How we got our Bible
I. Why should we
know how we got our Bible?
A.
To be informed If we claim the Bible as the
Word of God we should have a basic understanding of how it came to be.
B.
To give a defense 1 Peter 3:15 states, “but sanctify Christ as Lord in
your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to
give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and
reverence.” Christians should be able to explain intelligently the basis of the
Christian faith. This certainly would include our trust in the Bible.
C.
To have greater assurance A study of “how we
got our Bible” will give you greater assurance that the Bible you hold in your
hand is accurate and truly represents what God originally gave to the prophets.
II. The four main
links in the revelatory process The study of How
We Got Our Bible can be summarized into four main sections—Inspiration,
Canonization, Transmission and Translation.
A.
Inspiration The first link in the chain of revelation is inspiration.
Inspiration deals with what God did, namely, breathing out the Scriptures.
Inspiration is what gives the Bible its authority.
B.
Canonization The second link, canonization, deals with how the inspired
books of God came to be recognized as Holy Scripture. Inspiration tells us how
the Bible received its authority; canonization tells us how these books came to
be accepted by men.
C.
Transmission The third link, transmission, deals with how the original
autographs of the Bible were copied and whether these copies accurately reflect
the original autographs.
D.
Translation The fourth link, translation, discusses the translation of
the Bible into other languages and whether the Bible in our language accurately
reflects what the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts said.
Revelation:
God Has Spoken
I. Definition The
word “revelation” comes from the Greek word apokalupsis, which means
“disclosure” or “unveiling.” “Revelation has to do with disclosing, uncovering,
or unveiling what previously was hidden, making known what had been secret.
When used theologically. . . revelation refers to
God’s deliberate manifestation of his plans, his character, and himself”
(William B. Nelson, Jr. , “Revelation,” in The
II. Categories of
Revelation There are two avenues through which God has taken the initiative
to reveal Himself—General and Special revelation.
A. General
revelation General revelation deals with “the truths God has revealed about
Himself to all mankind through nature, providential control, and conscience”
(Paul Enns. The Moody Handbook of Theology, p. 645). General revelation,
though not adequate to procure salvation, reveals certain truths about God’s
nature to all humanity.
1.
Nature God has revealed important truths about Himself and the guilt of
man through nature.
a. Psalm 19:1-6 “The heavens are telling of the glory of
God; and their expanse is declaring the work of His hands.” Nature reveals
God’s glory and the facts that He exists.
b. Romans 1:18-21 “For since the creation of the world
His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been
clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are
without excuse.” Creation also shows that God is all-powerful and that the
whole human race is guilty of sin and without excuse.
2.
Providence God has revealed Himself through providential control.
a. Matthew
b. Acts 14:15-17 God has graciously provided food, rain
and gladness for people.
c. Daniel
3.
Conscience God has given man an intuitional knowledge concerning Himself
in the heart of man. According to Romans 2:14-15, every person has the Law of
God “written in their hearts” thus knowing right from wrong. .
B. Special
revelation Special revelation is narrower in focus than general revelation.
Special revelation involves the various means God used to communicate His
message. By way of contrast, though general revelation is available to
everyone, special revelation is available only to those who have access to
biblical truth. Hebrews 1:1 tells us that “God. . .
spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many
ways.” The avenues of special revelation God has used include:
1.
The
2.
The Urim and Thummim The Urim and Thummim were two precious stones on
the breastplate of the high priest that were sometimes used to determine the
will of God (Ex. 28:30; Num. 27:21; Deut. 33:8; 1 Sam. 28:6).
3.
Dreams God used dreams to communicate at various times in the Old
Testament (Gen. 20:3; 31:11-13, 24; 40-41).
4.
Visions Sometimes God used visions as He did with Isaiah and Ezekiel
(Isa. 1:1; 6:1; and Ezek. 1:3).
5.
Audible voice God sometimes spoke with an audible voice (1 Sam. 3:4; Luke
6.
Theophanies Before the incarnation of Christ, God sometimes manifested
Himself, often as the Angel of the Lord, to communicate His divine message to
the people (Gen. 16:7-14; Ex. 3:2; 2 Sam. 24:16; Zech. 1:12).
7.
Angels Angels at times carried God’s message to people (Dan. 9:20-21;
Luke 2:10-11; and Rev. 1:1).
8.
The Prophets Old Testament and New Testament prophets received direct
revelation and brought God’s message to mankind (2 Sam. 23:2; Zech 1:1; and
Eph. 3:5).
9.
Miracles and Events God used sign miracles and events such as the
deliverance of
10.
Jesus Christ “God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets
in many portions and in many ways, in these last days has spoken to us in His
Son” (Heb. 11:1-2). Special revelation centers in Jesus Christ.
a. John 1:1 He is the “Word” because He is the complete
revelation of the Father.
b. John
c. John 5:36-37 He reveals the Father’s compassion.
d. John 6:63;
e. Matthew
f. John 14:9 To know Jesus is to
know the Father.
11.
The Bible The Bible serves as the most inclusive of all the avenues of
special revelation for it encompasses the other avenues of special revelation.
Plus, though special revelation centers in the person of Christ, all that can
be known about Jesus Christ is known through the Bible. In a very real way,
then, it can be said that special revelation is restricted solely to the Bible.
a. 2 Timothy 3:16-17 Scripture reveals all the doctrine,
rebuke, correction and guidance that is needed for
godly living.
b. 2 Peter
Inspiration:
The God-breathed Scriptures
The most basic question about the nature of the Bible centers in
its claim to be “inspired” or to be the “Word of God.” What is meant by
“inspiration” is the subject of this section.
I. Necessity of
inspiration “Inspiration is necessary to preserve the revelation of God. If
God has revealed Himself but the record of that revelation is not accurately
recorded, then the revelation of God is subject to question. Hence,
inspiration guarantees the accuracy of the revelation” (Enns, p. 159).
II. Definition
and meaning of inspiration The English word “inspiration” in its
theological usage comes from 2 Timothy 3:16. The word is used to translate the
Greek term theopneustos which means “God-breathed.” “Inspiration may be
defined as the Holy Spirit’s superintending over the writers [of Scripture] so
that while writing according to their own styles and personalities, the result
was God’s Word written—authoritative, trustworthy, and free from error in the
original autographs” (Enns, p. 160).
III. Differences
between inspiration and revelation Revelation concerns the origin and
giving of truth while inspiration relates to the reception and recording of
truth. “Inspiration is the means God used to achieve His revelation in the
Bible. Inspiration involves man in an active sense, whereas revelation is
solely the activity of God. . . . Inspiration as a total
process includes both the prophet and the product of his pen” (Norman L. Geisler
and William E. Nix, A General Introduction to the Bible, 1986. pp.
39-40).
IV. Elements of
inspiration Several important elements belong in a
proper definition of inspiration.
A.
Divine element The prime mover in inspiration
is God. God the Holy Spirit superintended the writers, ensuring the accuracy of
the writing. Though men are involved in the process, the Bible originated with
God and was authorized by Him.
1. 2 Timothy
2. 2 Peter 1:20-21 “But know this first of all, that no
prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, for no prophecy
was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke
from God.” Concerning the divine element in prophecy, Herman Hoyt states, “This
[
B.
Human element Though the Bible comes from God
the human writers played an important role in the overall process of
inspiration. As they wrote under the direction of the Holy Spirit, they used
their own individual writing styles. “In inspiration, then, God is the primary
cause, and the prophets are the secondary causes. Thus the divine influence did
not restrict human activity but rather enabled the human authors to communicate
the divine message accurately” (Geisler and Nix, p. 39).
V. Inspiration
clarified
A.
What is inspired—the writer or his writings? “The person as well as his
pen is under the direction of the Holy Spirit in the total process of
inspiration. Nevertheless, the New
Testament
reserves the word “inspiration” only for the product of that process, that is
the writings, of graphe [Scripture] (2 Tim.
B.
What is inspired—the autographs or the copies? Inspiration applies
specifically to the original autographs of the Bible not to copies and
translations. This should not cause concern about whether the Bible one holds
is truly the Word of God. As Geisler says, “Even when the accuracy of a reading
in the original text cannot be known with 100 percent accuracy, it is
possible to be 100 percent certain of the truth preserved in the texts
that survive. It is only in minor details that any uncertainty
abut the textual rendering exists, and no major doctrine rests on any
one minor detail. A good translation will not fail to capture the overall
teaching of the original. In this sense, then, a good translation will have
doctrinal authority, although actual inspiration is reserved for the
autographs” (Geisler and Nix, p. 44).
VI. Results of
inspiration
A.
An Inerrant Bible The result of the divine-human authorship is a message
without error. If God is true (Rom. 3:4) and the Bible comes from God (2 Tim.
B.
A verbal revelation Inspiration applies to the words of Scripture not
just to the ideas. As 1 Corinthians 2:12-13 states, “Now we have received, not
the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the
things freely given to us by God, which things we also speak, not in words
taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining
spiritual thoughts with spiritual words” (Emphasis mine). Verbal
inspiration can also be seen in the many “it is written” statements (Matt. 4:4,
7, 10) and the fact that Jesus said not even the smallest part of a Hebrew word
or letter could be broken (Matt.
C.
A Bible inspired in all its parts (Plenary) All
parts of the Bible are equally inspired. Thus, the Bible is fully inspired in
all its parts. As 2 Timothy
inspired by God” (emphasis mine). This includes
matters pertaining to science and history.
D.
An unbreakable Word of God The Bible is unbreakable or infallible. Jesus
said in John 10:35, “the Scripture cannot be broken.”
E.
An authoritative standard Jesus and the Apostles used the Scriptures as
the final authority in all matters (Matt. 4:4, 7, 10; Acts 17:2).
VII. False views
of inspiration
A.
Natural inspiration This view holds that there
is no supernatural element involved in the writing of Scripture. The writers of
the Bible were men of unusual religious insight writing on religious subjects
in the same way men like Shakespeare wrote literature. HOWEVER, Scripture is
clear that God was supernaturally involved in inspiring the books of the Bible.
B.
Spiritual illumination “The illumination view suggests that some
Christians may have spiritual insight that although similar to other Christians
is greater in degree. In this view any devout Christian, illuminated by the
Holy Spirit, can be the author of inspired Scripture. Adherents
to this view suggest it is not the writings that are inspired, rather it is the
writers who are inspired” (Enns, p. 161). HOWEVER, the Bible
claims that its own writings are inspired.
C.
Partial or dynamic inspiration This view holds
that the parts of the Bible related to matters of faith and practice are
inspired, but matters relating to history, science or chronology may be in
error. HOWEVER, who decides which parts of the Bible are in error and which
parts are not? PLUS: how can doctrine be separated
from history when much of doctrine is based on historical factors? How can the
Bible be trustworthy in one area but not another?
D.
Conceptual inspiration This view holds that
only the concepts or ideas of the writers are inspired not the words. Thus
error can occur as the human puts God’s ideas into his own words. HOWEVER, the
Bible affirms verbal inspiration (see 1 Cor.
E.
Divine dictation “The dictation theory is the teaching that God actually
dictated the Bible to the writers. Passages where the Spirit is depicted as
telling the author precisely what to write are regarded as applying to the
entire Bible” (Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology.
F.
Neo-orthodox opinion According to this view, the Bible in written,
verbal form is not the revealed Word of God. However, it can become the
Word of God if it points a person to an experiential encounter with Christ.
HOWEVER, the Bible is the objective authoritative Word of God whether a person
believes it or not. It does not “become” the Word of God; it “is” the Word of
God. .
Structure
and Divisions of the Bible
I. Definitions
A.
Bible “Bible” is the name commonly used to designate the thirty-nine
books of the Old Testament and the twenty-seven books of the New Testament.
These sixty-six books make up one book —the Bible. The English word Bible came
originally from the name of the papyrus or
B.
Testament The Bible is one book but it is
divided into two parts called Testaments. The term, “Testament” (berith in
Hebrew and diatheke in Greek) means “covenant. The Old Testament was
written and preserved by the Jewish Community before the time of Christ and the
New Testament was composed by the followers of Christ during the first century
A. D.
II. Old Testament
Classifications
A.
Hebrew form (see chart entitled Hebrew/Protestant/Catholic Old
Testament Categories, p. 11) The Hebrew Bible is composed of twenty-four
books. The earliest division of the Hebrew Bible was twofold—the Law and the
Prophets. This is the most common distinction in the New Testament and is
confirmed by Jewish usage and the Dead Sea Scrolls. In less ancient times,
however, the Jewish Bible was arranged in three sections—1) the Law, 2) the
Prophets, and 3) the Writings.
B.
Greek form The Hebrew Scriptures were translated into Greek at
Alexandria, Egypt (c. 250—150 B. C.). This translation was known as the
Septuagint (LXX). The Alexandrian tradition arranged the Old Testament
according to subject matter and became the basis for our modern
classification of the Old Testament—1) five books of Law, 2) twelve books of
History, 3) five books of Poetry and 4) seventeen books of Prophecy.
NOTE: The Hebrew
classification of the Old Testament totals twenty-four books while the Greek
order totals thirty-nine. How can this be? The answer is that the Jews
enumerated the Old Testament books differently. The twelve minor
prophets were considered one book. 1 and 2 Samuel were considered one
book. The same holds true for 1 and 2 Kings, 1 and 2 Chronicles and Ezra-Nehemiah.
