(This is one post of a large series where I will copy down the key points of each chapter as I read through Wayne Grudem's Systematic Theology. I will be copying many lines word-for-word and also shortening and summarizing some points in my own words. I hope that this can be useful for others as a quick reference but it is not meant to in any way substitute the personal study and investigation of the Bible and these important topics.)
What belongs in the Bible and and what does not belong?
Explanation and Scriptural Basis
The canon of Scripture is the list of all the books that belong in the Bible.
To add to or subtract from God's words would be to prevent God's people from obeying him fully.
Deuteronomy 4:2
If we trust and obey God absolutely we must have a collection of words that we are certain are God's own words to us.
A. The Old Testament Canon
The Ten Commandments form the beginning of the biblical canon.
Exodus 31:18
Exodus 32:16
The tablets were deposited in the ark of the covenant (Deut. 10:5) and constituted the terms of the covenant between God and his people.
This collection of absolutely authoritative words from God grew in size throughout the time of Israel's history.
Moses wrote books of the Bible, first four and Deuteronomy.
Joshua also aded to the collection of written words of God.
Joshua 24:26
God must have authorized Joshua to add to the written words like this.
Later, others in Israel, usually those who fulfilled the office of prophet, wrote additional words from God.
1 Samuel 10:25
1 Chronicles 29:29
2 Chronicles 20:34
2 Chronicles 26:22
2 Chronicles 32:32
Jeremiah 30:2
After approximately 435 B.C. there were no further additions to the Old Testament canon.
When we turn to Jewish literature outside the Old Testament, we see that the belief that divinely authoritative words from God had ceased is clearly attested in several different strands of extrabiblical Jewish literature.
1 Macabees for example.
Josephus (born c. A.D. 37/38) explained, "From Artaxerxes to our own times a complete history has been written, but has not been deemed worthy of equal credit with the earlier records, because of the failure of the exact succession of the prophets". Josephus was the greatest Jewish historian of the first century and he knew of the writings now considered part of the "Apocrypha", but he and many of his contemporaries considered these other writings "not... worthy of equal credit" with what we now know as the Old Testament Scriptures.
Writings subsequent to about 435 B.C. were not accepted by the Jewish people generally as having equal authority with the rest of Scripture.
And by reading the New Testament it is apparent that Jesus and his disciples, on the on hand, and the Jewish leaders or Jewish people, on the other hand, were in full agreement that additions to the Old Testament conan had ceased after the time of Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi.
Jesus and the New Testament authors quote various parts of the Old Testament Scriptures as divinely authoritative around 295 times, but not once do they cite any statement from the books of the Apocrypha or any other writings as having divine authority.
So, the New Testament authors agreed that the established Old Testament canon, no more and no less, was to be taken as God's very words.
The Apocrypha is the collection of books included in the canon by the Roman Catholic Church but excluded from the canon by Protestantism. What should we say about these books?
These books were never accepted by the Jews as Scripture.
The fact that these books were included by Jerome in his Latin Vulgate translation of the Bible (completed in A.D. 404) gave support to their inclusion, even though Jerome himself said that they were not "books of the canon" but merely "books of the church" that were helpful and useful for believers.
The wide use of this translation in subsequent centuries guaranteed their continued accessibility, but the fact that they had no Hebrew original behind hem, and their exclusion from the Jewish canon, as well as the lack of their citation in the New Testament, led many to view them with suspicion or to reject their authority.
It was not until 1546, at the Council of Trent, that the Roman Catholic Church officially declared the Apocrypha to be part of the canon.
It is significant that the Council of Trent was the response of the Roman Catholic Church to the teaching of Martin Luther and the rapidly spreading Protestant Reformation, and the books of the Apocrypha contain support for the Catholic teaching of prayers for the dead and justification by faith plus works, not by faith alone.
The writings of the Apocrypha should not be regarded as part of Scripture:
(1) They do not claim for themselves the same kind of authority as the Old Testament writings
(2) They were not regarded as God's words by the Jewish people from whom they originated
(3) They were not considered to be Scriptures by Jesus or the New Testament authors
(4)They contain teachings inconsistent with the rest of the Bible
They do have value for historical and linguistic research, but they have never been part of the Old Testament canon, and they should not be thought of as part of the Bible.
With regard to the canon of the Old Testament, Christians today should have no worry that anything needed has been left out or that anything that is not God's words has been included.
Posts
