How do we know that there are only 39 books in the Old Testament? Ultimately, the Holy Spirit, who is the author of the Old Testament, leads us to believe what He has authored. This is not mere fideism. Instead, the evidence abounds, both within the canonical Scriptures and outside the Scriptures.
The core of the issue is this:
We should, by default, not accept books as being Scripture until they have been shown to be Scripture;
Scripture teaches us about Scripture, and based on what Scripture teaches us about Scripture, we can identify various "exclusionary criteria" that can narrow the range of books that could even possibly be considered Scripture;
Once we apply those criteria (especially in view of our need to be careful not to add to God's Word), we are at exactly the 39 book canon.
The Known Scriptures
Let’s find the Old Testament Scriptures. What do we know about them? We know they were known to Timothy, even as a child:
2 Timothy 3:15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
It’s not just Timothy, of course, but the Jewish people generally were given the Scriptures:
Romans 3:1-2 What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit [is there] of circumcision? Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.
So, let’s ask the Jews what the Scriptures are. If we do, we discover that they have exactly the same books that we do, even though they don’t enumerate the books as 39, but as 22 or 24, and don’t necessarily put them in the same order we do.
The Affirmative Burden of this Debate
In debate theory, the Affirmative has the burden, and the Negative has the presumption. That doesn’t apply in the usual way to this debate, of course, because imagine the absurdity of thinking that your default position as the audience should be that every book ever written is part of the Old Testament or that your default position as the audience should be that at least one part of the Old Testament is missing! Beyond debate theory, we have a Scriptural reason for rejecting books by default.
Scripture teaches us:
Deuteronomy 4:2 Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish [ought] from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.
Deuteronomy 12:32 What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it.
Proverbs 30:6 Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.
Revelation 22:18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
So the affirmative burden is rightly placed on the one affirming some book beyond the 39 to be Scripture, and the negative presumption against their inclusion is based on sound Scriptural reasoning. Whoever affirms something, must demonstrate it.
But we know that the Biblical canon is more than just the Pentateuch, it’s more than just Proverbs, and it’s more than just Revelation. So, what does Scripture teach us about Scripture, so we can know if a book is Scripture and - more significantly for this debate - how can we exclude books?
The Existence of a Canon
The objective canon is an artifact of revelation. Even if no human knows what it is, the set of the authoritative books, inspired by God, exists as a result of God doing the work of inspiration. But there was already recognition of that set of canonical books.
In John’s Gospel, Jesus said:
John 5:39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.
In Luke’s Gospel, Luke tells us, about Jesus:
Luke 24:27 And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.
Taken together, these verses inform us that there was a group of writings known as the “Scriptures” that was known to Jesus and to the first century audience of Luke. Unfortunately for tonight’s debate, there is not a single tidy list of all the book names provided in the New Testament. However, we are not left entirely without information about the books.
For example, we have these books referred to as “Moses and all the prophets” in Luke 24:27, which we’ve just read. With some variation, this shorthand way of describing the Old Testament is used over a half dozen times in Luke, John, and Acts.
Luke 16:29, 31 Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them. ... And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.
Luke 24:44 And he said unto them, These [are] the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and [in] the prophets, and [in] the psalms, concerning me.
John 1:45 Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.
Acts 26:22 Having therefore obtained help of God, I continue unto this day, witnessing both to small and great, saying none other things than those which the prophets and Moses did say should come:
Acts 28:23 And when they had appointed him a day, there came many to him into [his] lodging; to whom he expounded and testified the kingdom of God, persuading them concerning Jesus, both out of the law of Moses, and [out of] the prophets, from morning till evening.
Similarly, Jesus in Matthew’s gospel refers to the Old Testament as “the law and the prophets” (Matthew 7:12). This formula is also used over a half dozen times in the New Testament, including some cases that overlap, with expressions like “law of Moses and the prophets”
Matthew 7:12 Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.
Matthew 11:13 For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John.
Matthew 22:40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
Luke 16:16 The law and the prophets [were] until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it.
Luke 24:44 And he said unto them, These [are] the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and [in] the prophets, and [in] the psalms, concerning me.
John 1:45 Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.
Acts 13:15 And after the reading of the law and the prophets the rulers of the synagogue sent unto them, saying, [Ye] men [and] brethren, if ye have any word of exhortation for the people, say on.
