1 Esdras

A Greek Ezra-related book found in many Septuagint manuscripts and some Orthodox collections.

1 Esdras is a Greek book about Ezra and the restoration, found in many Septuagint manuscripts and in some Orthodox collections. Its date is only broadly Hellenistic or early Roman, at low to medium confidence. It is not English 2 Esdras, also called 4 Ezra, and it is not the Septuagint book sometimes numbered 2 Esdras, which is Greek Ezra–Nehemiah. Catholic Bibles after Trent do not count this Greek 1 Esdras among the deuterocanonical books. The matrix status depends on which tradition’s numbering you mean, so this entry keeps the Greek book separate.

Not the same as English 2 Esdras (4 Ezra) or LXX 2 Esdras (Greek Ezra–Nehemiah).

Date

Hellenistic or early Roman period (low–medium confidence)

Confidence

low

Languages

Greek

Traditional authorship

Not named in the book

Authorship note

Author not named; received as Esdras A in the Greek Old Testament

• B · Codex Vaticanus

  4th century CE · Greek · Greek 1 Esdras

  Codex Vaticanus, Vat. gr. 1209, is a fourth-century Greek parchment Bible long held in the Vatican Library. Its designation is B. The Old Testament follows a Septuagint-shaped collection. This dataset links Greek Tobit, Wisdom of Solomon, and Sirach to that Old Testament block, and it notes lacunae elsewhere in the codex, so “present in Vaticanus” is not a claim that every leaf survives. The find spot is not known in the way Sinaiticus’s monastery is known. What the manuscript shows is that these Greek writings were copied inside a fourth-century Christian Bible of the Septuagint type. Catholic reception later names overlapping books as deuterocanonical at Trent. Protestant confessions later deny them equal canonical status. Vaticanus itself is the copy, not those later rulings.

• A · Codex Alexandrinus

  5th century CE · Greek · Greek 1 Esdras

  Codex Alexandrinus is a fifth-century Greek parchment Bible, shelfmark Royal MS 1 D V–VIII in the British Library. Its Old Testament is Septuagint-shaped and includes books that later Western lists call deuterocanonical, among them Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, Baruch, the Letter of Jeremiah, 1 Esdras, and 1–4 Maccabees, plus the Prayer of Manasseh among the Odes. The New Testament includes Jude. After the biblical books the codex copies 1 Clement. A fifth-century binding shows what one scriptorium copied. It is not the Council of Trent and not the Westminster Confession.

• mentions

  Hebrew canon / Greek-speaking Jews

  1 Esdras is not a book of the Tanakh. Josephus, near the end of the first century, describes twenty-two Jewish books his people trust and sets later writings in a lower rank. The later rabbinic Bible, counted as twenty-four books, likewise leaves 1 Esdras outside Torah, Nevi'im, and Ketuvim. 1 Esdras is a Greek retelling of material from Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah, with the story of the three guards. It is not the Hebrew book of Ezra. Jewish copying or quotation, where it exists, is reception. It is not the same fact as a place in the Hebrew canon, and it is not a Christian council’s decision.

• uses liturgically

  Greek and Latin churches

  Greek-speaking churches met 1 Esdras in Septuagint Bibles. Fourth- and fifth-century pandects copy it beside other Old Testament books. Early lists do not all use the same boundary. Athanasius in 367 keeps a shorter Old Testament and still names some of these books as useful to read. Hippo in 393 is reported to have approved a wider list, and Carthage in 397 names several of them among books to be read in church. Vaticanus and Alexandrinus copy Greek 1 Esdras. Latin Bibles later print it in an Apocrypha or appendix. It is not 2 Esdras. Those are early Christian acts. Trent, Luther’s Apocrypha, and Westminster are later and stay on the councils list.

• ProtestantRelated literature

  Related Ezra literature; English naming must not be confused with Ezra–Nehemiah.

• CatholicRelated literature

  Not the Catholic Ezra–Nehemiah pair defined at Trent.

• OrthodoxCanonical

  Greek Esdras A is used in many Orthodox collections.

• EthiopianRelated literature

  Ezra traditions in Ethiopia use different titles; do not equate automatically with LXX 1 Esdras.

• TanakhNot applicable

  Not a separate Tanakh book beside Ezra–Nehemiah.

• LXXCanonical

  Esdras A in the Greek corpus.

• Early ChristianDisputed

  Greek Ezra traditions were known; Latin usage varied.

• Second TempleRelated literature

  Greek recension of Ezra materials.

• 1611 CE · Bible edition · London

  King James Bible of 1611 includes an Apocrypha section

  The 1611 Authorized Version printed an Apocrypha section between the Old and New Testaments, including Tobit and 2 Esdras among others.

  The 1611 Authorized Version, printed in London, placed an Apocrypha section between the Old Testament and the New Testament. The curated source names Tobit and 2 Esdras among the writings in that section.

