HowTheBibleBooksWereChoosen
|
There is much talk these days about lost books of the
Bible. From cults to the New Age, people make all sorts of claims about how
the Bible is missing books, books that help justify what they hope to
believe. Sometimes people claim that the Bible was edited to take out reincarnation,
or the teaching of higher planes of existence, or different gods, or ancestor
worship, or "at-one-ment" with nature. Just started reading some of
these "additional books", though they are not claimed to be
"the word of God", its still pretty cool, here are links
to the other books.
|
|
Re: Books
around the same time the Bible was written The funny thing about that. The books of the Bible were
actually voted in by The Council of Nicaea and were choosen carefully by
relevance. Some of the other books that wern't included in the final
"official" Bible I hear still make for good reading. It's not that
they were all false or anything, not by any means. But if you read through
some, you will see some of the reasons. Some were just worded better than
others and got added.
|
http://www.panheads.org/boards/showthread.php?t=4192 JWsArticlesOnHowCanonicalBooksWereCompleted.htm
|
More Resources at AmericanBible.org |
Re: Books around the same time the Bible was written http://www.panheads.org/boards/showthread.php?t=4192
Highlights from the above article—are--the additional books were not included in the Bible for
several reasons. They
lacked apostolic or prophetic authorship, they did not claim to be the Word of God; they contain
unbiblical concepts such as prayer for the dead in 2 Macc.
SBT-Note--Keep these in mind while
Studying the following Articles--–Plus a few Scriptures--Paul warned Christians? What are the facts?— Verses are hyperlinked 2 Tim 3:16- 3:17
Col. 2:8. Rom 15:4
Plus Luke 8:17; and Rev 22:16-21— 22:16
Open In Context|
John –The Last writer surely must have been
familiar with all the other inspired writings that His fellow Apostles and
Close Disciples had written. Enjoy the following articles and make your own
conclusion—Open FREEasGOD.htm
and PurposeOfReligion.htm
Compare Open
JWsArticlesOnHowCanonicalBooksWereCompleted.htm
Luke 8:17 Jesus
"For nothing is hidden that will not become evident, nor anything secret that will not be known and come to light.
ou gar estin (5748) krupton o ou faneron genhsetai, (5695) oude apokrufon o ou mh gnwsqh| (5686) kai eiv faneron elqh|. (5632)
Jesus –Red Letters (
Open [In Context] For there is nothing hidden that will not be revealed, and there is
nothing secret that
will not become known and come to light.
(1) The
Development of the Canon of the New Testament http://www.ntcanon.org/ With http://www.ntcanon.org/authorities.shtml
(2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_canon#Early_Christianity_of_the_first_three_centuries
(3) http://www.tertullian.org/rpearse/nicaea.html
References
(1) Source http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_canon
(2) Source http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Books_of_the_Bible
(3) Source http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Quotations_from_the_Old_Testament_in_the_New_Testament
(4) Source http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Old_Testament
(5) Source http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_of_Tarsus
Apocrypha---
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apocrypha
From
Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Apocrypha (from the Greek
word απόκρυφα meaning "those
having been hidden away"[1])
are texts of uncertain authenticity or writings where the authorship is
questioned.
In Judeo-Christian theology, the
term apocrypha refers to any collection of scriptural texts that falls
outside the canon. Given that different denominations have
different ideas about what constitutes valid scripture,
there are several different versions of the apocrypha. Commonly, among Protestant
Christians, the apocrypha includes (but is not limited to) those books in the Old
Testament that, early in his life, Jerome described as
apocryphal in the 4th Century.
During sixteenth-century controversies over the biblical
canon the word "apocrypha" acquired a negative connotation, and
it has become a synonym for "spurious" or "false". This
usage usually involves fictitious or legendary accounts that are plausible
enough to commonly be considered as truth. For example, the Parson
Weems account of George Washington and the cherry tree is
considered apocryphal.
|
Contents [hide] |
[edit]
The term "apocrypha" has evolved in meaning
somewhat, and its associated implications have ranged from positive to
pejorative.
[edit]
The word "apocryphal"
(αποκρυφους) was first
applied, in a positive sense, to writings which were kept secret because they
were the vehicles of esoteric knowledge considered too profound or too sacred
to be disclosed to anyone other than the initiated.
It is used in this sense to describe A Holy and Secret
Book of Moses, called Eighth, or Holy
(Μωυσεως ἱερα βιβλος
αποκρυφος
επικαλουμενη
ογδοη ἡ ἁγια), a text taken from a Leiden papyrus of the third or fourth
century CE, but which may be as old as the first century. In a similar vein,
the disciples of the Gnostic Prodicus boasted that they possessed the secret
(αποκρυφους) books of
Zoroaster. The term in general enjoyed high consideration among the Gnostics
(see Acts of Thomas, 10, 27, 44)[1].
4 Ezra is,
in its author's view, a secret work whose value was greater than that of the
canonical scriptures because of its transcendent revelations of the future. Gregory
of Nyssa, in Oratio in suam ordinationem, labels the words of St.
John in the New Testament Book of Revelation as εν
αποκρυφοις [2].
[edit]
"Apocrypha" was also applied to writings that
were hidden not because of their divinity but because of their questionable
value to the church.
Origen, in Commentaries on Matthew,
X. 18, XIII. 57, distingushes between writings which were read by the
churches and apocryphal writings: γραφη μη
φερομενη μεν
εν τοις
κοινοις και
δεδημοσιευμενοις
βιβλιοις εικος
δ ὁτι εν
αποκρυφοις
φερομενη. The meaning of
αποκρυφος is here practically
equivalent to "excluded from the public use of the church", and
prepares the way for an even less favourable use of the word[3].
