Bible canon

In the ancient Church ( Irenaeus of Lyons and others), the very teaching of the Church was called κανών (canon), κανών τής πίστεως (canon of faith), τής αληθειας (truth); then the name "canon" was transferred to the composition of those books that contain this doctrine (for the first time - from Origen : "Scripturae canonicae") ^[1] .

Many scholars, following the example of Zemler, explain the word “Canon” as applied to the Holy Scripture in the sense of a catalog, or a list of books assigned to be read in the church, so this name does not indicate their inspiration or the meaning of the source of the norms of faith ^[1] .

Although this word was sometimes used in the meaning of a catalog, in most cases it meant norma, regula (fidei); in the IV c. it has been exclusively applied to the composition of inspired books ^[1] .

Tanah

The books of the Hebrew Bible or Tanach constitute the Jewish (Jewish) canon. Books Tanakh created over a considerable period of time: from the XV century BC. er before the II century BC. er ^[2] .

An indication of the gradual drafting of the canon is found in the most sacred books: having written all the words of the Law into the book and passing it on to the Levites for storage, Moses ordered to put it on the right hand of the Ark of the Covenant ( Deut. 31: 24-26 ). Joshua wrote the words and revelations of the Lord to him that were in the Book of the Law, that is, he attached to the Pentateuch the Mosaic ( Josh. 24:26 ). Samuel , promulgating the rights of the kingdom, wrote them in a book and laid before the Lord ( 1S. 10:25 ), that is, in the tabernacle, where the writings of Moses and Joshua had previously been laid. The “book” referred to here seems to have been the book of the Law, begun by Moses and continued by Joshua ^[3] .

The ancient existence, the general popularity of individual books are proved by numerous references of some sacred books to others ^[4] . Upon returning from Babylon, the Jews brought with them to Palestine and their main shrine - the scrolls of the sacred books ^[3] .

The modern Jewish Bible (Tanakh) consists of three sections: “ Torah ” ( Genesis , Exodus , Leviticus , Numbers , Deuteronomy ), “Prophets” (books of Joshua , Judges of Israel , Samuel , Kings , Prophet Isaiah , Prophet Jeremiah , Prophet Ezekiel) , 12 minor prophets), “Scriptures” (books of Psalms , Proverbs of Solomon , Job , Song of Solomon , Ruth , Lamentations of Jeremiah , Ecclesiastes , Esther , Prophet Daniel , Ezra - Nehemiah , Chronicles ) ^[2] . According to Saint Epiphanius of Cyprus and St. John of Damascus, these books were located in the Ark of the Covenant (to the right of the ark) in the Jerusalem temple ^[5] .

At the time of "closing" (final adoption) of the Jewish canon there are different opinions ^[2] .

In the first half of the 16th century, Protestant theologians adopted the dating of the “closure” of the Jewish canon to the era of Ezra-Nehemiah and the “ Great Synagogue ” (V century BC). For the first time this hypothesis was proposed by the Jewish scholar Ili Levit in the treatise Massoret Ha-Massoret (1538). This concept was not disputed until the end of the XIX century and prevailed in pre-revolutionary Russian biblical studies. At the beginning of the XXI century, such dating is found mainly in Protestant fundamentalist literature ^[2] .

At the end of the 19th century, the Jewish historian Heinrich Gretz put forward the hypothesis that the canon of the Jewish Bible determined the decisions of the Sanhedrin in Yavne (Yamniya) at the end of the 1st century AD. This hypothesis was most common from the end of the 19th century to the second half of the 20th century. However, according to the Mishnah , only two books were discussed at the Yamnian Academy: the book of Ecclesiastes and the book of the Song of the Song of Solomon, and there is evidence that debates about their dignity continued later. There is no information about the discussion of the status of other biblical books in Yamnia. At the same time, there is evidence that the status of the books of Esther, the Proverbs of Solomon and the prophet Ezekiel was questioned after the Yamnian era. By the beginning of the 21st century, the hypothesis of the “closure” of the canon in the Yamni Sanhedrin was almost completely abandoned by biblical science ^[2] .

In modern biblical science there are two concepts at the time of the final adoption of the Jewish canon. According to the first concept, the "closure" of the Jewish canon took place in the Maccabean period (II century BC), according to the second - at the end of the 1st - beginning of the 2nd century AD Oe., but not in the Yamnian Sanhedrin, who did not have the authority to conclude a canon. According to this concept, the “closure” of the canon was not a one-time decision of any competent assembly, but represented a lengthy process that proceeded differently in different Jewish communities ^[2] .

