translation. However, Biblical manuscripts found among the Dead Sea Scrolls indicate that the differences between the LXX and the MT are not necessarily because the LXX is a translation, but because the LXX is based on a different Hebrew source than the MT. If this is true, it may elevate the authoritative of the LXX in the eyes of Biblical scholars (the early Christians may have been right all along in using the LXX!!). Hershel Shanks, editor of Biblical Archeology Review, comments:

Saint Augustine was a strong proponent of the Septuagint, according divine inspiration to the original translators. Clearly, Augustine considered the Septuagint to be of equal authority with Hebrew versions of the Old Testament:

So why do we care about the relative authority of the Septuagint compared to early Hebrew versions of the Old Testament? Because the Greek Septuagint contains a number of books not in the Hebrew Masoretic Text. Those books (with a couple of additions) make up the Apocrypha.

The Maccabean Revolt, started in 167 B.C. by a Jewish Priest named Mattathias, was one of the defining moments of Jewish history. One of the high points of the Revolt, the rededication of the Temple, is still commemorated today by the Jewish Festival of Hanukkah.

At the time of the revolt, Palestine was under the control of the Seleucid King Antiochus Epiphanes IV. Antiochus (possibly the “abomination that causes desolation” in Daniel) was 1) hard up for money and 2) determined to Hellenize the territories controlled by him. These two factors would put him on a collision course with the Jews in Palestine.

In order to get more money for his depleted treasury, Antiochus IV on at least one occasion looted the Jerusalem Temple treasury (c. 169 B.C.). This act followed in the footsteps of his predecessor Selecus IV (187-175 B.C.) who had done the same thing. Antiochus also put the Jerusalem High Priest position up to the highest bidder – High Priests Jason and Menelaus both achieved their positions through bribes to the Seleucid King.

In c. 167 B.C., Antiochus intensified his attempts at Hellenization by desecrating the Temple in Jerusalem. The act is vividly described in 1 Maccabees 1:54-61:

These outrages would lead to a revolt that would eventually kick the Seleucids out of Palestine. The revolt was named after the nickname of one of its greatest leaders – Judas Maccabeus, or Judas “the hammer”.

The revolt started when a Priest from Modein named Mattathias refused to commit an apostasy ordered by the King’s men in Modein. Mattathias ended up killing both an officer of the king, and a Jew that agreed to commit the apostasy. 1 Maccabees 2:23-28 describes the scene:

Mattathias may have fled to the hills, but a great revolt would grow out his actions. Mattathias would only live for another year, but the revolt would succeed under the leadership of his five sons – John, Simon, Judas, Eleazer, and Jonathan. Three of them would lead the rebel forces in succession (Judas, Jonathan, and Simon), and two would rise to the position of High Priest and Ruler of Judea (Jonathan and Simon).

When Mattathias was on his deathbed, he turned the reins of the revolt over to his son Judas. The scene is described by 1^st century Jewish historian Flavius Josephus:

Judas won a number of battles against the Seleucids, and in December of 164 B.C., Judas occupied the Temple area in Jerusalem, and cleansed and re-dedicated the Temple. After the rededication, the Jewish Festival of Hanukkah was established, and it is still celebrated today. The establishment of the festival is described in 1 Maccabees 4:59:

In c. 160 B.C, Judas fell in battle against Seleucid commander Bacchides. 1 Maccabees commemorated the event by using language that had heretofore only been used to describe the great Kings of Israel’s past – “How is the valiant man fallen, that delivered Israel!”

The revolt didn’t end with the death of Judas Maccabeus, though. His brother Jonathan, and later his brother Simon took over the leadership of the revolt. By skillful manipulation of a state of disorder in the Seleucid line of succession, Jonathan was eventually named High Priest. After his death, his brother Simon took over as ruler, and in c. 142 B.C. the last vestiges of Seleucid control of Israel ended:

Descendents of Mattathias would rule as High Priests and ethnarchs until the time of Herod the Great (37 A.D.) This long period of family rule is known as the Hasmonean Dynasty.

Three books of the Apocrypha record events of the Maccabean Revolt (1, 2, 4 Maccabees).