Though the classifications are different between the Hebrew and Greek forms,
the same books are in both forms.
C.
Latin form “The grouping of books in the Latin
Bible (the Vulgate) follows that of the Septuagint (LXX), or Greek version.
Jerome, who translated the Latin Vulgate (c. 383-405), was familiar with the
Hebrew division, but Christendom as a whole had come to favor (or be associated
with) the Greek version; thus it was only natural for him to adopt its fourfold
classification.” (Norman L. Geisler and William E. Nix, A
General Introduction to the Bible. Chicago: Moody Press. 1986. p. 26)
D.
English form Following the Latin Vulgate, which had been the standard
Bible for a thousand years, Wycliffe’s first English Bible followed the
fourfold division of its Latin precursor. All subsequent English versions
follow this fourfold division (Law, History, Poetry and Prophecy).
III. New
Testament classification (see chart entitled New Testament
Classification, p. 12) The books of the New
Testament have been classified into four groups: 1) Gospels, 2) History, 3)
Epistles and 4) Prophecy.
IV. Chapter and
verse divisions The earliest Bibles have no
chapter and verse distinctions. Stephen Langton, a professor at the University
of Paris, divided the Bible into chapters in 1227. Later, Robert Stephanus, a
Paris printer, added verses in 1551 and 1555.
Hebrew/Protestant/Catholic
Old Testament Categories
Hebrew Bible (24
books)
The Law
Genesis, Exodus,
Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy,
The Prophets
Joshua, Judges,
Samuel, Kings, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, The 12 Minor
Prophets,
The Writings
Psalms, Proverbs,
Job, Song of Solomon, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, Esther, Daniel,
Ezra-Nehemiah, Chronicles
Protestant Bible (39
books)
The Law
Genesis, Exodus,
Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy,
The Writings
Psalms, Proverbs,
Job, Song of Solomon, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, Esther, Daniel,
Ezra-Nehemiah, Chronicles
Poetry/Wisdom
Job, Psalms, Proverbs,
Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon, Prophecy, Isaiah, Jeremiah,
Lamentations, Ezekiel, Daniel, Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum,
Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi.
Roman Catholic Bible
(46 books)
The Law
Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus,
Numbers, Deuteronomy
History
Joshua, Judges,
Ruth, 1 and 2 Samuel, 1 and 2 Kings, 3 and 4 Kings (Chron), Ezra, Nehemiah,
*Tobit, *Judith, Esther, *1 Maccabees, *2
Maccabees
Poetry/Wisdom
Job, Psalms,,Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon, *Wisdom of
Solomon, *Ecclesiastieus, (Sirach)
Prophecy
Isaiah, Jeremiah,
Lamentations, *Baruch, Ezekiel, Daniel, Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah,
Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi
*Apocrypha books
accepted as canonical by Roman Catholic Church.
The Roman Catholic
Church also accepts as canonical additions to Daniel (Song of the Three
Young Men; Susanna; and Bel and the Dragon) and additions to
Esther
New Testament
Classification,
Gospels (4)
1. Matthew, 2. Mark, 3. Luke, 4. John
History (1)
Acts
Epistles (21)
Pauline (13)
1. Romans, . 1 Corinthians, 3. 2 Corinthians, 4. Galatians, 5. Ephesians, 6. Philippians, 7. Colossians, 8. 1 Thess, 9. 2 Thess, 10. 1 Timothy, 11. 2 Timothy, 12. Titus, 13. Philemon,
General (8), 14. Hebrews, 15. James, 16. 1 ,Peter, 17. 2 Peter, 18. 1 John, 19. 2 John, 20. 3 John, 21. Jude
Prophecy (1)
Revelation.
Time
Period of Bible
The time span for the writing of the Bible covers approximately
fifteen-hundred years.
Old
Testament (1445—400 B. C.)
Genesis (1445),
Exodus (1445), Leviticus (1445), Numbers (1405), Deuteronomy (1405), Joshua
(1405—1385), Judges (1043), Ruth (1000), 1 and 2 Samuel (1000—900), 1 and 2
Kings (561—538), 1 and 2 Chronicles , 450—430), Ezra (457—444), Nehemiah (425),
Esther (475), Job (lived in patriarchal times), Psalms (1450—500), Proverbs
(950), Ecclesiastes (931), Song of Solomon (960), Isaiah (740), Jeremiah (561),
Lamentations (586) ,Ezekiel (570), Daniel (536), Hosea (750), Joel (830), Amos
(760), Obadiah (845), Jonah (780), Micah (735), Nahum (661—612), Habakkuk
(609),, Zephaniah (635), Haggai (520), Zechariah (520—518), Malachi (430),
New Testament (A. D.
50—100)
Matthew (50), Mark
(50), Luke (60-61), John (80-90), Acts (63), Romans (56), 1 Corinthians
(54-55), 2 , orinthians (55-56), Galatians (48), Ephesians (61), Philippians
(62), Colossians (61), 1 Thessalonians (51), 2 , hessalonians (51), 1 Timothy
(62), 2 Timothy (64), Titus (63), Philemon (61), Hebrews (65), James (45), 1
,Peter (65), 2 Peter (67), 1 John (85), 2 John (90), 3 John (90), Jude (70),
Revelation (95).
The
Making of the Bible
I. The Bible and
early writings
A.
Bible not the oldest book “Our Bible is a very old book, but it is by no
means the oldest book in the world. Discoveries made within the last century
show that writing was a well-established art in many countries long before the
beginnings of the Hebrew nation in the land of Palestine” (Neil Lightfoot, How
We Got the Bible, p. 14).
B.
The beginning of writing “The earliest known examples of writing carry
us into the ancient land of Egypt and into Mesopotamia. We do not know exactly
when or where writing began. . . . What is known is that an early Sumerian
limestone tablet is extant, a written text which is dated about 3500 B. C. What
is also known is that Egyptian hieroglyphs were in a developmental stage at
least by 3000 B. C. In
C.
Implication of other early writings on the Bible It
was formerly held by some liberal critics that Moses could not have written the
first five books of the Bible since writing was unknown in the days of Moses.
Now, however, we know that writing was generally practiced many centuries
before Moses. This argument, then, is no longer valid.
II. Writing
materials of Bible times The ancient people of
A. Stone In almost
every area the earliest material on which writing has been found is stone.
1.
The Ten Commandments The earliest writing
material mentioned in the Old Testament is stone. The Ten Commandments were
written on stone (Ex. 31:18; 34:1, 28).
2.
Joshua and the memorial stones After Israel crossed the Jordan, stones with
the Law written on them were set up as a memorial (Deut. 27:2-3 with Josh.
8:30-32).
B. Clay The
predominant writing material of Assyria and Babylonia was clay. Huge libraries
of clay tablets have been discovered from these areas. Clay material is
referred to in Ezekiel 4:1 when Ezekiel was told to draw a plan of
C. Wood The use
of wooden tablets was common in
D. Leather “For
hundreds of years leather or animal skins played an important role in the
history of the Bible. Leather is not specified in the Old Testament, but it was
unquestionably the principal material employed for literary purposes by the
Hebrews.” (Lightfoot, p. 16) (See Jeremiah 36:23). .
E. Papyrus Papyrus
was the most important writing material during the inter-testamental and New
Testament times. In fact, it is almost certain that the original New Testament
letters were penned on papyrus sheets.
1.
What was papyrus? Papyrus sheets came from papyrus reeds that grew in
abundance along the
2.
Papyrus rolls Papyrus rolls were the “books” of the ancient world until
the second century. These “rolls” were thirty feet long and nine to ten inches
high. Writing was usually done on one side of the scroll (one exception is
Revelation 5:1).
3.
Papyrus codex By the second century the papyrus
roll gave way to the papyrus codex. A codex manuscript is simply a book.
Papyrus sheets were put together in the form of a book instead of joining them
side by side to make a roll.
F. Vellum or
parchment Vellum and parchment (used interchangeably) refers to animal
skins dressed for writing purposes. Because of the high price of papyrus,
vellum became a less expensive substitute. By the fourth century vellum
replaced papyrus. The use of vellum is significant because this was the
material used to make copies of the New Testament for over a thousand years
(fourth century —Middle Ages). The two most valuable
New Testament manuscripts, the
G. Paper The
production of paper stretches back to the second century B. C. with the
Chinese. The secrets of paper making, though, were not widely made known until
the middle of the eighth century when Arabs captured some Chinese men who were
skilled in making paper. By the time of the thirteenth century paper was being
used in much of
III. Languages of
the Bible The Bible was originally written in
three languages —Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek.
A. Hebrew Almost all of the Old Testament was written in Hebrew.
1.
Semitic language “Hebrew is of a large family of languages known as
Semitic, and is akin to such languages as Aramaic, Syriac, Akkadian
(Assyrian-Babylonian) and Arabic” (Lightfoot, p. 29).
2.
Much different from English Unlike Greek in which many of the letters
and words are recognizable to English speaking people, Hebrew is a “strange”
language in that it is written backwards (from our standpoint) from right to
left, it has many sounds that differ from English forms, and has a vocabulary
unrelated to English words. Plus, the Hebrew alphabet is without vowels.
B. Aramaic Though most of the Old Testament was written in Hebrew, some
portions were written in Aramaic. Aramaic sections of the Old Testament
include: 1) two words as a place-name in Genesis 31:47, 2) one verse in
Jeremiah 10:11, 3) six chapters in Daniel (2:4b—
1.
Similarities to Hebrew Aramaic is a kindred
language to Hebrew. In fact, anyone not trained in the languages of Hebrew and
Aramaic would not be able to tell the difference between these two languages in
the Old Testament because they look so similar.
2.
Beginning of Aramaic among the Jews Aramaic became the language of the
common people in
3.
The primary language of Christ Aramaic was spoken by the Jews several
centuries before Christ and was the primary vernacular of
4.
Aramaic expressions found in the New Testament
a. talitha cumi (little girl, get up) in Mark
b. ephphatha (be opened) in Mark
c.
Eli, eli lama sabachthani (My God, my God, why
hast thou forsaken me?) in Matthew 27:46
d.
Jesus addressed God as Abba (Aramaic for Father) (see also Rom.
e.
Maranatha (“Our Lord, come!”) in 1 Corinthians
C. Greek Though
Aramaic was the common language of Christ and the early Christians, Greek was
the language of the New Testament.
1.
Common Greek More precisely, the language of the New Testament is
properly called Hellenistic or Koine (common) Greek. New Testament Greek
was the language of the “common” man.
2.
Why did God choose Greek? Probably because the language
chosen for the universal proclamation of the Gospel would need to be one that
was most widely known throughout the nations. This language was Greek.
As Lightfoot states, “since the gospel was to be proclaimed to every creature. . . the New Testament writers made use of a
language that was known everywhere. Greek in the first
century, as English is today, was the ‘universal’ language” (Lightfoot, p. 31).
D. Are these
three languages dead? Contrary to many people’s opinions these languages
are not dead languages. Hebrew is the spoken language of the state of
Canonicity:
Determining and Discovering the God-inspired Books
I. Introduction to Canonicity
A. Significance of
canonicity “If the Scriptures are indeed inspired by God then a significant
question arises: Which books are inspired? Historically, it was important for
the people of God to determine which books God had inspired and which ones were
recognized as authoritative” (Enns, p. 170).
B. Difference
between inspiration and canonicity “Inspiration indicates how the Bible
received its authority, whereas canonization tells how the Bible
received its acceptance. It is one thing for God to give the
Scriptures their authority, and quite another for men to recognize that
authority” (Geisler and Nix, p. 203).
C. What does
“canon” mean?
1.
Original meaning The original meaning of “canon”
can be traced to the ancient Greeks who used the term in a literal sense. To
them, a kanon was a rod, ruler, staff or measuring rod. Thus, a kanon
was a standard for measurement. This literal meaning provided the basis for
a later, extended use of the term. The word eventually was extended to mean a
rule or standard for anything.
2.
In regard to the Bible In theological usage, “canon” refers to
authoritative Scripture. As F. F. Bruce says, “When we speak of the canon of
scripture, the word ‘canon’ has a simple meaning. It means the list of books
contained in scripture, the list of books recognized as worthy to be included
in the sacred writings of a worshipping community. In a Christian context, we
might define the word as ‘the list of the writings acknowledged by the Church
as documents of the divine revelation. ’” (The Canon of Scripture,p. 17).
3.
Usage in early church The term “canon,” in
reference to the books of Scripture, developed with the early church fathers.
The first clear application of this term to the Scriptures is attributed to
Athanasius in A. D. 367. (F. F. Bruce, The Canon of
Scripture, p. 17).
II. Determining
the canon Who or what determined which books were
canonical?
A. God determines the Canon Canonicity is determined by
God. A book is not inspired because men made it canonical; it is canonical
because God inspired it. Thus, canonicity is determined by inspiration.
B. Distinction between determination and discovery Understanding
canonicity involves two related but separate issues: 1) Canonicity is determined
by God and 2) Canonicity is discovered by man. A failure to keep
this distinction leads to confusion. How a book received its authority is
determined by God. How men discover and recognize that authority is another
matter altogether.
C. False views concerning canonicity
1. Old Age determines canonicity Canonicity is not
determined by the antiquity of a book. (This view was held by J. G. Eichorn
(1780). He believed all books composed after Malachi’s time
were excluded from consideration. Thus, he believed all Jewish books
before Malachi were considered canonical.)
a. There are many
books that are older than some of the books of the Bible that are not
considered “canon.”
