| Part ofa series on the |
| Bible |
|---|
 |
Outline of Bible-related topics Bible portal |
There is no scholarly consensus as to when thecanon of theHebrew Bible (orTanakh) was fixed.Rabbinic Judaism recognizes the twenty-four books of theMasoretic Text (five books of theTorah, eight books of theNevi'im, and eleven books of theKetuvim) as the authoritative version of theTanakh.[1] Of these books, theBook of Daniel ofKetuvim has the most recent final date of composition (chapters 10–12 were written sometime between 168 and 164 BCE).[2][3][4] The canon was therefore fixed at some time after this date. Some scholars argue that it was fixed during theHasmonean dynasty (140–40 BCE),[5] while others argue it was not fixed until the second century CE or even later.[6]
The book of2 Maccabees, itself not a part of the Jewish canon, describesNehemiah (around 400 BCE) as having "founded a library and collected books about the kings and prophets, and the writings ofDavid, and letters of kings about votive offerings" (2:13–15). TheBook of Nehemiah suggests that the priest-scribeEzra brought theTorah back fromBabylon to theSecond Temple ofJerusalem (8–9) around the same time period. Both 1 and 2 Maccabees suggest thatJudas Maccabeus (around 167 BCE) also collected sacred books (3:42–50,2:13–15,15:6–9).
TheBook of Sirach provides evidence of a collection ofsacred scriptures similar to portions of the Hebrew Bible. The book, which is dated to between 196 and 175 BCE[7][8] (and is not included in the Jewish canon), includes a list of names of biblical figures (44–50) in the same order as is found in the Torah (Law) and the Nevi'im (Prophets), and which includes the names of some men mentioned in theKetuvim (Writings). Based on this list of names, some scholars have conjectured that the author,Yeshua ben Sira, had access to, and considered authoritative, the books ofGenesis,Exodus,Leviticus,Numbers,Deuteronomy,Joshua,Judges,Samuel,Kings,Job,Isaiah,Jeremiah,Ezekiel, and theTwelve Minor Prophets.[9]
His list excludes names fromRuth,Song of Songs,Esther andDaniel, suggesting that people mentioned in these works did not fit the criteria of his current listing of great men,[10] or that he did not have access to these books, or did not consider them authoritative. In the prologue to the Greek translation of Ben Sira's work, his grandson, dated at 132 BCE, mentions both the Torah and the Nevi'im, as well as a third group of books which is not yet named asKetuvim (the prologue simply identifies "the rest of the books").[11]
TheSeptuagint (LXX) is aKoine Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures, translated in stages between the 3rd to 2nd century BCE inAlexandria, Egypt.
According to Michael Barber, the Torah and Nevi'im are recognized as canonical in the Septuagint, but the Ketuvim appear not to have been definitively canonized yet. The translation (and editing) work might have been done by seventy (or seventy-two) elders who translated the Hebrew Bible into Koine Greek, but the historical evidence for this story is rather sketchy. Beyond that, according to him, it is virtually impossible to determine when each of the other various books was incorporated into the Septuagint.[12][unreliable source?]
Philo andJosephus (both associated with first-centuryHellenistic Judaism) ascribed divine inspiration to its translators, and the primary ancient account of the process is the circa 2nd-century BCELetter of Aristeas. Some of theDead Sea Scrolls attest to Hebrew texts other than those on which theMasoretic Text was based; in some cases, these newly discovered texts accord with the Septuagint version.[13]
In the 1st century CE,Philo Judaeus of Alexandria discussed sacred books, but made no mention of a three-part division of the Bible;[citation needed] although hisDe vita contemplativa[14] (sometimes suggested in the 19th century to be of later, Christian, authorship)[15] does state at III(25) that "studying… 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." Philo quotes almost exclusively from the Torah, but occasionally fromBen Sira andWisdom of Solomon.[16][17]
According to Michael Barber, the earliest and most explicit testimony of a Hebrew canonical list comes fromJosephus (37 CE – c. 100 CE).[12][citation needed] Josephus refers to sacred scriptures divided into three parts, the five books of the Torah, thirteen books of the Nevi'im, and four other books of hymns and wisdom:
For we have not an innumerable multitude of books among us, disagreeing from and contradicting one another [as the Greeks have], but only twenty-two books, which contain all the records of all the past times; which are justly believed to be divine; and of them five belong to Moses, which contain his laws and the traditions of the origin of mankind till his death.… the prophets, who were after Moses, wrote down what was done in their times in thirteen books. The remaining four books contain hymns to God, and precepts for the conduct of human life.[18]
Since there are 24 books in the current Jewish canon instead of the 22 mentioned by Josephus, some scholars have suggested that he consideredRuth part ofJudges, andLamentations part of Jeremiah.[19] Other scholars suggest that at the time Josephus wrote, such books asSong of Songs orEcclesiastes were not yet considered canonical.[20]
According toGerald A. Larue, Josephus' listing represents what came to be the Jewish canon, although scholars were still wrestling with problems of the authority of certain writings at the time that he was writing. Significantly, Josephus characterizes the 22 books as canonical because they were divinely inspired; he mentions other historical books that were not divinely inspired and that he therefore did not believe belonged in the canon.[21]
The first allusion to a 24-book Jewish collection of books is found in2 Esdras, which was probably written sometime between 90[22] and 100 CE,[23] afterthe destruction of the Second Temple. At the end of the narrative, Ezra receives the Holy Spirit and dictates 94 books. Then God tells him:
Make public the twenty-four books that you wrote first, and let the worthy and the unworthy read them; but keep the seventy that were written last, in order to give them to the wise among your people.
