How Did the Bible Come About?

From: A monthly magazine of the

An International Association of Pontifical Right Vol. 7, No. 71, September 2013

How  Did  the   Bible  Come  About?

A long and marvellous journey travelled by human reason illuminated by faith, and aided by grace and the charisms of the Spirit, has made it possible to define the “regula fidei” of Sacred Scripture with divine authority.

Fr. Arnóbio Glavam, EP

Much is said of the Bible, but how many people have a profound understanding of it? Do most Catholics— even those considered practicing Catholics—know the origin of the sacred books, the criteria used to select them and by what authority they were adopted or rejected? Undoubtedly, the majority of the faithful would benefit from some enlightenment on these points.

Old and New Testament

The Bible, as we know, is the assembled writings or books of the Old and the New Testament, by which God revealed Himself to man. Also called Sacred Scripture or Holy Writ, they constitute a single book containing the Word of God. Although it is the work of human authors—hagiographers and sacred authors—it was written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and thus it is truly the Word of God. Hence, it is often said that Sacred Scripture is the combined work of hagiographers and the Divine Paraclete.

The Bible, then, is divided into two major parts: the Old and New Testament.1 The first contains the Word of God addressed to the Chosen People of the First Covenant and was recorded in various writings elaborated over the course of approximately 900 years. The New Testament, recorded by the Apostles and Evangelists, contains the teachings of Jesus Christ, by which He completed and perfected the Old Revelation, and the testimony of His Death and Resurrection—the Paschal Mystery—with which He triumphantly opened the Era of Grace, thereby sealing the New and Everlasting Covenant.

The divine axis on which both Testaments turn is the Person of Jesus Christ. In fact, He is pro- claimed in the Old Testament: “the Scriptures [...] bear witness to Me” (Jn 5:39), said Our Lord; and the New is the fulfillment of this proclamation. This truth is expressed by St. Augustine with the brilliance and conciseness of his genius: “in Vetere Novum lateat, et in Novo Vetus pateat — The New Testament is hidden in the Old, and the Old is revealed in the New.”2

Before Christ and, above all, in the Christian era, innumerable writings surfaced, allegedly containing the Word of God. But among these, only a small number were eventually included on the list of the Sacred Books. Why were some writings included and others not? Who made this selection, and with what authority? These questions lead us to an awe-inspiring theme: the formation of the Canon of sacred books.

Admirable unanimity forged over the course of centuries

The Greek word for ‘canon’ has various meanings: standard of measure, rule, norm, and, by extension, a list or registry. The Canon of Sacred Scriptures is, then, the list of Sacred Books that compose the Bible: 46 in the Old Testament and 27 in the New. Only these 73 books have the privilege of being the Word of God.

The formation of the Canon has a long and luminous history. It is the story of how Divine Providence, over the course of centuries, pre- pared circumstances and souls so that the Holy Church would discern and identify, among the diverse writings presented as authentic transmitters of the Word of God, which of them were truly inspired and in- fallibly contained the truths of the Faith.

But there was difficulty in the fact that, with the passage of centuries, a number of writings had appeared within the Israelite religious com- munities of the Old Testament, but not all of them were equally recognized and respected. Some, from the beginning, reflected ancient and authentic traditions with which the People of God fully identified. Others, however, did not enjoy this general acceptance.

A marvellous action of God gradually led the Jewish communities to an almost unanimous opinion on this subject. An admirable work in- deed, for at that time they did not have infallible authority, such as was granted by Jesus Christ to His Church, to recognize and declare the sacred and inspired character of these books.

First, the Pentateuch, or Torah, was acknowledged from earliest times as the Word of God. Next, the Prophets and later the other texts gradually acquired formal acknowledgement until these collections came to comprise essentially what is contained in the present set of books called the Old Testament.3

Distinguishing the evangelical message from false interpretations

The story surrounding the New Testament is even richer and more complex, although, in a sense, clear- er and easier to follow. At a certain moment of the early Church’s history, the Apostles and their followers dedicated themselves to the task of registering in writing much of what they preached orally, giving rise to the first books.

