Most people know that the Protestant Bible is actually a collection of 66 individual books, 39 in the OT and 27 in the NT. It is generally understood that the Bible was written by about 40 different men over a period of about 1600 years. But how did these books come to be collected as we have them today? This question brings us to a study of the canon. 

The word canon comes from the Greek word kanon, which in turn is taken from the Hebrew word kaneh, meaning a reed or measuring stick. Later it came to refer to literature of acceptable standards, and then it came to mean the authoritative books accepted by a religious community. 

The term actually occurs in 2 places in the NT and is translated in the King James Version as "rule" in both places. 2 Corinthians 10:13 says, "But we will not boast of things without our measure, but according to the measure of the rule which God hath distributed to us, a measure to reach even unto you." Paul further states in Galations 6:16, "And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on them, and mercy."

Therefore, when we talk about the canon of the Bible, we are referring to that collection of books that has generally been accepted as being inspired of God and as the authoritative rule of God's people. This lesson will focus on the history of how these books came to be collected as a whole.

Today we generally divide the 39 books of the OT into the following 5 divisions:

• The Books of the Law
• The Books of History
• The Books of Poetry
• The Major Prophets
• The Minor Prophets

However, the Jews themselves divided the OT collection of books into only 3 divisions:

• The Law
• The Prophets
• The Writings

The books of the Law contained the 5 books of Moses: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. When these writings were completed they were accepted by Israel as divinely authoritative. Scripture itself teaches us concerning the process of inspiration and preservation of these books of the Law.

--Exodus 24:4 (Moses began to write down all the words of God)

--Exodus 40:20 (2 tablets placed in the ark of the covenant)

--Deuteronomy 31:9, 24-26 (Moses writes book of the law which is then placed beside the ark of the covenant)

--Deuteronomy 17:18-20 (kings would be required to make a copy of the law on a scroll and to read and observe it)

--Joshua 1:8 (maintains importance of the book of the law)

--2 Kings 22 (Josiah finds the book of the law; acknowledges that it is the divinely authorized word of God)

Deuteronomy 18:18 clarifies that the words and writings given through Moses were not the only words to be accepted as inspired and authoritative. God stated that the words of the prophets were also to be accepted as the word of God. Throughout these books of the OT we find over and over again the statement that the prophets were proclaiming the word of God. Therefore it is easy to understand that these books would also be collected and accepted as part of the OT canon of scripture.

This division of scripture (as held by ancient Israel) contained altogether 21 books of our OT. First, there were the so-called Former Prophets: Joshua, Judges, 1 & 2 Samuel, and 1 & 2 Kings. Then there were the so-called Latter Prophets: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the 12 Minor Prophets (Hosea-Malachi).

The 3^rd division of scripture contained the 5 books of Poetry (Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Song of Solomon) as well as these remaining 8 books: Ruth, Esther, Lamentations, Daniel, Ezra, Nehemiah, and 1 & 2 Chronicles. These books were written by men who were inspired of God but nevertheless were not officially recognized as occupying the status of a prophet. There is no clear passage in the Bible that tells us who actually collected these books nor when such was done, but evidence makes it clear that these books of the third division were indeed recognized as part of the OT canon.

As far back as can be traced, we find the Jews holding to the 39 books of the OT as their authoritative canon. Many scholars state that the canon of the OT was complete and fixed by the time of the 1^st century. Throughout the writings of the NT there are numerous references to the writings of the OT:

--"Scripture" (John 10:35; 19:36; 2 Peter 1:20)

--"Scriptures" (Matthew 22:29; Acts 18:24)

--"Holy scriptures" (Romans 1:2; 2 Timothy 3:15)

--"law and prophets" (Matt 5:17; 7:12; 22:40; Luke 16:16; 24:44; Acts 13:15; 28:23)

--"oracles of God" (Romans 3:2; Acts 7:38; Hebrews 5:12; 1 Peter 4:11)

Throughout the NT, these references to scripture generally refer to the OT as a whole.

Particular attention should be given to the statements made by Jesus Himself in regards to the OT scripture. His remarks indicate an acceptance of the OT as a whole and as unconditionally inspired by God:

--Matthew 5:17, "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill."

--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 22:40, "[Love God and neighbor...] 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."

