Biblical canon
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
A Biblical canon or canon of scripture[1] is a list or set of Biblical books considered to be authoritative as scripture by a particular religious community, generally in Judaism or Christianity. The term itself was first used by Christians, but the idea is found in Hellenistic Jewish sources.[2] The internal wording of the text can also be specified, for example: the Masoretic Text is the canonical text for Judaism, and the King James Version is the canonical text for the King-James-Only Movement, but this is not the general meaning of canon.
These lists, or canons, have been developed through debate and agreement by the religious authorities of those faiths. Believers consider these canonical books to be inspired by God or to express the authoritative history of the relationship between God and his people. Books excluded from a particular canon are considered non-canonical — however, many disputed books considered non-canonical or even apocryphal by some are considered Biblical apocrypha or Deuterocanonical or fully canonical, by others. There are differences between the Jewish and Christian canons, and between the canons of different Christian denominations. The differing criteria and processes of canonization dictate what the communities regard as the inspired books.
The canons listed below are usually considered closed (i.e., books cannot be added or removed[3]). The closure of the canon reflects a belief that public revelation has ended and thus the inspired texts may be gathered into a complete and authoritative canon.[4] By contrast, an open canon permits the addition of additional books through the process of continuous revelation. In Christian traditions, continuing revelation is most commonly associated with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church), the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers), and with some denominations of Pentecostal and Charismatic Christianity.
Contents |
[edit] Canonic texts
The word "canon" derives from the Greek word meaning "reed" or "cane," often used as a standard of measurement. Thus, a canonic text is a single authoritative edition for a given work. The establishing of a canonic text may involve an editorial selection from biblical manuscript traditions with varying interdependence. Significant separate manuscript traditions in the Hebrew Bible are represented in the Septuagint, the Targums and Peshitta, the Samaritan Pentateuch, the Masoretic Text, and the Dead Sea scrolls.
New Testament Greek and Latin texts presented enough significant differences that a manuscript tradition arose of presenting diglot texts, with Greek and Latin on facing pages. New Testament manuscript traditions include the Codex Vaticanus, Codex Sinaiticus, Codex Bezae, Codex Alexandrinus, Textus Receptus, Vetus Latina, Vulgate, and others, see also Categories of New Testament manuscripts.
[edit] Jewish canon
Rabbinic Judaism recognizes the twenty-four books of the Masoretic Text, commonly called the Tanakh or Hebrew Bible. Evidence suggests that the process of canonization occurred between 200 BCE and 200 CE, indeed a popular position is that the Torah was canonized circa 400 BCE, the Prophets circa 200 BCE, and the Writings circa 100 CE[5] perhaps at a hypothetical Council of Jamnia—however this position is increasingly criticised by modern scholars. The book of Deuteronomy includes a prohibition against adding or subtracting (4:2, 12:32) which might apply to the book itself (i.e. a closed book, a prohibition against future scribal editing) or to the instruction received by Moses on Mt. Sinai.[6] The book of 2 Maccabees, itself not a part of the Jewish canon, describes Nehemiah (around 400 BCE) as having "founded a library and collected books about the kings and prophets, and the writings of David, and letters of kings about votive offerings" (2:13-15). The Book of Nehemiah suggests that the priest-scribe Ezra brought the Torah back from Babylon to Jerusalem and the Second Temple (8-9) around the same time period. Both I and II Maccabees suggest that Judas Maccabeus (around 167 BCE) likewise collected sacred books (3:42-50, 2:13-15, 15:6-9), indeed some scholars argue that the Jewish canon was fixed by the Hasmonean dynasty.[7] However, these primary sources do not suggest that the canon was at that time closed; moreover, it is not clear that these sacred books were identical to those that later became part of the canon. Today, there is no scholarly consensus as to when the Jewish canon was set.
[edit] Samaritan canon
A Samaritan Pentateuch exists which is another version of the Torah, in this case in the Samaritan alphabet. The relationship to the Masoretic Text and the Septuagint is still disputed. Scrolls among the Dead Sea scrolls have been identified as proto-Samaritan Pentateuch text-type.[8] This text is associated with the Samaritans, a people of whom the Jewish Encyclopedia[9] states: "Their history as a distinct community begins with the taking of Samaria by the Assyrians in 722 B.C."
