In my post, "The Scriptures: A Written Conversation" I noted the chiastic structure of the Writings (the third section of the OT canon) highlights Ecclesiastes (Qoheleth) as the central book. I said, "This ending to the central book of the chiasm of the Writings is fitting. It is similar to ending the New Testament with the Book of Revelation given how Revelation ends warning about adding or subtracting from it. The effect of Ecclesiastes 12:12 is to say, the Writings are now complete until prophecy resumes, beware of adding to or subtracting from them."

Sailhamer notes in The Meaning of the Pentateuch that Scripture distinguishes between "writing in a book" and "making a book." Writing usually has more to do with copying. Making a book has to do with the composition of written works. His point is that making a book is much more complicated than simply taking dictation or copying.

He further argues that "many" can be an adjective "many books" or an adverb "constantly." Thus the verse may refer to either making an "endless number of books" or to how "the process of making a book is endless." He concludes it is the latter because of the warning about adding any more "wise sayings" (Ecclesiastes 12:11). So Sailhamer says, "in Ecclesiastes it aims at cutting short the process of making a book. The problem is not making more books, but deciding whether and when to end this one" (267). The composition of a book can involve several editions and revisions and such, and the author means to cut that process short rather than let it continue indefinitely.

I want to argue that the deeper problem is deciding whether and when to end the composition of the Hebrew Scriptures. Because of the placement of Ecclesiastes in the Hebrew canon, I want to suggest that it is aiming to end the process of making the Scriptures. In other words, for the rest of this time when prophecy has ceased, there should be no more books added to the Book and there should be no more revisions (no more editions of Biblical books, no more editing of Biblical books, and the like). The composition of the Hebrew Scriptures was complete.

It is fitting then that the apostles did not publish their own edition of the Hebrew Scriptures. The apostles viewed the Hebrew Scriptures as a finished product. To be sure they and others close to them made new compositions and some of those are collectively a new composition we now call the New Testament. But early Christians did not write their own versions of the OT Torah, Prophets, and Writings. This is an important observation because various groups in Judaism did this very thing -- they continued to edit and revise the Hebrew Bible for some time.

Labels: composition, ecclesiastes, hebrew scriptures, qoheleth, sailhamer, writing, writings

Too many conservative Christians view the Bible the way Muslims view the Qur'an -- they act as if the Bible fell out of heaven in a heavenly language. But our God is a God who works in history. And in the incarnation, the Son of God came down from heaven and took on flesh, lived and spoke, died, and was resurrected in history.

You will find that there is similar literature to what is in Scripture in the Ancient Near East (ANE). Moreover, Scripture is not written in a heavenly language. Some assumed that the New Testament's Greek was unique until they discovered everyday documents proving that it was the common Greek of the common people at the time. The cosmology of Scripture is not unique, the authors of Scripture use the normal ANE framework in their descriptions. Scripture is fully the words of its human authors. We should expect that on this level Scripture would "fit in" in the world when it was written. In other words, we should expect that on this level Scripture would not be strange in the ANE. What makes Scripture unique is that it is fully the word of the true and living God.

Reformed theologians have been apt defenders of the doctrine of inerrancy (Scripture is without error) and infallibility (Scripture is unable to err). They have positively set forth how Scripture is fully the word of God written down. And they began to positively set forth how Scripture is fully the words of its human authors. But this point was not developed and stressed. We can only speculate on the question of "What if?" If they had developed the full humanity of Scripture, would Barthianism have become so popular? And perhaps if they had done so then the multitudes that become convinced intellectually (even if the Spirit is testifying to Scripture as the word of God in their hearts) that Scripture has errors would not have been so convinced.

One of the problems is that most conservatives and liberals share the same set of modern presuppositions. That is, they both begin from the same assumptions about what would make Scripture err and anyone who is intellectually honest would have to admit that on this foundation the liberals would be right. In other words, both come to the text expecting that Scripture has to speak the way a modern would or it is in error. They impose upon the text their own criteria for truth. They set themselves up as gods judging the word of the true God.

