Page 77 - Doctrine and History of the Preservation of the Bible revised

The first test was to answer the question, is it authoritative (“Thus saith the Lord”)? Next, they asked
this question: is it prophetic (“a man of God” 2 Peter 1:20)? A book in the Bible must have the authority
of a spiritual leader of Israel (O.T. – prophet, king, judge, scribe) or an apostle of the church (N.T. – It
must be based on the testimony of an original apostle). Third, they asked, is it authentic (consistent
with other revelation of truth)? Fourth, they asked, is it dynamic (life-changing)? Finally, they asked, is
it received (accepted and used by believers)? (Norman L. Geisler & William Nix, A General Introduction
to the Bible, pp. 137-144). Basically, if a book was to be included in the canon of Scripture, the church
recognized it and simply validated it. It was a God process.

The Old Testament books were selected first. How was this accomplished? It was accomplished the
same way as the New Testament Books. The New Testament refers to Old Testament books as
“scripture” (Matt.21:42, etc.). The Council of Jamnia in A.D. 90 recognized 39 books as the Old
Testament Scriptures. Josephus (A.D. 95) indicated that the 39 books were recognized as authoritative.

The New Testament books were then selected in the same manner. The church identified the apostle’s
claiming authority for their writings (1 Thess.5:27). The apostle’s writings were equated with O.T.
Scriptures (2 Pet.3:2,15,16). The Council of Athanasius (A.D. 367) and the Council of Carthage (A.D. 397)
recognized the 27 books in our N.T. today as inspired. The Apocrypha (other books included in the
Catholic Bible) were not recognized as Scripture. The Apocrypha is never quoted as authoritative in
scriptures.

It is interesting that in Matthew 23:35 Jesus mentioned that the close of Old Testament historical
scripture was the death of Zechariah (400 B.C.) This excludes any books written after Malachi and before
the New Testament (ex., the Apocrypha).

Canon determined immediately
The books of the Bible became canon the moment they were written. They did not need to wait for the
church’s sanction to become canon. They were canon the moment they were written.
Some factors made it clear which to recognize and which not to. Was the book written by a clearly
acknowledged prophet of God? Does the writing declare its own spiritual authority? Does the book
agree with all other recognized Scripture? Is the book universally recognized by common conviction?
Did Jesus or the apostles consider the writings as Scripture? Is the book geographically and historically
accurate? Shortly we will look at the internal and external “rules” the prophets and early church
considered when selecting the biblical canon.

Five OT books were disputed by a few in the Jewish community.

Most books in the Bible were immediately recognized as Scripture. However, the Jewish community did
not immediately recognize these books:

1. Song of Solomon
The school of Shammai (first. cent. A. D.), as well as some others, expressed doubt about the canonicity
of the Song of Solomon. The basic reason was that the book seemed sensual to some. The view of Rabbi
Akiba ben Joseph (c. A. D. 50—132), however, prevailed as is evidenced in his statement, “God forbid!—
No man in Israel ever disputed about the Song of Songs that it does not render the hands unclean [ie. is
xxii
not canonical]”.

75