,the ,canon of the ,bible3              
,its ,formation1 ,history1 ,and         
,fluctuations                           
,by                              ,samuel
 ,davidson1 ,d4,d4                      
,of ,halle1 ,and ,,ll4,d4               
,from the ,third ,revised and ,enlarged 
,edition4                               
,new ,york                              
,peter ,eckler ,publishing ,co4         
#ahgg            ,,contents             
,preface4  ,chapter ,i4 ,introductory4  
,chapter ,,ii4 ,the ,old ,testament     
,canon ,from ,its ,beginning ,to ,its   
,close4  ,chapter ,,iii4 ,the ,samaritan
 ,and ,alexandrian ,canons4  ,chapter   
,,iv4 ,number ,and ,order ,of ,the      
,separate ,books4  ,chapter ,v4 ,use ,of
 ,the ,old ,testament ,by ,the ,first   
,christian ,writers1 ,and ,by  ,the     
,fathers ,till ,the ,time ,of ,origen4  
,chapter ,,vi4 ,the ,new ,testament     
,canon ,in ,the ,first ,three           
,centuries4  ,chapter ,,vii4 ,the ,bible
 ,canon ,from ,the ,fourth ,century ,to 

,the ,reformation4  ,chapter ,,viii4    
,order ,of ,the ,new ,testament ,books4 
,chapter ,,ix4 ,summary ,of ,the        
,subject4  ,chapter ,x4 ,the ,canon ,in 
,the ,confession ,of ,different         
,churches4  ,chapter ,,xi4 ,the ,canon  
,from ,semler ,to ,the ,present ,time1  
,with ,reflections ,on  ,its            
,readjustment4  ,footnotes              
,,preface4      ,the substance of the   
present work was written toward the     
close of the year  #ahge for the new    
edition of the ,encyclopaedia           
,britannica4 ,having been  abridged and 
mutilated1 contrary to the author's     
wishes1 before its  publication there1  
he resolved to print it entire4 ,with   
that view it has  undergone repeated    
revision with enlargement in different  
parts1 and been  made as complete as the
 limits of an essay appeared to allow4  
,as nothing  of importance has been     
knowingly omitted1 the writer hopes it  
will be  found a comprehensive summary  
of all that concerns the formation and  

history of the ,bible canon4 ,the place 
occupied by it was vacant4 ,no  ,english
 book reflecting the processes of       
results of recent criticism1  gives an  
account of the canon in both            
,testaments4 ,articles and essays upon  
the subject there are2 but their        
standpoint is usually apologetic not    
scientific1 traditional rather than     
impartial1 unreasonably conservative    
without being critical4 ,the topic is   
weighty1 involving the consideration  of
 great questions1 such as the           
inspiration1 authenticity1 authority1   
and  age of the ,scriptures4 ,the author
 has tried to handle it fairly1 founding
  his statements on such evidence as    
seemed convincing1 and condensing them  
into a moderate compass4 ,if the reader 
wishes to know the evidence1 he may     
find it in the writer's ,introductions  
to the ,old and ,new ,testaments1  where
 the separate books of ,scripture are   
discussed2 and in the late  treatises of
 other critics4 ,while his expositions  

are capable of  expansion1 it is        
believed that they will not be easily   
shaken4 ,he commends  the work to the   
attention of all who have an interest in
 the progress of  theology1 and are     
seeking a foundation for their faith    
less precarious  than books however     
venerable4    ,it has not been the      
writer's purpose to chronicle phases of 
opinion1 or to  refute what he believes 
to be error in the newest hypotheses    
about the  age1 authority1 and          
composition of the books4 ,his aim has  
been rather to  set forth the most      
correct view of the questions involved  
in a history of  the canon1 whether it  
be more or less recent4 ,some may think 
that the  latest or most current account
 of such questions is the best2 but that
 is  not his opinion4 ,hence1 the       
fashionable belief that much of the     
,pentateuch1 the ,book of ,leviticus    
wholly1 with large parts of ,exodus and 
,numbers1 in a word1 that all the laws  
relating to divine worship1 with  most  

of the chronological tables or          
statistics1 belong to ,ezra1 who is     
metamorphosed in fact into the first    
,elohist1 is unnoticed4 ,hence1 also1   
the earliest gospel is not declared to  
be ,mark's4 ,neither has the author     
ventured to place the fourth gospel at  
the end of the first century1 as  ,ewald
 and ,weitzscker do1 after the manner of
 the old critics2 or with  ,keim so     
early as #aaj-aae ,a4,d4    ,many evince
 a restless anxiety to find something   
novel2 and to depart from               
well-established conclusions for the    
sake of originality4 ,this shows a      
morbid state of mind4 ,amid the feverish
 outlook for discoveries and the  slight
 regard for what is safe1 conservatism  
is a commendable thing4 ,some  again    
desire to return1 as far as they can1 to
 orthodoxy1 finding between  that       
extreme and rationalism a middle way    
which offers a resting-place to  faith4 
,the numerous changes which criticism   
presents are not a symptom of           

soundness4 ,the writer is far indeed    
from thinking that every question       
connected with the books of ,scripture  
is finally settled2 but the majority    
undoubtedly are1 though several already 
fixed by great scholars continue  to be 
opened up afresh4 ,he does not profess  
to adopt the phase of  criticism which  
is fashionable at the moment2 it is     
enough to state what  approves itself to
 his judgment1 and to hold it fast amid 
the  contrarieties of conjecture or the 
cravings of curiosity4 ,present         
excrescences or aberrations of belief   
will have their day and disappear4      
,large portions of the ,pentateuch will 
cease to be consigned to a  post-exile  
time1 and the gospels of ,matthew and   
,luke will again be counted  the chief  
sources of ,mark's4 ,it will also be    
acknowledged that the first  as it now  
exists1 is of much later origin than the
 fall of ,jerusalem4 ,nor  will there be
 so great anxiety to show that ,justin  
,martyr was acquainted  with the fourth 

gospel1 and owed his ,logos-doctrine    
chiefly to it4 ,the  difference of ten  
or twenty years in the date of a gospel 
will not be  considered of essential    
importance in estimating its character4 
,the present edition has been revised   
throughout and several parts            
re-written4 ,the author hopes that it   
will be found still more worthy of  the 
favor with which the first was received4
            ,,chapter ,i4               
,,introductory4      ,as introductory to
 the following dissertation1 ,i shall   
explain and define  certain terms that  
frequently occur in it1 especially      
canon1  apocryphal1 ecclesiastical1 and 
the like4 ,a right apprehension of      
these will make the observations        
advanced respecting the canon and its   
formation plainer4 ,the words have not  
been taken in the same sense by all1  a 
fact that obscures their sense4 ,they   
have been employed more or less  vaguely
 by different writers4 ,varying ideas   
have been attached to them4    ,the     

,greek original of canon7#a7 means      
primarily a straight rod or pole2  and  
metaphorically1 what serves to keep a   
thing upright or straight1 a  rule4 ,in 
the ,new ,testament it occurs in ,gal4  
vi4 #af and #b ,cor4 x4 #ac1  #ae1 #af1 
signifying in the former1 a measure2 in 
the latter1 what is  measured1 a        
district4 ,but we have now to do with   
its ecclesiastical use4  ,there are     
three opinions as to the origin of its  
application to the  writings used by the
 church4 ,according to ,toland1         
,whiston1 ,semler1 ,baur1  and others1  
the word had originally the sense of    
list or catalogue of  books publicly    
read in ,christian assemblies4 ,others1 
as ,steiner1 suppose  that since the    
,alexandrian grammarians applied it to  
collections of ,old  ,greek authors as  
models of excellence or classics1 it    
meant  classical 7canonical7 writings4  
,according to a third opinion1 the term 
included from the first the idea of a   
regulating principle4 ,this is the  more

 probable1 because the same idea lies in
 the ,new ,testament use of the  noun1  
and pervades its applications in the    
language of the early ,fathers  down to 
the time of ,constantine1 as ,credner   
has shown47#b7 ,the 8canon of  the      
church0 in the ,clementine homilies27#c7
 the 8ecclesiastical canon107#d7  and   
8the canon of the truth10 in ,clement   
and ,irenus27#e7 the 8canon0 of  the    
faith in ,polycrates17#f7 the regula    
fidei of ,tertullian17#g7 and the  libri
 regulares of ,origen17#h7 imply a      
normative principle4 ,but we  cannot    
assent to ,credner's view of the ,greek 
word for canon being an  abbreviation of
 8,scriptures of canon107#i7 equivalent 
to ,scriptur legis  in ,diocletian's    
,act7#aj7--;a view too artificial1 and  
unsanctioned by usage4    ,it is true   
that the word canon was employed by     
,greek writers in the  sense of a mere  
list2 but when it was transferred to the
 ,scripture  books1 it included the idea
 of a regulative and normal power--a    

list of  books forming a rule or law1   
because the newly-formed ,catholic      
,church  required a standard of appeal  
in opposition to the ,gnostics with     
their  arbitrary use of sacred writings4
 ,there is a lack of evidence on behalf 
of  its use before the books of the ,new
 ,testament had been paralleled with    
those of the ,old in authority and      
inspiration4    ,the earliest example of
 its application to a catalogue of the  
,old or ,new  ,testament books occurs in
 the ,latin translation of ,origen's    
homily on  ,joshua1 where the original  
seems to have been 8canon407#aa7 ,the   
word itself  is certainly in            
,amphilochius17#ab7 as well as in       
,jerome17#ac7 and  ,rufinus47#ad7 ,as   
the ,latin translation of ,origen has   
canonicus and  canonizatus1 we infer    
that he used 8canonical107#ae7 opposed  
as it is to  apocryphus or secretus4    
,the first occurrence of 8canonical0 is 
in the  fifty-ninth canon of the        
,council of ,laodicea1 where it is      

contrasted with  two other ,greek       
words47#af7 8,canonized books107#ag7 is 
first used in  ,athanasius's #cith      
festal epistle4 ,the kind of rule which 
the earliest  fathers attributed to the 
,scriptures can only be conjectured2 it 
is  certain that they believed the ,old 
,testament books to be a divine and     
infallible guide4 ,but the ,new         
,testament was not so considered till   
towards the close of the second century 
when the conception of a ,catholic      
,church was realized4 ,the latter       
collection was not called ,scripture1 or
  put on a par with the ,old ,testament 
as sacred and inspired1 till the  time  
of ,theophilus of ,antioch 7about #ahj  
,a4,d47 ,hence1 ,irenus applies the     
epithets divine and perfect to the      
,scriptures2 and ,clement of            
,alexandria calls them inspired4        
,when distinctions were made among the  
,biblical writings other words7#ah7     
were employed1 synonymous with          
8canonized407#ai7 ,the canon was thus a 

catalogue of writings forming a rule of 
truth1 sacred1 divine1 revealed by  ,god
 for the instruction of men4 ,the rule  
was perfect for its purpose4    ,the    
word apocryphal7#bj7 is used in various 
senses1 which it is difficult  to trace 
chronologically4 ,apocryphal books      
are1--    #ast1 ,such as contain secret 
or mysterious things1 books of the      
higher  wisdom4 ,it is thus applied to  
the ,apocalypse by ,gregory of          
,nyssa47#ba7 ,akin  to this is the      
second meaning4    #bnd1 ,such as were  
kept secret or withdrawn from public    
use4 ,in this  sense the word           
corresponds to the ,hebrew ganuz47#bb7  
,so ,origen speaking  of the story of   
,susanna4 ,the opposite of this is read 
in public17#bc7 a  word employed by     
,eusebius47#bd7    #crd1 ,it was used of
 the secret books of the heretics by    
,clement7#be7 and  ,origen17#bf7 with   
the accessory idea of spurious1         
pseudepigraphical17#bg7 in opposition to
 the canonical writings of the          

,catholic ,church4 ,the book of ,enoch  
and similar productions were so         
characterized47#bh7    #dth1 ,jerome    
applied it to the books in the          
,septuagint which are absent  from the  
,hebrew canon1 i4e41 to the books which 
were read in the  church1 the           
ecclesiastical ones7#bi7 occupying a    
rank next to the  canonical4 ,in doing  
so he had respect to the corresponding  
,hebrew epithet4  ,this was a misuse of 
the word apocryphal1 which had a        
prejudicial effect  on the character of 
the books in after-times47#cj7 ,the     
word1 which he did  not employ in an    
injurious sense1 was adopted from him by
 ,protestants  after the ,reformation1  
who gave it perhaps a sharper           
distinction than he  intended1 so as to 
imply a contrast somewhat disparaging to
 writings which  were publicly read in  
many churches and put beside the        
canonical ones by  distinguished        
fathers4 ,the ,lutherans have adhered to
 ,jerome's meaning  longer than the     

,reformed2 but the decree of the        
,council of ,trent had some  effect on  
both4 ,the contrast between the         
canonical and apocryphal writings  was  
carried to its utmost length by the     
,westminster divines1 who asserted  that
 the former are inspired1 the latter    
not4            ,,chapter ,,ii4 ,,the   
,,old ,,testament ,,canon ,,from ,,its  
,,beginning ,,to ,,its ,,close4         
,the first important part of the ,old   
,testament put together as a whole was  
the ,pentateuch1 or rather1 the five    
books of ,moses and ,joshua4 ,this was  
preceded by smaller documents1 which one
 or more redactors embodied in it4  ,the
 earliest things committed to writing   
were probably the ten words  proceeding 
from ,moses himself1 afterwards enlarged
 into the ten  commandments which exist 
at present in two recensions 7,exod4    
xx41 ,deut4  v47 ,it is true that we    
have the oldest form of the decalogue   
from the  ,jehovist not the ,elohist2   
but that is no valid objection against  

the  antiquity of the nucleus1 out of   
which it arose4 ,it is also probable    
that  several legal and ceremonial      
enactments belong1 if not to ,moses     
himself1  at least to his time2 as also 
the ,elohistic list of stations in      
,numbers  xxxiii4 ,to the same time     
belongs the song of ,miriam in ,exodus  
xv41  probably consisting of a few lines
 at first1 and subsequently enlarged2   
with a triumphal ode over the fall of   
,heshbon 7,numbers xxi4 #bg-cj74 ,the   
little poetical piece in ,numbers xxi4  
#ag1 #ah1 afterwards misunderstood and  
so taken literally1 is post-,mosaic4    
,during the unsettled times of ,joshua  
and the ,judges there could have been   
comparatively little writing4 ,the song 
of ,deborah appeared1 full of poetic    
force and fire4 ,the period of the early
 kings was characterized not only  by a 
remarkable development of the ,hebrew   
people and their consolidation  into a  
national state1 but by fresh literary   
activity4 ,laws were written  out for   

the guidance of priests and people2 and 
the political organization  of the      
rapidly growing nation was promoted by  
poetical productions in  which spiritual
 life expressed its aspirations4        
,schools of prophets were  instituted by
 ,samuel1 whose literary efforts tended 
to purify the worship4  ,david was an   
accomplished poet1 whose psalms are     
composed in lofty  strains2 and ,solomon
 may have written a few odes4 ,the      
building of the  temple1 and the        
arrangements connected with its worship1
 contributed  materially to a written   
legislation4    ,during this early and  
flourishing period appeared the book of 
the ,wars of  ,jehovah17#ca7 a heroic   
anthology1 celebrating warlike deeds2   
and the book  of ,jashar17#cb7 also     
poetical4 ,jehoshaphat is mentioned as  
court-annalist  to ,david and           
,solomon47#cc7 ,above all1 the ,elohists
 now appeared1 the first  of whom1 in   
the reign of ,saul1 was author of       
annals1 beginning at the  earliest time 

which were distinguished by genealogical
 and chronological  details as well as  
systematic minuteness1 by archaic       
simplicity1 and by  legal prescriptions 
more theoretical than practical4 ,the   
long genealogical  registers with an    
artificial chronology and a statement of
 the years of  men's lives1 the dry     
narratives1 the precise accounts of the 
gradual  enlargement of divine laws1 the
 copious description of the tabernacle  
and  the institution of divine worship1 
are wearisome1 though pervaded by a     
theoretic interest which looks at       
everything from a legal point of view4  
,a  second or junior ,elohist was less  
methodical and more fragmentary1        
supplying additional information1       
furnishing new theocratic details1 and  
setting forth the relation of ,israel to
 heathen nations and to ,god4 ,in       
contrast with his predecessor1 he has   
great beauty of description1 which  is  
exemplified in the account of ,isaac's  
sacrifice and the history of  ,joseph2  

in picturesque and graphic narratives   
interspersed with few  reflections4 ,his
 parallels to the later writer commonly 
called the  ,jehovist1 are numerous4    
,the third author1 who lived in the time
 of ,uzziah1  though more mythological  
than the ,elohists1 was less formal4    
,his  stand-point is prophetic4 ,the    
third document incorporated with the    
,elohistic ones formed an important part
 of the whole1 exhibiting a  vividness  
which the first lacked2 with            
descriptions of persons and things  from
 another stand-point4 ,the ,jehovist    
belonged to the northern kingdom2  the  
,elohists were of ,judah4    ,the state 
of the nation after ,rehoboam was       
unfavorable to literature4 ,when  the   
people were threatened and attacked by  
other nations1 divided among  themselves
 in worship and all higher interests1   
rent by conflicting  parties1 the       
theocratic principle which was the true 
bond of union could  not assert itself  
with effect4 ,the people were corrupt2  

their religious  life debased4 ,the     
example of the kings was usually        
prejudicial to  political healthiness4  
,contact with foreigners as well as with
 the older  inhabitants of the land1    
hindered progress4 ,in these            
circumstances the  prophets were the    
true reformers1 the advocates of        
political liberty1  expositors of the   
principles that give life and stability 
to a nation4 ,in  ,judah1 ,joel wrote   
prophetic discourses2 in ,israel1 ,amos 
and ,hosea4 ,now1  too1 a redactor put  
together the ,elohistic and ,jehovistic 
documents1  making various changes in   
them1 adding throughout sentences or    
words that  seemed desirable1 and       
suppressing what was unsuited to his    
taste4 ,several  psalm-writers enriched 
the national literature after ,david4   
,learned men at  the court of ,hezekiah 
recast and enlarged 7,proverbs          
xxv4-xxix47 the  national proverbs1     
which bore ,solomon's name because the  
nucleus of an  older collection belonged

 to that monarch4 ,these literary       
courtiers were  not prophets1 but rather
 scribes4 ,the book of ,job was written1
 with the  exception of ,elihu's later  
discourses1 which were not inserted in  
it till  after the return from ,babylon2
 and ,deuteronomy1 with ,joshua1 was    
added to  the preceding collection in   
the reign of ,manasseh4 ,the gifted     
author of  ,deuteronomy1 who was        
evidently imbued with the prophetic     
spirit1 completed  the ,pentateuch1     
i4e41 the five books of ,moses and      
,joshua1 revising the                   
,elohist-,jehovistic work1 and making   
various additions and alterations4 ,he  
did the same thing to the historical    
books of ,judges1 ,samuel1 and ,kings2  
which received from him their present   
form4 ,immediately before and during    
the exile there were numerous authors   
and compilers4 ,new psalms appeared1    
more or less national in spirit4        
,ezekiel1 ,jeremiah and others          
prophesied2  especially an unknown seer 

who described the present condition of  
the  people1 predicting their coming    
glories and renovated worship in strains
  of far-reaching import47#cd7 ,this    
great prophet expected the regeneration 
of the nation from the pious portion of 
it1 the prophets in particular1  not    
from a kingly ,messiah as ,isaiah did2  
for the hopes resting on rulers  out of 
,david's house had been disappointed4   
,his aspirations turned to  spiritual   
means4 ,he was not merely an            
enthusiastic seer with comprehensive    
glance1 but also a practical philosopher
 who set forth the doctrine of the      
innocent suffering for the guilty2      
differing therein from ,ezekiel's theory
  of individual reward and punishment in
 the present world--a theory out of     
harmony with the circumstances of actual
 life4 ,the very misfortunes of the     
nation1 and the signs of their return1  
excited within the nobler spirits  hopes
 of a brighter future1 in which the     
flourishing reign of ,david should  be  

surpassed by the universal worship of   
,jehovah4 ,in consequence of their      
outward condition1 the prophets of the  
exile were usually writers1 like        
,ezekiel1 not public speakers2 and their
 announcement of glad tidings could     
only be transmitted privately from      
person to person4 ,this explains in part
  the oblivion into which their names   
fell2 so that the author or redactor  of
 ,jeremiah l41 li42 the author of       
chapters xiii4-xiv4 #bc1 xxi4 #a-aj1    
xxiv4-xxvii41 xxxiv41 xxxv41 inserted in
 ,isaiah2 and1 above all1 the           
,babylonian ,isaiah1 whom ,hitzig       
improbably identifies with the          
high-priest  ,joshua1 are unknown4      
,after the return from ,babylon the     
literary spirit  manifested itself in   
the prophets of the                     
restoration--,haggai1 ,zechariah1  and  
,malachi--who wrote to recall their     
countrymen to a sense of religious      
duties2 though their ideas were borrowed
 in part from older prophets of  more   

original genius4 ,the book of ,esther   
appeared1 to make the observance  of the
 purim feast1 which was of ,persian     
origin1 more general in  ,palestine4    
,the large historical work comprising   
the books of ,ezra1  ,nehemiah1 and     
,chronicles1 was compiled partly out of 
materials written by  ,ezra and         
,nehemiah1 partly out of older          
historical records which formed a       
portion of the national literature4     
,several temple-psalms were also        
composed2 a part of the present book of 
,proverbs2 ,ecclesiastes1 whose tone    
and language betray its late origin2 and
 ,jonah1 whose diction puts its  date   
after the ,babylonian captivity4 ,the   
,maccabean age called forth the  book of
 ,daniel and various psalms4 ,in        
addition to new productions there  was  
an inclination to collect former        
documents4 ,to ,zechariah's authentic   
prophecies were added the earlier ones  
contained in chapters ix4-xiv42 and  the
 ,psalms were gradually brought         

