THE CANON OF SCRIPTURE
Review by Kellia at Amazon.com
The Canon of Scripture:
The dean of evangelical biblical scholars did a great service when he decided to get this work out of his system (Preface), since he made a very successful attempt indeed to communicate the state of knowledge on this tricky and sensitive subject. This book stands my Criterion: If I only have one book on the subject, I would buy this book. This book is methodical, written basically for Seminarians, still tickles your curious bone, but don’t get tricked by the smoothness of his elaboration, being a top exegesist and a reference on biblical criticism.
Preface & Chapter one:
Read the condensed preface attentively, it highlights Dr. F.F. Bruce’s intended strategy to leave the more controversial issues on the OT canon to R. Beckwith and J. Barton. The short chapter defines terms that became the vocabulary of the subject, their meaning and roots. ‘People of the Book’ conveys his cultural standing, but he avoids elaborating on the concept of the two testaments but will not but mention Jeremiah 31:31, and later how Origen was the first to use and propagate this Alexandrine terminology (p. 192 : on First Principles 4.1.1)
TaNaKh & Wider Canon:
Bruce, who said will shy from OT canon, masterfully instructs us in his own way, starting from the authority of OT for a Christian: Jesus appeal to TaNaKh, going from the threefold division to the closing of the Hebrew canon in Jabneh. Now, with a firm foot, he delves into the Alexandrine wider Canon starting with Septuagint origin, order of books, and adoption as Ancient Churches OT, and NT evidence, but does not state citations or allusions to the Apocrypha (K. & B. Aland: The text of the NT, Eerdmans, 1979) that he mentions (p. 51)
Old Testament Christian Canon: Prevalence of Alexandria:
The Rylands chair for two decades enlighten us on how one Church transmitted the light for all others. He starts by stating the authority of the early Uncials, Alexandrinus, Sinaiticus, and Vaticanus that are all products of the Alexandrine Scriptorium, and are the most reliable (contrary of Ehrman’s thesis). Along side other easterners, he elaborates on Origen, and Athanasius, the first to use the term Canon, in relation to scripture.
Very interesting is his review of 17th and 18th centuries accomodation of canon, and Biblical societies. The canon in the West: Tertullian, Jerome, Augustine, to the reformation: Luther, Erasmus, and Tyndale through Trentine Council to the King James Authorized Version.
New Testament Canon:
If I would propose any clarification to this enjoyable treatise, it would be to copy the names and order of the bible in Orthodox, Catholic, and protestant traditions from a good study Bible, say the Harper Collins NRSV, with Apocrypha. Although differences exist in OT books, NT books are the exact 27 books. Only that the order of books in a genuine Orthodox Bible follows the Order of St. Athanasius in his Pascal letter of 367, the Catholic Epistles precede the Pauline letters.
Hebrews and Apocalypse:
The authority of Dionysius the Great, on the Apocalypse of John, followed by all the Orientals (p. 213) in spite of their Canonical diversity was never challenged by Athanasius letter, intended to compromise Rome with the eastern Church. He persauded the Romans to accept the book of Hebrews, next only to John’s Bible in the Alexandrine NT theological priority (canon within the canon) of the Didaskalia and Catechetical School, compromising for the Apocalypse, then considered a liturgical text in the East.
Great Chapters to enjoy:
The Alexandrian Fathers
New Testament canon in the Age of printing
Criteria of Canonicity
A Canon within the Canon
Canon, Criticism, and interpretation
Further Readings:
1. Barr, J. “Holy Scripture: Canon, Authority, Criticism, Westminster press, Philadelphia, 1983
2. Beckwith,R. “The Old Testament Canon of NT Church,…” Eerdmans, Gr. Rapids, 1985
3. Metzger,B. “The Canon of the NT, its origin, development, and significance”,Oxford U. Press, 1987