What is the New Testament Apocrypha?

What is the New Testament Apocrypha?

The Greek word apokrypha means “hidden writings.” Clement of Alexandria uses it in this literal sense (Stromateis But, for the most part, ancient Christian authors used it to refer to writings of their opponents, which they considered spurious. Clement says that his opponents “derived their doctrines from an apocryphal work. . . . where they have taken a sound doctrine and perversely misapplied it” (Stromateis 4.29). Ireneaus describes “apocryphal writings” as texts written by his opponents “who are ignorant of the Scriptures of truth” (Against Heresies 1.20.1). Tertullian refused to acknowledge teachings from the Shepherd of Hermas because it did not “find a place in the Divine canon” and “had been habitually judged by every council of Churches. . . among apocryphal and false (writing)” (On Modesty 10.6). The phrase New Testament Apocrypha was not used in antiquity. Instead, it is a modern umbrella title referring to a wide variety of Christian texts that ultimately were not included in the New Testament canon.

Bible and Book of MormonFor the most part, scholars follow the three categories of New Testament apocrypha used by Wilhelm Schneemelcher: 1) Gospels, which include non-biblical material about the life of Jesus; 2) writings related to the apostles; 3) apocalypses and related subjects.[1] Some of the apocryphal gospels, such as The Gospel of the Nazareans and The Gospel of the Ebionites are known today only because ancient Christian authors quoted them in their extant writings. Some, such as The Gospel of Thomas and The Gospel of Judas, were mentioned in ancient sources, but have only recently been discovered. Some texts, such as The Acts of Thomas, were used by both “orthodox” and “heterodox” groups.

In recent years, scholars have reexamined the role the New Testament apocrypha for understanding ancient Christianity. The more traditional view has been to study them to determine what light they shed on the development of the Christian church, with particular attention to how they compare with the texts that were later canonized. However a recent growing trend is to study these texts in their own right and let them speak independently about the diversity of expressions concerning what it meant to be a Christian in antiquity.

“About a dozen noncanonical gospels were known in the 2d century and . . . the evidence for these apocryphal writings compares quite well with the evidence for the canonical gospels. The attestations do not support a distinction between canonical and apocryphal gospels. Writings of both categories were used and are referred to quite early and often by the same writers.” Helmut Koester is the John H. Morison Research Professor of Divinity and Win Research Professor of Ecclesiastical History at Harvard Divinity School.

Helmut Koester, “Apocryphal and Canonical Gospels,” Harvard Theological Review 73 (1980): 110.

“The value in exerting effort to understand apocryphal literature is twofold: first, once we understand the compositional situation surrounding an apocryphal text, we can then ascertain its potential to preserve credible information about Jesus or the Church that He founded. Second, once we understand how the document impacted Christian communities, we can begin to discern the historical development of the Apostasy within those communities.” Thomas Wayment is an Associate Professor of Ancient Scripture at Brigham Young University.

Thomas A. Wayment, “False Gospels: An Approach to Studying the New Testament Apocrypha,” in How the New Testament Came to Be (ed. Kent P. Jackson and Frank F. Judd, Jr.; Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2006), 294.

[1] See Wilhelm Schneemelcher, ed., New Testament Apocrypha, 2 vols. (rev. ed.; trans. R. McL. Wilson; Louisville, KY: Westminster/ John Knox Press, 1992).

Article Name
What is the New Testament Apocrypha?
What do we make of the non-canonical scripture, the Aprocrypha?

About karenrose
Living out a great season of my life, thanks to Jesus Christ, and two wonderful daughters, a great life's work. Loving this opportunity to share faith online... I'm a single Mom, convert to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, second-gen Italian, from the East coast originally. Love the fine arts, dance, frozen yogurt, temples, scriptures, writing, jazz, helping others reach their potential, king salmon, ....and not in that order. God is good. I feel it deeply when people have a misconception of Heavenly Father or Jesus Christ, His Son, that lessens or cheapens Them and blinds one's ability to feel His presence or to trust in an ultimately good eternal end to life's circumstances.

1 Comment

  1. Books written in the format of the New Testament are divided into four sections, 1) Gospels, 2) Acts of the Apostles, 3) Apocalypses, and 4) Epistles. The New Testament has four Gospels, one Acts of the Apostles, One apocalypse called Revelations and 21 epistles. In comparison, the apocryphal literature contains at least 20 gospels, five Acts of the Apostles, six Apocalypses and nine Epistles and it seems that every year a new artifact or writing is discovered. I have not listed all of them here, only those that summarize some of the more commonly recognized apocrypha among scholars.

    Additionally there are some disagreements between Catholics and Protestants about what constitutes apocryphal literature. The ancient record mentions four Archangels, specifically, Michael, Gabriel, Raphael and Uriel. The first two archangels mentioned are accepted by the Protestants, especially Raphael who is prominent in the deutercannonical book Tobit that is in the Catholic Old Testament, but not in the Protestant Bible and Uriel appears in the Old Testament apocryphal book 2 Esdras. Some portions of the apocrypha also nearly made it into the Bible.

    For example some works from the era of the Apostolic Church such as Didache, the Sheppard of Hermas, the Epistle of Barnabas and the letters of Clement were held in high esteem by the early fathers of the church. These are they that the Catholic Church claims as tradition rather than apocrypha even though they are “extra-canonical” and from a protestant perspective are apocrypha. This is one of the areas where Catholic’s and Protestants differ. For the protestant these books are apocryphal and for the catholic they are tradition, and for the modern scholars they are merely extra-canonical. One aspect of accepting only canonical teaching and rejecting the apocrypha altogether is that it is severely limiting in terms of theological development.
    As stated before, there have also been a number of books that have only come to light in modern times, that perhaps should be at least considered perhaps, not as accepted scripture, but at least inspired.

Submit a Comment

Copyright © 2015 Jesus Christ. All Rights Reserved.
This website is not owned by or affiliated with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (sometimes called the Mormon or LDS Church). The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the position of the Church. The views expressed by individual users are the responsibility of those users and do not necessarily represent the position of the Church. For the official Church websites, please visit LDS.org or Mormon.org.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This

Share this with your friends!