THE NEW SCHAFF-HERZOG
Panzer, Geschichte der deutschen Bibelubersetzung, Nuremberg, 1783, pp. 294 sqq.)..
A. Old Testament Apocrypha: Those portions of the Greek and Latin Old Testaments which are not found in the Hebrew Canon, — the term " apocrypha " being used in this article with the meaning given to it by the Protestant Church (see § 3, above).
I. Position in the Canon: The Hebrew canon of the Bible in the first century of the Christian era comprised about the same books as at present, though the canonicity of the books of Ecclesiastes and the Song of Songs was disputed (Mishnah, Eduyot,v, 3; Yadayimxjii, 5; J. Furst, Der Kanon des Alten Testaments nach den Ueberlieferungen in Talmud und Midrasch, Leipsic, 1868; see Canon of Scripture, I). But it was otherwise with the Hellenistic Jews/ As far as the extent of the Greek canon of theBible can be traced, jt included a number of writings which are wanting in the Hebrew canon. No clear proofs of this from pre- Christian times exist; but the fact
1. Apocry- tnat Christians using the Greek Bible phainthe recejve(j these other writings also
_ makes it highly probable that these
belonged to the canon of the Hellenistic Jews. While it may be conceded to the opponents of this view that Hellenistic Jews had no strict conception of a canon, it can not be denied that certain writings were received into the Greek Bible-collection which were foreign to the Hebrew canon (cf. De Wette-Schrader, Einleitung, pp. 311 sqq.; Bleek, TSK, 1853, pp. 323 sqq.). The fact that Philo did not quote these other writings proves nothing, since Philo was interested mainly in the Pentateuch.
In the New Testament there are no express references to the so-called Apocrypha, a fact the more remarkable since most of the New Testament authors took their quotations from the Greek translation of the Old Testament. But to understand this rightly, one must not forget that a number of canonical writings of the Old Testament are never cited in the New Testament; others only seldom. The Pentateuch, the Proph-
2. Used in etS; an(j ^he psaims are frequently quoted; the historical books not so
Some New Testament
"Writings °^ev'> while the Song of Songs, Ecclesiastes, Esther, Ezra, and Nehemiah are never cited. The lack of express citations can therefore not be emphasized; and on the other hand, it can not be denied that at least in some writings of the New Testament the Apocrypha are used. This applies particularly to the Epistle of James and that to the Hebrews. That Ecclesiasticus was known to the author of the Epistle of James can not be denied in the face of the many parallels (cf. Werner in TQ, 1872, pp. 265 sqq.). The author of the Epistle to the Hebrews doubtless refers in xi, 34 sqq. to the story of the Maccabees (cf. II Mace, vi, 18-vii, 42). Striking agreements with the Wisdom of Solomon are also found (thus Heb. i, 3=Wisdom vii, 26; Heb. iv, 12-13=Wisdom vii, 22-24); andtherecan be no doubt that Paul made use of this book (cf. in general Bleek, TSK, 1853, pp. 325 sqq., especially 337-349).
Among the Church Fathers the Apocrypha were in common use from the earliest times. Clement of Rome puts " the blessed " Judith beside Esther as an example of female heroism (Epist., Iv, ANF, ix, 245). Barnabas (xix, 9) goes back to Ecclus. iv, 31 when he quotes " Be not ready to stretch forth thy hands to take whilst thou withdrawest them from giving." Justin Martyr (Apol., i, 46, ANF, i, 178) refers to the additions to Daniel. That none of these passages has the form of a true Scripture citation- may be viewed as
rh h 6 accidental and may be explained
Fathers *rom tne sma^ extent of this oldest literature. But from the time of Athenagoras true citations can be proved. Athenagoras (" Plea for the Christians," i, 9, ANF, ii, 133) quotes among the " voices of the prophets," as divinely inspired, Baruch iii, 25 upon an equality with Isa. xliv, 6; Irenaus (Hcer., IV, xxvi, 3, ANF, i, 497) cites as the words of " Daniel the Prophet " the history of Susanna, and (Hcer., V, xxxv, 1, ANF, i, 565) the Book of Baruch as the work of Jeremiah; Tertullian quotes the history of Susanna (De corona, iv, ANF, iii, 95), Bel and the Dragon (De idololatria, xviii, ANF, iii, 72), and the Wisdom of Solomon (Adversus Valentinos, ii, ANF, iii, 504) as canonical Scripture. Clement of Alexandria quotes Ecclesiasticus very often with the formula " Scripture," " Holy Scripture," " Wisdom says," and the like, and not so frequently, but with the same formulas, Wisdom of Solomon, Baruch, and Tobit. Abundant examples of the same practise can be cited from Hippolytus, Cyprian, and others.
In view of these facts it may be asserted that the Church of the first centuries made no essential difference between the writings of the Hebrew canon and the so-called Apocrypha. Only in an isolated way and evidently as the result of learned inquiry does an express limitation of the canon to the extent of the Hebrew Bible appear; for example, Melito of Sardis, according to Eusebius (Hist, eccl., IV, xxvi, 14), mentions only the books of the Hebrew canon as canonical, but he gives this list expressly as the result of learned inquiry in Palestine. When Origen gives a list which comprises only the Hebrew canon (Eusebius, Hist, eccl., vi,25), he gives it as the canon of the Hebrews, and his own view can not be deduced from the passage given by Eusebius. On the other hand, from Origen's correspondence with Julius Africanus it is deducible that he was by no means in favor of excluding those parts which were wanting in the Hebrew canon, because he defends the Greek additions to Daniel, and he likewise cites some Apocryphal writings (Maccabees, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Tobit, Baruch) as " Scriptural authority," "\the Holy Word," " Scripture," etc. (cf.De Wette- Schrader, Einleitung, p. 53). The critique which Julius Africanus wrote on the Greek text of the Book of Daniel, trying to remove the portions not found in the Hebrew-Aramaic text (Epist. ad Origenem), evidently remained an isolated phenomenon.
The learned disquisitions of men like Origen resulted, however, in this, that stricter regard was