Back in the 1970’s one of my very best students, if not the very best, at Eckerd College was David Jenkins. Since that time David and I have remained close friends. He went on to do a M.Div. degree at Duke and a Ph.D. degree at Loyola University in Chicago. David initially enrolled at the University of Miami’s Ph.D. program but found the hot weather too much to bear. So, he submitted his undergraduate Honors thesis as a Master’s thesis and it was accepted! Somewhere between Florida and Chicago he did some graduate work at Vanderbilt University as well. He ended up with a PH.D. from Loyola University in Chicago.
We kept in close touch through those years, with him taking care of my VW van while I spent a summer in Greece. As the years went bye I often visited David in Durham, Chicago, and eventually in Sweden. After completing his studies David volunteered for some mission work in Africa and that’s where he met his wonderful Finnish wife, Leena. She was – and is – a medical doctor and has practiced in Sweden as well as Finland. David has had various serious bouts with heart issues and fortunately Leena has been there to help him through the hard parts. He has been near death several times. Fortunately, as well he had the excellent National Finnish Health Services to cover these expenses.
One year he spent a Sabbatical year teaching at The College of St. Rose in Albany, NY where I was teaching at the time. It was good to be temporarily reunited with David and Leena for that year. It was a pure co-incidence that David and I both chose Finnish women for our wives, but it has proven to be a warm and valued arrangement for both of us. Mari and I have visited David and Leena several times while we were visiting in Finland off and on over the years and have come to love their daughter Cheri as well. They, too, have visited with us here in the states on several occasions.
While he was “just sitting around” in Finland David explored the possibility of obtaining another Ph.D. degree, this time at not-so-near-bye Swedish University of Upsala. Because of his outstanding academic record, the Philosophy department there only required that he write yet another Doctoral dissertation. This was right up David’s alley, and he finished the dissertation up in fine fashion, writing a first-class volume on the thought of the British theologian Professor John McQuarrie of Oxford University, famous for his book Honest to God. Now David’s friends took to addressing him as “Doctor Doctor Jenkins.”
All along this journey David was also interested in pursuing his calling as a Christian theologian Finland. This led down the labyrinthian pathways of obtaining Ordination himself in Finland. The journey led to several conflicts with different Lutheran clergy of various stripes, as well as with several specific church leaders who were threatened by his scholarly approach to philosophical/ theological issues. Eventually these issues resolved themselves and David is now comfortable remaining something of both an insider and an outsider.
Also, along the way David saw to it that one year I was able to teach a course in the winter Short Term curriculum at the University of Helsinki because he continues to serve as a regular philosophy professor there. It was a real honor to be able to teach a philosophy course in such a prestigious institution. It was clear that David is highly respected there.
Finally, let me say that readers may well recognize David’s name and thoughts on these pages because he has become a frequent and welcome responder to my ramblings on these blogs, as his entries to my previous posts clearly testify. My friendship with David Jenkins has been as “profitable” as it has been enjoyable all down through these years. Thanks David!!

The term “Apocrypha” designates 15 books of the Greek translation of the Old Testament which often were considered of questionable origin but were nonetheless included in the Bible by the early translators beginning in around 300 BCE. Up until the turn of the 20th Century these books were taken to be valid and authoritative books of the Bible, although the King James Bible never included them. At that time The American Bible Society decided no longer to include such books in the Bibles it published. Thus, most of us grew up without ever hearing of, let alone studying, these books. Fortunately, the modern versions of the Bible, such as the Revised Standard Version (RSV) and The New English Bible have returned to the practice of including them.
The Christian Church has always struggled with just how to view these books, although the Jewish community has by and large always considered them as part of their ‘Canon’ of accepted scripture. In addition to the Book of Esther the First and Second Maccabees add a great deal to understanding the Jewish revolt against their Syrian captors and the eventual overthrow of this government in 142 BCE. Of course, this revolt was only temporary and eventually fell to the Romans who continued the occupation and repression of the Jews until they destroyed Jerusalem in 70 CE. A list of the books comprising the Apocrypha can be found at the beginning of either the RSV or New English Bible.
In addition to filling in the historical-political gaps between the Old and New Testaments these books focus once again the key issues about what holy scripture is and how and why according to certain church groups some writings qualify to be included and others do not. Which books are and should actually be included in the official “Canon” of Scripture? The only passage in the Bible that speaks directly to this issue is Paul’s second letter to Timothy.
The King James translation of this passage reads: “All scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof profitable for correction, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.” In the New English Bible this verse reads: “Every inspired scripture has its use for teaching the truth and refuting error, or for the reformation of manners and discipline in right living.” It is easy to see that the subject of the sentence in the Greek is “inspired scripture”, not “all scripture.” So the question of which scripture is inspired is left open, to be determined by other criteria than simply being in the Bible.
So, in the end it is left up to the Chistian community to decide which passages in the sacred writings are “inspired” and which are not. Over the centuries this has remained an open question and we are left right back where we started with respect to the issue of how and/or to what degree any of the scriptures are inspired and thus authoritative. Different Christian, and even Jewish, communities have decided this issue differently, some leaving it an “open question” and others limiting the Bible’s authority to the King James translation.
The fact remains that in the time of Paul’s letter to Timothy not only was the contents of the Hebrew scripture still an open question, but the rest of the New Testament had yet to be written. Moreover, of what was yet to be written there would always be numerous variations and many multiple copies. In fact, the King James version was based on merely the four manuscripts existing at the time.
Today there are literally thousands of manuscripts from which to try to reconstruct the original texts of the scripture. So, we, the broad scope of existing believing communities, must still decide for ourselves the issue of what constitutes the Scriptures. So far, we have done an admirable job of doing this, thanks to the hard work of many, many scholars.
Thus, the questions about the standing of the apocrypha fades into a broader question about which writings should be included in the authoritative scriptures. It’s not an impossible question, but it is one with which the believing communities are still wrestling. It would seem that the issue of which books make up the Bible is still with us – and this renders the issue a live one. Luckily, many scholars have given us strong factual guidelines and our various church leaders have done so as well. In some deep sense, the question remains with each of us.