Constructing the Testaments: Mr Dean
Warbois©1993
The History Of Choosing The Stories Of the Bible
The concept that the Bible is the undisputed word of God assumes
the Bible is sacred. The Bible, of course, is an object. To hold
any object as sacred is idol worship. Like all idol worship, this
leads to dogma. It separates one from the living God. As I realized
that Bible worship is idol worship, I came to ask:
What is the Bible?
The word Biblia is Greek for book.
Literally, Bible means little books.
The Bible as scripture, or sacred volume, is a library. Included in
this library are books of history, law, poetry and stories. Each of
these books (with a few exceptions, like the Psalms of David) tell
several stories and, therefore, are libraries themselves.
As you know, the books in the Bible are divided in two great
categories, the Old Testament and the New Testament. The Old
Testament is the scripture of the Jewish religion and the New
Testament is the scripture of the Christian religion. How did these
books come to be the sacred writings for their religions? Why were
some books included and others were not? When did the Jews and the
Christians agree to their Testaments?
Well, dear reader, we can not cover these three questions in very
much depth in this little flier. These questions have had hundreds
of entire books written about each one of them. But we can get some
dates and some understanding. To do so we must look at what it is
to canonize. The word canon is rooted in the Greek word kanõn.
Originally a measuring rod, the word came to mean lists of the
genuine article. There were kanõn of officials and kanõn of
festivals. Some 150 years after Christ there began to appear kanõn,
or lists, of what books were read in churches at public worship.
These lists of books came to have the value of scripture and then
came to be accepted as the authority for instruction and for
settling disputes.
Meanwhile a powerful Jewish sect had made a list of its own.
The Bible, then, is a collection of books that have been canonized
according to these standards:
1) if they are history or law, are they accurate to the past or to
God's will? and,
2) if they are poetry or stories, were they written by the person
they claim to have been written by?
Canonizing the Old
Testament
Several factors made it difficult to canonize the Old
Testament:
1. A major difficulty was time. The stories of Israel were passed
on by word of mouth for hundreds and hundreds of years before they
were written down. During an 800-year span parts of these stories
became parts of books [footnote 1]. For 700 years these books were
rewritten, adding more complete or different versions of the
stories to suit the needs of the times or the authors [footnote 2].
These books, each filled with libraries of information, were
completed at different times - ranging from Amos (about 700 BC) to
Esther, Daniel, and Books 4 and 5 of the Psalter (during the 100's
BC).
2. Another difficulty in canonizing the Old Testament was language.
After the Exile, Aramaic became the every day language of the
Jewish people (Christ taught in Aramaic) while those living in
Egypt and elsewhere spoke Greek. Hebrew was relegated to the
language of law and literature, much as Latin is in our society.
While most of the books being considered for the Old Testament were
in Hebrew, some words, phrases, and even entire portions of these
books were in Aramaic. Meanwhile there were Latin translations in
Northern Africa to consider.
3. Another difficulty was the different cultures of Judaism, each
with an interest in their stories and traditions becoming part of
the sacred text. By the time of Christ these cultural differences
were primarily reflected in the Alexandrian Canon and the
Palestinian Canon.
Time, language and culture - these were three major difficulties in
deciding what was and what was not Old Testament scripture. But
there was yet another difficulty; Judaism included many rival
sects.
King Solomon had established the Zadokite line as priests, which
had been usurped by priests who had been appointed for bribes.
Also, the Maccabean revolt (2nd Century before Christ) established
the Hasmonean dynasty of Jewish rulers, who combined political and
religious authority and espoused a blend of Hellenism and Judaism.
In response to these changes, many sects arose with rival ideas -
much as many Protestant churches arose from Catholicism during the
Reformation. Some of these sects were the Sadducees, who favored
the priests, and the very strict Essenes. The Hasidims, the
Zealots, the Sacarii, the Boethusians, and, after Christ, the early
Christians were all Jewish sects looking to canonize Scripture to
their understanding. The most powerful and exclusive Jewish sect at
the time were the Pharisees, who were associated with the rabbis.
Rabbis were graduates of Palestinian academies who had studied the
Torah (the first five books of the OT). They were not priests.
Rabbi means my teacher. Rabbis were appointed scholars and
expounders of the law. Synagogues throughout Judaism appointed the
rabbi of their choice to be their expert on religious law.