Acts 24:14 But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets:
Acts 28:23 And when they had appointed him a day, there came many to him into [his] lodging; to whom he expounded and testified the kingdom of God, persuading them concerning Jesus, both out of the law of Moses, and [out of] the prophets, from morning till evening.
Romans 3:21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;
This manner of expression was not new to the New Testament. The liturgical reference, in Acts 13:15, to “after the reading of the law and the prophets” refers to an order of worship in the synagogue in the first century, a tradition that was established under Ezra.
Nehemiah 8:7-8 Also Jeshua, and Bani, and Sherebiah, Jamin, Akkub, Shabbethai, Hodijah, Maaseiah, Kelita, Azariah, Jozabad, Hanan, Pelaiah, and the Levites, caused the people to understand the law: and the people [stood] in their place. So they read in the book in the law of God distinctly, and gave the sense, and caused [them] to understand the reading.
Jesus himself participated in this custom (which, incidentally, is why we do so as well):
Luke 4:16-20 And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up: and, as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and stood up for to read. And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written, The Spirit of the Lord [is] upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, To preach the acceptable year of the Lord. And he closed the book, and he gave [it] again to the minister, and sat down. And the eyes of all them that were in the synagogue were fastened on him.
There is also intertestamental literature that testifies to a belief that collection of writings took place in the time of Nehemiah:
2 Maccabees 2:13 (KJV) The same things also were reported in the writings and commentaries of Neemias; and how he founding a library gathered together the acts of the kings, and the prophets, and of David, and the epistles of the kings concerning the holy gifts.
Intertestamental literature likewise includes the expression “law and prophets.” For example, the Greek prologue to the book of Sirach uses a related expression a few times, and 2 Maccabees uses it once:
Ecclesiasticus (aka Sirach) 1:1 (KJV) Whereas many and great things have been delivered unto us by the law and the prophets, and by others that have followed their steps, for the which things Israel ought to be commended for learning and wisdom; and whereof not only the readers must needs become skilful themselves, but also they that desire to learn be able to profit them which are without, both by speaking and writing: my grandfather Jesus, when he had much given himself to the reading of the law, and the prophets, and other books of our fathers, and had gotten therein good judgment, was drawn on also himself to write something pertaining to learning and wisdom; to the intent that those which are desirous to learn, and are addicted to these things, might profit much more in living according to the law. Wherefore let me intreat you to read it with favour and attention, and to pardon us, wherein we may seem to come short of some words, which we have laboured to interpret. For the same things uttered in Hebrew, and translated into another tongue, have not the same force in them: and not only these things, but the law itself, and the prophets, and the rest of the books, have no small difference, when they are spoken in their own language. For in the eight and thirtieth year coming into Egypt, when Euergetes was king, and continuing there some time, I found a book of no small learning: therefore I thought it most necessary for me to bestow some diligence and travail to interpret it; using great watchfulness and skill in that space to bring the book to an end, and set it forth for them also, which in a strange country are willing to learn, being prepared before in manners to live after the law. All wisdom cometh from the Lord, and is with him for ever.
2 Maccabees 15:9 (KJV) And so comforting them out of the law and the prophets, and withal putting them in mind of the battles that they won afore, he made them more cheerful.
Even the “Community Rule” scroll recovered from the Qumran caves has similar references:
Column I, lines 1-3 … Book of the Community Rule, that they may seek God with a whole heart and soul. and do good and right before Him as He commanded by the hand of Moses and all His servants the Prophets;
Column VIII, lines 15-16 15. This (path) is the study of the Law which He commanded by the hand of Moses, that they may do according to all that has been revealed from age to age, and as Prophets have revealed by His Holy Spirit.
Philo of Alexandria, writing On the Contemplative Life around the time of Christ’s earthly ministry, wrote (section III. (25)):
And in every house there is a sacred shrine which is called the holy place, and the monastery in which they retire by themselves and perform all the mysteries of a holy life, bringing in nothing, neither meat, nor drink, nor anything else which is indispensable towards supplying the necessities of the body, but studying in that place the laws and the sacred oracles of God enunciated by the holy prophets, and hymns, and psalms, and all kinds of other things by reason of which knowledge and piety are increased and brought to perfection.
The text of Sirach itself refers to the established collection of the twelve prophets:
Ecclesiasticus 49:10 (KJV) And of the twelve prophets let the memorial be blessed, and let their bones flourish again out of their place: for they comforted Jacob, and delivered them by assured hope.