Nevertheless, heresies arose among Christian communities from early on. Some came from erroneous doctrinal interpretations conceived by Christian judaizers; others, it seems, originated in paganism, such as the gnostic doctrines. Both led to distorted interpretations of the Gospel message.

In the earliest times of Christianity, neo-testamentary writings proliferated, mixing the authentic testimonies of the Apostles and their first followers with others whose authenticity could be legitimately doubted, for they did not have the guarantee of apostolic origin (from the time of the Apostles), or because they were not the object of belief on the part of the churches.

Heretical adaptations or interpolations were soon introduced in some writings with the claim that they originated from the apostolic era, but of dubious and suspect authorship.

Given that, by the Holy Spirit, the Church received the Scriptures— of both the Old and the New Testament—as a legacy, it fell to her to discern, acknowledge and declare, with the assistance of that same Spirit, which of these many writings were in fact the Word of God.

The result of this slow and sure- footed work of the Church in identifying the Sacred Books was the formation of the Canon.

At a certain moment

of the early Church’s

history, the Apostles

and their followers

dedicated themselves

to the task of registering

in writing much of

what they preached orally

The action of the Holy Spirit

A threefold action of the Holy Spirit can be observed in this patient labour of the Church.

First, the Divine Paraclete acted over the communities that received the Word of God, Who “spoke of old to our fathers by the prophets; but in these last days He has spoken to us by a Son” (Heb 1:1- 2), forming and inspiring traditions, allowing these to be conserved in the memory of the people, and the Word to remain integral and unchangeable. Secondly, He inspired the hagiographers to put in- to writing the content of the Word of God—transmitted at first orally and recorded in traditions— and to write “everything and only those things which He wanted.”4 The sacred authors thus committed themselves to this mission. Finally, through the same Tradition, that is, those things that have been, semper, ubique et ab omnibus, objects of faith, He revealed to the Church the inspired writings.

The definition of the Canon, both of the Old and the New Testa- ment is, therefore, a human and di- vine work of the Church. In other words, it applies the logical criteria of human wisdom to discern the authenticity of vetero and neo-testamentary writings, while being assisted by the Holy Spirit in the interpretation of the information coming from these human resources. The dedicated and intelligent work of an admirable constellation of men from early Christianity— the Holy Fathers—led the Church to a sublime plane in the knowledge of the Scriptures and helped her to discern, by the action of the Holy Spirit, precious criteria for the selection and classification of the Sacred Books.

The Old Testament Canon

Bearing in mind that the books of the Old Testament were writ- ten over the course of approximately 900 years in Hebrew, Aramaic, and to a much lesser extent, Greek, let us now go on to consider how these books became known, without touching on the interesting topic of the probable dates of these writings, and their authors, which would exceed the limits of this article focusing on the formation of the Canon.

It is certain that partial collections of Old Testament writings had been in circulation among the various Israelite communities, both those of Palestine as well as those of the diaspora, in the post-exile period, notably at the time of the Maccabees, but there is a lack of precise historical data in this regard.

               Around the year 200 BC, there appeared the first ample collection of the Old Testament writings, in Greek, compiled, it is said, by 70 wise Jews from Alexandria, and hence called “Septuagint” or “of the Seventy,” or even “Alexandrian,” frequently designated by the symbol LXX.

              Nevertheless, there is no indication that a Canon of books had been elaborated before the Christian era. Alongside some books acknowledged by all as sacred, there were several other doubtful ones, some of which were outright disputed.

              The various versions of the Scriptures circulated peacefully among the Jews of Palestine and outside, the Septuagint distinguishing it- self for its widespread acceptance among both parties and for being the most disseminated in the earliest times of Christianity.

“Most of the citations from the Old Testament attributed to Jesus in the Gospels correspond to the text from the version of the Seventy.”5

              The fact that this version was the most widely cited in the Gospels gives it unmatched authority. It was also the most used among the early Jewish Christians, and enjoyed full credibility in these circles.

              Over the course of the first century, the majority of the books contained in the LXX version were well accepted; they are the protocanonical books (from proto, Greek for first). Nevertheless, others were subject to debate and were accepted only at a later point: they are called deuterocanonical (from deutero, second).