The great debate – whether the Apocrypha should be viewed as authoritative or not by Christians, has raged for 2,000 years. In the early years of the Church, it was natural for Christians to use the Greek Septuagint translation of the Bible, as this was the language most familiar to them. As such, many of the Early Church fathers quoted from the Apocrypha in the same way that they quoted from the New and Old Testaments. However, there was some discord, even as early as the 4^th century.

In 382 A.D., St. Jerome was asked by Pope Damasus to translate the Bible into Latin (the “Vulgate”). Jerome felt that only Hebrew texts were authoritative. He therefore rejected the Greek additions to the Septuagint, but, under pressure, still included them in the Vulgate, calling them “apocryphal”.

On the other end of the spectrum, Jerome’s contemporary, St. Augustine, strongly believed in the canonicity of the Greek additions to the Septuagint, as he considered the Septuagint translation to be divinely inspired. St. Athanasius (c. 296-373 A.D.), whose list of books of the New Testament would become the standard of the Christian world, took a middle view, stating in his 367 A.D. Paschal letter:

Augustine’s view would prevail, though, and the Roman Catholic Church would include the Apocryphal books in the Catholic Bible, assigning them the official status of “deuterocanonical”, or being of a second tier of the canon. This view was made official at the Council of Trent in 1546, which condemned:

The Orthodox Church, which generally uses the Septuagint as its primary translation, also accepts the Apocrypha as canonical, and adds other books not included in the Vulgate (such as 1 Esdras, 3 & 4 Maccabees and Psalm 151).

The most heated debates regarding the authoritative-ness of the Apocrypha began in the Reformation. In 1534, Martin Luther placed the books of the Apocrypha in a separate section between the Old and New testaments, and commented:

This position, of course, is only mildly different than the Roman Catholic “deuterocanonical” view. The real difference of opinion occurred with 17^th century Calvinists (Puritans) who successfully lobbied to have the following section added to the 1646 Westminster Confession:

The Calvinist argument against the canonicity of the Apocrypha traditionally includes these points:

• The books of the Apocrypha are not part of the Jewish canon
• While 90% of the New Testament references to the Old Testament are from the Septuagint, there are no New Testament references to the Apocrypha
• Jerome rejected the Apocryphal books
• There are geographical and historical errors in some of the Apocryphal books (Judith, for example)
• None of the authors of the Apocrypha claimed divine inspiration
• Lying and assassination are accepted as tools for good in one book (Judith)

To balance out the argument slightly (without taking a stand one way or another), it should be noted:

• As mentioned previously, the Dead Sea Scrolls have given new status to the authoritative-ness of the Septuagint, which may have come from a different Hebrew Source than the one later approved by the Jewish Rabbis (the Masoretic Text)
• The book of Jude in the New Testament actually does refer to two apocryphal works – the Assumption of Moses, and 1 Enoch (although these two books are not included in the Vulgate)
• One of the reasons that Jerome rejected the Apocryphal books was because they were written in Greek, not Hebrew. Yet later evidence (including the Dead Sea Scrolls) indicate that many of the books of the Apocrypha were originally written in Hebrew (or Aramaic).
• One of the reasons that the apocryphal books were rejected by the Jewish rabbis is because they believed that the age of revelation ended with Ezra. Christians, of course, believe that the age of revelation ended with the death of John the Apostle, theoretically extending the time of revelation to include the period in which the Apocrypha was written.

The argument continues today. The Church of England includes the Apocrypha in their Bible editions, but stipulates that they can’t be used to prove any point of doctrine (Article 3 of the Thirty-Nine Articles). The Lutheran Church typically views them as useful for study, but not on the same level as the books of the Old or New Testament canon.

Tobit is a story of a pious Jew living in Ninevah during the Assyrian occupation of Northern Israel in the 7^th century B.C. The author and namesake of the story, Tobit, goes blind as the result of committing a pious act – burying a Jew who had been strangled in the marketplace.

Tobit is not the only person with problems in the piece. A woman named Sarah is possessed by a demon named Asmodeus with dire consequences:

As the result of prayers of supplication from Sarah and Tobit, the angel Raphael is sent to heal both of them. Through a series of events, the son of Tobit teams up with Raphael (not knowing that he’s with an angel), and:

• Marries Sarah
• Casts out the demon Asmodeus, using a foul-smelling concoction made up of a fish liver and heart recommended by the Angel Raphael
• Heals his father of his blindness using the same concoction

The pious Tobit lives to the ripe old age of 112, and his son lives to 117.