Moreover, reference to the Pentateuch as the “law of Moses” is attested in the canonical books of the Old Testament in numerous places:
Joshua 8:31-32 As Moses the servant of the LORD commanded the children of Israel, as it is written in the book of the law of Moses, an altar of whole stones, over which no man hath lift up [any] iron: and they offered thereon burnt offerings unto the LORD, and sacrificed peace offerings. And he wrote there upon the stones a copy of the law of Moses, which he wrote in the presence of the children of Israel.
Joshua 23:6 Be ye therefore very courageous to keep and to do all that is written in the book of the law of Moses, that ye turn not aside therefrom [to] the right hand or [to] the left;
1 Kings 2:3 And keep the charge of the LORD thy God, to walk in his ways, to keep his statutes, and his commandments, and his judgments, and his testimonies, as it is written in the law of Moses, that thou mayest prosper in all that thou doest, and whithersoever thou turnest thyself:
2 Kings 14:6 But the children of the murderers he slew not: according unto that which is written in the book of the law of Moses, wherein the LORD commanded, saying, The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, nor the children be put to death for the fathers; but every man shall be put to death for his own sin.
2 Kings 23:25 And like unto him was there no king before him, that turned to the LORD with all his heart, and with all his soul, and with all his might, according to all the law of Moses; neither after him arose there [any] like him.
2 Chronicles 23:18 Also Jehoiada appointed the offices of the house of the LORD by the hand of the priests the Levites, whom David had distributed in the house of the LORD, to offer the burnt offerings of the LORD, as [it is] written in the law of Moses, with rejoicing and with singing, [as it was ordained] by David.
2 Chronicles 30:16 And they stood in their place after their manner, according to the law of Moses the man of God: the priests sprinkled the blood, [which they received] of the hand of the Levites.
Ezra 3:2 Then stood up Jeshua the son of Jozadak, and his brethren the priests, and Zerubbabel the son of Shealtiel, and his brethren, and builded the altar of the God of Israel, to offer burnt offerings thereon, as [it is] written in the law of Moses the man of God.
Ezra 7:6 This Ezra went up from Babylon; and he [was] a ready scribe in the law of Moses, which the LORD God of Israel had given: and the king granted him all his request, according to the hand of the LORD his God upon him.
Nehemiah 8:1 And all the people gathered themselves together as one man into the street that [was] before the water gate; and they spake unto Ezra the scribe to bring the book of the law of Moses, which the LORD had commanded to Israel.
Daniel 9:11, 13 Yea, all Israel have transgressed thy law, even by departing, that they might not obey thy voice; therefore the curse is poured upon us, and the oath that [is] written in the law of Moses the servant of God, because we have sinned against him. ... As [it is] written in the law of Moses, all this evil is come upon us: yet made we not our prayer before the LORD our God, that we might turn from our iniquities, and understand thy truth.
Malachi 4:4 Remember ye the law of Moses my servant, which I commanded unto him in Horeb for all Israel, [with] the statutes and judgments.
Similarly the expression the “book of Moses” is also found in the Old Testament canonical books:
2 Chronicles 25:4 But he slew not their children, but [did] as [it is] written in the law in the book of Moses, where the LORD commanded, saying, The fathers shall not die for the children, neither shall the children die for the fathers, but every man shall die for his own sin.
2 Chronicles 35:12 And they removed the burnt offerings, that they might give according to the divisions of the families of the people, to offer unto the LORD, as [it is] written in the book of Moses. And so [did they] with the oxen.
Ezra 6:18 And they set the priests in their divisions, and the Levites in their courses, for the service of God, which [is] at Jerusalem; as it is written in the book of Moses.
Nehemiah 13:1 On that day they read in the book of Moses in the audience of the people; and therein was found written, that the Ammonite and the Moabite should not come into the congregation of God for ever;
I have not included similar references, which do - of course - exist in the intertestamental literature to “law of Moses” and “book of Moses,” which can also be found in the New Testament.
Indeed, the term “law” by itself can refer more broadly to the entire Old Testament, including the Psalms:
Psalm 82:6 I have said, Ye [are] gods; and all of you [are] children of the most High.
John 10:34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
Moreover, the Psalms themselves were canonically assembled in a book, with a recognized order, and their inspiration was acknowledged already in the New Testament time:
Luke 20:42 And David himself saith in the book of Psalms, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,
Acts 13:33 God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.