Take for example something as simple as the classification of plants and animals. The modern method of classification relies on dissection to know what is going on in the inside of the plant or animal. The ANE method of classification relied on looking at the outside of the plant or animal. In both systems there are plants and animals that do not quite fit. Which animals chew the cud again? Is the tomato really a fruit? Both systems can be valid ways of classifying plants and animals. Just because moderns use the one and ancients used the other does not mean that the ancient system is in error when it conflicts with the modern system. Scripture is not a science textbook. It does say things that are binding on science, but to expect it to be a science textbook is imposing upon the text external criteria for determining if it is inerrant.

Instead, what we need to do is to see what Scripture says about itself and what Scripture is actually saying and doing. It is important to know what genre of literature one is reading, for example, before one hastily jumps to the conclusion that Scripture is in error.

Speaking of jumping to conclusions, the simple answer is not often the right answer. Too often conservative Christians look for the simple answer. Take, for example, Chronicles. Some would want to harmonize what it says with what historical books in the Prophets say. But then they would miss what Scripture is doing. Chronicles is not making mistakes in telling about the history of Israel. Every word was intentional. So we need to begin asking, "Why?" Why is the author of Chronicles doing what he is doing?

If you want to understand why Scripture looks like it does, begin with the incarnational analogy. It is an analogy so do not force it to fit every detail. Let us state it: Scripture is fully the words of its human authors and fully the word of God just as Jesus Christ is fully human and fully divine. We might also note that as Jesus was without sin, all of the teaching of Scripture is without error and actually unable to err. You will run into problems any time you deny the humanity of Scripture or the divinity of Scripture. Both are true. Our God is a God who works in history.

It is also worth noting that it is only by the Holy Spirit that one can come to see the full divinity of Scripture.

This post sets forward nothing new than what I learned at Westminster Theological Seminary, though any mistakes are my own. A particularly helpful book is Inspiration and Incarnation: Evangelicals and the Problem of the Old Testament by Peter Enns. You may also find his further reflections online helpful. See http://peterennsonline.com/ii/

Labels: barthianism, hebrew scriptures, incarnation, incarnational analogy, inerrancy, infallibility, islam

John H. Sailhamer's Introduction to Old Testament Theology, lays out the argument that we are developing and building upon (we are especially adding its relevance for the Christian).

The shape of the Hebrew Scriptures (Torah-Prophets-Writings, see the posting below) is intentional and apologetic. It marks a historical shift from the spoken word of God (sometimes alongside the written) to the written exclusively. And it marks a shift from prophets to wise men (wisdom teachers). The shape of the Hebrew canon was meant to guide the faithful Israelite to wisdom to know the will of God for their life between the cessation of prophecy and the return of the prophet Elijah and then the prophet greater than Moses.

The way the Torah-Prophets-Writings are stitched together reveals this agenda, which is from God.

Torah: The compositional strategy of Genesis is easily seen when one observes where the poems fall within the text. The same pattern is also true on a larger level in the Torah. Genesis itself has as its finale a poem and then an epilogue. Numbers and Deuteronomy do the same. Each of the epilogues looks forward to the next leader within Israel.

However, in Deuteronomy there is then a second poem and a second epilogue written from the perspective of the editor of the canon. In them Moses is dead. This is traditionally one of the most controversial issues of Torah scholarship - how can one say that Moses wrote it if Moses died during it. The answer: Moses did not write the second poem and second epilogue, which do not fit the original compositional strategy of the Torah but clearly betray a later redaction. This later edit is fully the word of God as well as fully the words of this editor. The second poem repeats themes from the Genesis 49 poem. But here the role of the Levites are treated more comprehensively - because the Levites teach the written word to the people [the Levites are wise men, wisdom teachers]. The poem says,

"They shall teach Jacob your rules and Israel your Torah" (Deut 33:10).

The second epilogue reveals the editor's intentions by describing Joshua as

"full of the Spirit of wisdom" (34:9).

The agenda is to make Joshua more like a wisdom teacher than a prophet. That this is written when prophecy has ceased in Israel (for at least 400 years before Christ came) and when it was not expected to resume until the end is clear from the next verse.

