What is the New Testament Apocrypha? List and Summaries

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily match my own. - Dr. Bart D. Ehrman

The New Testament contains 27 books that Christians regard as inspired Scripture, but these were not the only writings produced by the earliest followers of Jesus. In the centuries after Christ, numerous books known as New Testament apocrypha circulated among Christian communities. Some were highly respected and widely read, while others promoted theological ideas that many Christians considered controversial or even heretical. So, what is the New Testament apocrypha?

In this article, I’ll explore what the New Testament apocrypha is, how it differs from the better-known Apocrypha of the Old Testament, and why these books were left out of the Bible. I’ll also summarize some of the most influential and intriguing apocryphal writings from the early Christian world.

“The Apocrypha” vs. New Testament Apocrypha

The word “apocrypha” is Greek for “hidden, concealed, or obscure.” This word is most commonly used to refer to ancient books that were ultimately excluded from the Bible.

Within the larger category of apocrypha, there is at least one key distinction to be made. Scholar Christy Cobb explains how to distinguish the Apocrypha from other apocryphal literature:

These Jewish books were written in the intertestamental period and were considered Scripture by many, including some of the New Testament writers (see, for example, Jude 1:9 and 1:14–15, which quote from the Assumption of Moses and 1 Enoch, respectively), though they were eventually considered outside the official canon. The books of the Apocrypha were written anonymously, except for the book of Sirach, the only book of the Apocrypha in which the author correctly identifies himself.

A couple of these books claim to be authored by well-known Jewish figures, but were probably not, according to most scholars. This puts them in the category of pseudepigrapha, books falsely attributed to famous figures in the hope of stamping their writing with authority. Among these is the book of Baruch, which is attributed to Baruch ben Neriah, a scribe of the prophet Jeremiah (Jer 36:9–10). Scholars are nearly unanimous, though, in rejecting that attribution.

Another piece of pseudepigrapha is found in additions to the book of Daniel, which are falsely attributed to the prophet Daniel. This shows, by the way, that apocrypha and pseudepigrapha are categories that sometimes overlap, and even some canonical books in both the Old and New Testaments are considered pseudepigrapha by scholars.

The New Testament apocrypha, on the other hand, consists of early Christian books, most of which were written between the 2nd and 4th centuries CE but were ultimately excluded from the New Testament canon. They include writings that tell stories about Jesus and outline his instructions, speculate on the divine nature, or tell of the teachings and miracles of the apostles. Some of these writings were cited as Scripture by early church fathers, despite eventually being left out of the Bible.

Several different literary genres are included among New Testament apocrypha. There are non-canonical gospels, both inside and outside the Nag Hammadi Library. Those outside the Nag Hammadi collection include the Protoevangelium of James and the Gospel of Peter. Within the Nag Hammadi collection there are The Gospel of Thomas and the Gospel of Philip.

There are also apocryphal acts, including the Acts of Paul and Thecla, stories of Jesus’ childhood like the Infancy Gospel of Thomas (see below), and 3 Corinthians.

How many books of New Testament apocrypha are there? Too many to count accurately. There are some that have been lost to us, others that only survive in fragments, and others for which we have multiple manuscripts. A list of some of the best-known books and their English translations can be found here.

Why Were Christian Apocrypha Excluded From the Canon?

Scholars have determined at least three criteria which had to be met for a book to be included in the Bible. This doesn’t mean that a committee sat down with these rules and decided on each book. Rather, scholars have seen that the messy process of forming a canon seems to have relied on these criteria over time.

1. Apostolic Roots

While there are far too many New Testament apocryphal texts to go through here, scholars have been able to make some general observations about why they were left out of the Bible. The first had to do with the apostolic origins of the texts. All the books of the 27-book New Testament canon are attributed to either an apostle (Matthew, Peter) or a close companion of an apostle (Mark, Luke). When ancient Christians believed these attributions, the book was more likely to be included in the canon.

As an example, almost all critical scholars trust that Paul actually wrote 1 Thessalonians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Romans, and Philemon. However, the books of Ephesians, Colossians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, and Titus, which claim Paul’s authorship, are probably pseudepigraphic, according to most scholars (although the authenticity of some of these is certainly still debated).

So, why were these included if Paul didn’t write them? Because enough ancient Christians believed he did. Some other books, such as the Gospel of Thomas, however, were attributed to an apostle, but the attribution was not sufficiently believable. Why? Some of its teachings were considered gnostic, a red flag for many early Christians. That introduces our next category which has more to do with the content of the writings.

2. Orthodoxy

In order to become part of the biblical canon, a book had to line up with the general theology and accepted beliefs of the majority of churches. As Christy Cobb writes, “Early Christians tended to read, copy, share, and preserve the texts whose contents they already agreed with.” Therefore, writings with Gnostic or other views that deviated from more established perspectives were rejected. 

There are many examples of this, including the Infancy Gospel of Thomas, a widely-read book in early Christianity that tells the story of Jesus’ childhood. In this book, the child Jesus performs miracles but also strikes some boys dead when they displease him. Not only does this contradict the biblical notion that Jesus only started performing miraculous acts as an adult, but it also shows him to be vindictive. It is likely for those reasons that the book was left out of the canon.