[edit]
The word "apocrypha" came finally to mean
"false, spurious, bad, or heretical."
This meaning also appears in Origen's prologue to his
commentary on the Song of Songs: De scripturis his, quae appellantur
apocryphae, pro eo quod multa in iis corrupta et contra fidem veram inveniuntur
a majoribus tradita non placuit iis dari locum nec admitti ad auctoritatem.
[4]
"Concerning these scriptures, which are called apocryphal, for the reason
that many things are found in them corrupt and against the true faith handed
down by the greater ones, it has pleased them that they not be given a place
nor be admitted to authority." (Translation by a Wikipedia editor.)
[edit]
In addition to the above, other uses of
"apocrypha" developed over the history of Western Christianity.
The Gelasian Decree refers to religious works by church
fathers Eusebius,
Tertullian
and Clement of Alexandria as
"apocrypha." Augustine defined the word as meaning simply
"obscurity of origin," implying that any book of unknown authorship
or questionable authenticity would be considered as apocrypha. On the other
hand, Jerome (in
Protogus Galeatus) declared that all books outside the Hebrew canon were
apocryphal [5]. In
practice, however, Jerome treated some books outside the Hebrew canon as if
they were canonical, and the Western Church did not accept Jerome's definition
of apocrypha, instead retaining the word's prior meaning (see: Deuterocanon).
As a result, various church authorities labeled different books as apocrypha,
and treated apocryphal books with varying levels of regard.
Many of the Greek fathers included some apocryphal books
in the Septuagint
with little distinction made between them and the rest of the Old Testament. Origen, Clement and
others cited some apocryphal books as "scripture", "divine
scripture", "inspired", and the like. On the other hand,
teachers connected with Palestine and familiar with the Hebrew canon
rigidly excluded all scriptures not found there. This view is reflected in the
canon of Melito of Sardis, and in the prefaces and letters
of Jerome [6].
A third view was that the books were not as valuable as
the canonical scriptures of the Hebrew collection, but were of value for moral
uses and to be read in congregations. They were referred to as
"ecclesiastical" works by Rufinus [7].
These three opinions regarding the apocryphal books
prevailed until the Reformation, when the idea of what constitutes
canon became a matter of primary concern for Catholics and Protestants
alike.
In 1546 the Catholic Council
of Trent adopted the canon of Augustine, declaring "He is also to be
anathema who does not receive these entire books, with all their parts, as they
have been accustomed to be read in the Catholic Church, and are found in the
ancient editions of the Latin Vulgate, as sacred and canonical." The whole
of the books in question, with the exception of 1st and 2nd Esdras and the Prayer of Manasses, were declared canonical at
Trent[8].
The Protestants, in comparison, universally held the
belief that only the books in the Hebrew collection were canonical. John
Wycliffe, a 14th-century reformer, had declared in his Biblical translation
that "whatever book is in the Old Testament besides these twenty-five
shall be set among the apocrypha, that is, without authority or belief" [9].
The respect accorded to apocryphal books varied between
Protestant denominations. In both the German
(1537) and English (1535) translations of the Bible, the
apocrypha are published in a separate section from the other books. In some
editions, (like the Westminster), readers were warned that these books were not
"to be any otherwise approved or made use of than other human
writings." A milder distinction was expressed elsewhere, such as in the
"argument" introducing them in the Geneva
Bible, and in the Sixth Article of the Church
of England, where it is said that "the other books the church doth
read for example of life and instruction of manners," though not to
establish doctrine [10].
[edit]
Apocryphal Texts by
Denomination
[edit]
Main article: Jewish apocrypha
Although Judaism historically insisted on the exclusive
canonization of the 24 books in the Tanakh, it also
claimed to have an oral law handed down from Moses. Certain
circles in Judaism, such as the Essenes in Palestine and the Therapeutae
in Egypt, were said to have a "secret" literature (see Dead
Sea scrolls). A large part of this "secret" literature consisted
of the apocalypses. Based on unfulfilled prophecies, these books were not
considered scripture, but rather part of a literary form that flourished from
200
[edit]
Biblical
books sometimes called "apocrypha"
Main article: Biblical apocrypha
During the birth of Christianity, some of the Jewish
apocrypha that dealt with the coming of the Messianic kingdom became popular in
the rising Jewish-Christian communities. Occasionally these writings were
changed, but on the whole it was found sufficient to reinterpret them as
conforming to a Christian viewpoint. Christianity eventually gave birth to new
apocalyptic works, some of which were derived from traditional Jewish sources.
The Jewish apocrypha were part of the ordinary religious
literature of the early Christians. This was not strange, as the large majority
of Old Testament references in the New Testament are taken from the Greek Septuagint,
which is the source of the deuterocanonical books ("secondary
canon") as they are known by many Christians. The Style Manual for the
Society of Biblical Literature recommends the use of the term deuterocanonical
literature instead of apocrypha in academic writing, although not
all apocryphal books are properly deuterocanonical.
These books form part of the Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox canons. New Testament
reliance on these books includes these examples: James
1:19 shows dependence on Sirach 5:11, Hebrews 1:3 on Wisdom
7:26, Hebrews 11:35 on 2 Maccabees
6, Romans 9:21 on Wisdom
15:7, 2
Cor. 5:1, 4 on Wisdom 9:15, etc.
