Read Part 1: "Errors" and Inerrancy
How, then, did the Old Testament come down to us living in the 21st century? The Old Testament originally came from the Jews. It was, and still is, their holy book, their revelation from God, which is written down in the TaNaK in Hebrew, and was translated into Greek in the Septuagint. The Jewish oral tradition also passed down the view of our modern 39 books of the Old Testament, in a slightly merged form of 24. Josephus records that the Jews kept to a list of 22 holy books, which, in actual fact, equals the 39 books currently held in the protestant Old Testament. So, Christians carry the same general view of the Old Testament, but they also add the New Testament to it to make up what is called the Bible.
 |
| Cumran Cave 4: Where the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered. Photo Credit. |
The TaNaK
The Jews called the Old Testament the TaNaK. They derived the name from the three different sections that it is made of. The first section is the law, which in Hebrew is “torah,” thus the “T.” Secondly, “the prophets” in Hebrew is “”nebi’im.” The prophets are further divided into two subcategories: the Former Prophets and the Latter Prophets. The “K” in “TaNaK” is “kethubim,” which means “the writings.” The writings are further divided into the three subcategories of poetry, the 5 megilloth (rolls), prophecy, and history. Included in all of these categories are the books that currently make up the protestant Old Testament, and this is the only version that I think is canonical.
The Biblical Canon
So how can I be so sure that these are the only books that are canonical? Well, firstly, these are the ones that were passed down through Jewish tradition, and are the ones included in the TaNaK. The fact that the Jews considered these books to be the Holy Scriptures for many hundreds of years is a very significant piece of evidence to support the view that these are, in fact, inspired. The Baba Bathra puts forth the view of 24 slightly merged books which equate to the 39 currently used.
Secondly, the original version of the Septuagint consisted of these books. Other books crept in further down the road, but there is significant evidence pointing to the fact that the Septuagint originally consisted of the books found in the TaNaK.
Thirdly, Josephus records the fact that the Jewish Scriptures consisted of 22 books, which is simply a list of the books in the TaNaK with a couple of the books merged together. In reality, he was listing all of the same books.
Also, the Jewish oral tradition only includes the books found in the TaNaK, and none of those found in the Apocrypha.
Fifthly and most importantly, Jesus Christ has made two references to what the accurate canon of the Bible consists of. One of the references appears in Luke 24:44 where He says “Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms.” The Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms all refer to the three different sections of the TaNaK, thus giving those books credibility as the true canon. An even more blatant reference appears in both Matthew 23:35 and Luke 11:50-51. Matthew 23:35 reads: “And so upon you will come all the righteous blood that has been shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Berekiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar.” Jesus is saying here that they will be responsible for all of the innocent people who were killed from Abel (Genesis) all the way through Zechariah (Chronicles, the last book of the TaNaK).
Now, there were many more righteous people killed during Maccabean period after Zechariah and before Christ came, but they were not held responsible for them. This is a direct reference to which books are truly canonical: The TaNaK, and not the Apocrypha, which was more or less written during the Maccabean period. In a nut shell, Jesus is saying that you will not be held responsible for those books! They are not revelation from God!
The Apocrypha
The Apocrypha started creeping into the Septuagint sometime before 400 AD, because the Christians at the time had very little contact with Jewish people. Some of them may had never even met a Jewish person, and so the Old Testament canon began to see some additions.
At first this may have been due to the fact that these books were included just as interesting reading, and as an aid in understanding the background of the times. However, they really started becoming considered part of the canon of the western church when St. Augustine forced Jerome to include them in his translation called the Latin Vulgate. Jerome did not want to include them, but as St. Augustine controlled the western church, he had little choice. The Latin Vulgate was the official version of the western church for over 1,000 years, and eventually there was a papal decree that made the Apocrypha a mandatory part of the Roman Catholic canon. So, there is nothing to lead me to believe that these books were the inspired word of God.
Works Cited
- The Journey from Texts to Translations: The Origin and Development of the Bible by Dr. Paul D. Wegner
- Lecture at Big Sky Bible Institute by Dr. Paul D. Wegner
Nice and scholarly in condensed form. Thank you!
Great work , Gregory.
So tell me, What is the whole issue of the Canon?
and what is the reference to Septuagint?
thanks
@Clint, You're welcome!
@Anonymous, Hey, The word "Canon," when we are speaking of the Bible, refers to those books which are divinely inspired.
The "Septuagint" is the Greek translation of what we refer to as the Hebrew Old Testament. It was compiled and translated during the Maccabean Period (sometime in the 400 years of silence between the Old and New Testaments... I don't know the exact date off the top of my head.) This is notable because it is a relatively old document, and because it was the first compilation that brought all of the books together into one place. (If my memory serves me ;) )
Does that help, or do you need more information?
Greg - I particularly love how you discussed the apocrypha. Biblical examples and a compact history leads to some solid evidence in this post!
I was actually hoping to do an entire post on the apocrypha in the future, and this definitely targets those exact concepts that such an article would hold.
Fantastic post with a brief, but dense, history and awesome examples!
AJ, that sounds like it'd be an awesome post, I'd love to read it!
I've been meaning to do a deeper study of the Apocrypha for some time (just out of personal curiosity), but I never seem to get around to it...
Totally know what you mean - I think I'll write one up on it in the next month or so. Right now, I just need to find a free weekend to do some writing and catch up on things. The Apocrypha is definitely on the list.
Good stuff!