Mark 12:36 For David himself said by the Holy Ghost, The LORD said to my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool.
Acts 1:16 Men [and] brethren, this scripture must needs have been fulfilled, which the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake before concerning Judas, which was guide to them that took Jesus.
These generalities will not likely satisfy Mr. Preston this evening. He will want to know with more specificity which books Jesus was referring to when (to quote Athanasius) “he put to shame the Sadducees, and said, ‘Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures.’ And He reproved the Jews, saying, ‘Search the Scriptures, for these are they that testify of Me.’” (Athanasius, Letter 39, Section 6)
Let’s address this negatively.
Exclusionary Criteria
Time of Composition
As mentioned above, we know that Timothy knew the Holy Scriptures from his childhood, and additionally, we see both Jesus and Luke speaking about an entirety of the Scriptures:
Matthew 11:13 For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John.
Matthew 22:40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
Luke 24:27 And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.
Acts 24:14 But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets:
2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God, and [is] profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
From this we can definitively exclude any books written after John the Baptist began to preach. This excludes 4 Esdras and 4 Maccabees.
Language of Composition
As noted above, we know that the Old Testament Scriptures were entrusted to the Jews. Since we know what the Jews’ language was, we can exclude books like the works of Plato and Homer, however edifying they may be, because they were not written in the Jews’ language. This also distinguishes the New Testament from the Old Testament, because the New Testament is written for the World, not specifically the Jews, and thus was written in a more globally known language: Greek.
This criteria also excludes books that were originally composed in Greek, which likely includes Wisdom of Solomon, the deuterocanonical portions of Esther and Daniel, the prayer of Manasseh, and the book of Baruch.
Reception by Intended Audience - Jewish and Christian
As noted above, the Old Testament Scriptures were entrusted to the Jews, and we know that God’s Word does what it is intended to do;
Isaiah 55:11 So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper [in the thing] whereto I sent it.
It was also, however, written for the time when the gospel extended to the nations:
Psalm 102:18 This shall be written for the generation to come: and the people which shall be created shall praise the LORD.
Romans 15:4 For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope.
1 Corinthians 10:11 Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.
So, we can see that while it was written for the Jews initially, it was also written for us.
This criteria would exclude books that were received by the Jews, but not by the Christians (if such books existed), as well as books that were received by the Christians, but not by the Jews (such as the books of the Maccabees), as well as books that were not received by either group (such as the War Scroll from the Dead Sea caves).
Existence
With the preceding criteria, we are already at exactly the 39 books. For good measure, I will add that the books have to exist. Scripture teaches:
Isaiah 40:8 The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever.
We can already exclude books like Sirach, Judith, and Tobit because they were not received by the Jews, and were only inconsistently received among the Christians. However, even if we were to ignore the standard of reception, we would still exclude these books because the original has been lost. The same would apply to Baruch, the Epistle of Jeremy, the Prayer of Mannaseh, Wisdom of Solomon, and the deuterocanonical parts of Esther and Daniel, if one were to argue that those were originally written in Hebrew.
Other Criteria
These are not even all the exclusionary criteria we can use. For example, we can also look at the truth (John 17:17) and beauty of the works. However, because beauty is often in the eye of the beholder, and because truth will focus too much on the details for a general presentation like this, I will reserve those criteria for the rebuttal, in case my sparring partner offers up any concrete examples that allegedly meet the exclusionary criteria I’ve mentioned above.
Jewish Reception and the Jewish Canon
Jesus and the Apostles were Jewish and had a Jewish canon, prior to the writing of the New Testament.
Although Jesus was willing to push back against the traditions of men held by the Pharisees, there is no good reason to think that they held to some different canon of Scripture than the Pharisees with whom they interacted.
As my sparring partner has quoted in other of his debates, the Pharisees were the most religiously correct group, such that Jesus and Paul both spoke positively of their teachings (though not their actions):
Matthew 23:1-3 Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples, saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, [that] observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.
Acts 26:4-5 My manner of life from my youth, which was at the first among mine own nation at Jerusalem, know all the Jews; which knew me from the beginning, if they would testify, that after the most straitest sect of our religion I lived a Pharisee.
