I have noticed that many Catholic believers will go to great detail as to why they think that the Holy Bible is “incomplete”, because the “Hidden Books” or as more commonly known as the Apocryphal books are not included. There are many reasons why they were not included.
To begin with, The Catholic Church itself did not always accept them. They were not even officially accepted until 1546 at The Council of Trent, 1500 years plus after they were written! In fact many today say that it was basically a reaction to the Protestant Reform. Fathers of the early Catholic Church such as Origen, Athanasius, Cyril of Jerusalem and Jerome rejected them as scripture! So who are we to take seriously here? The books of the Apocrypha were placed in separate sections as they were not considered inspired word and not of equal authority.
Jesus beyond any shadow of a doubt rejected them as scripture. 50Therefore this generation will be held responsible for the blood of all the prophets that has been shed since the beginning of the world, 51 from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah, who was killed between the altar and the sanctuary. Yes, I tell you, this generation will be held responsible for it all. (Luke 11: 50-51) Abel being the first martyr of the Book of Genesis and Zechariah the last in the book of Chronicles. Jesus referred to these books because he was going over the whole Canon of the Hebrew Scriptures. These scriptures were the same 39 books as accepted today by Protestants.
Questions to ponder: Why is there no mention of the Books of the Apocrypha in the Dead Sea Scrolls? Why does Tobit 4: 11 say we can have forgiveness of sins by “Alms giving”?” 11 “for alms deliver from all sin, and from death, and will not suffer the soul to go into darkness”, a false teaching. Why is the false teaching of offering of money for the sins of the dead in 2 Maccabees 12: 43-45 43”And making a gathering, he twelve thousand drachms of silver to Jerusalem for sacrifice to be offered for the sins of the dead, thinking well and religiously concerning the resurrection, 44 For if he had not hoped that the that were slain should rise again, it would have seemed superfluous and vain to pray for the dead, 45And because he considered that the who had fallen asleep with godliness, had great grace laid up for them.” Why didn’t Jesus or the Apostles ever quote from the Apocrypha? Finally the Books are not prophetic, no predictive prophecy, and not said to be authoritative by any book written after them.
In conclusion, I am only responding to the at times, militant protests by Catholic Apologists. Are the books not to be taken seriously? I believe they should be taken seriously as books of historical value. That being said, I believe that we have included all the books that belong in the Bible. God Bless,
Brian Mason
Beacon Apologetics 