What do you think?
Rate this book
An Introduction to the Apocrypha
An introduction to those books included in the Roman Catholic canon but deemed heretical by Protestants.
274 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1957
5 people are currently reading
120 people want to read
About the author
Bruce M. Metzger
165 books73 followersBruce Manning Metzger (February 9, 1914 – February 13, 2007) was an American biblical scholar and textual critic who was a longtime professor at Princeton Theological Seminary and Bible editor who served on the board of the American Bible Society and United Bible Societies. He was a scholar of Greek, New Testament, and New Testament textual criticism, and wrote prolifically on these subjects. Metzger is widely considered one of the most influential New Testament scholars of the 20th century.[1][2]
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
February 9, 2019
Bruce Metzger fulfills his stated purpose, which is "to supply in non-technical language a concise yet comprehensive account of this body of literature." (p. vii) He gradually introduces the Apocrypha through a preface, a section on the term Apocrypha, and a section on the growth of the Hebrew Cannon. The core of the work consists of a very interesting chapter on each of the fifteen books in the Apocrypha. The last three chapters contain a vast store of information on how the Apocrypha has influenced us, has related to the New Testament, and has related to the Christian church. Two appendices, a selected bibliography, and an index round out a very scholarly tome.
I was extremely impressed by the author's ability to give great quantities of information while holding my avid attention. It must have been difficult to condense so much information into an average-sized book. Metzger masterfully blends tremendous numbers of facts and examples into a smooth narrative. He also organized the material very well because it is easy to follow his train of thought. There is no doubt in my mind that Bruce M. Metzger was one of the finest writer-scholars in the Christian world.
Metzger's affiliation with Princeton Theological Seminary and the National Council of Churches might lead conservatives to suspect the theological veracity of his views. On page 172, he states that "several books within the Old Testament are manifestly quite disparate and occupy varying levels...." On the following page, he says that "God's supernatural hand is in the Apocrypha...." A more conservative view of inspiration would disagree with both of those statements. On the whole, however, Dr. Metzger was very open-minded and very reasonable throughout the book. He did not make this a doctrinal apologetic, so both liberals and conservatives alike can enjoy reading it.
I agree with the author's conclusion that the Apocrypha is NOT part of the canon of Scripture. However, after reading Metzger's book, my conclusion is that the Apocrypha IS helpful for understanding the period between the Old and New Testaments. Dr. Metzger has done a wonderful job in explaining the relevance of the Apocrypha and in making it easy to understand.
I was extremely impressed by the author's ability to give great quantities of information while holding my avid attention. It must have been difficult to condense so much information into an average-sized book. Metzger masterfully blends tremendous numbers of facts and examples into a smooth narrative. He also organized the material very well because it is easy to follow his train of thought. There is no doubt in my mind that Bruce M. Metzger was one of the finest writer-scholars in the Christian world.
Metzger's affiliation with Princeton Theological Seminary and the National Council of Churches might lead conservatives to suspect the theological veracity of his views. On page 172, he states that "several books within the Old Testament are manifestly quite disparate and occupy varying levels...." On the following page, he says that "God's supernatural hand is in the Apocrypha...." A more conservative view of inspiration would disagree with both of those statements. On the whole, however, Dr. Metzger was very open-minded and very reasonable throughout the book. He did not make this a doctrinal apologetic, so both liberals and conservatives alike can enjoy reading it.
I agree with the author's conclusion that the Apocrypha is NOT part of the canon of Scripture. However, after reading Metzger's book, my conclusion is that the Apocrypha IS helpful for understanding the period between the Old and New Testaments. Dr. Metzger has done a wonderful job in explaining the relevance of the Apocrypha and in making it easy to understand.
April 21, 2015
Bruce Metzger’s Introduction to the Apocrypha is an excellent summary of the contents and provenance of a complicated set of historical documents. He sets forth no real thesis, save perhaps that he does not consider the Apocryphal books as part of “the Bible.” Throughout his book he finds only evidence that supports this position.
The first portion of the book comprises engaging summaries of each of the fifteen common Apocryphal books. Metzger does his best to suggest a date for each book, as well as suggesting the type of author who might have produced it (all but one of the Apocryphal books are anonymous).
The second half of the book Metzger dedicates to evaluating the Apocrypha’s relevance to the New Testament Christian. He specifically avoids calling the collection of books a “keystone” between the Old and New Testaments, but he argues that “our understanding of certain expressions and arguments in the New Testament will be enhanced if we take into account... the books of the Apocrypha.” He shows how the different literary genres found in the Apocrypha can help students of the Bible to appreciate the cultural meaning of various New Testament literary forms, such as the epistolary. He then points to the information the Apocrypha provides regarding “broadly cultural, sociological, and theological” data. He notes that readers of the New Testament will not find the roots of the Pharisees or Sadducees in the Old Testament, though they figure prominently in the Gospels. The Apocryphal books fill out the history of these important groups.
