Do we need to understand the Apocrypha?
What is the Apocyrpha?
“Biblical apocrypha are a set of texts included in the Septuagint and the Latin Vulgate, but not in the Hebrew Bible. While Catholic tradition considers some of these texts to be deuterocanonical, and the Orthodox Churches consider them all to be canonical, Protestants consider them apocryphal, that is, non-canonical books that are useful for instruction.[2][3] Luther’s Bible placed them in a separate section in between the Old Testament and New Testament called the Apocrypha, a convention followed by subsequent Protestant Bibles.[4] Other non-canonical apocryphal texts are generally called pseudepigrapha, a term that means “false attribution”.[5] – Wikipedia
What did Ellen White say about the Apocrypha?
“I then saw the Word of God, pure and unadulterated, and that we must answer for the way we received the truth proclaimed from that Word. I saw that it had been a manner to break the flinty heart in pieces, and a fire to consume the dross and tin, that the heart might be pure and holy. I saw that the Apocrypha was the hidden book, and that the wise of these last days should understand it. I saw that the Bible was the standard Book, that will judge us at the last day.” – Manuscript Release Page 34
From this statement by Ellen White, some have concluded that the Apocrypha is a book containing some hidden knowledge that is important for God’s people in the last days to understand. After all, she wrote “the wise of these last days should understand it.” That is of course, if she did indeed write it. In my study of this subject I have researched the authenticity of the above statement, analyzed its context and searched her other writings for any statements that would affirm or deny a need to understand the Apocryphal books. I have concluded the Apocrypha is not a book necessary to the salvation of man or the wisdom of the wise in these last days for the following reasons:
1. Proclaims the Bible is “pure and unadulterated.”
3. Ellen White condemns the Apocrypha.
3. The Bible is “the standard book.”
4. The Apocrypha has no sanctifying influence.
5. The Apocrypha was hidden by God
5. Meaning of “understand the Apocrypha” is unclear.
4. This statement does not exist in Ellen White’s original handwriting.
5. This statement in Manuscript Release page 34 is a copy whose origin is uncertain.
6. The statement concerning the apocrypha is missing from the original writing.
7. Ellen White never quoted from the Apocrypha.
1. Proclaim's the Bible is "pure and unadulterated"
Ellen White writes in this statement “I then saw the Word of God, pure and unadulterated, and that we must answer for the way we received the truth proclaimed from that Word.” (MR 34) The meaning of this statement needs no explanation. The Word of God she writes is both “pure and unadulterated.” Why make this point along with a mention of the apocrypha, unless to infer the book to which the Bible is being compared (the apocrypha) is NOT “pure and unadulterated?” If the apocrypha were “pure and unadulterated” she would have placed upon it the same commendation — but she didn’t. Rather than taking away from the statement a regard for some hidden meaning or understanding the apocrypha contains for God’s people in the last days, I see her comment about the apocrypha bookended by two statements affirming the purity and veracity of the Bible in contrast with it. It is the Bible that is “pure and unadulterated,” not the apocrypha, and Sister White confirms this in another statement condeming the apocrypha in 1872.
2. Ellen White condemns the Apocrypha
“Christ retained a perfect identity of character, although surrounded by unfavorable influences, and placed in every variety of circumstances. Nothing supernatural occurred during the first thirty years of his life at Nazareth which would attract the attention of the people to himself. The apocraphy [apocrypha] of the New Testament attempts to supply the silence of the Scriptures in reference to the early life of Christ, by giving a fancy sketch of his childhood years. These writers relate wonderful incidents and miracles, which characterized his childhood, and distinguished him from other children. They relate fictitious tales, and frivolous miracles, which they say he wrought, attributing to Christ the senseless and needless display of his divine power, and falsifying his character by attributing to him acts of revenge, and deeds of mischief, which were cruel and ridiculous.” In what marked contrast is the history of Christ, as recorded by the evangelists, which is beautiful in its natural simplicity, with these unmeaning stories, and fictitious tales. They are not at all in harmony with his character. They are more after the order of the novels that are written, which have no foundation in truth; but the characters delineated are of fancy creating.” (YI April 1, 1872, par. 2)
From this statement from Ellen White we gather a very different picture concerning her thoughts about the apocrypha:
1. “attempts to supply the silence of the scriptures.”
2. “a fancy sketch”
3. “falsifying his [Jesus’] character”
4. “unmeaning stories”
5. “fictitious tales”
6. “have no foundation in truth”
Does this sound like a “hidden book” that contains important counsel for God’s people in the last days? If Ellen White was recommending God’s people understand the apocrypha, why does she so strongly condemn it in this statement from YI 1872? The fact Ellen White’s statement recommending we “understand” the apocrypha is bookended by two statements upholding the truthfulness and the importance of the Bible, conveys to me that what we are to “understand “about the apocrypha is that it is not “pure and unadulterated,” nor is it to be considered “the standard book” by which we will be judged. If this is how we understand the statement from Manuscript Release page 34, then both of these statements are in harmony. If not, then having one statement recommending the apocrypha and the other condemning it would be a clear contradiction.
