• Military Menu                       

• Introduction
• Systems
• Facilities
• Agencies
• Industry
• Operations
• Countries
• Hot Documents
• News
• Reports
• Policy
• Budget
• Congress
• Links

• WMD
• Intelligence
• Homeland Security
• Space

Tanakh - The Canon

The construction of a definite and authorized list of sacred writings is something not peculiar to any one religion. The followers of Buddha, Zoroaster, and Mahomet formed such canons. It could not be otherwise than that a people so intensely religious as the Jews, and so deeply feeling themselves to be the chosen people of God and under his guidance, should do the same. The Canon of the Old Testament was made up of three different collections of books, called the Law, the Prophets, and the Hagiographa. It was the Law that first became canonical through the influence of Ezra and Nehemiah; the Prophets became so considerably later, and the Hagiographa last of all. This really epitomizes the whole story; but it will be more intelligible if a few details are added.

Missing Books

No fewer than sixteen books are wanting from the Old Testament which seemingly ought to be there; at least which are referred to in various places in the Bible as if they were equally authoritative with books which are included in the Canon. The number of "biblical" writings that perished must be very considerable indeed. Distinct traces of a great many have survived in hte modern Canon. So far as is known, fifteen of these sixteen books are lost, with one exception - The Book of Enoch (Ethiopic and Greek). There is, e.g., the "Book of the Wars of Jehovah," in Numbers. In Kings the "Book of the History of Solomon" is referred to. In Chronicles we are told of histories by Samuel, Nathan the Prophet, Gad the Seer, as sources for the life of David. In the same work there are references for the further history of Solomon to the "Prophecy of the Silonite Ahia," the "Vision of the Seer Jedai (Iddo) on Jeroboam."

The Books of the Kings adduce (more than thirty times) certain Annals both of the kings of Judah and of Israel as separate works, speaking of them moreover, under different titles, so as to further favor the belief of the existence of several contemporary historical compilations. Isajah in his turn is mentioned as historiographer in Chronicles, where, further, the writings of Shemajah, of Jehu, of Hosai, &c, are spoken of. Of all these productions, great or small, there is no living trace now. They seem, indeed, to have dropped out of man's memory at a very early period. If they gave rise to some moderate discussions it was principally with regard to the possible identity of some of the differently named works. Why were these books allowed to perish? Why were they left out from the Old Testament? If scripture writers themselves referred to them as of equal authority with their own writings, how can a line be drawn between them and genuine scripture? Indeed, what is it that constitutes genuine scripture?

Pseudepigraphal Books

A second list of eighteen writings, now extant, generally known as the Old Testament "pseudepigraphal" books, must also be noticed. According to the standards of to-day, the value of these books is not great. Some of them, however, are known to hve exerted a good deal of influence upon early Christians. In the times immediately preceding and succeeding the commencement of the Christian era there arose among the Jews a style of writing to which the name Pseudepigraphic has been given, because most of the works so composed appeared under the assumed name of some famous person. They must not be considered in the light of literary forgeries; they are not like Macpherson with his Ossian, or Chatterton with his Rowley, fraudulent attempts at imposture; but the authors, having something to say which they deemed worthy of the attention of contemporaries, put it forth under the aegis of a great name, not to deceive, but to conciliate favour. A writer who ventured to appropriate a celebrated title would take care to satisfy the expectations raised by his pseudonym, and readers would believe that no one would dare to challenge comparison with a great original who was not qualified to sustain the character assumed. The most familiar instance is, perhaps, the book known as the Wisdom of Solomon, wherein the writer assumes the person of the great Israelite king, certainly with no idea of deceiving his readers (for the language of the treatise, the date and place of its composition, alike forbid any notion of fraud), but with the view of supporting his opinions by the highest authority, and as embodying sentiments which are such as the son of David might have enunciated.

Old Testament Apocrypha

Of much higher value is a third list, of fourteen books, known as the Old Testament Apocrypha. The Old Testament apocryphal books are all extant, and are more or less familiar to the public. They are found in the Septuagint, the translation of the Old Testament into Greek, made a century or two before Christ. The early Christians used them as true scripture. "The church of the first three centuries made no essential difference between the writings of the Hebrew Canon and the so-called Apocrypha. The Roman Catholic Church claims that they are true scripture, and prints them as a part of her Bible. Protestants, however, take the responsibility of casting them out; though now and then a Protestant Bible (generally a large one for family or pulpit use) falls into our hands which contains them. Whether these fourteen apocryphal books ought to be in the Bible or not is a question upon which scholars have never been agreed, and upon which the Christian world today is about evenly divided. That some of them are superior not only as literature, but in respect to their moral and religious teachings, to several of the books that are now in the Bible, is certain. For example, no unprejudiced mind can hesitate for a moment to place the religious value of the apocryphal Wisdom of Solomon or Ecclesiasticus above that of the canonical Esther or Ecclesiastes.