(1)Book
of Jasher (Joshua
(2)Book
of the Wars of the Lord (Numbers
(3)Books
of the Jewish Apocrypha
b. Many of the
canonical books were received into the canon shortly after they were written.
Moses’ writings were considered as authoritative while he was still living
(Deut. 31:24-26). Daniel accepted Jeremiah’s book as canonical (Dan. 9:2).
Peter considered Paul’s letters to be Scripture (2 Peter
2.
Hebrew language determines canonicity Hitzig (ca. 1850) believed the use
of the Hebrew language was the Jewish test for canonicity. However, books such
as Ecclesiasticus, Tobit, and 1 Maccabees were rejected even though they were
composed in Hebrew (see Gleason L. Archer, A
Survey of Old Testament Introduction, p. 78).
3.
Agreement with the Torah (Law) determines canonicity The Torah,
though, is not the standard of canonicity (though all canonical books will
agree with the Torah). Plus, Jewish fathers believed their Talmud and Midrash
agreed with the Torah, but they were never believed to be canonical.
4.
Religious value determines canonicity The very
fact that a book is canonical guarantees that it will have religious value. But
religious value does not necessarily make a book canonical. Many books with
religious value have been written that have not been accepted into the Bible.
5.
The Church determines canonicity (often associated with Roman Catholicism)
According to this view, the church determines the canonicity of the
books of the Bible. A book is canonical because the church declares it to be
so. (It must also be noted that since the Roman Catholic Church sees itself as
the determiner of the canon, it sees itself as having an authority to interpret
the books of the canon that others do not have.) The following points, however,
argue against this view:
a. God determines
whether a book is inspired and thus canonical —churches and councils do not.
Men do not determine which books are canonical. God does. God gives the books
of the Bible their divine authority. God’s people recognize this
authority but they do not determine its authority. As J. I. Packer has
said, “The Church no more gave us the New Testament canon than Sir Isaac Newton
gave us the force of gravity” (God Speaks to Man, p. 81).
b. Canon
determined immediately The books of the Bible
became canon the moment they were written. They did not need to wait for the
church’s sanction to become canon. They were canon the moment they were
written.
c. This view
confuses the two related but separate issues: 1) the canon’s nature
(determination) and 2) the canon’s discovery. James White in his
book, The Roman Catholic Controversy, rightly points out how some people
confuse the nature of the canon with how people come to know the contents of
the canon. He uses an example to illustrate this:
“I
have written eight books. The action of my writing those books creates the
canon of my works. If a friend of mine does not have accurate or full knowledge
of how many books I have written, does that mean there is no canon of my books?
No, of course not. In fact, if I was the only one who
knew how many books I had written, would that mean that the canon of my books
does not exist? The point is clear. The canon is one issue, and it comes from
God’s action of inspiring the Scriptures. Our knowledge of the canon is
another. Our knowledge can grow and mature, as it did at times in history. But the canon is not defined by us nor is it affected by our
knowledge or ignorance” (James R. White, The Roman CatholicControversy,
Minneapolis: Bethany House, 1996. p. 94).
Development
of the Old Testament Canon
I. The Canon of the Hebrew Bible
A. The twenty four
books recognized as canonical (See chart on page 11.) (Remember that these
twenty-four books correspond exactly to the books in our English Protestant
Bibles which numbers thirty-nine. The difference is in the enumeration of the
books.)
1.
The Law (5) Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy.
2.
The Prophets (8) Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel
and the Twelve.
3.
The Writings (11) Psalms, Proverbs, Job, Song of Solomon, Ruth,
Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, Esther, Daniel, Ezra-Nehemiah and Chronicles.
B. Origin of
three-section division The division of the Hebrew Bible into three sections
(not four or five, as in Greek, Latin, and English translations), known as the
Law, the Prophets, and the Writings, can be traced back to the second century
B. C. , when it is three times referred to in the prologue of Sirach, added by
the Greek translator of the book in about 130 B. C. (Roger T. Beckwith, “Canon
of the Hebrew Bible and the Old Testament,” in The Oxford Companion To The
Bible, pp. 100-101). Jesus referred to this division in Luke 24:44 when He
said “the Law of Moses and the Prophets and Psalms must be fulfilled.”
II. The growth
and formation of the OT canon
A. Progressive collection
of OT prophetic books (as recorded in the OT) From
the beginning, the inspired writings of the Old Testament were collected by the
Jews and revered as sacred and divinely authoritative.
1.
Moses put the Book of the Covenant, including the Ten Commandments (Ex. 20:1—
2.
The Book of Deuteronomy was immediately stored by the
3.
Joshua added his words and set them up in the sanctuary of the Lord (Josh.
24:26).
4.
Daniel refers to “the books” which contained the “law of Moses” and the
prophets (Dan. 9:2, 6, 11).
B. Later OT books
quote earlier OT books as authoritative
1.
The books of Moses, which were immediately recognized as canonical, are cited
throughout the Old Testament from Joshua (1:7) to Malachi (4:4).
2.
The events of Joshua are referred to in Judges (1:1, 20-21; 2:8). .
3. The books of Kings cites the life of David as told in the
books of Samuel (1 Kings
4.
Chronicles reviews
5.
The ninth chapter of Nehemiah reviews
6.
1 Kings 4:32 refers to Solomon’s proverbs and songs.
7.
Daniel cites Jeremiah 25 (Daniel 9:2).
8.
Jonah recites parts from the Psalms (Jonah 2).
9.
Ezekiel mentions both Job and Daniel (Ezekiel
NOTE: “Not every
book is cited by a later one, however; but enough are cited to demonstrate that
there was a growing collection of divinely authoritative books available to and
quoted by subsequent prophets.” (Norman L. Geisler and
William E. Nix, From God to Us, Chicago: Moody, 1974. p. 81).
C. Prophetic
continuity A prophetic chain links the books of
the Old Testament together.
1.
Moses wrote the Pentateuch
2.
Joshua, the author, of Joshua and perhaps the very end of Deuteronomy (which
records Moses’ death), took over for Moses in writing inspired Scripture.
3.
Samuel wrote of the history of David (1 Chron. 29:29).
4.
Nathan, Ahijah and Iddo wrote of the history of Solomon (2 Chron.
5.
Shemaiah and Iddo wrote of the history of Rehoboam (2 Chron.
6.
Iddo wrote of the history of Abijah (2 Chron.
7.
Jehu wrote about Jehoshaphat’s reign (2 Chron.
8.
Isaiah wrote of Hezekiah’s reign (2 Chron. 32:32).
9.
Unnamed prophets wrote about Manasseh’s reign (2 Chron. 33:19).
10.
Jeremiah wrote just prior to and during the Babylonian exile.
11.
Daniel and Ezekiel continued the prophetic ministry during the exile.
12.
Ezra, after the exile, returned from
NOTE: “Each prophet
from Moses through Nehemiah contributed to the growing collection which was
preserved by the official prophetic community stemming from Samuel.” (Geisler and Nix, How We Got Our Bible, p. 83).
III. Factors
contributing to the recognition of certain books as canonical
A.
Tradition The well-established tradition that many of the books came
from Moses or one of the other acknowledged prophets.
B.
Spiritual authority of the books themselves — as they were used in
public or private reading and in exposition.
C.
Recognition in the
D.
Conviction of leaders and people The opinions
of religious leaders and common convictions of the people about the books were
considered.
E.
Jesus and the Apostles “For Christians, there was the additional
consideration that Jesus himself and his apostles, in the pages of the New
Testament, often refer to the Jewish scriptures in general, and to many of the
individual books as having the authority of God” (Beckwith, p. 100).
IV. End of OT canonical
era Malachi, the last Old Testament book, was written around 430 B. C. The
Old Testament canon era, then, as determined by God, lasted from 1445 B. C. to
430 B. C. (See Time Period of the Bible chart on page 13.). Evidences
that the OT canon ceased at the time of Malachi include:
A.
Josephus According to the Jewish historian, Josephus (A. D. 37-95), the
Hebrew OT was complete and no more canonical writings were composed after the
reign of Artaxerxes (464—424 B. C.) (The time of Malachi.):
“From
Artaxerxes (the successor of Xerxes) until our time everything has been
recorded, but has not been deemed worthy of like credit with what preceded,
because the exact succession of the prophets ceased. . . . For though so long a
time has now passed, no one has dared to add anything to them, or to take
anything from them, or to alter anything in them” (Josephus, Against Apion I.
8.).
NOTE:
Rationalist higher critics claim that portions of Scripture such as Daniel,
Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon and many of the Psalms were compiled many years
after Malachi. According to Josephus, though, no additional material was ever
included in the canonical twenty-two books during the centuries between 425 B.
C. and A. D. 90. This presents a problem to those who challenge the traditional
authorship of these books (Archer, p. 73).
B.
The Talmud The Jewish Talmud states, “After the latter prophets Haggai,
Zechariah, and Malachi, the Holy Spirit departed from
C. New Testament The New Testament never quotes any OT
book as authoritative after the time of Malachi.
V. Recognition of
the Old Testament as completed canon When were all
the books of our Old Testament canon recognized as canonical?
A. New Testament “Good
evidence exists in the New Testament which shows that by the time of Jesus the
canon of the Old Covenant had been fixed” (Lightfoot, p. 106).
1.
Luke 24:44 The canonical writings, according to
Jesus, are composed of the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms. This threefold
division is equivalent to the three divisions of the Hebrew scriptures—the
Law, the Prophets and the Writings.
2.
Martyrs of the Old Testament Jesus once spoke of the time “from the
blood of Abel to the blood of Zachariah” (Luke
B. Josephus (A. D.
37-95) Josephus, in his Against Apion stated, “We have not tens of
thousands of books, discordant and conflicting, but only twenty-two containing
the record of all time, which have been justly believed to be divine.” (I. 8). (NOTE: “It is the opinion of most scholars that
Josephus in deriving his number of twenty-two books joined Ruth to Judges and
Lamentations to Jeremiah; and remembering that the Jews enumerated their books
differently. . . the twenty-two books mentioned by Josephus equal our present
thirty-nine books” (Lightfoot, p. 108)).
ALSO: “It is
unlikely that Josephus’s classification of the books was his own; he probably
reproduces a tradition with which he had been familiar for a long time, having
learned it either in the priestly circle into which he was born or among the
Pharisees with whose party he associated himself as a young man” (Bruce, The
Canon of Scripture, pp. 33-34).
C. Council of
Jamnia (A. D. 90) This council met to discuss the
canonicity of Proverbs,
Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon and Esther. Some have said that
this council determined the limits of the Old Testament canon, and thus, the
Old Testament canon was not finalized until A. D. 90. But as Bruce says, “The
upshot of the Jamnia debates was the firm acknowledgment of all these books as
Holy Scripture.” And after warning us not to “exaggerate the importance of the
Jamnia debate” he said, “The books which they decided to acknowledge as
canonical were already generally accepted, although questions had been raised
about them” (Bruce, The Books and the Parchments, pp. 97-98). Thus, the
Council of Jamnia did not include any knew books as canonical,
it simply reaffirmed those books already considered canonical.
D. Bishop Melito of
Sardis (A. D. 170) “Bishop Melito of
E. Early church fathers
1.
Third century A. D. In the third century A. D. ,
Origen confirmed the testimony of Josephus on the number of books in the Hebrew
canon. The books Origen listed correspond to the thirty-nine books of the
Protestant Old Testament.
2.
Fourth century A. D. “In the fourth century eight prominent Church fathers,
Athanasius of Alexandria, Cyril of Jerusalem, Epiphanius of Cyprus, Amphilocius
of Asia Minor, and Gregory Nazianzus of Cappadocia, Hilary of France, Rufinus
of Italy, and Jerome have left us lists all of which agree with the Hebrew
canon except for very minor variations. . .” (R. Laird
Harris, Inspiration and Canonicity of the Bible, Grand Rapids:
Zondervan, 1957, p. 189).
F. Conclusion The
“evidence implies that by the beginning of the Christian era the identity of
all the canonical books was well known and generally accepted” (Roger T.
Beckwith, “The Canon of the Old Testament,” in The Origin of the Bible,
p. 61.).
Old
Testament Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha
I. The issue Many books were
written during the Old Testament era. Which ones are canon and which ones are
not? How do we classify the many writings of the Old Testament era?
II. Old Testament
arrangement overview Not all books written during
the Old Testament era are Scripture. How are the different books classified?
They can be classified into four categories.
A.
Homologoumena — Books accepted by all
B.
Antilegomena — Books disputed by some
C.
Pseudepigrapha — Books rejected by all
D.
Apocrypha — Books accepted by some
III. The
Homologoumena (Books accepted by all)
A.
Nature “The Homologoumena are books which once
they were accepted into the canon were not subsequently questioned or disputed.
They were recognized not only by early generations but by
succeeding generations as well” (Geisler and Nix, p. 257).
B.
Number The Homologoumena comprise thirty-four
of the thirty-nine books in the Protestant Old Testament. The only books
that are not part of the Homologoumena in the Protestant Old Testament are Song
of Solomon, Ecclesiastes, Esther, Ezekiel and Proverbs.
IV. The
Antilegomena (Books disputed by some)
A.
Nature The Antilegomena are the several books
that were initially and ultimately considered canonical but were, at one time,
disputed by some of the Jewish community.
B.