--Luke 16:29, Abraham said to the rich man in Hades concerning his five brothers, "They have Moses and the prophets...."

It is important to understand that a reference to the law and the prophets by Jesus or anyone in the NT does not necessarily exclude the 3^rd division known as the writings. For all practical purposes, the phrase "law and the prophets" is a reference to the complete 39 books of the OT canon. Quotations and references from the 3^rd division are found throughout the NT and are called "scripture" a total of 37 times.

Jesus makes this clear in several examples:

--John 10:31-36 (Jews were going to stone Him; He refers to OT by quoting Psalm 82:6 and then states that scripture cannot be broken.)

--Matthew 26:54 (He accepted being arrested so that the scriptures might be fulfilled, indicating His acceptance of numerous OT writings concerning the Messiah; all combined constituted "the scriptures.")

--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." (The book of Psalms contains numerous Messianic references, so it seems natural that Jesus would refer to the 3^rd division of Writings by simply saying "in the psalms.")

Finally, there are altogether about 700 quotations and references to the OT found throughout the NT. Out of the 39 books, citations from 31 are made, coming from all parts of the OT and from every division. Certainly there is every reason to have complete confidence that the 39 books we find in our OT today are the divinely inspired and authoritative word of God.

There is a notable difference between the Catholic Bible and the Protestant Bible. The Catholic Bible contains several books, as well as additional sections in other books, interspersed throughout the OT that are not found in the Protestant Bible. The Catholic Bible contains the 39 books of the Hebrew canon plus additional material known as deuterocanonical (later or second canon). This deuterocanonical material consists of seven additional books (Tobit, Judith, 1 & 2 Maccabees, Wisdom, Sirach, and Baruch), as well as other additions to the canonical book of Esther and the canonical book of Daniel (The Prayer of Azariah, Susanna, Bel and the Dragon). Protestants (and some Catholics throughout time) refer to these books as the Apocrypha (books of doubtful authenticity).

These additional books are found in the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the OT. The original work was apparently done around 250-150 BC by approximately 70 different scholars, hence the name and the designation LXX. Since many of the Jews of that time (including the days of the early church) were Greek speaking (having given up their own language), the LXX came to be commonly used by them. Furthermore, since the early church was largely composed of converts among these Greek speaking Jews, the LXX continued to be the OT Scripture of the early church. It was thus commonly used by Jesus, the apostles, and their converts.

The Greek scholars did take numerous liberties in modifying the text while translating from the Hebrew to the Greek; it is, in fact, in many places, a rather free paraphrase. When NT writers quoted from OT writers, they generally quoted from the Greek translation. This explains the variations found between the quotes in the Greek NT and the original wording found in the Hebrew OT (from which modern translations are generally derived).

In Historical and Geographical Background for the Development of the Two Old Testament Canons, Paul Flanagan and Robert Schihl explain the differences between the Hebrew and Greek canons: "In Palestine, with the return of Ezra from exile (458 BC) and Nehemiah (445 BC), and the prophecy of Malachi (433 BC) there is established biblical silence--no further known divine revelation. . . There is no biblical silence in the Greek Septuagint: the Septuagint conveys the original text of some books (Wisdom, 2 Maccabees) and the basic canonical form of others, either in part (Esther, Daniel, Sirach) or as a whole (Tobit, Judith, Baruch, and 1 Maccabees). While the Septuagint was a collection of the books of the Old Testament and an attempt at a canon, it was not a fixed canon in the first century. It was a popular translation of scripture because Greek was the common language of the entire Mediterranean world by the time of the Apostolic Church."

In other words, the Hebrew canon stops at Malachi and contains only the same 39 books that most Bibles contain today. The Greek LXX, however, adds several more books that were written during the time of "biblical silence" that were apparently not accepted as inspired by the Jews of that time. Since the LXX was being used to prove Jesus as the Messiah, those Jews who did not convert to Christianity ceased their use of it around the end of the 1st century. Perhaps in further opposition to such, they met in A.D. 90 to confirm the long-accepted canon of 39 books.