In addition to the moral lesson that the pious are eventually rewarded in this life (similar to the message in Job), Tobit is characterized by flashes of humor. Two examples:

• It is the smell of the fish concoction which drives the demon “to the remotest parts of Egypt”
• There is a wonderful scene that has Sarah’s father Raguel telling his servants to dig a grave for young Tobias on the night of his wedding, because of the possibility that he may be killed by the demon before the morning. When a maid discovers that Tobias is quite alive, Raguel has the grave filled in before the sun rises.

Relevance to Christianity

Tobit is of interest in a Christian context because it helps illuminate the intense Jewish interest in angels and demons during the Inter-Testamental period (see 2 Esdras and 1 Enoch for more on theme). In the New Testament, Jesus drives out many demons, but the concept is pretty much absent in the Old Testament.

As far as the angel Raphael is concerned, we may view that he is an archangel, because of a statement in Tobit 12:15:

The beautiful words spoken by Tobias during his wedding ceremony are said to be used by the Amish in modern-day weddings:

Judith is the story of a beautiful young widow who saves a Jewish town from the massed troops of King Nebuchadnezzar. The town is named Bethulia, and is unknown outside of this work. It appears to be located in Samaria.

The town is besieged by almost 200,000 troops under army commander Holefernes. Holefernes gives orders to cut off the water supply of Bethulia, and in a short time, the city is completely without water. In despair, the citizens consider surrendering, but Judith gives a passionate speech to the elders of the town, and convinces them to let her try to save them. She doesn’t specify how she will go about it, though.

Judith leaves Bethulia after making herself as alluring as possible.

She is quickly captured by one of the patrols of Holofernes, and taken to the commander. Judith offers to help Holofernes capture Bethulia. The commander is smitten with her, and gives her free rein to move around the camp.

Eventually, Judith cuts of the head of Holofernes, after he becomes drunk. The event is described in some detail:

Judith returns to Bethulia in triumph, and the besieging army eventually withdrawals in disarray. The Elder Uzziah says of Judith:

The story of Judith of Bethulia was made into a silent film by D.W. Griffith in 1913/14.

Still from Judith of Bethulia, D.W. Griffith, 1914

Judith is one of the strongest female characters in all of Jewish tradition.

Relevance to Christianity

Out of all of the books of the Apocrypha, this is perhaps the work that causes the raises the most ire among some Protestant groups. Among the objections:

• The book contains historical and geographical errors. The first one is in the first verse of the first chapter, which tells us that King Nebuchadnezzar ruled over the Assyrians in Nineveh. Nebuchadnezzar, of course, was the ruler of the Babylonians, not the Assyrians.
• The book seems to accept lying, deceit, and assassination, as tools for good

Martin Luther had a milder point of view regarding Judith:

The “Greek Esther” contains six lengthy additions to the original “Hebrew Esther” found in the Old Testament, including two letters (proclamations) by King Artaxerxes, prayers by Esther and Mordecai, and a dream (and interpretation of the dream) by the latter. The most striking difference in the Greek Esther, though, is the fact that the word “God” or “Lord” is mentioned over 50 times, whereas God isn’t mentioned once in the Hebrew Esther!

In the Hebrew Esther, most of the positive action happens as the result of the personal bravery or resourcefulness of the two heroes, Esther and Mordecai. In the Greek Esther, most of the action is as a result of God’s will. An example is the famous scene where an uninvited Esther invades the inner court of the King – an act punishable by death, unless looked upon favorably by the King. In the Hebrew version, Esther is spared because the King seems glad to see her. In the Greek version, Esther is spared because of the direct intervention of God:

The Wisdom of Solomon is a book of Hebrew “wisdom” literature, similar in style to such Old Testament books such as Job and Proverbs. As in Proverbs, Wisdom is characterized as being female. While the work is entitled “The Wisdom of Solomon”, it is more likely the work of a 1^st century B.C. Jew.