According to the Jewish Encyclopedia, the canonization of the Torah refers to the VI century BC, the section of the Prophets - to 323 BC, the section of the Scriptures - to the beginning of the II century AD. er ^[6]

Old Testament

The Fathers of the Church and the local councils of the 4th century created lists of the Holy Books: 85 Apostolic Rule ^[7] , 60 Rule of the Laodicea Cathedral ^[8] , 39th epistle of Athanasius the Great about the holidays ^[9] , Poems of St. Gregory the Theologian ^[10] , Poems of St. Amphilochius Iconium ^[11] , 33 rule of the Carthaginian Cathedral ^[12] . In 692, at the Trullan Council, all these rules were accepted by the second rule of this council ^[13] as obligatory for the whole Church ^[14] , but the lists of books they cited differed, as a rule, in the number of books missing in the Hebrew Bible but present in the Greek translation The Septuagint Thus, in the Middle Ages, the Eastern Church did not make a final decision on the composition of the Old Testament part of the Bible. In the handwritten Greek Bible, books that are found in the Septuagint, but which are missing in the Tanach, were copied along with the books of the Tanach. In the Sinai (IV century), Vatican (IV century) and Alexandria (V century) Bible codes of the book, the Septuagint, which are absent in the Tanakh, is contained along with the books of the Tanakh ^[2] .

Orthodoxy

In Byzantium and in Russia in the Middle Ages there were various lists of biblical books. The composition of the books of the Old Testament in the Orthodox Church was not fixed until the beginning of the era of typography. In fact, the decision on the scope of the Old Testament was made by the first publishers of the Greek and Slavic Bibles in the 15th – 16th centuries ^[2] . The Old Testament books of the Slavic Bible include all the books of the Tanakh, as well as the books of the Code of Alexandria, which are absent in the Tanakh, such as the books of Judith , Tobit , Baruch , the Epistle of Jeremiah , the Wisdom of Solomon , the Wisdom of Jesus, the son of Sirachow , the Second Book of Ezra, and three Maccabee books and also the Third Book of Ezra , absent in the Septuagint and translated from the Latin Vulgate. At the same time, all the editors of the Slavic Bible did not contain instructions on the division of books on the authority of their status. The composition of the Greek printed Bible also included the books of the Code of Alexandria without separating their status, the Fourth Book of the Maccabees in the modern Greek Bible is enclosed in the annex as non-canonical. Thus, unlike in the Greek Bible, the Slavic Bible contains the Third Book of Ezra, but the Fourth Book of Maccabees ^{[2] is} missing.

At the Jerusalem Council of 1672, which was attended by representatives of the majority of Orthodox Churches ^[15] , it was assumed that all the books recognized by the Laodicea Council (all books of the Jewish Bible, the book of the Prophet Baruch and the Epistle of Jeremiah), as well as the books of Wisdom of Solomon, Judith, Tobiah , Daniel 13-14 chapters (the story of Susanna and the story of Wil and the Dragon), the books of Maccabees and the Wisdom of Sirach are canonical books and are recognized as a constant part of the Holy Scriptures ^{[2] [16]} .

The question of the canon was not raised at the councils of the Russian Church. In the catechism of Filaret (Drozdov) of 1839, only books of the Jewish canon (Tanakh) were accepted as books of the Old Testament ^{[2] [17]} .

In 1847, for the first time in Russian theological literature, the term “canonical” and “non-canonical” books were applied to the books of the Old Testament by Archimandrite Makarii Bulgakov in his essay “Introduction to Orthodox Theology”. The books of the Hebrew Bible were named the canonical books by Archimandrite Makariy, non-canonical books - the books included in the Slavic Bible, but not in the Hebrew Bible, except that the book of the Prophet Baruch and the Epistle of Jeremiah were among the canonical books. The canonical books were called inspired and the Holy Scriptures are inspired , and the non-canonical books “serve only as an addition to the inspired Scripture, like good, instructive, sacred books” ^[18] . However, the term “non-canonical books” in relation to the books of the Old Testament was not known for the patristic and Byzantine traditions and was not used in other Christian denominations. In the second half of the 19th - early 20th centuries, the term “non-canonical books” in Russian theology became well-established, non-canonical books were called uninspired, but sacred and edifying, and canonical books were inspired ^[2] .