The RCC takes the position that, since the LXX was largely the Bible of the early church, all its contents ought to thus be considered as canonical. It is not possible, however, to determine with certainty the exact contents of the LXX. Zondervan's Bible Dictionary says: "Little is certainly known about it, for our information is frequently based on ancient traditions of doubtful authenticity, and scholars are divided in their judgments both concerning its origin and its usefulness in textual criticism" (p. 770). Furthermore, the Catholic Encyclopedia - Canon of the Old Testament admits: "The oldest extant copies date from the fourth and fifth centuries of our era, and were therefore made by Christian hands." In other words, there are no copies of the LXX of any period close to the time it originated, and thus there are no absolute means of verifying its original contents. Some scholars argue that, lacking any contrary evidence of that time period, the original LXX was identical to the Hebrew canon of 39 books. Some even go so far as to suggest that the original LXX never contained more than the Pentateuch and that the rest of the OT books were added by Christians at a later time.

Finally, it is acknowledged that the apocryphal/deuterocanonical books do provide some historical information regarding that time, but Protestant scholars (as did numerous Catholic scholars throughout history) believe that the inclusion of them in the Biblical canon is inappropriate as there is not sufficient evidence of inspiration.

Allow one example of such inferiority to be given from the end of 2 Maccabees (from which is found a passage that Catholics use to support their doctrine of Purgatory): "Author's Apology. Since Nicanor's doings ended in this way, with the city remaining in possession of the Hebrews from that time on, I will bring my own story to an end here too. If it is well written and to the point, that is what I wanted; if it is poorly done and mediocre, that is the best I could do. Just as it is harmful to drink wine alone or water alone, whereas mixing wine with water makes a more pleasant drink that increases delight, so a skillfully composed story delights the ears of those who read the work. Let this, then, be the end" (15:37-39). It is obvious that the writer claims to simply be writing a story; he claims no inspiration from God and sounds nothing like any inspired writer of Scripture.

The early Christians continued to hold to the OT as their divinely-given Scripture, but they soon came to realize the need to value 1^st century apostolic writings as well. Recorded in John 14:16-17, 25-26 and 16:13 is the promise given by Jesus that the Holy Spirit would come and guide His disciples into all truth. Through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, Peter and the others preached on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2). This process of inspiration continued in their preaching and in their writing.

It is assumed that all NT books were written before the end of the 1^st century. Paul wrote letters to several churches and asked that they be read publicly when the Christians assembled (I Thessalonians 5:27; Colossians 4:16). Early historical accounts clarify that apostolic writings were read on a regular basis in the Christian assemblies.

In Paul's letter to the Colossians, he commands that they exchange letters with the church of the Laodiceans (4:16). It appears that early Christians soon began to circulate many of the apostolic writings. It is in this way, most likely, that various books of the NT began to be gathered into collections. Peter, in 2 Peter 3:16, indicates already a collection of Paul's letters (notice that Peter calls them "scriptures" and places them alongside that of the OT).

In the 2^nd century, following the death of all the apostles and the end of the direct inspiration by the Holy Spirit, the writings of the apostles became more valuable. The desire to exchange and collect such writings increased. The gospel accounts appear to be quickly accepted by the Christian community. Paul's letters were commonly accepted. There was yet, however, no mention of a canon of the NT; there were only casual collections of writings that were being passed around.

Soon, however, spurious or pseudonymous letters came into circulation among the churches (letters falsely bearing apostolic names and/or claiming apostolic authority). Furthermore, false teachers arose claiming knowledge handed down by tradition. All this led to the beginning of the canon as Christians realized the need to determine what writings were genuine and what writings were not. By the end of the 2^nd century, the idea of a NT canon was clearly understood. The extent of that canon, however, was yet to be determined.

It is important to understand the criteria used by early scholars to determine the canonicity of any book. The true (and obvious) test of canonicity is/was inspiration. If a book was clearly inspired of God, then certainly it was accepted as part of the NT canon. The question then remains: how was inspiration to be demonstrated?

There was a clear and distinguishable difference between those books that were genuinely inspired and those books that were not. The apocryphal writings (such as the Didache, Shepherd of Hermas, the Epistle of Barnabas, and the Gospel of the Hebrews) were of such an inferior class that such could be noted with reasonable certainty. These books were generally more concerned with such things as miracles than they were about teaching.

Furthermore, there was little actual concentration on Jesus Christ Himself, and the moral, ethical, and spiritual effect of these books was inferior to that of genuinely inspired writings. On the other hand, books that were obviously written by one of the apostles were found to be clearly superior; they were therefore accepted by churches everywhere.