together1 being made up into divisions  
at different times2 the first and second
 divisions proceeding from one          
redactor1 the third from another1 the   
fourth and fifth from a still later4    
,various writings besides their own were
 grouped around the names of  earlier   
prophets1 as was the case with ,isaiah  
and ,jeremiah4    ,the literature is    
more indebted for its best constituents 
to the prophetic  than to the priestly  
order1 because the prophets were        
preachers of  repentance and            
righteousness whose great aim was to    
make ,israel a  ,jehovah-worshipping    
nation to the exclusion of other gods4  
,their  utterances were essentially     
ethical and religious2 their pictures of
 the  future subjective and ideal4      
,there was silently elaborated in their 
schools a spiritual monotheism1 over    
against the crude polytheism of the     
people generally--a theocratic ideal    
inadequately apprehended by gross and   
sensuous ,israel--,jehovism simple and  

sublime amid a sacerdotal worship  which
 left the heart impure while cleansing  
the hands4 ,instead of taking  their    
stand upon the law1 with its rules of   
worship1 its ceremonial  precepts and   
penalties against transgressors1 the    
prophets set themselves  above it1      
speaking slightingly of the forms and   
customs which the people  took for the  
whole of religion4 ,to the view of such 
as were prepared to  receive a faith    
that looked for its realization to the  
future1 they helped  to create a        
millennium1 in which the worship of     
,jehovah alone should  become the basis 
of a universal religion for humanity4   
,in addition to the  prophetic          
literature proper1 they wrote historical
 works also4 ,how  superior this        
literature is to the priestly1 appears  
from a comparison of  the ,kings and    
,chronicles4 ,the subjective underlies  
the one2 the objective  distinguishes   
the other4 ,faith in ,jehovah1 clothed1 
it may be in sensible  or historical    

forms1 characterizes the one2 reference 
of an outward order  to a divine source1
 the other4 ,the sanctity of a people   
under the  government of a righteous    
,god1 is the object of the one2 the     
sanctity of  institutions1 that of the  
other4 ,even when the prophets wrote    
history1  the facts are subordinate to  
the belief4 ,subjective purposes colored
  their representation of real events4  
,to them we are indebted for the        
,messianic idea1 the hope of a better   
time  in which their high ideal of the  
theocracy should be realized4 ,with such
  belief in the future1 with pious      
aspirations enlivening their patriotism1
  did they comfort and encourage their  
countrymen4 ,the hope1 general or       
indefinite at first1 was afterwards     
attached to the house of ,david1 out of 
which a restorer of the theocracy was   
expected1 a king pre-eminent in         
righteousness1 and marvelously gifted4  
,it was not merely a political but a    
religious hope1 implying the thorough   

purification of the nation1 the         
extinction of idolatry1 the general     
spread and triumph of true religion4    
,the pious wishes of the prophets1 often
 repeated1 became a sort of  doctrine1  
and contributed to sustain the failing  
spirit of the people4 ,the  indefinite  
idea of a golden age was commoner than  
that of a personal  prince who should   
reign in equity and peace4 ,neither was 
part of the  national faith1 like the   
law1 or the doctrine of sacrifice2 and  
but a few  of the prophets portrayed a  
king1 in their description of the period
 of  ideal prosperity4    ,the man who  
first gave public sanction to a portion 
of the national  literature was ,ezra1  
who laid the foundation of a canon4 ,he 
was the leader  in restoring the        
theocracy after the exile1 8a ready     
scribe in the law of  ,moses1 who had   
prepared his heart to seek the law of   
the ,lord and to teach  in ,israel      
statutes and judgments40 ,as we are told
 that he brought the book  of the law of

 ,moses before the congregation and read
 it publicly1 the idea  naturally arises
 that he was the final redactor of the  
,pentateuch1  separating it from the    
historical work consisting of ,joshua   
and the  subsequent writings1 of which  
it formed the commencement4 ,such was   
the  first canon given to the ,jewish   
,church after its reconstruction--ready 
for  temple service as well as synagogue
 use4 ,henceforward the ,mosaic book    
became an authoritative guide in        
spiritual1 ecclesiastical1 and civil    
matters1 as we infer from various       
passages in ,ezra and ,nehemiah and from
  the chronicler's own statements in the
 book bearing his name4 ,the doings  of 
,ezra with regard to the ,scriptures are
 deduced not only from what we  read of 
him in the ,biblical book that bears his
 name1 but also from the  legend in the 
fourth book of ,ezdras17#ce7 where it is
 related that he  dictated by           
inspiration to five ready writers       
ninety-four books2 the first            

twenty-four of which he was ordered to  
publish openly that the worthy and      
unworthy might read1 but reserved the   
last seventy for the wise4 ,though  the 
twenty-four books of the ,old ,testament
 cannot be attributed to him1  the fact 
that he copied and wrote portions need  
not be questioned4 ,he  edited the law1 
making the first canon or collection of 
books1 and  giving it an authority which
 it had not before4 ,talmudic accounts  
associate with him the men of the great 
synagogue4 ,it is true that they  are   
legendary1 but there is a foundation of 
fact beneath the fanciful               
superstructure4 ,as to ,ezra's treatment
 of the ,pentateuch1 or his specific    
mode of redaction1 we are left for the  
most part to conjecture4 ,yet it is     
safe to affirm that he added2--making   
new precepts and practices either in    
place of or beside older ones4 ,some    
things he removed as unsuited to the    
altered circumstances of the people2    
others he modified4 ,he threw back      

later enactments into earlier times4 ,it
 is difficult to discover all the  parts
 that betray his hand4 ,some elaborate  
priestly details show his  authorship   
most clearly4 ,if his hand be not       
visible in ,leviticus1 chap4            
xvii4-xxvi42 a writer not far removed   
from his time is observable2 ,ezekiel   
or some other4 ,it is clear that some of
 the portion 7xxv4 #ai-bb2 xxvi4  #c-de7
 is much later than the ,elohists1 and  
belongs to the exile or  post-exile     
period4 ,but great difficulty attaches  
to the separation of the  sources here  
used2 even after ,kayser's acute        
handling of them4 ,it is also           
perceptible from ,ezekiel xx4 #be1 #bf1 
that the clause in ,exodus xiii4 #ae1   
8but all the first-born of my children  
,i redeem10 was added after the  exile1 
since the prophet shows his             
unacquaintance with it4 ,the statute    
that all which openeth the womb should  
be burnt in sacrifice to ,jehovah1      
appeared inhuman not only to ,ezekiel1  

but to ,ezra or his associates in       
re-editing the law2 and therefore the   
clause about the redemption of every    
first-born male was subjoined4 ,ezra1 a 
second ,moses in the eyes of the  later 
,jews1 did not scruple to refer to      
,moses what was of recent origin1  and  
to deal freely with the national        
literature4 ,such was the first         
canon--that of ,ezra the priest and     
scribe4    ,the origin of the great     
synagogue is noticed in ,ezra x4 #af1   
and described  more particularly in     
,nehemiah viii4-x41 the members being   
apparently  enumerated in x4 #a-bg2 at  
least the ,megila ,jer4 7i4 #e7 and     
,midrash ,ruth 7  #c7 speak of an       
assembly of eighty-five elders1 who are 
probably found in  the last passage4    
,one name1 however1 is wanting1 for only
 eighty-four are  given2 and as ,ezra is
 not mentioned among them1 the          
conjecture of ,krochmal  that it has    
dropped out of x4 #i1 may be allowed4   
,another tradition gives  the number as 

one hundred and twenty1 which may be got
 by adding the  8chief of the fathers0  
enumerated in ,ezra viii4 #a-ad to the  
hundred and  two heads of families in   
,ezra ii4 #b-eh4 ,whether the number was
 the same at  the commencement as       
afterwards is uncertain4 ,late ,jewish  
writers1 however1  such as ,abarbanel1  
,abraham ben ,david1 ,ben ,maimun1 c41  
speak as if it  consisted of the larger 
number at the beginning2 and have no    
scruple in  pronouncing ,ezra president1
 rather than ,nehemiah47#cf7    ,the    
oldest extra-biblical mention of the    
synagogue1 is in the ,mishnic  treatise 
,pirke ,aboth1 where it is said1 8,moses
 received the laws from  ,mount ,sinai1 
and delivered it to ,joshua1 ,joshua to 
the elders1 the elders  to the prophets1
 and the prophets delivered it to the   
men of the great  synagogue4 ,these last
 spake these words3 #8,be slow in       
judgment2 appoint  many disciples2 make 
a hedge for the law4' 07#cg7 ,in the    
,talmudic ,baba  ,bathra1 their biblical

 doings are described3 8,moses wrote his
 book1 the  section about ,balaam and   
job4 ,joshua wrote his book and eight   
verses of  the law4 ,samuel wrote his   
book and judges and ,ruth4 ,david wrote 
the book  of ,psalms by 7877#ch7 ten    
elders1 by ,adam the first man1 by      
,melchizedek1  by ,abraham1 by ,moses1  
by ,heman1 by ,jeduthun1 by ,asaph1 and 
the three sons  of ,korah4 ,jeremiah    
wrote his book1 the books of ,kings and 
,lamentations4  ,hezekiah and his       
friends wrote ,isaiah1 ,proverbs1       
,canticles1 and ,coheleth2  the men of  
the great synagogue1 ,ezekiel1 the      
twelve prophets1 ,daniel and  ,esther4  
,ezra wrote his own book and the        
genealogies of ,chronicles down to      
himself407#ci7 ,this passage has its    
obscurities4 ,what is meant by the verb 
write67#dj7 ,does it mean composition   
and then something else2 the  former in 
the first part of the passage1 and      
editing in the second8  ,rashi explains 
it of composition throughout1 which     

introduces absurdity4  ,the most obvious
 interpretation is that which           
understands the verb of  writing in one 
place1 and editing in the second4 ,but  
it is improbable  that the author should
 have used the same word in different   
senses1 in one  and the same passage4   
,bloch7#da7 understands it of copying or
 writing  out1 a sense that suits the   
procedure of the men of the great       
synagogue  in regard to ,ezekiel1 the   
twelve prophets1 c41 but is inapplicable
 to  ,moses1 ,joshua1 ,samuel1 ,david1  
,jeremiah1 c4 ,it is probable enough    
that the  synagogue scribes put into    
their present form and made the first   
authorized copies of the works          
specified4 ,the ,boraitha1 however1 is  
not  clear1 and may only express the    
opinion of a private individual in a    
confused way4 ,simon the ,just is said  
to have belonged to the remnants of  the
 synagogue4 ,as ,ezra is called 8a ready
 scribe10 and his labors in  connection 
with the law were important1 he may have

 organized a body of  literary men who  
should work in harmony1 attending1 among
 other things1 to  the collection and   
preservation of the national literature2
 or they may  have been an association  
of patriotic men who voluntarily rallied
 round  the heads of the new state1 to  
support them in their fundamental       
reforms4  ,the company of scribes       
mentioned in #a ,maccabees does not     
probably relate  to it47#db7 ,a         
succession of priests and scribes1      
excited at first by the  reforming zeal 
of one whom later ,jews looked upon as a
 second ,moses1  labored in one         
department of literary work till the    
corporation ceased to  exist soon after1
 if not in the time of ,simon1 i4e41    
from about #dde ,b4,c4  till about #bjj2
 for we identify the ,simon celebrated  
in ,sirach l4 #a-bf  with ,simon ,,ii41 
son of the high-priest ,onias ,,ii41    
,b4,c4 #bba-bjb2 not with  ,simon ,i41  
son and successor of the high-priest    
,onias ,i41 ,b4,c4 #caj-bia4            

,josephus's opinion1 indeed1 is         
contrary2 but leading ,jewish scholars1 
such  as ,zunz1 ,herzfeld1 ,krochmal1   
,derenbourg1 ,jost1 and ,bloch differ   
from him4    ,to the great synagogue    
must be referred the compilation of the 
second  canon1 containing ,joshua1      
,judges with ,ruth1 ,samuel1 ,kings1    
,isaiah1  ,jeremiah with ,lamentations1 
,ezekiel and the twelve minor prophets4 
,it was  not completed prior to #cjj    
,b4,c41 because the book of ,jonah was  
not written  before4 ,this work may be  
called a historical parable composed for
 a  didactic purpose1 giving a milder1  
larger view of ,jehovah's favor than the
  orthodox one1 that excluded the       
,gentiles4 ,ruth1 containing an idyllic 
story with an unfinished genealogy      
attached1 meant to glorify the house of 
,david1 and presenting a kindred spirit 
towards a people uniformly hated1  was  
appended to ,judges2 but was            
subsequently transferred to the third   
canon4 ,it was written immediately after

 the return from the ,babylonian        
captivity2 for the ,chaldaising language
 points to this date1  notwithstanding  
the supposed archaisms discovered in it 
by some4 ,in like  manner1 the          
,lamentations1 originally added to      
,jeremiah1 were afterwards  put into the
 later or third canon4 ,joshua1 which   
had been separated from  the five books 
of ,moses with which it was closely     
joined at first1 formed1  with the other
 historical portion 7,judges1 ,samuel1  
,kings71 the proper  continuation of    
,ezra's canon4 ,the prophets included   
the three greater and  twelve minor4    
,with ,isaiah's authentic oracles were  
incorporated the last  twenty-seven     
chapters1 belonging for the most part to
 an anonymous prophet  of the exile1    
besides several late pieces inserted in 
the first  thirty-nine chapters4 ,men of
 prophetic gifts wrote in the name of   
distinguished prophets1 and put their   
productions with those of the  latter1  
or adapted and wrote them over after    

their own fashion4 ,the  fiftieth and   
fifty-first chapters of ,jeremiah show  
such over-writing4 ,to  ,zechariah's    
authentic oracles were attached chapters
 ix4-xiv41 themselves  made up of two   
parts 7ix4-xi41 xii4-xiv47 belonging to 
different times and  authors prior to   
the destruction of the ,jewish state by 
the ,babylonians4    ,the character of  
the synagogue's proceedings in regard to
 the books of  ,scripture can only be   
deduced from the conduct of ,ezra       
himself1 as well as  the prevailing     
views and wants of the times4 ,the      
scribes who began with  ,ezra1 seeing   
how he acted1 would naturally follow his
 example1 not  hesitating to revise the 
text in substance as well as form47#dc7 
,they did  not refrain from changing    
what had been written1 or from inserting
 fresh  matter4 ,some of their novelties
 can be discerned even in the           
,pentateuch4  ,their chief work1        
however1 related to the form of the     
text4 ,they put  into a proper form and 

state the text of the writings they     
studied1  perceiving less need for      
revising the matter4 ,what they did was 
in good  faith1 with honest intention4  
,the prophetic canon ended with         
,malachi's oracles4 ,and it was made    
sometime  after he prophesied1 because  
the general consciousness that the      
function  ceased with him required a    
considerable period for its growth4 ,the
 fact  that it included ,jonah and ,ruth
 brings the completion after #cjj       
,b4,c41 as  already stated4 ,there are  
no definite allusions to it till the    
second  century ,b4,c4 ,daniel speaks of
 a passage in ,jeremiah being in 8the   
books0  or 8writings207#dd7 and the     
prologue of ,jesus ,sirach presupposes  
its  formation4 ,such was the second    
canon1 which had been made up gradually 
7#ddd-bij ,b4,c47    ,another view of   
the collection in question has been     
taken by various  scholars4 ,according  
to a passage in the second book of      
,maccabees1 the  second canon originated

 with ,nehemiah1 who 8gathered together 
the acts of  the kings and the prophets 
and 7psalms7 of ,david1 and the epistles
 of the  kings concerning the holy      
gifts407#de7 ,these words are obscure4  
,they occur  in a letter purporting to  
be sent by the ,sanhedrim at ,jerusalem 
to the  ,jews in ,egypt1 which contains 
apocryphal things2 a letter which       
assigns to  ,nehemiah the merit of      
various arrangements rather belonging to
 ,ezra4 ,it is  difficult to understand 
the meaning of 8the epistles of the     
kings  concerning the offerings40 ,if   
they were the documents of heathen or   
,persian kings favorable to the         
rebuilding of ,jerusalem and its temple1
  would they not have been rejected from
 a collection of sacred books  belonging
 to the chosen people8 ,they might      
perhaps have been adopted had  they been
 interwoven with the holy books         
themselves1 like portions of ,ezra  and 
,nehemiah2 but they could not have      
formed a distinct part of the  national 

literature1 because they were foreign   
and heathen4 ,again1 8the  psalms of    
,david0 cannot have existed in the time 
of ,nehemiah1 if the  phrase includes   
the whole collection4 ,it may perhaps   
refer to the first  three divisions of  
the book1 as ,herzfeld thinks2 but these
 contain many  odes which are not       
,david's2 while earlier ones belong to  
the last two  divisions of the          
,psalm-book4 ,in like manner1 8the      
prophets0 could not all  have belonged  
to this canon2 neither ,malachi1 who was
 later1 nor ,jonah4  ,the account will  
not bear strict examination1 and must be
 pronounced  apocryphal4 ,nehemiah was a
 statesman1 not a priest or scribe2 a   
politician1 not a literary man4 ,it is  
true that he may have had  assistants1  
or committed the work to competent      
hands2 but this is  conjectural4 ,the   
account of his supposed canon hardly    
commends itself by  inherent            
truthfulness or probability1 though it  
is accepted by ,ewald and  ,bleek4      

,when the great synagogue ceased1 there 
was an interval during which it is  not 
clear whether the sacred books were     
neglected1 except by private            
individuals2 or whether they were       
studied1 copied1 and collected by a body
  of scribes4 ,perhaps the scribes and  
elders of the ,hasmonan time were       
active at intervals in this department4 
,the institution of a senate by  ,judas 
,maccabaeus is supposed to be favored by
 #b ,maccabees 7chapter i4  #aj-;ii4    
#ah72 but the passage furnishes poor    
evidence of the thing4 ,judas is  there 
made to write to ,egypt in the year of  
the ,seleucidae #ahh1 though he  died   
thirty-six years before1 i4e41 #aeb4    
,other places have been added as        
corroborative1 viz41 #b ,maccab4 iv4    
#dd1 xi4 #bg2 #a ,maccab4 vii4 #cc4     
,some go  so far as to state that ,jose 
ben ,joeser was appointed its first     
president  at that time4 ,the ,midrash  
in ,bereshith ,rabba 7 #fe7 makes him   
one of the  sixty ,hassidim who were    

treacherously murdered by ,alcimus2 but 
this is  neither in the first book of   
the ,maccabees 7chapter vii47 nor in    
,josephus17#df7 and must be pronounced  
conjectural4 ,it is impossible to fix   
the exact date of ,jose ben ,joeser in  
the ,hasmonean period4 ,pirke ,aboth    
leaves it indefinite4 ,jonathan1 ,judas 
,maccabaeus's successor1 when writing   
to the ,lacedaemonians1 speaks of the   
gerusia or senate as well as the  people
 of the ,jews2 whence we learn that the 
body existed as early as the  time of   
,judas47#dg7 ,again1 ,demetrius writes  
to ,simon1 as also to the  elders and   
nation of the ,jews47#dh7 ,after        
,jonathan and ,simon1 it may  have been 
suspended for a while1 in consequence of
 the persecution and  anarchy prevailing
 in ,judea2 till the great ,sanhedrim at
 ,jerusalem  succeeded it1 under        
,hyrcanus ,i4 ,though the traces of a   
senate in the  ,maccabaean epoch are    
slight1 the ,talmud countenances its    
existence47#di7 ,we  believe that it was

 earlier than ,judas ,maccabaeus4 ,of   
its constitution  nothing is known2 but 
it was probably aristocratic4 ,the      
,hasmonean prince  would naturally exert
 a commanding influence over it4 ,the   
great synagogue  had been a kind of     
democratic council1 consisting of       
scribes1 doctors or  teachers1 and      
priests47#ej7 ,like their predecessors  
of the great synagogue1  the ,hasmonan  
elders revised the text freely1 putting 
into it explanatory  or corrective      
additions1 which were not always        
improvements4 ,the way in  which they   
used the book of ,esther1 employing it  
as a medium of ,halachite  prescription1
 shows a treatment involving little idea
 of sacredness  attaching to the        
,hagiographa4    ,we are aware that the 
existence of this body is liable to     
doubt1 and that  the expressions        
belonging to it in ,jewish books1       
whether elders or  gerusia1 have been   
applied to the great synagogue or to the
 ,sanhedrim at  ,jerusalem1 or even to  

the elders of any little town or hamlet2
 but it is  difficult to explain all on 
that hypothesis1 without attributing    
confusion  to the places where they     
occur4 ,if the body in question be not  
allowed1 an  interval of about sixty    
years elapsed between the great         
synagogue and the  ,sanhedrim1 during   
which the hagiographical writings were  
comparatively  neglected1 though        
literary activity did not cease4 ,no    
authoritative  association1 at least1   
dealt with them4 ,this is improbable4   
,it is true  that we read of no         
distinguished teachers in the interval1 
except  ,antigonus of ,socho1 disciple  
of ,simon the ,just2 but the silence can
 hardly  weigh against a reasonable     
presumption4 ,one thing is clear1 viz41 
that  ,antigonus did not reach down to  
the time of the first pair that presided
  over the ,sanhedrim4    ,the contents 
of the third canon1 i4e41 ,psalms1      
,proverbs1 ,job1 ,canticles1            
,ecclesiastes1 ,esther1 ,daniel1 ,ezra1 