The Book of Enoch is included in the biblical canon only
of the Oriental Orthodox churches. However, the Epistle
of Jude quotes the Book of Enoch by name, and use of this book appears in
the four gospels and 1 Peter. The genuineness and inspiration of Enoch were
believed in by the writer of the Epistle of Barnabas, Irenaeus, Tertullian
and Clement of Alexandria, and much of the early
church. The epistles of Paul and the gospels also show influences from the Book
of Jubilees, which is part of the Oriental Orthodox canon, as well as the Assumption of Moses and the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs,
which are included in no biblical canon.
The high position which some apocryphal books occupied in
the first two centuries was undermined by a variety of influences in the
Christian church. All claims to the possession of a secret tradition (as held
by many Gnostic sects) were denied by the influential theologians like Irenaeus
and Tertullian, the timeframe of "true inspiration" was limited to
the apostolic age, and universal acceptance by the church was required as proof
of apostolic authorship. As these principles gained currency, books deemed
apocryphal tended to become regarded as spurious and heretical writings, though
books now considered deuterocanonical have been used in liturgy and theology
from the first century to the present.
[edit]
New
Testament apocryphal literature
Main article: New Testament apocrypha
New Testament apocrypha — books similar to
those in the New Testament but rejected by Catholics, Orthodox
and/or Protestants — include several gospels and lives of apostles. Some of
these were clearly produced by Gnostic authors or members of other groups later defined
as heterodox.
Many texts believed lost for centuries were unearthed in the 19th
and 20th
centuries, producing lively speculation about their importance in early Christianity
among religious scholars.
The Gnostic tradition was a prolific source of apocryphal gospels.
While these writings borrowed the characteristic poetic features of apocalyptic
literature from Judaism, Gnostic sects largely insisted on allegorical
interpretations based on a secret apostolic tradition. With them, as with most
Christians of the first and second centuries, apocryphal books were highly
esteemed.
Though Protestants, Catholics and, in general, Orthodox
agree on the canon of the New Testament, the Ethiopian Orthodox have in the past also
included I & II Clement, and Shepherd of Hermas in their New
Testament canon. This is no longer the case, according to Biblical scholar R.W. Cowley.
A well-known New Testament apocryphal book is the Gospel
of Thomas, the only complete text of which was found in the Egyptian town
of Nag
Hammadi in 1945. The Gospel of Judas, a Gnostic
gospel, also received much media attention when it was reconstructed in 2006.
Artists and theologians have drawn upon the New Testament
apocrypha for such matters as the names of Dismas and Gestas and details
about the Three Wise Men. The first explicit mention of the perpetual virginity of Mary is found in
the pseudepigraphical Infancy Gospel of James.
[edit]
· This article incorporates text from the Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh
Edition, a publication now in the public
domain.
Information concerning the Hellenist Jews was
incorporated from the Catholic Encyclopedia at newadvent.com.
[edit]
· Table of books of
Judeo-Christian Scripture
[edit]
· Ethiopian Orthodox Canon Cowley, R.W. "The
Biblical Canon Of The Ethiopian Orthodox Church Today." Ostkirchliche
Studien, 1974, Volume 23, pp. 318-323. Accessed online via
islamicawareness.org.
· Complete NT Apocrypha Claims to be the largest
collection of New Testament apocrypha online
· Major collection
of pseudepigrapha Large number of NT and OT apocrypha and general
pseudepigrapha
· German Apocrypha research Scholarly research site
on individual manuscripts.
· Deuterocanonical books - Full text from Saint
Takla Haymanot Church Website (also presents the full text in Arabic)
· The Unknown Lives of Jesus and Mary from the
Apocrypha and other little-known sources.
· LDS
Bible Dictionary > Apocrypha Definition & LDS POV, including
brief book descriptions.
· Epistle of the Apostles Text of the Epistle of
the Apostles
· Dark
Mirrors of Heaven A look at the Biblical creation myth from
non-canonical literature.
Retrieved from
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apocrypha"
Categories: 1911 Britannica | Apocrypha | Christian texts | Judaism
Views
Personal
tools
Navigation
Search
Toolbox
In
other languages
·
This page was last modified
13:09, 3 August 2006.
·
All text is available under
the terms of the GNU Free
Documentation License. (See Copyrights for details.)
Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.
--------------------------------------
-Early
Christianity of the first three centuries
Early Christianity had no well-defined set of scriptures
outside of the Septuagint[1].
The New
Testament refers to the "Law and Prophets", for example the Gospel
of Luke 24:44-45
records Jesus
stating: "written. . .in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms. .
.the Scriptures" and Acts of the Apostles 24:14
records Paul of Tarsus stating: "I believe everything
that agrees with the Law and that is written in the Prophets". The
earliest Christian canon is found in the Bryennios manuscript, published by J.-P. Audet
in JTS [3] 1950, v1, pp 135-154, dated to
around 100, written
in Koine
Greek, Aramaic
and Hebrew; it is this 27-book Old
Testament list: "Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers,
Deuteronomy,
Jesus
Nave, Judges, Ruth,
4 of Kings (Samuel and Kings),
2 of Chronicles, 2 of Esdras, Esther,
Psalms, Proverbs,
Ecclesiastes,
Song
of Songs, Job, Minor
prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah,
Ezekiel,
Daniel"
(2 of Esdras might include 1 Esdras; Esther,
Jeremiah and Daniel might include their Septuagint additions; Jesus
Nave[2]
is an early translation of Joshua son of Nun). Early Christianity also
relied on the Sacred Oral
Tradition of what Jesus
had said and done, as reported by the apostles and other followers. Even after
the Gospels
were written and began circulating, some Christians preferred the oral Gospel
as told by people they trusted (e.g. Papias, c. 125).