An appendix lists groups of translators which produced important versions of the Apocrypha, one of which Metzger was a member of. Another appendix provides brief summaries of the contents of the so-called “New Testament Apocrypha,” the pseudipigraphical books which date between the second and ninth centuries of the Christian era.
Criticism
Metzger openly states in the introduction that he does not believe the Apocrypha is part of the Bible, and most of his analysis of the various Apocryphal books maintains a decidedly conservative approach. An evangelical layperson curious about the Apocrypha’s origins could read this portion with little fear of picking up subtle liberal ideas. The second portion of the book does contain some more subtly liberal statements.
Though Metzger helpfully points out Christian writings and pieces of art which drew from Apocryphal stories, he admits too much when speaking of the Apocrypha’s influence upon incipient Christianity. In his summary of Bel and the Dragon, Metzger points out that England’s St. George can trace his dragon-slaying back to that Apocryphal book. But Metzger also suggests that the author of Revelation drew upon Bel for his image of Satan the dragon.
Metzger also follows an otherwise valid point with an unnecessary conclusion. He notes that intertestamental Judaism refined its understanding of the Messiah and of the future resurrection hope of God’s children, but then he seems to suggest that Jesus and his followers merely culled their beliefs on these topics from this popular understanding.
Refreshingly, Metzger avoids any attempt to steal from Paul his claim to originality (inspired originality, that is) in writing Romans, Ephesians, and 2 Corinthians, though he seems to be heading that direction at one point. He finds interesting parallels between Apocryphal and Pauline passages and convincing (if minor) reasons to conclude that Paul at least had close familiarity with The Wisdom of Solomon. Conservatives need not fear this reasoning, for Paul’s use of sources would be no different from Luke’s admitted practice of the same (cf. Luke 1:1ff).
The other parallels Metzger marshals between Apocryphal and New Testament books are not as convincing. “Undoubtedly,” Metzger argues, Hebrews 11 refers to the famous story of 2 Maccabees in which a mother and her seven sons are martyred for their faith. James, he says, had no passing familiarity with Ecclesiasticus. Even Jesus likely used Apocryphal expressions he argues. But his examples fail to persuade. He points to superficial similarities in wording and to usage of rare Greek words in the passages in question, but these conclusions are misleading, leaving room for those who claim that Christianity is merely the next human step in the evolution of religion.
Criticism need not always be negative, and Metzger deserves praise for his readable style and helpful insights. For example, he suggests that the move from scrolls to codices—which put Apocryphal books in close physical juxtaposition to canonical ones—may be responsible for later confusion over the actual status of the erstwhile additions. This, Metzger says, is why many early Greek-speaking Church Fathers, who would not have known the contents of the Hebrew canon, quote indiscriminately from Apocrypha and canon alike.
Metzger’s tracing of the history of the Apocrypha, noting who used it and how over the centuries, is exceedingly helpful. He tracks down interesting details such as the placement of the Prayer of Manasseh among the canonical books in the Geneva Bible. He also counts the number of cross-references to the Apocrypha in the margins of the canonical books as printed in the original King James. He also shows how many Christians in the history of the church have made the simple argument against the canonicity of the Apocrypha that none of the books exist in Hebrew.
He chooses perceptively among the many historical data available just which pieces of information are likely to be helpful to the Protestant reader. He surveys reactions to the Apocrypha among Protestant leaders from Luther and Calvin to the Westminster Divines, and he sheds light on a topic shrouded by the mists of history.
There is little to complain of in this work and much to commend.
The first portion of the book comprises engaging summaries of each of the fifteen common Apocryphal books. Metzger does his best to suggest a date for each book, as well as suggesting the type of author who might have produced it (all but one of the Apocryphal books are anonymous).
The second half of the book Metzger dedicates to evaluating the Apocrypha’s relevance to the New Testament Christian. He specifically avoids calling the collection of books a “keystone” between the Old and New Testaments, but he argues that “our understanding of certain expressions and arguments in the New Testament will be enhanced if we take into account... the books of the Apocrypha.” He shows how the different literary genres found in the Apocrypha can help students of the Bible to appreciate the cultural meaning of various New Testament literary forms, such as the epistolary. He then points to the information the Apocrypha provides regarding “broadly cultural, sociological, and theological” data. He notes that readers of the New Testament will not find the roots of the Pharisees or Sadducees in the Old Testament, though they figure prominently in the Gospels. The Apocryphal books fill out the history of these important groups.