,nehemiah1 ,chronicles1 the formation of
  which we assign to the ,hasmonan      
gerusia1 were multifarious1 differing   
widely from one another in age1         
character1 and value--poetical1         
prophetic1  didactic1 historical4 ,such 
as seemed worthy of preservation1 though
 they  had not been included in the     
second canon1 were gathered together    
during  the space of an hundred and     
fifty years4 ,the oldest part consisted 
of  psalms supposed to belong to ,david4
 ,the first psalm1 which contains within
  itself traces of late authorship1 was 
prefixed as an introduction to the      
whole collection now put into the third 
canon4 ,next to the ,psalms were        
,proverbs1 ,job1 ,canticles1 which1     
though non-prophetic and probably       
excluded on that account from the second
 canon1 must have existed before  the   
exile4 ,enriched with the latest        
additions1 they survived the national   
disasters1 and claimed a place next to  
the ,psalms4 ,they were but a portion   

of the literature current in and after  
the #eth century ,b4,c41 as may be      
inferred from the epilogue to           
,ecclesiastes1 and the ,wisdom of       
,sirach4 ,the  historical work compiled 
by the chronicle-writer was separated1  
,ezra being  put first as the most      
important part1 and referring also to   
the church of  the #fth and #eth        
centuries whose history had not been    
written4 ,the  ,chronicles themselves   
were placed last1 being considered of   
less value  than the first part1 as they
 contained the summary of a period      
already  described1 though with numerous
 adaptations to post-exile times4 ,the  
youngest portion consisted of the book  
of ,daniel1 not written till the        
,maccabean period 7between #agj and #afj
 ,b4,c4727#ea7 and probably of several  
,psalms 7#dd1 #fj1 #gd1 #ge1 #gf1 #gi1  
#hj1 #hc1 #hi1 #aaj1 #aah7 which were   
inserted  in different places of the    
collection to make the whole number     
#aej4 ,these  late odes savor of the    

,maccabean time2 and are fitly          
illustrated by the  history given in the
 first book of ,maccabees4 ,the list    
continued open2  dominated by no        
stringent principle of selection1 and   
with a character  somewhat indefinite4  
,it was called c'tubim1 i4e41           
writings7#eb7 a  general epithet suited 
to the contents4    ,several books put  
into the third canon1--as ,job1         
,proverbs1 the greater  number of the   
,psalms1 c41--existed when the second   
was made4 ,but the  latter collection   
was pre-eminently prophetic2 and it was 
that idea of  the origin and contents of
 the books in it which regulated its    
extent4  ,bloch's supposition that the  
parts of the third collection then      
existing  were not looked upon as holy1 
but merely as productions embodying     
human  wisdom1 and were therefore       
excluded1 is improbable4 ,we do not     
think that  an alteration of opinion    
about them in the course of a century or
 more1 by  which they became divine and 

holy instead of human1 is a satisfactory
  explanation4 ,the ,psalms of ,david   
and the book of ,job must have been as  
highly esteemed in the period of the    
great synagogue's existence as they     
were at a later time4 ,other            
considerations besides the divinity and 
holiness of books contributed to their  
introduction into a canon4              
,ecclesiastes was taken into the third  
collection because it was attributed  to
 ,solomon4 ,the ,song of ,songs was     
understood allegorically1--a fact which1
  in addition to its supposed ,solomonic
 authorship1 determined its adoption4   
,and even after their canonical         
reception1 whether by the great         
synagogue  or another body1 the         
character of books was canvassed4 ,it   
was so with  ,ecclesiastes1 in spite of 
the supposed sanction it got from the   
great  synagogue contained in the       
epilogue1 added1 as some think1 by that 
body to  attest the sacredness of the   
book47#ec7    ,while the third canon was

 being made1 the soferim1 as the        
successors of  the prophets1 were active
 as before2 and though interpretation   
was their  chief duty1 they must have   
revised and corrected the sacred books  
to some  extent4 ,we need not hesitate  
to allow that they sometimes arranged   
parts1  and even added matter of their  
own4 ,in the time of the canon's entire 
preparation1 they and the priests1 with 
writers and scholars generally1         
redacted the national literature1       
excluding or sanctioning such portions  
of it as they thought fit4    ,at this  
time appeared the present five-fold     
partition of the ,psalms1  preceded as  
it had been by other divisions1 the last
 of which was very  similar to the one  
that became final4 ,several inscriptions
 and historical  notices were prefixed4 
,the inscriptions1 however1 belong to   
very different  times1 their historical 
parts being usually older than the      
musical2 and  date from the first       
collection to the period of the         

,hasmonean college1  when the final     
redaction of the entire ,psalter took   
place4 ,those in the  first three books 
existed at the time when the latter were
 made up2 those  in the last two were   
prefixed partly at the time when the    
collections  themselves were made1 and  
partly in the ,maccabean age4 ,how often
 they are  out of harmony with the poems
 themselves1 needs no remark4 ,they are 
both  traditional and conjectural4      
,the earliest attestation of the third  
canon is that of the prologue to  ,jesus
 ,sirach 7#acj ,b4,c471 where not only  
the law and the prophets are  specified1
 but 8the other books of the fathers10  
or 8the rest of the  books407#ed7 ,no   
information is given as to its extent1  
or the particular  books included4 ,they
 may have been for the most part the    
same as the  present ones4 ,the passage 
does not show that the third list was   
closed4  ,the better writings of the    
fathers1 such as tended to learning and 
wisdom1  are not excluded by the        

definite article4 ,in like manner1      
neither ,philo  nor the ,new ,testament 
gives exact information as to the       
contents of the  division in question4  
,indeed1 several books1 ,canticles1     
,esther1  ,ecclesiastes1 are unnoticed  
in the latter4 ,the argument drawn from 
,matthew  xxiii4 #ce1 that the          
,chronicles were then the last book of  
the canon1 is  inconclusive2 as the     
,zechariah there named was probably     
different from the  ,zechariah in #b    
,chronicles xxiv4 ,none of these        
witnesses proves that the  third canon  
was finally closed4    ,a more definite 
testimony respecting the canon is given 
by ,josephus  towards the end of the    
first century ,a4,d4 8,for we have not  
an innumerable  multitude of books among
 us1 444 but only twenty-two books1     
which contain  the records of all the   
past times2 which are justly believed to
 be divine4  ,and of them five belong to
 ,moses4444 ,but as to the time from the
 death of  ,moses till the reign of     

,artaxerxes1 king of ,persia1 the       
prophets who were  after ,moses wrote   
down what was done in their times in    
thirteen books4 ,the  remaining four    
books contain hymns to ,god and precepts
 for the conduct of  human life4 ,it is 
true our history has been written since 
,artaxerxes very  particularly1 but has 
not been esteemed of the like authority 
with the  former by our forefathers1    
because there has not been an exact     
succession  of prophets since that time3
 and how firmly we have given credit to 
these  books of our own nation is       
evident by what we do2 for during so    
many ages  as have already passed1 no   
one has been so bold as either to add   
anything  to them1 to take anything from
 them1 or to make any change in them2   
but it  has become natural to all ,jews 
immediately and from their very birth1  
to  esteem these books to contain divine
 doctrines1 and to persist in them1  and
 if occasion be1 willingly to die for   
them407#ee7 ,this list agrees with  our 

present canon1 showing that the         
,palestinian ,jews were tolerably       
unanimous as to the extent of the       
collection4 ,the thirteen prophets      
include ,job2 the four lyric and moral  
books are ,psalms1 ,proverbs1           
,ecclesiastes and ,canticles4    ,it is 
not likely that the ,hasmonan senate had
 a long existence4 ,it was  replaced by 
the ,sanhedrim1 a more definite and     
state institution1 intended  as a       
counter-balance to the influence of the 
,hasmonan princes4 ,the  notices of the 
latter reach no further back than       
,hyrcanus ,i41 i4e41  about #ace        
,b4,c47#ef7 ,josephus speaks of it under
 ,hyrcanus ,,ii47#eg7 ,it cannot  be    
referred to an earlier period than      
,hyrcanus ,i4 ,frankel7#eh7 indeed1     
finds a notice of it in #b ,chronicles  
xix4 #h1 #aa2 but the account there is  
indistinct1 and refers to the great     
synagogue4 ,the compiler having no      
certain information about what was long 
past1 transfers the origin of the  court

 he speaks of to ,jehoshaphat1 in order 
to glorify the house of ,david4  ,it is 
impossible to date the ,sanhedrim1 with 
,frankel1 in the ,grecian era1  in which
 case it must have been dissolved during
 the ,maccabean  insurrection1 and      
afterwards reconstructed2 it was not    
constituted till  about #acj ,b4,c4     
,whether it was modeled after the great 
synagogue or the  ,hasmonan senate1 is  
uncertain4 ,the idea of it may have been
 suggested by  the latter rather than   
the former1 for its basis was           
aristocratic4 ,the  ,hasmonan gerusia   
must have been less formal and definite 
than the  ,sanhedrim2 though the latter 
arose before the family ceased to be in 
power1 and differed materially from its 
predecessor4 ,it continued from #acj    
,b4,c4 till ,a4,d4 #ahj1 surviving the  
terrible disasters of the nation47#ei7  
,the closing of the third canon cannot  
be assigned1 with ,bloch1 to the  great 
synagogue4 ,if the college ceased with  
or before ,simon1 i4e41 about  #bjj-aib1

 and the work of ,daniel did not appear 
till about #agj ,b4,c41 twenty  years at
 least intervened between the extinction
 of the great synagogue  and ,daniel's  
book4 ,this holds good1 whether we      
assume1 with ,krochmal1 the  synagogue's
 redaction of the work1--more correctly 
the putting together  of the independent
 parts of which it is said to be        
composed2 or equally  so1 if the taking 
of it into the canon as a book already  
completed1 be  attributed to the same   
body4 ,but we are unable to see that    
,krochmal's  reasoning about the        
synagogue putting ,daniel's work        
together and one of  the members writing
 the book of ,esther is probable4    ,in
 like manner1 ,maccabean psalms are     
adverse to the hypothesis that the      
great synagogue completed the third     
canon4 ,in consequence of these late    
productions1 it is impossible to assert 
that the men of the synagogue were  the 
redactors of the ,psalter as it is4 ,it 
is true that the collection was  made   

before the ,chronicles and many other   
books of the hagiographical  canon2 but 
the complete ,psalter did not appear    
till the ,maccabean  period4 ,the canon1
 however1 was not considered to be      
finally closed in the  first century    
before and the next after ,christ4      
,there were doubts about  some portions4
 ,the book of ,ezekiel gave offence1    
because some of its  statements seemed  
to contradict the law4 ,doubts about    
others were of a  more serious nature2  
about ,ecclesiastes1 the ,canticles1    
,esther1 and the  ,proverbs4 ,the first 
was impugned because it had             
contradictory passages and  a heretical 
tendency2 the second1 because of its    
worldly and sensual tone2  ,esther for  
its want of religiousness2 and ,proverbs
 on account of  inconsistencies4 ,this  
scepticism went far to procure the      
exclusion of the  suspected works from  
the canon1 and their relegation to the  
class of the  genuzim47#fj7 ,but it did 
not prevail4 ,hananiah1 son of          

,hezekiah1 son of  ,garon1 about #cb    
,b4,c41 is said to have reconciled the  
contradictions and  quieted the         
doubts47#fa7 ,but these traces of       
resistance to the fixity of  the canon  
were not the last4 ,they reappeared     
about ,a4,d4 #fe1 as we learn  from the 
,talmud17#fb7 when the controversy      
turned mainly upon the  canonicity of   
,ecclesiastes1 which the school of      
,shammai1 who had the  majority1        
opposed2 so that the book was probably  
excluded47#fc7 ,the  question emerged   
again at a later synod at ,jabneh or    
,jamnia1 when ,r4  ,eleasar ben ,asaria 
was chosen patriarch1 and ,gamaliel the 
second1 deposed4  ,here it was decided1 
not unanimously however1 but by a       
majority of  ,hillelites1 that          
,ecclesiastes and the ,song of ,songs   
8pollute the hands10  i4e41 belong      
properly to the ,hagiographa47#fd7 ,this
 was about #ij ,a4,d47#fe7  ,thus the   
question of the canonicity of certain   
books was discussed at two  synods4     

,passages in the ,talmud have been      
adduced to show that the ,shammaite     
objections to the canonicity of         
,ecclesiastes 8were overruled by the    
positive declaration from the #gb       
elders1 being a testimony anterior to   
the ,christian era that ,coheleth is    
canonical2 but they do not support the  
opinion407#ff7    8,the sages0 referred 
to in the treatise ,sabbat and elsewhere
 is a vague  expression1 resting        
apparently on no historic tradition--a  
mere opinion of  comparatively late     
date4 ,if it refer to the ,jerusalem    
synod ,a4,d4 #fe1 the  ,hillelites were 
simply outnumbered there by the         
,shammaites4 ,the matter was  debated   
hastily1 and determined for the time by 
a majority4 ,but the synod  at ,jamnia  
consisted of #gb persons2 and a passage 
in the treatise ,yadayim  refers to     
it47#fg7 ,the testimony of the #gb      
elders to whom ,r4 ,simeon ben  ,asai   
here alludes1 so far from belonging to  
an anti-christian era1 belongs  to a    

date about #ij ,a4,d4 ,and the fact that
 the synod at ,jamnia took up  again a  
question already debated at ,jerusalem  
,a4,d4 #fe1 proves that no  final       
settlement of the canon had taken place 
before4 ,the canon was  virtually       
settled at ,jamnia1 where was confirmed 
what ,r4 ,akiba said of the  ,canticles 
in his usual extravagant way3 8,no day  
in the whole history of  the world is of
 so much worth as the one in which the  
,song of ,songs was  given to ,israel2  
for all the ,scriptures are holy2 but   
the ,song of ,songs is  most holy407#fh7
 ,as the ,hagiographa were not read in  
public1 with the  exception of ,esther1 
opinions of the ,jewish rabbins might   
still differ  about ,canticles and      
,ecclesiastes1 even after the synod of  
,jamnia4    ,in opposition to these     
remarks1 it is strenuously argued by    
,bloch that  neither the passage in the 
,mishnic treatise ,yadayim1 nor any     
other1 refers  to the canonical         
character of the books to which ,jewish 

elders raised  several objections4 ,but 
his arguments are more vehement than    
valid4  ,anxious to assign the final    
settlement of the entire canon to an    
authoritative body like the great       
synagogue1 he affirms that all parties  
were united in opinion about the time of
 ,christ1--,assiim1 ,perushim1 and      
,zeddukim2 ,shammaites and ,hillelites4 
,but it requires more than his          
ingenuity to explain away the meaning of
 ,yadayim #c1 #e1 ,adoyot v4 #c1 ,sabbat
  #a4 ,to what did such diversity of    
opinion relate1 if not to the canonical 
character of the books8 ,a specific     
answer to the question is not given by  
the learned writer17#fi7 who is too     
eager in his endeavor to attribute the  
settlement of the third canon to the    
great synagogue1 and to smooth away  all
 diversities of opinion about several   
books1 after that time1 as if  none     
could afterwards question the           
authoritative settlement by that body4  
,he will not even allow a wider canon to

 the ,alexandrian ,jews than that of    
their ,palestinian brethren1 though he  
cannot but admit that the former  read  
and highly esteemed various apocryphal  
books because of their  theocratic      
character4 ,surely the practical use of 
writings is an  evidence of their       
canonicity as strong as theoretical     
opinions4    ,the doubts about several  
books to which we have alluded1 some of 
which  ,hananiah is said to have        
resolved in his old age1 imply a        
diligent study  of the national         
literature1 if not a revision of the    
text2 and the  ,tannaite college at     
,jabneh must have cared for the same    
things1 as it had  to deal with similar 
objections4 ,after the last canon was   
made more than a  century anterior to   
the ,christian era1 the text was not    
considered  inviolate by the learned    
,jews2 it received subsequent           
modifications and  interpolations4 ,the 
process of redaction had not ceased     
before the time of  ,christ4 ,this was  

owing1 among other causes1 to the state 
of parties among  the ,jews1 as well as 
the intrusion of ,greek literature and  
culture1 whose  influence the           
,palestinian ,jews themselves were not  
able altogether to  withstand4 ,when    
,jeremiah accused the ,scribes of       
falsifying the law by  their lying pen  
7viii4 #h71 it may be inferred that the 
same process took  place afterwards2    
that offensive things were removed1 and 
alterations made  continuously down to  
the close of the canon1 and even after4 
,the  corrections consisted of additions
 and changes of letters1 being indicated
  in part by the most ancient versions  
and the traditions of the ,jews         
themselves who often knew what stood in 
the text at first1 and why it was       
altered4 ,they are also indicated by the
 nature of the passage itself  viewed in
 the light of the state of religion at  
the time4 ,here1 sober  judgment must   
guard against unnecessary conjectures4  
,some changes are  apparent1 as the     

plural oaks in ,genesis xiii4 #ah1 xiv4 
#ac1 xviii4 #a1  ,deuteronomy xi4 #cj1  
for the singular oak2 and the plural    
gods in  ,exodus xxxii4 #d1 for the     
singular god4 ,so #b ,sam4 ,vii4 #bc1   
7comp4 #a  ,chron4 xvii4 #ba1 and       
,,lxx727#gj7 and ,deuteronomy xxxii4    
#h17ga7 have been  altered4 ,popper and 
,geiger have probably assumed too much  
correction on  the part of the ,scribes 
and others2 though they have drawn      
attention to  the subject in the spirit 
of original criticism4    ,jewish       
literature began to degenerate after the
 captivity1 and it  continued to do so4 
,it leaned upon the past more and more1 
having an  external and formal character
 with little of the living soul4 ,the   
independence of their religious         
literature disappeared with the national
  independence of the ,jews2 and the    
genius of the people was too exclusive  
to receive much expansion from the      
spirit of nations with whom they came   
in contact4 ,in such circumstances1 amid

 the general consciousness of  present  
misfortune which the hope of a brighter 
future could not dispel1  and regretful 
retrospects of the past tinged with     
ideal splendor1 the  exact time of      
drawing a line between books that might 
be included in the  third division of   
the canon must have been arbitrary4 ,in 
the absence of a  normal principle to   
determine selection1 the productions    
were arbitrarily  separated4 ,not that  
they were badly adjusted4 ,on the       
contrary1 the canon  as a whole was     
settled wisely4 ,yet the critical spirit
 of learned ,jews in  the future could  
not be extinguished by anticipation4    
,the canon was not  really settled for  
all time by a synodical gathering at    
,jamnia2 for ,sirach  was added to the  
,hagiographa by some rabbins about the  
beginning of the  #dth century27#gb7    
while ,baruch circulated long in        
,hebrew1 and was publicly  read on the  
day of atonement in the third century1  
according to the  ,apostolic            

constitutions47#gc7 ,these two books    
were in high repute for a  considerable 
time1 possessing a kind of canonical    
credit even among the  learned ,jews of 
,palestine4 ,rab1 ,jochanan1 ,elasar1   
,rabba bar ,mare1  occasionally refer to
 ,sirach in the way in which the c'tubim
 were  quoted3 the writer of ,daniel    
used ,baruch2 and the translator of     
,jeremiah  put it into ,greek4    ,if it
 be asked on what principle books were  
admitted into the canon1 a  single      
answer does not suffice4 ,one and the   
same criterion did not  determine the   
process at all times4 ,the leading      
principle with which the  first         
canon-makers set out was to collect all 
the documents of ,hebrew  antiquity4    
,this seems to have guided ,ezra1 if not
 the great synagogue  after him4 ,the   
nation1 early imbued with the theocratic
 spirit and  believing itself the chosen
 of ,god1 was favorably inclined towards
  documents in which that standpoint was
 assumed4 ,the legal and ethical were   

specially valued4 ,the prophetic claimed
 a divine origin2 the lyric or  poetic  
touched and elevated the ideal faculty  
on which religion acts4 ,but  the       
leading principle which actuated ,ezra  
and the great synagogue was  gradually  
modified1 amid the growing compass of   
the national literature  and the        
consciousness that prophecy ceased with 
,malachi4 ,when the latest  part of the 
canon had to be selected from a         
literature almost  contemporaneous1     
regard was had to such productions as   
resembled the old  in spirit4 ,orthodoxy
 of contents was the dominant criterion4
 ,but this was  a difficult thing1 for  
various works really anonymous1 though  
wearing the  garb of old names and      
histories1 were in existence1 so that   
the boundary  of the third part became  
uncertain and fluctuating4    ,the      
principle that actuated ,ezra in making 
the first canon was a religious  and    
patriotic one4 ,from his treatment of   
the oldest law books we infer  that he  

did not look upon them as inviolable4   
,venerable they were1 and so  far       
sacred2 but neither perfect nor complete
 for all time4 ,in his view  they were  
not unconditionally authoritative4      
,doubtless they had a high  value as the
 productions of inspired lawgivers and  
men of a prophetic  spirit2 but the     
redaction to which he submitted them    
shows no  superstitious reverence4 ,with
 him canonical and holy were not        
identical4 ,nor does the idea of an     
immediate1 divine authority appear to   
have dominated the mind of the great    
synagogue in the selection of books4    
,like ,ezra1 these scholars reverenced  
the productions of the prophets1  poets1
 and historians to whom their countrymen
 were indebted in the past  for         
religious or political progress2 but    
they did not look upon them as  the     
offspring of unerring wisdom4 ,how could
 they1 while witnessing  repetitions and
 minor contradictions in the books      
collected8    ,the same remarks apply to

 the third canon4 ,direct divinity of   
origin was  not the criterion which     
determined the reception of a book into 
it2 but  the character and authorship of
 the book4 ,did it breathe the old      
spirit1  or proceed from one venerated  
for his wisdom8 ,was it like the old    
orthodox  productions2 or did it bear   
the name of one renowned for his piety  
and  knowledge of divine things8 ,the   
stamp of antiquity was necessary in a   
certain sense2 but the theocratic spirit
 was the leading consideration4         
,ecclesiastes was admitted because it   
bore the name of ,solomon2 and          
,daniel's apocalyptic writings1 because 
veiled under the name of an old         
prophet4 ,new psalms were taken in      
because of their association with much  
older ones in the temple service4 ,yet  
the first book of ,maccabees was        
excluded1 though written in ,hebrew4 ,it
 is still more remarkable that  ,sirach 
was put among the external productions2 
but this was owing not so  much to its  

recent origin1 for it is older than the 
book of ,daniel1 as to  its being an    
apparent echo of the ,proverbs1 and     
therefore unnecessary4 ,yet  it was long
 after assigned to the ,hagiographa1 and
 quoted as such by  several rabbis4     
,baruch was also left out1 though it is 
as old as ,daniel1  if not older2 and   
professes to have been written by       
,jeremiah's friend1 in  ,babylon4       
,that redactors dealt freely with the   
text of the second and third canons     
especially1 without a superstitious     
belief in its sacredness1 is apparent   
from the double recension which existed 
when the ,egyptian ,jews translated  the
 books into ,greek4 ,if the one that    
formed the basis of the ,alexandrian    
version be less correct than the        
,palestinian in the majority of         
instances1  it is still superior in     
many4 ,the differences between them1    
often  remarkable1 prove that those who 
had most to do with the books did not   
guard them as they would have done had  

they thought them infallibly  inspired4 
,palestinians and ,alexandrians         
subjected the text to redaction2  or had
 suffered it to fall into a state       
inconsistent with the assumption  of its
 supernatural origin4 ,at a much later  
period1 the ,masoretes reduced  to one  
type all existing copies of their       
,scriptures1 introducing an  uniformity 
imperatively demanded in their opinion  
by multiplied  discrepancies4           
,whatever divine character the          
reflecting attributed to the canonical  
books1 it must have amounted to the same
 thing as that assigned to human        
attributes and physical phenomena--a    
divinity resulting from the             
over-leaping of second causes1 in the   
absence of inductive philosophy4  ,here 
the imperfection conditioned by the     
nature of the created cannot be  hid4   
,yet the books may be truly said to have
 contained the word of ,god4    ,of the 
three divisions1 the ,law or ,pentateuch
 was most highly venerated  by the      

