. . . yet a large number of
books that were regarded as in some degree authoritative
and valuable were excluded. The Old Testament mentions the following by name,
and we have no reason to think that the list is exhaustive :
The Book of the Wars of the
Lord (Nu. 21:14).
The Book of Jashar (Jos.
10:13).
The book concerning the
manner of the kingdom (1 Sa. 10:25).
Presumably there had been a
collection of Solomon’s three thousand proverbs, his thousand and five songs
and his works on natural history (1 Ki. 4:32f.).
The Book of the Acts of
Solomon (1 Ki. 11:41).
The Book of the Chronicles
of the Kings of Israel (1 Ki. 14:19).
The Book of the Chronicles
of the Kings of Judah (1 Ki. 15:7).
The History of Samuel the
Seer;
The History of Nathan the
Prophet;
The History of Gad the Seer
(1 Ch. 29:29).
The Prophecy of Ahijah the
Shilonite;
The Visions of Iddo the Seer
(2 Ch. 9:29).
The History of Shemaiah the
Prophet (2 Ch. 12:15).
The History of Jehu (2 Ch.
20:34).
The Acts of Uzziah by Isaiah
the Prophet (2 Ch. 26:22).
The Lamentations (by
Jeremiah over Josiah — Josiah is not mentioned in our Lamentations) (2 Ch.
35:25).
Is
it possible to discover why these books were not included in the Canon?
We shall look in vain for a
direct answer to this question from the Bible. It has often been said that
Scripture, because it is the Word of God, is self-authenticating, and that
therefore all Scripture is immediately received as the Word of God by believers
from the time of its first promulgation. No doubt there is an important element
of truth in this. Yet it is palpably untrue that the Word of God is always
recognized as such immediately by all true believers. If it were so, why should
Peter have said, ‘God forbid, Lord! This shall, never happen to yow’ (Mt.
16:22)? Why should there have been a need for the Council of Jerusalem in Acts
15? Why should Luther have underrated the Epistle of James?
It is surely impossible to
prove that the tiny, personal Epistles of the New Testament were
self-authenticating from the first and immediately received by the church at
large. It is plain rather that the early church felt in need of objective,
historical tests to establish their apostolicity, before accepting them as
canonical. Similarly, in the case of the Old Testament, it is rash to suppose
that all inspired psalms were immediately distinguishable from uninspired
psalms, or that Esther, Ecclesiastes and Canticles were immediately accepted as
soon as they were written. Nor can it be proved that all the books pass the
test enunciated by W. H. Green: ‘Those books, and those only, were accepted as
the divine standards of their faith and regulative of their conduct which were
written for this definite purpose by those whom they believed to be inspired of
God.’ ° Nor can it be said that R. Laird Harris,’ for all his vigorous
argumentation, has proved that prophetic authorship is the one determining
principle of canonicity. That the authors of Joshua, Judges, Ruth, Chronicles,
Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and Canticles were
prophets, takes some proving ! (John Wenham, Christ and the Bible [The
Christian View of the Bible 1; Surrey: Eagle, 1993], 133-34)
To Support this Blog:
Email for Amazon Gift card: ScripturalMormonism@gmail.com
Email for Logos.com Gift Card: IrishLDS87@gmail.com
