Adora

Okay. I'm looking for information/documentation of the certain socio-political influences on the formation of the Bible we know now as the general standard version. Obviously, there were apocryphal texts left out, thousands of documents submitted to the original workers starting to create them etc etc and all of this because of certain idealogical and social beliefs and desires that were held at the time of formation. I guess what I'm looking for is something like that 'The Harlot at the Side of the Road' book (which I am still trying desperately to get my hands on) but on a larger scale. Does anybody know any other good books, urls or writers who do this kind of work, kind of like a historical social look at the history of church literature or something (I really don't know how to classify what I'm lookin for)? I know there are many links available on this website refering to the contextual aspect of the New Testament and certain Old testament scriptures, but I'm searching for it on a larger scale and more in a church historical context of "Why the establishment included this and this but not this" rather than "Why this was written like this".

All help and hints are welcome and loved. Thanks.

mike_decock

Elaine Pagels discusses the social and political influences which determined what scriptures became Orthodox in both The Gnostic Gospels and Beyond Belief.

-Mike...

Doctor X

For the formation of the OT texts, a good introduction is Friedman's Who Wrote the Bible?--see Recommended Reading. His dating is controversial in scholarship, but his presentation of the formation is good.

The canonization of the OT requires another text--and I have not read it yet!!

For the NT texts, Fortress Press may still have their "Guides to Critical Scholarship." There were two on the actual process of canonization--one was a Christian apologetic, but he had the process correct. If you cannot find these you have to look for the bigger texts.

Or . . . I am sure someone here has it on a web-page!

--J.D.

Celsus

The OT "canon" wasn't formalised until Jamnia in 90 (?) CE, IIRC. Variant texts proliferated at the turn of the millenia, although not significantly in most cases. Hence the early Christian use of the LXX which included additions to Daniel (etc.) and the Apocrypha. It was only the later Christians (at the Council of Trent?), particularly newly formed Protestants who returned to the Jewish canon. Martin Luther famously disliked much of the New Testament as well, so it wasn't a settled issue until relatively recently. It's a fascinating subject, well worth looking into (I've forgotten just about everything I once knew about it, but hey, it was fun!). There are a number of threads on this here, and I think in the Secular Web library (there's one called "The Formation of the New Testament Canon" I think)

Joel

Amaleq13

Were you thinking of Carrier's article summarizing Metzger?:

http://www.infidels.org/library/mode...r/NTcanon.html


Good stuff!

DrJim

On the early stages of canonicity of the Hebrew Bible literature, PR Davies has a book, "Scribes and Schools: Teh Canonization of the Hebrew Scriptures" (Westminster John Knox, 1998). You could also try his paper in hte Journal of Hebrew Scriptures,
Loose Canons reflections on the formation of the Hebrew Canon

Here is the abstract:

Canonizing begins and continues as an open-ended process. To canonize a work is not an entirely conscious process at all stages and does not entail that other works have to be barred from being canonized, or definitely excluded from such a status. Only when definitive canonical lists emerge does the canonizing process stop. While canonizing does entail listing, organizing and labelling, a single definitive list is not, indeed, the purpose of the canonizing process, any more than death is the purpose of life: just its end.

Also try John Barton's Holy Writings Sacred Texts The canon in early Christianity.


JRL