Journal
of the American Scientific Affiliation 26.2 (June 1974) 55-60.
[Cited with
permission]
Which Books Belong in the Bible?
Paul M. McKOWEN
Following is an introduction and definition
of basic terms (canon, apocrypha, pseudepigrapha) the development of the Old
Testament canon is treated, followed by an appraisal of Old Testament
apocrypha. The second section treats the congealing of the New Testament canon,
and the vast literature of New Testament apocrypha. The third section considers
modern day questions of canon and apocrypha, both from the standpoint of
deleting Scriptural books as well as from the viewpoint of adding "new
scriptures" to the canon.
Introduction
A person who
is not yet a believer may offer a
challenge,
"I heard that in the 4th Century it was de-
cided to
leave some books out of the New Testament."
Or "Why
did the Protestants decide to remove about
a dozen
books from the Old Testament?" Or
even
worse,
"You claim the Bible is the very Word of God,
and yet
human beings decided which books should be
in the
Bible! Why 66 books? Why not 166 books,
or
why not just
26 books? It seems to be the word of
man just as
much as the Word of God!"
We hope to answer these and other
questions in
this
paper. We limit ourselves to this
particular topic:
"Which
books belong in the Bible?" This
means we
do not have
latitude to explore another question of
great
interest, "By what means did God's mind get
communicated
into the minds of the men who wrote
the
Scriptures?" For our purposes, let
us assume that
God
succeeded in delivering his word authentically
and
accurately through chosen men. Let us
assume the
inspiration
of God's Word. The question now before
us is: How was the distinction made between books
WHICH BOOKS BELONG
IN THE BIBLE? 55b
given by the
inspiration of God on the one hand, and
on the other
hand the books that are hoaxes, forgeries,
or good
human material but not meant to be included
as Scripture?
Let us begin with two terms that are
basic in a
discussion
of "Which books belong in the Bible?"--
Canon:
A normative or regulative standard as to
what should be
included in sacred writings; straight
(orthodox) teach-
ings; the Scriptures viewed as a rule of
faith and conduct
(from the Greek kanon, from the
phoenician qana', He-
brew qaneh, meaning a rod, cane,
or reed, usable for
measuring).
Apocrypha:
Books rejected as unauthentic, of hidden
origin, or un-
canonical (from the Greek apokryphos,
hidden away).
Closely related is the term pseudepigrapha,
referring to
books written under false (Greek pseudes)
authorship
(Greek epi + graphe, to
write upon), such as Books of
Enoch, Psalms of Solomon, etc.
A
Consideration of the Old Testament
Some argue1 that the Old
Testament books, 39 in
the
Protestant Bible, were established as a canon as
early as
444-400 B.C., in the time of Ezra, contem-
porary of
the Persian King Artaxerxes (465-424 B.C.).
This view is
supported by the writings of Flavius
PAUL M. McKOWEN 56a
Josephus
(37-100? A.D.), Jewish soldier, statesman,
and
historian, who in his "Against Apion" states "We
have but
twenty-two books. . . . From the days of
Artaxerxes
to our own times every event has indeed
been
recorded; but these recent records have not been
deemed
worthy of equal credit with those which pre-
ceded them.
. ." (Those twenty-two books were the
same as our
thirty-nine, since the twelve minor prophets
were on a
single scroll, and thus counted as one book.
Ruth was
attached to Judges, and Lamentations tacked
on to the
Jeremiah scroll. Likewise Ezra and
Nehemiah
were
together. And each pair of Samuel,
Kings, Chron-
icles were
treated as one book. This arrangement
is
well-known
and well-accepted.)
This view, which may be oversimplified in
dating
the canon
closed at 400 B.C., has value in that it shows
how
Josephus, a first century Jew, from a practical
point of
view based on current usage, considered the
canon
"well-jelled" by 400 B.C., after which Josephus
considered
prophetic inspiration to have ceased.
A more precise study reveals that the
Pentateuch
(the law of
Moses, the first five books) was in use
canonically
as early as 400 B.C.; that the Prophets, a
second
Jewish division of Scriptures, was closed canon-
ically by
200 B.C.; and that the third division, the
Writings,
was closed in 100 B.C.2
(This three-fold
division of
Jewish Scripture is commonly known, and
it has been
designated by the acronym tanak, which
means torah
(law), nabiim (prophets), and Kethubim
(writings) .