Number Five canonical books of the Old Testament fall into this
category.
1. Song of Solomon The school of Shammai (first. cent. A.
D.), as well as some others, expressed doubt about the canonicity of the Song
of Solomon. The basic reason was that the book seemed sensual to some. The view
of Rabbi Akiba ben Joseph (c. A. D. 50—132), however, prevailed as is evidenced
in his statement, “God forbid!—No man in
2. Ecclesiastes One of the main objections to
Ecclesiastes was that it was skeptical and that its talk of life being “vanity”
was not fitting of Holy Scripture. This doubt about the book, however, is more
of an interpretive issue than one concerning inspiration.
The thrust of the book is that life lived apart from God is vanity. That is why
at the conclusion of the book, Solomon can say, “Fear God and keep His commandments. . . for God will bring every act to judgment”
(Eccl.
3. Esther Esther was doubted by some because the name of
God is absent from the book. People wondered how a book that did not mention
God could be inspired. God’s sovereignty and providence, however, is prevalent
throughout the book as He protected His people from extermination. Josephus and
the Mishnah cite Esther as Scripture.
4. Ezekiel “This book was questioned by some because of
its apparent anti-Mosaical teachings. The
5. Proverbs Some claimed that
Proverbs was not inspired because it supposedly contradicts itself (see
Proverbs 26:4-5). Many rabbis, though, claimed that when interpreted correctly,
Proverbs did not contradict itself. Support for Proverbs from
the Pharisaic, Essene and Christian community strongly vouch for its
canonicity.
V. The Pseudepigrapha
(Books rejected by all)
A. Nature The term pseudepigrapha means writings attributed to
fictitious authors. The Pseudepigrapha are books that are clearly spurious and
inauthentic. Many of these works claim to have been written by biblical authors,
but in reality were written between 200 B. C. and A.
D. 200. Most of these books are made up of dreams, visions and revelations in
the apocalyptic style of Ezekiel, Daniel and Zechariah (Geisler and Nix, pp.
262-63).
B. Number The actual number of Pseudepigrapha books is unknown.
According to Bruce Metzger, “The number of Jewish and Jewish-Christian
pseudepigraphic writings must once have been great. Jewish legend ascribes to
Enoch no fewer than 366 such works, and 2 Esdras (
1.
The Book of Jubilee (Legendary) A midrashic expansion of biblical
history from Creation to the First Passover.
2.
The Letter of Aristeas (Legendary) Supposedly an eyewitness account of
the translation of the Old Testament into Greek by seventy-two elders at the
instruction of Eleazar the high priest. Scholars say this book was written
between 200 B. C. and A. D. 33.
3.
The Book of Adam and Eve (Legendary)
4.
The Martyrdom of Isaiah (Legendary)
5.
1 Enoch (Apocalyptic) This book is cited in Jude 1:14-15 and is the
longest of the surviving Jewish pseudepigraphic writings. It is a composite
work, written by various authors in Aramaic during the last two centuries B. C.
“Professing to embody a series of revelations granted to Enoch, the seventh
from Adam, the anonymous authors discuss such matters as the origin of evil,
the angels and their destinies, the nature of Gehenna and Paradise, and various
astronomical and cosmological fancies” (Metzger, p. 171).
6.
The Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs (Apocalyptic) A
work based on Jacob’s words to his sons in Genesis 49.
7.
The Sibylline Oracle (Apocalyptic)
8.
The Assumption of Moses (Apocalyptic)
9.
2 Enoch, or The Book of the Secrets of Enoch
(Apocalyptic) “The book relates Enoch’s travels through the seven heavens
and the divine revelations that he received concerning creation, the history of
the world, hell, and paradise. Its composition is dated by
most scholars in the first half of the first Christian century” (Metzger, p.
173).
10.
2 Baruch, or The Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch
(Apocalyptic)
11.
3 Baruch, or The Greek Apocalypse of Baruch
(Apocalyptic)
12.
3 Maccabees (Didactical) This book has nothing
to do with the Maccabees but probably received its name since it claims to
describe events during the Maccabean period. The book contains impossibilities
and exaggerations and was written shortly before or during the beginning of the
Christian era.
13.
4 Maccabees (Didactical) This work is a Greek
philosophical treatise addressed to Jews on the supremacy of reason over the
passions (Metzger, p. 172). It was written between 150 B. C. and A. D. 70.
14.
Pirke Aboth (Didactical)
15.
The Story of Ahikar (Didactical)
16.
The Psalms of Solomon (Poetical) Eighteen in number, these psalms were
composed in the middle of the first century B. C. These psalms speak of the
coming age when God will send His Messiah, of the house of David, to purge
17.
Psalm 151 (Poetical)
18.
The Fragment of a Zadokite Work (Historical).
VI. The Apocrypha
(Books accepted by some)
A. Nature “The
word apocrypha has come into the English language from the Greek and
basically means hidden. It was used very early in the sense of secretive
or concealed, but was also used in reference to a book whose origin
was doubtful or unknown. Eventually the word took on the meaning of non-canonical,
and thus for centuries the non-canonical books have been known as apocryphal
books. Yet in Protestant circles ‘the apocrypha’ is the normal designation
for those extra books which are found in the Catholic Old Testament”
(Lightfoot, p. 115). To summarize, Apocrypha can refer to:
1. “Something hard
to understand” or “hidden”
2.
All noncanonical books A general designation
for all the books (including the pseudepigrapha) outside the Hebrew canon. The
use of the term “apocrypha” to mean “noncanonical” goes back to the fifth
century A. D. with Jerome (R. K. Harrison, “Old Testament and New Testament
Apocrypha,” in The Origin of the Bible, p. 84).
3.
The fifteen works found in the Alexandrian Canon and Septuagint that were
not part of the Hebrew (Palestinian)Canon “‘The
Apocrypha’ is the designation applied to a collection of fourteen or fifteen
books (or parts of books) not included in the Masoretic Hebrew Bible, which
were written during the last two centuries before Christ and the first century of
the Christian era” (Metzger, p. 161).
4.
Old Testament books and additions found in the Catholic Bible that are not
found in the Protestant Bible (Post-Reformation meaning).
B. Confusion over
the Apocrypha: Palestinian or Alexandrian Canon? The confusion over the
Apocrypha revolves around the two traditions of the Old Testament canon. The Palestinian
Canon contains the twenty-four books of the Hebrew Bible (thirty-nine in
English) while the Alexandrian Canon contains the additional fifteen
books we call the Apocrypha. (The Alexandrian Canon arose in
C. The
fifteen books of the Apocrypha (as noted by the Revised Standard Version
(1957)):
1.
The First Book of Esdras (150—100 B. C.) (not
included in Catholic Bible) This work begins with a description of the Passover
celebration under King Josiah and relates Jewish history down to the reading of
the Law in the time of Ezra. It reproduces with little change 2 Chronicles
35:1—36:21, the book of Ezra and Nehemiah 7:73—8:13a. It also includes the
story of three young men, in the court of Darius, who held a contest to
determine the strongest thing in the world. 1 Esdras has legendary accounts
which cannot be supported by Ezra, Nehemiah or 2 Chronicles.
2.
The Second Book of Esdras (c. A. D. 100) (not included in Catholic
Bible) Differs from the other fifteen books in that it is an apocalypse. It has
seven revelations (3:1—
3.
Tobit (c. 200—150 B. C.) The Book of Tobit describes the doings of
Tobit, a man from the tribe of Naphtali, who was exiled to Ninevah where he
zealously continued to observe the Mosaic Law. This book is known for its sound
moral teaching and promotion of Jewish piety. It is also known for its
mysticism and promotion of astrology and the teaching of Zoroastrianism (The
Bible Almanac, eds. Packer, Tenney and White, p. 501).
4.
Judith (c. 150 B. C.) Judith is a fictitious story of a Jewish woman who
delivers her people. It reflects the patriotic mood and religious devotion of
the Jews after the Maccabean rebellion.
5.
The Additions to the Book of Esther (140-130 B. C.) 107 verses added to
the book of Esther that were lacking in the original Hebrew form of the book.
6.
The Wisdom of Solomon (c. 30 B. C.) This work was composed in Greek by
an Alexandrian Jew who impersonated King Solomon.
7. Ecclesiasticus, or the Wisdom of Jesus the Son of
Sirach (c. 180 B. C.) This book is the longest and one of the
most highly esteemed of the apocryphal books. The author was a Jewish sage
named Joshua (Jesus, in Greek) who taught young men at an academy in
8.
Baruch (c. 150-50 B. C.) This book claims to have been written in
9.
The Letter of Jeremiah (c. 300-100 B. C.) This letter claims to be
written by the prophet Jeremiah at the time of the deportation to
10.
The Prayer of Azariah and the Song of the Three Young Men (2nd — 1st
century B. C.) This section is introduced to Daniel in the Catholic Bible after
Daniel 3:23 and supposedly gives more details of the fiery furnace incident.
11.
Susanna (Daniel 13 in the Catholic Bible) (2 nd — 1 st century B. C.) In
this account, Daniel comes to the rescue of the virtuous Susanna who was
wrongly accused of adultery.
12.
Bel and the Dragon (Daniel 14 in the Catholic Bible) (c. 100 B. C.) Bel
and the Dragon is made up of two stories. The first
(vv. 1-22) tells of a great statue of Bel (the Babylonian god Marduk).
Supposedly this statue of Bel would eat large quantities of food showing that
he was a living god who deserved worship. Daniel, though, proved it was the
priests of Bel who were eating the food. As a result, the king put the priests
to death and allowed Daniel to destroy Bel and its temple. In the second story
(vv. 23-42), Daniel, in defiance of the king, refuses to worship a great
dragon. Daniel, instead, asks permission to slay the dragon without “sword or
club” (v. 26). Given permission, Daniel feeds the dragon lumps of indigestible
pitch, fat and hair so that the dragon bursts open (v. 27).
13.
The Prayer of Manasseh (2 nd or 1 st century B. C.) (Not in Catholic
Bible) This work is a short penitential psalm written by someone who read in 2
Chronicles 33:11-19 that Manasseh, the wicked king of
14.
The First Book of the Maccabees (c. 110 B. C.) “The First Book of
Maccabees is a generally reliable historical account of the fortunes of Jewish
people between 175 and 134 B. C. , relating
particularly to their struggle with Antiochus IV Epiphanes and his successors.
. . . The name of the author, a patriotic Jew at
15.
The Second Book of the Maccabees (c. 110-70 B. C.) This book is not a
continuation of 1 Maccabees but an independent work partially covering the
period of 175-161 B. C. This book is not as historically reliable as 1
Maccabees.
D. Roman Catholic
inclusion of the Alexandrian list Of the fifteen
books mentioned in the Alexandrian list, twelve were accepted and incorporated
into the Roman Catholic Bible. Only 1 and 2 Esdras and the Prayer of Manasseh
were not included.
NOTE: Though twelve
of these works are included in the Catholic Douay Bible, only seven additional
books are listed in the table of contents. The reason is that Baruch and the
Letter of Jeremiah were combined into one book; the additions of Esther were
added to the book of Esther; the Prayer of Azariah was inserted between the
Hebrew Daniel 3:23 and 24; Susanna was placed at the end of the book of Daniel
(ch. 13); and Bel and the Dragon was attached to Daniel as chapter 14.
E. Reasons for
rejecting the Apocrypha as canon There are many reasons why the Apocrypha
should not be accepted as Holy Scripture:
1.
The Apocryphal books were never included or accepted into the Hebrew canon
Since the Old Testament is a collection of Jewish history and Law, it is very
significant that none of these books were accepted by any Jewish community in
or outside of
2.
Jesus, the Apostles and the New Testament writers never quote the books of
the Apocrypha as Scripture Jesus never refers to the Apocrypha. The
apostles in their preaching mention many Old Testament events but never refer
to any incidents or characters from the Apocrypha. The New Testament writers
quote extensively from all over the Old Testament but nowhere quote from the
Apocrypha as Scripture (NOTE: An allusion to 2 Maccabees 7 may occur in Hebrews
11:35.).
NOTE: What about
Jude’s reference to the book of Enoch (and possibly The Assumption of Moses) in
Jude 14-15? First, it should be noted that the Book of Enoch is classified as
part of the Pseudepigrapha (see p. 31). Thus it is rejected as canonical by
Jews, Protestants and Catholics. Enoch is “apocrypha” in the broad sense of
being an Old Testament era book that was not part of the Hebrew canon. But it
is not “Apocrypha” in the narrower sense of being one of the Old Testament
books included in the Alexandrian Canon or the Catholic Bible. It is correct,
then, to say that Jesus and the Apostles never quote from the Apocryphal books.
Second, Jude’s quotation of Enoch does not mean that Jude accepted Enoch as
inspired. As Edward Pentecost says, “If Jude quoted the apocryphal book, he was affirming only the truth of that prophecy and
not endorsing the book in its entirety.” (Edward C.
Pentecost, “Jude” in Bible Knowledge Commentary, vol. 2, p. 922).
It should be remembered that the New Testament also quotes from heathen poets
such as Aratus (Acts
3.
Most of the Old Testament Apocryphal books were written during Israel’s
post-biblical period Josephus and the Talmud declared that after the time
of Malachi (430 B. C.) no more inspired Scripture was being given (see point
IV. A and B, p. 26). All of the Apocryphal books, though,with
the possible exception of 2 Esdras, were written after 430 B. C.