An appendix lists groups of translators which produced important versions of the Apocrypha, one of which Metzger was a member of. Another appendix provides brief summaries of the contents of the so-called “New Testament Apocrypha,” the pseudipigraphical books which date between the second and ninth centuries of the Christian era.
Criticism
Metzger openly states in the introduction that he does not believe the Apocrypha is part of the Bible, and most of his analysis of the various Apocryphal books maintains a decidedly conservative approach. An evangelical layperson curious about the Apocrypha’s origins could read this portion with little fear of picking up subtle liberal ideas. The second portion of the book does contain some more subtly liberal statements.
Though Metzger helpfully points out Christian writings and pieces of art which drew from Apocryphal stories, he admits too much when speaking of the Apocrypha’s influence upon incipient Christianity. In his summary of Bel and the Dragon, Metzger points out that England’s St. George can trace his dragon-slaying back to that Apocryphal book. But Metzger also suggests that the author of Revelation drew upon Bel for his image of Satan the dragon.
Metzger also follows an otherwise valid point with an unnecessary conclusion. He notes that intertestamental Judaism refined its understanding of the Messiah and of the future resurrection hope of God’s children, but then he seems to suggest that Jesus and his followers merely culled their beliefs on these topics from this popular understanding.
Refreshingly, Metzger avoids any attempt to steal from Paul his claim to originality (inspired originality, that is) in writing Romans, Ephesians, and 2 Corinthians, though he seems to be heading that direction at one point. He finds interesting parallels between Apocryphal and Pauline passages and convincing (if minor) reasons to conclude that Paul at least had close familiarity with The Wisdom of Solomon. Conservatives need not fear this reasoning, for Paul’s use of sources would be no different from Luke’s admitted practice of the same (cf. Luke 1:1ff).
The other parallels Metzger marshals between Apocryphal and New Testament books are not as convincing. “Undoubtedly,” Metzger argues, Hebrews 11 refers to the famous story of 2 Maccabees in which a mother and her seven sons are martyred for their faith. James, he says, had no passing familiarity with Ecclesiasticus. Even Jesus likely used Apocryphal expressions he argues. But his examples fail to persuade. He points to superficial similarities in wording and to usage of rare Greek words in the passages in question, but these conclusions are misleading, leaving room for those who claim that Christianity is merely the next human step in the evolution of religion.
Criticism need not always be negative, and Metzger deserves praise for his readable style and helpful insights. For example, he suggests that the move from scrolls to codices—which put Apocryphal books in close physical juxtaposition to canonical ones—may be responsible for later confusion over the actual status of the erstwhile additions. This, Metzger says, is why many early Greek-speaking Church Fathers, who would not have known the contents of the Hebrew canon, quote indiscriminately from Apocrypha and canon alike.
Metzger’s tracing of the history of the Apocrypha, noting who used it and how over the centuries, is exceedingly helpful. He tracks down interesting details such as the placement of the Prayer of Manasseh among the canonical books in the Geneva Bible. He also counts the number of cross-references to the Apocrypha in the margins of the canonical books as printed in the original King James. He also shows how many Christians in the history of the church have made the simple argument against the canonicity of the Apocrypha that none of the books exist in Hebrew.
He chooses perceptively among the many historical data available just which pieces of information are likely to be helpful to the Protestant reader. He surveys reactions to the Apocrypha among Protestant leaders from Luther and Calvin to the Westminster Divines, and he sheds light on a topic shrouded by the mists of history.
There is little to complain of in this work and much to commend.
January 6, 2021
My cousin got married recently and in true bookworm fashion, I have already borrowed a book from my new cousin-in-law! Since he and my cousin are theology students/graduates, I found an introduction to the apocrypha (literally the subject and title of the book) on their shelves.
Like the title says, An Introduction to the Apocrypha does exactly that. The apocrypha covered in this book are:
The First Book of Esdras
The Second Book of Esdras
Tobit
Judith
The Additions to the Book of Esther
The Wisdom of Solomon
Ecclesiasticus, or the Wisdom of Jesus the Son of Sirach
Baruch
The Letter of Jeremiah
The Prayer of Azariah and the Song of the Three Young Men
Susanna
Bel and the Dragon
The Prayer of Manasseh
The First Book of the Maccabees
The Second Book of the Maccabees
Each book contains an overview of the history of that particular apocryphon and a summary of its contents. Metzger writes with an affectionate but appropriately critical view. While he acknowledges the influence that the Apocrypha has had, he also doesn’t pretend that they are on the same level as the canonical books of the Bible.