An important date is 90 A.D. when the
Council of
Jamnia
convened under Johanan ben Zakkai, official-
ly
congealing the Old Testament canon in its present
form of thirty-nine
books without Apocrypha.3
Prior to
this the
canon had been socially closed by usage and
practice,
and discussions about Ezekiel, Daniel, Song
of Solomon,
Ecclesiastes, and Esther, for example,
were
academic and not of historical and theological
PAUL M. McKOWEN 56b
significance. (Such discussions even continued after the
formal
closing of the canon in 90 A.D.)
Perhaps the
development
of Christian literature, which was coming
to the fore,
made it prudent for the rabbis to take
official
action in closing their canon.
Old
Testament Apocrypha
The Apocrypha (and Pseudepigrapha) were
pro-
duced
between 250 B.C. and the early Christian cen-
turies. The Apocryphal books, found in the Douay
Version
(Roman Catholic), can be roughly divided into
three
groups:
1. Books that are allegedly additions
and comple-
tions of existing books of the Old Testament
canon.
(II Esdras
adds apocalyptic visions given to Ezra; "The
Rest of
Esther" seeks to show God's hand in "Esther"
in clearer
focus; and three additions to Daniel, the
first two of
which are based on the lion's den setting:
Song of the
Three Holy Children, Bel and the Dragon,
and History
of Susanna, add to the heroic feats of
Daniel. )
2. Books that can be called "wisdom
literature",
similar to
Job, Proverbs and Ecclesiastes. These are
Wisdom of
Solomon and Ecclesiasticus.
3. Books that treat historical
narrative, sometimes
with
apparent forthrightness, as I and II Maccabees,
which relate
the Jews' warfare for liberty (175-130
B.C.) against
the Syrians under the ambitious and
outrageous
Antiochus Epiphanes; on other occasions
the
historical narratives appear legendary (I Esdras
regarding
Zerubbabel), or infused with romantic love
(Tobit and
Judith), or mere paraphrases from other
books (Baruch
paraphrasing the prophets Jeremiah:
Daniel,
etc.).
What has been the fate of these assorted
books?
The rabbis
did not want to accept them in the Old
Testament
canon because they appeared in Greek in
the
Septuagint translation in 150 B.C., and God's
PAUL M. McKOWEN 56c
language is
Hebrew! (Four were originally written in
Hebrew.) It is important to emphasize that Jewish
usage
rejected these books from their canon.
They
were
definitely rejected at Jamnia in 90 A.D.
On April 8, 1546 The Council of Trent of
the
Roman
Catholic Church declared some of these above-
mentioned
apocryphal books to be canonical or deutero-
canonical,
offering an anathema against any who ven-
tured a
different view. The books were Tobit,
Judith
The Wisdom
of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch (with
the Epistle
of Jeremy as Chapter 6) and I and II Macca-
bees. The Rest of Esther was added to canonical
Esther
and Daniel
was expanded by The History of Susanna;
Song of the
Three Holy Children, and Bel and the
Dragon.
In
the New English Bible the Apocrypha also in-
cludes I and
II Esdras and the Prayer of Manasseh,
which were
rejected by the Council of Trent. It is
evident that
this Apocrypha is about equal in length
to the New
Testament.
Martin Luther, the German reformer, felt
that some
of these
books favored papal doctrines. He also
re-
jected the
Apocrypha. Probably he was
over-reacting,
as these
books are not theologically radical and here-
tical. More important is the principle that these
books
were never
part of the Jewish canon of the Scriptures.
They found
their way into the Bible via the Greek
Septuagint
version, and its translation into Latin in
the second
century, and the Latin Vulgate which was
completed in
405 A.D. by Jerome. Once included
alongside
canonical Scripture, tradition tended to can-
onize these
apocryphal books also.
It is worth noting that Jesus is not
recorded as
having
quoted from these apocryphal books.
There is
no explicit
reference to them in the New Testament
canon. They are useful books in terms of
understanding
the life and
thought of Judaism in the intertestamental
period, as a
bridge between Old and New Testaments.
PAUL M. McKOWEN 56d
We should
not be threatened by these books or seek
to burn them
thinking they are devilish tools. But
we do
not see
sufficient evidence for accepting them as canon
material. Likewise historical investigations show the
pseudepigraphal
documents to be unauthentic and
unacceptable.
Representative reading samples from the
Apocrypha
are offered
as an introduction: (1) Additions and
Completions, see Daniel's vindication of Susanna's
in-
nocence, in
History of Susanna 49-64. (2) Wisdom
Literature, see Wisdom of Solomon 14:23-26 for
rituals
of evil, and
a passage to arouse Women's Lib, Eccle--
siasticus
25: 19-26. Also 26:9-12 on the loose woman. (3)
Historical
Narrative, see I
Maccabees 1:10, 20-24,
41-64 on the
outrages of "that wicked man, Antiochus
Epiphanes"
who set up the "abomination of desolation"
on the altar
of the temple (175 B.C.).