4.
Many Jewish and Christian scholars rejected the Apocrypha as Scripture
“These books were not accepted as Scripture by such Jewish writers of the first
century as Philo and Josephus; the Jewish council at Jamnia (c. A. D. 90); and
by such eminent Christian writers as Origen and Jerome. About A. D. 400 the
great Christian scholar Jerome, whose translation of the Latin Vulgate remains
the basis of the official Roman Catholic Bible, strongly maintained that these
books were “apocryphal” and were not to be included in the canon of Scripture”
(Lightfoot, p. 120). “Although some individuals in the early church had a high
esteem for the Apocrypha, no council of the entire church during the first four
centuries favored them, and there were many individuals who vehemently opposed
them” (Geisler and Nix, p. 268).
5.
The Apocrypha includes many historical and geographical inaccuracies For
example, in the Book of Judith, Holofernes is
described as the general of “Nebuchadnezzar who ruled over the Assyrians in the
great city of
6.
Some of the Apocryphal books teach unbiblical or heretical doctrines
a. Prayers for the dead 2 Maccabees 12:45-46 promotes
prayers for the dead which conflicts with passages
such as Hebrews
b. Salvation by works Tobit 12:9 teaches salvation by
works —something the Bible strongly teaches against (see Romans 4-5; Gal.
NOTE: The two above
doctrines were heavily disputed during the Reformation era. As Geisler and Nix
say, “the addition of books that support salvation by works and prayers for the
dead at that time—only twenty-nine years after Luther posted his Ninety-five
Theses—is highly suspect” (Geisler and Nix, p. 269).
7.
Late date for acceptance “The Council of Trent (1545-63) was the first
official proclamation of the Roman Catholic Church on the Apocrypha, and it
came a millennium and a half after the books were written, in an obvious
polemical action against Protestantism” (Geisler and Nix, p. 269).
8.
There is no claim within the Apocrypha itself that it is the Word of God
Unlike many of the books of the Old Testament, the
Apocryphal books do not claim divine authority.
F. Value of the
Apocrypha Even though the Apocryphal books are clearly not part of the
Canon of Scripture, that does not mean that all of the books should be
dismissed as having no value. Some of the books give important historical and
cultural information. For example, 1 Maccabees gives valuable historical
information concerning the Jews during the era of 175-134 B. C., particularly
their struggles with Antiochus Epiphanes. .
Development
of the New Testament Canon
I. The Canon of the New Testament
A. The twenty-seven
books recognized as canonical (See chart on page 12.)
1.
Gospels (4) Matthew, Mark, Luke and John
2.
History (1) Acts
3.
Epistles (21)
a. Pauline (13) Romans, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians,
Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 Thessalonians, 2
Thessalonians, 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon
b. General (8) Hebrews, James, 1 Peter, 2 Peter, 1 John,
2 John, 3 John, Jude
4.
Prophecy (1) Revelation
B. Time period Unlike
the Old Testament that was written over a thousand year period, the entire New
Testament Canon was written within fifty years (See Time Period of the Bible
chart, p. 13).
C. Geographic
region Although the New Testament Canon was
written in a much shorter period of time than the Old Testament Canon, the
geographic range of the New Testament Canon is far wider. This greater distance
may explain why some books of the New Testament took longer to be universally
recognized as canon.
D. Early use of
“New Testament” “Tertullian, an outstanding Christian writer in the first
two decades of the third century, was one of the first to call the Christian
Scriptures the ‘New Testament. ’ That title had appeared earlier (c. 190) in a
composition against Montanism, the author of which is unknown” (Milton Fisher,
“The Canon of the New Testament,” in The Origin of the Bible, p. 66).
II. The process
of determining the New Testament Canon
A. Reasons for
collection The following are reasons for the
collection of the New Testament books in the early church era.
1.
Access to inspired books The early church was
interested in collecting those books that were inspired and thus, prophetic.
The works written by the apostles and prophets were considered valuable and
worthy of preservation.
2.
Guidelines for faith and practice The early church needed to know which
books should be read in the churches as the Word of God and which books could
be used to determine God’s will for doctrine and living.
3.
Defense against other religions and philosophies “As the Christian
movement was confronted with philosophical and religious trends current in the
Mediterranean world of its time, the need for an authentic expression and
preservation of the foundation of its belief became the basic motivation toward
the realization of the New Testament canon. This grew more
acute after the demise of the first generation of eyewitnesses” (Andrie B. Du
Toit, “Canon,” in The Oxford Companion to the Bible, p. 102).
4.
Heretical threats The early church needed to
know exactly which books were canonical because certain heretics were coming up
with their own canons. Around A. D. 140, the heretic—Marcion, had his own
“canon” that excluded most of the New Testament canonical writings we possess.
Marcion believed that only Luke’s Gospel and ten of Paul’s epistles were
inspired Scripture. Montanists and gnostic groups were also threats to the
early church.
5.
Persecutions Diocletians’s persecution of Christians from A. D. 303-306
included the confiscating and destroying of New Testament books. This
persecution motivated the church to sort through and settle on which books were
really Scripture and which books were worth suffering for.
B. Phases of New
Testament collection
1. 1st phase—Creation
and Spread of the New Testament books (A. D. 50-95) In this period the
various New Testament books were written and they also began to be copied and
disseminated throughout the churches.
a. New Testament
(1) 1 Thessalonians (A. D. 51) “I adjure you by the Lord
to have this letter read to all the brethren” (1 Thess.
(2) 1 Corinthians (A. D. 54-55) “. . . the things I write
to you are the Lord’s commandment” (1 Cor.
(3) Colossians (A. D. 61) Paul’s letter to the Colossians
was to be read in other churches (Col. 4:16).
(4) Revelation (A. D. 95) Blessings are promised to all
who read and heed the words of the prophecy given to the apostle John (Rev.
1:3). The Book of Revelation was also to be spread throughout the “seven
churches” (Rev. 1:11).
(5) 1 Timothy (A. D. 62) Paul, in 1
Timothy 5:18, quotes Deuteronomy 25:4 and Luke 10:7 as “Scripture.”
Thus, Paul saw Luke’s Gospel as Scripture and saw this New Testament Gospel on
equal par with the Old Testament Pentateuch.
(6) 2 Peter (A. D. 67) In 2 Peter 3:15-16, Peter refers
to Paul’s letters as part of the “the Scriptures.” Since Peter’s letter is a
general one it implies that widespread knowledge of Paul’s letters was known
before A. D. 70.
b.
Oral tradition “From the beginning, the proclamation about the death and
resurrection of Jesus, as well as the teaching of Jesus, circulated among the
Christian churches in oral form. Some of the tradition was down quite early
(ca. 35-65), but much of it remained in oral form for a considerable period of
time” (Lee M. McDonald, The Formation of the Christian Biblical Canon,
p. 139) The early Christians took oral tradition very
seriously. Eusebius quoted Papias as saying, “For I did not suppose that
information from books would help me so much as the word of a living and
surviving voice.”
c. Clement of
2. 2nd
phase—Growing recognition and collection into groups of the New Testament books
(A. D. 96-150) Within this period all of the
Gospels and all of Paul’s letters were known and recognized in the churches.
Some of the smaller letters took more time to be accepted as authoritative
because of questions about authentic authorship. But as questions about
authorship were answered, they, too, were universally accepted as Scripture. As
Fisher states, “This demonstrates that acceptance was not being imposed by the
actions of councils but was rather happening spontaneously through a normal
response on the part of those who had learned the facts about authorship”
(Fisher, p. 70).
a. Clement, Polycarp and Ignatius These three
church fathers of this era used the majority of the New Testament in a free
manner thus showing that most of the New Testament was accepted without
argument. In the writing of these three men only Mark, 2 and 3 John, Jude and 2
Peter are not clearly referred to (Fisher, p. 70). These men also made a clear
distinction between their own writings and the inspired apostolic writings.
(1)Polycarp (c. A. D. 110) Polycarp, a disciple of the
apostle John, quotes from Matthew, John, the first ten letters of Paul, 1 Peter
and 1 and 2 John.
(2)The Epistle of Ignatius (c. A. D. 115) This work corresponds in several places to the Gospels and
incorporates language from some of Paul’s letters.
b.
Papias (c. 70-163) Papias’s work, Interpretation of the Oracles of
the Lord (c. 120) includes material from the four Gospels.
c.
The Epistle of Barnabas (c. A. D. 130) This
work uses the first “it is written” statement in reference to a New Testament
book (Matthew
d.
Gospel of Truth (A. D. 140) This recently
discovered gnostic work treats many of the New Testament books as
authoritative. Citations come from the Gospels, Acts, Paul’s letters, Hebrews
and Revelation.
e.
The Marcion Canon (A. D. 140) The heretic,
Marcion, determined his own canon selecting only Luke (minus chapters 1 and 2
that he considered too Jewish) and ten of Paul’s epistles.
f. Justin Martyr (c. A. D. 140) Justin Martyr,
around the end of this period, stated that the apostolic writings were on a par
with those of the Old Testament prophets. He referred to all four Gospels, most
of Paul’s letters, 1 Peter and Revelation.
g.
Pseudo-Barnabas (A. D. 70-130) This work which
claims the name Barnabas, includes Matthew, Mark, Luke, Ephesians, 2 Timothy,
Titus, Hebrews, 1 Peter and 2 Peter.
h.
Summary of this period “By the middle of the second century every book
of the New Testament was referred to, as authoritative (canonical), by at least
one of these fathers” (Geisler and Nix, p. 288). (For more information on
specific quotes of all the New Testament books during this period see Geisler
and Nix, pp. 288-91).
3. 3rd phase—Compiling of the canon (A. D. 150-190) During this era,
the formal idea of a canon takes shape. Most books of the New Testament are
clearly recognized as canon—only a few need further scrutiny.
a.
Irenaeus (c. A. D. 170) This disciple of
Polycarp (who was discipled by John) is the first early church father to quote
almost every book of the New Testament. He quoted or considered authentic
twenty-three of the twenty-seven books—omitting only Philemon, James, 2 Peter
and 3 John.
b.
Tatian (c. A. D. 170) A pupil of Justin Martyr,
Tatian made a harmony of the four Gospels known as the Diatessaron.
Other gospels had surfaced by this time but he recognized only the four
traditional ones.
c.
The Muratorian Canon (c. A. D. 170) All the New Testament books except
Hebrews, James, 1 and 2 Peter were a part of the original copy of this
document.
d.
The Old Latin translation (c. A. D. 200) Translated before A. D. 200
this translation served as the Bible of the Western church. This Latin version
has all of the New Testament books except Hebrews, James, 1 and 2 Peter.
4. 4th
phase—Formation of the canon continues (Third century A. D.)
a.
Origen (A. D. 185-254) Origen wrote commentaries and homilies on most of
the New Testament books, emphasizing their inspiration.
b.
Dionysius of
5. 5th phase—Closing of the canon (fourth century)
a.
Eusebius (A. D. 270-340) This Bishop of Caesarea and church historian,
early in the fourth century, set forth his estimate of the canon in his work Church
History. He classified the status of the canon during this time.
(1) Universally accepted The
four Gospels, Acts, the Letters of Paul, Hebrews, 1 Peter, 1 John and
Revelation.
(2) Accepted by most (including Eusebius) but disputed by
some James, 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John and Jude.
(3) Rejected The Acts of Paul, the Didache and the
Shepherd of Hermas.
b.
Athanasius (A. D. 296-373) With his Festal
Letter for Easter in 367, Athanasius gave the first full and final
declaration on the extent of both Old and New Testament canons. The
twenty-seven books he listed as New Testament Canon are the same twenty-seven
books in our Bibles today. He also said, “Let no one add to these; let nothing
be taken away.”
c.
Council of Hippo (A. D. 393) This was probably the first church council
to lay down the limits of the canon of Scripture (Bruce, The Canon of
Scripture, p. 323). The limits of the canon as discussed here were approved
by Augustine and verified what was set down by Athanasius.
d.
Council of
e.
Jerome (early 5th century) In a letter dated
414, Jerome appears to accept the New Testament books as fixed. Jerome, personally thought the Letter of Barnabas should
have been included in the canon but is content to accept what had already come
to be the consensus. “Jerome confirms that by the beginning of the fifth
century, the canon of the New Testament had achieved a kind of solemn,
unshakable status; it could not be altered, even if one had different opinions”
(Carsten Peter Thiede, “A Testament is Born, in Christian History, issue
43, p. 29).
III. Criteria
used by early church in discovering the New Testament Canon
A. Inspiration As with the Old
Testament, canonicity of New Testament writings was based on inspiration. Only
those works that had been inspired by God were to be part of the canon.
B. Apostolic
authority Every New Testament book has apostolic authority since they were
written by apostles or close associates of the apostles or Jesus.
1.
Matthew — an apostle
2.
Mark — a close associate of the apostle Peter
3.
Luke — a close associate of Paul
4.
John — an apostle
5.
Paul — an apostle
6.
Peter — an apostle
7.
James — a half-brother to Jesus and leader of the church in
8.
Jude — a half-brother to Jesus.
9. The writer of
Hebrews — though unknown to us today, was associated with the ministries of
the apostles (Hebrews 2:3-4).
NOTE: Points A and B
are not synonymous. Not everything the apostles wrote was inspired. All
inspired writings were written by an apostle or associate of an apostle but not
all writings of the apostles were inspired.