,jews4 ,it was the first translated into
 ,greek2 and in ,philo's view  was      
inspired in a way peculiar to itself4   
,the ,prophets1 or second  division1    
occupied a somewhat lower place in their
 estimation1 but were  read in the      
public services as the law had been     
before4 ,the c'tubim1 or  third         
division1 was not looked upon as equal  
to the ,prophets in  importance3 only   
the five ,megiloth were publicly read4  
,the three parts of  the collection     
present the three gradations of sanctity
 which the books  assumed successively  
in ,israelite estimation4 ,a certain    
reverence was  attached to all as soon  
as they were made canonical2 but the    
reverence was  not of equal height1 and 
the supposed authority was              
proportionally  varied47#gd7 ,the       
consciousness of prophetism being       
extinct soon after the  return from     
,babylon1 was a genuine instinct4 ,with 
the extinction of the  ,jewish state the
 religious spirit almost evaporated4    

,the idealism which  the old prophets   
proclaimed in contrast with the symbolic
 religion of the  state gave place to   
the forms and an attachment to the      
written law4  ,religion came to be a    
thing of the understanding1 the subject 
of learned  treatment2 and its essence  
was reduced to dogmas or precepts4 ,thus
 it  ceased to be a spiritual element in
 which the heart had free scope for its 
highest aspirations4 ,in addition to    
all1 a foreign metaphysical theology1   
the ,persian doctrine of spirits1 was   
introduced1 which seemed to enlarge  the
 sphere of speculation1 but really      
retarded the free exercise of the  mind4
 ,as the external side of religion had  
been previously directed to the         
performance of good works1 this         
externality was now determined by a     
written law4 ,even the prophetism that  
appeared after the restoration was      
little more than an echo of the past1   
falling in with an outward and  written 
legalism4 ,the literature of the people 

deteriorated in quality1  and prophecy  
became apocalypse4 ,in such             
circumstances the advent of a  new man  
was needed to restore the free life of  
religion in higher power4  ,christ      
appeared in the fullness of time to do  
this effectually by  proclaiming the    
divine ,fatherhood1 and founding a      
worship in spirit and  in truth4 ,rising
 above the symbolic wrappings of the    
,mosaic religion1 and  relying upon the 
native power of the spirit itself1 he   
showed how man may  mount up to the     
throne of ,god1 adoring the ,supreme    
without the  intervention of temple1    
sacrifice1 or ceremony4    ,when the    
three divisions were united1 the        
ecclesiastical respect which had        
gathered round the law and the prophets 
from ancient times began to be          
transferred to the c'tubim4 ,a belief in
 their sanctity increased apace  in the 
#ast century before the ,christian era1 
so that sacredness and  canonicity were 
almost identical4 ,the doubts of        

individuals1 it is true1  were still    
expressed respecting certain books of   
the c'tubim1 but they  had no           
perceptible effect upon the current     
opinion4 ,the sanctity attaching  to the
 last division as well as the others did
 not permit the total  displacement of  
any part4    ,the passage in ,josephus  
already quoted shows the state of the   
canon about  ,a4,d4 #ajj4 ,according to 
it1 he considered it to have been closed
 at the  time of ,artaxerxes            
,longimanus1 whom he identifies with the
 ,ahasuerus of  ,esther1 #dfd-dbd ,b4,c4
 ,the books were divine1 so that none   
dared to add to1  subtract from1 or     
alter them4 ,to him the canon was       
something belonging to  the venerable   
past1 and inviolable4 ,in other words1  
all the books were  peculiarly sacred4  
,although we call scarcely think this to
 be his private  opinion merely1 it is  
probably expressed in exaggerated terms1
 and hardly  tallies with his use of the
 third ,esdras in preference to the     

canonical  texts47#ge7 ,his authority1  
however1 is small4 ,bloch's estimate of 
it is too  high4 ,it is utterly         
improbable that ,josephus's opinion was 
universally  held by the ,jews in his   
day4 ,his division of the books is      
peculiar3 five  ,mosaic1 thirteen       
historical1 four containing religious   
songs and rules of  life4 ,it appears1  
indeed1 that as he had the same         
twenty-two books we now  have1 ,ruth was
 still attached to ,judges1 and         
,lamentations to ,jeremiah2 but  his    
credit is not on a par with that of a   
,jew who adhered to his  countrymen in  
the time of their calamity4 ,he wrote   
for the ,romans4 ,one who  believed that
 ,esther was the youngest book in the   
canon1 who looked upon  ,ecclesiastes as
 ,solomon's1 and ,daniel as an exile    
production1 cannot be a  competent      
judge4 ,in his time the historical sense
 of the book of ,daniel  was            
misapprehended2 for after the ,grecian  
dynasty had fallen without the          

fulfillment of the ,messianic prophecy  
connected with it1 the ,roman empire    
was put into its place4 ,hence various  
allusions in ,the ,history of the       
,jewish ,wars47#gf7 ,the passage in the 
,antiquities17#gg7 about ,alexander  the
 ,great and the priests in the ,temple  
at ,jerusalem is apocryphal4 ,in any    
case1 ,josephus does not furnish a      
genuine list of the canonical books any 
more than ,philo4 ,the ,pharisaic view  
of his time is undoubtedly given1 that  
the canon was then complete and sacred4 
,the decision proceeded from that  part 
of the nation who ruled both over school
 and people1 and regained  supremacy    
after the destruction of the temple2    
i4e41 from the  ,pharisee-sect to which 
,josephus belonged4 ,it was a conclusion
 of orthodox  ,judaism4 ,with true      
critical instinct1 ,spinoza says that   
the canon was the  work of the          
,pharisees4 ,the third collection was   
undoubtedly made under  their influence4
    ,the origin of the threefold        

division of the canon is not1 as ,oehler
  supposes17#gh7 a reflection of the    
different stages of religious           
development through which the nation    
passed1 as if the foundation were the   
,law1 the ulterior tendency in its      
objective aspect the ,prophets1 and its 
subjective aspect the ,hagiographa4 ,the
 books of ,chronicles and others  refute
 this arbitrary conception4 ,the        
triplicity lies in the manner in  which 
the books were collected4 ,men who      
belonged to different periods and       
possessed different degrees of culture1 
worked successively in the  formation of
 the canon2 which arose out of the      
circumstances of the times1  and the    
subjective ideas of those who made it4  
,the places of the separate books within
 the first division or ,torah1  were    
determined by the succession of the     
historical events narrated4 ,the  second
 division naturally begins with ,moses's
 successor1 ,joshua4 ,judges1  ,samuel1 
and ,kings follow according to the      

regular chronology4 ,to the  former     
prophets1 as ,joshua--,kings were       
called1 the latter were attached1       
,isaiah1 ,jeremiah1 and ,ezekiel2       
succeeded by the twelve minor prophets1 
arranged for the most part according to 
their times1 though the length of       
individual prophecies and similarity of 
contents also influenced their          
position4    ,the arrangement of books  
in the third division depended on their 
age1  character1 and authors4 ,the      
,psalms were put first1 because ,david  
was  supposed to be the author of many1 
and on account of their intrinsic value 
in promoting the religious life of the  
people4 ,after the ,psalms came the     
three poetical works attributed to      
,solomon1 with the book of ,job among   
them1--,proverbs1 ,job1 ,canticles1     
,ecclesiastes4    ,the book of ,esther  
followed1 since it was intended to      
further the  observance of the ,purim   
feast2 with the late book of ,daniel4   
,the position  of ,daniel among the     

c'tubim arises solely from the fact of  
its posterior  origin to the prophetic  
writings1 not excepting the book of     
,jonah itself2  and the attempt to      
account for its place in the third      
division on the  ground of its          
predominant subjectivity is based on the
 unfounded  assumption that the         
objective state of religion is          
represented in the  second division and 
the subjective in the third4 ,had the   
book existed  before #djj ,b4,c41 it    
would doubtless have stood in the second
 division4 ,but  the contents themselves
 demonstrate its date2 contemporary     
history being  wrapped in a prophetic   
form4 ,having some affinity to ,esther  
as regards  heathenism and ,greek life1 
the book was put next to the latter4 ,to
 ,ezra  and ,nehemiah1 which were       
adopted before the other part of the    
,chronicle  book and separated from it1 
were added the so-called ,chronicles4   
,such was  the original succession of   
the third division or c'tubim2 but it   

did not  remain unaltered4 ,for the use 
of the synagogue1 the five ,megiloth    
were put  together2 so that ,ruth1 which
 was originally appended to ,judges1 and
 the  ,lamentations affixed at first to 
,jeremiah's prophecies1 were taken out  
of  the second and put into the third   
canon4 ,this caused a separation of     
,canticles and ,ecclesiastes4 ,the new  
arrangement was made for liturgical     
purposes4            ,,chapter ,,iii4   
,,the ,,samaritan ,,and ,,alexandrian   
,,canons4      ,the ,samaritan canon    
consists of the ,pentateuch alone4 ,this
 restricted  collection is owing to the 
fact1 that when the ,samaritans         
separated from  the ,jews and began     
their worship on ,gerizim1 no more than 
the ,mosaic  writings had been invested 
by ,ezra with canonical dignity4 ,the   
hostile  feeling between the rivals     
hindered the reception of books         
subsequently  canonized4 ,the idea of   
their having the oldest and most sacred 
part in its  entirety satisfied their   

spiritual wants4 ,some have thought that
 the  ,sadducees1 who already existed as
 a party before the ,maccabean period1  
agreed with the ,samaritans in rejecting
 all but the ,pentateuch2 yet this  is  
doubtful4 ,it is true that the          
,samaritans themselves say so27#gi7 and 
that some of the church fathers1        
,origen1 ,jerome1 and others agree2 but 
little reliance can be put on the       
statement4 ,the latter1 perhaps1        
confounded the ,samaritans and          
,sadducces4 ,it is also noteworthy that 
,christ  in refuting the ,sadducees     
appeals to the ,pentateuch alone2 yet   
the  conclusion1 that he did so because 
of their admitting no more than that    
portion does not follow4    ,the        
,alexandrian canon differed from the    
,palestinian4 ,the ,greek translation   
commonly called the ,septuagint contains
 some later productions which the       
,palestinian ,jews did not adopt1 not   
only from their aversion to ,greek      
literature generally1 but also from the 

recent origin of the books1  perhaps    
also their want of prophetic sanction4  
,the closing line of the  third part in 
the ,alexandrian canon was more or less 
fluctuating--capable  of admitting      
recent writings appearing under the garb
 of old names and  histories1 of        
embracing religious subjects2 while the 
,palestinian  collection was pretty well
 determined1 and all but finally        
settled4 ,the  judgment of the          
,alexandrians was freer than that of    
their brethren in the  mother country4  
,they had even separated in a measure   
from the latter1 by  erecting a temple  
at ,leontopolis2 and their enlargement  
of the canon was  another step of       
divergence4 ,nor had they the criterion 
of language for the  separation of      
canonical and uncanonical2 both classes 
were before them in  the same tongue4   
,the enlarged canon was not formally    
sanctioned2 it had  not the approval of 
the ,sanhedrim2 yet it was to the       
,alexandrians what the  ,palestinian one

 was to the ,palestinians4 ,if ,jews who
 were not well  acquainted with ,hebrew1
 used the apocryphal and canonical books
 alike1 it  was a matter of feeling and 
custom2 and if those who knew the old   
language  better1 adhered to the        
canonical more closely1 it was a matter 
of  tradition and language4 ,the former 
set little value on the prevalent       
consciousness of the race that the      
spirit of prophecy was extinct2 their   
view of the ,spirit's operation was     
larger4 ,the latter clung to the past   
with all the more tenacity that the old 
life of the nation had  degenerated4    
,the ,alexandrian ,jews opened their    
minds to ,greek culture and philosophy1 
appropriating new ideas1 and explaining 
their ,scriptures in accordance  with   
wider conceptions of the divine         
presence2 though such adaptation  turned
 aside the original sense4 ,consciously 
or unconsciously they were  preparing   
,judaism in some degree to be the       
religion of humanity4 ,but the  ,rabbins

 shut out those enlarging influences1   
confining their religion  within the    
narrow traditions of one people4 ,the   
process by which they  conserved the old
 belief helped to quench its spirit1 so 
that it became an  antique skeleton1    
powerless beside the new civilization   
which had followed  the wake of         
,alexander's conquests4 ,rabbinical     
,judaism proved its  incapacity for     
regenerating the world2 having no       
affinity for the  philosophy of second  
causes1 or for the exercise of reason   
beneath the  love of a ,father who sees 
with equal eye as ,god of all4 ,its     
isolation  nourished a sectarian        
tendency4 ,tradition1 having no creative
 power like  revelation1 had taken the  
place of it2 and it could not ward off  
the  senility of ,judaism2 for its      
creations are but feeble echoes of      
prophetic  utterances1 weak imitations  
of poetic inspiration or of fresh       
wisdom4 ,they  are of the understanding 
rather than the reason4 ,the tradition  

which  ,geiger describes as the         
life-giving soul of ,judaism--the       
daughter of  revelation1 enjoying the   
same rights with her mother--a spiritual
 power  that continues ever to work--an 
emanation from the divine ,spirit--is   
not1  indeed1 the thing which has       
stiffened ,judaism into ,rabbinism2 but 
neither  is it tradition proper2 it is  
reason working upon revelation1 and     
moulding  it into a new system4 ,such   
tradition serves but to show the        
inability of  genuine ,judaism to       
assimilate philosophic thought4         
,rationalizing should  not be styled the
 operation of tradition4    ,the truth  
of these remarks is evident from a      
comparison of two books1  exemplifying  
,alexandrian and ,palestinian ,judaism  
respectively4 ,the ,wisdom  of ,solomon 
shows the enlarging effect of ,greek    
philosophy4 ,overpassing  ,jewish       
particularism1 it often approaches      
,christianity in doctrine and  spirit1  
so that some7#hj7 have even assumed a   

,christian origin for it4 ,the  ,wisdom 
of ,jesus1 son of ,sirach has not the   
doctrine of immortality4 ,death  is     
there an eternal sleep1 and retribution 
takes place in this life4 ,the  ,jewish 
theocracy is the centre of history2     
,israel the elect people2 and  all      
wisdom is embodied in the law4 ,the     
writer is shut up within the old        
national ideas1 and leans upon the      
writings in which they are expressed4   
,thus the ,hagiographical canon of      
,judea1 conservative as it is1 and purer
  in a sense1 presents a narrower type  
than the best specimens of the          
,alexandrian one4 ,the genial breath of 
,aryan culture had not expanded its     
,semitism4    ,the identity of the      
,palestinian and ,alexandrian canons    
must be abandoned1  notwithstanding the 
contrary arguments of ,eichhorn and     
,movers4 ,it is said1  indeed1 that     
,philo neither mentions nor quotes the  
,greek additions2 but  neither does he  
quote several canonical books4          

,according to ,eichhorn1 no  fewer than 
eight of the latter are unnoticed by    
him47#ha7 ,besides1 he had  peculiar    
views of inspiration1 and quoted loosely
 from memory4 ,believing  as he did in  
the inspiration of the ,greek version as
 a whole1 it is  difficult to think that
 he made a distinction between the      
different parts  of it4 ,in one passage 
he refers to the sacred books of the    
,therapeutae1 a  fanatical sect of ,jews
 in ,egypt1 as 8laws1 oracles of        
prophets1 hymns  and other books by     
which knowledge and piety are increased 
and  perfected107#hb7 but this presents 
little information as to the canon of   
the ,egyptian ,jews generally2 for it is
 precarious argumentation to say  with  
,herbst that they prove a twofold canon4
 ,even if the ,alexandrian and          
,palestinian canons be identical1 we    
cannot be sure that the other books     
which the ,therapeutae read as holy     
besides the law1 the prophets and       
hymns1 differed from the hagiographa1   

and so constituted another canon  than  
the general ,egyptian one4 ,it is quite 
possible that the hymns mean  the       
,psalms2 and the other books1 the rest  
of the hagiographa4 ,the  argument for  
the identity of the two canons deduced  
from #d ,esdras xiv4 #dd1  c41 as if the
 twenty-four open books were            
distinguished from the other  writings  
dictated to ,ezra1 is of no force1      
because verisimilitude required  that an
 ,egyptian ,jew himself must make ,ezra 
conform to the old ,palestinian  canon4 
,it is also alleged that the grandson of
 ,jesus ,sirach1 who  translated his    
grandfather's work during his abode in  
,egypt1 knew no  difference between the 
,hebrew and ,greek canon1 though he     
speaks of the  ,greek version2 but he   
speaks as a ,palestinian1 without having
 occasion to  allude to the difference  
between the canonical books of the      
,palestinian  and ,egyptian ,jews4 ,the 
latter may have reckoned the apocryphal 
writings in  the third division2 and    

therefore the translator of ,jesus      
,sirach could  recognize them in the    
ordinary classification4 ,the mention of
 three  classes is not opposed to their 
presence in the third4 ,the general use 
of  an enlarged canon in ,egypt cannot  
be denied1 though it was somewhat loose1
  not regarded as a completed           
collection1 and without express         
rabbinical  sanction4 ,if they did not  
formally recognize a canon of their own1
 as ,de  ,wette says of them1 they had  
and used one larger than the            
,palestinian1  without troubling        
themselves about a formal sanction for  
it by a body of  ,rabbis at ,jerusalem  
or elsewhere4 ,their canon was not      
identical with that  of the             
,palestinians1 and all the argumentation
 founded upon ,philo's  non-quotation of
 the apocryphal books1 fails to prove   
the contrary4 ,the  very way in which   
apocryphal are inserted among canonical 
books in the  ,alexandrian canon1 shows 
the equal rank assigned to both4 ,esdras

 first and  second succeed the          
,chronicles2 ,tobit and ,judith are     
between ,nehemiah and  ,esther2 the     
,wisdom of ,solomon and ,sirach follow  
,canticles2 ,baruch succeeds  ,jeremiah2
 ,daniel is followed by ,susanna and    
other productions of the same  class2   
and the whole closes with the three     
books of ,maccabees4 ,such is the  order
 in the ,vatican ,,ms4    ,the threefold
 division of the canon1 indicating three
 stages in its  formation1 has          
continued4 ,josephus1 indeed1 gives     
another1 based on the  nature of the    
separate books1 not on ,,mss4 ,we learn 
nothing from him of its  history1 which 
is somewhat remarkable1 considering that
 he did not live  two centuries after   
the last work had been added4 ,the      
account of the  canon's final           
arrangement was evidently unknown to    
him4            ,,chapter ,,iv4 ,,number
 ,,and ,,order ,,of ,,the ,,separate    
,,books4      ,the number of the books  
was variously estimated4 ,josephus gives

  twenty-two1 which was the usual number
 among ,christian writers in the        
second1 third1 and fourth centuries1    
having been derived perhaps from the    
letters of the ,hebrew alphabet4        
,origen1 ,jerome1 and others have it4   
,it  continued longest among the        
teachers of the ,greek ,church1 and is  
even in  ,nicephorus's stichometry47#hc7
 ,the enumeration in question has ,ruth 
with  ,judges1 and ,lamentations with   
,jeremiah4 ,in ,epiphanius7#hd7 the     
number  twenty-seven is found1 made by  
taking the alphabet enlarged with the   
five  final letters1 and dividing       
,samuel1 ,kings1 and ,chronicles into   
two books  each4 ,this is probably an   
ingenious combination belonging to the  
father  himself4 ,the ,talmud has       
twenty-four17#he7 a number which did not
 originate  in the ,greek alphabet1 else
 the ,palestinian ,jews would not have  
adopted  it4 ,the synagogue did not fix 
it officially4 ,after the ,pentateuch   
and the  former prophets1 which are in  

the usual order1 it gives ,jeremiah as  
the  first of the later1 succeeded by   
,ezekiel and ,isaiah with the twelve    
minor  prophets4 ,the ,talmud knows no  
other reason for such an order than that
 it  was made according to the contents 
of the prophetic books1 not according   
to the times of the writers4 ,this      
solution is unsatisfactory4 ,it is more 
probable that chronology had to do with 
the arrangement47#hf7 ,after the        
anonymous collection or second part of  
,isaiah had been joined to the first  or
 authentic prophecies1 the lateness of  
these oracles brought ,isaiah into  the 
third place among the greater prophets4 
,the ,talmudic order of the             
,hagiographa is ,ruth1 ,psalms1 ,job1   
,proverbs1 ,ecclesiastes1 ,canticles1   
,lamentations1 ,daniel1 ,esther1 ,ezra1 
,chronicles4 ,here ,ruth precedes the   
,psalter1 coming as near the former     
prophets as possible2 for it properly   
belongs to them1 the contents           
associating it with the ,judges' time4  

