Before we go further in our study of the Old Testament, the Septuagent, and the Apocrypha, we need to accept one fact. It must be addressed by both Catholics and Protestants and is often overlooked in the arguments over the "when, where, what, by who" of books being added/used/confirmed by various scholars, both Jewish and Christian. Yes, the debates will get that detailed. (I know, you're breathless with anticipation.) This fact is: we have to decide which books are canonical somehow. The Bible does not - cannot - do so on its own. So we (all Christians: Catholics and Protestants) must look to both authority and criteria. But which authority do we choose? Christians disagree. For now, let's look at the criteria for what is canon. And what it is not. The word "canon" comes from the Greek "κανών", meaning "rule" or "measuring stick". The concept is believed to have predated Christ, though. First we'll look at a couple of criteria that are often cited, but are invalid. • Is it divinely inspired? No book of the Bible claims itself to be divinely inspired. Jesus never left a list of Old Testament books to be followed (nor a list of New Testament books…which would be out of order choronologically…but not impossible for God). "The term 'inspired' (Greek, theopneustos) only occurs once in the Bible (2 Tm 3:16), where we are told that all Scripture is inspired. We first know that something is Scripture and then infer that it is inspired; we do not first know that it is inspired and then conclude it is Scripture" (Catholic Answers, ref. 1). Now, other sections of the Bible may indicate previous sections were inspired (by saying "God spoke" or "the Spirit spoke"), but we must acknowledge that something can claim to be inspired, but not actually be so. (The Book of Mormon, for example). • Does it agree with doctrine? This is a circular argument. Some people don't like the idea of praying for the dead, for example, so they point to 2 Maccabbees and say "it isn't canon." Here is the thing, though: just because someone doesn't personally like a practice or doctrine in the Bible doesn't mean it shouldn't be in the Bible. We get our doctrines and beliefs from the Bible; not the other way around. However, there is some merit to the argument. If doctrine clearly disagrees with another section of the Bible (a section which is generally deemed to be of high authority), then we can start to consider it a valid argument. Even then, we have to realize this is a complex argument. James 2:24 and Romans 4:3 (accepted by all Christians as canonical) teach different things: salvation by faith or by faith plus works? Many things appear contradictory in scripture; Christians attempt to reconcile these things all of the time. The following are canon requirements that are generally agreed upon, but still with reservations. The debate comes in when we start arguing over who/what/when. • Was the author an apostle or have a close connection with an apostle? Or in the OT, what the author a prophet or have a close connection with a prophet? The argument comes in as to who "qualifies" as a prophet or apostle and what defines as "closely connected" with them. We also have the slight problem of Esther, who wasn't a prophet, but the book is universally accepted. And the Book of Wisdom, not accepted by Protestants, has prophecy in it. • Did the book bear evidence of high moral and spiritual values that would reflect a work of the Holy Spirit? Does it "ring true" with the reader? (Sometimes states as the book "transforms" the reader). This is almost entirely subjective, thus while it makes sense to have as criteria, it usually does not lead to consensus among Christians. • Is the book being accepted by the body of Christ at large? (There will always be individuals who do not agree; what do Christians as a whole- especially those who are learned- think?) This is where the debate comes in, as well as the "we must accept authority." We will address these questions- at length- below. Along with discussions of what various individuals thought. There is an entire (in progress) page dedicated to lists of canon at various times. The major ones will be listed at the top in chronological order, with the others listed alphabetically. See: "Canon Lists Throughout History" page for this. Thus, after looking at this subject, we find that the Bible does not (and can not) state what is Scripture. More bluntly, the Bible didn't come with a table of contents. And Jesus didn't leave us "to read" list of books. Thus, we will turn to authority. Our best authorities are those closest to Christ. So…we shall look to history. ****Note: The material for these posts will probably end up filling many pages when I'm done, but I'll be posting as I go along in "quick bites" for people who are interested in such things. But this means that I won't have read everything or know everything (if such a thing is possible) when I write each blog post. I'm learning as I continue to research. Should you find an error, please let me know! Please, please, reference "Canon History" for the most up-to-date, accurate information!