Relevance to Christianity

Unlike the aforementioned Job, which posits that the righteous are rewarded in this life, and that evil is punished in this life, the Wisdom of Solomon makes extensive references to an afterlife for the righteous, and a final punishment for the evil. These are, of course, themes that would flower in Christianity a century later. Some examples:

The Wisdom of Solomon was so widely read in the early Christian Church, that it actually appears in one prototypical list of New Testament books (Muratori Canon (c. 200)).

Unlike many books in the Bible, we know exactly who wrote Sirach, and who translated it into Greek. The massive work was written by Jesus ben Sirach, a Jewish scribe, probably around 200 B.C.:

The Greek translation was done by his grandson in 132 B.C.:

Sirach is another example of Jewish “wisdom” literature, similar especially to Proverbs. It is full of helpful advice on many diverse topics, from friendship, women and the sin of pride, to inappropriate speech. Also, perhaps the most famous phrase in all of the Apocrypha is contained in Sirach. In the introduction to a lengthy section describing the fine attributes of various heroes of Jewish history (Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Moses, etc.), Sirach states, “Let us now sing the praises of famous men”.

Also of interest in Sirach is a description of the activities of the scribes. Many scholars believe that the scribes were the beginning of the Pharisic movement. Sirach comments:

Baruch is purportedly written by the scribe of the prophet Jeremiah (see Jeremiah 32:12, 36:4). It is more likely written in the 2^nd century B.C. by an unknown Jewish author.

Baruch is written in three parts.

The first part is a prayer of confession and petition read to the deposed King of Judah, Jeconiah, and later sent to Jerusalem. It contains a harrowing description of the destruction of the Jews in the time of Nebuchadnezzar:

The second part is in the Jewish Wisdom tradition (“In praise of wisdom...”), similar to the early chapters of Proverbs.

The final section contains encouragement for Israel, assuring the faithful that eventually God will return Israel to the Chosen People:

Relevance to Christianity

Some early translations (the Vulgate, among others) of Baruch stated in Baruch 3:37 that God appeared on earth and lived with human kind. The following is an example:

It appears that the proper translation, though, (as in NRSV) is that wisdom appeared on earth, and lived with mankind.

The Letter of Jeremiah purports to be:

It was more likely written at a later date by a Hellenized Jew.

The primary theme of the Letter of Jeremiah (see Jeremiah 29:1-23 for a description of a similar letter) is to disparage the worship of idols. The real point seems to be to discourage Hellenized Jews from following foreign ways - and foreign religions:

Note that in some Bibles, the Letter of Jeremiah appears as Chapter 6 of Baruch.

The Prayer of Azariah and the Song of the Three Jews is the first of three additions to the book of Daniel found in the Septuagint. It is inserted between Daniel 3:23 and 3:24. It contains “The Prayer of Azariah in the Furnace” and “The Song of the Three Jews”, purportedly written by the three youths that are thrown into a furnace by King Nebuchadnezzar when they refused to commit apostasy. Verse 1:66 states that the three have been “rescued from Hades” by the Lord:

The three youths are perhaps better known by their Babylonian names – Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego.

Susanna is Chapter 13 of the Book of Daniel in the Septuagint. It concerns a beautiful woman named Susanna, who is married to a rich man named Joakim.

The plot develops when two lecherous elders attempt to seduce Susanna in a private garden. They tell her that if she doesn’t have sex with them, they will claim that she was committing debauchery with a young man when they came upon her. The virtuous Susanna refuses their advances, and is later condemned to death on the false testimony of the elders.

The plot thickens, though, when God “stirred up the holy spirit of a young lad named Daniel”, who says to the people “Return to court, for these men have given false evidence against her” (Susanna 49).

In a performance worthy of Perry Mason or Colombo, Daniel separately asks the two elders “under what tree did you see them being intimate with each other?” (Susanna 54) When the two give different answers, Susanna is found innocent, and the two elders are put to death for bearing false witness. “And from that day onward Daniel had a great reputation among the people.” (Susanna 64)

Bel and the Dragon is the third of three Septuagint additions to the book of Daniel. It often appears as Chapter 14.