,the  ,talmudic order is that usually   
adopted in ,german ,,mss4 ,what is the  
true  estimate of it8 ,is it a proper   
,talmudic regulation8 ,perhaps not1 else
 the  ,hebrew ,,mss4 of the ,french and 
,spanish ,jews would not so readily have
  departed from it4 ,bloch supposes that
 ,baba ,bathra1 which gives the         
arrangement of the books1 is one of the 
apocryphal ,boraithas that  proceeded   
from an individual teacher and had no   
binding authority47#hg7    ,the         
,masoretic arrangement differs from the 
,talmudic in putting ,isaiah  before    
,jeremiah and ,ezekiel4 ,the            
,hagiographa are1 ,psalms1 ,proverbs1   
,job1  ,canticles1 ,ruth1 ,lamentations1
 ,ecclesiastes1 ,esther1 ,daniel1 ,ezra 
7with  ,nehemiah71 ,chronicles47#hh7    
,this is usually adopted in ,spanish    
,,mss4 ,but  ,,mss4 often differ        
arbitrarily1 because transcribers did   
not consider  themselves bound to any   
one arrangement47#hi7 ,according to     
some1 a very old  testimony to the      

commencing and concluding books of the  
third division is  given by the ,new    
,testament 7,luke xxiv4 #dd2 ,matthew   
xxiii4 #ce71 agreeably  to which the    
,psalms were first and the ,chronicles  
last2 but this is  inconclusive4    ,the
 ,alexandrian translators1 as we have   
seen already1 placed the books          
differently from the ,palestinian ,jews4
 ,in their version ,daniel comes after  
,ezekiel1 so that it is put beside the  
greater prophets4 ,was this done by     
,jews or ,christians8 ,perhaps by the   
latter1 who put it between the greater  
and lesser prophets1 or in other words1 
out of the third into the second        
division1 because of dogmatic grounds1  
and so effaced a trace of the  correct  
chronology4 ,little importance1 however1
 can be attached to the  order of the   
books in the ,septuagint2 because the   
work was done at  different times by    
different persons4 ,but whatever may    
have been the  arrangement of the parts 
when the whole was complete1 we know    

that it was  disturbed by ,protestants  
separating the apocryphal writings and  
putting  them all together4             
,,chapter ,v4 ,,use ,,of ,,the ,,old    
,,testament ,,by ,,the ,,first          
,,christian ,,writers1 ,,and ,,by  ,,the
 ,,fathers ,,till ,,the ,,time ,,of     
,,origen4      ,the writings of the ,new
 ,testament show the authors'           
acquaintance with the  apocryphal books4
 ,they have expressions and ideas       
derived from them4 ,stier  collected one
 hundred and two passages which bear    
some resemblance to  others in the      
,apocrypha27#ij7 but they needed        
sifting1 and were cut down to  a much   
smaller number by ,bleek4 ,they are     
,james i4 #ai1 from ,sirach v4 #aa  and 
iv4 #bi2 #a ,peter i4 #f1 #g1 from      
,wisdom iii4 #c-g2 ,hebrews xi4 #cd1    
#ce1  from #b ,maccabees vi4 #ah-vii4   
#db2 ,hebrews i4 #c1 from ,wisdom vii4  
#bf1 c42  ,romans i4 #bj-cb1 from       
,wisdom xiii4-xv42 ,romans ix4 #ba1 from
 ,wisdom xv4 #g2  ,eph4 vi4 #ac-ag1 from

 ,wisdom v4 #ah-bj2 #a ,cor4 ii4 #aj1   
c41 from ,judith  viii4 #ad4 ,others are
 less probable47#ia7 ,when ,bishop      
,cosin says1 that 8in  all the ,new     
,testament we find not any one passage  
of the apocryphal books  to have been   
alleged either by ,christ or ,his       
apostles for the confirmation  of their 
doctrine107#ib7 the argument1 though    
based on fact1 is scarcely  conclusive2 
else ,esther1 ,canticles1 ,ecclesiastes1
 and other works might be  equally      
discredited4 ,yet it is probable that   
the ,new ,testament writers1  though    
quoting the ,septuagint much more than  
the original1 were  disinclined to the  
additional parts of the ,alexandrian    
canon4 ,they were  ,palestinian         
themselves1 or had in view ,judaisers of
 a narrow creed4  ,prudential motives1  
no less than a predisposition in favor  
of the old  national canon1 may have    
hindered them from expressly citing any 
apocryphal production4 ,the apostle     
,paul and probably the other writers of 

the ,new ,testament1 believed in the    
literal inspiration of the ,biblical    
books1 for he uses an argument in the   
,galatian epistle which turns upon  the 
singular or plural of a noun47#ic7 ,and 
as the inspiration of the  ,septuagint  
translation was commonly held by the    
,christians of the early  centuries1 it 
may be that the apostles and evangelists
 made no distinction  between its parts4
 ,jude quotes ,enoch1 an apocryphal work
 not in the  ,alexandrian canon2 so that
 he at least had no rigid notions about 
the  difference of canonical and        
uncanonical writings4 ,still we know    
that the  compass of the ,old ,testament
 canon was somewhat unsettled to the    
,christians of the first century1 as it 
was to the ,hellenist ,jews  themselves4
 ,it is true that the ,law1 the         
,prophets1 and the ,psalms were         
universally recognized as authoritative2
 but the extent of the third  division  
was indefinite1 so that the non-citation
 of the three books  respecting which   

there was a difference of opinion among 
the ,jews may not  have been accidental4
 ,inasmuch1 however1 as the             
,greek-speaking ,jews  received more    
books than their ,palestinian brethren1 
the apostles and  their immediate       
successors were not wholly disinclined  
to the use of the  apocryphal           
productions4 ,the undefined boundary of 
the canon facilitated  also the         
recognition of all primitive records of 
the new ,revelation4    ,the early      
fathers1 who wrote in ,greek1 used the  
,greek ,bible1 as almost all  of them   
were ignorant of ,hebrew4 ,thus         
restricted2 they naturally  considered  
its parts alike1 citing apocryphal and  
canonical in the same  way4             
,accordingly1 ,irenus7#id7 quotes       
,baruch under the name of 8,jeremiah    
the prophet207#ie7 and the additions to 
,daniel as 8,daniel the prophet407#if7  
,clement of ,alexandria7#ig7 uses the   
apocryphal books like the canonical     
ones1 for explanation and proof         

indiscriminately4 ,he is fond of        
referring  to ,baruch1 which he cites   
upwards of twenty-four times in the     
second book  of his ,pdagogus1 and in a 
manner to show that he esteemed it as   
highly  as many other parts of the ,old 
,testament4 ,a passage from ,baruch is  
introduced by the phrase17#ih7 8the     
divine ,scripture says20 and another    
from ,tobit by7#ii7 8,scripture has     
briefly signified this1 saying40        
,assuming  that ,wisdom was written by  
,solomon1 he uses it as canonical and   
inspired1  designating it divine47#ajj7 
,judith he cites with other books of the
 ,old  ,testament7#aja72 and the ,song  
of the three children in the furnace is 
used  as ,scripture47#ajb7              
,ecclesiasticus also is so              
treated47#ajc7 ,dionysius of            
,alexandria7#ajd7 cites ,ecclesiasticus 
7xvi4 #bf71 introducing the passage     
with 8hear divine oracles407#aje7 ,the  
same book is elsewhere cited1  chapters 
xliii4 #bi1 #cj7ajf7 and i4 #h4 #i47ajg7

 ,so is ,wisdom1 vii4 #ae7ajh7  and     
#be47aji7 ,baruch 7iii4 #ab-ae7 is also 
quoted47#aaj7 ,the fathers who  wrote in
 ,latin used some of the old ,latin     
versions of which ,augustine  speaks2   
one of them1 and that the oldest        
probably dating soon after the  middle  
of the second century1 being known to us
 as the ,itala4 ,as this  was made from 
the ,septuagint1 it had the usual       
apocryphal books4 ,jerome's  critical   
revision or new version did not supplant
 the old ,latin till some  time after   
his death4 ,tertullian7#aaa7 quotes the 
,wisdom of ,solomon  expressly as       
,solomon's27#aab7 and introduces ,sirach
 by 8as it is  written407#aac7 ,he cites
 ,baruch as ,jeremiah47#aad7 ,he also   
believes in the  authenticity of the    
book of ,enoch1 and defends it as       
,scripture at some  length47#aae7       
,cyprian often cites the ,greek         
additions to the ,palestinian  canon4   
,he introduces ,tobit with the words 8as
 it is written107#aaf7 or  8divine      

,scripture teaches1 saying207#aag7 and  
,wisdom with1 8the ,holy ,spirit  shows 
by ,solomon407#aah7 ,ecclesiasticus is  
introduced with1 8it is  written207#aai7
 and ,baruch with1 8the ,holy ,spirit   
teaches by  ,jeremiah407#abj7 #a and #b 
,maccabees are used as ,scripture27#aba7
 as are the  additions to ,daniel47#abb7
 ,the ,african fathers follow the       
,alexandrian canon  without scruple4    
,hippolytus of ,rome 7about ,a4,d4      
#bbj71 who wrote in ,greek1  quotes     
,baruch as ,scripture27#abc7 and        
interprets the additions to ,daniel1    
such as ,susanna1 as ,scripture         
likewise47#abd7    ,melito of           
,sardis7#abe7 made it his special       
business to inquire among the           
,palestinian ,jews about the number and 
names of their canonical books2 and  the
 result was the following list3--the    
five books of ,moses1 ,joshua1  ,judges1
 ,ruth1 four books of ,kings1 two of    
,chronicles1 the ,psalms of ,david1  the
 ,proverbs of ,solomon1 ,ecclesiastes1  

the ,song of ,songs1 ,job1 ,isaiah1     
,jeremiah1 the twelve in one book1      
,daniel1 ,ezekiel1 ,ezra47#abf7 ,here   
,ezra  includes ,nehemiah2 and ,esther  
is absent1 because the ,jews whom he    
consulted did not consider it canonical4
    ,origen's7#abg7 list does not differ
 much from the ,palestinian one4 ,after 
the ,pentateuch1 ,joshua1 ,judges1      
,ruth1 ,kings first and second1 ,samuel1
  ,chronicles1 come ,ezra first and     
second1 ,psalms1 ,proverbs1             
,ecclesiastes1  ,canticles1 ,isaiah1    
,jeremiah with ,lamentations and the    
epistle1 ,daniel1  ,ezekiel1 ,job1      
,esther4 ,besides these there are the   
,maccabees1 which are  inscribed        
,sarbeth ,sarbane el47#abh7 ,the twelve 
prophets are omitted in  the ,greek2 but
 the mistake is rectified in ,rufinus's 
,latin version1 where  they follow      
,canticles1 as in ,hilary and ,cyril of 
,jerusalem4 ,it is  remarkable that     
,baruch is given1 and why8 ,because     
,origen took it from the  ,,mss4 of the 

,septuagint he had before him1 in which 
the epistle is  attributed to ,jeremiah4
 ,but the catalogue had no influence    
upon his  practice4 ,he followed the    
prevailing view of the extended canon4  
,sirach is  introduced by 8for this also
 is written027#abi7 the book of ,wisdom 
is  cited as a divine word27#acj7 the   
writer is called a prophet27#aca7       
,christ is represented as speaking in it
 through ,solomon27#acb7 and  ,wisdom   
vii4 #ag is adduced as the word of      
,christ himself47#acc7 ,tobit is  cited 
as ,scripture47#acd7 ,his view of the   
additions to the books of  ,daniel and  
,esther1 as well as his opinion about   
,tobit1 are sufficiently  expressed in  
the epistle to ,africanus1 so that      
scattered quotations from  these parts  
of ,scripture can be properly estimated4
 ,of the history of  ,susanna he        
ventures to say that the ,jews withdrew 
it on purpose from the  people47#ace7   
,he seems to argue in favor of books    
used and read in the  churches1 though  

they may be put out of the canon by the 
,jews4 ,as divine  ,providence had      
preserved the sacred ,scriptures1 no    
alteration should be  made in the       
ecclesiastical tradition respecting     
books sanctioned by the  churches though
 they be external to the ,hebrew canon4 
,most of the writings of ,methodius1    
,bishop of ,tyre7#acf7 are lost1 so that
  we know little of his opinions        
respecting the books of ,scripture4 ,but
 it  is certain that he employed the    
,apocrypha like the other writings of   
the  ,old ,testament4 ,thus ,sirach     
7xviii4 #cj and xix4 #b7 is quoted in   
the same  way as the ,proverbs47#acg7   
,wisdom 7iv4 #a-c7 is cited17#ach7 and  
,baruch 7iii4  #ad747aci7               
,,chapter ,,vi4 ,,the ,,new ,,testament 
,,canon ,,in ,,the ,,first ,,three      
,,centuries4      ,the first ,christians
 relied on the ,old ,testament as their 
chief religious  book4 ,to them it was  
of divine origin and authority4 ,the    
,new ,testament  writings came into     

gradual use1 by the side of the older   
,jewish documents1  according to the    
times in which they appeared and the    
names of their  reputed authors4 ,the   
,epistles of ,paul were the earliest    
written2 after  which came the          
,apocalypse1 the ,epistle to the        
,hebrews1 and other  documents1 all in  
the first century4 ,after the first     
gospel had undergone  a process of      
translation1 re-writing1 and            
interpolation1 from the ,aramaic  basis1
 the discourses17#adj7 of which ,papias 
of ,hierapolis speaks1 until  the traces
 of another original than the ,greek    
were all but effaced2 it  appeared in   
its present form early in the second    
century4 ,soon after1 that  of ,luke was
 composed1 whose prevailing ,pauline    
tendency was not allowed to  suppress   
various features of a ,jewish ,essene   
type4 ,the second gospel1  which bears  
evidences of its derivation from the    
other synoptists1 was  followed by the  
fourth4 ,the last document was the      

so-called second ,epistle  of ,peter4   
,it is manifest that tradition assumed  
various forms after the  death of       
,jesus2 that legend and myth speedily   
surrounded ,his sacred  person2 that the
 unknown writers were influenced by the 
peculiar  circumstances in which they   
stood with respect to ,jewish and       
,gentile  ,christianity2 and that their 
uncritical age dealt considerably in the
  marvelous4 ,that the life of the great
 ,founder should be overlaid with       
extraneous materials1 is special matter 
for regret4 ,however conscientious  and 
truth-loving they may have been1 the    
reporters were unequal to their  work4  
,it is also remarkable that so many of  
them should be unknown2  productions    
being attached to names of repute to    
give them greater  currency4    ,when   
,marcion came from ,pontus to ,rome     
7#add ,a4,d417 he brought with him a    
,scripture-collection consisting of ten 
,pauline epistles4 ,with true  critical 
instinct he did not include those       

addressed to ,timothy and ,titus1  as   
also the epistle to the ,hebrews4 ,the  
gospel of ,marcion was ,luke's in an    
altered state4 ,from this and other     
facts we conclude that external parties 
were the first who carried out the idea 
of collecting ,christian writings1  and 
of putting them either beside or over   
against the sacred books of the  ,old   
,testament1 in support of their systems4
 ,as to ,basilides 7#abe ,a4,d471  his  
supposed quotations from the ,new       
,testament in ,hippolytus are too       
precarious to be trusted47#ada7         
,testimonies to the 8acknowledged0 books
 of  the ,new ,testament as ,scripture  
have been transferred from his followers
 to  himself2 so that his early witness 
to the canon breaks down4 ,it is        
inferred from statements in ,origen and 
,jerome that he had a gospel of his  own
 somewhat like ,st4 ,luke's1 but        
extra-canonical4 ,his son ,isidore and  
succeeding disciples used ,matthew's    
gospel4 ,jerome says that ,marcion and  

,basilides denied the ,pauline          
authorship of the epistle to the        
,hebrews and  the pastoral ones47#adb7  
,it is also doubtful whether            
,valentinus's 7#adj-aff  ,a4,d47 alleged
 citations from the ,new ,testament can 
be relied upon4 ,the  passages of this  
kind ascribed to him by the fathers     
belong in a great  measure to his       
disciples4 ,the fragment of a letter    
preserved by ,clement of  ,alexandria in
 the second book of the ,stromata1 has  
been thought to contain  references to  
the gospels of ,matthew and ,luke2 but  
the fact is doubtful4  ,nor has ,henrici
 proved that ,valentinus used ,john's   
gospel47#adc7 ,but his  followers1      
including ,ptolemy 7#ahj ,a4,d47 and    
,heracleon 7#ahe-bjj ,a4,d471  quote the
 ,gospels and other portions of the ,new
 ,testament47#add7 ,from  ,hippolytus's 
account of the ,ophites1 ,perat1 and    
,sethians1 we infer that  the ,christian
 writings were much employed by them4   
,they rarely cite an  apocryphal work4  

,more than one hundred and sixty        
citations from the ,new  ,testament have
 been gathered out of their             
writings47#ade7 ,we may admit that      
these ,ophites and ,perat were of early 
origin1 the former being the oldest     
known of the ,gnostic parties2 but there
 is no proof that the acquaintance  with
 the ,new ,testament which ,hippolytus  
attributes to them belongs to the  first
 rather than the second half of the     
second century4 ,the early  existence of
 the sect does not show an early        
citation of the ,christian  books by it1
 especially of ,john's gospel2 unless   
its primary were its last  stage4 ,later
 and earlier ,ophites are not           
distinguished in the  ,philosophumena4  
,hence there is a presumption that the  
author had the  former in view1 which is
 favored by no mention of them occurring
 in the  8,adversus omnes ,hreses0      
usually appended to ,tertullian's       
,prscriptiones  ,hreticorum1 and by     
,irenus's derivation of their heresy    

from that of  ,valentinus4 ,the latter  
father does not even speak of the       
,perat4 ,clement  of ,alexandria is the 
first who alludes to them4 ,the early   
heretics were  desirous of confirming   
their peculiar opinions by the writings 
current  among ,catholic ,christians1 so
 that the formation of a canon by them  
began  soon after the commencement of   
the second century1 and continued till  
the  end of it2 contemporaneously with  
the development of a ,catholic ,church  
and  its necessary adjunct a ,catholic  
canon4    ,no ,new ,testament canon1    
except a partial and unauthoritative    
one1 existed  till the latter half of   
the second century1 that is1 till the   
idea of a  ,catholic church began to be 
entertained4 ,the living power of       
,christianity  in its early stages had  
no need of books for its nurture4 ,but  
in the  development of a church         
organization the internal rule of       
consciousness  was changed into an      
external one of faith4 ,the ,ebionites  

or ,jewish  ,christians had their       
favorite ,gospels and ,acts4 ,the gospel
 of ,matthew was  highly prized by them1
 existing as it did in various          
recensions1 of which  the gospel        
according to the ,hebrews was one4      
,other documents1 such as the           
,revelation of ,john2 and the preaching 
of ,peter1 a ,jewish-,christian history 
subsequently re-written and employed in 
the ,clementine ,recognitions and       
,homilies1 were also in esteem4 ,even so
 late as #age-ahj ,a4,d41 ,hegesippus1 a
  ,jewish ,christian1 does not seem to  
have had a canon consisting of the four 
gospels and ,paul's ,epistles1 but      
appeals to 8the law and the prophets and
  the ,lord10 so that his leading       
principle was1 the identity of ,jesus's 
words with the ,old ,testament2         
agreeably to the tenets of the party he 
belonged to4 ,the source whence he drew 
the words of ,jesus was probably the    
,gospel according to the ,hebrews1 a    
document which we know he used1 on the  

authority of ,eusebius4 ,he does not    
refer to ,paul except by implication in 
a passage given in ,photius from        
,stephen ,gobar17#adf7 where he says    
that  such as used the words 8,eye hath 
not seen1 nor ear heard10 c41 falsified 
the ,divine ,scriptures and the ,lord's 
words1 8,blessed are your eyes for  they
 see10 c4 ,as ,paul quoted the condemned
 language1 he is blamed47#adg7  ,though 
he knew ,paul's epistles1 he does not   
look upon them as  authoritative4 ,he   
betrays no acquaintance with the fourth 
gospel2 for  the question1 8,what is the
 door to ,jesus80 does not presuppose   
the  knowledge of ,john x4 #b1 #g1 #i4  
,nsgen has failed to prove ,hegesippus's
  ,jewish descent2 and ,holtzmann's     
mediating view of him is                
incorrect47#adh7    ,the ,clementine    
,homilies 7#afa-ahj ,a4,d47 used the    
four canonical gospels  even the fourth 
7which is somewhat singular in a writer 
who denies the  deity of ,christ71 and  
assigned it to the apostle ,john4 ,the  

