Chizuk Emunah Under the Microscope: Chapter 43

Chapter 43 is so short, that I am going to quote this passage in its entirety.

    Some small portion of Christians have reproached the Jews with the disbelief in the Apocryphal books; but such persons have been confuted by scholars of their own creed. The works comprised under the collective title "Apocrypha," were composed at a late period after the dispersion of Israel, when prophecy was totally extinct, and when inspiration no longer elevated the compositions of religious writers. The Apocrypha has, therefore, no claim on our religious reverence. Some of those books may have an historical foundation, others are based on fiction and mere invention; and the whole of the Apocrypha was composed in the Greek language, which language does not bear the stamp of authority in the mind of the Jew; we may therefore dismiss this subject without entering into further detail.

 Troki is absolutely correct, but there are some Christian sects, such as the Eastern Orthodox, who believe that the Apocrypha is canonical. The rest of this post will explain why these sects are wrong, and Troki is correct.

The Jewish tradition speaks of an era of prophecy lasting from Moses to Malachi. Since prophecy did not return until the age of the Apostles, book written in between cannot be inspired Scripture.
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/14162-synagogue-the-great

One of the key marks of Scripture is its historical authenticity. As archaeology advances, and we learn more and more about the ancient world, our understanding conforms to the Bible's picture of that world. Even books like Daniel are increasingly being shown to be historically accurate regarding the kingdom of Babylon.

Judith, on the other hand, contains a massive historical blunder. "Now in the twelfth year of his reign, Nabuchodonosor king of the Assyrians, who reigned in Ninive the great city, fought against Arphaxad and overcame him (Judith 1:5)."Nebuchadnezzar was neither an Assyrian nor did he rule in Ninevah.

Secondly, books like the Maccabees recognize that the era of prophecy, and hence the era of written Scripture, has ceased. "And there was a great tribulation in Israel, such as was not since the day, that there was no prophet seen in Israel" (1 Maccabees 9:27).

The reference in Luke implies that the Hebrew Scriptures end with 2 Chronicles. "from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah, who perished between the altar and the sanctuary. Yes, I tell you, it will be required of this generation." (Luke 11:51). Abel was the first to be killed in Genesis, and Zechariah the son of Jehoiada was the last to be killed in 2 Chronicles. This implies that the Hebrew Bible ends with 2 Chronicles.

The Jewish traditions all point to an acceptance of the Tanakh, but not to the Apocrypha. The Dead Sea Scrolls feature commentaries on many books from the three divisions of the Tanakh, but not from the Apocrypha. Philo created a commentary on the Pentateuch, citing references from the Torah, Neviim, and Ketuvim. However, the Apocrypha was not cited.

Also, many of the church fathers did not accept the Apocrypha as canon. Jerome as just one example, writes in his introduction to the books of the Kings:

This preface to the Scriptures may serve as a helmeted  introduction to all the books which we turn from Hebrew into Latin, so that we may be assured that what is outside of them must be placed aside among the Apocryphal writings. Wisdom, therefore, which generally bears the name of Solomon, and the book of Jesus the Son of Sirach, and Judith, and Tobias, and the Shepherd are not in the canon.