Some Considerations on the Categories “Bible” and “Apocrypha”

In this chapter, the author argues that the tripartite Hebrew Bible, while the collections of Torah and Nevi'im were firmly established in the first century BCE and CE, the collection of Ketubim was not yet closed, though its central works had come together. His remarks are relevant only to the Second Temple period; that is, before the destruction of the Temple and the use of the terms canon and is inappropriate in the Second Temple period in apocryphal works. Yet, the collections that eventually constituted the Hebrew Bible were in the process of coming into being and had gained a special status. It is not certain that the attitude to authoritative writings discernable at Qumran was held universally in Second Temple Judaism. But it seems that the Essenes, and perhaps other groups, regarded certain nonbiblical works as authoritative. They also did not think that biblical and inspired were identical. Keywords:Apocrypha; Bible; Dead Sea Scrolls; Hebrew Bible; Qumran; Second Temple Judaism; Torah