The Samaritans accept the Torah but do not accept any other parts of the Bible, probably a position also held by the Sadducees.[10] Moreover, they did not expand their Pentateuchal canon even by adding any Samaritan compositions.
Both texts from the Church Fathers and old Samaritan texts provide us with reasons for the limited extent of the Samaritan Canon. According to some of the information the Samaritans parted with the Jews (Judeans) at such an early date that only the books of Moses were considered holy; according to other sources the group intentionally rejected the Prophets and (possibly) the other Scriptures and entrenched themselves in the Law of Moses.
The small community of the remnants of the Samaritans in Palestine includes their version of the Torah in their canon[11] The Samaritan community possesses a copy of the Torah that they believe to have been penned by Abisha, a grandson of Aaron.[citation needed]
[edit] Christian canons
The Biblical canon is the set of books Christians regard as divinely inspired and thus constituting the Christian Bible. Though the Early Church used the Old Testament according to the canon of the Septuagint (LXX)[12], the apostles did not otherwise leave a defined set of new scriptures; instead the New Testament developed over time.
The writings attributed to the apostles circulated amongst the earliest Christian communities. The Pauline epistles were circulating in collected form by the end of the first century AD. Justin Martyr, in the early second century, mentions the "memoirs of the apostles," which Christians called "gospels" and which were regarded as on par with the Old Testament.[13]
A four gospel canon (the Tetramorph) was in place by the time of Irenaeus, c. 160, who refers to it directly.[14] By the early 200's, Origen may have been using the same 27 books as in the modern New Testament, though there were still disputes over the canonicity of Hebrews, James, II Peter, II and III John, and Revelation (see also Antilegomena).[15] Likewise by 200 the Muratorian fragment shows that there existed a set of Christian writings somewhat similar to what is now the New Testament, which included the four gospels and argued against objections to them.[16] Thus, while there was a good measure of debate in the Early Church over the New Testament canon, the major writings were accepted by almost all Christians by the middle of the second century.[17]
In his Easter letter of 367, Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, gave a list of exactly the same books as what would become the New Testament canon,[18] and he used the word "canonized" (kanonizomena) in regards to them.[19] The African Synod of Hippo, in 393, approved the New Testament, as it stands today, together with the Septuagint books, a decision that was repeated by Councils of Carthage in 397 and 419. These councils were under the authority of St. Augustine, who regarded the canon as already closed.[20] Pope Damasus I's Council of Rome in 382, if the Decretum Gelasianum is correctly associated with it, issued a biblical canon identical to that mentioned above,[21] or if not the list is at least a sixth century compilation.[22] Likewise, Damasus's commissioning of the Latin Vulgate edition of the Bible, c. 383, was instrumental in the fixation of the canon in the West.[23] In 405, Pope Innocent I sent a list of the sacred books to a Gallic bishop, Exsuperius of Toulouse. When these bishops and councils spoke on the matter, however, they were not defining something new, but instead "were ratifying what had already become the mind of the Church."[24] Thus, from the fourth century, there existed unanimity in the West concerning the New Testament canon (as it is today),[25] and by the fifth century the East, with a few exceptions, had come to accept the Book of Revelation and thus had come into harmony on the matter of the canon.[26] Nonetheless, a full dogmatic articulation of the canon was not made until the Council of Trent of 1546 for Roman Catholicism,[27] the Thirty-Nine Articles of 1563 for the Church of England, the Westminster Confession of Faith of 1647 for Calvinism, and the Synod of Jerusalem of 1672 for the Greek Orthodox.
[edit] Modern interpretation
Many Evangelical Christian groups do not accept the theory that the Christian Bible was not known until various local and Ecumenical Councils, which they deem to be "Roman-dominated", made their official declarations.
These groups believe that, in spite of the disagreements about certain books in early Christianity and, indeed, still today, the New Testament supports the view that Paul (2 Timothy 4:11–13), Peter (2 Peter 3:15–16), and ultimately John (Revelation 22:18–19) finalized the canon of the New Testament. Some note that Peter, John, and Paul wrote 20 (or 21) of the 27 books of the NT and personally knew all the other NT writers. (Books not attributed to these three are: Matthew, Mark, Luke, Acts, James, and Jude. The authorship of Hebrews has long been disputed.)
