The Bible in the Early Church

Justo L. González

• Publisher: Eerdmans
• Year: 2022
• ISBN:
  9781467464079
• Topic: Teología y religión
• Subtopic: Historia del cristianismo

A concise history of the Bible: its creation, use, and interpretation  

What is the Bible? To answer this question we must understand the Bible’s origins in the early church. In this book, celebrated church historian Justo González introduces the reader to some important features of the earliest Bibles—for instance, the Bible’s original languages, its division into chapters and verses, and even its physical appearance in its first forms. González also explores the use of the Bible in the early church (such as in worship or in private reading) and the interpretation of the Bible throughout the ensuing centuries, giving readers a holistic sense of the Bible’s emergence as the keystone of Christian life, from its beginnings to present times.

1

THE SHAPE OF THE BIBLE

CHAPTER 1

The Languages and Contents of the First Christian Bibles

Christianity was born within Judaism, and therefore, among other things, it appropriated the Scriptures of Israel as its own Bible. That is the origin of what we now call the Old Testament. But in the early church there were relatively few Christians who could easily read the Hebrew text of the Bible. For some time before the advent of Jesus, Hebrew had begun to decline as a spoken tongue, and was preserved mostly in the sacred writings. What the people actually spoke was Aramaic, another Semitic language that made headway among the Hebrew people beginning at the time of the Babylonian exile. By the first century CE, Jews generally spoke not Hebrew but Aramaic—although they called this latter language “Hebrew” when contrasting it with the other common language of the area, Greek. Generally, when we read in the New Testament that someone spoke in “Hebrew,” or when we are offered the meaning of a “Hebrew” word, this actually refers not to the Hebrew language of the Old Testament but to Aramaic.

Since the population at large knew little Hebrew, there were also Aramaic translations of various passages and books of the Old Testament. These are called “targums,” which literally means “translations.” Since Aramaic was spoken not only in Palestine but also in a vast area extending eastward into Syria and Mesopotamia, Christians as well as Jews in those areas employed these Aramaic translations.

Of greater impact, though, was the language commonly spoken toward the west of Palestine: Greek. Slightly more than three centuries before the advent of Christianity, the conquests of Alexander the Great had taken Greek culture and language to a vast area that included not only Greece and its environs but also Egypt, Syria, and Palestine. When the Roman Empire conquered the eastern Mediterranean, Greek became a language spoken throughout the empire, particularly by the learned and by those engaged in long-distance commerce. In Egypt there was a large Jewish population that soon adopted Greek as its own language. This required that the Old Testament be translated into Greek. This translation was not done all at once, nor with a single understanding of the nature of translation itself. For this reason, there were some very literal translations—to the point that the actual meaning of a passage was obscured—while others sought to communicate the meaning rather than the words of the original text. To bolster the authority of this collection of translations commonly used by the Jewish people, a legend developed claiming that the translation was done by seventy-two Jewish scholars who worked independently from one another, and when they finally compared what they had done, it was found that they had all produced identical translations. The legend gave this ancient Greek translation of the Old Testament the name “Version of the Seventy,” or Septuagint—a name commonly abbreviated as LXX. The list of books included in the LXX is frequently called the “Alexandrine Canon”—which, as we shall see, is more extensive that the actual Hebrew Bible.

The LXX was the Bible Christians used as they began sharing their faith with other people among whom Greek was spoken. This is the Bible that Paul and most of the other authors of the New Testament quote as Scripture. The main exception is the Revelation of John, which seems to quote an unknown version—although it is quite possible that as he was writing, John simply translated into Greek passages that he knew by heart in either Hebrew or Aramaic. Also, the first chapters of the Gospel of Matthew quote Isaiah and the Minor Prophets in a translation that is independent of the LXX. As in the case of Revelation, it would seem that the author of this Gospel either was making use of a different translation—of which there were several—or was simply translating passages in order to quote them in Greek.