By the end of the 1st century,
some Letters of Paul were collected and circulated, and
were known to Clement of Rome (c. 95), Ignatius of Antioch (died 117), and Polycarp of Smyrna (c. 115) but they weren't
usually called scripture/graphe as the Septuagint was and they weren't
without critics. In the late 4th century Epiphanius of Salamis (died 402) Panarion 29
says the Nazarenes
had rejected the Pauline epistles and Irenaeus Against
Heresies 26.2 says the Ebionites rejected him. Acts 21:21 records a rumor that Paul
aimed to subvert the Old Testament (see Romans 3:8, 31). 2 Peter 3:16 says his
letters have been abused by heretics who twist them around "as they do with the
other scriptures." In the 2nd and 3rd centuries Eusebius Ecclesiastical History 6.38
says the Elchasai
"made use of texts from every part of the Old Testament and the Gospels;
it rejects the Apostle (Paul) entirely"; 4.29.5 says Tatian the Assyrian
rejected Paul's Letters and Acts of the Apostles; 6.25 says Origen accepted 22
canonical books of the Hebrews plus Maccabees
plus the four Gospels but Paul
"did not so much as write to all the churches that he taught; and even to
those to which he wrote he sent but a few lines."
Bruce Metzger in his Canon of the New Testament,
1987, draws the following conclusion about Clement:
Clement's Bible is the Old Testament, to which he refers
repeatedly as Scripture (graphe), quoting it with more or less exactness.
Clement also makes occasional reference to certain words of Jesus; though they
are authoritative for him, he does not appear to enquire how their authenticity
is ensured. In two of the three instances that he speaks of remembering 'the
words' of Christ or of the Lord Jesus, it seems that he has a written record in
mind, but he does not call it a 'gospel'. He knows several of Paul's epistles,
and values them highly for their content; the same can be said of the Epistle
to the Hebrews, with which he is well acquainted. Although these writings
obviously possess for Clement considerable significance, he never refers to
them as authoritative 'Scripture'.
Marcion of Sinope: c. 150, was the first of
record to propose a definitive, exclusive, unique canon of Christian
scriptures. (Though Ignatius did address
christian scripture, before Marcion, against the heresies of the Judaizers and
Dociests, he
did not publish a canon.) Marcion rejected the theology of the Old
Testament, which he claimed was incompatible with the teaching of Jesus regarding God
and morality. The Gospel of Luke, which Marcion called simply the Gospel
of the Lord, he edited to remove any passages that connected Jesus with the
Old Testament. This was because he believed that the god of the Jews, YHWH, who gave them the
Jewish Scriptures,
was an entirely different god than the Supreme God who sent Jesus and inspired
the New
Testament. He used ten Letters
of Paul as well (excluding Hebrews and the Pastoral
Epistles) assuming his Epistle to the Laodiceans referred to canonical Ephesians and
not the apocryphal
Epistle to the Laodiceans or another text
no longer extant. He also edited these in a similar way. To these, which he
called the Gospel and the Apostolicon, he added his Antithesis
which contrasted the New Testament view of God and morality with the Old
Testament view of God and morality. By editing he thought he was removing judaizing
corruptions and recovering the original inspired words of Jesus and Paul.
Marcion's canon and theology were rejected as heretical by the
early church; however, he forced other Christians to consider which texts were
canonical and why. He spread his beliefs widely; they became known as Marcionism.
Henry Wace
in his introduction [4] of
1911 stated: "A modern divine. . .could not refuse to discuss the question
raised by Marcion, whether there is such opposition between different parts of
what he regards as the word of God, that all cannot come from the same
author." The Catholic Encyclopedia of 1913 stated:
"they were perhaps the most dangerous foe Christianity has ever
known." Adolf von Harnack in Origin of the New
Testament [5], 1914,
argued that Marcion viewed the church at this time as largely an Old Testament
church (one that "follows the Testament of the Creator-God") without
a firmly established New Testament canon, and that it gradually formulated its
New Testament canon in response to the challenge posed by Marcion. The
Prologues to the Pauline Epistles (which are not a part of the text, but short
introductory sentences as one might find in modern study Bibles [6]), found in
several older Latin codices,
are now widely believed to have been written by Marcion or one of his
followers. Harnack notes [7]:
"We have indeed long known that Marcionite readings found their way into
the ecclesiastical text of the Pauline Epistles, but now for seven years we
have known that Churches actually accepted the Marcionite prefaces to the
Pauline Epistles! De Bruyne has made one of the finest discoveries of later
days in proving that those prefaces, which we read first in Codex
Fuldensis and then in numbers of later manuscripts, are Marcionite, and
that the Churches had not noticed the cloven hoof."
Muratorian fragment [8]: this 7th Century
latin manuscript is often considered to be a translation of the first non-Marcion
New Testament canon, and dated at between 170 (based on an internal
reference to Pope Pius I and arguments put forth by Bruce
Metzger) and as late as the end of the 4th century
(according to the Anchor Bible Dictionary[3]).
This partial canon lists the four gospels and the Letters
of Paul, as well as two books of Revelation, one of John, another of Peter (the latter of which it notes is not
often read in the churches). It rejects the Epistle to the Laodiceans and Epistle to
the Alexandrians both said to be forged in Paul's name to support Marcionism.