There are no clues in the text as to which of these 94 books were considered the publicly revealed 24, but the publicly revealed books probably are the same or close to the 24 books of the Jewish scriptures.[24]
The Rabbis also debated the status of canonical books. In the 2nd century CE,Rabbi Akiva declared that those who read non-canonical books would not share in theafterlife.[25] But, according toBacher andGrätz, Akiva was not opposed to a private reading of theApocrypha, as is evident from the fact that he himself makes frequent use ofSirach.[26]
They also debated the status ofEcclesiastes andSong of Songs concluding like the tradition of RabbiSimeon ben Azzai that they are holy.[27] Akiva stoutly defended, however, the canonicity of the Song of Songs, andEsther.[28] ButHeinrich Graetz's statements[29] respecting Akiva's attitude toward the canonicity of the Song of Songs are misconceptions, asI.H. Weiss has to some extent shown.[30] He was antagonistic toward the Septuagint text family and the apocryphal books contained therein, since Christians drew so heavily from them.
TheMishnah, compiled at the end of the 2nd century CE, describes a debate over the status of some books of Ketuvim, and in particular over whether or not they render the handsritually impure.Yadaim 3:5 calls attention to a debate overSong of Songs and Ecclesiastes. TheMegillat Ta'anit, in a discussion of days when fasting is prohibited but that are not noted in the Bible, mentions the holiday ofPurim. Based on these, and a few similar references,Heinrich Graetz concluded in 1871 that there had been aCouncil of Jamnia (orYavne in Hebrew) which had decided Jewish canon sometime in the late 1st century (c. 70–90). This became the prevailing scholarly consensus for much of the 20th century.
W. M. Christie was the first to dispute this popular theory in 1925.[31]Jack P. Lewis wrote a critique of the popular consensus in 1964.[32]Raymond E. Brown largely supported Lewis in his review,[33] as did Lewis' discussion of the topic in 1992'sAnchor Bible Dictionary.[34] Sid Z. Leiman made an independent challenge for his University of Pennsylvania thesis published later as a book in 1976, in which he wrote that none of the sources used to support the theory actually mentioned books that had been withdrawn from a canon, and questioned the whole premise that the discussions were about canonicity at all, stating that they were actually dealing with other concerns entirely. Other scholars have since joined in and today the theory is largely discredited.[35]
Some scholars argue that the Jewish canon was fixed earlier by theHasmonean dynasty.[5]Jacob Neusner published books in 1987 and 1988 that argued that the notion of a biblical canon was not prominent in 2nd-centuryRabbinic Judaism or even later and instead that a notion of Torah was expanded to include theMishnah,Tosefta,Jerusalem Talmud,Babylonian Talmud andmidrashim.[6] Thus, there is no scholarly consensus as to when the Jewish canon was set.
Sirach… knew the Law and Prophets in their present form and sequence; for he glorifies (ch. xliv.–xlix.) the great men of antiquity in the order in which they successively follow in Holy Writ. He not only knew the name [Hebrew omitted] ("The Twelve Prophets"), but cites Malachi iii. 23, and is acquainted with by far the greatest part of the Hagiographa, as is certain from the Hebrew original of his writings recently discovered. He knew the Psalms, which he ascribes to David (Ecclus. [Sirach] xlvii. 8, 9), and the Proverbs: "There were those who found out musical harmonies, and set forth proverbs [A. V., "poetical compositions"] in writing" (xliv. 5). An allusion to Proverbs and probably to the Song of Solomon is contained in his words on King Solomon: "The countries marveled at thee for thy songs, and proverbs, and parables [or "dark sayings"], and interpretations" (xlvii. 17); the last three words being taken from Prov. i. 6, while the Song of Solomon is alluded to in "songs." He would have had no authority to speak of "songs" at all from I Kings v. 12; he must have known them. While he had no knowledge of Ecclesiastes, his didactic style proves that he used Job, as is also indicated by the words [Hebrew omitted] (xliv. 4, and afterward, [Hebrew omitted]). Ecclesiastes, Esther, and Daniel are not included in his canon (see Halévy, "Etude sur la Partie du Texte Hébreux de l'Ecclésiastique," pp. 67 et seq., Paris, 1897); he considers Chronicles and Ezra-Nehemiah as Holy Scripture (xlix. 12 = Ezra iii. 2; xlix. 13 = Neh. iii. and vi.; compare Neh. vi. 12); he mentions distinctly "the laws and prophets" (xxxix. 1); in the following sentences there are allusions to other writings; and verse 6 of the same chapter leads to the supposition that in his time only wisdom-writings and prayers were being written.
However, it was not until the time ofAugustine of Hippo (354–430 CE) that the Greek translation of the Jewish scriptures came to be called by the Latin termseptuaginta. [70 rather than 72] In hisCity of God 18.42, while repeating thestory of Aristeas with typical embellishments, Augustine adds the remark, 'It is their translation that it has now become traditional to call the Septuagint' …[Latin omitted]… Augustine thus indicates that this name for the Greek translation of the scriptures was a recent development. But he offers no clue as to which of the possible antecedents led to this development: Exod 24:1–8,Josephus [Antiquities 12.57, 12.86], or an elision. …this nameSeptuagint appears to have been a fourth- to fifth-century development.
Part of a series on theBiblical canon | ||
|---|---|---|
| Background |  | |
| Christian canons | ||