the writers of the New Testament are infallible or not is a question which rarely occurs to me. Somehow when they tell me a truth, I come to know it for myself; the truth is mine and not merely theirs.’ R. W. Dale, quoted in Albert Peel, ‘The Bible and the People,’ in C. W. Dugmore, The Interpretation of the Bible, p. 72. ff.
4 See the suggestions based on case studies of contemporary theologians in David H. Kelsey, The Uses of Scripture in Recent Theology.
5 See below: chapters IX to XI address some problems involved in interpreting the text of Scripture.
6 Tom Driver, Christ in a Changing World, pp. 86, 94.
7 A. G. Hebert, The Authority of the Old Testament. London: Faber and Faber, 1947. pp. 23-42.
8 Ibid., p. 25.
9 See below: Chapter V. 7,8, where we discuss the concepts of inerrancy and infallibility.
SUMMARY OF CHAPTER II: CANON
It is by looking back at the story of how the books came to be accepted and used that we can understand why there are just sixty- six in the canon of Scripture. It was a gradual process both in the case of the Old Testament and of the New. Some of the books were read more widely and valued more highly than others. By producing a list of accepted books, the church arrived at a unity about them, which has been accepted ever since. But there is a distinction between a formal canon and the canon in use, even if the church holds to the principle of sola scriptura.
II. CANON
1 SIXTY SIX BOOKS
‘In the Bible there are sixty-six books, Genesis to Revelation.’ This statement expresses the fact in its most obvious sense that there is wide diversity between the various component writings that make up the whole Bible. It expresses the fact that there are a great number of writings coming from different times, different places, different persons, written in different styles and with different purposes in mind.
‘In the Bible there are two books: the Old Testament and the New Testament.’ expresses the fact that there were separate collections of literature, one of thirty-nine and the other of twenty- seven pieces. One is called ‘old,’ and the other is called ‘new.’ This expresses their difference. It also expresses the fact that they were considered to have sufficient unity for both to go by the same name, the name of ‘testament’!
‘The Bible is one book, the Holy Scriptures.’ We speak of the unity of these diversified materials. We think of these sixty-six, and these two, books as in some sense one. We must not take this unity for granted.
Why are there in this collection sixty-six books, no more and no less? Why did the Old Testament get put alongside the New Testament? Why is it in this case, as in no other religion, that
Christians have taken over as a whole the book of another religion, a book moreover which is very considerably longer than their own distinctive writings? Why did those who read the Old Testament alongside the New Testament call it the ‘Old Testament’? The Hebrews called it the Tanach or ‘The Law, the Prophets and the Writings.’ It was thus itself the putting together of three books, each of which had its own story. Why did they put these three books together? Why did they, as the later Christians did, then treat them as one book?
Further questions arise. What has the recognition of the books as special, unique, got to do with their being put together, used and preserved? How did they, whoever they were, come to recognize just this number of books? Why does the contemporary Christian accept their decision about which were the books to put in and which to leave out of the collection?
Most Christians never even raise the question. They find a trimly bound book, sometimes printed on India paper and edged with gold, with the title ‘The Holy Bible,’ and they take for granted that it has unique authority for their faith and for their church, and are not the least bit concerned that this collection of writings has had a history. But the collection as it is now is not the same as the collection it has been at other times and in other places. Sometimes there have been more than sixty-six and sometimes effectively rather less.
2 THE IMPORTANCE OF THE STORY OF THE BIBLE
It is essential then that we look back. The reason is that unless we look back at their history we shall not be able to understand, let alone answer, the question, ‘Why does the Christian community take these particular books to be distinctive?’ An adequate doctrine of the Bible must give careful consideration to the story of the book. ‘The history of the canon can and must be the foundation on which any modern doctrine of Scripture shall be built.’10 When we examine that history, we find that decisions which make a difference to the books considered were taken at specific times and with good reason. ‘For some who first discover as adults that the canon has not always been as we now have it, but came about via a long and complex history, serious questions about its inspiration and authority may arise.’11
Christians took over the Jewish Scriptures as a whole. The Bible, a set of documents, came from a time span of at least a thousand years. That is a very, very long time. The Old Testament represents traditions which go back even further than that. It is an extremely varied collection of many kinds of literature. So it is fitting that we address ourselves to two questions: first, how did this collection of writings come to be written and put together i.e. become a whole; and second, how did this collection of writings come to be acknowledged and accepted as ‘sacred’ writings? Other writings did not. Why these? Why were some taken and others left?
The first important point is that the books circulated and were given a standing in the community. In the case of the Old Testament it was the Jewish community. Members of that community read them and chose them from among others. The standing they had in the community derived from the experience and the judgment of that community, as it read and used them. These writings gained an authority which other books did not. In due course they achieved a status. They became sacred books.
It is interesting that the term ‘scripture,’ which etymologically simply means ‘writing,’ has itself come to acquire a special meaning, namely writings which have particular value for religions, and so ‘holy’ writings, writings set aside from ordinary use, writings which ‘defile the hands.’ Such holy writings are distinguished from others by being set aside, considered as having a special status and repeatedly used within the religious community.
3 THE OLD TESTAMENT
The process by which the books of the Old Testament came to have authority was a gradual one. It was complete roughly bythe beginning of the Christian era. The books of the Old Testament are divided into three groups: the Torah, or Law, the Nebi’im or Prophets and the Kethubim, or Writings. The Prophets are divided into two and called the Former Prophets and the Latter Prophets. The Former Prophets include the history books.
The Law includes narratives of ancient Israel and codes of law. The whole is divided into five parts and thus comes to be known as the Pentateuch. This collection is the core of the Old Testament. It was the first to become recognized as sacred literature by the Jews. It was promulgated by Ezra and was the foundation of the Jewish community after the Exile (which ended 538 BC). It thereafter had a special status in Jewish life.
The