Diatessaron: c. 173, a one-volume harmony of the four Gospels, translated and
compiled by Tatian
the Assyrian into Syriac. In Syriac speaking churches, it effectively served as
the only New Testament scripture until Paul's Letters were added during the 3rd
century. Some believe that Acts was also used in Syrian churches alongside the Diatessaron,
however, Eusebius' Ecclesiastical
History 4.29.5 states: "They, indeed, use the Law and Prophets and
Gospels, but interpret in their own way the utterances of the Sacred
Scriptures. And they abuse Paul the apostle and reject his epistles, and do not
accept even the Acts of the Apostles." [Note also that there were many
books with the title of 'Acts', written about
the same time by different writers. Moreover, at one time the Gospel of
Luke and the Biblical 'Acts' appear to have been one continuous document.]
In the 4th century, the Doctrine of Addai lists a 17 book NT canon using
the Diatessaron and Acts and 15 Pauline Epistles (including 3rd Corinthians). The Diatessaron
was eventually replaced in the 5th century by the Peshitta, which
contains a translation of all the books of the 27-book NT except for 2 John, 3 John, 2 Peter, Jude
and Revelation and is the Bible of the Syriac Orthodox Church where some members
believe it is the original New Testament, see Aramaic
primacy.
Irenaeus of Lyons: c. 185, claimed that there
were exactly four Gospels, no more and no less, as a touchstone of orthodoxy.
He argued that it was illogical to reject Acts of the Apostles but accept the
Gospel of Luke, as both were from the same author. In Against Heresies
3.12.12 [9]
he ridiculed those who think they are wiser than the Apostles
because they were still under Jewish influence. This was crucial to refuting Marcion's
anti-Judaizing, as Acts gives honor to James,
Peter,
John
and Paul
alike. At the time, Jewish Christians tended to honor James (a
prominent Christian in Jerusalem described in the New Testament as an apostle
and pillar, and by Eusebius and other church historians as the first Bishop of Jerusalem) but not Paul,
while Pauline Christianity tended to honor Paul more
than James.
Codex Claromontanus canon [10]: c. 250, a page found
inserted into a 6th Century copy of the Epistles of Paul and Hebrews, has the 27-book OT plus
Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, 1-2,4 Maccabees, and the 27-book NT plus 3rd Corinthians, Acts of Paul,
Apocalypse of Peter, Barnabas, and Hermas, but missing Philippians, 1-2
Thessalonians, and Hebrews.
[edit]
Era
of the Seven Ecumenical Councils
Eusebius, around the year 300, recorded a New Testament
canon in his Ecclesiastical History Book
3, Chapter XXV:
"1...
First then must be put the holy quaternion of the Gospels;
following them the Acts of the Apostles... the epistles
of Paul... the epistle of John... the epistle of Peter... After them is to be
placed, if it really seem proper, the Apocalypse of John, concerning which we shall
give the different opinions at the proper time. These then belong among the accepted
writings."
"3
Among the disputed writings, which are nevertheless recognized by many,
are extant the so-called epistle of James and that of Jude,
also the second epistle of Peter, and those that are
called the second and third of John, whether they belong to the evangelist or to another person of the same
name. Among the rejected [Kirsopp Lake translation: "not genuine"]
writings must be reckoned also the Acts of
Paul, and the so-called Shepherd, and the Apocalypse of Peter, and in addition to these
the extant epistle of Barnabas, and the so-called Teachings of the
Apostles; and besides, as I said, the Apocalypse of John, if it seem proper, which
some, as I said, reject, but which others class with the accepted books. And
among these some have placed also the Gospel according to the Hebrews... And all
these may be reckoned among the disputed books"
"6...
such books as the Gospels of Peter, of Thomas,
of Matthias, or of any others besides them, and the
Acts
of Andrew and John and the other apostles... they clearly show
themselves to be the fictions of heretics. Wherefore they are not to be placed even among the
rejected writings, but are all of them to be cast aside as absurd and
impious."
The Apocalypse of John, also called Revelation, is
counted as both accepted (Kirsopp Lake translation:
"Recognized") and disputed, which has caused some confusion
over what exactly Eusebius meant by doing so. From other writings of the Church
Fathers, we know that it was disputed with several canon lists rejecting its
canonicity. EH 3.3.5 adds further detail on Paul: "Paul's fourteen
epistles are well known and undisputed. It is not indeed right to overlook the
fact that some have rejected the Epistle to the Hebrews, saying that it is
disputed by the church of Rome, on the ground that it was not written by
Paul." EH 4.29.6 mentions the Diatessaron:
"But their original founder, Tatian, formed a certain combination and
collection of the Gospels, I know not how, to which he gave the title
Diatessaron, and which is still in the hands of some. But they say that he
ventured to paraphrase certain words of the apostle [Paul], in order to improve
their style."
Cheltenham Canon ([11], [12]), (also known as
Mommsen's):
c. 350, a page found
inserted in a 10th Century manuscript, has a 24 book OT and 24 book
NT which provides syllable and line counts but omits Hebrews, Jude and James,
and seems to question the epistles of John and Peter beyond the first.
Synod of Laodicea: c. 363, was one of the first
synods that set out to judge which books were to be read aloud in churches. The
decrees issued by the thirty or so clerics attending were called canons.
Canon 59 decreed that only canonical books should be read, but no list was
appended in the Latin and Syriac manuscripts recording the decrees. The list of
canonical books, Canon 60 [13],
sometimes attributed to the Synod of Laodicea is a later addition according to
most scholars and has a 22 book OT and 26-book NT (excludes Revelation).
