What Is The Bible Fergus J King

Dating Conventions In Biblical Studies, it is increasingly common to see BCE (Before the Common Era) used instead of BC (Before Christ) CE (Common Era) used instead of AD (Anno Domini) I tend to use BCE and CE as a scholarly convention

Canon: A Key Term The Bible is a collection of books made over an extended period of time It is a newer collection than we might think… The collection is sometimes known as the CANON in Christian tradition But Christians do not always agree on what constitutes the CANON

“The Old Testament” Or Jewish Scriptures It is worth remembering that the Jewish Scriptures were not collected into a formal collection until the Hasmonean period Jewish literature which is not included in the CANON is referred to as the Jewish Pseudepigrapha

Examples to substantiate this The Hebrew or Masoretic text (MT) of the Jewish Scriptures differs in content from the Greek (or Septuagint, sometimes LXX as an abbreviation) text. Example: the book of Daniel contains what are sometimes called the Greek Additions The Book of Tobit The Maccabean Histories

Hebrew better than Greek? This is often assumed, but is it the case. MT which is used in OT studies dates from the ninth century CE The LXX dates from the second century BCE ( according to the Letter of Aristeas) The Dead Sea Scrolls contain quotations from an earlier Hebrew and Aramaic versions which are sometimes closer to the LXX SO never assume Hebrew is always earlier and therefore more reliable

The New Testament 27 books. The first move to a CANON appears in response to Marcion (fl CE) The Canon is pretty well agreed by late 5 th century CE. This canon constitutes the authoritative texts of orthodoxy. Other Christian groups had their own authoritative collections of Scripture

The OT in the NT The NT often draws on the OT. Sometimes we can see specific use of LXX by NT writers ( e.g., Matthew 1:23 cites the LXX text of Isaiah 7:14- the Gk parthenos can be translated “virgin”) Sometimes, non-canonical books are cited: Jude 14 inludes a citation from the Book of Enoch, not part of MT or LXX The Church Fathers and medieval Church used the LXX as their canon of the OT

The Reformation The Reformers rejected the LXX as the canon of the OT, and preferred to see the MT as authoritative Hopes, by some like Luther, that James (‘a letter of straw’) and Revelation (“neither apostolic, nor prophetic, and Christ was ‘neither sought not known in it’”)* be removed did not transpire.

Points to ponder Even a CANON can fall prey to sectarian interests. Indeed, the development of a Canon seems to involve the selection or discernment or selection of what is authoritative? How do we ensure that this is not a circular process?

Suggested Further Reading Lucas Grollenburg, Rediscovering the Bible ( SCM, 1978) Etienne Charpentier, How to Read The Bible (Testament, 1993)