C. Apostolic era “If a writing was the work of an apostle or someone closely
associated with an apostle, it must belong to the apostolic age. Writings of
later date, whatever their merit, could not be included among the apostolic or
canonical books” (Bruce, The Canon of Scripture, p. 259). This is one of
the reasons the highly regarded Shepherd of Hermas was not included.
D. Orthodoxy No works could be
canon that contradicted the apostolic faith—the faith set forth in the
undisputed books. For example, the Gospel of Peter was challenged by Bishop
Serapion because it hinted at the Docetic view that Christ did not really
suffer. The church also did not accept any works that were known to be
pseudonymous.
E.
New
Testament Antilegomena, Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha
I. New Testament
classification As with the Old Testament (see p. 29) the following fourfold
classification of the New Testament includes:
A.
Homologoumena (books accepted by all)
B.
Antilegomena (books disputed by some)
C.
Pseudepigrapha (books rejected by all)
D.
Apocrypha (books accepted by some)
II. The
Homologoumena (books accepted by all) Twenty of the twenty-seven books of
the New Testament had no serious questions about their inspiration. This
includes all of the books from Matthew through Philemon, plus 1 Peter and 1
John.
III. The Antilegomena
(books disputed by some) Seven books of the New Testament were disputed in
regard to their canonicity.
A.
Hebrews This book was questioned because of its anonymity. In the East,
where it was believed to be written by Paul, it was readily accepted. The
church in the West was more slow to accept it because
of questions about its authorship. Through the influence of Jerome and
Augustine in the fourth century, the West finally accepted Hebrews as
canonical.
B.
James James was slow to be accepted by the church because of its
statements on the relationship of faith and works which seemed to differ from
Paul’s epistles. Luther questioned its canonicity on this basis. Eusebius,
Jerome and Augustine and the rest of the church, however, finally recognized
its complementary nature to Paul’s letters and hence its canonical status.
C.
2 Peter 2 Peter was the most disputed book in the New Testament. Its
dissimilarity with 1 Peter and the claim that it was a second century work have
caused many to doubt its authenticity. These objections, though, were overcome
and the testimony of Origin, Eusebius, Jerome and Augustine on its authenticity
won out.
D.
2 and 3 John These books were questioned
because of their limited circulation and private nature. They simply did not
enjoy the wider circulation of the other books of the New Testament. The strong
similarities with 1 John, though, gave strong testimony that these letters were
written by John the apostle.
E.
Jude Jude’s authority was questioned mainly because of its references to
the pseudepigraphic work, Enoch. Quotation, however, of a secular source does
not make a book noncanonical.
F.
Revelation This book was clearly accepted in the early church but became
questioned later because of its teaching of a millennium. This, however, was an
interpretation matter, not an inspiration matter.
IV. The
Pseudepigrapha (books rejected by all) The first
few centuries of the Christian era saw the production of numerous fanciful and
heretical works that were neither genuine or valuable. “These
books indicate the heretical teaching of gnostic, docetic, and ascetic groups,
as well as the exaggerated fancy of religious lore in the early church”
(Geisler and Nix, p. 301). It has been estimated that there were about
three hundred books of this nature. The following are well-known
pseudepigraphic works:
A.
The Gospel of Thomas (early second century) This
gnostic gospel is a mixture of authentic sayings of Jesus and Gnostic teachings
which only the enlightened few are supposed to be able understand. In this
gospel Jesus fashioned twelve sparrows from clay and made them fly. He also
cursed a young boy who withered like a tree. Eusebius (c. 260-340) said that
this work should be “cast aside as absurd and impious” because its style and
content clearly show it not to be apostolic (“Books That Almost Made It,” in Christian
History, issue 43, p. 31).
B.
The Gospel of the Ebionites (second century) Made by a Jewish sect of
Christians who stressed the law of Moses, the Gospel of the Ebionites teaches
that Jesus was a mere man who God adopted at His baptism.
C.
The Gospel of Peter (second century) This
docetic work denied the humanity of Christ.
V. The Apocrypha (books
accepted by some) None of these works are in modern
versions of the Bible but they were sometimes quoted by the Fathers and
appeared in some Bible translations.
A.
Epistle of Pseudo-Barnabas (c. A. D. 70-130) Quoted as Scripture by
Origen and Clement of Alexandria, this work parallels Hebrews in style but is
allegorical and mystical in nature.
B.
Shepherd of Hermas (c. A. D. 115-140) This work
was the most popular of all the noncanonical books. It is a picturesque
allegory about a shepherd (Jesus) who gives moral guidance through visions and
mandates to a man named Hermas. It was considered Scripture by Irenaeus and
Clement of Alexandria (See “Books that Almost Made It,” p. 30).
C.
Didache (c. A. D. 100-120) This work was held
in high regard by the early church and gives the opinion of the early church of
the second century on the essential truths of Christianity.
D.
Apocalypse of Peter (c. A. D. 150) This
apocalypse gives picturesque descriptions of heaven and hell.
E.
The Acts of Paul (A. D. 170) This is the story
of the conversion and testimony of an Iconian lady, Thelca, based on Acts
14:1-7.
F.
The Gospel According to the Hebrews (A. D. 65-100)
G.
The Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians (c. A. D. 108).
Texts
and Manuscripts of the Old Testament
I. Hebrew
manuscripts throughout history
A. The Old
Testament Canon era (1450-400 B. C.) Old Testament books were copied by hand
for generations on highly perishable papyrus and animal skins. The survival of
the Old Testament Scriptures in spite of persecutions and exiles shows the
determination of the Jewish scribes to preserve the Old Testament books (Bruce
K. Waltke, “The Textual Criticism of the Old Testament,” in Expositor’s
Bible Commentary, vol. 1, p. 212). No copies of this era are extant today.
B. The Talmudic
era (c. 400 B. C. —A. D. 500) This era produced a
flood of manuscripts that were used in the synagogues and for private use. The
copies for synagogue use were made with extreme caution and were considered
“sacred.” By the time of the Maccabean revolt (168 B. C.) the Syrians had
destroyed most of the existing manuscripts of the Old Testament (Geisler and
Nix, p. 354).
C. The Masoretic
period (c. A. D. 500-1000) During this period,
various Jewish scholars arose dedicated to the preservation of the Old
Testament text. This group became known as the Massoretes because of their
acknowledged dependence on the authoritative traditions (Massorah) of the text.
Centered in Tiberias, this school began around A. D. 500 and continued on for
five centuries. Their contributions are many. In addition to adding vowel
points to the Hebrew text (all Hebrew letters are consonants),
they also sought ways and methods to eliminate copying mistakes (Lightfoot, p.
91).
II. Surviving
Hebrew manuscripts Until the Dead Sea Scrolls discoveries, the earliest
existing Hebrew manuscripts were dated around A. D. 1000.
A.
The
B.
The
C.
D.
NOTE:
Before 1947, Old Testament versions were based on these three partial and one
complete manuscript from around A. D. 1000.
F.
Others Many other manuscripts exist but the
above mentioned were the main witnesses to the original Old Testament text.
G.
Dead Sea Scrolls The Dead Sea Scrolls, discovered in 1948, are extremely
important in that they include Hebrew manuscripts of the Old Testament written
around 200-100 B. C. —more than a thousand years earlier than the previously
earliest manuscripts! The Dead Sea Scrolls include one complete book (Isaiah)
and thousands of fragments which, together, represent every Old Testament books
except Esther. W. F. Albright has called these scrolls, “The greatest
manuscript discovery of modern times.”
H.
Why don’t earlier copies of the Hebrew Bible exist? “One may wonder why
copies of the Hebrew Bible are late in comparison with the New Testament
materials and especially so when it is recalled that the Old Testament was
completed several centuries before the first New Testament book was written.
The answer is not difficult to find. The Jewish scribes looked upon their
copies of the Scriptures with an almost superstitious respect, which led them
to give a ceremonial burial to any copy which was old or became worn. Their
motive was to prevent the improper use of the material on which the sacred name
of God had been inscribed. But however noble their intentions, this ancient custom
has deprived us of the early Hebrew manuscripts which we might otherwise have,
and thus has lengthened the gap between the available copies of the text and
the Old Testament autographs” (Lightfoot, p. 90).
III. Other Old
Testament witnesses The most important witnesses
to the Old Testament are the Hebrew manuscripts. But other sources are helpful.
A.
Samaritan Pentateuch (c. 400 B. C.) This manuscript of the Hebrew text
covers the first five books of Moses.
B.
Septuagint (c. 250 B. C.) This Greek translation of the Old Testament
spans the entire Old Testament. It was quoted often by the apostles and New
Testament writers.
C.
Aramaic Targums Aramaic translations came in existence after the exile.
D.
Syriac Peshitta Begun in the middle of the first century A. D. the
Peshitta is in close agreement with the Massoretic text.
E.
Latin Vulgate (A. D. 390-405) Unlike the Old Latin version (A. D. 150)
that based its translation on the Greek Septuagint, the Vulgate, composed by Jerome,
was translated directly from the Hebrew.
F.
Biblical quotations from the Talmud (A. D. 200-500)
G.
Origen’s Hexapla (3 rd century A. D.).
IV. Reasons for
trusting our Old Testament If the oldest Hebrew
manuscripts (before consideration of the Dead Sea Scrolls) are dated around A.
D. 1000, how can we be sure they accurately reflect what the original writers
of Scripture wrote centuries earlier?
A. Meticulous care
of Jewish Scribes The lack of manuscript evidence
could be a cause for alarm if it were not for the extreme care of the Jewish
scribes who made copies of the Old Testament. The Jewish scribes
conscientiously sought perfection in the transcription of the text. According
to the Talmud, rigid regulations were laid down for making copies of Old Testament
texts:
1.
The copyist was required to sit in full Jewish dress after a complete bathing.
2.
Only a certain kind of ink could be used.
3.
Rules governed the spacing of words.
4.
No word or letter could be written from memory.
5.
Lines and letters were methodically counted.
6.
If a manuscript was found to have even one error it was destroyed. (This helps
explain why only a few manuscripts survived.)
NOTE: “This strict
set of regulations which governed the early Jewish scribes is a chief factor which
guarantees the accurate transmission of the Old Testament text” (Lightfoot, pp.
97-98).
B. The work of the
Massoretes (A. D. 500-1000) The Massoretes took meticulous precautions to
avoid copying mistakes and detect scribal errors. As Lightfoot says, “The
Massoretes were textual critics of the first rank. They examined and appraised carefully all the textual materials available to
them, and on the basis of their abundant evidence set down in writing the form
of the text which had been received at least several centuries before their
time. Indeed, their labors were so productive and their contributions so large
that our Hebrew text today is often referred to as ‘the Massoretic text’”
(Lightfoot, p. 92).
C. Confirmation of
the Dead Sea Scrolls “With the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, scholars
have Hebrew manuscripts one thousand years earlier than the great Masoretic
Text manuscripts, enabling them to check on the fidelity of the Hebrew text.
The result of comparative studies reveals that there is a word-for-word
identity in more than 95 percent of the cases, and the 5 percent variation
consists mostly of slips of the pen and spelling” (Geisler and Nix, p. 382). As
F. F. Bruce says, “The new evidence confirms what we had already good reason to
believe—that the Jewish scribes of the early Christian centuries copied and
recopied the text of the Hebrew Bible with the utmost fidelity” (F. F. Bruce, Second
Thoughts on the Dead Sea Scrolls, pp. 61-62).
Texts
and Manuscripts of the New Testament
I. Introduction
to New Testament manuscripts
A. No original
autographs The New Testament books were written in the latter half of the
first century A. D. Soon after the books were written, the original autographs
perished. But God has preserved His Word through copies of the New Testament
called manuscripts—all written in Greek.
B. Comparison
between Old Testament and New Testament manuscript evidence
The integrity and accuracy of the Old Testament text is largely the result
of the extreme care taken by the rabbinical scholars in the transmission
process. Though very few Old Testament manuscripts are known, we know they are
of very high quality. The reliability of the New Testament text, however, rests
on a different basis—the vast multitude of existing manuscripts.
C. Number of
manuscripts The number of New Testament
manuscripts written in Greek between the second and fifteenth centuries that we
currently possess is 5,366. Because of the vast number of manuscripts, the New
Testament is undoubtedly the best-attested book from the ancient world.
D. Grouping of
manuscripts Most manuscripts do not contain the
entire New Testament because a hand-produced copy of the whole New Testament
was too bulky for practical use. Four categories were generally followed when
making copies of the New Testament 1) the four Gospels, 2) Acts and the General
epistles, 3) Pauline epistles and 4) Revelation.
E. Types of
manuscripts New Testament manuscripts are made up of three major types.
1.
Papyrus Many of the earliest witnesses to the New
Testament were written on papyrus material (see page 15). This was the material
that the New Testament was written on.
2.
Uncials The manuscripts of this group are the earliest and most
important. Uncial manuscripts were written with all capital letters and no
spaces between letters. 362 uncial manuscripts are in existence.
3.
Minuscule (cursives) The minuscule script was a
development of the cursive hand and differs from uncials by its use of smaller
forms of letters. The small letters could be written more quickly and required
less space. The minuscules did not make their debut until the ninth century and
thus are of less value because of their dates” (Lightfoot, pp. 36, 49).
