David Young argues that the reception of the Epistle to the Hebrews in early Christianity was influenced by a number of factors which had little to do with debates about an authoritative canon of Christian writings, and which were primarily the concern of a relatively small group of highly educated scholars. Through careful study of the quotations and reproductions of Hebrews in their own rhetorical and material context, Young stresses that the concept of canon had little bearing on its early reception. By exploring the transformation of authorship into authority, the patristic citations of Hebrews, the Epistle's position in edited collections of the Pauline corpus and the consequences of translation, this complex reception history illustrates the myriad ways in which early Christians thought of and interacted with their scriptures.

How did the books of the Bible come to be recognized as Holy Scripture? After nearly nineteen centuries the canon of Scripture remains an issue of debate. Adept in both Old and New Testament studies, F. F. Bruce brings the wisdom of a lifetime of reflection and biblical interpretation to bear in addressing the criteria of canonicity, the canon within the canon, and canonical criticism.

DIVThe discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls provides unprecedented insight into the nature of the Hebrew Bible or Old Testament before its fixation. Timothy Lim here presents a complete account of the formation of the canon in Ancient Judaism from the emergence of the Torah in the Persian period to the final acceptance of the list of twenty-two/twenty-four books in the Rabbinic period./divDIV /divDIVUsing the Hebrew Bible, the Scrolls, the Apocrypha, the Letter of Aristeas, the writings of Philo, Josephus, the New Testament, and Rabbinic literature as primary evidence he argues that throughout the post-exilic period up to around 100 CE there was not one official “canon” accepted by all Jews; rather, there existed a plurality of collections of scriptures that were authoritative for different communities. Examining the literary sources and historical circumstances that led to the emergence of authoritative scriptures in ancient Judaism, Lim proposes a theory of the majority canon that posits that the Pharisaic canon became the canon of Rabbinic Judaism in the centuries after the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple./div

For many years now, the topic of the New Testament canon has been the main focus of my research and writing. It is an exciting field of study that probes into questions that have long fascinated both scholars and laymen alike, namely when and how these 27 books came to be regarded as a new scriptural deposit. But, the story of the New Testament canon is bigger than just the "when" and the "how". It is also, and perhaps most fundamentally, about the "why". Why did Christians have a canon at all? Does the canon exist because of some later decision or action of the second- or third-century church? Or did it arise more naturally from within the early Christian faith itself? Was the canon an extrinsic phenomenon, or an intrinsic one? These are the questions this book is designed to address. And these are not micro questions, but macro ones. They address foundational and paradigmatic issues about the way we view the canon. They force us to consider the larger framework through which we conduct our research - whether we realized we had such a framework or not. Of course, we are not the first to ask such questions about why we have a canon. Indeed, for many scholars this question has already been settled. The dominant view today, as we shall see below, is that the New Testament is an extrinsic phenomenon; a later ecclesiastical development imposed on books originally written for another purpose. This is the framework through which much of modern scholarship operates. And it is the goal of this volume to ask whether it is a compelling one. To be sure, it is no easy task challenging the status quo in any academic field. But, we should not be afraid to ask tough questions. Likewise, the consensus position should not be afraid for them to be asked.

This new study of the Old Testament canon by Roger Beckwith is on a scale to match H. E. Ryle's classic work, which was first published in 1892. But Beckwith has the advantage of writing after the Qumran (and other) discoveries; and he has also made full use of all the available sources, including biblical manuscripts and rabbinical and patristic literature, taking into account the seldom studied Syriac material as well as the Greek and Latin material. The result of many years of study, this book is a major work of scholarship on a subject which has been neglected in recent times. It is both historical and theological, but Beckwith's first consideration has been to make a thorough and unprejudiced historical investigation. One of his most important concerns - and one that is crucial for all students of Judaism, and Christians in particular - is to decide when the limits of the Jewish canon were settled. In the answer to this question lies an important key to the teaching of Jesus and his apostles, and the resultant beliefs of the New Testament church. Furthermore, any answers to questions about the state of the canon in the New Testament period would help to open a way through the present ecumenical (and interfaith) impasse on the subject. With its meticulous research and evenhanded approach, this book is sure to become the starting point for study of the Old Testament canon in the years to come.

This volume highlights the complex development of the Pauline corpus and the larger Christian canon, by exploring the reception of the Epistle to the Hebrews in early Christianity

Some questions about the New Testament are far from settled, to say nothing of misconception and confusion. In this wide-ranging yet accessible overview, Bejamin Laird offers constructive insight on matters tied to the composition, collection, and authority of the New Testament canon.