gospel  according to the ,egyptians was 
also employed4 ,paul's epistles were    
rejected of course1 as well as the      
,acts2 since the apostle of the         
,gentiles  was pointed at in ,simon     
,magus1 whom ,peter refutes4 ,it is1    
therefore1  obvious that a collection of
 the ,new ,testament writings could make
 little  progress among the ,ebionites  
of the second century4 ,their reverence 
for  the law and the prophets hindered  
another canon4 ,among the ,gentile      
,christians the formation of a canon    
took place more rapidly1 though ,judaic 
influences retarded it even there4      
,after ,paul's epistles were            
interchanged  between churches1 a few of
 them would soon be put together4 ,a    
collection  of this kind is implied in  
#b ,peter iii4 #af4 ,the pastoral       
epistles1 which  show their dependence  
on the authentic ,pauline ones1 with    
those of ,peter1  presuppose a similar  
collection2 which along with the        
,synoptists1 existed  before the fourth 

gospel4 ,the ,apocalypse and the epistle
 to the ,hebrews  were obnoxious to the 
,pauline churches1 as ,paul's letters   
were to the  ,jewish-,christian ones4   
,hence the former were outside the      
,pauline  collections4    ,the apostolic
 fathers quote from the ,old ,testament1
 which was sacred and  inspired to them4
 ,they have scarcely any express        
citations from the ,new  ,testament4    
,allusions occur1 especially to the     
epistles4    ,the first ,epistle of     
,clement to the ,corinthians 7about #abj
 ,a4,d471 implies  acquaintance with    
several of the epistles1 with those to  
the ,corinthians1  ,romans1 ,hebrews1   
and perhaps others4 ,two passages have  
also been adduced  as derived from the  
gospels of ,matthew and ,luke1 viz41 in 
chapters xiii4 #b  and xlvi4 #h2 but    
probably some other source supplied     
them1 such as oral  tradition4 ,it has  
also been argued that the quotation in  
the fifteenth  chapter1 8,the ,scripture
 says somewhere1 ,this people honoreth  

me with their  lips1 but their heart is 
far from me10 comes from ,mark vii4 #f  
in which it  varies from the ,hebrew of 
,isaiah xxix4 #ac1 as well as the       
,septuagint  version4 ,clement          
therefore1 so it is said1 quotes the    
,old ,testament  through the medium of  
the gospels 7,matthew xv4 #h1 ,mark vii4
 #f74 ,but the  argument is inconclusive
 because the words agree closely enough 
with the  ,septuagint to render the     
supposition very probable that they are 
a  memorized citation from it4 ,as they 
stand1 they coincide exactly neither    
with ,mark nor the ,septuagint47#adi7   
,thus we dissent from the opinion of    
,gebhardt and ,harnack4 ,wherever       
8,scripture0 is cited1 or the expression
 8it  is written0 occurs1 the ,old      
,testament is meant4    ,hermas 7about  
#adj ,a4,d47 seems to have used the     
epistle to the ,ephesians  and perhaps  
that to the ,hebrews1 as well as the    
epistle of ,james2 but  there is great  
uncertainty about the matter1 for there 

is no express or  certain quotation from
 any part of the ,new ,testament4 ,the  
writer often  alludes to words of       
,jesus1 found in ,matthew's gospel1 so  
that he may have  been acquainted with  
it4 ,keim7#aej7 and others have         
discovered references  to the fourth    
gospel2 but they are invalid4 ,there is 
no allusion to the  ,acts in vis4 iv4   
#b1 #d4 ,the only ,scripture cited is   
the apocryphal book  ,eldat and ,modat1 
now lost47#aea7 ,the writer seems to    
have known several  ,jewish             
,apocalypses47#aeb7    ,barnabas 7about 
#aai ,a4,d47 has but one quotation from 
the ,new ,testament1  if1 indeed1 it be 
such4 ,apparently1 ,matthew xx4 #af or  
xxii4 #ad is  introduced by 8as it is   
written10 showing that the gospel was   
considered  ,scripture47#aec7 ,this is  
the earliest trace of canonical         
authority being  transferred from the   
,old ,testament to ,christian writings4 
,but the citation  is not certain4 ,the 
original may be #d ,esdras1 viii4 #c2   

and even if the  writer took the words  
from ,matthew's gospel1 it is possible  
that he used  8it is written0 with      
reference to their prototype in the ,old
 ,testament4 ,of  such interchanges1    
examples occur in writers of the second 
century2 and it  is the more probable   
that this is one1 from the fact that #d 
,esdras is  elsewhere considered a      
prophet and referred to in the same way 
as  ,ezekiel47#aed7 ,barnabas's citation
 of a gospel as canonical is wholly     
improbable1 since even ,justin1 thirty  
years after1 never quotes the ,new      
,testament writings as ,scripture4 ,the 
thing would be anomalous and  opposed to
 the history of the first half of the   
second century4 ,when these             
post-apostolic productions appeared1 the
 ,new ,testament writings did not  stand
 on the same level with the ,old1 and   
were not yet esteemed sacred  and       
inspired like the ,jewish ,scriptures4  
,the ,holy ,spirit was thought to  dwell
 in all ,christians1 without being      

confined to a few writers2 and his      
influence was the common heritage of    
believers4 ,there are evidences of      
,barnabas's acquaintance with the       
,epistles to the ,romans and            
,corinthians2  nor is it improbable that
 he knew the canonical gospel of        
,matthew1 though  one passage appears to
 contradict ,matthew xxviii4 #aj1 c41   
without  necessarily implying ignorance 
of what lies in it1 viz41 that the      
ascension of ,jesus took place on the   
day of his resurrection47#aee7          
,strangely enough1 ,keim thinks that the
 writer had ,john's gospel before  him2 
but this opinion is refuted by the end  
of ,barnabas's fifth  chapter47#aef7    
,holtzmann has ably disposed of the     
considerations adduced by  ,keim47#aeg7 
,barnabas quotes the book of ,enoch as  
,scripture27#aeh7 and an  apocryphal    
prophecy is introduced with1 8another   
prophet says407#aei7    ,as far as we   
can judge from ,eusebius's account of   
,papias7#afj7 7about #aej  ,a4,d471 that

 writer knew nothing of a ,new          
,testament canon4 ,he speaks of         
,matthew and ,mark2 but it is most      
probable that he had documents which    
either formed the basis of our present  
,matthew and ,mark1 or were taken  into 
them and written over47#afa7 ,according 
to ,andreas of ,csarea he was           
acquainted with the ,apocalypse of      
,john2 while ,eusebius testifies to his 
knowledge of #a ,peter and #a ,john4    
,but he had no conception of canonical  
authority attaching to any part of the  
,new ,testament4 ,his language implies  
the opposite1 in that he prefers        
unwritten tradition to the gospel he    
speaks of4 ,he neither felt the want nor
 knew the existence of inspired         
gospels4    ,we need not notice the     
three short ,syriac epistles attributed 
to ,ignatius1  as we do not believe them
 to be his1 but of later origin4 ,traces
 of later  ideas about the canonicity of
 the ,new ,testament appear in the      
shorter  ,greek recension of the        

,ignatian epistles 7about #age ,a4,d47  
,there the  ,gospel and the ,apostles   
are recognized as the constituents of   
the  book47#afb7 ,the writer also used  
the ,gospel according to the ,hebrews1  
for  there is a quotation from it in the
 epistle to the ,smyrnians47#afc7 ,the  
second part of the collection seems to  
have wanted the epistle to the          
,ephesians47#afd7 ,the two leading      
parties1 long antagonistic1 had now     
become  united2 the apostles ,peter and 
,paul being mentioned together47#afe7   
,in the  ,testaments of the twelve      
patriarchs 7about #agj ,a4,d471 ,paul's 
life is said  to be described in 8holy  
books10 i4e41 his own epistles and the  
,acts47#aff7    ,justin ,martyr 7#aej   
,a4,d47 knew the first and third of the 
synoptic gospels4  ,his use of ,mark's  
does not appear4 ,his knowledge of the  
fourth is denied  by many1 and zealously
 defended by others4 ,thoma finds proofs
 that ,justin  knew it well1 and used it
 freely as a text-book of gnosis1       

without  recognizing it as the          
historical work of an apostle2 an       
hypothesis  encumbered with             
difficulties47#afg7 ,whatever be said   
about ,justin's  acquaintance with this 
gospel2 its existence before #adj ,a4,d4
 is incapable  either of decisive or    
probable proof2 and this father's       
,logos-doctrine is  less developed than 
the ,johannine1 because it is encumbered
 with the  notion of miraculous birth by
 a virgin4 ,the ,johannine authorship   
has  receded before the tide of modern  
criticism2 and though this tide is      
arbitrary at times1 it is here          
irresistible4 ,apologists should abstain
  from strong assertions on a point so  
difficult1 as that each 8gospel is      
distinctly recognized by him20 for the  
noted passage in the dialogue with      
,trypho does not support them47#afh7 ,it
 is pretty certain that he employed  an 
extra-canonical gospel1 the so-called   
gospel of the ,hebrews4 ,this  ,petrine 
document may be referred to in a passage

 which is unfortunately  capable of a   
double interpretation47#afi7 ,he had    
also the older ,acts of  ,pilate4       
,paul's epistles are never mentioned1   
though he doubtless knew  them4 ,having 
little sympathy with ,paulinism he      
attached his belief much  more to the   
primitive apostles4 ,the ,apocalypse1 #a
 ,peter1 and #a ,john he  esteemed      
highly2 the epistle to the ,hebrews and 
the ,acts he treated in the  same way as
 the ,pauline writings4 ,justin's canon1
 as far as divine  authority and        
inspiration are concerned1 was the ,old 
,testament4 ,he was  merely on the      
threshold of a divine canon made up of  
primitive ,christian  writings1 and     
attributed no exclusive sanctity to     
those he used because  they were not to 
him the only source of doctrine4 ,even  
of the ,apocalypse  he says1 8,a man    
among us named ,john1 c41 wrote         
it407#agj7 ,in his time none  of the    
gospels had been canonized1 not even the
 synoptists1 if1 indeed1 he  knew them  

all4 ,oral tradition was the chief      
fountain of ,christian  knowledge1 as it
 had been for a century4 ,in his opinion
 this tradition was  embodied in        
writing2 but the documents in which he  
looked for all that  related to ,christ 
were not the gospels alone4 ,he used    
others freely1 not  looking upon any as 
inspired1 for that idea could arise only
 when a  selection was made among the   
current documents4 ,he regarded them all
 as  having been written down from      
memory1 and judged them by criteria of  
evidence conformable to the ,old        
,testament ,scriptures4 ,though lessons 
out  of ,gospels 7some of our present   
ones and others71 as also out of the    
prophets1 were read in assemblies on the
 first day of the week17#aga7 the  act  
of converting the ,christian writings   
into ,scripture was posterior2  for the 
mere reading of a gospel in churches on 
,sunday does not prove that  it was     
considered divinely authoritative2 and  
the use of the epistles1  which formed  

the second and less valued part of the  
collection1 must still  have been       
limited4    ,justin's disciple1 ,tatian 
7#afj-ahj ,a4,d471 wrote a ,diatessaron 
or harmony  of the gospels1 which began1
 according to ,ephrem ,syrus1 with ,john
 i4 #a2  but our knowledge of it is     
uncertain4 ,the author omitted the      
genealogies  of ,jesus and everything   
belonging to ,his ,davidic descent4 ,he 
seems also to  have put into it         
particulars derived from extra-canonical
 sources such as  the ,gospel according 
to the ,hebrews4 ,doubtless he was      
acquainted with  ,paul's writings1 as   
statements made in them are quoted2 but 
he dealt  freely with them according to 
,eusebius1 and even rejected several    
epistles1 probably first and second     
,timothy47#agb7    ,in ,polycarp's      
epistle 7about #afj ,a4,d471 which is   
liable to strong  suspicions of having  
been written after the death of the     
bishop17#agc7  there are reminiscences  
of the synoptic gospels2 and most of    

,paul's  epistles as well as ,i ,peter  
were used by the writer4 ,but the idea  
of  canonical authority1 or a peculiar  
inspiration belonging to these          
writings1 is absent4    ,the author of  
the second ,clementine epistle 7about   
#aej-afj7 had not a ,new  ,testament    
canon made up of the four gospels and   
epistles4 ,his ,scripture  was the ,old 
,testament1 to which is applied the     
epithet 8the ,books0 or 8the  ,bible20  
and the words of ,christ4 8,the         
,apostles0 immediately subjoined to     
8the ,books10 does not mean the ,new    
,testament1 or a special collection of  
the apostolic epistles1 as has been     
supposed47#agd7 ,the preacher employed a
  gospel or gospels as ,scripture2      
perhaps those of ,matthew and ,luke1 not
  the whole documents1 but the parts    
containing the words of ,christ47#age7  
,he  also used the ,gospel of the       
,egyptians as an authoritative document1
 and  quoted his sources freely4 ,with  
the ,johannine writings he seems to have

  been unacquainted47#agf7              
,athenagoras of ,athens wrote an apology
 addressed to ,marcus ,aurelius 7#agf   
,a4,d474 ,in it he uses written and     
unwritten tradition1 testing all by the 
,old ,testament which was his only      
authoritative canon4 ,he makes no       
reference to the ,christian documents1  
but adduces words of ,jesus with the    
verb 8he says40 ,it is not clear whether
 he quoted from the ,synoptics2  perhaps
 the passages which are parallel to     
,matthew v4 #dd1 #de1 #df17agg7 and     
,mark x4 #f17agh7 were taken from these2
 but the matter is somewhat  uncertain4 
,his treatise on the resurrection       
appeals to a passage in one of  ,paul's 
epistles47#agi7    ,dionysius of        
,corinth 7 #agj ,a4,d47 complains of the
 falsification of his  writings1 but    
consoles himself with the fact that the 
same is done to the  8,scriptures of the
 ,lord10 i4e41 the gospels containing   
the ,lord's words2  or rather the two   
parts of the early collection1 8the     

gospel0 and 8the  apostle0 together2    
which agrees best with the age and tenor
 of his  letters47#ahj7 ,if such be the 
meaning1 the collection is put on a par 
with  the ,old ,testament1 and regarded 
as inspired4    ,in the second epistle  
of ,peter 7about ,a4,d4 #agj7 ,paul's   
epistles are  regarded as ,scripture    
7iii4 #af47 ,this seems to be the       
earliest example of  the canonizing of  
any ,new ,testament portion4 ,here a    
brotherly recognition  of the ,gentile  
apostle and his productions takes the   
place of former  opposition4 ,a false   
interpretation of his epistles is even  
supposed to  have induced a departure   
from primitive apostolic ,christianity4 
,the letter of the churches at ,vienne  
and ,lyons 7#agg ,a4,d47 has quotations 
from the epistles to the ,romans1       
,philippians1 #a ,timothy1 #a ,peter1   
,acts1  the gospels of ,luke and ,john1 
the ,apocalypse4 ,the last is expressly 
called  ,scripture47#aha7 ,this shows a 
fusion of the two original tendencies1  

the  ,petrine and ,pauline2 and the     
formation of a ,catholic church with a  
common  canon of authority4             
,accordingly1 the two apostles1 ,peter  
and ,paul1 are  mentioned together4     
,theophilus of ,antioch 7#ahj ,a4,d47   
was familiar with the gospels and most  
of  ,paul's epistles1 as also the       
,apocalypse4 ,passages are cited from   
,paul as  8the divine word407#ahb7 ,he  
ascribes the fourth gospel to ,john1    
calling him  an inspired man1 like the  
,old ,testament prophets47#ahc7 ,we also
 learn from  ,jerome that he commented  
on the gospels put together by way of   
harmony47#ahd7    ,the author of the    
epistle to ,diognetus 7about #bjj       
,a4,d47 shows his  acquaintance with the
 gospels and ,paul's epistles2 but he   
never cites the  ,new ,testament by way 
of proof4 ,words are introduced into his
 discourse1 in  passing and from        
memory47#ahe7    ,the conception of a   
,catholic canon was realized about the  
same time as  that of a ,catholic       

church4 ,one hundred and seventy years  
from the coming  of ,christ elapsed     
before the collection assumed a form    
that carried with  it the idea of holy  
and inspired47#ahf7 ,the way in which it
 was done  was by raising the apostolic 
writings higher and higher till they    
were of  equal authority with the ,old  
,testament1 so that the church might    
have a  rule of appeal4 ,but by lifting 
the ,christian productions up to the    
level  of the old ,jewish ones1 injury  
was done to that living consciousness   
which  feels the opposition between     
spirit and letter2 the latter writings  
tacitly assuming or keeping the         
character of a perfect rule even as to  
form4 ,the ,old ,testament was not      
brought down to the ,new2 the ,new was  
raised to the ,old4 ,it is clear that   
the earliest church fathers did not  use
 the books of the ,new ,testament as    
sacred documents clothed with divine    
authority1 but followed for the most    
part1 at least till the middle of the   

second century1 apostolic tradition     
orally transmitted4 ,they were not      
solicitous about a canon circumscribed  
within certain limits4    ,in the second
 half1 then1 of the second century there
 was a canon of the  ,new ,testament    
consisting of two parts called the      
gospel7#ahg7 and the  apostle47#ahh7    
,the first was complete1 containing the 
four gospels alone2  the second1 which  
was incomplete1 contained the ,acts of  
the ,apostles and  epistles1 i4e41      
thirteen letters of ,paul1 one of       
,peter1 one of ,john1 and  the          
,revelation4 ,how and where this canon  
originated is uncertain4 ,its           
birthplace may have been ,asia ,minor1  
like ,marcion's2 but it may have grown  
about the same time in ,asia ,minor1    
,alexandria1 and ,western ,africa4 ,at  
all  events1 ,irenus1 ,clement of       
,alexandria1 and ,tertullian agree in   
recognizing its existence4    ,irenus   
had a canon which he adopted as         
apostolic4 ,in his view it was of       

binding force and authoritative4 ,this  
contained the four gospels1 the  ,acts1 
thirteen epistles of ,paul1 the first   
epistle of ,john1 and the  ,revelation4 
,he had also a sort of appendix or      
deutero-canon1 which he  highly esteemed
 without putting it on a par with the   
received collection1  consisting of     
,john's second epistle1 the first of    
,peter1 and the ,shepherd  of ,hermas4  
,the last he calls ,scripture47#ahi7    
,the epistle to the ,hebrews1  that of  
,jude1 ,james's1 second ,peter1 and     
third ,john he ignored4    ,clement's   
collection was more extended than       
,irenus'4 ,his appendix or              
deutero-canon included the epistle to   
the ,hebrews1 #b ,john1 ,jude1 the      
,apocalypse of ,peter1 the ,shepherd of 
,hermas1 the ,epistles of ,clement and  
,barnabas4 ,he recognized no obligatory 
canon1 distinct and of paramount        
authority4 ,but he separated the ,new   
,testament writings by their            
traditionally apostolic character and   

the degree of importance attached to    
them4 ,he did not attach the modern idea
 of canonical in opposition to          
non-canonical1 either to the four       
gospels or any other part of the ,new   
,testament4 ,barnabas is cited as an    
apostle47#aij7 ,so is the ,roman        
,clement47#aia7 ,the ,shepherd of       
,hermas is spoken of as divine47#aib7   
,thus  the line of the ,homologoumena is
 not marked off even to the same extent 
as  in ,irenus4    ,tertullian's canon  
consisted of the gospels1 ,acts1        
thirteen epistles of  ,paul1 the        
,apocalypse1 and #a ,john4 ,as an       
appendix he had the epistle to the      
,hebrews1 that of ,jude1 the ,shepherd  
of ,hermas1 #b ,john probably1 and #a   
,peter4 ,this deutero-canon was not     
regarded as authoritative4 ,no trace    
occurs in his works of ,james' epistle1 
#b ,peter1 and #c ,john4 ,he used the   
,shepherd1 calling it ,scripture17#aic7 
without implying1 however1 that he  put 
it on a par with the usually            

acknowledged canonical writings2 but    
after he became a ,montanist1 he        
repudiated it as the apocryphal         
,shepherd  of adulterers1 8put among the
 apocryphal and false1 by every council 
of  the churches407#aid7 ,it was not1   
however1 reckoned among the spurious and
  false writings1 either at ,rome or    
,carthage1 in the time of ,tertullian4  
,it  was merely placed outside the      
universally received works by the       
western  churches of that day4    ,these
 three fathers did not fix the canon    
absolutely4 ,its limits were  still     
unsettled4 ,but they sanctioned most of 
the books now accepted as  divine1      
putting some extra-canonical productions
 almost on the same level  with the     
rest1 if not in theory1 at least in     
practice4    ,the canon of ,muratori is 
a fragmentary list which was made       
towards the end  of the second century  
7#agj ,a4,d474 ,its birthplace is       
uncertain1 though  there are traces of  
,roman origin4 ,its translation from the

 ,greek is  assumed1 but that is        
uncertain4 ,it begins with the four     
gospels in the  usual order1 and        
proceeds to the ,acts1 thirteen epistles
 of ,paul1 the  epistles of ,john1 that 
of ,jude1 and the ,apocalypse4 ,the     
epistle to the  ,hebrews1 #a and #b     
,peter1 #a ,john and ,james are not     
named4 ,the ,apocalypse of  ,peter is   
also mentioned1 but as not universally  
received4 ,of the ,shepherd  of ,hermas1
 it is stated that it may be read in the
 ,church4 ,the epistle 8to  the         
,laodiceans0 may either be that to the  
,ephesians1 which had such              
superscription in ,marcion's canon1 or  
less probably the supposititious        
epistle mentioned in the codex          
,boernerianus17#aie7 after that to      
,philemon1  and often referred to in the
 middle ages47#aif7 ,that 8to the       
,alexandrians0  is probably the epistle 
to the ,hebrews2 though this has been   
denied  without sufficient reason4      
,according to the usual punctuation1    

both are  said to have been forged in   
,paul's name1 an opinion which may have 
been  entertained among ,roman          
,christians about #agj ,a4,d4 ,the      
,epistle to the  ,hebrews was rejected  
in the west1 and may have been thought a
  supposititious work in the interests  
of ,paulinism1 with some reason  because
 of its internal character17#aig7 which 
is at least semi-,pauline1  though its  
,judaistic basis is apparent4 ,the story
 about the origin of the  fourth gospel 
with its apostolic and episcopal        
attestation1 evinces a  desire to       
establish the authenticity of a work    
which had not obtained  universal       
acceptance at the time47#aih7 ,it is    
difficult to make out the  meaning in   
various places2 and there is            
considerable diversity of opinion  among
 expositors of the document47#aii7 ,in  
accord with these facts we find         
,serapion bishop of the church at       
,rhossus1 in ,cilicia17#bjj7 allowing   
the  public use of the gospel of        

