Exploring the enigmatic apocryphal writings beyond the canon of Scripture.
All-In-One Holy Bible with Apocrypha
All-In-One Holy Bible with Apocrypha
All-In-One Holy Bible with Apocrypha
All-In-One Holy Bible with Apocrypha
All-In-One Holy Bible with Apocrypha
All-In-One Holy Bible with Apocrypha
All-In-One Holy Bible with Apocrypha
All-In-One Holy Bible with Apocrypha
All-In-One Holy Bible with Apocrypha
All-In-One Holy Bible with Apocrypha
All-In-One Holy Bible with Apocrypha
All-In-One Holy Bible with Apocrypha
The Bible contains sixty-six books: thirty-nine books in the Old Testament and twenty-seven books in the New Testament. This is the Protestant canon, and it represents the clearest and most defensible collection of books that bear the marks of inspired Scripture. Other traditions include additional writings, but the sixty-six books stand apart because of their prophetic and apostolic authority, doctrinal unity, covenantal recognition, and enduring reception by the people of God.1
The Old Testament canon consists of the books received in the Hebrew Bible (the Tanakh). Although Jewish tradition counts these books differently, the content corresponds to the thirty-nine books found in Protestant Old Testaments. The Jewish arrangement often groups books differently, such as combining Samuel, Kings, Chronicles, and the Twelve Minor Prophets, but the substance is the same. This Hebrew canon is the foundation for the Protestant Old Testament.2
The New Testament canon consists of twenty-seven apostolic books: the four Gospels, Acts, thirteen letters of Paul, Hebrews, the General Epistles, and Revelation. These writings were recognized because they were connected to the apostles, faithfully proclaimed the apostolic gospel, and were received by the churches as authoritative. The Church did not create their authority; it recognized the authority they already possessed as apostolic Scripture.3
One of the strongest arguments for the sixty-six-book canon is the distinction between the Hebrew Scriptures and later Jewish writings. The Apocrypha arose largely in the period after the Old Testament prophetic era. While these books can be historically useful, they were not received into the Hebrew Bible. Josephus describes a limited collection of sacred writings and indicates that later books did not possess equal authority because the succession of prophets had ceased.4
Jesus and the apostles also confirm the authority of the Hebrew Scriptures. Jesus refers to the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms as the Scriptures that testify to Him. He treats the Old Testament as a unified and authoritative body of divine revelation. The New Testament repeatedly quotes the Hebrew Scriptures with formulas such as “it is written,” but it never clearly quotes the Apocrypha as Scripture in this way.5
The claim that “there are many Bibles with different numbers of books, so no one can know the true canon” is overstated. Differences exist, but differences do not eliminate evidence. The sixty-six-book canon is not an arbitrary Protestant reduction. It reflects the Hebrew canon of the Old Testament and the apostolic canon of the New Testament. The additional books in Roman Catholic and Orthodox traditions have a more disputed reception history.
The Apocrypha fails to meet the same standards as the protocanonical books. It lacks universal Jewish reception, lacks clear prophetic confirmation, and was disputed by major Christian teachers. Jerome, for example, defended the Hebrew canon and denied that apocryphal books should be used to establish doctrine. The Reformers followed this older distinction rather than inventing a new canon.6
The New Testament canon also developed around apostolic authority. A book had to be written by an apostle or a close associate of the apostles, agree with the rule of faith, and be widely received by the churches. By the fourth century, the twenty-seven-book New Testament was clearly recognized in Athanasius’ Festal Letter and later confirmed in regional councils.7
The sixty-six books also display theological unity. From Genesis to Revelation, Scripture presents one redemptive story centered on creation, fall, covenant, promise, Christ, atonement, resurrection, and final restoration. This unity does not prove the canon by itself, but it confirms the coherence of the received books and distinguishes them from later writings that often contain speculative expansions or doctrinal problems.
The existence of many apocryphal and pseudepigraphal books is actually an argument for careful canon recognition, not for expanding the Bible indiscriminately. If every ancient religious writing were treated as a possible biblical book, the canon would become unstable and incoherent. The Church needed discernment precisely because extremely numerous writings claimed religious authority without good warrant.