While Jesus did not get his understanding from the Rabbis, Paul did. Specifically, Paul was taught by Gamaliel, one of the most noted Rabbis amongst the Pharisees:
Acts 5:34 Then stood there up one in the council, a Pharisee, named Gamaliel, a doctor of the law, had in reputation among all the people, and commanded to put the apostles forth a little space;
Acts 22:3 I am verily a man [which am] a Jew, born in Tarsus, [a city] in Cilicia, yet brought up in this city at the feet of Gamaliel, [and] taught according to the perfect manner of the law of the fathers, and was zealous toward God, as ye all are this day.
Acts 23:6 But when Paul perceived that the one part were Sadducees, and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, Men [and] brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee: of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question.
Philippians 3:5 Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, [of] the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee;
I’ve already mentioned above that today the Jewish canon is exactly the same 39 books as we are affirming tonight, and no more than that. But that’s today! What about the past? There is evidence of this being the Jewish canon going back to the first century. Moreover, of all the potential first-century Jewish canons, the modern Jewish canon has the best evidence for being the canon that Paul is referring to, namely the first century canon of the Pharisees.
Canon Evidence
Jewish Evidence
We have evidence from first and second century Jewish sources that they held to the same canon that the Rabbis have today. For example, while Josephus does not give a list of the books, Josephus says (Thackery’s translation) in Against Apion Book I (around 37-42):
we do not possess myriads of inconsistent books, conflicting with each other. Our books, those which are justly accredited, are but two and twenty, and contain the record of all time. Of these, five are the books of Moses, comprising the laws and the traditional history from the birth of man down to the death of the lawgiver. This period falls only a little short of three thousand years. From the death of Moses until Artaxerxes, who succeeded Xerxes as king of Persia, the prophets subsequent to Moses wrote the history of the events of their own times in thirteen books. The remaining four books contain hymns to God and precepts for the conduct of human life.
A first or second century portion of 2 Esdras (II Esdras xiv. 44-46) gives the number of books as 24 (rather than 22). Although Bava Batra 14b, in the Babylonian Talmud, does not give a number, it lists the books beyond the Pentateuch with specificity, in the context of explaining the order of the books. An order of the books is logically subsequent to the question of the number of books.
I’ve already provided some primary sources, but what do “the scholars” say:
John J. Collins, Introduction To The Hebrew Bible, 3rd Edition, (Fortress Press, 2018) p. 6: “... it is at this time (70—100 C.E.) that we first find references to a fixed number of authoritative books. It may be that the list adopted consisted of the books that were accepted by the Pharisees already before the fall of Jerusalem.”
That is, of course, my view. Timothy Lim agrees.
Timothy H. Lim, The Formation of the Jewish Canon, (Yale University, 2013) p. 179, expresses it more strongly: “Scholarly opinion remains divided over the origins and history of the canon. There are, however, two basic positions with variations on the theme, Sid Leiman and Roger Beckwith argue that the canon was closed by the second century BCE, whereas Albert Sundberg and John Barton maintain that it remained open well into the first centuries of the Common Era.” Later on the same page, Lim explains: “The hypothesis advocated in this book is that by the end of the first century of the Common Era the Pharisaic canon became the canon of Rabbinic Judaism because the majority of those who gathered in the grand coalition at Yavneh were Pharisees. … Before there was one common canon, there were several collections of authoritative scriptures held by different groups.”
So, I agree with Lim’s main point that it is the canon of the Pharisees that won out.
The views at the other extreme suggest that there was no fixed canon, as mentioned above. Lee Martin McDonald is an example here. He claims:
Lee Martin McDonald, Formation of the Bible: the Story of the Church’s Canon, 2nd Edition, (Hendrickson Publishers, 2023), p. 87, (with whom I disagree) forcefully insists “The evidence above assures that a fixed biblical canon in the early churches began to develop during the fourth century.” He also insists (p. 84): “Jewish interest in a fixed collection of Scriptures apparently had no impact on the writers of the New Testament or the early church fathers.”
The central flaw of McDonald’s view is that shorthand like “Scripture” and “all the law and prophets” implies some kind of known list, even if it was not universally agreed.
F.F. Bruce highlights some fascinating circumstantial evidence that the canonization process probably accepted Ezra-Nehemiah before it accepted the Chronicles, and that this was before Jesus’ earthly ministry, because of his reference to an account from the end of 2 Chronicles.