,peter27#bja7 which shows that there was
 no  exclusive gospel-canon at the end  
of the second century1 at least in      
,syria4 ,the present canon had not then 
pervaded the churches in general4       
,what is the result of an examination of
 the ,christian literature belonging  to
 the second century8 ,is it that a canon
 was then fixed1 separating some  books 
from others by a line so clear1 that    
those on one side of it were  alone     
reckoned inspired1 authoritative1 of    
apostolic origin or sanction2  while    
those on the other were considered      
uninspired1 unauthoritative1  without   
claim to apostolicity1 unauthentic8 ,was
 the separation between  them made on   
any clear principle or demarcation8 ,it 
cannot be said so4 ,the  century        
witnessed no such fact1 but merely the  
incipient efforts to bring  it about4   
,the discriminating process was begun1  
not completed4 ,it was  partly forced   
upon the prominent advocates of a policy
 which sought to  consolidate the       

,jewish and ,gentile-,christian parties1
 after the decline of  their mutual     
antagonism1 into a united church4 ,they 
were glad to transfer  the current      
belief in the infallible inspiration of 
the ,old ,testament1 to  selected       
,christian writings1 as an effective    
means of defence against  those whom    
they considered outside a new           
organization--the ,catholic ,church4    
,the stichometrical list of the ,old and
 ,new ,testament ,scriptures in the     
,latin of the ,clermont ,,ms4 7,d71 was 
that read in the ,african ,church in    
the third century4 ,it is peculiar4     
,after the ,pentateuch1 ,joshua1        
,judges1  ,ruth1 and the historical     
books1 follow ,psalms1 ,proverbs1       
,ecclesiastes1  ,canticles1 ,wisdom1    
,sirach1 the twelve minor prophets1 the 
four greater2  three books of the       
,maccabees1 ,judith1 ,esdras1 ,esther1  
,job1 and ,tobit4 ,in  the ,new         
,testament1 the four gospels1 ,matthew1 
,john1 ,mark1 ,luke1 are  succeeded by  

ten epistles of ,paul1 two of ,peter1   
the epistle of ,james1  three of ,john1 
and that of ,jude4 ,the epistle to the  
,hebrews 7characterized  as that of     
,barnabas71 the ,revelation of ,john1   
,acts of the ,apostles1 the  ,shepherd  
of ,hermas1 the ,acts of ,paul1 the     
,revelation of ,peter1 follow4 ,the     
last three constitute a sort of         
appendix2 and the number of their verses
  is given4 ,it is possible that the    
carelessness of a transcriber may have  
caused some of the singularities        
observable in this list2 such as the    
omission of the epistles to the         
,philippians and ,thessalonians2 but the
 end  shows a freer idea of books fit   
for reading than what was usual even at 
that early time in the ,african         
,church47#bjb7    ,in ,syria a version  
of the ,new ,testament for the use of   
the church was made  early in the third 
century4 ,this work1 commonly called the
 ,peshito1 wants  #b ,peter1 #b and #c  
,john1 ,jude1 and the ,apocalypse4 ,it  

has1 however1 all the  other books1     
including the epistle of ,james and that
 to the ,hebrews4 ,the  last two were   
received as apostolic4    ,towards the  
middle of the third century1            
,origen's7#bjc7 testimony  respecting   
the ,canon is of great value4 ,he seems 
to have distinguished  three classes of 
books--authentic ones1 whose apostolic  
origin was  generally admitted1 those   
not authentic1 and a middle-class not   
generally  recognized or in regard to   
which his own opinion wavered4 ,the     
first  contained those already adopted  
at the beginning of the century both in 
the ,east and ,west1 with the           
,apocalypse1 and the epistle to the     
,hebrews so  far as it contains ,pauline
 ideas27#bjd7 to the second belongs the 
,shepherd  of ,hermas1 though he        
sometimes hesitated a little about      
it17#bje7 the  epistle of ,barnabas1 the
 ,acts of ,paul1 the gospel according to
 the  ,hebrews1 the gospel of the       
,egyptians1 and the preaching of        

,peter27#bjf7 to  the third1 the epistle
 of ,james1 that of ,jude1 #b ,peter1 #b
 and #c ,john47#bjg7  ,the separation of
 the various writings is not formally   
made1 nor does  ,origen give a list of  
them4 ,his classification is gathered   
from his works2  and though its         
application admitted of considerable    
latitude1 he is  cautious enough1       
appealing to the tradition of the       
church1 and throwing in  qualifying     
expressions47#bjh7    ,the ,canon of    
,eusebius7#bji7 is given at length in   
his ,ecclesiastical  ,history47#baj7 ,he
 divides the books into three classes1  
containing those  writings generally    
received17#baa7 those                   
controverted17#bab7 and the             
heretical47#bac7 ,the first has the four
 gospels1 the ,acts1 thirteen  epistles 
of ,paul1 #a ,john1 #a ,peter1 the      
,apocalypse47#bad7 ,the second class  is
 subdivided into two1 the first         
corresponding to ,origen's mixed7#bae7  
or intermediate writings1 the second to 

his spurious7#baf7 ones4 ,the  former   
subdivision contains the epistle of     
,james1 #b ,peter1 ,jude1 #b and #c     
,john2 the latter1 the ,acts of ,paul1  
the ,shepherd1 the ,revelation of       
,peter1  the epistle of ,barnabas1 the  
,doctrines of the ,apostles1 the        
,apocalypse of  ,john1 the gospel       
according to the ,hebrews4 ,the third   
class has the gospels  of ,peter1 of    
,thomas1 the traditions of ,matthias1   
the ,acts of ,peter1  ,andrew1 and      
,john4 ,the subdivisions of the second  
class are indefinite4 ,the  only        
distinction which ,eusebius puts between
 them is that of  ecclesiastical use4   
,though he classes as spurious the ,acts
 of ,paul1 the  ,shepherd1 the          
,revelation of ,peter1 the epistle of   
,barnabas1 the doctrines  of the        
,apostles1 the ,apocalypse of ,john1 the
 gospel according to the  ,hebrews1 and 
does not apply the epithet to the       
epistle of ,james1 the #b of  ,peter1 #b
 and #c ,john2 he uses of ,james's in   

one place the verb to be  counted       
spurious47#bag7 ,in like manner he      
speaks of the ,apocalypse of  ,peter and
 the epistle of ,barnabas as            
controverted47#bah7 ,the mixed or       
spurious of ,origen are vaguely         
separated by ,eusebius2 both come under 
the general head of the controverted2   
for after specifying them  separately he
 sums up1 8all these will belong to the 
class of the  controverted10 the very   
class already described as containing   
8books  well known and recognized by    
most10 implying also that they were read
 in  the churches47#bai7    ,it is      
somewhat remarkable that ,eusebius does 
not mention the ,epistle of  ,clement to
 the ,corinthians in this list4 ,but he 
speaks of it in another  place as a     
production whose authenticity was       
generally acknowledged17#bbj7  and of   
its public use in most churches both    
formerly and in his own time4  ,this    
wide-spread reading of it did not       
necessarily imply canonicity2 but  the  

mode in which ,eusebius characterizes   
it1 and its extensive use in  public1   
favor the idea that in many churches it 
was almost put on equality  with the    
productions commonly regarded as        
authoritative4 ,the canonical  list was 
not fixed immovably in the time of      
,eusebius4 ,opinions about books        
varied1 as they had done before4    ,the
 testimony of ,eusebius regarding the   
canon1 important as it is1 has  less    
weight because of the historian's       
credulity4 ,one who believed in the     
authenticity of ,abgar's letters to     
,christ1 and in the canon of the four   
gospels at the time of ,trajan1 cannot  
take rank as a judicious collector  or  
sifter of facts4    ,about #ccb ,a4,d4  
the ,emperor ,constantine entrusted     
,eusebius with the  commission to make  
out a complete collection of the sacred 
,christian  writings for the use of the 
,catholic ,church4 ,how this order was  
executed  we are not told4 ,but ,credner
 is probably correct in saying that the 

code  consisted of all that is now in   
the ,new ,testament except the          
,revelation4  ,the fifty copies which   
were made must have supplied            
,constantinople and the  ,greek ,church 
for a considerable time with an         
authoritative canon4    ,eusebius's     
catalogue agrees in substance with that 
of ,origen's4 ,the  historian followed  
ecclesiastical tradition4 ,he inquired  
diligently into  the prevailing opinions
 of the ,christian churches and writers1
 with the  views held by others before  
and contemporaneously with himself1 but 
could  not attain to a decided result4  
,his hesitation stood in the way of a   
clear1 firm1 view of the question4 ,the 
tradition respecting certain books  was 
still wavering1 and he was unable to fix
 it4 ,authority fettered his            
independent judgment4 ,that he was      
inconsistent and confused does not need 
to be shown4    ,the exact principles   
that guided the formation of a canon in 
the earliest  centuries cannot be       

discovered4 ,strictly speaking there    
were none4  ,definite grounds for the   
reception or rejection of books were not
  apprehended4 ,the choice was          
determined by various circumstances1 of 
which  apostolic origin was the chief1  
though this itself was insufficiently   
attested2 for if it be asked whether all
 the ,new ,testament writings  proceeded
 from the authors whose names they bear1
 criticism cannot reply  in the         
affirmative4 ,the example and influence 
of churches to which the  writings had  
been first addressed must have acted    
upon the reception of  books4 ,above    
all1 individual teachers here and there 
saw the necessity of  meeting heretics  
with their own weapons1 in their own    
way1 with apostolic  records instead of 
oral tradition4 ,the circumstances in   
which the  orthodox were placed led to  
this step1 effecting a bond of union    
whose  need must have been felt while   
each church was isolated under its own  
bishop and the collective body could not

 take measures in common4 ,writings  of 
more recent origin would be received    
with greater facility than such as  had 
been in circulation for many years1     
especially if they professed to  come   
from a prominent apostle4 ,a code of    
apostolic writings1 divine and  perfect 
like the ,old ,testament1 had to be     
presented as soon as possible  against  
,gnostic and ,manichan heretics whose   
doctrines were injurious to  objective  
,christianity2 while the multiplication 
of apocryphal works  threatened to      
overwhelm genuine tradition with a heap 
of superstition4 ,the  ,petrine and     
,pauline ,christians1 now amalgamated to
 a great extent1 agreed  in hastening   
the canon-process4    ,the infancy of   
the canon was cradled in an uncritical  
age1 and rocked with  traditional ease4 
,conscientious care was not directed    
from the first to  the                  
well-authenticated testimony of         
eye-witnesses4 ,of the three fathers    
who contributed most to its early       

growth1 ,irenus was credulous and       
blundering2 ,tertullian passionate and  
one-sided2 and ,clement of  ,alexandria1
 imbued with the treasures of ,greek    
wisdom1 was mainly occupied  with       
ecclesiastical ethics4 ,irenus argues   
that the gospels should be four  in     
number1 neither more nor less1 because  
there are four universal winds  and four
 quarters of the world4 ,the ,word or   
,architect of all things gave  the      
gospel in a fourfold shape4 ,according  
to this father1 the apostles  were fully
 informed concerning all things1 and had
 a perfect knowledge1  after their      
,lord's ascension4 ,matthew wrote his   
gospel while ,peter and  ,paul were     
preaching in ,rome and founding the     
church47#bba7 ,such assertions  show    
both ignorance and exaggeration4        
,tertullian affirms that the tradition  
of the apostolic churches  guarantees   
the four gospels17#bbb7 and refers his  
readers to the churches  of ,corinth1   
,philippi1 ,ephesus1 c41 for the        

authentic epistles of  ,paul47#bbc7     
,what is this but the rhetoric of an    
enthusiast8 ,in like manner  he states  
that bishops were appointed by the      
apostles1 and that they  existed from   
that time downward1 the succession      
originating so early47#bbd7    ,clement 
contradicts himself in making ,peter    
authorize ,mark's gospel to be  read in 
the churches2 while in another place he 
says that the apostle  neither 8forbad  
nor encouraged it407#bbe7    ,the three 
fathers of whom we are speaking1 had    
neither the ability nor the  inclination
 to examine the genesis of documents    
surrounded with an  apostolic halo4 ,no 
analysis of their authenticity and      
genuineness was  seriously attempted    
either by them or by the men of their   
time4 ,in its  absence1 custom1         
accident1 taste1 practical needs        
directed the tendency of  tradition4    
,all the rhetoric employed to throw the 
value of their testimony  as far back as
 possible1 even up to or at least very  

near the apostle ,john  is of the       
vaguest sort4 ,appeals to the continuity
 of tradition and of  church doctrine1  
to the exceptional veneration of these  
fathers for the  gospels1 to their      
opinions being formed earlier than the  
composition of  the works in which they 
are expressed1 possess no force4 ,the   
ends which  the fathers in question had 
in view1 their polemic motives1 their   
uncritical1 inconsistent assertions1    
their want of sure data1 detract from   
their testimony4 ,their decisions were  
much more the result of pious  feeling  
biased by the theological speculations  
of the times1 than the  conclusions of a
 sound judgment4 ,the very arguments    
they use to establish  certain          
conclusions show weakness of perception4
 ,what are the  manifestations of       
spiritual feeling1 compared with the    
results of logical  reasoning8 ,are they
 more trustworthy than the latter8      
,certainly not1 at  least in relation to
 questions of evidence4 ,it is true that

 their  testimony has a value2 but it is
 one proportionate to the degree of     
credibility attaching to witnesses      
circumstanced as they were1 whose       
separation of canonical from uncanonical
 gospels1 or rather their  canonizing of
 certain writings apart from others1 and
 their claiming of  inspiration for the 
authors of the former1 must be judged by
 the  reasonableness of the thing       
itself1 in connection with men of their 
type4  ,the second century abounded in  
pseudonymous literature2 and the early  
fathers1 as well as the churches1 were  
occupied with other things than the     
sifting of evidence connected with      
writings considerably prior to their    
own time4 ,the increase of such         
apocryphal productions1 gospels1 acts1  
and  apocalypses among the heretical    
parties stimulated the orthodox bishops 
and churches to make an authentic       
collection2 but it increased the        
difficulties of the task4    ,textual   
criticism has been employed to discredit

 the true dates of the  present gospels2
 and the most exaggerated descriptions  
have been given of  the frequent        
transcription of the text and its great 
corruption in the  second century4 ,the 
process of corruption in the course of  
frequent  transcription has been        
transferred even to the first century4  
,it is true  that the gospels at the end
 of that century exhibited a text which 
bears  marks of transcription1          
interpolation1 and addition2 but they   
were not the  complete works as we have 
them now1 being then but in progress1   
except the  fourth4 ,the assumption that
 8advanced corruption0 existed in the   
present  text of the synoptists as early
 as the first century is gratuitous2    
unless  the process by which they were  
gradually built up is so called4 ,no    
attempt  to get a long history behind   
the canonical gospels at the close of   
the  first century out of 8advanced     
corruption0 can be successful4 ,it is   
attested by no ,christian writer of the 

century2 and those in the first  half of
 the second1 both heretical and         
orthodox1 did themselves treat the  text
 in a manner far short of its implied   
infallibility4 ,the various  readings   
with which they had to do1 do not carry 
up the canonical  gospels far into the  
first century4 ,the transcription1      
enlargement1 and  interpolation of the  
materials which make up the body of     
them1 must not be  identified with the  
corruption of their completed texts1 in 
order that  the latter may be relegated 
to an early period2 for the synoptists  
did not  come forth full-blown1 each    
from the hand of a single person4 ,the  
old  ,latin version or versions used by 
,tertullian and the interpreter of      
,irenus1 have been pressed into the same
 service1 but in vain4    ,in like      
manner the ,curetonian ,syriac version  
of the gospels has been put  as early as
 possible into the second century1      
though it can hardly have  been prior to
 the very close of it1 or rather to the 

beginning of the  third4 ,here the      
strong assertions of apologetic writers 
have been freely  scattered abroad4 ,but
 the evidence in favor of the authors   
traditionally  assigned to the gospels  
and some of the epistles1 is still      
uncertain4 ,a  wide gap intervenes      
between eye-witnesses of the apostles or
 apostolic men  that wrote the sacred   
books1 and the earliest fathers who     
assert such  authorship4 ,the           
traditional bridge between them is a    
precarious one4 ,as  the chasm cannot be
 filled by adequate external evidence1  
we are thrown  back on the internal     
character of the works themselves4 ,one 
thing appears  from the early corruption
 of the sacred records spoken of by     
,irenus1  ,origen1 and others1 that they
 were not regarded with the veneration  
necessarily attaching to infallible     
documents4 ,their being freely handled  
excludes the idea of rigid canonization4
 ,the men who first canonized them  had 
no certain knowledge of their authors4  

,to them1 that knowledge had  been      
obscured or lost2 though a sagacious    
criticism might have arrived at  the    
true state of the question even in their
 day4    ,in the sub-apostolic age      
,ebionitism passed into ,catholicism1   
,jewish into  ,pauline ,christianity1   
the mythical and marvelous into the     
dogmatic1 the  traditional into the     
historic1 the legendary into the        
literary4 ,the  conflict of parties     
within the sphere of ,christianity gave 
rise to  productions of various         
tendencies which reflected the          
circumstances out of  which they arose4 
,these were accepted or rejected by the 
churches  according to the prevailing   
opinions of the persons composing the   
churches4 ,common usage led to the      
authorization of some2 others were      
neglected4 ,the state of the second     
century in its beliefs1 credulity1      
idiosyncracies of prominent teachers1   
antagonistic opinions and mystic        
speculations1 throws a light upon the   

,new ,testament writings and  especially
 on the formation of the canon1 which   
explains their genesis4  ,two things    
stand out most clearly1 the             
comparatively late idea of a  canonical 
,new ,testament literature2 and the     
absence of critical  principles in      
determining it4 ,the former was not     
entertained till the  latter part of the
 second century4 ,the conception of     
canonicity and  inspiration attaching to
 ,new ,testament books did not exist    
till the time  of ,irenus4    ,when it  
is asked1 to whom do we owe the canon8  
the usual answer is1 to the  ,church4   
,this is true only in a sense4 ,the     
unity attributed to ,christians  before 
,irenus and ,tertullian1 consisted in   
their religious consciousness4  ,it was 
subjective4 ,the idea of the church was 
that of inward  fellowship--the         
fellowship of the spirit rather than an 
outward organism4  ,the preservation of 
the early ,christian writings was owing1
 in the first  instance1 to the         

congregations to whom they were sent1   
and the neighboring  ones with whom such
 congregations had friendly connection4 
,the care of  them devolved on the most 
influential teachers1--on those who     
occupied  leading positions in the chief
 cities1 or were most interested in     
apostolic writings as a source of       
instruction4 ,the ,christian books were 
mostly in the hands of the bishops4 ,in 
process of time the canon was the  care 
of assemblies or councils4 ,but it had  
been made before the first  general     
council by a few leading fathers towards
 the end of the second  century in      
different countries4 ,the formation of a
 ,catholic ,church and of  a canon was  
simultaneous4 ,the circumstances in     
which the collection  originated were   
unfavorable to the authenticity of its  
materials1 for  tradition had been busy 
over them and their authors4 ,instead of
  attributing the formation of the canon
 to the ,church1 it would be more       
correct to say that the important stage 

in it was due to three teachers1  each  
working separately and in his own way1  
who were intent upon the  creation of a 
,christian society which did not appear 
in the apostolic  age1--a visible       
organization united in faith1--where the
 discordant opinions  of apostolic and  
sub-apostolic times should be finally   
merged4 ,the canon  was not the work of 
the ,christian ,church so much as of the
 men who were  striving to form that    
,church1 and could not get beyond the   
mould received  by primitive ,christian 
literature4 ,the first mention of a     
,catholic  ,church occurs in ,the       
,martyrdom of ,polycarp1 an epistle that
 cannot be  dated earlier than #afj     
,a4,d41 and may perhaps be ten years    
later4 ,but  though the idea is there1  
its established use is due to ,irenus1  
,tertullian1 and ,cyprian4 ,the         
expression has a different and narrow   
sense  in the seven ,ignatian epistles  
which we believe to be supposititious   
and  later than ,justin4 ,neither the   

three epistles published in ,syriac by  
,cureton1 nor the seven ,greek ones     
enumerated by ,eusebius are authentic2  
though ,zahn has tried to prove the     
latter such1 dating them ,a4,d4 #add4   
,his  arguments1 however1 are far from  
convincing2 and the whole story of7#bbf7
  ,ignatius's martyrdom at ,rome rather 
than ,antioch is still doubtful2 for    
the circumstances under which he is said
 to have been dragged to ,rome1 and  his
 writing letters to the churches by the 
way1 are highly improbable4 ,the        
testimony of ,malalas that ,ignatius    
suffered at ,antioch in ,december1 #aae1
  in the presence of ,trajan1 may be    
quite as good as that of ,chrysostom and
  the ,syriac monthly calendar on which 
,zahn relies so confidently4 ,the fact  
of the priority of the last two to      
,malalas is of little weight as         
evidence4 ,the main point is the        
locality in which ,ignatius suffered2   
which ,malalas1 himself a native of     
,antioch and a historian1 ought to have 