The sixty-six-book canon is therefore not merely a denominational preference. It is grounded in the Hebrew Scriptures received by Israel and the apostolic writings received by the early Church. The Bible is not an open-ended library of religious literature. It is the inspired collection of books God gave through prophets and apostles.
So how many books are really in the Bible? The most defensible answer is sixty-six. These books alone possess the clearest marks of canonical authority and form the sufficient rule of faith and practice for the Church.
The word “canon” means a rule, standard, or measuring line. Applied to Scripture, it refers to the collection of writings that function as the Church’s authoritative rule of faith. The canon is therefore not simply a table of contents. It is a theological claim about which books are God-breathed and binding on the people of God. This is why the difference between sixty-six books and larger canons matters.
The thirty-nine-book Old Testament is not a rejection of Jewish history between Malachi and Matthew. It is a recognition that the Hebrew Scriptures possess a distinct covenantal authority. The Apocrypha may explain many developments in Jewish life after the exile, but it does not stand on the same level as Moses, the Prophets, and the Writings. The Old Testament canon was not determined by what was interesting about Jewish history, but by what was received as the word of God.
The twenty-seven-book New Testament likewise rests on the apostolic foundation. The apostles were uniquely commissioned witnesses of Christ’s resurrection and authorized teachers of the New Covenant. Books that arose later, even when devotional or popular, could not simply be added to the apostolic foundation. This is why later gospels and acts were rejected even when they attracted attention in some communities.
The sixty-six books also provide a closed and coherent covenantal structure. The Old Testament prepares for Christ through promise, law, prophecy, wisdom, and kingdom history. The New Testament announces Christ’s fulfillment through gospel, apostolic witness, church instruction, and final hope. Adding disputed books as doctrinal authorities risks confusing this structure and weakening the clarity of the canon.
The Protestant Bible contains sixty-six books: thirty-nine in the Old Testament and twenty-seven in the New Testament.
Catholic Bibles include deuterocanonical books that Protestants classify as Apocrypha.
Because these books correspond directly to the Hebrew Bible (the Old Testament) and apostolic New Testament canon. The sixty-six books are determined by 1. prophetic and apostolic authority, 2. theological and doctrinal consistency, and 3. universal acceptance in the Church.
Protestants rejected the canonical status of disputed books rather than removing universally accepted Scripture. The apocryphal books have been disputed since the earliest centuries, long before the Reformation.
The protocanon refers to books universally recognized as Scripture, unlike disputed deuterocanonical writings.
There are twenty-seven books in the New Testament, and this number is universally recognized.
The Protestant Old Testament contains thirty-nine books corresponding to the Hebrew Bible, although Catholic and Orthodox Christians add several additional books that are not part of the Hebrew Bible.
No. The canon is tied to the completed prophetic and apostolic foundation. The account of the history of the world begins in Genesis and ends in Revelation. Genesis is the beginning, Revelation is the end, and nothing can be taken away or added to what is an already complete revelation from God to mankind.
1. F. F. Bruce, The Canon of Scripture (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1988), 19–27, 117–269.
2. Roger T. Beckwith, The Old Testament Canon of the New Testament Church (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985), 21–44.
