This article offers a review of the book by Hal Taussig, A New New Testament, a book that argues that apocryphal literature should be regarded as scriptural. The review interacts with the book's introduction, where the author offers his apologetic for the book. This article shows that the author's claims regarding the origins and dates of the books are deceptive, as are his remarks on when the current New Testament came into existence.

This article offers a review of the book by Hal Taussig, A New New Testament, a book that argues that apocryphal literature should be regarded as scriptural. The review starts with the inside flap of the book cover, showing how already here, statements are misleading.

This article stresses that all apocryphal writings are dated to the second century or later. It also explains why there are no compelling reasons to accept these later texts over the New Testament canon.

Were the apocryphal gospels as popular and widespread as the canonical gospels? This article argues to the contrary, with three pieces of evidence: the extant manuscripts, the (in)frequency of their citation, and the way they are cited. The majority of early Christians preferred the books that are now in our New Testament canon.

A development took place in the Jewish messianic expectation during the intertestamental period that can be found in apocryphal and pseudepigraphal writings. The idea that developed was that the Messiah would be a Levitical priest. This essay surveys the relevant passages.