"And there has not arisen a prophet since in Israel like Moses, whom YHWH knew face to face" (Deut 34:10) and "none like him for all the signs and wonders that YHWH sent him to do" (Deut 34:11-12).

Thus concludes the Torah. No prophet greater than Moses has appeared. Prophecy has ceased. Look to Wisdom to know the will of God for your decision-making.

Prophets: The canon editor then stitched this together with the Prophets section. Joshua, opening the prophets, is portrayed as a wisdom leader. God tells Joshua,

"Only be strong and very courageous, being careful to do according to all the Torah, which Moses my servant commanded you. Do not turn from it to the right hand or to the left, that you may have good success wherever you go" (Josh 1:7).

Not turning to the right or to the left is wisdom language, and the promise that this will bring success is common in wisdom literature. As if to make this connection to wisdom concrete, the introduction to Joshua continues in this vein,

"This Book of the Torah shall not depart from your mouth, but you shall meditate on it day and night, so that you may be careful to do according to all that is written in it. For then you will make your way prosperous, and then you will have good success" (Josh 1:8).

Here we see the move from the spoken word of the prophet to the written word ("the book of the Torah" that you meditate upon) and we see the wisdom themes continue.

The Prophets ends with the Book of the Twelve, concluding with Malachi. The shape of the latter prophets within the Prophets moves in the direction of priestly concerns. Ezekiel would have been a priest and shows deep concern for priestly issues and the Book of the Twelve shows the same movement because the last three books are concerned with priestly issues. Malachi, for example, focuses on the job of the priests as teaching the Torah:

"True instruction was in his [Levi] mouth, and no wrong was found on his lips. He walked with me in peace and uprightness, and he turned many from iniquity. For the lips of a priest should guard knowledge, and people should seek Torah from his mouth, for he is the messenger of YHWH of hosts" (Mal 2:6-7).

Malachi ends with these words, though they are not necessary for the book on its own,

"Remember the Torah of my servant Moses, the statutes and rules that I commanded him at Horeb for all Israel. Behold, I will send Elijah the prophet before the great and awesome day of YHWH comes. And he will turn the hearts of fathers to their children and the hearts of children to their fathers, lest I come and strike the land with a decree of utter destruction" (devoted to destruction) (Mal 4:4-6 in English Bible).

Here the editor concludes the Prophets on much the same note that he concluded the Torah. The prophet greater than Moses has not appeared (it was not Elijah). Prophecy has ceased, adding that it will return with the return of Elijah before the coming of the prophet greater than Moses. Until then, look to Wisdom (study Scripture) to know the will of God for your decision-making.

The editor stitched the Prophets to the Writings just like he did the Torah to the Prophets. These seams are parallel.

Writings: The writings open with Psalm 1. Of course, Psalms 1 & 2 serve as an introduction to the entirety of the book of Psalms. This book has been compiled intentionally as well. But for our purposes remember that Psalm 1 is much like the opening to Joshua.

Psalm 1: Blessed is the man who walks not in the counsel of the wicked, nor stands in the way of sinners, nor sits in the seat of scoffers; 2 but his delight is in the law of the LORD, and on his law he meditates day and night. 3 He is like a tree planted by streams of water that yields its fruit in its season, and its leaf does not wither. In all that he does, he prospers. 4 The wicked are not so, but are like chaff that the wind drives away. 5 Therefore the wicked will not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous; 6 for the LORD knows the way of the righteous, but the way of the wicked will perish (ESV).

Here again the way of wisdom is presented and the righteous wisdom teacher meditates on the Torah of YHWH day and night - and he prospers.



How is this relevant for those who live on this side of the New Testament canon?

The Old Testament is shaped to answer the question: "How do I know the will of the Lord when prophecy has ceased?" Now that we have a complete New Testament canon, with nothing to add or subtract, and prophecy has again ceased, "How do I know the will of the Lord?" Study the Torah, Prophets, Writings (Old and New). Study the written word of God under wisdom teachers because that has replaced the spoken word of the prophets. The written word is sufficient - we need nothing more to know the will of God for our salvation or to make any decision. We have the advantage of the Holy Spirit poured out on all flesh - the Wisdom of God is in our hearts and can show us the way of wisdom as a rule by using the written word of God. How do we know when one Proverb applies and another does not? This is a wisdom question. Wisdom is the paradigm for Christian living during this time between the end of prophecy (the end of the New Testament era) and the return of Jesus Christ.