0 Comments
Before we go further, let's define our terms. The tension-loaded "Apocrypha" as a term solely for the deuterocanonical books (Tobit, Judith, 1 & 2 Maccabees, Wisdom, Ecclesiastes, and Baruch) and using the term to mean 'un-Biblical' is a Protestant trend. The original term "apocrypha" is medieval Latin, from Late Latin, neuter plural of apocryphus secret, from Greek apokryphos obscure, from apokryptein to hide away, from apo- + kryptein to hide. It was generally used by the early church fathers (and Jewish scholars before them) to indicate that EITHER the books were not used by them during their own particular liturgies OR that the books had questionable value and/or contents. Its very earliest usage has been obscured by the passage of time, but it is "highly probable that in its original meaning an apocryphal writing had no unfavorable import, but simply denoted a composition which claimed a sacred origin, and was supposed to have been hidden for generations, either absolutely, awaiting the due time of its revelation, or relatively, inasmuch as knowledge of it was confined to a limited esoteric circle." There are many, many, many Apocryphal writings: among these are the 1st and 2nd books of Adam and Eve, Testament of Reuben, and Gospel of Thomas. The sole reason I have labeled this section of the website "Apocrypha" is because that is- for better or for worse- what the deuterocanonical books have come to be called. Canon originally meant that it was a valid scripture and used during the liturgy. I'm going to quote from Catholic Bridge.com because they explain this concisely and it matches with what I've read elsewhere. Specifically note that I have read this same thought/ideas/facts at multiple other sources…this is simply a concisely put together definition: "Before the late 4th Century, each city-church had its own, local "canon" of the Bible, and these local canons differed from city-church to city-church ---some local canons including books which are currently excluded from our present Bible (such as 1 Clement to the Corinthians, or the Epistle of Barnabas, or the Book of Enoch, etc.), and some local canons excluding books which are currently included in our present Bible (such as the Epistle of James, and Hebrews, and 2 Peter, and 2 & 3 John, Jude, and Revelation). The reason that city-churches had different local canons is because city-churches had different local Liturgies --that is, the Liturgy (form of worship) in the city-church of Rome was different from the Liturgy (form of worship) in the city-Church of Corinth, or the city-church of Ephesus, or Antioch, or Jerusalem, etc. This included the yearly Liturgical calendar, with different city-churches celebrating different local feast days on any given date." http://www.catholicbridge.com/catholic/orthodox/why_orthodox_bible_is_different_from_catholic.php For another, exhaustive, very long history of the term canon, see: http://oce.catholic.com/index.php?title=Canon_of_the_Holy_Scriptures Now, obviously, the term canon has grown to mean more. Currently, the term 'canon' is seen as identical with "Scripture" and/or "inspired" (aka- "official" Word of God). As I'm writing to an educated, but not scholastic audience, I am going to use the current "Apocrypha" and "canon" to mean "deuterocanonical books" and "official Scripture." This is both for ease of understanding and because, as times change, our word usage changes. Post 1 of this series was "Septuagint: Introduction and Basic Definition" The material for these posts will probably end up filling many pages when I'm done, but I'll be posting as I go along in "quick bites" for people who are interested in such things. But this means that I won't have read everything or know everything (if such a thing is possible) when I write each blog post. I'm learning as I continue to research. Should you find an error, please let me know! Please, please, reference "Canon History" for the most up-to-date, accurate information! Since it has been brought to my attention that the Septuagint and the Apocrypha books are a source of great division, I have decided (through a series of posts) to expand the original, quite short definition of the book I had. With each post, I will link back to the earlier ones as well as post on the new "Septuagint & Apocrypha" page in case one wishes to read the entire thing! (& as always, thank you to those who give me feedback and let me know what my readers would like to see.) The Septuagint has become an issue of serious debate. The reason for this is because the Old Testament in Protestant and Catholic Bibles is different. The Catholic Bible contains the Apocrypha, which was later removed by Luther. The trend of removing these books from the Bible was continued by the other Protestant churches. The Septuagint is organized in the following order: the Pentateuch, followed by the historical, poetic, wisdom, and prophetic books. The order is loosely followed by our English translations. Due to the fact that various translators at various times with varying capabilities and styles. The Septuagint is the Greek translation of the Old Testament (both Hebrew and Aramaic). The title “Septuagint” is Latin for “seventy.” Legend/tradition holds that 72 elders, working independently of one another, each produced an identical translation of the Hebrew Pentateuch into Greek around 285 B.C. Originally designed for Greek-speaking Jews in Egypt, the Septuagint was completed by various translators in or around Alexandria between the third and first centuries B.C. The reason it was in Greek is because the vast majority of the people (including Jews) spoke Greek. It was fairly pointless to read the scripture in Hebrew because most couldn't understand it (much like why the Bible is read in English now; no one understood the Latin). It came to have great authority among the non-Palestinian Jews, and allowed the Greeks to read the divine revelation in their own tongue. New Testament writers