The Synodal Translation , completed in 1876, included all the books of the Slavic Bible, and until 1917, in all its editions, no division of the books of the Old Testament was noted by their status. In 1896, a new academic program attributed the book of the Prophet Baruch and the Epistle of Jeremiah to non-canonical books ^[19] . The term “non-canonical books” became commonly used after the publication of the Bible by the Moscow Patriarchate in 1968, which contained the appendix “On canonical and non-canonical books”, which was then repeated by all subsequent ecclesiastical publications of the Bible. Books missing in the Jewish canon in the table of contents of these publications were marked as non-canonical ^[2] .

Catholicism

In the Vulgate , the Latin translation of the Bible, used in the Catholic Church in the Middle Ages, included all the books of the Tanach, as well as the books of Tobit, Judith, the prophet Baruch, the Epistle of Jeremiah, the Wisdom of Solomon, the Wisdom of Jesus, son of Sirachow, the Second Book of Ezra (in Latin tradition 3 Book of Ezra), the Third Book of Ezra (in the Latin tradition, the 4th book of Ezra), the first and second Maccabean books . At the Florentine Cathedral of 1439, these books, with the exception of the Second and Third Books of Ezra, were recognized as inspired and equal in authority to the books of the Tanakh ^[20] .

The biblical canon in the Catholic Church was approved in 1546 at the Council of Trent , at its 4th meeting ^[21] , although before that, in the West, the decisions of the Laodicea and Carthage cathedrals enjoyed great prestige; they were repeatedly published in the collection: “Codex Canonum ecclesiae Romanae ” ^[22] , just as the text of the Vulgate used in worship did not raise doubts about its holiness in Catholicism. In the resolution of the Council of Trent, all the books of the Vulgate, with the exception of the Second and Third Books of Ezra, were recognized as canonical (inspired), along with the books of the Jewish canon (Tanakh). This decree differs from all conciliar definitions by pronouncing an “anathema” on Christians who disagree with this calculation of Old Testament books. The second and third books of Ezra were removed from the Old Testament of the Vulgate and placed in the annex to it. Books submitted to the appendix are non-canonical from the point of view of Catholic theology ^[2] .

In the New Vulgate (1979), adopted as the official biblical text in the Catholic Church, the appendix is ​​absent, there are no Second and Third Ride books. Books that were included in the biblical canon at the Council of Trent are called deuterocanonical in the Catholic Church, that is, subsequently included in the canon, unlike the books of the Tanakh, which are called “protocanonical,” that is, originally in the canon. These terms were first used in 1566 by the Catholic theologian Sixt of Siena . Also in the New Vulgate, there is no prayer of Manasia, available in the Slavic and Russian Bibles ^[2] .

Protestantism

The need for the conciliar approval of the biblical canon in Catholicism arose in connection with the movement of the Reformation . The Protestant leaders, in translating the Old Testament of the Holy Scriptures, did not take the Vulgate or the Septuagint , but the text of the Tanoren Masoretic edition in Hebrew. At the same time, they did not include in the Old Testament, the Bibles published by them, deuterocanonical books, but placed them in the “Apocrypha” section after the books of the Old Testament ^[2] . These books were declared by the Protestants to be apocrypha ^[23] , although these books are repeatedly quoted by many Church Fathers, and the readings from them are included, for example, in the composition of Orthodox worship. Books that are called apocrypha in Orthodoxy and Catholicism are called pseudo-epigraphs in Protestantism. The canon of the Old Testament in Protestantism is consistent with the Jewish canon of the Bible, it differs only in the order of the books and their division. At the end of the twentieth century, the Protestant Bibles were usually published without deuterocanonical books ^[2] .

New Testament

The New Testament canon was compiled and defined gradually, with full care in considering the actual apostolic origin and dignity of the scriptures. In the first century, the Gospels and Apostolic Epistles appear, and with them, false works on the life of Jesus Christ and on Christian doctrine ^[4] .

In the II century, the writings of husbands, known and honored in the Church, immediate apostolic disciples, such as Clement, Polycarp, Ignatius and other so-called apostolic husbands, appear. Thus, it became necessary for the Church to determine precisely which particular scriptures she considers truly apostolic, sacred and inspired, in order to separate them, on the one hand, from false and containing wrong doctrine, and on the other, from the writings of apostolic husbands teaching, but still human and not able to be equal in meaning, importance and commitment with the scriptures divine and frank. This was done by the Church gradually, after a careful and thorough solution of the question of the authenticity and origin of the apostolic writings ^[4] .

