Apocryphal texts New Testament

I have a few versions of Apocryphal texts of the New Testament but a scholar friend of mine said I needed the three volumes below edited by Tony Burke. How do they differ from these texts The King James Version Apocrypha (KJVA), The New Cambridge Paragraph Bible with the Apocrypha, rev. ed. (NCPB), William Hone’s Apocryphal New Testament, New Revised Standard Version with Apocrypha, and The Apocryphal New Testament: Being the Apocryphal Gospels, Acts, Epistles, and Apocalypses Montague Rhodes James? These are all owned in my Logos Bible Software account.

New Testament Apocrypha, vol. 1: More Noncanonical Scriptures

New Testament Apocrypha, vol. 2: More Noncanonical Scriptures

New Testament Apocrypha, vol. 3: More Noncanonical Scriptures

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

DMB

Well, it's complicated.

First, your KJV apocrypha is 2nd Temple. NT apocrypha is later, of course.

Burke's set is NT/later. James volumes cover some 2nd Temple, as well as post-NT (depends on volume).

But the bigger issue is time. James is a century ago. Later, usually means more critical translation, as well as more extensive coverage. Charlesworth and McDonald have a good crossover volume that tracks the judaic/Christian transition.

Rick Brannan

Essentially: MR James's work establishes a "corpus" (use that really loosely, please) for the works known as the "New Testament Apocrypha"; these are post-NT apocryphal stories that involve or include NT personas. And we should really probably call it "Christian Apocrypha".

JK Elliot updated James' work, that was published by Oxford in the 1990s, I think. It is not available in Logos.

Burke, et. al. (disclaimer: I've contributed to all three volumes) essentially use James/Elliot as the assumed corpus and provide editions (introduction and translation) of unpublished and under-published (so, only in journal articles, or book chapters, or elsewhere) Christian Apocrypha not available in James or Elliot, or significant updates of material in James/Elliot.

Does that help?

Christian Alexander

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1298393#Comment_1298393

I thought I saw you in the excerpt of Burke, et al. I have heard very good things. I was hoping you (Rick B.) would respond on the forum. My issue is money, as always. I also had a few professors call this corpus the Christian Apocrypha. Do I own James' work you cite above? I posted a list but do not see his name anywhere in the documentation. Did you by chance do the introductions on Didache, The Shepherd of Hermas and or The Gospel of Nicodemos (The Acts of Pilate)? If so could you post it here if it is ok within fair use terms? Thank you so much for your help.

Rick Brannan

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1298399#Comment_1298399

Do I own James' work you cite above? I posted a list but do not see his name anywhere in the documentation.

Note what I've bolded in your list:

I have a few versions of Apocryphal texts of the New Testament but a scholar friend of mine said I needed the three volumes below edited by Tony Burke. How do they differ from these texts The King James Version Apocrypha (KJVA), The New Cambridge Paragraph Bible with the Apocrypha, rev. ed. (NCPB), William Hone’s Apocryphal New Testament, New Revised Standard Version with Apocrypha, and The Apocryphal New Testament: Being the Apocryphal Gospels, Acts, Epistles, and Apocalypses Montague Rhodes James? These are all owned in my Logos Bible Software account.

RE: Didache, Shepherd of Hermas: These are in what are known as the "Apostolic Fathers", you can find information on them in Bible Dictionaries. There are translations in my Apostolic Fathers translation that you likely have access to. I believe the Lexham Bible Dictionary has articles for these.

RE Gospel of Nicodemus / Acts of Pilate; "Gospel of Nicodemus" is how the Latin version is labeled, "Acts of Pilate" is the Greek of the same material. These are in collections like that of M.R. James, and also in my Greek Apocryphal Gospels book that you likely have access to as well.