Why it matters for reading Scripture
The writings between the Testaments, the Dead Sea Scrolls among them, are the world the New Testament was written in.
Biblical studiesWhat does the text say?
Second Temple and early Christian literature is the study of two groups of ancient writing read together because they share a period, a set of scriptures and many of the same manuscripts: Jewish literature written outside the Hebrew Bible in the later Second Temple period and shortly after, and early Christian literature outside the New Testament.
Study v1.1, 23 October 2026
The writings between the Testaments, the Dead Sea Scrolls among them, are the world the New Testament was written in.
Most of this literature reached us through Christian copying, and much survives complete only in Ge'ez, Syriac or Slavonic; its manuscripts, not later legends, settle the public claims made about it.
Traditions divide on these books' authority, from Scripture read in worship to no authority at all; scholars divide on provenance, the Essene link, early dates and Gnosticism.
The Catechism cites deuterocanonical books as Scripture, and 2 Maccabees 12:46 carries the main scriptural weight for prayer for the dead.
The Lectionary for Mass has 58 readings from deuterocanonical texts, and the Office of Readings draws on 1 Clement, Ignatius and Barnabas. Narrative apocrypha shape feasts while the texts are kept at a distance: the Protevangelium and Pseudo-Matthew lie behind the feasts of Anne and of the Presentation. Catholic sources do not treat 1 Enoch as scripture.
Reads the Wisdom of Solomon at Vespers for martyrs, monastics and hierarchs, and prays the Prayer of Manasseh at Great Compline.
The feast of the Entry of the Theotokos tells the Protevangelium story as Holy Tradition without naming the text, and the lives of Thecla, Ignatius and Polycarp follow the Acts of Paul and Thecla, the Ignatian letters and the Martyrdom of Polycarp. One Orthodox writer places 1 Enoch among books preserved for the faithful but not read liturgically as scripture.
Fr Moses Samaan names ten deuterocanonical books that the traditional churches "accepted", calls the label "Apocrypha" a misnomer, and says the early church agreed they "ought to be read in church services".
Diocesan answers, not synodal statements, say the church takes its Old Testament from the Septuagint, which lacks Enoch, and does not recognize 3 Maccabees as canonical, though reading it is acceptable.
The Ethiopian church's own list counts 81 books, 46 in the Old Testament and 35 in the New, with Jubilees and Enoch in the Old Testament and church-order books in the New, and says its Bible "was made from the Septuagint".
The Eritrean diocese of the USA and Canada gives the same count and names Enoch, Jubilees and the three books of Meqabyan in its narrower canon. Sources differ on whether the Ethiopian list's Maccabees are the Meqabyan.
Uses the Peshitta, whose early New Testament has 22 books.
A lectionary page says both Testaments are read "including the apocrypha", except Revelation, the Song of Solomon and 1 and 2 Maccabees, while Patriarch Ignatius Aphram Barsoum says that only "the greater parts" of the two books of Maccabees were excluded. Its seminary teaches the Odes of Solomon, Aphrahat and Ephrem.
Its lectionary index sets Wisdom 7:7 to 24 for the morning of the first Monday of Great Lent.
Its statement of belief reveres "the Scriptures as the inspired Word of God" but gives no list of books.
The pages of the Mother See of Holy Etchmiadzin say nothing on the deuterocanon or the apocrypha, but the manuscript evidence is substantial.
Many Armenian Bibles include 3 Corinthians, sometimes as canonical, the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs are usually included in Armenian Bible codices, and the Zohrab Bible prints 3 Corinthians in an appendix.
Catholicos-Patriarch Ilia II closed his 1989 Easter epistle with Sirach 7:1 to 2, cited as "Jesus Sirach", which shows the book in pastoral use.
The Oshki Bible probably did not include Maccabees, and the printed Georgian Bible of 1743 was revised against Slavonic.
Calls the Peshitta its "official Bible", as one parish site states, and the Diocese of California publishes a modern Assyrian New Testament from the Peshitta text and a Sunday lectionary.
A youth retreat of that diocese in January 2015 was dedicated to Mar Aphrahat, with three Bible studies based on his Demonstrations.
Follows Luther's 1534 Bible, which printed the Apocrypha as an appendix headed "books not held equal to Holy Scripture, yet useful and good to read".
The Lutheran confessional writings contain no canon list, and the Lutherbibel 2017 retranslated several of these books from the Göttingen Septuagint, though standard editions usually omit them.
The Belgic Confession lets the church read the apocryphal books "as far as they agree with the canonical books", but not to confirm "any point of faith".
The Westminster Confession (1647) says they are "of no authority in the Church of God" and are to be used no otherwise "than other human writings".
Article VI distinguishes the canonical books from "other Books" which the Church reads "for example of life and instruction of manners", but does not "apply them to establish any doctrine".
The King James Bible of 1611 printed 15 apocryphal books.
Article V, as the United Methodist Church prints it today, keeps the Anglican statement that Scripture contains all things necessary to salvation but has no list of other books and no "example of life" clause.
Methodist doctrinal standards are therefore silent on reading the Apocrypha.
The Baptist Faith and Message 2000 does not mention the Apocrypha or the number of books.
Wider evangelical teaching sources do not treat 1 Enoch as scripture but discuss it as background, especially for Jude.
The Assemblies of God Statement of Fundamental Truths says that "the Scriptures, both the Old and the New Testaments, are verbally inspired of God", without a list of books and without mention of the Apocrypha.
A manuscript copy of Ellen G. White's vision of 11 January 1850 reads, "I saw that the Apocrypha was the hidden book, and that the wise of these last days should understand it".