The chapter contains two different stories. The first concerns “Daniel and the Priests of Bel”. In this story, the Babylonians are worshipping an idol named Bel (probably the Babylonian God Marduk). Through a clever ploy involving spreading ashes on the floor in a supposedly inaccessible room (sounds a bit like a Sherlock Holmes mystery!), Daniel proves to the King that Bel does not actually eat the daily offering of food made to it. It turns out that the priests and their families had been sneaking into the room at night through a hidden entrance, and eating the food. “Therefore the king put them to death, and gave Bel over to Daniel, who destroyed it and its temple.” (Bel and the Dragon 22, NRSV)

The second story concerns Daniel killing a “great dragon which the Babylonians revered.” Daniel kills the dragon by feeding it a foul concoction containing “pitch, fat, and hair”. The Babylonians become outraged at this, and throw Daniel into a lion’s den. Daniel survives for six days in the lion’s den, receiving sustenance by the miraculous intervention of the prophet Habakkuk:

On the seventh day, the King comes to mourn Daniel, and discovers that he is still alive. Daniel is rescued, and his tormenters are thrown into the den and killed.

1 Maccabees is one of the great histories of the ancient world, and is the most important work in the Apocrypha in terms of describing the key Jewish Inter-Testamental historical event – the Maccabean Revolt.

1 Maccabees starts with a brief description of the reign of Alexander the Great (334-323 B.C.). However, the bulk of the work concentrates on the period from about 167 B.C. to 134 B.C., starting with a description of the rebellious actions of the priest Mattathias, and ending with a description of the murder of his son Simon (and installation of his grandson, John Hyrcanus, as High Priest).

The hero of the story is, of course, Judas Maccabeus, for whom the whole revolt (and four Apocryphal books) are named, with his brothers Simon and Jonathan coming in a close second. The villain of the piece is Seleucid King Antiochus IV, perhaps the “abomination that causes desolation” in Daniel.

As I have already described the Maccabean Revolt in some detail in an earlier section, I won’t recount it here. 1 Maccabees recounts the story of the revolt reasonably crisply and soberly, although it does show a strong bias in favor of the family of Mattathias and his descendents (the Hasmonean Dynasty), that would rule Israel for 100 years.

2 Maccabees, like 1 Maccabees, tells the story of the Maccabean Revolt. However, it ends after the defeat and death of Nicanor, while Judas is still alive (c. 161 B.C). Thus, there is no discussion of the line of succession of the Hasmonean family that appears in some detail in 1 Maccabees (Judas, Jonathan, Simon, John Hyrcanus).

2 Maccabees says that it is a condensed version (an early Reader’s Digest?) of a five volume work of a Jason of Cyrene (a work which is now lost). It tells us in the preface that it will discuss:

It differs from 1 Maccabees in ways other than the aforementioned time frame that it covers:

• It describes the political infighting among the various high priests Onias, Jason, and Menelaus is great detail, the last two “buying” the priesthood from Antiochus Epiphanes IV for money
• 2 Maccabees ascribes some of the success of the Jews in the Revolt to direct Divine intervention, such as this description of one of the battles of Judas Maccabeus:

• There are some differences in the timeline. In 2 Maccabees, for example, the death of Antiochus Epiphanes IV precedes the rededication of the Temple. (In 1 Maccabees, he dies after the rededication of the Temple).
• 2 Maccabees is perhaps even more passionate than 1 Maccabees in describing the horrors of Hellenization, and the indignities forced on the Jews by Antiochus. In one passage, for example, 2 Maccabees records that 80,000 Jews were slain:

Relevance to Christianity

2 Maccabees has several passages that indicate a Jewish belief in the resurrection of the dead, and a final judgement day – themes that would later flourish in Christianity. One section discusses the martyrdom of seven brothers, who died rather than agree to eat pork. The brothers are defiant partially because they believe in resurrection of the dead:

In another scene, Judas discovers that some of his troops have been wearing pagan amulets. In atonement:

1 Esdras (which is listed as 3 Esdras in an appendix to the Vulgate) is one of the more curious apocryphal books. It contains most of the Hebrew version of Ezra (translated into Greek), but also contains portions of 2 Chronicles and Nehemiah. There is one addition to 1 Esdras which doesn’t appear anywhere in the Hebrew Bible, which will be discussed presently. Curiously, the Septuagint not only included 1 Esdras, but also a Greek translation of the Old Testament Ezra. Scholars have argued about which came first, but generally the view is that the Old Testament Ezra as we know it today is the source document (although 1 Esdras may have been taken from a different Hebrew source document).