Evangelicals tend not to accept the Septuagint as the inspired Hebrew Bible, though many of them recognize its wide use by Greek-speaking Jews in the first century. They note that early Christians knew the Hebrew Bible, since around 170 Melito of Sardis listed all the books of the Old Testament that those in the Evangelical faiths now use (without mentioning, at least explicitly, the Book of Esther and, on the other hand, explicitly including the deuterocanonical Book of Wisdom). Melito's canon is found in Eusebius EH4.26.13–14[28]:
Accordingly when I went East and came to the place where these things were preached and done, I learned accurately the books of the Old Testament, and send them to thee as written below. Their names are as follows: Of Moses, five books: Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, Leviticus, Deuteronomy; Jesus Nave, Judges, Ruth; of Kings, four books; of Chronicles, two; the Psalms of David, the Proverbs of Solomon, Wisdom also, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Job; of Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah; of the twelve prophets, one book ; Daniel, Ezekiel, Esdras. From which also I have made the extracts, dividing them into six books.
However, Melito's account, as well as including the Book of Wisdom, does not determine that the specific documentary tradition used by the Jews was necessarily that which was eventually assembled into the Masoretic text, several centuries later.
St Athanasius is often quoted as endorsing 39 books in his Old Testament, rejecting any apocryphal writings. However his 39 books are a little different from the Protestant canon in that he rejects Esther and includes Baruch.
But for greater exactness I add this also, writing of necessity; that there are other books besides these not indeed included in the Canon, but appointed by the Fathers to be read by those who newly join us, and who wish for instruction in the word of godliness. The Wisdom of Solomon, and the Wisdom of Sirach, and Esther, and Judith, and Tobit, and that which is called the Teaching of the Apostles, and the Shepherd. But the former, my brethren, are included in the Canon, the latter being [merely] read; nor is there in any place a mention of apocryphal writings. But they are an invention of heretics, who write them when they choose, bestowing upon them their approbation, and assigning to them a date, that so, using them as ancient writings, they may find occasion to lead astray the simple.[29]
Many modern Protestants point to the following four "Criteria for Canonicity" to justify the selection of the books that have been included in the New Testament:
- Apostolic Origin — attributed to and based on the preaching/teaching of the first-generation apostles (or their close companions).
- Universal Acceptance — acknowledged by all major Christian communities in the ancient world (by the end of the fourth century).
- Liturgical Use — read publicly when early Christian communities gathered for the Lord's Supper (their weekly worship services).
- Consistent Message — containing a theological outlook similar or complementary to other accepted Christian writings.
The basic factor for recognizing a book's canonicity for the New Testament was divine inspiration, and the chief test for this was apostolicity. The term apostolic as used for the test of canonicity does not necessarily mean apostolic authorship or derivation, but rather apostolic authority. Apostolic authority is never detached from the authority of the Lord. See Apostolic succession.
It is sometimes difficult to apply these criteria to all books in the accepted canon, however, and some point to books that Protestants hold as apocryphal which would fulfill these requirements.[citation needed]
[edit] See also
- Books of the Bible for a side-by-side comparison of Jewish, Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant canons.
- Table of books of Judeo-Christian Scripture
- Non-canonical books referenced in the Bible
- Standard Works - several books (including the Bible) that constitute the open scriptural canon of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church)
- Canon (fiction) - a concept inspired by Biblical canon
[edit] Footnotes
- ^ McDonald & Sanders, editors of The Canon Debate, 2002, The Notion and Definition of Canon by Eugene Ulrich, page 29 defines canon as follows: "...the definitive list of inspired, authoritative books which constitute the recognized and accepted body of sacred scripture of a major religious group, that definitive list being the result of inclusive and exclusive decisions after serious deliberation."; page 34 defines canon of scripture as follows: "...the definitive, closed list of the books that constitute the authentic contents of scripture."
- ^ McDonald & Sanders, editors of The Canon Debate, 2002, The Notion and Definition of Canon by Eugene Ulrich, page 28; also from the Introduction on page 13: "We should be clear, however, that the current use of the term "canon" to refer to a collection of scripture books was introduced by David Ruhnken in 1768 in his Historia critica oratorum graecorum for lists of sacred scriptures. While it is tempting to think that such usage has its origins in antiquity in reference to a closed collection of scriptures, such is not the case." The technical discussion includes Athanasius's use of "kanonizomenon=canonized" and Eusebius's use of kanon and "endiathekous biblous=encovenanted books".