WHICH BOOKS
BELONG IN THE
BIBLE? 57a
A
Consideration of the New Testament
The Old Testament canon jelled between
400-
100 B.C.
(first the Law in 400 B.C., then the prophets
in 200 B.C.
and finally the Writings in 100 B.C.) with
a final
definitive decision being made at the Council of
Jamnia in 90
A.D. In like manner the New Testament
canon
jelled, between about 75 A.D. and 400. A.D.
Again we
observe three stages of development in the
New
Testament canon, culminating in its congealing
at the
synods of Hippo Regius (393 A.D.) and Carth-
age (397,
419 A.D.).
(1) In the period of the apostolic church
there
were hints
and allusions that make us suspect that
authoritative
Christian writings were in the making.
For
instance, Jesus Christ was a person of authority
who spoke
with authority, e.g., "You have heard that it
was said. .
. but I say. . . ". One would
expect that
sooner or
later such sayings would be recorded, along
with his
memorable parables, and narratives of his
mighty deeds. Paul the apostle claimed, in his letter
to the
Galatians, to have received instructions directly
from the
risen and ascended Christ concerning the
breadth of
the gospel for both Jew and Gentile, and
concerning
all men being made right with God by
faith; one
would expect these apostolic revelations to
be
written. Indeed, Paul did develop his
concepts in
letters, and
instructions were given to Christian
churches to
circulate these letters and read them.
Peter
referred to
Paul's writings in his letters, comparing
them with
"other scriptures" (II Peter 3:16).
Paul,
in his first
letter to Timothy, quotes the words of Jesus
and refers
to his source as "scripture".
All this gives
a feeling
that there is developing a Christian canon,
even as
there was a Jewish canon.
As new false teachers arose here and
there, Chris-
tian leaders
in the generation following the apostles
wrote
letters to combat these wrong ways and encour-
age the
Christians. In so doing, from 95 A.D.
to 150
WHICH BOOKS BELONG
IN THE BIBLE? 57b
A.D. we find
Clement of Rome quoting from half a
dozen
sources that we presently have in our New Tes-
tament
canon. In like fashion the letters of
Polycarp
and
Ignatius, the Didache, Papias, the Epistle of Barn-
abas, Justin
Martyr, and Tatian all quote freely from
authoritative
sources that they had (although the
New
Testament canon was far from being jelled), and
their
sources read the same as they do in our New
Testaments.
Two of the false movements are worthy of
special
note.5 The heretic Marcion (about 140 A.D.) chal-
lenged the
church with an assorted set of Christian
writings
which he put forth as a canon. They
included
his own
mutilated arrangement of Luke and ten of the
letters of
Paul. Needless to say, this made the
church
ponder, as
early as 140 A.D., just what should be the
correct
limits for a New Testament canon. The
church
responded
with a larger canon close to our 27 New
Testament
books. In the second place, we call
atten-
tion to the
school of the Montanists, who had exagger-
ted claims
of inspiration in their own utterances, mak-
ing
necessary written teachings from the apostolic era,
closer to
the time of our Lord Jesus Christ.
By the time of 180-200, things had jelled
to a
degree that
a "New Testament" was clearly and def-
initely
present. The church was conscious that
it pos-
sessed
documents from the apostolic age, and these
documents
were regarded as canonical and of apostolic
authority. Evidence for this comes from three great
writers of
the period, Irenaeus (of Asia Minor and
Gaul),
Tertullian (of North Africa), and Clement (of
Alexandria,
Egypt). There was discussion about
wheth-
er Hebrews
and Jude belonged in the canon, and also
about the
status of James, II Peter, II and III John, and
Revelation.
(2) During the years 200-325 A.D. discussion
about
"fringe books" continued.
Origen of Alexandria
WHICH BOOKS BELONG
IN THE BIBLE? 57c
faced all
the literature that claimed to be apostolic
and
classified it "genuine", "doubtful", and "rejected".
The canon
was beginning to solidify. Eusebius,
leader
from
Caesarea and an historian, followed Origen, and
in 330 A.D.
wrote that seven doubtful books had been
accepted
(Hebrews, James, II Peter, II and III John,
Jude, and
Revelation). Other literature, such as
The
Epistles of
Barnabas, The Shepherd of Hermas, and
the Didache,
which had been fringebooks, were ac-
cepted as
useful but not included in the canon.