Another example is the Acts of John. It is a book which contains views attributed to the early Christian heresy known as Docetism. Adherents of Docetism believed that Jesus was a purely spiritual being and that, therefore, his physical body was a mere illusion. Since this belief was classed as a heresy by the Christian establishment, the Acts of John was not given canonical status.

3. Widespread Usage in Churches

In order to be canonized, a book needed to be widely read and used in worship by churches across different regions. In some cases, these books had been widely used for so long that there could be no question of their inclusion in the Bible. On the other hand, if use of the book was not common, or if it declined over time, it was much less likely to be included.

An example of a book widely read that was eventually included is the book of Revelation. Plenty of early Christians did not want to see it included in the Bible. Remember how I said above that a book had to have apostolic origins to be included? In Canon and Canonicity: The Formation and Use of Scripture, Dimitris Kyrtatas writes that some early Christians doubted that the John who wrote Revelation was John the apostle, noting big differences in its style and language compared to the Gospel of John. 

Fourth-century church historian Eusebius of Caesarea wrote that while many Christians of his time accepted the book as canonical, many others rejected it. Revelation’s inclusion ultimately came down to its widespread use in churches in the 4th century, as well as a sufficient belief that it really was written by John the Apostle (a view that scholars generally reject now).

On the other side, a book called the Didache was ultimately excluded from the canon. Its status was high among 2nd century Christians but it failed to make the cut by the 4th century. There are many possible reasons for this, but one is certainly the fact that it was tied more to the Syrian church, where it was probably written, than to others. 

In The Didache: Faith, Hope, & Life of the Earliest Christian Communities, 50-70 C.E., Aaron Milavec writes that famous theologians such as “...Origen and Athanasius had made early reference to the Didache by way of naming ancient works whose reputation was too local to allow inclusion in the universal canon.” Since the book was more influential in one region than in others, it was left out.

Having established some of the reasons that NT apocryphal books were rejected from the canon, let’s look at an intriguing example of a popular early Christian book that was nevertheless excluded.

Why the Shepherd of Hermas Isn’t in the Bible

A 2nd-century Christian book known as the Shepherd of Hermas may have been the most popular Christian book that was excluded from the Bible. This is clear from the fact that there are more surviving manuscripts of the Shepherd than of any New Testament books except Matthew and John.

The book was massively popular with Christians in the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th centuries and can even be found in the 4th-century Codex Sinaiticus, one of the oldest complete Bible manuscripts in existence. Why was it eventually rejected as Scripture?

In his book The Shepherd of Hermas as Scriptura Non Grata, Robert Heaton writes that it all comes down to an Egyptian bishop named Athanasius. As the first bishop to list our current New Testament canon of 27 books as Scripture, he failed to include the Shepherd of Hermas. 

He didn’t prohibit the book. Rather, Athanasius deemed it worthy of reading but not of biblical status. Heaton writes that the principal reason for this is that he was a rabid defender of the Christian orthodoxy established at the Council of Nicaea (which he had attended). So it’s not that the Shepherd contradicted Nicene Christianity, just that it didn’t promote it enough, in Athanasius’ opinion. The book’s focus on ethical behavior rather than correct belief may have doomed it to extracanonical status.

Since he was a very influential bishop, Athanasius’ exclusion of the Shepherd either gradually led to its being dropped from the canon or solidified an already-emerging consensus on the canon. In addition, the book did not claim to be written by an apostle, which didn’t help its status.

So, after understanding why some of these books were left out of the Bible, how should we think about their original purpose, the motivation behind their composition?

Are New Testament Apocryphal Books Fan Fiction?

Fan fiction is usually composed by non-professional authors based on an existing work of fiction. They  do this as a labor of love, writing new stories that include established and beloved characters. So, here is an interesting question: can we define New Testament apocrypha as fan fiction?

Christy Cobb, whom I cited earlier in this article, thinks we can:

In other words, at least some of the NT apocrypha was written to fill in gaps perceived in New Testament texts. In addition to the childhood of Jesus, several books tell stories about the missionary activities and miracles of apostles such as Peter and Paul, as well as the story of the childhood of Mary, the mother of Jesus. While ancient writers would not have called their writings by this name, in a general sense, much of this literature could, indeed, be classified as fan fiction.

Conclusion

What is the New Testament Apocrypha? Not to be confused with the capital-A Apocrypha, it is a series of books written by early Christians but eventually excluded from the biblical canon. It often consists of a number of different genres corresponding to the genres of New Testament literature: gospels, acts, and letters.

There seem to be three general reasons why these books were left out of the Bible. First, they were either not attributed to an apostle or their apostolic ascription was not considered valid. Second, they contained theology deemed heretical or insufficiently orthodox by influential Christians, and third, they were not widely used by churches. Some books failed just one of these tests, while others failed all three.

The Shepherd of Hermas is a good example of this type of literature. While it was not considered heretical, it was reckoned insufficient as a support for the Nicene Christianity strongly emphasized by an influential bishop. Accordingly, he declared that the book was fine for occasional reading, but should not be considered holy Scripture.

Finally, as a way of conceptualizing the nature of New Testament apocrypha, some have labeled it as fan fiction. This label is oddly apt, as the books fill in gaps in history left by the books of the New Testament using established characters, including Jesus and the apostles. While the books may finally have been rejected, there is ample evidence to prove that this did not prevent many early Christians from reading them.