- ^ Athanasius Letter 39.6.3: "Let no man add to these, neither let him take ought from these."
- ^ McDonald & Sanders, page 32-33: Closed list; page 30: "But it is necessary to keep in mind Bruce Metzger's distinction between "a collection of authoritative books" and "an authoritative collection of books." "
- ^ McDonald & Sanders, page 4
- ^ McDonald & Sanders, ed., The Canon Debate, page 60, chapter 4: The Formation of the Hebrew Canon: Isaiah as a Test Case by Joseph Blenkinsopp.
- ^ Philip R. Davies in The Canon Debate, page 50: "With many other scholars, I conclude that the fixing of a canonical list was almost certainly the achievement of the Hasmonean dynasty."
- ^ The Canon Debate, McDonald & Sanders editors, 2002, chapter 6: Questions of Canon through the Dead Sea Scrolls by James C. VanderKam, page 94, citing private communication with Emanuel Tov on biblical manuscripts: Qumran scribe type c.25%, proto-Masoretic Text c. 40%, pre-Samaritan texts c.5%, texts close to the Hebrew model for the Septuagint c.5% and nonaligned c.25%.
- ^ Jewish Encyclopedia: Samaritans
- ^ Jewish Encyclopedia: Sadducees: "With the destruction of the Temple and the state the Sadducees as a party no longer had an object for which to live. They disappear from history, though their views are partly maintained and echoed by the Samaritans, with whom they are frequently identified (see Hippolytus, "Refutatio Hæresium," ix. 29; Epiphanius, l.c. xiv.; and other Church Fathers, who ascribe to the Sadducees the rejection of the Prophets and the Hagiographa; comp. also Sanh. 90b, where "Ẓadduḳim" stands for "Kutim" [Samaritans]; Sifre, Num. 112; Geiger, l.c. pp. 128-129), and by the Karaites (see Maimonides, commentary on Ab. i. 3; Geiger, "Gesammelte Schriften," iii. 283-321; also Anan ben David; Karaites)."
- ^ JewishEncyclopedia.com - SAMARITANS
- ^ McDonald & Sanders's 2002 The Canon Debate, page 259: "the so-called Septuagint was not in itself formally closed." — attributed to Albert Sundberg's 1964 Harvard dissertation.
- ^ Everett Ferguson, "Factors leading to the Selection and Closure of the New Testament Canon," in The Canon Debate. eds. L. M. McDonald & J. A. Sanders (Hendrickson, 2002) pp. 302–303; cf. Justin Martyr, First Apology 67.3
- ^ Everett Ferguson, "Factors leading to the Selection and Closure of the New Testament Canon," in The Canon Debate. eds. L. M. McDonald & J. A. Sanders (Hendrickson, 2002) pp. 301; cf. Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses 3.11.8
- ^ Both points taken from Mark A. Noll's Turning Points, (Baker Academic, 1997) pp 36–37
- ^ H. J. De Jonge, "The New Testament Canon," in The Biblical Canons. eds. de Jonge & J. M. Auwers (Leuven University Press, 2003) p. 315
- ^ The Cambridge History of the Bible (volume 1) eds. P. R. Ackroyd and C. F. Evans (Cambridge University Press, 1970) p. 308
- ^ Lindberg, Carter (2006). A Brief History of Christianity. Blackwell Publishing, 15. ISBN 1405110783.
- ^ David Brakke, "Canon Formation and Social Conflict in Fourth Century Egypt: Athanasius of Alexandria's Thirty Ninth Festal Letter," in Harvard Theological Review 87 (1994) pp. 395–419
- ^ Everett Ferguson, "Factors leading to the Selection and Closure of the New Testament Canon," in The Canon Debate. eds. L. M. McDonald & J. A. Sanders (Hendrickson, 2002) p. 320; F. F. Bruce, The Canon of Scripture (Intervarsity Press, 1988) p. 230; cf. Augustine, De Civitate Dei 22.8
- ^ Lindberg, Carter (2006). A Brief History of Christianity. Blackwell Publishing, 15. ISBN 1405110783.