3. Michael J. Kruger, Canon Revisited, 161–203.
4. Josephus, Against Apion 1.37–43.
5. Luke 24:44; Beckwith, Old Testament Canon, 110–34.
6. Jerome, “Prologue to the Books of Solomon,” 492–93.
7. Athanasius, Festal Letter 39; Bruce, Canon of Scripture, 208–30.
All-In-One Holy Bible with Apocrypha
Christian Classics Ethereal Library
There is no single universally agreed number of apocryphal books because the word “Apocrypha” is used in more than one way. In a narrow Protestant sense, the Apocrypha usually refers to the books printed between the Old and New Testaments in many older Bibles. In a Roman Catholic context, many of these books are called deuterocanonical. In a broader academic context, “apocryphal” may include a much larger body of Jewish and Christian writings outside the biblical canon, including pseudepigrapha.1
The standard Protestant Apocrypha often includes 1 Esdras, 2 Esdras, Tobit, Judith, additions to Esther, Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach, Baruch, the Letter of Jeremiah, additions to Daniel, the Prayer of Manasseh, and 1–2 Maccabees. Depending on how additions are counted, this produces a list of roughly fourteen or fifteen works.2
The Roman Catholic Deuterocanon is smaller than the traditional Protestant Apocrypha list. It includes Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, Baruch with the Letter of Jeremiah, 1–2 Maccabees, and additions to Esther and Daniel. Catholic Bibles integrate these books into the Old Testament rather than placing them in a separate Apocrypha section.3
Eastern Orthodox traditions often include additional books. Depending on the tradition and edition, Orthodox Bibles may include 1 Esdras, 3 Maccabees, Psalm 151, and sometimes other writings. The Ethiopian Orthodox tradition has an even broader canon, including books such as 1 Enoch and Jubilees. This diversity shows why the question “how many apocryphal books are there?” must first define which tradition or category is being discussed.4
The broader category of Old Testament pseudepigrapha is much larger. It includes writings such as 1 Enoch, 2 Enoch, Jubilees, the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, the Life of Adam and Eve, the Apocalypse of Abraham, and many other works. Modern scholarly collections of the Old Testament pseudepigrapha fill multiple volumes and include dozens and even hundreds of texts.5
There are also New Testament apocrypha. These include noncanonical gospels, acts, epistles, and apocalypses, such as the Gospel of Thomas, Gospel of Peter, Protoevangelium of James, Acts of Paul and Thecla, and Apocalypse of Peter. These works vary greatly in date, theology, genre, and historical value. Some are early and historically important; others are late, legendary, and clearly secondary.6
The large number of apocryphal writings is one reason that the canon must be approached carefully. It is not enough to say that a book is ancient or religious. Many texts claim to reveal hidden teachings, expand biblical stories, or speak in the name of famous biblical figures. But canonicity requires more than religious interest. It requires divine authority, truth, and recognition by the covenant people of God.
The existence of many apocryphal books also refutes the simplistic idea that there were only a few “missing books” that someone removed from the Bible. The real historical situation is much more complex. Ancient Judaism and Christianity produced a vast library of religious literature. The Church did not hide this literature; much of it survived precisely because religious communities copied and preserved it.
Some apocryphal books are historically reliable in places, while others contain legendary expansions or theological speculation. 1 Maccabees, for example, is an important source for Jewish history in the second century BC. By contrast, some later apocryphal gospels contain fanciful childhood miracle stories about Jesus that clearly differ from the sober style and apostolic foundation of the canonical Gospels.
For readers, the most useful answer is this: the traditional Protestant Apocrypha contains about fourteen or fifteen works, the Roman Catholic Deuterocanon contains fewer, Orthodox traditions may contain more, and the broader world of apocryphal and pseudepigraphal literature contains hundreds of additional writings. The exact number depends entirely on how the category is defined.
This is why Apocrypha.com distinguishes carefully between the Protestant Apocrypha, Catholic Deuterocanon, Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, and other extrabiblical literature, while grouping all of these under the general umbrella of “apocrypha.” These writings are important for history, but there are clear, well-defined, and numerous reasons for excluding them from the inspired canon.
In conclusion, there are many apocryphal books, but only sixty-six books belong to the biblical canon. The rest should be studied with historical interest and theological discernment.
The number also changes because some writings are counted as independent books in one tradition and as additions in another. The additions to Daniel may be listed separately as Susanna, Bel and the Dragon, and the Prayer of Azariah with the Song of the Three Young Men, or they may be counted together as additions to one canonical book. The Letter of Jeremiah may be counted separately or as part of Baruch. This is why numerical claims about the Apocrypha should always explain the counting method.
Manuscript history adds another complication. Ancient biblical manuscripts were not always organized like modern printed Bibles. A codex could contain canonical books, disputed books, liturgical material, or other useful writings without necessarily implying that every included text had the same authority. The presence of a book in a manuscript is important evidence, but it is not by itself a complete doctrine of canon.
Theological use also varied. Some communities read certain apocryphal books publicly for instruction while still distinguishing them from the books used to establish doctrine. This distinction is often lost in modern debates. A book may be spiritually useful, historically informative, and ecclesiastically respected without being inspired Scripture.