F.F. Bruce, The Canon of Scripture, (Intervarsity Press, 1988), p. 30, explains: “... it cannot be by accident that, in the traditional arrangement of the books, Chronicles follows Ezra-Nehemiah. This is quite an unnatural sequence, which could not have been adopted without some substantial reason. Ezra-Nehemiah takes up the history of Israel where Chronicles leaves off, whether or not Ezra-Nehemiah was originally part of the same work as Chronicles–’the work of the Chronicler’, as it is often called. Practically every edition of the Old Testament, therefore, apart from the Hebrew Bible (and versions which follow its order), makes Ezra-Nehemiah come immediately after Chronicles (which is the logical and chronological sequence).” Bruce goes on to observe on the next page, (p. 31), that Jesus himself selects the first martyr in the Hebrew canon and the last martyr in the Hebrew canon when describing those whose blood God was going to require from that generation:
Matthew 23:35 That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.
Luke 11:51 From the blood of Abel unto the blood of Zacharias, which perished between the altar and the temple: verily I say unto you, It shall be required of this generation.
2 Chronicles 24:20-22 And the Spirit of God came upon Zechariah the son of Jehoiada the priest, which stood above the people, and said unto them, Thus saith God, Why transgress ye the commandments of the LORD, that ye cannot prosper? because ye have forsaken the LORD, he hath also forsaken you. And they conspired against him, and stoned him with stones at the commandment of the king in the court of the house of the LORD. Thus Joash the king remembered not the kindness which Jehoiada his father had done to him, but slew his son. And when he died, he said, The LORD look upon [it], and require [it].
Christian Evidence
We have evidence from Cyril of Jerusalem, in his Catechetical Lectures (written around AD 350), who says that the number of Old Testament Scriptures is 22 and he says that this is the Septuagint canon. Of course, our Roman Catholic friends will be excited to point out that he includes the books of Baruch and the Epistle of Jeremy as being associated with Jeremiah.
Likewise, Eusebius preserves a writing from Melito of Sardis that enumerates a short list of the Old Testament books. Once again, our Roman Catholic friends like to latch on to some minor inconsistencies: Esther seems to be left out, for example. The same thing applies to Athanasius, who affirms the 22-book enumeration and then gives a listing of books, purposely excluding Esther, but including Baruch and the Epistle of Jeremy. Jerome finally provides exactly the same canon we have today, and his opinion was maintained in high regard (even if it was not followed by all) in the Western churches throughout the middle ages right up until Trent.
Rational Arguments (Specifically for Tony L of “The Good Fight”)
Argument 1:
If Jesus (and others) could use shorthand for the Old Testament, like “the Scriptures,” then people in 1st century Judea must have had a good idea of what the shorthand referred to. => If Jesus used shorthand, there must have been a known canon.
They did use such shorthand.
So, there must have been a known canon. The people of 1st century Judea must have had a good idea of what terms like “the Scriptures” and “the law and the prophets” referred to.
How can we know what the known canon was? If we accept the theological premises explained above, namely that the books that are canon will be received by the Jews and then by the Christians, we can look at the reception data. We will note some inconsistencies in that reception data.
Argument 2:
If Paul and Timothy knew the canon, they would have shared this information with early Christians;
They did know the canon;
So we can conclude that early Christians were informed about the canon.
However, by the fourth century, the lists of books that make up the canon differ from one another. Jerome’s list is not the same as the North African councils, and neither of them is exactly identical to Cyril of Jerusalem or Athanasius.
Argument 3:
From the rival canon lists, we should go with the list having the strongest evidence;
The list having the strongest evidence is the 39 book list;
Therefore, we should follow the 39 book list.
But how is it the strongest evidence?
In a nutshell, the very long canon lists include books that were never received as Scripture by the Jewish people, such as the books of the Maccabees and Judith. They also contain books that were received - if at all - very poorly among the Jewish people, like Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach, and Tobit.
The shorter canon lists, on the other hand, only differ in very minor ways from the 39 book canon: such as by excluding Esther and/or including Baruch and the Epistle of Jeremy. When we recognize that the inclusion of Baruch and the Epistle was under a mistaken view that they were to be received with Jeremiah, we can set them aside. As for Esther, we can appreciate why a book that does not use the word “God” might be received with hesitation, but this debate is not about why Esther should be included, but why the other books should be excluded.
In conclusion, the weight of the evidence both internal to Scripture and external to Scripture supports the 39 book Old Testament canon.
No comments:
Post a Comment