When Christianity appeared on the scene, Judaism itself had not yet decided exactly which books were sacred. All agreed on the authority of the Pentateuch and the Prophets. The book of Psalms also had great authority, since it was frequently employed in worship, particularly on certain special days and occasions. But the remainder of the canon of the Old Testament was not yet fixed. It was only late in the first century, after the temple had been destroyed, that Judaism, led by a center of biblical studies in the small Palestinian town of Jamnia, decided which books were so sacred that it was necessary to wash one’s hands before reading them. (Although mention is often made of a “Council of Jamnia,” it is very likely that there was no council in the sense of a gathering of people from different areas, and that what took place was simply a process whereby the Jewish scholars and leaders in that city reached a consensus on the canon late in the first century.) It is important to note that what was primarily discussed in the development of the canon was not how particular books could be employed in theological debates but what could and should be read in the synagogue—and, later, in the church as well. Naturally, the theological content of the books affected the decisions that were made. But the formation of the canon was not first of all a doctrinal matter but a question of worship. As has often been affirmed, worship itself is a very important factor in the theological formation of those who partake in it. Here we see that worship was also an important factor in the formation of the canon.

Frequently, the list of sacred books that became the Hebrew Bible is called the “Jerusalem Canon,” in contrast to the “Alexandrine Canon.” The Jerusalem Canon is similar to most Protestant Bibles today, although the order of the books is slightly different:

The Law or Torah: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy

The Prophets: the ancient prophets (Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings) and the later prophets (Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the twelve Minor Prophets)

The Writings: Psalms, Proverbs, Job, the Song of Solomon, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, Esther, Daniel, Ezra-Nehemiah, and Chronicles

There were several factors leading Judaism to determine the exact limits of the canon of its Scriptures. One of them was the need to develop a measure of uniformity among a population that was now dispersed throughout the world in ever-growing numbers, and soon with no homeland. Another was the conviction of some that God’s revelation originally came in Hebrew, and that therefore books written in another language should not have the same authority—although the Hebrew Bible does include brief portions in Aramaic. It is also certain that one of the forces leading Judaism to determine the canon of its sacred text was the growth of Christianity. Since one of the main instruments that Christianity employed in its quest for followers was the LXX, the Hebrew canon now made it clear that several books that were part of the LXX but that were originally written in Greek—or at least were not known in Hebrew—were not legitimate Scripture. These books are commonly called “apocryphal” or “deuterocanonical.” The latter name is to be preferred, since these books in fact form a “second canon” and were never generally forbidden or declared apocryphal.

All of this resulted in a difference between the Bible that Christians used, which was the LXX (see chapter 5) and which therefore included the deuterocanonical books, and the Hebrew Bible, which excluded them. There were a few Christians, but not many, who preferred the Hebrew list, or Jerusalem Canon; but in general, the church followed the Alexandrine Canon of the LXX. When late in the fourth century Jerome produced the Latin version commonly known as the Vulgate, he wished to limit his work to the Hebrew canon, but he eventually bent to church authorities and included also the deuterocanonical books. These continued being part of the Christian Bible until the Protestant Reformation, with its emphasis on translations from the original languages, provided the beginning of a movement seeking to restore the Hebrew canon. This is why today the main difference between Protestant and Catholic Bibles is that the latter include the deuterocanonical books, whereas the former do not. In brief, this means that, with some differences having to do mostly with their order, the books of the Hebrew Bible today are the same as those in most Protestant versions.

The deuterocanonical books are Tobias, Judith, 1 and 2 Maccabees, the Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus (not to be confused with Ecclesiastes), Baruch, and several minor additions, particularly in the books of Esther and Daniel.

The book of Tobias is the story of a Jew who, having been taken as a captive to Assyria, was blinded and impoverished and yet remained faithful in his devotion to God and in works of mercy. As in the case of Job, the sufferings of Tobias are seen as tests coming from God in order to fortify and purify his faith and character.

The book of Judith is set during the reign of King Nebuchadnezzar, who wished to be adored as a god. Nebuchadnezzar orders his general Holofernes to subject any nations that refuse to worship him, and he gives Holofernes command of a vast army to accomplish this task. According to the story, the people of Israel had recently returned from their captivity and were governed by a council of elders. When the army of Holofernes was besieging a city in northern Israel that resisted valiantly but with little hope of success, Judith, who had been a widow for slightly over three years, dressed as attractively as she could and presented herself to the enemy army, claiming she was fleeing from the Hebrews and wished to tell Holofernes how to enter the city. In a banquet with much drinking, Judith gave Holofernes to understand that she was ready to go to bed with him. Once she was in the tent alone with the general, who was weakened by drink, Judith cut off his head, put it in a sack, and left the tent, claiming she was going out to pray. She then carried the head of Holofernes to the governing elders of Israel and told them to hang it from the city wall. When they saw the hanging head of their general, the Babylonian armies fled. Through the centuries, Christian art has frequently depicted Judith holding the head of Holofernes.