By
now the
canon was becoming well-shaped, twenty-
seven books
in all, just as our New Testament.
(3) From 325-400 A.D. we see the church
taking
an official
position on the canon. Christianity was no
longer
persecuted, for Emperor Constantine had em-
braced the
Christian gospel. It is reasonable to
imagine
that leaders
could breathe more easily. Furthermore,
communication
was opened more freely, making it
possible for
church leaders to appreciate why certain
letters had
been directed to churches in distant areas.
Authoritative
pronouncements on the canon began on
local
levels, by bishops of provincial churches.
Later
councils and
synods endorsed the canon on a larger
geographical
basis. Athanasius, bishop of
Alexandria,
in his
Easter Letter of 367 A.D. listed our twenty-
seven books
as canonical. Then at the synods of
Hippo
Regius (393 A.D.)
and Carthage (397 A.D. and 419
A.D.) the
same twenty-seven books were accepted.
(This canon
was supported by Augustine (354-430
A.D.),
bishop of Hippo, one of the great Latin church
fathers.) The canon issue of the New Testament was
thus
settled.
Let us note these conclusions about the New
Testament
canon.
(1) In making its choices, the early
church was
greatly
influenced by "apostolic authority". They ac-
cepted the
scriptures clearly attributed to apostles.
WHICH BOOKS BELONG
IN THE BIBLE?
57b
They
screened out forgeries supposedly written by apos-
tles. They accepted literature from sources that
had
apostolic
authority by approval or inference, such
as Luke's
writings.
(2) Although the collection of
twenty-seven books
into one
volume was slow, the belief in a written rule
of faith
came very early. Furthermore the time
span
gave the
church ample opportunity to sift out the pos-
sibilities. It is perhaps better that we do not rely on
a
hastily-made decision of one solitary church council,
say, from
100 A.D.
(3) The proof on which we should accept
the
PAUL M. McKOWEN 58a
books today
is historical evidence. We need not
accept
blindly
those church councils' decisions of 393-419
A.D. Modern scholarship has been applied to the
New
Testament
canon, and these twenty-seven books fare
very well as
authentic, when subjected to scientific
inquiry.
(4) This scholarship which promotes our
assent to
the
credibility of the canon is added to our personal
certitude
that Almighty God has been faithful and
not left
himself without accurate witness. The certitude
of our faith
in God is more important than our assent
to careful
scholarship.
New
Testament Apocrypha
No Christian Bibles of today (Roman
Catholic,
Orthodox, or
Protestant) include New Testament apoc-
ryphal
writings. Pastoral experience indicates
that lay-
men are less
knowledgable about New Testament
Apocrypha
than they are about the Old Testament
Apocrypha. Yet the collection of such writings is huge,
comprised of
false gospels, false Acts of the Apostles,
false
epistles, and false Revelations. Its
content quick-
ly appears
to be vastly inferior to the tone of the twen-
ty-seven
books of the New Testament.
An admirable collection of these
documents has
been
published by the Oxford Press, under the direc-
tion of
Montague Rhodes James, editor and translator.6
Here are
some excerpts.
The Gospel of Thomas reports that the boy
Jesus
went with
his mother to the house of a dyer.
Various
pieces of
cloth were here and there, brought by sundry
customers,
waiting to be dyed different colors.
The boy
Jesus
plunged them all into the black dye.
This "sore
vexed"
the craftsman and irritated Jesus' mother who
had to
"amend that which" the boy Jesus had done.
But "the
beautiful child Jesus" pulled out the fabrics,
and each was
dyed a different color. (Page 67).
