I am a simple 'confessional' Baptist and certainly not versed in the more esoteric views of you Orthodox brethren on the Apocrypha, or Deuterocanonical books as you call them. Even the 4th Edition of the Oxford Annotated Bible with NRSV lists so many variations of the "Apocryphal/Deuterocanonical Books" that on page 1362 it has six columns as Roman Catholic, Greek Orthodox, Slavonic (Russian Orthodox), Latin Vulgate Appendix, Greek Appendix and Protestant/Anglican Apocrypha showing the differences. My reason for the post was for those who, like myself, have a background where the Apocrypha was considered merely Roman Catholic, not for us. Yet, when we go back in our Protestant history, the Apocrypha was not shunned, but made use of as we viewed it as important but not inspired. I find it of interest how one of the Puritans commented on a non-canonical book mentioned in the OT.
"And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the nation took vengeance on their enemies. Is this not written in the Book of Jashar? The sun stayed in the midst of heaven, and did not hasten to go down for about a whole day." (Josh 10:13 RSV)
From the Commentary by Puritan John Trapp (1601-1669):
"
Is not this written in the book of Jasher?] Which Jerome {a} will have to be Genesis: but it seemeth rather to have been some civil history or continued chronicle, such as are amongst us the Chronicles of England, which is now lost, as are also some other books, {1 Chronicles 29:29; 2 Chronicles 12:15; 2 Chronicles 9:29} and was therefore, we may be sure, no part of the holy canon: God, by his providence, taking care and course that no one hair of that sacred head should fall to the ground. This book of Jasher, or the upright, together with Solomon’s Physics, {1 Kings 4:32-33} the book of his Acts, {1 Kings 11:41} the books of Nathan and Gad, {1 Chronicles 29:29} of Shemaiah, {2 Chronicles 12:15} of Jehu, {2 Chronicles 20:34} the books of the Chronicles of the Kings of Israel and Judah, &c., were not testamentary or canonical: and are now taken away, not because they contained matter either above human capacity, or else corrupt and unsound, as Origen {b} determineth: but rather, as Augustine {c} hath it, we are to know, that although they were both pious and profitable, yet were they written out of a historical diligence for more plentiful knowledge; not by divine inspiration, for the authority of religion."
Joshua 10 - John Trapp Complete Commentary - Bible Commentaries - StudyLight.org
When you read the references John Trapp gives, it is clear that the hearers/readers were expected to have knowledge of those writings and not be ignorant. My favorite modern study Bible is the Lutheran Study Bible by the LCMS and while it does not include the Apocrypha, using the ESV, it has very good articles on the matter with many quotes by Martin Luther. I find it reasonable and sound interpretation to consider the viewpoints of OT teachings held by the Israelites in the centuries prior to the Incarnation. Along with the Lutheran study Bible, I do have The Orthodox Study Bible copyright 2008 as well as the NAB Roman Catholic Study Bible among many others. I find it valuable to study from various perspectives; and while the annotations of the Oxford Study Bibles are usually far too liberal for me, I still find nuggets of interest and thought stimulation there as well. But, again, my OP was mainly to share the only sources of Cross-References to the Apocrypha I have been able to find and share the three with others who like myself do not have a background with the Apocryphal writings.