The two books of Maccabees, which in truth are only one, tell what happened after the empire of Alexander the Great was dismembered. Taking advantage of tensions and disagreements between the rulers in Syria and those in Egypt, the Jews rebelled under the leadership of Mattathias and his sons. The books carry the name of one of those sons, Judas Maccabee, meaning “the hammer” or “the sledge.” Although the books were originally written in Hebrew, the Hebrew Bible did not include them due to their late date, as it was decided that only books written before the time of Ezra could be considered sacred.

The Wisdom of Solomon seems to have no real connection with that famous king. It is a praise of wisdom. The first nine of its nineteen chapters are similar to Proverbs in the nature of the material they include. The second part personifies God’s wisdom as a woman and lists the evils that had befallen the Hebrew people as a result of not seeking her.

Ecclesiasticus seems to date from the second century BCE and to have been written originally in Hebrew but soon translated into Greek. The Greek version attributes the work to Joshua ben Sirach, the grandfather of the translator. In its contents it is very similar to Proverbs, for most of it is a song in praise of wisdom. However, in contrast with Proverbs, Ecclesiasticus is not a fairly loose list of wise advice, but rather follows a logical order. Near the end of the book there is also a review of the great figures in the history of Israel and the role of wisdom in their accomplishments.

The book of Baruch claims to have been written by the disciple and amanuensis of Jeremiah whose name was Baruch (Jer. 32:12–16). It is fairly short, and most of its first section is actually a prayer of penance before God asking for mercy. The second part is an exhortation to wisdom, repentance, and hope. At the end there is a supposed letter of Jeremiah against idolatry.

The differences in the books of Esther and Daniel as they appear in the Jerusalem Canon versus its Alexandrine counterpart are a series of short episodes that the Alexandrine Canon inserts in these two books. Finally, as we shall see in chapter 8, the Psalms are numbered differently, although their content is the same.

At any rate, such differences regarding the canon of the Old Testament have little to do with the disagreements between Catholics and Protestants. (The main exception is a brief passage in Maccabees that has been employed to support the doctrine of purgatory.)

As to the names of the books of the Old Testament, there are some differences between the ones they have in Protestant Bibles and those found in traditional Catholic Bibles. Most of these differences apply to the historical books. What Protestants call the two books of Samuel and the two books of Kings are the four books of Kings in traditional Catholic Bibles. What Protestants call the two books of Chronicles, older Catholic Bibles call Paralipomena, a word meaning “other things” or “the rest.” The books of Ezra and Nehemiah in Protestant Bibles are often the two books of Ezra in Catholic Bibles.

This complex history explains the differences between the Alexandrine Canon, which coincides with the Roman Catholic canon, and the Jerusalem Canon, which coincides with the Protestant. Furthermore, the fluidity of early canons, both Jewish and Christian, should help readers understand how it is that the Epistle of Jude in the New Testament quotes as Scripture the book of Enoch, which is not considered canonical by Jews, Catholics, or Protestants (Jude 14–15).

CHAPTER 2

The Shaping of the New Testament

The earliest Christians had no other Bible than what today we call the Old Testament. As in the synagogues, it was this Bible that was read and explained in the gatherings of the church. There are many indications that those early Christians, Jews as they were, continued attending worship at the temple if they lived in Jerusalem; or if not, at the local synagogue. As those Jewish Christians, gathered in the synagogue every Sabbath with other Jews, heard the reading of the Scriptures of Israel, they would understand them in the light of Jesus the Messiah—the Anointed One—and they would seek to convince other Jews that this was the proper interpretation of what had recently happened in Jerusalem. After that meeting in the synagogue, once the sun had set on the seventh day of the week (Saturday), and therefore now at the beginning of the first day of the new week (Sunday), Christians would gather again to break bread in memory of the passion and resurrection of Jesus, and as a foretaste and reminder of his promised return. When they were finally expelled from the synagogues, they would continue gathering to break bread, but now they would also devote time to the reading and interpretation of the Scriptures of Israel.

