How did we get our Old Testament? Who decided which books made the cut (and became “canon”)? Why are there differences between the list of books in Catholic and Protestant Bibles?
Before we get into these questions, however, it is important to differentiate a couple terms: “Scripture” and “Canon.” “Scripture” can refer to any writing considered by a community to be inspired, authoritative, and normative for that community. “Canon,” a term that originally meant “measuring stick” refers to a recognized collection of inspired writings.
What Criteria Were Used for the Old Testament Canon?
Eugene Ulrich stated that there needed to be three qualities present in order for one to speak of a “canon.” The collection…
- was the result of judgment made by the community,
- denotes a closed list,
- concerns biblical books.[1]
While we do not have any record of a formal discussion of criteria required to be included in canon, there do seem to be some criteria that we can infer from the books that are part of the Old Testament canon and those that are not.
First, the author, whether directly stated or by strong tradition, needed to be recognized as an inspired person (like a prophet). Even books like the Psalms, which are not authored by a traditional-style prophet, have David as author of at least half of the Psalms and he is called a prophet in Acts 2:30.
Second, the book needed to have relatively universal acceptance amongst the Jews.
Third, it needed to be consistent with the rest of the accepted scriptures. Rabbi Hillel (died A.D. 10) came up with 7 rules of interpreting texts and most of these rules were built on the assumption that the scriptures needed to be consistent with each other.
“The author, whether directly stated or by strong tradition, needed to be recognized as an inspired person.”
So, what was the canon of Scripture of the Jews of the 1st century—and by likely extension the canon of Jesus and Paul? First, we will look at the Old Testament’s sections and then take a look at what books comprised these sections.
Into What Sections Was the Old Testament Canon Divided?
Several times in the Gospels, there are mentions of “collections” of accepted scriptures. Sometimes they are in bipartite division like the Law and the Prophets (Luke 16:16), and other times they are a tripartite division like that of the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms (Luke 24:44). Both the bipartite and tripartite arrangement of the Scriptures seem to have been used interchangeably for the same scriptures.
In modern Judaism, the tripartite Old Testament canon is referred to as the “Tanach,” an acronym based on the Hebrew words for Law (Torah), Prophets (Nebiim) and Writings (Ketubim).
What Books Formed the Old Testament Canon?
What books constituted the Tanach is cited in a couple of different sources.
First, Josephus in Against Apion Vol. 1 notes that the Jews considered Scripture as 22 books. These are probably the same 39 books found in most English Bibles because the Jews notably combined books that we separate. For example, the 12 Minor Prophets are considered one book, known as the book of the Twelve. The other books combined include joining 1 and 2 Samuel, 1 and 2 Kings, 1 and 2 Chronicles, Judges and Ruth, Ezra and Nehemiah, and Jeremiah and Lamentations. Combining all these books brings us to Josephus’s number of 22 (which probably was used as it is the number of letters in the Hebrew alphabet). However, Josephus does not name the books by name, but divides them into the 5 books of Moses, 13 prophets, and 4 writings.
Another major source of our list of Old Testament books comes from the Babylonian Talmud which dates to about A.D. 600 but likely includes traditions from much earlier. A section called Baba Bathra 15a and 15b are part of a Babylonian Talmud tractate which discusses the canon and authorship of various books. It seems to be the standard 24 book canon.
“What books constituted the Tanach is attested in a couple of different sources.”
Beyond this, we have the witness of the New Testament in which all but ten of the Old Testament books are quoted, with the quotes being understood as Scripture. Even among the ones that are not quoted, many of them are alluded to.
When it comes to what the Dead Sea Scroll community considered Scripture, every Old Testament book save Esther has been found so far (though to be fair, some extra-biblical books have also been found at Qumran, the site of the Dead Sea Scroll community). While there was some debate about a few books such as Esther, Ecclesiastes, the Song of Solomon, and Ezekiel, there can be some consensus that the canon of the Old Testament books was closed by the 1st century.
What About the Apocrypha?
But what of the books that are found in other Christian Bibles like those of Roman Catholic and the Eastern Orthodox churches? Both the Roman Catholic and the Eastern Orthodox churches include the Apocrypha (which means “hidden books”) which are 13 to 15 books composed mostly between the end of the Old Testament (400 B.C.) until the time of Christ (A.D. 26). Some branches of the Church, such as the Ethiopian Church, even include some works classified as Pseudepigrapha (which means “false writings,” because they are attributed to someone who didn’t write it) in their Bibles.
However, it seems that most Jews did not accept these Apocryphal works as Scripture. One of the primary reasons is found within the Apocryphal books themselves: 1 Maccabees 4:46, 9:27, and 14:41 seem to indicate that prophecy ended with Zechariah and Malachi. The assumption seems to be that in order to have a book considered as Scripture, it needed a prophetically inspired author. Many of the Apocryphal and Pseudepigraphal works are by unknown authors and after the time period of Zechariah and Malachi. In addition, the Manual of Discipline, which was a guide for the Dead Sea Scroll Community, did not include these books in what they considered Scripture.
“It seems that most Jews did not accept these Apocryphal works as Scripture.”
What about the fact that the Septuagint version of the Old Testament includes the books of the Apocrypha? While this is true, the Septuagint Old Testament books were translated at various times (it doesn’t seem to be a single uniform project), and the Apocryphal books were for the most part written in Greek, with the exception of Ecclesiasticus, which was originally in Hebrew (thus, they seem to be written no earlier than Alexander the Great’s conquest). The Apocryphal books were considered useful for the church and so were included, and some early Christian canon lists do include some of these books as well as some Pseudepigraphal works. However, these books do not show evidence of being considered Scripture by the 1st century Jews or even the New Testament authors.
But aren’t some of these Apocryphal books quoted in the New Testament? There is really only one likely Apocryphal quote in the New Testament. Some have attested the book of Jude, verses 14-15, as being from the Apocryphal book of Enoch. However, quotation in the scriptures is not proof that a work is inspired. The Old Testament mentions several works, such as the Book of Jashar and the Book of the Wars of the Lord, which are not included in the canon. Paul actually quotes Greek playwrights (see Titus 1:12 as an example), and they certainly are not considered Scripture. The Jude reference also is lacking formula like “it is written” or that “the Scriptures might be fulfilled” that is often attached to quotations of Scripture.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the Hebrew Old Testament canon, likely completed by 400 B.C., included only the books that are found in most Protestant Bibles. These books, numbering 39 in our Bibles, were the Bible of Jesus and Paul.
[1] Eugene Ulrich, “The Notion and Definition of Canon,” in The Canon Debate, edited by Lee McDonald and James Sanders (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2001), 34.
For a video teaching on this topic, click here. For more such videos, check out KAPOL Apologetics.