The latter half of the book talks about the relationship between the Apocrypha and the New Testament, the history of the Apocrypha in the Church, and the Influence it has had. For example, the gospel accounts of the birth of Christ say nothing of when he was born, but due to a few lines in the Apocrypha, the image of him being born at night was fixed in the popular consciousness.
My main takeaway from this book was that while the Apocrypha may have no Scriptural authority, they are useful in helping us understand the various schools of thought that were developing around that time and to see how Judaism developed between the books of the Old Testament and New Testament.
If you’re somewhat interested in the apocrypha and want to learn more, I think this is a good starting point. The text is clear and easy and I finished this book with a better understanding of what the Apocrypha is and how they are related to the various books of the Bible.
This review was first posted at Eustea Reads
Like the title says, An Introduction to the Apocrypha does exactly that. The apocrypha covered in this book are:
The First Book of Esdras
The Second Book of Esdras
Tobit
Judith
The Additions to the Book of Esther
The Wisdom of Solomon
Ecclesiasticus, or the Wisdom of Jesus the Son of Sirach
Baruch
The Letter of Jeremiah
The Prayer of Azariah and the Song of the Three Young Men
Susanna
Bel and the Dragon
The Prayer of Manasseh
The First Book of the Maccabees
The Second Book of the Maccabees
Each book contains an overview of the history of that particular apocryphon and a summary of its contents. Metzger writes with an affectionate but appropriately critical view. While he acknowledges the influence that the Apocrypha has had, he also doesn’t pretend that they are on the same level as the canonical books of the Bible.
The latter half of the book talks about the relationship between the Apocrypha and the New Testament, the history of the Apocrypha in the Church, and the Influence it has had. For example, the gospel accounts of the birth of Christ say nothing of when he was born, but due to a few lines in the Apocrypha, the image of him being born at night was fixed in the popular consciousness.
My main takeaway from this book was that while the Apocrypha may have no Scriptural authority, they are useful in helping us understand the various schools of thought that were developing around that time and to see how Judaism developed between the books of the Old Testament and New Testament.
If you’re somewhat interested in the apocrypha and want to learn more, I think this is a good starting point. The text is clear and easy and I finished this book with a better understanding of what the Apocrypha is and how they are related to the various books of the Bible.
This review was first posted at Eustea Reads
August 16, 2020
A handy set of Sparknotes-style summaries of each book of the Apocrypha, with additional academic context for those who are interested.
November 30, 2018
There is oh so much information as to the history and uses of books of the Apocrypha. Metzger had much to do with the editing of the Apocrypha in the RSV translation. An excellant reference.
December 4, 2023
I have had this book on my shelf for years, and since I am currently writing an Advent preaching series on the Apocrypha, I decided to finally read it. Metzger's now-classic primer on the history and reception of the Apocrypha with summaries of the fourteen or fifteen "inter-testamental," apocryphal texts, is now a well-established classic because of its admirable scope, clarity, and quality of scholarship. It should be a student's first port of call when approaching these ancient Jewish religious texts.
I am most interested in the way that the early Church utilized the Apocrypha. Metzger shows that there has basically always been debate about the exact value and canonicity of these works. Where some (such as Hippolytus) virtually treat the Apocrypha as inspired Scripture, others (such as John of Damascus) suggest a secondary status for such works in the Church. Though Trent officially pronounced most of the apocryphal works to be scriptural and canonical, the general consensus across Christendom is that the Apocrypha is secondary to Scripture for various reasons, but is still worth reading. Since debates stretching back to Jerome and Origen, and because of the absence of most apocryphal writings (except for Baruch and Jeremiah's Letter) in Athanasius's famous festal letter 39, the Church has usually taken the stance that while the Apocrypha is good and valuable, it is not normative for dogmatics as the received Old and New Testament writings are.
I am most interested in the way that the early Church utilized the Apocrypha. Metzger shows that there has basically always been debate about the exact value and canonicity of these works. Where some (such as Hippolytus) virtually treat the Apocrypha as inspired Scripture, others (such as John of Damascus) suggest a secondary status for such works in the Church. Though Trent officially pronounced most of the apocryphal works to be scriptural and canonical, the general consensus across Christendom is that the Apocrypha is secondary to Scripture for various reasons, but is still worth reading. Since debates stretching back to Jerome and Origen, and because of the absence of most apocryphal writings (except for Baruch and Jeremiah's Letter) in Athanasius's famous festal letter 39, the Church has usually taken the stance that while the Apocrypha is good and valuable, it is not normative for dogmatics as the received Old and New Testament writings are.
December 14, 2022
A good overview of the contents of the Apocrypha, as well its historical place in the church. The appendices added little value in my view, and the second one seemed rather out of place in this volume.
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews