If you have ever compared different versions of the Bible, you may have noticed something surprising: the Book of Sirach appears in some Bibles but is completely absent from others.
That raises an obvious question:
Why is Sirach not in the Bible?
The short answer is that Sirach actually is in the Bible for some Christian traditions. It is included in the Catholic Bible and in many Eastern Orthodox Bibles, but it is not included in the standard Protestant Bible or the Jewish Tanakh.
The reason comes down to differences in how various religious traditions define the biblical canon, meaning the official list of books considered Scripture.
To understand why Sirach is accepted by some Christians and excluded by others, we need to look at its history, language, use in the early church, and the debates surrounding the Old Testament canon.
What Is the Book of Sirach?
The Book of Sirach is a Jewish wisdom book written around the early second century BC.
It is also known by several other names, including:
- Ecclesiasticus
- The Wisdom of Sirach
- The Wisdom of Jesus Son of Sirach
- Ben Sira
The author identifies himself as Jesus son of Sirach, or Yeshua ben Sira.
Despite the name Jesus, this is not Jesus Christ. “Jesus” is the Greek form of the Hebrew name Yeshua, which was common in the ancient world.
Sirach resembles other wisdom books in the Old Testament, especially Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Job.
It contains teachings about:
- Wisdom
- Family life
- Friendship
- Wealth
- Humility
- Speech
- Work
- Worship
- Discipline
- Social behavior
- Faithfulness to God
Sirach also includes praise of famous figures from Israel’s history and emphasizes respect for the Law of Moses.
Was Sirach Originally Written in Hebrew?
Yes.
Sirach was originally written in Hebrew, probably around 180 BC.
The author’s grandson later translated the book into Greek. In the introduction to the Greek version, the grandson explains that he translated his grandfather’s work for Greek-speaking Jews.
For many centuries, the complete Hebrew text was lost, although portions of Hebrew manuscripts were later rediscovered.
Because the Greek translation became widely circulated, Sirach became part of the Greek collection of Jewish Scriptures known as the Septuagint.
The Septuagint plays a major role in understanding why some Christian traditions accepted Sirach as Scripture.
What Is the Septuagint?
The Septuagint, often abbreviated as LXX, is an ancient Greek translation of Jewish Scripture.
Beginning several centuries before Christ, Jewish scholars translated biblical books from Hebrew into Greek for Jews who lived in Greek-speaking parts of the Mediterranean world.
The Septuagint eventually included books that are not found in the later traditional Hebrew Jewish canon.
These books include works such as:
- Tobit
- Judith
- Wisdom of Solomon
- Sirach
- Baruch
- 1 Maccabees
- 2 Maccabees
Catholics generally refer to these books as the Deuterocanonical books.
Many Protestants call them the Apocrypha.
Because the early Christian church used Greek extensively, the Septuagint was highly influential among early Christians.
This helped Sirach gain an important place in Christian teaching and worship.
Is Sirach in the Catholic Bible?
Yes.
Sirach is part of the Old Testament in the Catholic Bible.
The Catholic Church considers Sirach to be canonical Scripture.
In Catholic Bibles, the book usually appears among the wisdom books, alongside books such as Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Wisdom.
Catholics classify Sirach as one of the Deuterocanonical books.
The term “Deuterocanonical” does not mean that Catholics consider the book less inspired or less authoritative. It refers to books whose canonical status was discussed more extensively in the history of the church.
The Catholic Church formally reaffirmed its Old Testament canon at the Council of Trent in the 16th century, although the books had been used within Catholic Christianity long before that council.
Is Sirach in the Orthodox Bible?
Yes, Sirach is also accepted in Eastern Orthodox Christianity.
Orthodox churches generally include Sirach as part of the Old Testament.
However, the exact contents and organization of the Old Testament can vary somewhat among different Orthodox traditions.
The Orthodox Old Testament is strongly connected to the Septuagint tradition, which helps explain why Sirach is included.
Therefore, saying that Sirach is “not in the Bible” is not entirely accurate.
A better statement would be:
Sirach is not included in most Protestant Bibles, but it is included in Catholic and Orthodox Bibles.
Why Is Sirach Not in Protestant Bibles?
The exclusion of Sirach from most Protestant Bibles is connected to the Protestant Reformation and earlier debates about the Jewish biblical canon.
During the Reformation in the 16th century, Protestant reformers reconsidered which Old Testament books should be treated as fully canonical.
Many reformers preferred an Old Testament canon that closely matched the books found in the traditional Hebrew Jewish Bible.
Because Sirach was not part of that Hebrew canon, most Protestants did not give it the same authority as books such as Genesis, Isaiah, Psalms, or Proverbs.
Martin Luther, for example, included several books now called the Apocrypha in his Bible translation, but placed them in a separate section.
These books were considered useful for reading but not equal in authority to the canonical books.
Over time, many Protestant Bible publishers stopped printing the Apocrypha altogether.
As a result, modern Protestant readers may never encounter Sirach unless they specifically use a Bible that contains the Apocrypha.
Why Was Sirach Not Included in the Jewish Bible?
This is an important question because Protestant Old Testaments generally follow the same basic collection of books as the Jewish Hebrew Bible, although the books are arranged differently.
Sirach was widely known and respected in ancient Judaism.
However, it did not ultimately become part of the Jewish biblical canon.
There is no single surviving ancient document that explains exactly why every book was included or excluded.
Scholars have suggested several possible factors.
One may have been the book’s relatively late date of composition.
Sirach was written around the second century BC, later than many books that became part of the Hebrew Bible.
Questions about prophetic authority may also have played a role.
Some Jewish traditions held that the era of classical prophecy had ended before books like Sirach were written.
Sirach may therefore have been valued as religious wisdom without being regarded as part of the same category as Torah, Prophets, and other sacred writings.
It is also worth noting that Sirach continued to be quoted and respected in Jewish literature even though it was not included in the Tanakh.
So exclusion from the Jewish canon did not necessarily mean that the book was considered worthless or heretical.
Did Early Christians Use Sirach?
Yes.
Sirach was widely used in early Christianity.
Early Christian writers referred to it frequently, sometimes treating its teachings with great authority.
Its popularity was one reason it became known as Ecclesiasticus, a Latin term associated with the church.
The name suggests that the book was widely used for instruction in Christian communities.
Church leaders found Sirach useful because it contains practical moral teachings on subjects such as:
- Charity
- Humility
- Discipline
- Marriage
- Friendship
- Speech
- Wealth
- Care for the poor
- Respect for parents
- Faithfulness to God
The strong use of Sirach in early Christianity contributed to its continued acceptance in Catholic and Orthodox traditions.
Did the Early Church Agree on Sirach?
Not completely.
One reason the issue can become confusing is that early Christians did not all use identical lists of biblical books.
Different church leaders produced different canonical lists.
Some clearly accepted books like Sirach, while others distinguished between books of unquestioned authority and books that were useful for instruction.
For example, some early theologians preferred a list more closely connected to the Hebrew Jewish canon.
Others relied heavily on the Septuagint collection.
This means the question of Sirach cannot be reduced to a simple claim that everyone accepted it or everyone rejected it.
The development of the biblical canon took place over centuries.
Different Christian communities inherited slightly different Old Testament traditions.
Did the Council of Trent Add Sirach to the Bible?
A common claim is that the Catholic Church “added” Sirach to the Bible at the Council of Trent.
Historically, that description is misleading.
The Council of Trent took place between 1545 and 1563, long after Sirach had already been used by Christians for many centuries.
Catholic Bibles contained Sirach before the Reformation.
The council did not discover a new book and suddenly insert it into Scripture.
Instead, Trent formally defined the Catholic biblical canon in response to debates raised during the Protestant Reformation.
From the Catholic perspective, the council confirmed books that had long been received in the church.
From the Protestant perspective, those books did not have the same canonical status as the Hebrew Old Testament books.
Therefore, Catholics and Protestants interpret the significance of Trent differently.
What Is the Difference Between Apocrypha and Deuterocanonical Books?
The terminology often depends on religious tradition.
Deuterocanonical
Catholics use the word Deuterocanonical for Old Testament books such as Sirach that are considered fully canonical but whose status was debated in some parts of church history.
Apocrypha
Protestants commonly call these books the Apocrypha.
In Protestant usage, the term generally refers to ancient Jewish religious writings that may be historically or spiritually valuable but are not considered inspired Scripture on the same level as the Old and New Testaments.
Because these terms reflect different theological traditions, they should not always be treated as exact synonyms.
Does the New Testament Quote Sirach?
The New Testament does not introduce any verse from Sirach with a direct formula such as “it is written.”
However, scholars have noted possible similarities between Sirach and several New Testament passages.
For example, teachings about humility, speech, generosity, forgiveness, and daily conduct sometimes resemble themes found in Sirach.
These similarities do not automatically prove direct quotation.
Both Sirach and the New Testament emerged from Jewish religious and moral traditions, so some overlapping language and ideas are expected.
The absence of an explicit quotation from Sirach also does not by itself determine whether the book is canonical.
Several books included in the universally accepted Old Testament are not directly quoted in the New Testament either.
Is Sirach Worth Reading If You Are Protestant?
Many Protestants still read Sirach even though they do not regard it as canonical Scripture.
It can be valuable for understanding:
- Jewish thought before the time of Jesus
- Ancient wisdom traditions
- The religious background of the New Testament
- Early Christian ethics
- The development of the biblical canon
Sirach also gives readers insight into Jewish life during the centuries between the Old Testament prophets and the New Testament period.
For historians and biblical scholars, that alone makes it an important ancient document.
Is Sirach the Same as Ecclesiastes?
No.
Sirach and Ecclesiastes are completely different books.
The confusion often occurs because Sirach is sometimes called Ecclesiasticus.
Ecclesiastes is a canonical Old Testament book accepted by Jews, Catholics, Orthodox Christians, and Protestants.
Ecclesiasticus is another traditional name for Sirach.
The names sound similar, but the books have different authors, histories, and content.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why did Protestants remove Sirach?
Protestants generally followed an Old Testament canon based more closely on the Hebrew Jewish Bible. Because Sirach was not part of that canon, it was classified as Apocrypha rather than canonical Scripture.
Do Catholics believe Sirach is inspired?
Yes. The Catholic Church considers Sirach to be inspired Scripture and part of the Old Testament canon.
Do Orthodox Christians accept Sirach?
Yes. Sirach is included in the Old Testament tradition of Eastern Orthodox Christianity.
Was Sirach originally Jewish?
Yes. Sirach is a Jewish wisdom book written before Christianity, probably in the early second century BC.
Was Sirach originally written in Greek?
No. It was originally written in Hebrew. The author’s grandson later translated it into Greek.
Is Sirach in the King James Bible?
The original 1611 King James Version included Sirach, under the name Ecclesiasticus, in the Apocrypha section. Many later Protestant editions of the King James Bible omitted the Apocrypha.
Final Thoughts
The question “Why is Sirach not in the Bible?” depends entirely on which Bible tradition you mean.
Sirach is part of the Bible in Catholic and many Orthodox Christian traditions.
It is not part of the standard Protestant Old Testament, and it is not included in the Jewish Tanakh.
The disagreement comes from different traditions of biblical canon.
Catholic and Orthodox churches inherited an Old Testament strongly influenced by the Greek Septuagint, where Sirach was widely used.
Protestant reformers generally preferred an Old Testament collection corresponding more closely to the Hebrew Jewish canon, which did not include Sirach.
So Sirach was not simply “deleted” from Christianity, nor was it universally accepted by every group throughout history.
Instead, its status reflects a much larger historical question:
Which ancient books should be considered part of inspired Scripture?
Different Jewish and Christian traditions answered that question differently.
Regardless of one’s religious tradition, Sirach remains an important ancient work. It provides valuable insight into Jewish wisdom, morality, worship, and daily life in the centuries shortly before the New Testament period.
For Catholics and Orthodox Christians, it is Scripture.
For most Protestants, it is a valuable ancient religious book but not part of the biblical canon.
Understanding that distinction helps explain why you may find Sirach in one Bible and not another.