              It was only at the beginning of the second century—when the Church already had its own life, independent from Judaism, and had wide y accepted the list of books of the LXX, called the long Canon—that the Jewish authorities, under the initiative of the Pharisaic rabbis, decided to close their Canon, rejecting seven books contained in the version of the LXX6 thus adopting a reduced, short Canon.

              It seems reasonable to suggest that one of the motives of the Jews in implementing the short Canon, among others, was the need to distinguish themselves from Christianity.

              The historical information available indicates that, most likely, this collection implemented by the rabbis—also known as the proto-Masoretic Text— was later, in the Middle Ages, re- viewed and furnished with notes and vocalizing signs, in the form of commentaries, by the Jewish Masoretes, teachers and representatives of the Jewish Masorah (tradition), there- by constituting the Masoretic Text; which is the present Hebraic Bible.

              When the Jews resolved to close their Canon, the Septuagint version had already been widely accepted in the Church for over a century— the long Canon. Hence, the Canon of the Pharisaic rabbis had a limited scope, restricted to the ambit of remaining Jewish communities.

The early Church, from the beginning, had recognized the version of the Seventy, which, among others, as was already stated, had circulated freely among the Jews, for they still did not have a de- fined list of the books considered sacred. The Church, then, did not inherit a defined Canon from Judaism, but rather defined one herself, gathering all the books of the LXX along with the so-called deuterocanonical books. Hence, the Septuagint version—the long Canon—was adopted by Christianity, in its totality, from its very beginnings, some minor difficulties7 be- coming clarified with time, and it enjoyed full authority among Christians. The Council of Chalcedon (451 AD) did nothing but acknowledge a reality already lived by Christianity until the fourth century. For, while the Old Testament Canon had already been actively used in the Church, and the books that composed it held great authority among the faithful—with the exception of a few, isolated eastern communities without great influence—one still did not speak of canonical books. It was only after this Council that this collection acquired a fully canonical configuration,8 and so remained for over a thousand years.

              It was only in the sixteenth century—a millennium and a half after the birth of Christianity!—that this reality was contended. Martin Luther and his followers resolved to reject almost 1,500 years of Christian Tradition and adopt the short Canon, established by the Pharisaic rabbis for Jewish use, thus giving rise to the so- called Protestant Bible.

              In the centuries leading up to that point, the Church, following the path of the apostolic Tradition, had not felt the need to present a dogmatic definition on the sacred Canon, and the pax Christi was never seriously threatened in this regard. Luther’s negations in the sixteenth century, and the un- rest they fomented in the heart of Christianity, prompted the Holy Church to manifest, in this field, the power granted to her by her Divine Founder. Hence, what had been accepted as common Church doctrine since the fourth century, and lived by Christianity from its very beginnings, was the object of an explicit formulation in the Council of Florence (1442) in the decree Pro Iacobitis,9 and of a dogmatic definition in the Council of Trent (1564), reaffirmed in the First Vatican Council (1870).

New Testament Canon

As we have seen, apostolic preaching was exclusively oral from the beginning, for the Apostles went out into the world to preach, faithful to the mandate of the Divine Master who said, “go into all the world and preach” (Mk 16:15)—not, “go and write.” And let us not forget the great difficulty of the time in obtaining books, which were all manuscripts, and thus of costly and lengthy production.

              Therefore, in the Apostolic Period (until the year 70), the nascent Church did not have its own writings, but only the “Law and the Prophets”; that is, the Old Testament read in the light of the Christian message. However, two factors soon required the Apostles and their first followers to resort to writing: first, the multiplication of communities in distant regions— thanks, above all, to the apostolate of St. Paul; and secondly, the emergence of heresies. Nevertheless, for a long time and even until the Period of the Apostolic Fathers, the evangelical traditions were more widely known through oral than through written tradition.10 St. Luke provides testimony of this: “Many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things which have been accomplished among us, just as they were delivered to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word” (Lk 1:1-2).

Apostolic preaching

 was in the beginning

exclusively oral and,

so, the nascent Church

did not have its

own writings, but only

 the “Law and the Prophets”

              This struggle led to the consolidation within the Church of an idea that had already existed latently since the Sub-Apostolic Period:11 the need for a closed Canon.