also relied heavily on the Septuagint, as a majority of Old Testament quotes cited in the New Testament are quoted directly from the Septuagint (others are quoted from the Hebrew texts). It is still the official text of the Greek Church. We know that when Jesus read the passage for the day, he was reading from the Septuagint. I thought this was an interesting side-note from Septuagint website: "The majority of the Septuagint, Masoretic Text and the Dead Sea Scrolls are remarkably similar and have dispelled unfounded theories that the Biblical text has been corrupted by time and conspiracy. " The material for these posts will probably end up filling many pages when I'm done, but I'll be posting as I go along in "quick bites" for people who are interested in such things. But this means that I won't have read everything or know everything (if such a thing is possible) when I write each blog post. I'm learning as I continue to research. Should you find an error, please let me know! Please, please, reference "Canon History" for the most up-to-date, accurate information! The historical books of the Bible are a continuation of the history of the Pentateuch. They include: Joshua; Judges; Ruth; 1 and 2 Samuel; 1 and 2 Kings; 1 and 2 Chronicles; Ezra; Nehemiah; Tobit; Judith; Esther; and 1 and 2 Maccabees. Protestant Bibles removed Tobit, Judith, and the Maccabees during the Reformation. Note that the "divisions" of the Bible into Pentateuch, Historical books, Prophets, etc. can be different according to different scholars/schools of thought. Joshua, Judges, Samuel(s), & King(s) are often called "The Deuteronomistic History." In an earlier form, these books were published together with Deuteronomy as their introduction. The "final" edition of these books certainly dates from the post exilic period, but much of it may have been in written form before then. Sources mentioned throughout the books indicate that there was a body of historical writing that these authors drew upon. These books not only attempt to inform of historic events, but also inserts speeches/essays of theology. The Deuteronomistic History tells of Israel's history, but leaves its future a bit vague. Ruth is, quite simply, a short story of ordinary people. The artistic telling of this story is meant to inform and provide models of living faithfully even during times of difficulty. "The Chronicles and Later Histories" includes 1 and 2 Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah. Chronicles start with a list of genealogies starting with Adam and going to Saul. In contrast with the Deuteronomistic History, the Chronicles try to visualize for us a clearer form of Israel's future. It shows continuity between Israel's past and their coming future. It makes a larger effort not just to relay events of the past, but to interpret them. Ezra and Nehemiah are narrative accounts of the post exilic period, showing the restoration of Judah following the exile of Babylon. Tobit is often described as a "religious novel." The purpose of the story is to show that God controls events and circumstances in order for His own purposes. Judith and Esther are, bluntly, hard to classify at all. Both have multiple historical errors, but are kept for their attempts to show how God will rescue Israel. Finally, 1 2 Maccabees cover the period of the second century B.C. It provides details from the period after the histories but before the Gospels. The "Wisdom Books" of the Bible include: Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Wisdom, and Sirach. (Note: some branches of Protestantism removed the latter two [among other books] during the Reformation; they were part of the Bible since before Christ and confirmed at Council of Hippo in 390 A.D.). Despite the occasional claim otherwise, Solomon was not the author of the Wisdom literature. While he no doubt has a great reputation for wisdom, the timing is completely impossible for him to be the author. In addition, much of the material- in theme if not exact words- is part of a larger tradition of wisdom literature. The Catholic Study Bible notes: "Israel's wisdom tradition did not develop in a vacuum. It was part of a much boarder movements within the ancient Near East world...There is a remarkable similarity between the biblical wisdom material and some Egyptian, Mesopotamian, and Canaanite texts...Despite these similarities, Israel's wisdom tradition is clearly in accord with its Yahwistic faith" (RG 232). Now knowing what the Wisdom books are and the basics of the origins surrounding them, we come to the question of: Why read them? To gain an understanding of life. To learn what practices develop good character. To study instruction on the proper ways of living. And finally: to see what mistakes we humans tend to. "Although the wise women and men believed that there was a right way of behaving, they did not insist on a rigid standard that would fit every circumstance. Each case the different. The wise person was the one who had a store of wisdom gained from experience and who knew which way of the behaving was appropriate to each situation" (Catholic Study Bible, RG 232). "Experiential wisdom is human response to environment, an attempt to understand and cope with it. Successful insights are captured in pithy saying...Compared to the commandments of the Torah, their teaching deals with the grey area of life which has to do with formation of character" (The New Jerome Biblical Commentary, p.448) Finally, one should consider the "how" of reading the Wisdom books. The how may seem obvious (open the book and read), but isn't. Many Christians are unfamiliar with the genre of wisdom literature and believe you can pick one verse out and that it will always stand alone and be correct. This method of reading the wisdom books has led to people not gaining wisdom, but rather confusion and/or negative ways of living. The various sections of Wisdom literature must be read in context of the verses around them. And with