II. Important New
Testament manuscripts
A. Uncial manuscripts
on Papyrus (2nd — 3 rd centuries) There are eighty-eight papyri manuscripts of
portions of the New Testament. These very early and important witnesses of the
New Testament include most of the New Testament. The following are the more significant
papyri witnesses.
1.
P52 (c. A. D. 110-125) “According to most scholars, the closest copy to an
autograph is a papyrus manuscript designated P52, dated around 110-125,
containing a few verses of John 18 (31-34, 37-38). This fragment, only twenty
to thirty years removed from the autograph, was part of one of the earliest
copies of John’s Gospel.” (Philip W. Comfort, “Texts and Manuscripts of the New
Testament,” in The Origin of the Bible, p. 179) It should also be noted
that P52 confirms the traditional belief that the Gospel of John was written
before the end of the first century A. D.
2.
P87 (c. 125) Contains a few verses of Philemon.
3.
P77 (c. 150) Contains a few verses of Matthew
23.
4.
P32 (c. 175) Has portions of Titus 1 and 2.
5.
P45 (late second century) Contains portions of all four Gospels and
Acts.
6.
P46 (c. 200) Has almost all of Paul’s epistles
and Hebrews;
7.
P47 (third century) Contains Revelation 9-17.
8.
P66 (c. 175) One of the earliest witnesses to
the New Testament is this almost complete copy of the Gospel of John.
9.
P72 (c. third century) Earliest copy including
Jude and 1 and 2 Peter.
10.
P75 (c. 175-225) Contains large portions of
Luke 3 through John 15.
B. Uncial
manuscripts on vellum and parchment (4th — 9th centuries) The most important manuscripts of the New Testament are the
great uncial codices that date from the fourth and following centuries.
1. Codex Vaticanus (B) (c. 325-350) This fourth century manuscript is widely acknowledged as
being the most important witness on the New Testament text. This manuscript has
been located in the Vatican Library in
2.
Codex Sinaiticus (Aleph) (c. 340) Codex Sinaiticus is of
near-equal value to Codex Vaticanus and is also an important witness to the New
Testament text because of its age, accuracy and completeness. It is known as
Codex Sinaiticus because it was discovered by the great textual critic,
Constantine Tischendorf at St. Catharine’s Monastery on
NOTE:
Vaticanus and Sinaiticus rank as the two most important manuscript witnesses to
the New Testament.
3. Codex Alexandrinus (A) (c. 450) This Alexandrian
manuscript, composed by scribes in
4. Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus (C) (c. 345) This document is a palimpset —a manuscript in which the
original writing has been erased and written over. Through chemicals and hard
work, the original writing underneath can be read. It has material from every
book of the New Testament except 2 Thessalonians and 2 John. Its age makes it a
very valuable witness. It was not until 1845 that a full edition of this
manuscript was published.
5. Codex Bezae (D) (c. 450 or 550) This
is the earliest known biblical copy in two languages, Greek and Latin. It
contains the Gospels and Acts with a small section of 3 John in Latin.
NOTE:
Of these five very important manuscripts only one, Codex Bezae was available to
the translators of the 1611 King James Version. Revised versions, today, are
based on these earlier and better manuscripts.
C. Minuscule
Manuscripts (9th — 15th centuries) Because of their late dates, minuscule
manuscripts do not possess the high quality of the earlier uncials. These
minuscule manuscripts, though, make up the majority of New Testament
manuscripts. There are 2,795 manuscripts and 1,964 lectionaries in minuscule
script (Compare with 362 manuscripts and 245 lectionaries in uncial script.).
III. Other New
Testament witnesses
A. Lectionaries A lectionary is a manuscript arranged in sections for the
purpose of being read in a public worship service. Most lectionaries are of the
Gospels but some include Acts and the Epistles. 2,200 lectionaries have been
discovered.
B. Versions As
the New Testament message spread, it was translated into other languages.
1.
The Old Syriac This translation of the New Testament was in circulation
in
2.
The Old Latin The Old Latin version was translated around A. D. 150 and
served as the Bible of the Western church. “Some of the Old Latin copies are as
old as the celebrated
3.
The Peshitta This Syriac translation has been in use since the fifth
century.
4.
The Latin Vulgate This work, begun by Jerome in A. D. 384, became the
standard Bible for more than a thousand years and was made the official Bible
of the Roman Catholic Church.
C. Early Christian
writers Many volumes of literature exist from the
era of the early church fathers. Many of their writings are filled with
quotations from the New Testament. These men possessed copies of the New
Testament which are older than our manuscripts today. As Bruce Metzger says,
“so extensive are these citations that if all other sources for our knowledge
of the text of the New Testament were destroyed, they would be sufficient alone
in reconstructing practically the entire New Testament” (Lightfoot, p. 56).
Textual
Criticism
I. Introduction to textual criticism (applies to both Old
and New Testaments)
A. Defined “Textual
criticism (which in the past was sometimes referred to as lower criticism) is
the attempt to determine the original text of the biblical books” (Millard
Erickson, Christian Theology, p. 83). It is concerned with finding out
what the original texts (autographs) of the Bible actually said.
1.
Criticism not used negatively “Because at times the word ‘criticism’ can
mean ‘finding fault with,’ it is important to note that when it is used here it
means ‘evaluation,’ the analysis of something with the intent of determining
its value” (Bruce M. Metzger, The Oxford Companion to the Bible, p.
739).
2.
Not to be confused with “Higher Criticism” Higher criticism involves
judgments on the genuineness of the biblical texts (i. e. date, unity and
authorship). The findings of higher criticism are often subjective and in most
cases are not based on a high view of the Word of God.
B. Necessity of
textual criticism Since the original manuscripts
of the Bible are not extant how can we know that the books in the Bible
accurately reflect what the original authors wrote? This process of determining
what the original authors wrote is the task of textual criticism. The textual
critic seeks to weed out the bad readings from the original text.
C. Sources of
textual criticism There are three classes of
sources scholars use in determining what the original writers of Scripture
said.
1.
Hebrew and Greek manuscripts
2.
Ancient translations into other languages
3.
Quotations made by rabbis and church fathers
II. Textual
variations There are two general mistakes made in
the copying process:
A. Unintentional
errors “Mistakes of the hand, eye, and ear are of frequent occurrence in
the manuscripts, but usually pose no problem because they are easy to pick out.
Often a scribe with a copy before him mistakes one word for another, and so by
chance copies down the wrong word. . . . Errors of omission and addition are
common in all the manuscripts. Words sometimes are omitted by a copyist for no
apparent reason, simply an unintentional omission. More
often, however, omissions are due to the similar appearance of words at a
corresponding point several lines above or below the manuscript” (Lightfoot, p.
61).
1.
Examples A scribe may write the word “Jesus”
twice or accidentally skip a line when copying. A scribe may make a mistake
because of dim lighting or because he tried to write from memory.
2.
HOWEVER Because of the numerous manuscripts available, most textual variations are
easily spotted and accounted for. The textual critic, by comparison of many
manuscripts, can detect and explain these errors without hesitation. It should
also be noted that though unintentional alterations in the text are many, the
vast majority of them are of little consequence.
B. Intentional
errors A more serious problem happens when a
well-meaning scribe tries to correct what he perceives to be an error.
1.
Ex. Luke 11:2-4 the account of the Lord’s prayer
in Luke 11:2-4 was made to agree with the more popular version in Matthew
6:9-13.
2.
John
3.
1 John 5:7 This clear statement on the Trinity
in the Authorized Version (King James) was clearly added to bolster the
biblical view of the Trinity.
4.
Mark 16:9-20 Early manuscript evidence and
internal evidence within the Book of Mark strongly indicate that Mark 16:9-20
was not a part of Mark’s original Gospel and that the Gospel really ends at
verse 8. Because this ending at verse 8 seems so abrupt, early scribes probably
felt the necessity to add material about the resurrection to the end of Mark’s
Gospel.
5.
John
C. How significant
are the textual variations? When all the variants of all the manuscripts
are accounted for, the number of variants to the New Testament text is 200,000.
How sure can we be that our biblical text has not been corrupted? The answer is
that the vast majority of variants are very minor and affect, in only a very
few cases, the meaning of a text. None of the variants have an impact on any
major doctrine of Scripture.
1.
Westcott and Hort These excellent textual
critics believed that only one-sixtieth of the variants in the New Testament
rise above the level of “trivialities,” or could be called “substantial
variations.” Even before the recent manuscript findings this would amount to a
text that is 98.33 percent pure.
2.
Ezra Abbott According to his estimates the text is 99.75 percent pure.
3.
A. T. Robertson He believed that only a “thousandth part of the entire
text” was of any real concern. That would make the New Testament 99. 9 percent
free from real concern for the textual critic (Geisler and Nix, p. 474).
4.
Sir Frederic Kenyon “The Christian can take the whole Bible in his hand
and say without fear or hesitation that he holds in it the true word of God,
handed down without essential loss from generation to generation throughout the
centuries.”
History
of the English Bible
I. Introduction
to translation
A. Defined “Translation is the process of beginning with
something (written or oral) in one language (the source of language) and
expressing it in another language (the receptor language)” (Raymond Elliott,
“Bible Translation,” in The Origin of the Bible, p. 233). In regard to
the Bible it involves taking the Bible message, written originally in Hebrew,
Aramaic and Greek, and putting it into other languages.
B. Variety of
translations “The Bible—in whole or in part—has been translated into
everything from Afrikaans to Zulu and more than 1,900 languages in between. By
1989, according to the American Bible Society, there were complete Bible
translations in 314 languages (including all of the world’s major tongues), New
Testament translations in 715, and translations of at least one book of the
Bible in 890. The most widely translated book is the Gospel of Mark, available
in 800 different languages and dialects. . . . Every year
between 16 and 20 new languages or dialects receive their own Bible
translations” (Readers Digest ABC’s of the Bible, p. 300).
II. Introduction
to the English Bible
A. "English
Bible” defined “The Bible played a central part in English Christianity from
its earliest days. But when we speak of the English Bible, we are not
merely thinking of the Bible in
B. Precursor to the
Bible in English “The Bible which was known and used in the earliest
III. The history
of the English Bible to 1611
A. The beginning of
the Bible in English (Partial versions) (c. 690—1320)
1.
Caedmon (d. c. 680) “An unlearned laborer by the name of Caedmon is
reported to have arranged in verse form stories of the Bible on subjects
ranging from the creation to the work of the apostles. Although
these verses were not really translations, they mark the first known attempt to
put the Bible accounts in the native Anglo-Saxon” (Lightfoot, p. 125).
2.
Aldhelm (640-709) Aldhelm made the first straightforward translation of
portions of the Bible into English. He translated the Psalms into Old English
shortly after A. D. 700 (Geisler and Nix, p. 544).
3.
Egbert (c. 705) Egbert of Northumbria became the first to translate the
first three gospels into English.
4.
The Venerable Bede (674-735) Bede, one of the greatest scholars in
5.
Alfred the Great (849-901) Alfred translated part of Exodus and Acts
into English.
6.
Aldred (c. 950) “A priest named Aldred left his legacy by writing a
word-for-word translation of the Latin between the lines of the Latin
manuscript of the bishop of Lindisfarne—thus producing an interlinear
translation” (Jonathan Underwood, A History of the English Bible, p.
68). This manuscript of Aldred is our earliest evidence of an English
translation of the New Testament.
7.
Aelfric (c. 950-1020) Aelfric translated from the Latin the first seven
books of the Old Testament.
8.
William of Shoreham and Richard Rolle (1300s) Both
these men translated the Psalms into English. Rolle’s edition also contained a
verse-by-verse commentary.
B. The complete
English Bible (Wycliffe—King James) (1382-1611)
1. John Wycliffe (c. 1320-84) John Wycliffe, the ”Morning Star of the Reformation,” was responsible for
the first full translation of the Bible into English. Clashing often with the
Pope and
NOTE:
Wycliffe’s version came years before the invention of the printing press.
Though done by hand, enough copies were made to survive the attempts to have
all of Wycliffe’s copies burned. Today 170 copies of Wycliffe’s version exist.
2. Changing times (1396-early 1500's) This
time period brought many revolutionary changes to
a. The Renaissance brought about the rise of nationalism,
exploration, discovery and literary revival
b. Johannes Gutenberg (1396-1468) invented the printing
press. The Gutenberg Bible was published in 1455.
c. Cheap paper was introduced into
d. In 1458 Greek began to be studied publicly at the
e. The first Greek grammar appeared in 1476. The first Greek
lexicon appeared in 1492.
f. The first Hebrew Bible was published in 1488 followed by the
first Hebrew grammar (1503) and lexicon (1506).
g. William Caxton (1422-91) brought the new printing method
to
h. The Protestant Reformation brought attention back to the
authority and sufficiency of the Bible.
i. Erasmus’s Greek New Testament was published in 1516.
3. William Tyndale (c. 1492-1536) William Tyndale was a brilliant
scholar who studied at
4.
Miles Coverdale (1488-1569) Miles Coverdale, a friend and associate of
Tyndale, was responsible for the publication of the first complete English
Bible in printed form in 1535. Coverdale used the translations of Tyndale (the
New Testament and Genesis—2 Chronicles) and translated the rest himself.
Coverdale, however, in his translations, used the Latin rather than the Hebrew.
Within one year of Tyndale’s death, complete English Bibles were available to
the people.