              In the time of St. Justin Martyr (second century) in Rome, the New Testament already contained two thirds of what would be- come the definitive Canon. In the following period—that of St. Irenaeus, St. Clement of Alexandria, and Origen—the essential part of the definitive Canon had already been included in the Canon recognized by St. Irenaeus and by the church of Gaul: the four Gospels, the Acts of the Apostles, some letters and Revelation.

              It was  precisely St. Irenaeus—one of the great figures of Patristics — who, in face of Gnosticism and, above all, of Marcionism, developed Christian doctrine, magnificently establishing the foundations for the comprehension of the Scriptures as one, coherent, and harmonious ensemble.

St. Clement of Alexandria and Origen presented a list of 22 books, for them, devoid of doubt: the four Gospels, the Acts of the Apostles, the 14 Pauline letters, the first epistles of Peter and John and Revelation.12

              Some New Testament writings, as was seen above, seem to have obtained canonical recognition very early, expressed, above all, by the liturgical use made of them. They are called the protocanonical books of the New Testament.

              Others, however, presented some obstacles for acceptance, and only after a relatively long pro- cess did the Church’s authority include them in the Canon. They are called the deuterocanonical books of the New Testament: the epistle to the Hebrews, the second letter of Peter, the second and third of John, the epistles of James and Jude and Revelation. This means they were included in the New Testament Canon only after some hesitation being accepted, we repeat, solely on the authority of the Church.

Divine wisdom surpasses all human foresight

              Over the course of roughly 300 years, a nucleus of books was de- fined as being of certain and in- disputable canonicity, based on their acceptance by the communities— animated by the Sensus Fidei (sense of the Faith), but, above all by liturgical use, with the explicit recognition of ecclesiastical authorities, gathered in synods and regional or ecumenical councils.

              Luther also rejected the deuterocanonical writings of the New Testament, but his followers could not sustain this position and eventually admitted them. In this way, the Reform fell into the incoherence of denying the authority of the Church regarding the Old Testament and affirming it in relation to the New.

              Thus, in a divinely sapiential manner, the Holy Spirit governs the Church, without rationalist or schematic strictures, unhurriedly defining marvels such as the books of Sacred Scripture, in which “the and Father who is in Heaven meets His children with great love and speaks with them.”13

              This long and marvelous journey travelled by human reason illuminated by the faith, and assisted by grace and the charisms of the Holy Spirit, made it possible to clearly discern and define the regula fidei of the Sacred Scriptures, with divine authority. This process also encourages us to contemplate the marvelous harmony between the two sources upon which the entire Christian Faith is based: Sacred Tradition and Holy Writ.

1 Biblical term used in the sense of Covenant.

2 ST. AUGUSTINE. Quæstion- um in Heptateuchum, l.2, 73: ML 34, 623.

3 The terms “Old Testament” and “New Testament” were put into use by Christianity: the first comes from an expression of St. Paul (2 Cor 3:14), and the second extracted from an oracle of Jeremiah (31:31).

4 SECOND VATICAN COUN- CIL. Dei Verbum, n.11.

5 TREBOLLE BARRERA, Júlio. A Bíblia Judaica e a Bíblia Cristã. 2.ed. Petrópolis: Vozes, 1999, p.600.

6 Tobit, Judith, Baruch, Wisdom, Ecclesiastes, Maccabees 1 and 2, in addition to some passages from Esther and Daniel.

7 Some books, the deuterocanonical, were the object of some debate between the churches, but at a later time in the history of the Canon they were peacefully accepted by the generality of the Christian world.

8 Cf. TREBOLLE BARRERA, op.cit., p.273.

9 Cf. DZ 1334-1335; 1501-1504; 3029.

10 KÖSTER, Helmut. Synoptis- che Überlieferung bei den Apostolischen Vätern. In: TREBOLLE BARRERA,

op. cit., p.277.

11 Period immediately following the Apostles.

12  Note that while Revelation and the Letter to the Heb- rews did not present any doubts as to their authenti- city for Origen and St. Clem- ent of Alexandria, they were later considered deuterocan- onical by the Church.

13 SECOND VATICAN COUNCIL, op. cit., n.21