The Apocrypha usually means about fourteen or fifteen traditional books; the Catholic Deuterocanon means seven full books plus additions; Orthodox collections may be larger; and the broader apocryphal and pseudepigraphal world includes hundreds of Jewish and Christian writings. Any precise number depends on the definition being used.
A responsible count should also separate Jewish apocryphal literature from Christian apocryphal literature. Jewish apocryphal and pseudepigraphal writings often expand the Old Testament world, while Christian apocrypha often imitate or supplement New Testament genres. Combining both categories can produce a very large number, but it can also mislead readers unless the distinction is clearly explained.
The traditional Protestant Apocrypha contains about fourteen or fifteen works, depending on how additions are counted.
The Catholic Deuterocanon includes seven full books plus additions to Esther and Daniel.
Many Orthodox traditions include additional books beyond the Roman Catholic Deuterocanon.
The Pseudepigrapha is a broad group of writings falsely attributed to ancient biblical figures.
Yes. There are noncanonical gospels, acts, letters, and apocalypses.
No. They differ widely in date, genre, theology, and historical value.
No. It shows why careful canon recognition was necessary.
Study them historically while distinguishing them from inspired Scripture.
1. Metzger, An Introduction to the Apocrypha, 1–10.
2. Bruce, The Canon of Scripture, 90–100.
3. Council of Trent, Session 4, in Schaff, Creeds of Christendom, 2:81–83.
4. McDonald, The Biblical Canon, 70–85.
5. Charlesworth, ed., The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, 1:xxiii–xxxiv.
6. Wilhelm Schneemelcher, ed., New Testament Apocrypha, trans. R. McL. Wilson, 2 vols. (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1991–92), 1:1–35.
The Deuterocanon refers to books that Roman Catholic tradition receives as part of the Old Testament but that Protestants usually classify as the Apocrypha. The word comes from Greek roots meaning “second canon.” It does not necessarily mean “less inspired” in Catholic usage, but it does acknowledge that these books had a different and more disputed history of recognition than the books universally received as protocanonical Scripture.1
The books commonly called deuterocanonical include Tobit, Judith, Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach, Baruch, 1–2 Maccabees, and additions to Esther and Daniel. The additions to Daniel include the Prayer of Azariah, the Song of the Three Young Men, Susanna, and Bel and the Dragon. These writings are included in Roman Catholic Old Testaments but are separated or omitted in Protestant Bibles.2
The term “Deuterocanon” is often contrasted with “protocanon.” The protocanonical books are those that were received more broadly and earlier as Scripture. The deuterocanonical books had a more complicated reception history. This distinction is important because debates over the Deuterocanon are not simply debates about whether ancient Christians read the books. They are debates about whether those books possess the same authority as the Law, Prophets, Writings, Gospels, and apostolic books.
The Jewish background is decisive for many Protestant arguments. The books now called deuterocanonical were not part of the Hebrew Bible received in mainstream Judaism. Josephus describes a fixed body of sacred books and distinguishes later writings from those granted equal authority. Later rabbinic Judaism likewise did not receive the deuterocanonical books into the Hebrew canon.3 This matters because the Old Testament was first entrusted to Israel, not to the later medieval Church.
The Septuagint is the main argument often used in favor of the Deuterocanon. Since many deuterocanonical books circulated in Greek and appear in major Christian manuscripts of the Greek Old Testament, some argue that the early Church received a larger Alexandrian canon. The evidence, however, is not simple. Large Christian codices such as Vaticanus, Sinaiticus, and Alexandrinus are centuries later than the apostles and do not contain identical collections. Their inclusion of books does not necessarily prove equal canonical status for every writing included.4
Early Christian testimony is also mixed. Some fathers cite deuterocanonical books in ways that sound authoritative, while others distinguish them from the Hebrew canon. Athanasius, for example, listed the books of the Old Testament and then distinguished other books appointed by the fathers to be read by those newly joining the Church. Jerome made the distinction even more sharply and argued that the Church reads these books for edification but does not use them to confirm doctrine.5
The Council of Trent became a turning point. In 1546, during the Reformation, Trent declared many of these disputed books canonical for the Roman Catholic Church. This decision established the Catholic canon in formal opposition to Protestant arguments. Protestants rejected this decision because they believed it elevated books that lacked the same Jewish reception, prophetic authority, and early universal recognition as the protocanonical Old Testament.6
The Orthodox churches add another layer of complexity. Eastern Orthodox biblical traditions often include books beyond the Roman Catholic Deuterocanon, such as 3 Maccabees, Psalm 151, and sometimes 1 Esdras or other writings depending on the tradition. This diversity shows that “the Christian Old Testament” was not always a single fixed collection in every community and reinforces the need for careful canonical criteria.7
The Deuterocanon is historically valuable even if one rejects its canonical status. Sirach preserves important Jewish wisdom teaching. 1 Maccabees is one of the most important sources for the Maccabean revolt. Wisdom of Solomon gives insight into Hellenistic Jewish theology. These writings help explain the world of the New Testament and later Jewish-Christian thought.