  Printing a section inside the volume is an edition fact: contents and order in one London Bible. Canonical rank is a different kind of claim. About thirty-five years later, the Westminster Confession says the books commonly called Apocrypha are not of divine inspiration and are not part of the canon of Scripture. Many later Protestant printings leave the section out. The 1611 volume still contains it.

  Read the 1611 entry beside Luther’s 1534 Apocrypha section and beside Westminster. One prints the books in a separate section, one ranks them below Holy Scripture in German, and one refuses them a place in the Reformed canon. Edition placement and confessional status stay side by side on this tab.

  Why it matters. Edition placement is not the same as later Anglican or Reformed confessional statements that deny those books equal canonical status.

  Follow-up questions

  What is the Apocrypha section in the 1611 Bible?

  A printed block between the Old Testament and the New Testament. The source names Tobit and 2 Esdras among the writings included there, and it treats that placement as an edition fact.

  Does including those books give them the same status as the sixty-six?

  The 1611 fact on this page is edition placement. Equal canonical status is a separate claim. The Westminster Confession later says the Apocrypha are not of divine inspiration and are not part of the canon of Scripture.

  Why do many later King James Bibles omit that section?

  Later Protestant printing followed confessional statements such as Westminster, which refuse those books a place in the canon. The 1611 volume itself still prints the Apocrypha between the Testaments.

  Source: The 1611 King James Bible printed an Apocrypha section between the Old and New Testaments. That placement is an edition fact, not a claim that those books were canonical for every later Anglican confession.

• 1646/1647 CE · Reformation · Westminster, London

  Westminster Confession names the 66-book canon

  The Confession lists the 66 books and says the books commonly called Apocrypha are not of divine inspiration and are not part of the canon of Scripture.

  The Westminster Assembly’s Confession of Faith, chapter I, was finished in London in 1646/1647. Sections I.2–3 name the sixty-six books of the Protestant canon. They say the books commonly called Apocrypha are not of divine inspiration and are not part of the canon of Scripture.

  This is a Reformed confession. It sits on Councils & Lists because it is a dated canon list with a church-document source. It explains why many later Protestant editions leave the Apocrypha out of the printed Bible.

  Set it next to the other Protestant-tradition entries on this tab. Luther’s 1534 Bible still printed selected books in a separate section and called them useful to read, while ranking them below Holy Scripture. The 1611 King James Bible still included an Apocrypha section. Westminster’s wording refuses those books a place in the canon.

  Why it matters. A defining Reformed statement of the modern Protestant 66. It explains later omission from many Protestant printings.

  Follow-up questions

  What does Westminster Confession chapter I say about the canon?

  It names the sixty-six books and says the books commonly called Apocrypha are not of divine inspiration and are not part of the canon of Scripture. That wording is the source citation for this event.

  How is Westminster different from Luther’s 1534 Bible?

  Luther printed selected books in a separate Apocrypha section and called them useful to read, while ranking them below Holy Scripture. Westminster refuses them a place in the canon. Both are Protestant-tradition events, and they use different wording.

  How is Westminster different from the Council of Trent?

  Trent in 1546 defines the Roman Catholic list, including the deuterocanonical writings received in the Vulgate. Westminster in 1646/1647 is a Reformed confession that names the sixty-six and excludes the Apocrypha from the canon of Scripture. They are different bodies and different lists.

  Source: Westminster Confession I.2–3 names the 66-book Protestant canon and says the books commonly called Apocrypha are not of divine inspiration and are not part of the canon of Scripture.

• Shared tradition · Greek 1 Esdras ↔ Latin 4 Ezra

  Medium confidence — a common reading, with some uncertainty.

  The shared Esdras name hides two different books. 1 Esdras retells Ezra material in Greek. 2 Esdras is an apocalypse preserved in Latin.

1. 1611 CE — King James Bible of 1611 includes an Apocrypha section
2. 1646/1647 CE — Westminster Confession names the 66-book canon

• The 1611 King James Bible printed an Apocrypha section between the Old and New Testaments. That placement is an edition fact, not a claim that those books were canonical for every later Anglican confession.
• Council of Trent, Session IV (8 April 1546), lists the Catholic canonical books including the deuterocanonical writings received in the Vulgate.
• Brenton’s public-domain Septuagint translation includes Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, Baruch, the Additions, and Maccabees as part of the Greek Old Testament corpus.
• The Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church publishes an 81-book list that includes 1 Enoch, Jubilees, and the Meqabyan books.
• Josephus, Against Apion 1.8, speaks of 22 Jewish books and distinguishes later writings as not equally trusted.
• Jerome, Prologus Galeatus, distinguishes Hebrew-canon books from other church-read writings later often called Apocrypha.
• Codex Vaticanus is a fourth-century Greek Bible whose Old Testament contents follow a Septuagint-shaped collection, with some lacunae.
• Codex Alexandrinus is a fifth-century Greek Bible. It includes a Septuagint-shaped Old Testament, the New Testament, and 1 Clement.
• Westminster Confession I.2–3 names the 66-book Protestant canon and says the books commonly called Apocrypha are not of divine inspiration and are not part of the canon of Scripture.