Between time, language, cultures and sects, it's a wonder the Jews
ever agreed on a common scripture. But a major influence from
outside the Jewish community forced the issue. This influence came
from the Roman Empire in the person of Titus Flavius Vespasianus.
Titus was appointed to command the Roman forces of the Jewish War
in 67 AD.
One of the first things Titus did was to give Rabban Johanon ben
Zakkai permission to form a Jewish academy at the port city of
Jabneel. Johanon was a Pharisee. At his academy, Johanon reserved
the title Rabban (literally our master) for the rabbinic head of
the Academy.
At the time, the temple in Jerusalem was the center of Jewish life.
All priestly functions were carried out at the temple, as were most
political intrigues and cultural developments. To resolve the
Jewish War, Titus sacked the temple in 70 AD. There was an exodus
of Jewish echelon searching for a new home. With it's academy,
Jabneel was attractive to these people. Also, when the Sanhedrin
(high court) escaped from Jerusalem, it settled in Jabneel and was
replaced by the Beth Din. Soon Jabneel became the spiritual and
intellectual capitol of Jewish life.
In 90 AD Rabban Johanon called a council specifically to hash out
what was and what was not Scripture. The town's name had changed by
this time and the event is called the Council of Jamnia. It was the
first time the complete Old Testament, as we know it, was
officially sanctioned. That must have been an interesting meeting
of minds!
One thing is for sure: the Pharisees, under the leadership of
Rabban Johanon, took the day. Rabbinic Judaism has been just about
the only game in town from that day to this. The Christians were
the only other Jewish sect to survive the fall of Jerusalem.
Canonizing the New
Testament
In many ways canonizing the New Testament was much easier than
canonizing the old Testament. For one thing, it was all in Greek.
Greek was the common language of the Roman Empire and the stories,
notes and letters of the Christian era were all originally written
in Greek. Another way the New Testament was easier to canonize was
the time frame. Only 360 years after Christ's crucifixion the New
Testament was pretty well in the form we know it today. Even so,
360 years is a long time. Here are some highlights:
For most of the first 100 years AD, the stories of the disciples
were oral traditions. Brief recollections of the life and teachings
of Christ were first written in accounts like the Passion
narrative. Then more complete documents were written that became
the source of our Gospels (the stories of the original disciples).
Most written accounts of the life of Christ came during the later
part of the first century, two to four generations after Christ's
life.
In the mid-2nd Century, Justin Martyr described Sunday service in
Rome. This is the earliest reference to the use of New Testament
books as a regular church ritual. About that time, Marcion issued a
canon in which he omitted what books did not suit the purpose of
proving his views on Christ. Marcion is today labeled a heretic.
Also during the mid-2nd century Valentinus listed the books of the
New Testament, complete with a system of referencing them. The
system was so fantastic that it distorted the texts. For the next
eight generations, the listings went on.
Then, three hundred years after Christ, the Roman Empire again set
the stage for the canonization of scripture. This time the Roman
was an emperor named Flavius Valerius Constantinus, or Constantine
the Great. Constantine did four things that led to the canonization
of the New Testament:
First, he united the Roman world as one empire that recognized
toleration for all religions. This he accomplished by 323.
Second, Constantine solidified the Christian church by calling a
worldwide (ecumenical) council at Nicaea in 325. He ran this
council to settle a church dispute that was threatening to divide
the Empire. To this day, the Nicene Creed is the basic doctrine of
most Christian churches.
Third, he moved the capitol of the empire from Rome to the ancient
Greek city of Byzantium, which came to be known as Constantinople,
today's Istanbul.
And, finally, Constantine hired a man to make fifty copies of a
book. This book was the collection of Christian texts to be used in
the fifty churches of Constantinople. Constantine commissioned
these copies from the most recognized scholar of Christian
literature in the Empire: Bishop Eusebius of Caesarea, the capitol
of Palestine. Bishop Eusebius was widely read and had the advantage
of the great library of Caesarea, also known as the Library of
Pamphilus. But Eusebius was more than well read. He had cultivated
a fair and judicious mind and saw that definite answers are not
always possible. When considering which texts should be included in
an official collection of church writing, he came up with three
lists:
1. The Acknowledged. These were texts that everyone agreed were the
genuine article.