According to history, several books were universally accepted by every church without any doubt or hesitation. These were the 4 gospels, Acts, the 13 letters of Paul, 1 Peter and 1 John (20 books). Several years would pass, however, before the acceptance of the complete canon of 27 books as we have today.

In the 3^rd century, Origen, a well-known scholar of that time, gave a list of generally accepted books. He acknowledged the four gospels, Acts, the 13 letters of Paul, 1 Peter, 1 John, and Revelation. He mentioned Jude, wavered in regard to James, 2 Peter, and 2 and 3 John, and he evidently hesitated concerning Hebrews because, as he said, "God alone knows who wrote it."

In the early part of the 4th century, Eusibius expressed the general Christian thought of his time. He accepted Hebrews as authentic and indicated that James, Jude, 2 Peter and 2 John were beginning to find recognition. Finally, it was in 367 that a man named Athanasius first gave a list of canonical books identical with our 27 today. Scholars since that time have generally remained in agreement that the 27 books we have in our NT are all inspired of God and are the only available such writings.

The OT was originally written in Hebrew, except for a few passages in Aramaic (language closely related to Hebrew, adopted by the Jews following the Babylonian captivity): Jeremiah 10:11; Daniel 2:4-7:28; Ezra 4:8-6:18, 7:12-26.

There are also a few Aramaic phrases in the NT: Mark 5:41 (Talitha cumi); Mark 7:34 (Ephphatha); Mark 15:34, Matthew 27:46 (Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani); 1 Corinthians 16:22 (Maranatha); Mark 14:36, Romans 8:15, Galations 4:6 (Abba). Other than these few occasions, the NT is written in Koine Greek, which was the everyday common language of the people of that day.

The original Scriptures were written on animal skins, called vellum or parchment, or on papyrus, which comes from a water plant from the marshes of the Nile. Obviously, we no longer have the original autograph copies of any of the books of the Bible. What we do possess are copies of the originals and copies of them; all these have been handed down through the years.

For a long time, the earliest complete manuscripts of the Hebrew OT were dated about AD 900-1000. These manuscripts are the work of Jewish scholars called the Masoretes; hence, their work is called the Masoretic Text.

Then, in 1947, some Palestinian herdsmen accidentally stumbled onto a cave near the Dead Sea. The Dead Sea is the largest body of water in Palestine; near this sea are the ruins of a former small village called Qumran, a city which existed from about 100 BC to AD 100. Hidden in the caves among the ruins of this old location, archaeologists discovered a few complete books and thousands of fragments written by the ancient inhabitants (generally called Essenes). Some part of every OT book (except Esther) was found; these are the oldest copies of the OT found, dated about 200 BC and still in the original Hebrew.

There are basically two reasons why so few ancient manuscripts are available. First, when transcriptions were made onto new scrolls, it was common to destroy the older writings lest they should fall into the hands of profane people. Secondly, history tells us that various attempts were made by the enemies of the Jews to destroy their copies of Scripture. In the 2^nd century BC, Antiochus Epiphanes burned all the copies he could find; later, many scrolls were destroyed in the Roman war of AD 70. Fortunately, the copies we do have of the Hebrew OT are well preserved and represent quite accurately the original autograph copies inspired by God.

Various manuscripts of the NT are to found from every time period since the 1^st century. During the 1^st 3 centuries, writing was done upon sheets of papyrus. These were bound together in a codex, much like our books today. The letters during this time period were generally all capitals with the letters not connected to one another. This style is called uncial or majuscule.

From the 4^th century to the 10^th, NT writing was still done with majuscule letters, but the writing was then done on vellum or parchment instead of on papyrus sheets. The use of these animal skins was quite common for the Hebrew OT and was now restored for copies of the NT because of its durability. The use of such parchments continued until the introduction of paper in the 14^th century.

Beginning in the 10^th century, the style of letters moved from the majuscule (all capitals) to what was called miniscule or cursive style. In this style letters are connected together much like our common cursive writing today. Miniscule writing on parchment was common until the 14^th century when it was replaced by miniscule writing on paper. All writing was replaced by printing in the 15^th century.