An indirect indication of the existence of a certain canon of sacred books in the Church exists from the middle of the II century. At this time, Marcion composed his canon from the Gospel of Luke, which was a little different from the canonical Gospel of Luke, and ten Paul's epistles, also with alternative readings. The attempt of Marcion and others to encourage the Church to define the Canon more precisely, in order to oppose the traditions of the Gnostics to the apostolic teachings contained in the undoubted and whole Church recognized apostolic writings. Во II-м веке никто в Церкви не сомневался относительно подлинности четырёх Евангелий, деяний апостольских и тринадцати Посланий Павловых, 1-го послания апостола Петра и 1-го послания апостола Иоанна. Эти книги составляли всеобщий канон во второй половине II века ^[4] .

Остальные новозаветные писания, истинные и подлинные для одних Церквей, были неизвестны с этой стороны другим Церквам, а потому общее церковное признание получили после. Так, Ориген ещё в III в. не был убежден в подлинности апостольского происхождения — Послания к Евреям, Послания Иакова, Иуды, 2-го Петра, 2-го и 3-го Иоанновых. На Западе очень долго сомневались относительно Послания к Евреям; на Востоке долго сомневались в Апокалипсисе ^[4] .

Рядом с истинными апостольскими писаниями пользовались великим уважением и употреблялись в церкви до IV века некоторые неапостольские писания: послания Климента, Варнавы и Пастырь Гермы ^[4] .

Церковный историк Евсевий в IV веке все новозаветные писания разделил на три класса: первый — признанные всей Церковью по апостольскому происхождению гомологумены ( др.-греч. όμολογούμενα ): четыре Евангелия, Деяния апостольские, четырнадцать Посланий апостола Павла, 1-е Иоанна, 1-е Петра. Второй — не всеми признаваемые или спорные антилегомены ( др.-греч. ἀντιλεγομένα ) или подложные ( др.-греч. νόθα ): из этого отдела одни, как послание Иакова, Иуды, 2-е Петра, 2-е и 3-е Иоанна и Апокалипсис, впоследствии были признаны Церковью и внесены в Канон, а другие, как Деяния Павла, Пастырь Гермы , Апокалипсис Петра , послание Варнавы, Дидахе (Учение апостолов) и Евангелие к евреям, как не апостольские по своему происхождению, не были приняты в канон. В третьем отделе Евсевий перечисляет книги несомненно не апостольские и даже еретические ^[4] .

Запад прежде Востока пришёл к признанию настоящего Новозаветного канона из 27 книг. Лаодикийский собор (360 год) при перечислении книг Нового Завета не упоминает Апокалипсиса; западные соборы в Гиппоне (393) ^[24] , в Карфагене (397 год), в Риме при Иннокентии I, в начале V века, и Consilium Romanum при Геласии I (493) уже утверждают весь настоящий канон. После этого долгое время против канонического достоинства тех или других книг могли высказываться лишь отдельные нерешительные голоса ^[4] .

Попытки ревизии канона Нового Завета

Только со времени немецкой Реформации (XVI век) были высказаны в довольно решительной форме сомнения относительно канонического достоинства некоторых новозаветных книг. Так Мартин Лютер поместил в конце своей Библии Послание к Евреям, Иакова, Иуды и Апокалипсис. При этом Лютер несколько непоследовательно говорил, что не желает навязывать свое мнение другим или удалять эти четыре книги из Нового Завета. При этом для Лютера критерием каноничности было не авторство книг, а её богословская ценность. Иоганн Эколампадий говорил, что реформаторы признают все 27 книг Нового Завета, но при этом «мы не сравниваем Апокалипсис и Послания Иакова, Иуды, 2–е Петра, 2–е и 3–е Иоанна с остальными [книгами]» ^[25] . Этим книгам придавали лишь второстепенное значение: не исключали их из канона, но признавали неравными по достоинству с другими книгами ^[4] .

В таком положении вопрос относительно канона находился до половины XVIII века. С этого времени рационализм, порвав с верой в откровение и в богодухновенность писания, накопил множество возражений против подлинности, целости и достоверности как отдельных книг, так и относительно всего Священного Писания. Главными деятелями в этом направлении были: Землер, Гризбах , Михаэлис и Эйхгорн. Они встретили дружный и основательный отпор и от католиков, и от ортодоксальных протестантов, таких как Генгетенберг, Геферник, Гэрне, Делич и Каспари ^[4] .