Thomas Matthew (c. 1500-1555) John Rogers, under the name Thomas
Matthew, published his own version in 1537 by combining the Old Testament works
of Tyndale and Coverdale along with the 1535 revision of Tyndale’s New
Testament. This translation also included two-thousand marginal notes. Since he
was an associate of the declared heretic, Tyndale,
5.
Richard Taverner (1505-1575) Taverner’s Bible was a 1539 revision of the
Matthew’s Bible. He gave a number of improved renderings of the New Testament.
6.
The Great Bible (1539) In 1539 another revision
of Matthew’s Bible was published—the Great Bible. “Edited by Coverdale, it was
the first of the English Bibles authorized to be read in the churches. It was
the wish of Henry VIII that it go abroad among the people, and in keeping with
the king’s wish a copy of the Great Bible was placed in every church in the
land. People flocked eagerly to the churches to see the Bibles which had been
set up for reading, and at times the preachers complained because the people
chose rather to read the Bible than listen to their sermons. Tyndale’s dying
prayer at last had been answered: the Lord had opened the king of
7.
The Geneva Bible (1560) With the Roman Catholic, “Bloody Mary Tudor,” on the
throne in England(1553) some Protestants fled to Geneva where they produced a
new translation—the Geneva Bible. The main force behind the Geneva Bible was
William Whittingham—a colleague of John Calvin. The Geneva Bible was an
improvement to the previous English translations. Its translators were scholars
who were able to make revisions from the original languages. It was also the
first translation to use chapter and verse arrangement, print each verse as a
paragraph and put words not found in the original texts in italics. The Geneva
Bible was also small and moderately priced. Its commentary notes presented the
views of John Calvin and the Reformation. It was very popular among lay people
but was not acceptable to the Church of England because of its Calvinistic
bias. A 1595 edition added notes that the beast coming out of the pit in
Revelation 11:7 is “the pope which hath his power out of hell and cometh
thence” (Lane, p. 9). The Geneva Bible was the Bible of Shakespeare and the
Pilgrims of America.
8.
The Bishop’s Bible (1568) When Elizabeth came to
9.
The Rheims-Douai Version (1609-10) “The zeal of Protestant revisions and
editions eventually forced into being a Roman Catholic translation of the
Bible. An edition of the New Testament was produced in 1582 at the English
NOTE:
What commonly passes as the Douai-Rheims (or more simply the
10.
King James (“Authorized”) Version (1611) From the time of Tyndale until
1611, seven major English translations were made—the Coverdale Bible, the
Matthew Bible, the Taverner Bible, the Great Bible, the Geneva Bible, the
Bishop’s Bible and the Rheims-Douai Bible. The 1611 King James Version, though,
would surpass all these versions and become the standard
English Bible for the next 350 years.
a. History of the KJV In 1604, King James I summoned a
meeting of representatives from diverse religious groups to discuss the issue
of religious toleration. At this meeting, known as the Hampton Court
Conference, Dr. John Reynolds of
b. Reasons for success of the KJV
(1) Greek and Hebrew scholarship made great strides from the
time of Tyndale’s translation.
(2) The KJV was made at a time when literary scholarship was
flourishing.
(3) The KJV translators were able to learn from the other
translations before the KJV.
(4) The KJV was not the work of one man or party.
c. Revisions of the KJV The KJV has
been through many editions and has been modernized considerably since 1611. In
1613 a new edition was issued which contained more than four hundred variations
from the original printing. Other revisions took place in 1615, 1629, 1638 and
1762. The 1762 revision is what most people now know as the King James Version (The
Bible Almanac, p. 78).
d. Popularity of the KJV “The King James Version remains
the most popular English Bible ever. Its classic language though difficult for some
to understand today, has been communicating the will of God for over three and
a half centuries. Its majestic style has been quoted, paraphrased, and imitated
like no other. Its influence in Christian hymns is unmistakable. Although
recent textual developments have shown some weaknesses, the King James Version
will likely remain the most popular English translation for many years to come”
(Underwood, p. 78).
IV. Weaknesses of
the King James Version and the need for more recent translations “The King
James Version of the Bible was based on the best Greek and Hebrew texts
available. This contributed immeasurably to its worth, for most English Bibles
had been translated from a Latin translation. Thus, the King James took English
readers a full step closer to the original message. But that was over 350 years
ago. Archeology has contributed much to Biblical
studies since that time. And textual criticism has made some significant
advances since then as well” (Underwood, p. 79).
A.
Balanced view of weaknesses When discussing the
weaknesses of the King James Version a word of caution is necessary. The
differences between the King James Version and more recent versions are very
minor. The King James Version is an excellent version that clearly reveals the
will and purposes of God.
B.
Weaknesses of the KJV The following weaknesses,
though, do show a need for more revised editions of the Bible.
1. The KJV is founded on an inferior textual base The manuscript evidence available to the KJV translators was
not as good as the manuscript evidence we have today. “This is especially true
with reference to the Greek text for the New Testament. The
text underlying the King James [the Textus Receptus] was essentially a medieval
text embodying a number of scribal mistakes that had accumulated through the
years” (Lightfoot, pp. 137-38).
a. History of the Textus Receptus In 1516, Desiderius
Erasmus published a Greek text which came to be known as the Textus Receptus.
The Textus Receptus served as the basic guide for the translators of the King
James Version. Being an excellent scholar, Erasmus printed a fine text, but he
was only able to gather half a dozen Greek manuscripts for his initial work.
Plus, the Greek manuscripts used in the Textus Receptus were from the inferior
text-type known as “Byzantine.” The Byzantine text-type represents a revision
of the New Testament text made in the fourth century A. D. and later. It is
also farther removed from the text of the first century than certain earlier
text-types which have been distinguished in more recent times (Alexandrian,
Western and Caesarean) (Bruce, History of the English Bible, p. 127).
b. 1 John 5:7-8 and the Textus Receptus 1 John 5:7-8 in
the KJV reads, “For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the
Word, and the Holy Ghost; and these three are one.” This passage, which is
found in the Latin Vulgate, was not in any of the Greek manuscripts that
Erasmus used when he first was putting the Textus Receptus together. Erasmus
did not want this passage in his text but, under pressure, he consented that if
one Greek manuscript could be found including this passage he would include it.
A highly suspect manuscript from the house of Henry Standish, an enemy of
Erasmus, was found including this passage and thus, Erasmus included this
passage in his text. Since the KJV translators used the Textus Receptus, this
erroneous text became a part of the KJV.
NOTE: The revisers
of the 1611 KJV used the best textual evidence they had available to them.
Thus, they are not at fault here. They simply did not have at their disposal
the many manuscripts which are now known. “It is important to remember that
four of the most valuable witnesses on the New Testament text (the
2.
The KJV has archaic words that are either obscure or misleading today
a. Obscure “peradventure,” “aforetime,” “howbeit,”
“thine,” and “thou.”
b. Misleading “In the seventeenth century ‘allege’ was
used for ‘prove,’ ‘communicate’ for ‘share,’ ‘suffer’ for allow,’ ‘allow’ for
approve,’ ‘let’ for ‘hinder,’ ‘prevent’ for ‘precede,’ ‘conversation’ for
‘conduct,’ and so forth. These expressions are grossly
misleading since they are still in use today but carry different associations”
(Lightfoot, p. 138).
3.
Errors of translation The KJV sometimes fails to preserve distinctions
in the Greek text. For example, the KJV gives the rendering of “hell” for the
distinct Greek terms “hades” and “gehenna.”
C. Recent English
translations With the discovery of earlier and better manuscript evidence the
time had come for updated versions of the English Bible.
1. The English
Revised Version (1885) In February of 1870 a motion to consider a revision
of the King James was passed by the Convocation of the Providence of Canterbury.
As a result, sixty-five British scholars, along with American scholars who
joined them in 1872, made significant changes from the KJV. The Old Testament
scholars corrected mistranslations of Hebrew words. The New Testament scholars
made thousands of changes based on better textual evidence. The New Testament
was not based on the Textus Receptus but rather on the excellent textual work
of men like Westcott and Hort, Tischendorf and Tregelles. On
2. The American
Standard Version (1901) Some of the American
scholars who worked on the English Revised Version banded together to produce
their own revision of the KJV that was more suited to people in the
3. The Revised
Standard Version (1952) In 1929, the International
Council of Religious Education began work on a revision of the ASV. Two reasons
for the revision included 1) the desire to correct the stiffness and unnatural
reading of the ASV, and 2) the desire to include the findings of the very
important manuscript discoveries such as the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Chester
Beatty Papyri. Work on the RSV began in the summer of 1943 and the complete
Bible was published on
4. The New
English Bible (1961) “In October 1946, representatives of the major Protestant
churches in Great Britain met at Westminster Abbey to commission a new
translation that would be better suited to British readers. The New Testament
portion of this New English Bible was released in 1961, exactly 350 years after
the publication of the KJV. The complete
5. The Good News
Bible (1966) This translation was heavily
influenced by the theory of dynamic equivalence. Its readability made it very
popular as evidence by the 35 million copies sold within the first six years of
publication.
6. The Living
Bible (1971) Using the American Standard Version as his working text,
Kenneth Taylor rephrased the Bible into modern speech with the intent that even
a child could understand its message. The Living Bible is a paraphrase and not
a translation.
7. The New
American Standard Bible (1971) “In the New American Standard Bible,
evangelical scholars have attempted to update and clarify the ASV. The NASB’s
New Testament translators mainly used Nestle’s improved text based on Westcott
and Hort; but they also referred to some of the papyrus manuscripts and recent
studies of the New Testament text. Generally, the Old
Testament committee used Kittel’s Hebrew text” (The Bible Almanac, p.
79). The NASB capitalizes personal pronouns that refer to deity. The
NASB has been praised for being accurate and literal and criticized for not
being contemporary.
8. The New
International Version (1979) The New International Version is a completely
new translation of the original languages done by an international group of
more than one-hundred scholars. The NIV translators sought to make a version
that was midway between a literal rendering (such as the NASB) and a free
paraphrase (such as the Living Bible). Their goal was to convey in modern
English the thought of the original writers. It is very easy to read but like
other versions based on the principle of “dynamic equivalence,” it at times
resembles a commentary more than a translation.
9. The New King
James Version (1982) “In 1979, Thomas Nelson Publishers issued a new
edition of the KJV New Testament. This edition was based on the 1894 edition of
the Textus Receptus. While it preserved the integrity of the text, it
eliminated many archaic expressions that made the old KJV difficult to read.
The publisher assembled 119 scholars to work on this new publication. Dr.
Arthur Farstad coordinated the work on the New Testament section. ‘We chose to
follow the same theory of manuscript selection as was employed by the 1611
translators,’ Dr. Farstad said. In 1982 Thomas Nelson
published the complete NKJV Bible, which quickly gained wide acceptance” (The
Bible Almanac, p. 79).
10. Era of revisions “The last part of
the twentieth century (the 1980s and 1990s) seems to be a time for new
revisions, not new translations. The general consensus among the consumers is,
‘We have enough translations, don’t give us anymore. ’ Most of the publishers
seem to be getting the message. Therefore, instead of
publishing new translations, they are issuing new, revised editions of existing
translations” (Comfort, p. 287).
Recommended Books
1. A General
Introduction to the Bible by Norman L. Geisler and William E. Nix. (
2. How We Got the
Bible by Neil R. Lightfoot. (
3. The Canon of
Scripture by F. F. Bruce. (
4. The Origin of
the Bible edited by Philip W. Comfort. (
5. The King James
Only Controversy by James R. White. (
Bibliography
Archer, Gleason L. A Survey of Old Testament Introduction.
Beckwith, Roger T. The Old Testament Canon in the New
Bruce, F. F. The Books and the Parchments. Westwood: Revell, 1963.
___________. The Canon of Scripture. Dowers Grove: InterVarsity
Press, 1988.
___________. History of the English Bible. Oxford: New York, 1978.
___________. Second Thoughts on the
Comfort, Philip W.
ed. , The Origin of the Bible. Wheaton:
Tyndale, 1992.
Elwell, Walter A. ed. , Evangelical Dictionary of Theology. Grand Rapids:
Baker, 1984.
Erickson, Millard. Christian
Theology.
Enns, Paul. The Moody Handbook of Theology. Chicago: Moody, 1989.
Gaebelein, Frank E. ed. The Expositor’s Bible Commentary.
12 vols. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1979.
Geisler,
____________. A General Introduction to the Bible. Chicago: Moody,
1986.
Harris, R. Laird. Inspiration and Canonicity of the Bible. Grand
Rapids: Zondervan, 1957.
Hoyt,
Herman A. Studies in 2 Peter. Winona Lake: BMH Books, 1983.
Lightfoot,
Neil. How We Got the Bible. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1988.
McDonald, Lee M. The Formation of the Christian Biblical Canon.
Peabody: Hendrickson, 1995.
Metzger, Bruce M.
and Coogan, Michael D. eds. ,
Packer, J. I. God
Speaks to Man. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1965.
Packer, J. I. , Tenney, Merrill C. and White, William, Jr. eds. , The
Bible Almanac.
Reader’s Digest. Reader’s
Digest ABC’s of the Bible. Pleasantville: Reader’s Digest, 1991.
Underwood, Jonathan.
A History of the English Bible.
Waltke, Bruce, “How
We Got Our Old Testament,” Christian History, issue 433, Vol. XIII, No.
3).
Wegener,
G. S. 6,000 Years of the Bible.
White, James R. The King James Only Controversy.
_____________. The Roman Catholic Controversy.