While Christians were thus reading and studying the Scriptures of Israel, several factors led to the production of the books we now call the New Testament and to their being collected into a canon, or list of authoritative books. These factors were mainly three.

The first of them was the need to have books that referred more explicitly to the life and teachings of Jesus, relating them to the ancient Scriptures of Israel. These books, precisely because they dealt more directly with Christian faith, rapidly took center stage in Christian worship. Thus, when in the second century Justin described Christian worship, he listed among other things the reading of the Hebrew prophets and “the memoirs of the apostles.” He says:

And on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits; then, when the reader has ceased, the presider verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things. (First Apology 67.3–4; ANF 1:186)

A second factor leading to the formation of the canon of the New Testament was the importance given to communication among churches, and therefore also to the correspondence and other documents that were both a means and a result of that communication. When a highly respected leader of the church—such as Paul in his travels, John from Patmos, or Ignatius on his way to martyrdom—wrote to a particular church or person, what they wrote would soon circulate among other churches and be read in their gatherings. Writing to the Colossians, Paul tells them, “When this letter has been read among you, have it read also in the church of the Laodiceans; and see that you read also the letter from Laodicea” (Col. 4:16). John’s Revelation included seven letters addressed to specific churches, but certainly John expected that the entire book would be read in each of the seven churches, and possibly elsewhere. There were also other inspiring documents that circulated among the churches and that were sometimes read in worship. Among others, one may mention the Shepherd of Hermas, which originated in Rome in the middle of the second century, and the already mentioned letters of Ignatius of Antioch. Regarding these letters and the esteem in which they were held, we have the witness of Polycarp of Smyrna, who shortly after Ignatius’s martyrdom wrote to the Philippians:

The Epistles of Ignatius written by him to us, and all the rest [of his Epistles] which we have by us, we have sent to you, as you requested. They are subjoined to this Epistle, and by them ye may be greatly profited; for they treat of faith and patience, and all things that tend to edification in our Lord. Any more certain information you may have obtained respecting both Ignatius himself, and those that were with him, have the goodness to make known to us. (Epistle to the Philippians 13.2; ANF 1:36)

Finally, a third factor leading to the formation of the New Testament was the need to determine which of the many books circulating among Christians were worthy of being read in worship and which should not be read, mostly because their teachings did not agree with those of the church at large. This need was precipitated by the canon that Marcion proposed in the mid-second century. Since Marcion was convinced that the god of the Hebrew Bible was not the same as the Christian God, and that it was only Paul who fully understood this, he rejected the Hebrew Bible, for which he substituted the Gospel of Luke and the Epistles of Paul—although deleting every reference to the Hebrew Bible from both the Gospel and the Epistles. Besides this canon proposed by Marcion, there were many other documents in circulation—none of them as early as the Epistles of Paul or the canonical Gospels—claiming to be the true teaching of Jesus, or the acts of a particular apostle. Some of these were mere works of fiction in which the imagination of some believer created stories regarding matters such as the childhood of Jesus. But some others also had a doctrinal agenda. Some put forward the doctrines of a particular gnostic teacher. Such is the case with the Gospel of Truth by Valentinus. Others advocated for absolute celibacy and rejected marriage. This was the stance of most of the apocryphal acts attributed to various apostles, such as the Acts of Andrew and the Acts of Thomas.

In brief, it was necessary both to declare some books to be authoritative and to disavow others. This led to a long process that took centuries. From an early date, there was a general consensus regarding the present four canonical Gospels as well as the letters of Paul. There are indications that, as was to be expected, each of the Gospels was partic...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title Page
• Copyright
• Contents
• Preface
• List of Abbreviations
• Introduction
• Part 1: The Shape of the Bible
• Part 2: The Use of the Bible
• Part 3: The Interpretation of the Bible
• Cast of Characters
• Further Reading