Bible 101

Lesson 2: Who decided what the finished Bible should look like?

Forgotten Scriptures?

So far, we have explored how the books we now know as the OT and NT were compiled. The next logical question now must be: were there other writings that were not included, and why not?

As we have seen, the inclusion of manuscripts into the NT canon rested chiefly on the determination of apostolic authority. Yet in some earlier lists, other books were mentioned that some early believers treated as divinely inspired writings: i.e. the Epistle of Barnabas (5) and the Shepherd of Hermas (6). Both texts were written and circulated right around 100 AD. The Muratorian Fragment does indeed mention the writing known as the Shepherd of Hermas; however, it denotes that while this writing could be read in public, it was not to be considered as part of the apostolic writings. Other letters circulated as well throughout the churches, but each and every time a clear dividing line was drawn between those writings that should be read for the sole purpose of encouraging the members of the early church, and those which were considered canonical on the basis of apostolic authority.

As noted earlier, the OT canon rested chiefly on the tradition respected by the Jewish leaders, and was settled, albeit informally, at the Council of Jamnia. At that time there were some discussions whether or not to include the book of Esther, especially since it does not actually mention the name of God; similarly, the other books in question were Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs. The latter books did mention the name of God, but did not fit into the context of (at that time) current religious sentiment. Nonetheless, the books in question were included into the OT canon, and it has not been changed since that time.

  1  2  3  4  5