2 The Disputed. These were texts Eusebius thought should be
admitted to scripture although others disagreed.
3. The Spurious. These were texts he considered illegitimate.
Eusebius was a careful and considerate scholar - very likely the
best of his time. Whether he was right or wrong, one fact remains:
it was he who was commissioned by Constantine to compile the
Christian texts for the churches of Constantinople. It was he who
decided what was to be included in the books for these churches,
and he decided what was to be left out.
He included those texts he considered Acknowledged and those he
considered Disputed. He left out the texts he considered Spurious.
The resulting book was the canon of Eusebius. Scribes copied this
book fifty times, and what a magnificent job they did! Entirely
lettered on vellum these copies remain today as beautiful examples
of the scribe's art. Being the official text of the churches of
Constantinople - and Constantinople being the Capitol of the Roman
Empire - these books took on the value of Scripture. This was about
330 AD.
Fluctuations in canon since then have been very slight. A few other
canons were: Cyril of Jerusalem omitted Revelation (about 340); the
Festal Letters of Athanasius added the Apocalypsi attributed to
John and the New Testament first became all the books we know today
(367); Bishop Amphilochius of Iconium came out with a catalog of
Bible books in which he omitted Revelation, which he considered
spurious (after 394); the New Testament of Epiphanius, which
corresponds to the current New Testament (403). In the West,
Augustine judged texts by how they were received by the individual
churches. The authority of the texts depended on the influence of
the church. He only considered the New Testament (430).
Canonization After the Middle Ages
Since 430 AD there have been great upheavals and changes in the
Christian church. Here is a very brief look how some of these
considered the canon:
The Renaissance, 1300-1400's: The scholars of the Renaissance
rediscovered the writings of the ancient Greek and Roman worlds.
Giovanni Boccaccio (1313-1375) became the first Italian in 700
years who could read classical Greek. It was a great rebirth of
learning and discovery. This learning directed critical, scholarly
attention to the canonization and it's process.
The Reformation, 1500's: The Reformation did not change what books
we consider valid to the Bible. But it did change our thinking on
the value of the Bible itself. For the first time the authority of
the Bible was considered greater than the authority of the Church.
This was used to justify breaking away from the Church. The two
great reformers, Luther and Calvin, found the Bible's higher
authority in two different truths. Luther believed the Bible's
"analogy of faith," justifying Biblical authority by faith. Calvin
accepted the Bible's authority by being "the testimony of the Holy
Spirit."
The real effect of the Reformation on canon was to shift our
understanding of what the books of the Bible are. Before the
Reformation, the main concern about the Bible was whether it told
the actual stories of Christ and the Apostles. After the
Reformation, the main concern has been whether the texts are
inspired. The Deists and the Rationalists. In the 18th Century the
Deist and Rationalist movements came to question the very idea of
canon as an authoritative standard. They pursued a critical study
that was begun by Semler (1771-1775) in which he pointed out the
early variations of the texts to demonstrate the opportunity for
error.
A Note on Canonization
Not all sects of Judaism and Christianity agree on what is
canonized and what is not. The fifteen books of the Apocrypha,
which the Catholics include in their Bible but most Protestants do
not, is an example. Even of the churches that accept the Apocrypha,
not all the books are agreed on and some of these fifteen accounts
are left out of some Bibles.
Effects of Canonization
One effect of selecting the sacred texts of the Bible was to give
cohesiveness to the religions.
Another effect was to discard much of our history. Of course, many
of the books that were not canonized have come to us as part of our
literary heritage. But power corrupts and one of the first acts of
despots has always been to silence differing views and to destroy
their writings. Who knows what stories, histories, and politics
have been lost when texts that were not deemed authentic were
destroyed for political reasons. The Dead Sea Scrolls (dating from
250 BC to 68 AD) have been instrumental in filling in some of these
blanks. Even today some religious leaders are calling to have parts
of the scrolls withheld from the public, saying they will undermine
what has become accepted to be sacred.
The Living Bible
Biblical canonization is not over.
Now translated into over a thousand
languages and dialects, the Bible continues to share it's history,
law, poetry and stories with different cultures. In English, these
libraries come to us in an amazing array of different wordings
since John Wycliffe first translated the Bible from Latin in
1382.