At the same time, historical value is not the same as inspiration. A book can be ancient, orthodox in many places, and spiritually useful without being Scripture. Church history contains many valuable writings—such as the letters of Ignatius, the Didache, and the writings of Augustine—that are not canonical. The same principle applies to the Deuterocanon.
For Protestant readers, the best approach is to understand the Deuterocanon as a historically significant but noncanonical collection. These books should be studied as part of the broader world of Second Temple Judaism and early Christianity, but Christian doctrine should be grounded in the inspired books of the Hebrew Old Testament and apostolic New Testament.
In short, the Deuterocanon is the Roman Catholic name for the disputed Old Testament-era books that Protestants call the Apocrypha. The difference in terminology reflects a deeper difference in canon. The books are important, but their disputed reception means they should not be placed on the same level as the universally recognized Scriptures.
The label “deuterocanonical” is itself important because it admits a historical distinction. These books were not received with the same clarity and universality as Genesis, Isaiah, Psalms, Matthew, Romans, or Revelation. Catholic theology ultimately receives them as Scripture, but the term acknowledges that their canonical recognition followed a different path. Protestant theology argues that this different path is evidence against their full canonical status.
Several deuterocanonical books contain material of real historical and devotional value. Sirach gives a rich example of Jewish wisdom instruction. Wisdom of Solomon reflects Hellenistic Jewish reflection on righteousness, immortality, and idolatry. 1 Maccabees preserves crucial historical memory about Jewish resistance to Antiochus IV Epiphanes. These strengths explain why Christians valued the books, but they do not remove the canon problem.
The Reformation debate sharpened these older questions. Protestants did not deny that the books had been read in Christian history. They denied that ecclesiastical use was the same as divine inspiration. A sermon illustration, liturgical reading, or moral citation does not have the same status as a canonical proof text. That distinction lies at the heart of the Protestant rejection of the Deuterocanon as Scripture.
Modern readers should therefore avoid two extremes. One extreme dismisses the Deuterocanon as useless because it is not Scripture. The other treats the books as if their presence in some Christian traditions settles the question of canon. A better approach is to study them carefully as significant ancient writings while asking whether they meet the same standards as the universally recognized biblical books.
It means “second canon” and refers to books received by Catholics but classified as Apocrypha by Protestants.
Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, Baruch, 1–2 Maccabees, and additions to Esther and Daniel are the main Roman Catholic deuterocanonical books.
For many practical discussions, yes, though the terms reflect different theological positions.
Protestants generally value the books historically but do not receive them as Scripture.
Mainstream Judaism did not include these books in the Hebrew Bible.
The Council of Trent formally defined these books as canonical for Roman Catholicism.
Yes. They are valuable for studying Jewish history, wisdom, and theology before the New Testament.
Protestants argue that doctrine should not be established from these disputed books.
1. Metzger, An Introduction to the Apocrypha, 3–7.
2. deSilva, Introducing the Apocrypha, 21–35.
3. Josephus, Against Apion 1.37–43; Beckwith, Old Testament Canon, 276–320.
4. Sundberg, Old Testament of the Early Church, 50–69.
5. Athanasius, Festal Letter 39; Jerome, “Prologue to the Books of Solomon,” 492–93.
6. Council of Trent, Session 4, “Decree Concerning the Canonical Scriptures,” in Schaff, Creeds of Christendom, 2:81–83.
7. McDonald, The Biblical Canon, 70–85.
© Apocrypha.com. All Rights Reserved. A publication of Covenant Press.