PAUL M. McKOWEN 58b
In the same Gospel of Thomas the boy
Jesus
changed a
group of children into goats for a short
time, and
made this ethnocentric statement to the
amazed women
onlookers:
Verily the children of Israel are like
unto the black
folk among the natives, for the black ones
seize the
outer side of the flock, etc. (Page 68)
The Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew has Jesus
get off
his mother's
lap to be worshipped and adored by
dragons,
lions, leopards, and wolves, once fearsome but
now
docilized. On the third day Jesus
caused a very
tall palm
tree to bend down to give Mary fruit; when
it rose
again a spring issued from its roots. (Pages
74, 75)
When Jesus was four he was playing by the
Jordan
and arranged
seven pools. Another lad messed up the
pools. He "was struck dead", but when his
parents
complained
Jesus resurrected him. But when the son
of Annas the
priest broke up the pools with a stick,
one word
from the four year old Jesus sufficed to with-
er the
bully, who was not raised up. From the
pools
he also made
clay sparrows, "clapped his hands", and
twelve
feathered birds took flight. (Page 76)
At age eight he crossed the Jordan River
whose
waters
parted, in company with a group of docilized
lions,
saying ". . . the beasts know me and are tame,
while men
know me not". (Page 76)
Concluding the Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew,
we
make
reference to Jesus' stretching a cut beam of wood
to a correct
length, after it had been cut too short by
a lad
working for Joseph who had a contract for a
bed nine
feet long. Then in school, on his
second day,
the teacher
demanded: "Say Alpha". Jesus replied that
the teacher
must first tell him what Beta was, and then
Jesus would
explain Alpha. When the teacher struck
Jesus, the
teacher died. (Page 78)
PAUL M. McKOWEN 58c
The Arabic Gospel of the Infancy relates
how Jesus,
when placed
on the back of a mule, restored the mule
into a
man. Later Jesus carried water in his
cloak
when his
earthen jug had been broken. And the
ac-
count of the
boy Jesus in the temple is enlarged to
specify his
having been questioned about law, as-
tronomy, and
philosophy, answering all questions per-
fectly.
(Pages 81, 82)
Passing now to spurious Acts accounts, we
refer to
The Acts of
John for a narrative in which beautiful
Drusiana,
who had no sexual relations with her hus-
band
Andronicus, due to John's directives, was almost
seduced by a
man named Callimachus. In sorrow she
died. While John was trying to console the
relatives
evil
Callimachus was attempting to have intercourse
with the
corpse of Drusiana. Fortunately a
serpent
appeared and
slew him. Later John and the unfor-
tunate
widower went to the tomb. First John
raised,
the seducer
Callimachus from the dead. Then he
raised
the wife
Drusiana. Callimachus instantly became
a
believer and
Drusiana forgave him. Another man, in-
cidental to
the plot, was also raised from the dead by
John, but he
said he did not want to be raised, and
after John
had prayed this man was bitten by a snake,
had blood
poisoning, died, and the corpse turned
black.
(Pages 243-250)
In the Acts of Andrew, this apostle
healed one
Maximilla of
a fever and she was raised up and con-
verted. Andrew instructed her to abstain from rela-
tions with
her husband, with whom she had lived and
borne
children. Andrew told her that marriage
is a
"foul
and polluted way of life", and he encouraged her,
to resist
the "artful flatteries" of her husband. For this
Andrew was
imprisoned, scourged, and crucified. He
hung on the
cross for three days preaching. When he
died,
Maximilla embalmed his corpse and buried it.
(Pages 349,
352)
PAUL M. McKOWEN 58d
Of course a
more extensive perusal of these apoc-
ryphal New
Testament narratives will fill in the con-
texts of the
selected passages listed above. However
even in
context these events appear fanciful, even ab-
surd and
often purposeless, quite different qualitative-
ly from the
blending of miracle and teaching in the
Gospel of
John, or from the skillful composition of
the Gospel
of Luke. One is not surprised to know
these
accounts were rejected by the early church.
Some Review
Questions and Answers
In drawing some modest conclusions, we
return
to our
original question, "Which books belong in the
Bible?"
Let us evaluate our understanding by a few
review
questions and answers.
1. Did humanity receive the Old and New
Testaments, bound
in sixty-six books, directly from God
in a once-and-forever
package, as when a phone directory is
brought to our door
by a company representative? (Answer:
No.)
2. Are Biblical teachings and our
understanding of God dis-
torted more seriously by the Old Testament
Apocrypha or
by the New Testament Apocrypha?
(Answer: The New
Testament Apocrypha.)
3. What were the dates when the Old
Testament canon was
WHICH BOOKS
BELONG IN THE
BIBLE? 59a
firmed up?, (Answer: Pentateuch 400
B.C., Prophets 200
B.C., Writings 100 B.C. All the
thirty-nine books at the
Council of Jamnia, officially, in 90
A.D.)
4. Did the Roman Catholics, invent and add
the Old Testa-
ment Apocrypha to our Bibles about
1546? (Answer: No,
the Old Testament Apocrypha found their
way into the
Scriptures as a caboose attachment by
means of early
translations into Greek and Latin,
about 150 B.C. and
150 A.D., long, before lines of
disagreement were drawn
between Catholics and Protestants.)
5. Do the Jews recognize the Old Testament Apocry