I have trouble picking people's comments and turning those discussion items into posts. Even when done with the best motives, I always get the feeling reading them that the author is "beating up" that person in a public forum. However, comments "Shawn" made on the last two canon posts were in depth enough and interesting enough to require a long response. Please keep this in mind as I respond:
The relevant comments (in blue):
"Let's test your premise from the Gospels. It is obvious that Jesus and the NT writers understood what the OT/TNK was. To what council or entity did they refer to verify the veracity of the TNK that they used?"
"The main questions concern the OT/TNK and the apocryphal books. An obvious question would be, 'what books did Jesus and the NT writers recognize to be the books that comprised the OT/TNK canon?' or 'What was the Jewish canon at the time of Jesus?' Is there a Jewish writer who listed the TNK at the time of Jesus? Does the NT indicate anywhere what the extent of the TNK wold be? "
I will post my responses in red.
Let's test your premise from the Gospels.
I'm very happy too. I'd like to state that unlike philosophy and logic, which I'd like to claim a minor amount of knowledge, I make no such claim to being in expert in this area.
It is obvious that Jesus and the NT writers understood what the OT/TNK was.
I'm not sure I agree, nor and I sure it is obvious. A bit of google-fu divined that OT/TNK is Old Testament/T(orah),N(aviim, prophets) and K(etuvim, writings) [1], which is a term I never had heard of before tonight. For example, the Catholics here [2] find plenty of allusions and references they claim between various bits of the gospels/NT Writers and books not in the standard Protestant OT canon. I have not researched any of these reference, so I'm not claiming any/all of them are true references. However, it does show that they could be referring to materials not found in the standard Protestant OT canon. In the end however, I will agree they did have a canon they reference, and I'm very curious what canon it is.
To what council or entity did they refer to verify the veracity of the TNK that they used?"
From what I can tell, the Jews did not even have a closed canon until around the time of Christ. Wikipedia, not always a great source of information, seems to point to some time between 200 B.C. to 200 A.D. [3], with a non-trivial number of people pointing to around 70 A.D (Council of Jamnia). [4]. It also appears that possibly some of the Jews of the time only held to the Torah itself. (I told you I wasn't in expert in these things.) I would say they appealed to no council since their canon wasn't even fixed.
The main questions concern the OT/TNK and the apocryphal books.
I as a practical matter agree, as nearly every Christian of every age in the church has agreed about the NT canon (with Luther as a notable exception).
An obvious question would be, 'what books did Jesus and the NT writers recognize to be the books that comprised the OT/TNK canon?'
I agree. We don't have that information directly unfortunately. We can infer it based upon their writings, but as I noted before [2], others can make arguments that the NT writers obviously held book X in canon, since they referenced it in place Y. By what criteria do you want to use to determine what the NT writers recognized as the OT/TNK canon?
or 'What was the Jewish canon at the time of Jesus?' Is there a Jewish writer who listed the TNK at the time of Jesus?
To be blunt, I am unsure how the Sadducees and/or Pharisees belief on the canon is helpful. As a Christian, I believe they were wrong on some of the fundamental aspects of faith (Deity of Christ for example). Even if they believed in canon X, I could have reasonable doubt in it for this reason.
Does the NT indicate anywhere what the extent of the TNK wold be? "
Not that I know of. However, even if it was, wouldn't that be begging the question somewhat. We use the NT to determine what the OT is, but we claim the OT is the fulfillment of the NT.
As I noted, I have many more questions than answer. If I didn't scare him away, I invite Shawn to respond. I promise every response won't be in entry form :) . I appreciate him spending the time creating an account and writing in comments, and I hope to find answers, not just more questions.
As an unsettling note, even if the Jews had a closed canon hundreds of years before Christ, it still wouldn't solve my issue with the canon in general. As a protestant, I claim that a given source of information is good (biblical), if it can be traced to Scripture. I claim that Scripture is the sole and infallible source of divine revelation. Even if every Christian every held the same NT canon (for different reasons), it doesn't resolve the fact that I need a non-arbitrary reason to hold that it is correct. Stating for 2000 years, roughly everyone agreed on it isn't good enough for me, since the reformation threw away a significant number of things that were held in high esteem for 1600 years.
As a note, I would feel amiss not linking to the original post that starting this entire canon question in motion for me. Found here [5], my friend Devin describes why struggling with this issue turned him Catholic. While I am not there, much of the logic does apply to my struggles as well.
And, as I mention in my book, you have Jude in the NT referencing 1 Enoch and the Assumption of Moses. But we don't accept those as canonical. No wonder Luther thought that Jude was junk (and he claimed it was a copy of Peter's epistles)! But in fact God inspired it.
ReplyDelete