3. The Bible is the "standard book."
Not once, but three times in the Manuscript Release page 34 statement, Ellen White writes that it is the Bible by which we will be judged. She wrote “we must answer for the way we received the truth proclaimed from that Word,” and “I saw that the Bible was the standard Book, that will judge us at the last day.” (Manuscript Release Page 34) The fact these comments immediately precede and immediately follow the statement concerning understanding the Apocrypha, tell me that even while mentioning the Apocrypha, she wanted to make it unmistakeably clear to God’s people, that it is the Bible by which we will be judged — thereby showing that no one will be judged by the books of the apocrypha. If we will not be judged by those things contained in these books, then why would Sister White recommend we understand them? Again, I don’t believe the statement is saying we should understand what is in them, but only that we should understand about them, and in particular, that we should understand no one will be judged by them. Simply put, “the Bible is the standard book,” not the apocrypha, and I believe that is her point.
4. The Apocrypha has no sanctifying influence
In the middle of the Manuscript Release page 34 statement, Ellen White wrote concerning the Bible, “I saw that it had been a manner to break the flinty heart in pieces, and a fire to consume the dross and tin, that the heart might be pure and holy.” We know from following Miller’s rules of interpretation, that every statement and every word must have its proper influence. Why would this statement, which may at first seem unrelated to the rest of the paragraph, be included just prior to mentioning the apocrypha? Like the other statements affirming the truthfulness of the Bible, reason necessitates that if the Bible is specifically pointed out as having a sanctifying influence “to break the flinty heart in pieces” and to “consume the dross and tin, that the heart might be pure and holy,” then it follows that the apocrypha mentioned in her following sentence does not have this sanctifying influence. Furthermore, the sanctifying influence of the Word of God was shown to Ellen White as she wrote “I saw.” And if God was showing her the sanctifying influence of the Bible, then it has to mean that one of the things the wise are to understand about the apocryhpa, is that it does not have this sanctifying influence. How could it? If, after all, the writers of the apocrypha she says were “falsifying his [Jesus’] character,” how could it have a refining and ennobling influence when the writers speaking of Jesus, were “attributing to him acts of revenge, and deeds of mischief, which were cruel and ridiculous?” (YI April 1, 1872, par. 2)
5. The Apocrypha was hidden by God
When Ellen White wrote “I saw that the Apocrypha was the hidden book, and that the wise of these last days should understand it. I saw that the Bible was the standard Book, that will judge us at the last day.” – Manuscript Release Page 34
5. The Apocrypha is an idol
“I then saw the Word of God pure and unadulterated, and that we must answer for the way we received the truth proclaimed from that Word. I saw that it had been a hammer to break the flinty heart in pieces, and a fire to consume the dross and tin, that the heart might be pure and holy. I saw that the Apocrypha was the hidden book, and that the wise of these last days should understand it. I saw that the Bible was the standard book, that will judge us at the last day. I saw that heaven would be cheap enough, and that nothing was too dear to sacrifice for Jesus, and that we must give all to enter the kingdom. I heard an angel say, think ye God will place His seal where there is an idol? No, no.” {Ms 4, 1850, par. 13}
Meaning of "understand it."
Not once, not twice, or even three or four times, but five times in five sentences, Ellen White begins her sentence with the words “I saw” or “I then saw.” She was shown two books. She writes “I then saw the Word of God,” and “I saw that the apocrypha was the hidden book.” What she was shown, was… that the Bible should be understood as pure and unadulterated, that it is the standard book etc and that the apocrypha is not. It was hidden by God because it was an idol…..
When Ellen White wrote “I saw that the Apocrypha was the hidden book, and that the wise of these last days should understand it. I saw that the Bible was the standard Book, that will judge us at the last day.” – Manuscript Release Page 34
I agree “the wise of these last days should understand it.” They should understand the apocrypha. They should understand it is not “pure and unadulterated” by the Bible is. They should understanding it is not the standard book, but the Bible is….
Conclusion
Ellen White was not recommending God’s people believe or place faith in, or even read the Apocrypha, she was only recommending that they “understand it,” which I am taking to mean, to understand that it is not “pure and unadulterated” and to understand that it is not “the standard book” and that “we must answer for the way we received the truth proclaimed from that Word,” not the “unmeaning stores, and fictitious tales” contained in the apocrypha. If God wants us to understanding anything about the Apocrypha, Ellen White’s statement, I believe, conveys to us the significance and importance of the Bible and to place no confidence at all in the apocryphal books.