ESV with the Apocrypha

I can certainly understand why you might not wish to answer my earlier question, for the act of doing so leads to so many unsupportable conclusions.

You accept this as an article of faith then, seeing this cannot be shown from the historical record?

No one has a list of the books the Apostles accepted as Old Testament "canon".

No records exist from the religious leaders of the Jews prior to 70 AD, showing their list of "canon" either.

 

Summa, please check your private messages.

 

I replied to your PM twice but my "sent" folder is empty! Can you verify and tell me whether you got them?

 

Even though the subject of inspiration is not identical with canon, it is difficult to speak of one without the other so forgive me if my reply bleeds between these two themes.

Inspiration was present from the time when the inspired book was written. Inspired books moved from their early status emerging from the pen of an author into a canon of Scripture over a passage of time. During the passage of time, there were reasons why a concensus devopled and it was recognized that "yes, this book is not ordinary, it is inspired", and eventually the body of such books were compiled and finally canonized.

In this order:
Inspiration > Recognition > Compilation > Canonization

It is tempting to look back and come up with a list of "hows" that this concensus developed, but truthfully, no one has left us a list of the criteria they used, at least not in the case of the Old Testament. Many people have attempted to guess at this, but the fact is, no records were left describing how a concensus came to be.

The bottom line for me is not that a book was deemed Scripture by a Council, Synod or other official meeting of the Church. In fact, I would argue that formal canonical lists of books were issued by councils AFTER the Church had already established an informal canon over time through the corporate usage of the Church.

When an effort was made to compare what the various communions used a authoritative Scripture, an extraordinary degree of agreement could be discerned. Gnostic books were not in use in any of the orhtodox communions, for instance. With very little difference between them the Churches already used almost all the same books with some diversity here and there.

The canon is closed. The canon was established before the councils tried to make it happen. The broad concensus of what was "inspired" was established by the long-term usage of the Church. A few books in the O.T. were accepted with less than universal endorsement, and so, we have a small body of disputed books of the Old Testament.

How does one determine inspiration? Which books has the Church borne witness to over the centuries to their helpfulness, and edifying qualities? There you will see the hand of the Holy Spirit in guiding his people. How does one deal with those books which have less than universal acceptance? Some of us cut them out, some others of us, myself included, leave them in.

 

Have I lost you?

 

LOL, no, I'm still here. I have been away from internet access for the past few days and just got back today. I did get your PM's, thank you. Give me a couple of days to catch up and I'll reply to your messages.

 

Sorry, my OCD was showing.

 

It is the typical knee-jerk response of we Protestants that when the question is raised concerning books which are apparently missing from the Protestant Bible that we turn the subject to canonization or inspiration or both.

In this manner we dodge the more relevant questions concerning the nature of the Bible and its history.

Lets be honest, its difficult at times to articulate the faith position that Esther, Song of Solomon, Ecclesiates and others are "the inspired word of God".

Is it to be the Protestant position that we eliminate the more difficult books just so that we can more confidently defend a more limited Biblical corpus?

Here is what I believe: the canon is and has been closed since the Apostolic era. The Church informally canonized the books it received as Scripture through usage (long before councils and synods attempted to). I put my seal to theirs and admit into my practical canon all that the historic orthodox Church bore witness to as having admitted into their canon(s), even though at times with a less than universal witness.

 

Think the 66 books of the canon were and are ONLY inspired writings that were given by God unto us for today!

 

Can you tell me when and where the Church ever canonized this 66-book canon of which you speak?

 

the jews had their books as canon at the time of christ, neither jesus nor the Apsotles saw ANY other books as being in OT canon, and the Apsotles wrote their books, and from earliest time, the Church had received and used as authoritative those that were "officially" ratlified later on !

NO other books had the marks of being inspired by God!

 

And you know these things by how?

 

Good post!

Here's a LINK pointing to an interactive tool from an article in Bible Study Magazine called, "What's in Your Bible".

I've posted it before but it may be helpful to do so again.

Rob

 

Historically, the jews had the canon completed by the time of jesus, and neither jesus nor his Apostles ever saw any other books as being canon!

Those NT writtings to be seen as the canon books were received and being used as inspired books even in the Apostolic era!

 

And you know these things by how?

 

The Diatribe of the Pharisees Against Christ as
Foretold in Wisdom, Chapter 2
(Includes Hyper-Links to New Testament Fulfillments)​

12"Let us lie in wait for the righteous man, because he is inconvenient to us and opposes our actions; he reproaches us for sins against the law, and accuses us of sins against our training. 13He professes to have knowledge of God, and calls himself a child of the LORD.

14"He became to us a reproof of our thoughts; 15the very sight of him is a burden to us, because his manner of life is unlike that of others, and his ways are strange. 16We are considered by him as something base, and he avoids our ways as unclean; he calls the last end of the righteous happy, and boasts that God is his father.

17"Let us see if his words are true, and let us test what will happen at the end of his life; 18for if the righteous man is God's son, he will help him, and will deliver him from the hand of his adversaries.

19"Let us test him with insult and torture, that we may find out how gentle he is, and make trial of his forbearance. 20Let us condemn him to a shameful death, for, according to what he says, he will be protected."

21Thus they reasoned, but they were led astray, for their wickedness blinded them, 22and they did not know the secret purposes of God. (ESV, 2009)