Athanasius: in 367, in Festal Letter 39 [14] listed a
22 book OT and 27-book NT and 7 books not in the canon but to be read:
Wisdom of Solomon, Wisdom of Sirach, Esther, Judith, Tobit, Didache, and the
Pastor (probably Hermas). This list is the very similar to the modern Protestant
canon. Other differences are his exclusion of Esther
and his inclusion of Baruch and the Letter of Jeremiah as part of Jeremiah.
In c. 380, the redactor of the Apostolic Constitutions attributed a canon
to the Twelve Apostles themselves ([15]) as the 85th of
his list of such apostolic decrees:
Canon 85. Let the following books be esteemed venerable and holy by all of
you, both clergy and laity. [A list of books of the Old Testament ...] And our
sacred books, that is, of the New Testament, are the four Gospels, of Matthew,
Mark, Luke, John; the fourteen Epistles of Paul; two Epistles of Peter; three
of John; one of James; one of Jude; two Epistles of Clement; and the Constitutions
dedicated to you, the bishops, by me, Clement,
in eight books, which is not appropriate to make public before all, because of
the mysteries contained in them; and the Acts of us, the Apostles. (From the Latin version.)
Some later Coptic and Arabic translations add Relevation
and the Epistles of Clement.
Pope Damasus I: is often considered to the father of
the modern Catholic canon. Though purporting to date from a "Council
of Rome" under Pope Damasus I in 382, the so-called
"Damasian list" appended to the pseudepigraphical Decretum Gelasianum [16] is actually a
valuable though non-papal list from the early 6th century. Denziger's recension
is found in the links at Decretum Gelasianum. The "Damasian
Canon" was published by C.H. Turner in JTS, vol. 1, 1900, pp
554-560. In 405, Pope
Innocent I in Letter #6 (to Exuperius) described a canon identical to Trent
(without the distinction between protocanonicals and deuterocanonicals).
In the late 380s, Gregory of Nazianus produced a canon ([17]) in verse which
agreed with that of his contemporary Athanasius, other than placing the
"Catholic Epistles" after the Pauline Epistles and omitting
Revelation.
Bishop Amphilocus of Iconium, in his
poem Iambics for Seleucus ([18]) written some
time after 394, discusses
debate over the canonical inclusion of a number of books, and almost certainly
rejects the later Epistles of Peter and John, Jude, and Revelation.
3rd Synod of Carthage [19]: in 397, ratified the canon
accepted previously at the Synod of Hippo Regius in North Africa in 393 and which was
purportedly endorsed by Pope Damasus I. The 27-book NT canon included the
Gospels, four books; the Acts of the Apostles, one book; the Epistles of Paul,
thirteen; of the same to the Hebrews; one Epistle; of Peter, two; of John,
apostle, three; of James, one; of Jude, one; the Revelation of John.
When St. Jerome translated the Bible into Latin, producing the Vulgate bible c.
400, he argued for
the Veritas Hebraica, meaning the truth of the Jewish
Bible over the Septuagint translation. At the insistence of the Pope,
however, he added existing translations for what he considered doubtful books,
but did not personally translate them anew. This period marks the beginning of
a more widely recognized canon, although the inclusion of some books was still
debated: Epistle to Hebrews, James, 2 John, 3 John, 2 Peter, Jude and
Revelation. Grounds for debate included the question of authorship of these
books (note that the so-called Damasian "Council at Rome" had already
rejected John the Apostle's authorship of 2 and 3 John,
while retaining the books), their suitability for use (Revelation at that time
was already being interpreted in a wide variety of heretical ways),
and how widely they were actually being used (2 Peter being amongst the most
weakly attested of all the books in the Christian canon).
The late-5th or
early-6th
Century Peshitta
of the Syrian Orthodox Church ([20]) includes a 22-book NT,
excluding II Peter, II John,
List of the Sixty Books [21]: dated to
the 7th century, has 34 OT books and 26-book NT (excludes Revelation)
and 9 books "outside the sixty": Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach, 1-4
Maccabees, Esther, Judith, Tobit and a 25 book apocrypha.
Orthodox Synod in Trullo: in 692, rejected by Pope
Constantine, approved Gregory Theologus' 22 book OT and 26-book NT
(excludes Revelation) and the Canons of the Apostles of the Apostolic Constitutions of which Canon #85 [22] is a list of
the 27-book OT plus Judith, Sirach, 1-3Maccabees, Didache, 1-2Clement,
and 26-book NT (excludes Revelation), and the Apostolic Constitutions
which themselves were rejected because they were said to contain heretical
interpolations.
John of Damascus: c. 654 - 749, in Exact Exposition
of Orthodox Faith 4.17 accepted Didache and Apostolic Constitutions.
[edit]
Nicephorus: the Patriarch of Jerusalem, 806-815, in a Stichometria
[23]
appended to the end of his Chronography rejected Esther, Tobit, Judith, Wisdom
of Solomon, Sirach, Maccabees, Psalms
of Solomon, Enoch,
Didache, Barnabas, Hermas, Clement, Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs,
Gospel of Thomas, Gospel of the Hebrews, 3rd Corinthians, Acts of Paul,
Revelation, Apocalypse of Peter.