Keep in mind that all copying until the 15^th century was done by hand. It would seem obvious to most people that mistakes and variant readings were inevitable under such conditions. When scribes would make copies by dictation, certain words would often sound alike. Sometimes a man would depend on his memory and thereby make mistakes. Words that were not spelled accurately would eventually be changed through the process of time and copying. When a scribe was copying directly from another manuscript, at times he would misread a word or letter; at times he would look at the wrong word and thereby copy the wrong thing.

Occasionally a scribe would attempt to clarify a difficult reading or insert a marginal note. Many such errors made their way into manuscripts and were passed down through the years. There are actually many thousands of variant readings among all the manuscripts available, although it is generally held that there is no variation that poses a threat to any fundamental doctrine.

It would be obvious that the work of textual scholars is to attempt to determine what the reading of the NT ought to be. They do so by sorting through the errors and all the available manuscripts in an effort to restore as close as possible the original reading of each verse of Scripture.

The first complete translation of the Bible into English was done by John Wycliffe in 1380 before the invention of the printing press. He was unable to read Greek so he translated from previous Latin versions of the Bible. His efforts to translate the Bible into the common language of the people were severely opposed by church authorities. In 1428, following his death, to show their contempt for his work, the church ordered that Wycliffe's bones be dug up, burned, and the ashes be cast into the River Swift.

In 1525, William Tyndale produced the first printed version of the NT in English. Realizing that the Latin versions had grown full of errors through centuries of copying, he translated from available Greek manuscripts. As with Wycliffe, Tyndale's work met with anger and persecution. He was burned at the stake in 1536; copies of his book were burned as well.

After Tyndale, there were other efforts to translate the Bible into English: Coverdale Bible, 1535; The Great Bible, 1539; Taverner's Bible, 1539; The Geneva Bible, 1560; The Bishop's Bible, 1568; The Rheims-Douai Bible, 1582. Things had suddenly changed from no Bible in the language of the people to several from which to choose, thereby bringing about confusion and division.

Thus, in 1604, King James ordered a group of scholars to translate the Bible as accurately as possible from the original languages. The result is the King James Version, printed in 1611. The original KJV of 1611 was actually in an older form of English (most likely Middle English); it was revised several times: 1629, 1638, 1762, and finally in 1769. This last revision differed from the original in about 75,000 places.

In 1870 it was felt that the KJV needed revising. Scholars had learned a great deal more about the Greek and Hebrew languages since 1611. These scholars also had the benefit of many recently found manuscripts, many of which were much older than those used by the KJV translators. This revision was published in 1881 as the English Revised Version. In 1901, the same revision (with a few minor spelling changes) was published in the United States as the American Standard Version.

Since that time we have continued to see many more translations of the Bible. Many people welcome new translations; many oppose them and wish to cling to the older KJV or ASV. Is there a need to continue to have new translations of the Bible? Should we remain faithful to only the older versions?

A large number of Biblical scholars agree that it is important that we continue to translate the Bible. New manuscripts are discovered continuously which enable people to know more accurately what the original writers wrote. In 1611, the KJV translators probably knew of about 25 manuscripts of the Greek NT. By 1881, they had come to know about 1500. Today the number of manuscripts and fragments totals well over 5000.

In 1611, no known manuscripts dated earlier than the middle ages. By 1901, scholars had access to manuscripts from the 4^th century. Today, we have papyrus manuscripts from as early as the 2^nd century. Today, we can know clearer than ever before the original text of the Greek NT.

Scholars today have a greater knowledge of the Greek and Hebrew languages than ever before. Even in the days of the ASV (early part of this century) there were 500 Greek words that were not to be found anywhere outside the Greek NT. Such a singular occurrence rendered the task to translate a word accurately quite difficult. A scholar could only make an educated guess at a given word based upon the context. Today, because of further archeological finds, that list of words has been reduced to less than 50. Such increased knowledge and scholarship have enabled translators to translate the Bible more accurately now than ever before.

Many believe that God has in some way overseen the work of establishing the canon of the Bible. Regardless of that, when we consider the amount of scholarship that went into this finalized collection, and when we consider the careful examination of each book before it was accepted, then we can have complete faith and confidence in our NT (and our OT) that it is the divinely inspired and authoritative word of God.