This conclusion of course is not one that my Pentecostal friends (of which I have many here in Appalachia) can follow: they believe that the infallible spoken word still is to sought for direction from the Lord. They will often say, "the Lord told me to say..." or "the Lord has revealed to me...." But prophecy has ceased, just as it did before. I do not deny that God will work with some people non-discursively (bypassing teaching) but He does not do so infallibly today just as discursive prophecy (preaching) is not infallible today. Yet the shape of the Scriptures clearly show the advantages of the latter. Much more important is this consideration: NT writings like Ephesians do not describe being filled with the Holy Spirit as being someone who speaks in tongues or does other special prophecy but instead they say the Spirit-filled address one another in psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs; sing; make melody; give thanks to God; and the Spirit-filled household is a place of mutual submission (Eph 5).

As an additional note for those interested in the discipline of Biblical Theology: this makes a way for us to appreciate the role of wisdom literature. The question had always been: "How do books like Proverbs fit into Biblical Theology?" This gives these texts a place in redemptive history - they speak to how to live during the era between prophecy's cessation and Christ's arrival just as they point forward to an era of prophecy's cessation and Christ's return. Thus the almost instinctive drive to put Proverbs in pocket NT's is very wise indeed.

3 May 2008: I would like to add that in seminary we looked rather extensively at the hints within the NT that prophecy would cease with the end of the apostolic age. I was reading something that said the writings are always the last to be received as part of the canon -- this was true with the OT writings as well as the NT writings. Revelation was one of the last books to receive recognition as being within the canon. And it was part of the writings, but not just placed anywhere within the writings, it was put last. It is noteworthy then that Revelation ends this way:

"I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book, and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book. He who testifies to these things says, "Surely I am coming soon." Amen. Come, Lord Jesus! The grace of the Lord Jesus be with all. Amen" (Rev 22:18-21, ESV).

What a fitting end to the NT canon. Like the ending of OT Torah and Prophets it acknowledges the gap between the end of canon and the coming of the Christ. And thus it serves as an appropriate end to the book as well as to the NT writings. Moreover, its warning about adding or subtracting from the book also then applies to the whole canon. This is my primary issue with the error of pentecostalism, it has to do with Scripture's own doctrine of Scripture, for infallible prophecy to continue is to add to Scripture. The problem is pastoral -- how can I help you discover the will of God to make decisions in your life? Wisdom, not prophecy, is the answer Scripture gives. And we discern wisdom in the community of faith -- thus issues of calling require both an internal and external call.

Labels: bible, biblical theology, book of the twelve, canon, cessationism, deuteronomy, elijah, Genesis, hebrew scriptures, joshua, malachi, moses, pentecostalism, prophets, psalms, sailhamer, torah, wisdom

OT Canonical Order assumed in the NT: Jesus said,

"everything written about me in the Law of Moses [Torah] and the Prophets and the Psalms [Writings] must be fulfilled" (Luke 24:44).

The Psalms, the first and largest book of the writings section, is often used to refer to all of the writings. And Jesus said to the scribes and Pharisees,

"on you may come all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of innocent Abel to the blood of Zechariah the son of Barachiah, whom you murdered between the sancturary and the altar" (Matt 23:35).

Jesus is refering to the first book Genesis (where Abel is the first death) and the last book of the Hebrew canon Chronicles (where this Zechariah is the last death). Thus he is using this as shorthand for all of the righteous saints who died in the Old Testament Scriptures. Jesus assumed the OT canonical order stated below.

It is the order found in Jewish Bibles. Thus, the Hebrew Scriptures are often called the Tanakh (in Hebrew, T is for Torah, N for Prophets, K for Writings). Here the Westminster Confession of Faith could use some reformation as it lists the Old Testament books in a different order reflected also in English language translations of the Bible. Notice that the New Testament follows the same God-given pattern...