[edit]
Protestant Reformation: begun by Martin
Luther, who made an attempt to remove the books of Hebrews, James, Jude and
Revelation from the canon (echoing the consensus of many Christian Humanists --
such as Cardinal Ximenez, Cardinal
Cajetan, and Erasmus
-- and partially because they were perceivvved to go against certain Protestant
doctrines such as sola gratia and sola fide),
but this was not generally accepted among his followers. However, these books
are ordered last in German-language Lutheran Bibles
to this day. [citation needed]
Bruce Metzger's Canon of the New Testament says in
1596 Jacob Lucius
published a Bible at Hamburg which labeled Luther's four as
"Apocrypha"; David Wolder the pastor of Hamburg's Church of St. Peter
published in the same year a triglot Bible which labeled them as "non
canonical"; J. Vogt published a Bible at Goslar in 1614 similar to
Lucius'; Gustavus Adolphus of Stockholm in 1618 published a Bible
with them labeled as "Apocr(yphal) New Testament."
Luther also eliminated the "doubtful" books
from his Old Testament, terming them "Apocrypha,
that are books which are not considered equal to the Holy Scriptures, but are
useful and good to read". He also argued unsuccessfully for the relocation
of Esther
from the Canon to the Apocrypha, since without the deuterocanonical sections,
it never mentions God. As a result Catholics and Protestants continue to use
different canons, which differ in respect to the Old Testament.
Charles Caldwell Ryrie's Basic Theology
counters in 1986 the claim that Martin
Luther rejected the Book of James as being canonical. Here's what Luther
wrote in his preface to the New Testament in which he ascribes to the several
books of the New Testament different degrees of doctrinal value. "St.
John's Gospel and his first Epistle, St. Paul's Epistles, especially those to the
Romans, Galatians, Ephesians, and St. Peter's Epistle-these are the books which
show to thee Christ, and teach everything that is necessary and blessed for
thee to know, even if you were never to see or hear any other book of doctrine.
Therefore, St. James' Epistle is a perfect straw-epistle compared with them,
for it has in it nothing of an evangelic kind." Thus Luther was comparing
(in his opinion) doctrinal value, not canonical validity.
There is some evidence that the first decision to omit
these books entirely from the Bible was made by Protestant laity rather than
clergy. Bibles dating from shortly after the Reformation
have been found whose tables of contents included the entire Roman Catholic
canon, but which did not actually contain the disputed books, leading some
historians to think that the workers at the printing presses took it upon
themselves to omit them. However, Anglican and Lutheran Bibles usually still
contained these books until the 20th
century, while Calvinist Bibles did not. Several reasons are proposed for
the omission of these books from the canon. One is the support for Catholic
doctrines such as Purgatory and prayer for the dead found in 2 Maccabees.
Luther himself said he was following Jerome's teaching about the Veritas
Hebraica.
According to the Catholic Encyclopedia article on the Canon of the New Testament:
"The idea of a complete and clear-cut canon of the New Testament existing
from the beginning, that is from Apostolic times, has no foundation in history.
The Canon of the New Testament, like that of the Old, is the result of a
development, of a process at once stimulated by disputes with doubters, both
within and without the Church, and retarded by certain obscurities and natural
hesitations, and which did not reach its final term until the dogmatic
definition of the Tridentine Council."
Council of Trent: on April 8, 1546, by vote (24 yea,
15 nay, 16 abstain) approved the present Roman
Catholic Bible Canon including the Deuterocanonical Books. This is said to be
the same list as produced at the Council of Florence in 1451, this list was
defined as canonical in the profession of faith proposed for the Jacobite Orthodox Church. Because of its
placement, the list was not considered binding for the Catholic church, and in
light of Martin Luther's demands, the Catholic Church examined
the question of the Canon again at the Council of Trent, which reaffirmed the
Canon of the Council of Florence. The Old Testament books that had been in
doubt were termed deuterocanonical, not indicating a lesser degree of
inspiration, but a later time of final approval. Beyond these books, some
editions of the latin Vulgate include Psalm 151,
the Prayer of Manasseh, 1 Esdras
(called 3 Esdras), 2 Esdras (called 4 Esdras), and the Epistle to the Laodiceans in an appendix,
styled "Apogryphi".
Thirty-Nine Articles: in 1563, of the Church
of England, article 6, recognized the Roman Catholic Canon including the
Deuterocanonicals with the caveat "for example of life and instruction in
manners ... [but not] to establish any doctrine."
King James Bible: of 1611, included
deuterocanon and apocrypha from the Vulgate and Septuagint.
Westminster Confession of Faith: in
1647, of Calvinism,
decreed a 39-book OT and 27-book NT, all others labelled as
apocrypha [24].
Synod of Jerusalem[25]: in 1672, decreed the Greek Orthodox Canon which is the same as
the Roman
Catholic but includes Psalm 151, 1 Esdras, 3 Maccabees,
4
Maccabees, Psalms of Solomon, Odes, Letter of Jeremiah. The Greek Orthodox generally
consider the Septuagint to be divinely inspired.
Thomas Jefferson: in 1819, produced the Jefferson
Bible, by excluding sayings of Jesus which he felt were easily determined
to be inauthentic ("like picking diamonds from dunghills" -To Adams, 24 January
1814).
Vatican I: on April 24, 1870, approved the
additions to Mark
(v.16:9-20), Luke, (22:19b-20,43-44) and John, (7:53-8:11) which are not present in early
manuscripts.
Pope Pius XI: on June 2, 1927, decreed the Comma
Johanneum was open to dispute.
The Jesus Seminar in 1993 ranked sayings of
Jesus for authenticity by consensus vote and published The Five
Gospels : What Did Jesus Really Say? The Search for the Authentic Words of
Jesus. In addition to the canonical four gospels, the fifth gospel is the Gospel
of Thomas.