an understanding of various types of literature (parable, couplet designed to follow parallelism, etc.) Much of Job most definitely needs to be read in context; some of Job's "friends" various rebuttals along with Job's comments are outrageous if reading only a single verse and not understanding the larger story. Another example is Proverbs 31 (right/ideal conduct of women/wives), which is often taken out of context or without an understanding of the genre. While much of it is good advice or something to strive for, understanding what the examples are for is also important. An example of picking a single verse out of context? Not many of us still do the following: "She seeks out wool and flax and weaves with skillful hands." Is a women failing if she doesn't fulfill 31:13 then? No. Another author summed up the problem with Proverbs 31 perfectly: "Because trying to mold your personality and life by one proverb of the Bible causes you to miss the whole point of the rest of it – your value isn’t in your works, but in Christ." Please see Emily Timbol's article at: http://www.emilytimbol.com/2014/03/the-20-most-misunderstood-verses-in-the-bible/ for a further explanation. For a further, exhaustive study of Wisdom literature, it's extents, characteristics, origins, settings, forms, theological aspects, etc., I would suggest The New Jerome Biblical Commentary, p. 447-452. The Pentateuch consists of the first five books of the Bible: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. It is derived from the Greek "pentateuchos" meaning "five containers" or "five-volumed." It enjoys particular prestige among Jews as the "Law" or "Torah," the concrete expression of God's will. It also has the benefit of being containing five books that have NEVER had their canonicity called into question (by either Jews, Catholics, or Protestants). The division of the material into five sections is supported by both the Septuagint, a 3rd century B.C. translation of the Hebrew Old Testament into Greek, as well as the Samaritan Pentateuch, which dates from even earlier. As for material, it contains: a body of legal doctrine, the formation of the People of God (Abraham and the patriarchs), Moses and the oppressed Hebrews in Egypt, the birth of Israel in the Sinai covenant, the journey to the promised land, and the "discourses" of Moses. The time frame is from creation to the end of the Mosaic era. Many scholars divide/identify the material as coming from four major historical traditions/sources: Yahwist (J), Elohist (E), Priestly (P), and Deuteronomic (D). This theory is called the "Documentary Hypothesis." However, this is a simplification, and one that many scholars are now rejecting, due to the simple fact that all four of these "divisions" draw upon even older material from different sources (not just from four major sources), and that it ignores what we know of literary traditions of the time (for example, how stories would often be told from two or more points of view, even by the same author). However, other scholars feel that modifying the initial hypothesis, not rejecting it outright, is the proper course of action. By looking at the Pentateuch from the Documentary Hypothesis viewpoint, one can accept the fact that Moses was not the sole author of this entire section of the Bible, as previously believed. It also gives us deeper insight in the meaning behind various verses if one can understand the background and viewpoint of that particular "author" or school of authorship. It must be noted that more conservative scholars vehemently reject this theory, saying that it shows a complete misunderstanding of how early writings were passed on, and "rewrites the Bible" by forcing a 19th century and later editing process on material that is ancient. |
Jennifer Becker Landsberger
Who am I? Freelance writer (magazines, websites, & copywriting), Catholic, military wife, and Mensan. Double Bachelor's in History & Psychology. Witnessing by charity and love are above all. Studying the Bible and beyond helps me on this quest. Feel free to join my walk into the Bible.
If you wish to donate in order to help support the cost of running this website, it would be greatly appreciated!
If you found the information helpful, even a small donation would be wonderful! Thank you & God bless you. ~~~Prayer before Writing-
Oh creator of the universe, who has set the stars in the heavens and causes the sun to rise and set, shed the light of your wisdom into the darkness of my mind. Fill my thoughts with a loving knowledge of you, that I may bring you like to others. Just as you can make even babies speak your truth, instruct my tongue and guide my pen to convey the wonderful glory of the Gospel. Make my intellect sharp, my memory clear, and my words eloquent, so that I may faithfully interpret the mysteries what you have revealed. Categories
All
To my readers & fellow writers,
I promise: 1. I will pray that God's grace helps illuminate all of our interactions- both those of simple reading and more active conversations. 2. I will communicate with you respectfully and civilly. These are (rightly) issues which we feel passionate about. But even in disagreements, I will respect you fellow "seekers of truth." 3. I will not fall into negative behavior or words, such as insinuations, exaggerations, blames, or personal attacks. I respectfully ask you to do the same. 4. I will pray we will all find the truth and strive to fulfill the two greatest commandments: "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind, and with all your strength.’ The second is this: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these." (Mark 12:30-31) This site will occasionally feature paid posts! I always 100% verify everything I endorse. You will not see posts for products or sites I would not use myself.
All images on site were labeled for general re-use. If you find an image that is NOT supposed to be used, please contact me & I will remove it. Sites I Recommend |