Torah: In the beginning (Genesis); Exodus; Leviticus; In the wilderness (Numbers); and These are the words (Deuteronomy). The phrases are the Hebrew titles (the first word in the Hebrew text).

Prophets: Joshua; Judges; Samuel; Kings; Isaiah; Jeremiah; Ezekiel; The Book of the Twelve (Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi).

Writings: Psalms, Job, Proverbs, Ruth, Song of Songs, Qoheleth (Ecclesiastes), Lamentations, Esther, Daniel, Ezra-Nehemiah, Chronicles.

New Testament Torah: Matthew, Mark, Luke and John

New Testament Prophets: Acts

New Testament Writings: Romans, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 Thessalonians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon, Hebrews, James, 1 Peter, 2 Peter, 1 John, 2 John, 3 John, Jude, Revelation.

Eugene Peterson suggests that Acts is partially Torah and partially Prophets, making the fifth book of NT Torah. Then he makes most of the epistles Prophets while James and Revelation are writings. Sometimes I am persuaded by this argument.

Early comments: As you might guess, you can compare the Books of Moses to the gospels and Joshua to Acts. And putting them this way helps you see why Daniel and Revelation have so much in common -- they are both apocalyptic (genre) writings (section). Nevertheless, do not flatten the Bible and ignore the historical nature of special revelation.

First observation: Old Testament books that have been divided in the English Bible into two should be read as one book. For example, 1 Kings and 2 Kings is one book as is 1 Chronicles and 2 Chronicles. One you might not realize is that Ezra-Nehemiah is also one book. And it is very important to read the so-called minor prophets instead of as separate books as The Book of the Twelve. They have been edited together to be read as a single book. It would also be appropriate, though divided in the order of the New Testament, to read Luke and Acts as one book. The reason that the gospel of John divides them in our canon is that John is assuming that you already know the stories we can find in Matthew, Mark & Luke. Thus he writes a book that reflects much more theologically on the life of Christ.

It is worth noting, unlike in the OT the 1 Letter, 2 Letter, 3 Letter designations in the NT are indeed separate letters and should be read as such but putting them next to one another also encourages you to see the connections between them. In this order the authors of the epistles are separated: Romans through Philemon are by Paul, Hebrews is by an unknown author, James, Peter, John, and Jude are as the names suggest.

Second observation: You should read Scripture according to these divisions (Torah, Prophets, Writings, Old and New). How you read the OT Torah is different than how you read the OT Writings.

To build on this observation: Each book needs a unique reading strategy and knowing where they fall in the canoncial order helps. One thing that is necessary for interpretation is to identify the kind of writing (the genre) that you are reading. You read a grocery list differently than a love letter and a fable different than a history textbook. And so you should read Matthew differently than Revelation and Psalms differently than Isaiah. Not every scholar will agree on the genre of a text. For example, one person might say that you should read Deuteronomy like you would read the gospels. It contains his speeches but it also includes information that is likely told by someone telling us the story. Another will mention that the book resembles an ancient treaty formula. Actually both of these observations are helpful for Deuteronomy, especially the former given our discussion. Knowing which section of the canon a book falls into will help you to identify the genre. For another example, Daniel is a wisdom book (found in the writings alongside other wisdom books) and not one of the prophetic books. This does not mean that Daniel does not include prophecy but it does mean that you should read it differently than one of the prophetic books. It is a failure to recognize this truth that has led to all sorts of interpretive mistakes.

Third Observation: And when we read the books in order we should also interpret them in order, thus Ruth and the woman in Song of Songs are examples of the virtuous woman of Proverbs 31 (in the Hebrew order it is Proverbs, Ruth, Song of Songs).

May you read Scripture afresh. Amen.

Labels: bible, book of the twelve, canon, daniel, deuteronomy, ezra-nehemiah, hebrew scriptures, prophets, proverbs 31, psalms, ruth, scripture, song of songs, Tanakh, torah, writings