Most Christian churches accept the 27-book NT,
except the Syriac Orthodox Church, which uses the Peshitta and
the Ethiopian Orthodox Church (which lists four books
of Sinodos (church practices), two Books of Covenant, "Ethiopic
Clement", and "Ethiopic Didascalia" within a broader New
Testament canon, although their narrow canon is the same as that of other
churches; see this
webpage for much more detailed information on the Ethiopian Canon), and the
Armenian Orthodox church, which includes the Third Epistle to the Corinthians.
The canon of the Tewahedo Church is looser than for most other traditional
Christian groups. The Ethiopian "narrow" Old Testament canon includes
the books found in the Septuagint accepted by the Orthodox plus Enoch,
Jubilees, 1 Esdras and 2 Esdras, 3 Maccabees,
and Psalm
151; but their three books of the Maccabees are quite different in content
from those of the other Christian churches which include them. The order of the
books is somewhat different from that of other groups, as well. This Church
also has a "broader canon" that includes more books.
The books that were not canonized, but that are known to
have existed in antiquity, are stylistically or in subject matter similar to
the New Testament, and claim apostolic authorship, are known as the New Testament apocrypha.
[edit]
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 the New Testament supports 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. They 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.)
Protestants tend not to accept the Septuagint
as the correct Hebrew Bible. They claim that the Masoretic
text was known and used by the end of 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 (except, according to the Catholic Encyclopedia,
the Book of Esther, and with the addition of the Book of Wisdom). Melito's
canon is found in Eusebius EH4.26.13-14 [26]:
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 still does not determine that
the specific documentary tradition used by the Jews necessarily was that
which was eventually assembled into the Masoretic text, several centuries
later.
[edit]
Modern
interpretation of canonization
Many modern Protestants point to four "Criteria for
Canonicity" to justify the books that have been included in the Old and
New Testament, which are judged to have satisfied the following:
1.
Apostolic Origin —
attributed to and based on the preaching/teaching of the first-generation
apostles (or their close companions).
2.
Universal Acceptance —
acknowledged by all major Christian communities in the ancient world (by the
end of the fourth century).
3.
Liturgical Use — read
publicly when early Christian communities gathered for the Lord's Supper (their
weekly worship services).
4.
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. In practice,
Protestants hold to the Jewish canon for the Old Testament and the Catholic
canon for the New Testament.
[edit]
1. ^ Assuming Koine Greek primacy, which is the majority view, however, a small
minority assume Aramaic primacy, meaning an original Aramaic Gospel
which would cite the Aramaic Old Testament.
2. ^ According to the Catholic Encyclopedia [1]:
"In the Fathers, the book is often called "Jesus Nave". The name
dates from the time of Origen, who translated the Hebrew "son of Nun"
by uìòs Nauê and insisted upon the Nave as a type of a ship;
hence in the name Jesus Nave many of the Fathers see the type of Jesus,
the Ship wherin the world is saved."
3. ^ Hahneman, Geoffrey Mark. The Muratorian Fragment and the Development of
the Canon. Oxford: Clarendon, 1992. Sundberg, Albert C., Jr. "Canon
Muratori: A Fourth Century List." Harvard Theological Review 66 (1973):
1-41.
[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
·
Lost books of the Old Testament
·
Lost books of the New Testament
[edit]
References
·
Anchor Bible Dictionary
·
Ante-Nicene Fathers,
Eerdmans Press
·
Apostolic Fathers,
Lightfoot-Harmer-Holmes, ISBN
0801056764
·
Encyclopedia of the Early
Church, Oxford
·
Beckwith, R.T. OT Canon
of the NT Church ISBN
0802836178
·
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
083081258X
·
Davis, L.D. First Seven
Ecumenical Councils ISBN
0814656161
·
Ferguson Encyclopedia of
Early Christianity
·
Fox, Robin Lane. The
Unauthorized Version. 1992. A classical historian dispassionately discusses
the formation of the canons.
·
Gamble. NT Canon ISBN
0800704709
·
Hennecke-Schneemelcher. NT
Apcrypha
·
Jurgens, W.A. Faith of
the Early Fathers ISBN
0814656161
·
Metzger, Bruce. Canon of
the NT ISBN
0198261802
·
John Salza, Scripture
Catholic, Septuagint references
·
Sundberg. OT of the
Early Church Harvard Press 1964
[edit]
External links
·
Catholic
Encyclopedia: Canon of the Old Testament
·
Catholic
Encyclopedia: Canon of the New Testament
·
Jewish Encyclopedia: Bible Canon
·
Development
of the Canon of the New Testament
·
Gnostic
Society Library page on The Nag Hammadi library
·
United Bible Societies, Translation Information
Clearinghouse: Canon Update Annotated bibliography of recently
published research
·
Judaica
Press Translation - Online Jewish translation of the Biblical canon.
The Tanakh and Rashi's
entire commentary.
·
OrthodoxWiki:
Holy Scripture
Retrieved from
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_canon"
Categories: Articles needing sources | Bible
| Christian texts | Jewish Christian topics | Old Testament topics
Views
Personal
tools
Navigation
Search
Toolbox
In
other languages
·
This page was last modified
13:51, 7 August 2006.
·
All text is available under
the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License. (See Copyrights
for details.)
Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.
Searches
Open http://search.yahoo.com/search?ei=utf-8&fr=slv1-mdp&p=How%20the%20Bible%20books%20were%20choosen
Open-
http://www.wordiq.com/search/books%20of%20the%20Bible%20by%20The%20Council%20of%20Nicaea
Open- http://www.wordiq.com/search/New%20Testament%20Bible%20Writers