Дело старых рационалистов продолжили Бертольд, Де-Бетте, Креднер, Рейс и многие другие. Они высказали много взглядов произвольных, личных и в самой рационалистической школе спорных. Эта школа признала за несомненно доказанное неподлинность Послания к Евреям и неподлинность 2-го послания апостола Петра, а кроме того, что Евангелие Иоанна и Апокалипсис принадлежат двум различным авторам ^[4] .

Совершенно новую эпоху в области отрицательного направления составили работы Фр. Хр. Баура и основанной им Тюбингенской школы . Баур отверг и церковные, и прежние рационалистические положения, от внешней критики перешёл к внутренней, сосредоточивающей все внимание на духе, характере и тенденции книги. Результаты, добытые его работами, не отличались прочностью. Относительно посланий апостола Павла только четыре из них он признает за несомненно подлинные: послания к Галатам, к Римлянам и два послания к Коринфянам ^[26]. Even in the Tübingen school itself, the results of his research were significantly limited and relaxed. Thus, the school did not recognize the neopostolic origin of the Epistles to the Colossians, to the Philippians, the 1st to the Thessalonians and Philemon, to be unquestionable and definitively proved. Similarly, the position of Baur and the time of the origin of the New Testament Scriptures is not accepted. Baur believed that the Gospels and most other New Testament books appeared in the second half of the 2nd century, but other scholars pointed to the earlier origin of the New Testament Scriptures ^[4] .

Currently, in Protestantism, all 27 books of the New Testament are canonical.

Old Testament

In the Protestant Bibles, in the Bible of King Jacob and the Lutheran Bible, deceased books were placed in the section titled “The Apocrypha”. In 1885, they were excluded from the Bible of King Jacob ^[38] , but remain in the Lutheran Bible ^[39] .

In the Ethiopian Bible, the book of Ezra Sutuel contains only chapters 3–14 of the Third Book of Ezra (the 2nd book of Ezra in the Bible of King Jacob or the 4th book of Ezra in the Vulgate), that is, it does not include the Latin prologue (5th book of Ezra) and the Latin epilogue (6th book of Ezra) ^[37] . The Armenian version of this book differs from other versions in essential additions ^[40] .

New Testament

In general, among the Christian Churches, the canon of the New Testament is a consistent list of 27 books, with the exception of the Malankara, Assyrian, and Ethiopian Ancient Oriental Churches. In this case, the order of books can also be different. The New Testament has different orders in the Lutheran, Slavic, Ethiopian, Syrian and Armenian traditions. Protestant Bibles in Russia usually follow the local Orthodox order of the New Testament.

The first and second epistles of Clement, Didache , Herm's Shepherd , and other epistles, possibly written by the Apostolic Fathers, were once considered Scriptures by some early Fathers of the Church . They are still revered in the Orthodox and Catholic traditions, as well as the Proto-Gospel of James , although these books are not considered canonical in any tradition.

The third Epistle to the Corinthians and the Covenants of the Twelve Patriarchs were once considered part of the Armenian Orthodox Bible, but are no longer published in modern editions. Laodicean was once part of the Latin Vulgate and was included in the English translation of John Wycliffe.

Complete dogmatic definitions of canons were not made before the Council of Trent of 1546 for the Roman Catholic Church ^[48] , 39 articles of 1563 for the Church of England .

Notes to the table

1. ↑ ^{1 2 3 4} These four works were put under the “ question ” by Martin Luther , who changed the order of his New Testament to reflect this, but did not exclude these books, but placed it at the end of the New Testament

• Bible. Synodal translation on pravoslavie.ru
• Canon of the Bible / Lyavdansky AK / / Iceland - Clerical. - M .: The Great Russian Encyclopedia, 2008. - (The Great Russian Encyclopedia : [in 35 t.] / Ch. Ed. Yu. S. Osipov ; 2004–2017, vol. 12). - ISBN 978-5-85270-343-9 .
• Canon of the Bible // Orthodox Encyclopedia . - M .: Church Research Center "Orthodox Encyclopedia" , 2012. - T. XXX. - p. 212-257. - 752 s. - 39 000 copies - ISBN 978-5-89572-031-8 .
• Inspiration of the Holy Scriptures // Orthodox Theological Encyclopedia. Volume 2. Edition of Petrograd. Supplement to the spiritual journal "Wanderer" for 1901
• Bruce M. Metzger. Canon of the New Testament. Origin, development, value . Per. from English David Gzgzyan. Scientific Ed. Andrey Desnitsky. Editor Natalia Trauberg . Biblical Theological Institute of St. Andrew, 2008.

• Apocrypha