The White Estate says the meaning is unclear and that she never mentioned the Apocrypha again or urged its reading. Adventist voices on 1 Enoch diverge.
Doctrine and Covenants 91 (1833) says the Apocrypha contains many true things but also many additions "by the hands of men", need not be translated, and benefits the reader enlightened by the Spirit.
Their own Enoch material in Moses 6 to 7 is separate from 1 Enoch.
The Watchtower (1 April 2012) judges the Protevangelium, the Infancy Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Peter and the Nag Hammadi gospels to show "a clear lack of divine inspiration".
Their publications index lists the Apocrypha as "not canonical" and explains why it is omitted from the New World Translation.
The Babylonian Talmud both forbids reading Ben Sira and quotes Ben Sira 13:17 as "triplicated in the Writings".
Rabbi Akiba excluded those who read "the extraneous books", yet Sirach stayed popular, and the Rema's gloss on the Shulchan Arukh records the custom of eating cheese on Hanukkah because of Judith. Beta Israel keep Jubilees and Enoch among their sacred Ge'ez texts.
Qur'an 3:49 and 5:110 tell of Jesus shaping a bird from clay, a motif paralleled in the Infancy Gospel of Thomas, and Qur'an 3:37 has Mary in the sanctuary receiving provision from God, paralleled in the Protevangelium.
Many Muslims regard the Gospel of Barnabas as the only remaining authentic Gospel; the NASSCAL e-Clavis judges it likely composed in the sixteenth century.
Jean-Baptiste Cotelier's Paris edition gathers the works of the Fathers "who flourished in apostolic times". L. J. Ittig's Leipzig edition of 1699 shortens the name to "Bibliotheca Patrum Apostolicorum", the source of the modern label Apostolic Fathers.68
Strack and Billerbeck's verse-by-verse collection of rabbinic parallels to the New Testament appears. Its use declines after Samuel Sandmel and E. P. Sanders.76
Samuel Sandmel's SBL presidential address of 27 December, published in 1962 as "Parallelomania", warns against overstating the similarity of passages and then treating it as literary dependence running in a fixed direction.85
The seventh edition of the German collection of Christian apocrypha founded by Edgar Hennecke and continued by Wilhelm Schneemelcher, edited by Christoph Markschies and Jens Schröter, appears from Mohr Siebeck.93
Read a text that reached the present only through Christian hands first as Christian; in Robert Kraft's words, "The burden of proof lies with claims of Jewishness"100103.
Test Jewish or Christian origin against James R. Davila's signature features: concern for cult, priesthood, temple, purity and Torah on the Jewish side, and favorable mention of Jesus or quotation of the New Testament on the Christian side101.
Where the evidence is divided, give the provenance of a disputed text as a range of positions, as with the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs104100.
Date the scrolls by paleography and radiocarbon together, and now also by a handwriting model trained on dated samples1051061079899.
Weigh the late date of the rabbinic and targumic texts: the Mishnah reached its final form early in the third century and the standard Targumim not before the fifth, though much of their content is older108109.
State a parallel, its source and its date, and argue any claim of dependence rather than assume it, after Sandmel's warning against "parallelomania"85.
Use "Gnostic" as a conventional label and name the specific group or text, since the category itself is disputed102110111.
Read each text through the communities that copied, read and used it, including its manuscripts, book order and paratext, as Liv Ingeborg Lied does for 2 Baruch100112113.
The works below shaped the field and are cited in this study, from the earliest to the most recent. Hover over a book, or select it, to see its author and the sources behind it.
Listed because this study draws on their published work; no association with or endorsement of Numa Verse is implied. Suggest a correction.
The words that carry the most weight in this field, each defined from the sources of this study. Turn a card over to read its definition.
No. The New Catholic Encyclopedia states that the scrolls contain no reference to John the Baptist, Jesus or his followers105. Their value for the New Testament lies in shared language and practice within a common Jewish world, and the Library of Congress concludes that Qumran literature and early Christian teaching "do not reflect a direct link"171172.
Their publication was slow: access was restricted to the editorial team, and by 1991 only about half the scrolls had been published91173. In September 1991 a computer reconstruction appeared and the Huntington Library announced unrestricted access to its photographs, after which the Israel Antiquities Authority lifted its restrictions9192174. Eileen Schuller concludes that "the reality was far less dramatic and more mundane"175.
Often that is disputed, because most of these Jewish writings reached the present through Christian copying87. Robert Kraft's working rule is that a text preserved only in Christian hands must first be read as Christian, and James R. Davila proposed "signature features" to test Jewish or Christian origin100103101. The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, for instance, are read either as a Jewish work with Christian interpolations or as a Christian composition of about 200 CE that uses Jewish sources104100.
It is a real early sayings collection, surviving in three Greek Oxyrhynchus fragments of the second and third centuries and one complete Coptic text of 114 sayings from the fourth century124. The e-Clavis states that "there is no widespread agreement" about when it was composed or its relationship to the New Testament124. Patterson suggests a date near 70 to 80 CE, while Davies, Goodacre and Gathercole argue that Thomas knows the Synoptics176124. Calling it a "fifth gospel" reflects the judgment of one scholarly group, the Jesus Seminar, in The Five Gospels (1993)177178.
No. Karen L. King presented the papyrus in 2012, and critics pointed at once to faulty Coptic grammar and close dependence on the Gospel of Thomas179180. In 2016 King said the provenance documents "were fabrications" and conceded that the fragment was most likely a fake; it is silent on whether Jesus married179180.
Reviewed and approved by Duane Herholdt, BA (Theology), Chief Executive Officer, Numa Verse
Study version: v1.1, 23 October 2026 (theology map v1.27)
Last reviewed: 7 November 2026