- ^ F. F. Bruce, The Canon of Scripture (Intervarsity Press, 1988) p. 234
- ^ F. F. Bruce, The Canon of Scripture (Intervarsity Press, 1988) p. 225
- ^ Everett Ferguson, "Factors leading to the Selection and Closure of the New Testament Canon," in The Canon Debate. eds. L. M. McDonald & J. A. Sanders (Hendrickson, 2002) p. 320; Bruce Metzger, The Canon of the New Testament: Its Origins, Development, and Significance (Oxford: Clarendon, 1987) pp. 237–238; F. F. Bruce, The Canon of Scripture (Intervarsity Press, 1988) p. 97
- ^ F. F. Bruce, The Canon of Scripture (Intervarsity Press, 1988) p. 215
- ^ The Cambridge History of the Bible (volume 1) eds. P. R. Ackroyd and C. F. Evans (Cambridge University Press, 1970) p. 305; cf. the Catholic Encyclopedia, Canon of the New Testament
- ^ Catholic Encyclopedia, Canon of the New Testament
- ^ Fathers, New Advent.
- ^ NPNF2-04. Athanasius: Select Works and Letters | Christian Classics Ethereal Library
[edit] References
- Anchor Bible Dictionary
- Ante-Nicene Fathers, Eerdmans Press
- Apostolic Fathers, Lightfoot-Harmer-Holmes, ISBN 978-0-8010-5676-5
- Encyclopedia of the Early Church, Oxford
- Beckwith, R.T. OT Canon of the NT Church ISBN 978-0-8028-3617-5
- Brakke, David. "Canon formation and social conflict in fourth century Egypt," in Harvard Theological Review 87:4 (1994) pp. 395–419. Athanasius' role in the formation of the N.T. canon.
- Bruce, F.F., Canon of Scripture ISBN 978-0-8308-1258-5
- Davis, L.D. First Seven Ecumenical Councils ISBN 978-0-8146-5616-7
- Ferguson Encyclopedia of Early Christianity
- Fox, Robin Lane. The Unauthorized Version. 1992.
- Gamble. NT Canon ISBN 1579109098
- Hennecke-Schneemelcher. NT Apocrypha
- Jurgens, W.A. Faith of the Early Fathers ISBN 978-0-8146-5616-7
- Metzger, Bruce. Canon of the NT ISBN 978-0-19-826180-3
- Noll, Mark A. Turning Points. Baker Academic, 1997. ISBN 978-0-8010-6211-7
- John Salza, Scripture Catholic, Septuagint references
- Sundberg. OT of the Early Church Harvard Press 1964
[edit] Further reading
- Barnstone, Willis (ed.) The Other Bible: Ancient Alternative Scriptures. HarperCollins, 1984, ISBN 978-0739484340.
- Childs, Brevard S., The New Testament as canon: an introduction ISBN 0334022126
- Gamble, Harry Y., The New Testament canon: its making and meaning ISBN 0800604709
- McDonald, Lee Martin, The formation of the Christian biblical canon ISBN 0687132932
- McDonald, Lee Martin, Early Christianity and its sacred literature ISBN 1565632664
- McDonald, Lee Martin, The Biblical canon: its origin, transmission, and authority ISBN 9781565639256
- McDonald, Lee Martin, and James A. Sanders (eds.) The canon debate ISBN 1565635175
- Metzger, Bruce Manning, The Canon of the New Testament: its origin, development, and significance ISBN 0198261802
- Souter, Alexander, The text and canon of the New Testament, 2nd. ed., Studies in theology; no. 25. London: Duckworth (1954)
- Wall, Robert W., The New Testament as canon: a reader in canonical criticism ISBN 1850753741
- Westcott, Brooke Foss, A general survey of the history of the canon of the New Testament, 4th. ed, London: Macmillan (1875)
[edit] External links
- The Development of the Canon of the New Testament - includes very detailed charts and direct links to ancient witnesses
- Catholic Encyclopedia: Canon of the Old Testament
- Catholic Encyclopedia: Canon of the New Testament
- Jewish Encyclopedia: Bible Canon
- United Bible Societies, Translation Information Clearinghouse: Canon Update (PDF) Annotated bibliography of recently published research
- "The Old Testament of the Early Church" Revisited, Albert C. Sundberg, Jr., 1997.
- Scholarly articles on the Biblical Canon from the Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary Library
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
