Footnotes
Footnotes
1.See H. W. Beyer, "κανών,” in TDNT 3:596-602.
2.See esp. Theodor Zahn, Geschichte des neutestamentlichen Kanons, 4 vols. (Erlangen: A. Deichert’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1888-92); Brooke Foss Westcott,
A General Survey of the History of the Canon of the New Testament, 7th ed. (London: Macmillan, 1896); Bruce M. Metzger, The Canon of the New Testament: Its Origin, Development, and Significance (Oxford Clarendon, 1987); and, more briefly, David G. Dunbar, "The Biblical Canon,” in Hermeneutic, Authority, and Canon, ed. D. A.
Carson and John D. Woodbridge (Grand Rapids: Zondervan: 1986), pp. 297-360, 424-46. R. P. Meye, "Canon of the NT,” in ISBE 1:601-6.
3.Jack N. Lightstone, "The Formation of the Biblical Canon in Judaism of Late Antiquity: Prolegomenon to a General Reassessment,” SR 8 (1979): 141-42. See also Jack P. Lewis, "What Do We Mean by Jabneh?” JBR 32 (1964): 125-32. Robert C. Newman, "The Council of Jamnia and the Old Testament Canon,” WTJ 38 (1976): 319-49.
4. Sid Z. Leiman, The Canonization of the Hebrew Scriptures: The Talmudic and Midrashic Evidence (Hamden, Conn.: Archon, 1976), pp. 121-24. See also Roger Beckwith, The Old Testament Canon of the New Testament Church and Its Background in Early Judaism (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985), pp. 276-77.
5.R. J. Coggins, Samaritans and Jews: The Origins of Samaritanism Reconsidered (Oxford: Blackwell, 1975), p. 164.
6.Even this exception may be conceding too much. The ancient Hebrew-Aramaic list of the books of the Old Testament preserved in MS 54 of the library of the Greek patriarchate in Jerusalem (see J.-P. Audet, "A Hebrew-Aramaic List of Books of the Old Testament in Greek Transcription,” JTS 1 [1950]: 135-54) preserves the following order: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Joshua, Deuteronomy, Numbers, Ruth, Job, Judges....Paul E. Kahle thinks this "is possibly the oldest list available to us” (The
Cairo Geniza [Oxford: Blackwell, 1959], p. 218). See also Leon Morris, Ruth, TOTC (London: Tyndale, 1968), p. 231.
7.John Barton, Oracles of God: Perception of Ancient Prophecy in Israel After the Exile (London: DLT, 1986), p. 15.
8.See exp. ibid., pp. 35-37.
9.David E. Aune, Prophecy in Early Christianity and in the Ancient Mediterranean World (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1983), pp. 103-52.
10. Ibid. p. 368 n. 2.
11.The extremes are represented by David Noel Freedman and A. C. Sundberg respectively. For discussion, see Barton, Oracles, pp. 27-29.
12.B (Codex Vaticanus, fourth century) includes all of the Apocrypha except 1 and 2 Maccabees; a(Codex Sinaiticus, fourth century) includes Tobit, Judith, 1 and 2 Maccabees, Wisdom, and Ecclesiasticus; A (Codex Alexandrinus, fifth century) includes all of the Apocrypha, plus 3 and 4 Maccabees and the Psalms of Solomon.
13.Albert C. Sundberg, Jr., The Old Testament of the Early Church (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1964).
14.Respectively, H.E. 4.26 (Origen as cited by Eusebius), and Ep. List. 39 (= NPNF2 4:552).
15.So, rightly, F. F. Bruce, "New Light on the Origins of the New Testament Canon,” in New Dimensions in New Testament Study, ed. Richard N. Longenecker and Merrill C. Tenney (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1974), p. 12, against the magisterial work of H. von Campenhausen, The Formation of the Christian Bible (Philadelphia: Fortress,
1972), p. 148.
16.Uncertainty about where Eusebius places the Apocalypse turns on his own confused way of expressing himself. Although the Apocalypse was almost universally recognized as Scripture in the second century, it fell under suspicion in the Eastern church. Eusebius’s stance seems to vary from initial acceptance of the Apocalypse as the work of the apostle John, to rejecting it completely as a forgery by the heretic Cerinthus, to accepting the canonical status of the book while denying its apostolic authorship. See the discussion of Robert M. Grant, Eusebius as Church Historian (Oxford: Clarendon, 1980), pp. 126-37.
17.See Metzger, Canon, p. 210.
18.See Westcott, History of the Canon,pp. 445-48.
19.See R. W. Cowley, "The Biblical Canon of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church Today,” ostK 23 (1974): 318-23.
20.Dunbar, "Biblical Canon,” p. 317-18. In a footnote Dunbar points out that this is true even with Martin Luther, who raised the strongest questions about the antilegomena (p. 432 n. 117). It is often pointed out that the table of contents of Luther’s translation of the Bible separates Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation from the rest of the books and discontinues counting them (e.g., Meye, "Canon,” p. 605); it is not always pointed out that this configuration was in the 1522 edition but was dropped in subsequent editions, along with the most strident of his negative judgments on these books (expressed in his prefaces). Only his negative judgment on James continued to the end of his life. See Paul Althaus, Theology of Martin Luther (ET Philadelphia: Fortress, 1966), pp. 83-85.
21.Barker/Lane/Michaels, p. 29.
22.See Metzger, Canon, pp. 251-54.
23.See further the section Pseudonymity in chap. 15 above.
24.Perhaps it should be mentioned that the Fathers do not recognize a work as canonical on the grounds that it is inspired, since they freely apply "inspiration” and related expressions to noncanonical books as well (see Metzger, Canon, pp. 254-57). "Inspiration” in modern theological discussion is a theological construct drawing from a number of important historical and theological structures and is commonly more tightly defined than in the rather flexible usage of the first centuries.
25.Theo Donner, "Some Thoughts on the History of the New Testament Canon,” Themelios 7, no. 3 (April 1983): 23-27.
26.The reference is probably to the Torah, not the entire Old Testament; see v. 15.
27."New” is retained in Luke and Paul (1 Cor. 11:23-26), omitted by Matthew and Mark. 28.See D. A. Carson, Showing the Spirit (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1987), pp. 88-91. 29.See Donald Robinson, Faith’s Framework: The Structure of New Testament
Theology (Sutherland, NSW: Albatross, 1985).
30.See esp. F. F. Bruce, "Scripture in Relation to Tradition and Reason,” in Scripture, Tradition, and Reason: A Study in the Criteria of Christian Doctrine, Fs. Richard P. C. Hanson, ed. Richard Bauckham and Benjamin Drewery (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark,
1988), pp. 35-64.
31.See Campenhausen’s discussion in Formation, pp. 130ff. Similarly, see Bruce, "Scripture,” pp. 37-38.
32.This line of interpretation appears to have originated with J. B. Lightfoot, Essays on the Work Entitled Supernatural Religion (London: Macmillan, 1893), pp. 156ff.
33.See Moule, pp. 239-41.
34.See Guthrie, pp. 986-1000.
35.So C. K. Barrett, "The Centre of the New Testament and the Canon,” in Die Mitte des Neuen Testaments: Einheit und Vielfalt neutestamentlicher Theologie, Fs.
Eduard Schweizer, ed. Ulrich Luz and Hans Weder (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1983), pp. 5-21.
36.E.g., Childs; James A. Sanders, From Sacred Story to Sacred Text (Philadelphia: Fortress, 198