The one addition to 1 Esdras appears in 1 Esdras 3:1-4:63. It describes the story of three bodyguards of King Darius who have an argument regarding “what one thing is strongest”. They decide to present their arguments to the King, in hopes of reward. One says that wine is the strongest because “it leads astray the minds of all who drink it”. The second says that the King is strongest, because “whatever he says to them they must obey”.

The third bodyguard, interestingly identified as Zerubbabel, starts out with an argument that women are the strongest, because they “gave birth to the king and to every people that rules over sea and land.” He then changes his vote to say that “Great is truth, and strongest of all!” His argument:

Passages regarding the greatness of truth were often quoted in the Early Church.

According to 2 Kings 21:1-18, and 2 Chronicles 33, Manasseh was one of the worst Kings in the history of Judah, ruling for 55 years, and bringing idolatry and other sacrileges to Jerusalem. 2 Chronicles 33:10-13 describes an incident where Manasseh is captured by the Assyrians and taken to Babylon. Verse 13 states that “He [Manasseh] prayed to him [God], and God received his entreaty, heard his plea, and restored him again to Jerusalem and to his kingdom.”

The Prayer of Manasseh purports to be that prayer, although it is more likely that it was written in the 2^nd century B.C.

Most versions of the Septuagint have 151 Psalms, with this one being listed last. The translator records “This psalm is ascribed to David as his own composition (though it is outside the number), after he had fought in single combat with Goliath (NRSV).” “Outside the number” can be taken to mean that it is outside the traditionally accepted number of 150 Psalms. However, Hebrew versions of the Psalm have been found among the Dead Sea Scrolls, perhaps giving more authority to Psalm 151.

The first thing to note about 3 Maccabees is that it has nothing to do with the Maccabean Revolt or Judas Maccabeus. It is set fifty years earlier in the reign of Ptolemy IV Philopator (221-204 B.C.). The story concerns a lapsed Jew named Dositheus who prevents an assassination plot against Ptolemy. A grateful Ptolemy visits Jerusalem laden with gifts, and all is well until the King desires to enter the inner sanctuary of the Temple. When told that that is forbidden, he tries to enter anyway, and is stricken down with a paralysis sent by God.

The enraged Ptolemy swears revenge against the Jews, and orders various measures against them, including deportation, ordering them to commit apostasy, and removing their citizenship. Finally, Ptolemy orders all Jews to be rounded up and executed in a particularly gruesome fashion – to be trampled to death by 500 drunk elephants in a hippodrome! The Jews are saved twice by divine intervention, when the King 1) falls asleep, and 2) becomes forgetful.

Eventually, though, the King orders the massacre, and the elephants are released. Apparently in answer to a prayer by a priest named Eleazar, God once again intervenes to save the Jews:

The Jews are spared, and are returned to the good graces of the King.

While 2 Esdras does not appear in the Septuagint, it appears in the Slavonic Bible as 3 Esdras, and in an appendix in the Vulgate as 4 Esdras. The work is very apocalyptic in tone, presenting a series of visions of the end times.

The visions are presented through the device of a dialogue between the prophet Ezra and the archangel Uriel (once seemingly referred to as Jeremiel). As such, it similar in tone, content, and style to the Book of Revelation in the New Testament, and also may have served as a model for the (probably) 2^nd century Christian work “The Shepherd of Hermas”, with the angel asking tough questions that are probably unanswerable by a mere mortal. (“He [Uriel] said to me, ‘You cannot understand the things with which you have grown up; how then can your mind comprehend the way of the Most High?’” (2 Esdras 4:10-11, NRSV))

Some people date 2 Esdras as late as the end of the 1^st century A.D., interpreting the following phrase in 2 Esdras 3:1 to be referring to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.:

Note that some scholars believe that 2 Esdras 3:1 is the original Jewish beginning to the work.

