Looking for a book on the canon

[mpethe]

Can anyone recommend a good book on the canon of scripture?

I am particularly interested in the NT, but wouldn't mind one with insights towards the OT as well.

How did we get our Bible? I have a vague understanding, but am looking for some depth of knowledge on this issue.

Thanks!

[Soulfyre]

From my perspective, while there are several that could be listed which I believe most would find helpful, one simply cannot buy the library, so I will restrict myself to one book which gives what I believe to be the best all around treatment of the topic. F. F. Bruce (Frederic Fyvie Bruce) was the Rylands Professor of Biblcal Criticism and Exegesis in the University of Manchester (England), and has written some of the most accessible books on the subject. I would recommend

[/link][/b], by F. F. Bruce - This is a balanced treatment of both the Old and New Testament, as well as the controversy concerning Apocrypha. His is a treatment that Roman Catholics, Orthodox, and Evangelicals will all find palatible and helpful. To echo the words of one reviewer, if I could have only one book in my library on the subject of the canon, this is the book I would choose.[/ul]Similarly helpful, although restricted to the New Testament, is F. F. Bruce's The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable?, long a staple in the library of most Evangelicals from an IVP background as a basis for the textual accuracy of the New Testament.

Of course, one of the major disagreements between scholars of the Bible involves which text to use. For example, in the Old Testament, does one give pricedence in interpretation to the Hebrew Canon of the TaNaKh, generally utilized as the BH3 or BHS (Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia), or to the Septuagint, the later Greek translation of the TaNaKh, often quoted in the New Testament? And does one include the Apocrypha as part of the canon of scripture, on par with the thirty-nine books of the TaNaKh generally recognized as inspired and fully authoritative, or does one restrict the concept of "canonicity" to the thirty-nine alone? And does one use the "Critical" text of the New Testament as published by the United Bible Societies, edited by Aland, Black, Martini, Metzger, and Wikgren, or does one prefer the "Majority" text (also referred to as the "Recieved", "Byzantine", or "Alexandrian" text), the basis for the beloved King James Version? These questions are multilayered in their answers, since a lot depends on particular attitudes toward the methodology of textual criticism and its relationship to Church history and tradition. I will include some good references in this ongoing debate in a later post.

God bless and keep you and yours always.

Matthew (soulfyre)

[rgrove]

I'll second F.F. Bruce's work. Very readable and even handed with respect to the differences in Christianity regarding the topic (Protestants, Catholics and Orthodox all have a different formal "Canon" of Scripture). That being said, it is certainly from a Protestand perspective, but doesn't employ polemics when various issues are addressed. This is such an important topic nowadays with the DaVinci Code attacking scripture that I hope more people start to take it seriously.

Yours In Christ,
Ron