2 Esdras also contains an interesting claim that Ezra and five companions wrote ninety-four books in forty days, under the inspiration of the Most High:

The claim that some knowledge should remain hidden would later be echoed by the early Gnostics, who believed that salvation could only be achieved through secret knowledge.

Relevance to Christianity

2 Esdras is, perhaps, the Jewish apocryphal book with the most “Christian” tone and language. (In fact, some scholars believe that the first and last two chapters may have been later Christian additions). At a minimum, 2 Esdras shows that, at the time of Christ, there were Jewish sects that believed in many of the same precepts as Christianity, such as original sin, a divine Messiah, and a final judgement day for sinners. While it is in no place stated, 2 Esdras seems especially Essene in style and theology (assuming the Dead Sea Scrolls can be used as a guide for Essene thought).

Some examples of themes in 2 Esdras that would later take root in Christianity follow.

4 Maccabees, which appears in an appendix in the Septuagint, is written in the form of a sermon, seemingly to demonstrate that the Greek philosophy of rational judgment being the highest virtue is fully reconcilable with Jewish religious belief, and belief in the Law.

The bulk of the work is another telling (see also 2 Maccabees) of the martyrdom of Eleazer and the seven brothers under the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes IV. 4 Maccabees, like 2 Maccabees, also gives additional details of the evil perpetrated by the High Priest Jason, who had purchased his priesthood from the Seleucid king:

4 Maccabees assures the faithful that Antiochus Epiphanes IV would be punished for his sins:

Relevance to Christianity

4 Maccabees is a stirring tribute to the ability of religious faith to overcome even the direst forms of torture. In seeming anticipation of the later Christian martyrs, one of the brothers is quoted as saying “How sweet is any kind of death for the religion of our ancestors” (4 Maccabees 9:29). Several of the Church Fathers, including Augustine and Origen (and, possibly, the author of Hebrews) referred to 4 Maccabees as the epitome of pious martyrdom.

The author of 4 Maccabees goes into great detail to describe the tortures suffered by Eleazer and the seven brothers (and, finally, the mother of the brothers). The descriptions are eerily reminiscent of the torture methods that would be perfected by the Inquisition a thousand years later.

Until recently, 1 Enoch existed only in an ancient Ethiopic translation, which was only “discovered” and brought to the West in 1768. Since then, however, at least 20 fragmentary copies of 1 Enoch in Aramaic have been found among the Dead Sea Scrolls, showing 1) that 1 Enoch existed at least as early as 1^st or 2^nd century B.C. and 2) 1 Enoch was considered important by at least one Jewish sect at the time of Christ. 1 Enoch does not appear in the Septuagint, and is not generally considered to be part of the collection of books known as the Apocrypha.

However, it does hold a unique position among Inter-Testamental Jewish works, which is why it is included in this study – it is the only Inter-Testamental Jewish writing quoted in the New Testament (see next section).

1 Enoch purports to be written by Enoch:

Most scholars today believe that several authors wrote it, perhaps over a period of some years.

1 Enoch has a number of somewhat discrete sections/themes, which lends itself to the theory of multiple authorship. Some of these include:

• The Fallen Angels
• Three parables
• Visions of the Son of Man/Elect One
• “The book of the revolution of the luminaries of heaven”
• A dissertation on Noah’s Ark

Spread throughout 1 Enoch are graphic and detailed descriptions of heaven, hell, God on the Throne, and even the Garden of Eden. Parallels to both Revelation and Daniel are readily apparent.

In one passage, hell is described in terms especially familiar to later Christians:

Angel-ology

1 Enoch contains an elaborate hierarchy of angels and demons, including (as referenced above) a lengthy description of the story of the Fall of the Angels. More angels and demons are named in 1 Enoch than in the New Testament, Old Testament, and Apocrypha combined.

The story of the Fall of the Angels is told in some detail, amplifying on Genesis 6:1-4. As in Revelation 12, the Fall is often discussed in terms of stars falling from the heavens. Interestingly, the term “satan” is sometimes applied corporately, as opposed to an individual (“expelling the satans”). The angel that led the others astray is named Azazyel:

Many descriptions of the archangels are given in 1 Enoch. In one section, six are listed, along with their roles (the number is slightly at odds with the verse from Tobit 12:15):