known better than ,chrysostom1 because  
he copied preceding historians4    ,it  
is necessary to be precise on this      
subject because some speak of the       
church as though it were contemporary   
with the apostles themselves1 or at     
least with their immediate disciples2   
and proceed to argue that  dissensions  
arose soon after 8within the church0    
rendering an appeal to  the written word
 necessary4 ,when the authority of      
traditional teaching  gave way to that  
of a written rule1 a change came over   
the condition of  the church4 ,such a   
view tends to mislead4 ,there were      
dissensions among  the earliest         
,christians4 ,the apostles themselves   
were by no means  unanimous4 ,important 
differences of belief divided the       
,jewish and ,gentile  ,christians from  
the beginning4 ,the types of ,christian 
truth existing from  the first gradually
 coalesced about the middle of the      
second century2 when  heretics1         
especially the ,gnostics1 appeared so   

formidable that a catholic  church was  
developed4 ,along with this process1 and
 as an important element  in it1 the    
writings of apostles and apostolic men  
were uncritically taken  from tradition 
and elevated to the rank of divine      
documents4 ,it was not  the rise of new 
dissensions 8within the church0 which   
led to the first  formation of a        
,christian canon2 rather did the new    
idea of 8a catholic  church0 require a  
standard of appeal in apostolic         
writings1 which were now  invested with 
an authority that did not belong to them
 from the beginning4    ,origen was the 
first who took a somewhat scientific    
view of the relative  value belonging to
 the different parts of the biblical    
collection4 ,his  examination of the    
canon was critical4 ,before him the     
leading books had  been regarded as     
divine and sacred1 the source of        
doctrinal and historic  truth4 ,from    
this stand-point he did not depart4     
,with him ecclesiastical  tradition was 

a prevailing principle in the           
recognition of books belonging  of right
 to the ,new ,testament collection4 ,he 
was also guided by the  inspiration of  
the authors2 a criterion arbitrary in   
its application1 as  his own statements 
show4 ,in his time1 however1 the        
collection was being  gradually         
enlarged2 his third class4 i4e41 the    
mixed1 approaching  reception into the  
first4 ,but amid all the fluctuations of
 opinion to  which certain portions of  
the ,new ,testament were subject1 and   
the  unscientific procedure both of     
fathers and churches in the matter1     
though  councils had not met to discuss 
it1 and vague tradition had strengthened
  with time1 a certain spiritual        
consciousness manifested itself         
throughout  the ,east and ,west in the  
matter of the canon4 ,tolerable         
unanimity ensued4  ,the result was a    
remarkable one1 and calls for our       
gratitude1  notwithstanding its defects4
 ,though the development was pervaded by

 no  critical or definite principle1 it 
ended in a canon which has maintained   
its validity for centuries4    ,it is   
sometimes said that the history of the  
canon should be sought from  definite   
catalogues1 not from isolated           
quotations4 ,the latter are supposed  to
 be of slight value1 the former to be   
the result of deliberate judgment4      
,this remark is more specious than      
solid4 ,in relation to the ,old         
,testament1  the catalogues given by the
 fathers1 as by ,melito and ,origen1    
rest solely  on the tradition of the    
,jews2 apart from which they have no    
independent  authority4 ,as none except 
,jerome and ,origen knew ,hebrew1 their 
lists of  the ,old ,testament books are 
simply a reflection of what they learned
 from  others4 ,if they deviate in      
practice from their masters by quoting  
as  ,scripture other than the canonical 
books1 they show their judgment         
over-riding an external theory4 ,the    
very men who give a list of the ,jewish 

books evince an inclination to the      
,christian and enlarged canon4 ,so      
,origen  says1 in his ,epistle to       
,africanus1 that 8the churches use      
,tobit40 ,in  explaining the prophet    
,isaiah1 ,jerome employs ,sirach vi4 #f1
 in proof of  his view1 remarking that  
the apocryphal work is in the ,christian
  catalogue4    ,in like manner         
,epiphanius1 in a passage against       
,aetius1 after referring to  the books  
of ,scripture1 adds1 8as well as the    
books of ,wisdom1 i4e41 the  ,wisdom of 
,solomon and of ,jesus1 son of ,sirach2 
finally1 all the other  books of        
,scripture40 ,in another place he gives 
the canon of the ,jews  historically1   
and excludes the apocryphal ,greek      
books2 here he includes  some of the    
latter4 ,we also learn from ,jerome that
 ,judith was in the  number of the books
 reckoned up by the ,nicene ,council4   
,thus the fathers  who give catalogues  
of the ,old ,testament show the         
existence of a ,jewish  and a ,christian

 canon in relation to the ,old          
,testament2 the latter wider  than the  
former2 their private opinion being more
 favorable to the one1  though the other
 was historically transmitted4 ,in      
relation to the ,new  ,testament1 the   
synods which drew up lists of the sacred
 books show the  view of some leading   
father like ,augustine1 along with what 
custom had  sanctioned4 ,in this        
department no member of the synod       
exercised his  critical faculty2 a      
number together would decide such       
questions summarily4  ,bishops proceed  
in the track of tradition or authority4 
,,chapter ,,vii4 ,,the ,,bible ,,canon  
,,from ,,the ,,fourth ,,century ,,to    
,,the ,,reformation4      ,it will now  
be convenient to treat of the two       
,testaments together1 i4e41  the canon  
of the ,bible4 ,the canons of both have 
been considered  separately to the end  
of the third century2 they may be       
henceforward  discussed together4 ,we   
proceed1 therefore1 to the ,bible-canon 

of the  fourth century1 first in the    
,greek ,church and then in the ,latin4  
,the  ,council of ,laodicea 7,a4,d4     
#cfc71 at which there was a predominant 
semiarian  influence1 forbad the reading
 of all non-canonical books4 ,the #eith 
canon  enacts1 that 8private psalms must
 not be read in the ,church1 nor        
uncanonized books2 but only the         
canonical ones of the ,new and ,old     
,testament40 ,the #fjth canon proceeds  
to give a list of such4 ,all the books  
of the ,old ,testament are enumerated1  
but in a peculiar order1 somewhat  like 
the ,septuagint one4 ,with ,jeremiah is 
specified ,baruch1 then the             
,lamentations and ,epistle4 ,the        
prophets are last2 first the minor1 next
  the major and ,daniel4 ,in the ,new   
,testament list are the usual seven     
,catholic epistles1 and fourteen of     
,paul1 including that to the ,hebrews4  
,the ,apocalypse alone is wanting4      
,credner has proved that this #fjth     
canon  is not original1 and of much     

later date47#bbg7    ,the ,apostolic    
,constitutions give a kind of canon like
 that in the #eith of  ,laodicea4 ,after
 speaking of the books of ,moses1       
,joshua1 ,judges1 ,kings1  ,chronicles1 
those belonging to the return from the  
captivity1 those of  ,job1 ,solomon1 the
 sixteen prophets1 and the ,psalms of   
,david2 our ,acts1 the  epistles of     
,paul1 and the four gospels are         
mentioned4 ,it is remarkable  that the  
,catholic epistles are not given4 ,that 
they are indicated under  ,acts is      
altogether improbable4 ,the ,antiochian 
,church of that time doubted  or denied 
the apostolicity of these letters1 as is
 seen from ,theodore1  ,cosmas1 and     
others4 ,hence1 their absence from these
 ,constitutions1 which  are a collection
 belonging to different times2 the      
oldest portion not  earlier perhaps than
 the third century47#bbh7    ,cyril of  
,jerusalem1 who took part in the        
,council of ,laodicea17#bbi7 gives a    
list 8of the divine ,scriptures40 ,the  

books of the ,old ,testament are        
twenty-two1 and the arrangement is      
nearly that which is in the ,english    
,bible4 ,with ,jeremiah is associated   
8,baruch and the ,epistle40 ,all the    
,new  ,testament books are given except 
the ,apocalypse4 ,the list agrees very  
nearly with that of ,eusebius1 by taking
 the latter's 8controverted0  writings  
into the class of the 8generally        
received407#bcj7 ,the writer  insists on
 the necessity of unity in the ,church  
upon the subject1 and  forbids the      
reading of writings not generally       
received4 ,none but these  are allowed4 
,yet he refers to ,baruch 7iii4 #cf-ch7 
as the prophet27#bca7  and in adducing  
the testimonies of the prophets for the 
existence of the  ,holy ,spirit1 the    
last he gives is ,daniel xiii4 #da1 #de4
 ,sirach iii4 #ba1 #bb  is cited27#bcb7 
,wisdom is quoted as ,solomon's 7xiii4  
#e727bcc7 the song of  the three        
children is used 7verse #ee77bcd7 with  
verses #bg1 #bi27bce7 and  ,daniel      

7xiii4 #bb1 #de7 is quoted47#bcf7    ,in
 ,athanasius's festal epistle 7#cfe     
,a4,d47 the archbishop undertakes 8to   
set forth in order1 the books that are  
canonical and handed down and  believed 
to be divine40 ,his list of the ,old    
,testament nearly agrees with  ,cyril's1
 except that ,esther is omitted and     
,ruth counted separately1 to  make out  
the twenty-two books4 ,he adds1 8there  
are other books not  canonical1 designed
 by the fathers to be read by those just
 joining us and  wishing to be          
instructed in the doctrine of piety20   
i4e41 the ,wisdom of  ,solomon and the  
,wisdom of ,sirach1 and ,esther and     
,judith and ,tobit1 and the  ,doctrine  
of the ,apostles so called1 and the     
,shepherd2 8those being  canonical1 and 
these being read1 let there be no       
mention of apocryphal  writings10 c4    
,the ,new ,testament list is the same as
 ,cyril's1 with the  addition of the    
,apocalypse47#bcg7 ,he quotes several of
 the apocryphal books  in the same way  

as he does the canonical4 ,thus he      
introduces ,judith 7viii4  #af7 with    
8the ,scripture said207#bch7 and ,baruch
 7iii4 #ab7 is cited as if it  were     
,scripture47#bci7 ,wisdom 7vi4 #bf7 has 
the epithet ,scripture applied to       
it47#bdj7 ,sirach 7xv4 #i7 is introduced
 with 8what is said by the ,holy        
,spirit407#bda7 ,baruch 7iv4 #bj1 #bb7  
and ,daniel 7xiii4 #db7 are referred to 
in  the same way as ,isaiah47#bdb7      
,tobit 7ii4 #g7 has 8it is written0     
prefixed to  it47#bdc7 ,canonical and   
apocryphal are mentioned together2 and  
similar  language applied to them4      
,eusebius of ,caesarea cites ,wisdom as 
a divine oracle27#bdd7 and after        
adducing several passages from          
,proverbs1 subjoining to them others    
from  the same book with the            
introductory formula 8these are also    
said to be the  same writers10 he       
concludes with 8such is the             
scripture407#bde7 ,sirach is  cited as  
,solomon's along with various passages  

from ,proverbs47#bdf7 ,after  quoting   
,baruch1 he says1 8there is no need to  
appeal to the divine voices1  which     
clearly confirm our proposition407#bdg7 
,the additions to ,daniel are  also     
treated as ,scripture47#bdh7    ,basil  
of ,caesarea7#bdi7 had a canon agreeing 
with that of ,athanasius4 ,along  with  
the usual books reckoned as belonging to
 the canon1 he used the  apocryphal     
productions of the ,old ,testament4     
,thus the book of ,wisdom 7i4  #d77bej7 
is quoted by him4 ,so are ,sirach 7xx4  
#b727bea7 ,baruch1 7iii4  #cf77beb7     
called ,jeremiah's2 ,judith 7ix4        
#d727bec7 and ,daniel 7xiii4  #ej747bed7
    ,gregory of ,nazianzus7#bee7 puts   
his list into a poetical form4 ,in the  
,old  ,testament it agrees with         
,athanasius's exactly1 except that he   
mentions  none but the canonical books4 
,like ,athanasius1 he omits ,esther4 ,in
 the ,new  ,testament he deviates from  
,athanasius1 by leaving out the         
,apocalypse1  which he puts among the   

spurious47#bef7 ,he does not ignore the 
apocryphal  books of the ,old           
,testament1 but quotes ,daniel xiii4    
#e47beg7    ,amphilochius of            
,iconium7#beh7 gives a metrical         
catalogue of the ,biblical  books4 ,the 
canon of the ,old ,testament is the     
usual one1 except that he  says of      
,esther at the end1 8some judge that    
,esther should be added to the          
foregoing40 ,he notices none of the     
apocryphal books4 ,his ,new ,testament  
canon agrees with the present1 only he  
excludes the ,apocalypse as  spurious2  
which is given as the judgment of the   
majority4 ,he alludes to  the doubts    
that existed as to the epistle to the   
,hebrews1 but regards it  as ,pauline2  
and to the number of the catholic       
epistles 7seven or  three747#bei7 ,the  
concluding words show that no list was  
universally  received at that time4     
,epiphanius7#bfj7 follows ,athanasius in
 his canon4 ,as to the number of the    
,old ,testament books1 he hesitates     

between twenty-two and twenty-seven2 but
  the contents are the same4 ,at the end
 of the twenty-seven books of the ,new  
,testament1 ,wisdom and ,sirach are     
mentioned as 8divine writings20         
elsewhere  they are characterized as    
8doubtful407#bfa7 ,his practice shows   
his  sentiments clearly enough1 when    
,sirach 7vii4 #a7 is introduced with    
8the  ,scripture0 testifies7#bfb72 vii4 
#i is elsewhere quoted7#bfc72 ,wisdom   
7i4 #d7  is cited as ,solomon's27#bfd7  
,baruch 7iii4 #cf7 is introduced with1  
8as the  ,scripture says107#bfe7 and    
,daniel 7xiii4 #db7 is quoted with1 8as 
it is  written407#bff7 ,he mentions the 
fact that the epistles of ,clement of   
,rome  were read in the churches47#bfg7 
,didymus of ,alexandria7#bfh7 speaks    
against #b ,peter that it is not in the 
canons47#bfi7    ,chrysostom7#bgj7 does 
not speak of the canon2 but in the ,new 
,testament he  never quotes the last    
four catholic epistles or the           
,apocalypse4 ,all the  other parts he   

uses throughout his numerous            
works17#bga7 including the  ,apocrypha4 
,thus he introduces ,wisdom 7xvi4 #bh7  
with 8,scripture says407#bgb7  ,he      
quotes ,baruch 7iii4 #cf1 #ch727bgc7 and
 ,sirach 7iv4 #a4747bgd7    ,didymus of 
,alexandria7#bge7 cites ,baruch 7iii4   
#ce7 as ,jeremiah17#bgf7 and  treats it 
like the ,psalms47#bgg7 ,daniel 7xiii4  
#de7 is also quoted47#bgh7 ,he  says of 
,peter's ,second ,epistle that it is not
 in the canon4    ,theodore of          
,mopsuestia7#bgi7 was much freer than   
his contemporaries in  dealing with the 
books of ,scripture4 ,it seems that he  
rejected ,job1  ,canticles1 ,chronicles1
 and the ,psalm-inscriptions2 in the    
,new ,testament  the epistle of ,james1 
and others of the catholic ones4 ,but   
,leontius's  account of his opinions    
cannot be adopted without               
suspicion47#bhj7    ,the canon of ,cyril
 of ,alexandria7#bha7 does not differ   
from ,athanasius's4  ,like other writers
 of the ,greek ,church in his day he    

uses along with the  canonical the      
apocryphal books of the ,old ,testament4
 ,he quotes #a 7iii47  ,esdras 7iv4 #cf7
 with 8inspired ,scripture says407#bhb7 
,wisdom 7vii4 #f7 is  introduced with1  
8according to that which is             
written407#bhc7 ,in another  place it   
has the prefix 8for it is written0 7i4  
#g727bhd7 and is treated as  ,scripture 
7ii4 #ab747bhe7 ,sirach 7i4 #a7 is      
cited47#bhf7 ,baruch also 7iii4  #ce-cg7
 is introduced with1 8another of the    
holy prophets said407#bhg7    ,the      
catalogues of the ,old ,testament       
contained in the manuscripts ,b1 ,c1 and
   need not be given1 as they are merely
 codices of the ,septuagint1 and  have  
or had the books canonical and          
apocryphal belonging to that version4   
,the list of the ,new ,testament books  
in ,b is like that of ,athanasius4      
,imperfect at the end1 the ,,ms4 must   
have had at first the ,epistles to      
,timothy1 ,titus1 ,philemon1 and the    
,apocalypse4 ,c 7cod4 ,ephraemi         

rescriptus7  has fragments of the ,new  
,testaments1 which show that it had     
originally all  the present books in the
 same order as ,athanasius's4  or the   
,sinaitic  manuscript has the ,epistle  
of ,barnabas and the ,shepherd of       
,hermas1 in  addition to the ,new       
,testament4    ,the progress made by the
 ,greek ,church of the fourth and former
 part of the  fifth century1 in its     
conception of the canon seems to be1    
that the idea  of ecclesiastical        
settlement1 or public1 legal1 definitive
 establishment  was attached to the     
original one4 ,a writing was considered 
canonical when  a well-attested         
tradition put it among those composed by
 inspired men1  apostles or others2 and 
it had on that account a determining    
authority in  matters of faith4 ,books  
which served as a rule of faith and were
  definitively set forth by the ,church 
as divinely authoritative1 were now     
termed canonical4 ,the canon consisted  
of writings settled or determined  by   

ecclesiastical law47#bhh7 ,such was the 
idea added to the original  acceptation 
of canon4 ,to canonical were opposed    
apocryphal writings1  i4e41 heretical   
and fabricated ones2 while an           
intermediate class  consisted of those  
read in the churches1 which were useful1
 but not  decisive in matters of belief4
 ,another advance in the matter of the  
canon  at this period was the general   
adoption of the ,hebrew canon1 with a   
relegation of the ,greek additions in   
the ,septuagint to the class publicly   
read47#bhi7 ,yet doubts about the       
reception of ,esther into the number of 
the canonical books were still          
entertained1 though it was one of the   
,jewish canon2 doubtless on account of  
its want of harmony with ,christian     
consciousness4 ,and the catholic        
epistles which had been doubted before1 
,jude1 ,james1 ,second ,peter1 were now 
generally received4 ,but there was a    
division of opinion about the           
,apocalypse4    ,we come to the period  

of the ,latin1 corresponding to that of 
the ,greek  ,church which has just been 
noticed4 ,augustine7#bij7 gave great    
attention to  the subject1 laboring to  
establish a complete canon1 the         
necessity of  which was generally felt4 
,according to him the ,scriptures which 
were  received and acknowledged by all  
the churches of the day should be       
canonical4 ,of those not universally    
adopted1 such as are received by the    
majority and the weightier of the       
churches should be preferred to those   
received by the fewer and less important
 churches4 ,in his enumeration of  the  
forty-four books of the ,old ,testament1
 he gives1 after ,chronicles1  other    
histories 8which are neither connected  
with the order0 specified in  the       
preceding context1 8nor with one        
another10 i4e41 ,job1 ,tobit1 ,esther1  
,judith1 the two books of the           
,maccabees1 and ,esdras4 ,wisdom and    
,ecclesiasticus1 he thinks1 should be   
numbered among the prophets1 as         

deserving of authority and having a     
certain likeness to ,solomon's          
writings47#bia7 ,he says of the         
,maccabees that this 8,scripture has    
been  received by the ,church not       
uselessly1 if it be read or heard       
soberly407#bib7 ,the famous passage in  
the treatise on ,christian doctrine1    
where he enumerates the whole canon1 is 
qualified by no other2 for though  he   
knew the distinction between the        
canonical books of the ,palestinian     
,jews and the so-called apocryphal ones1
 as well as the fact of some ,new       
,testament writings not being received  
universally1 he thought                 
church-reception a sufficient warrant   
for canonical authority4 ,hence1 he     
considered the books of the ,maccabees  
canonical1 because so received by  the  
,church2 while he says of ,wisdom and   
,sirach that they merited  authoritative
 reception and numbering among the      
prophetic  ,scriptures47#bic7 ,of the   
former in particular he speaks strongly 

in one  place1 asserting that it is     
worthy to be venerated by all           
,christians as of  divine               
authority47#bid7 ,but he afterwards     
retracted his opinion of the  canonical 
authority of ,sirach47#bie7 ,he raises1 
not lowers1 the authority  of the       
so-called apocryphal books which he     
mentions4 ,he enumerates all the  ,new  
,testament books1 specifying the        
,pauline epistles as fourteen1 and so   
reckoning that to the ,hebrews as the   
apostle's2 but he speaks of it          
elsewhere as an epistle about which some
 were uncertain1 professing that  he was
 influenced to admit it as canonical by 
the authority of the  ,oriental         
churches47#bif7 ,in various places he   
speaks hesitatingly about its  ,pauline 
authorship4    ,in #cic1 the ,african   
bishops held a council at ,hippo where  
the canon was  discussed4 ,the list of  
the canonical ,scripture given includes1
 besides the  ,palestinian one1 ,wisdom1
 ,ecclesiasticus1 ,tobit1 ,judith1 and  

the two books  of ,maccabees4 ,the ,new 
,testament canon seems to have agreed   
exactly with  our present one47#big7    
,the ,council of ,carthage 7#cig7       
repeated the statute  of its            
predecessor1 enumerating the same books 
of the ,bible as  canonical47#bih7      
,augustine was the animating spirit of  
both councils1 so  that they may be     
taken as expressing his views on the    
subject4    ,jerome7#bii7 gives a list  
of the twenty-two canonical books of the
 ,old  ,testament1 the same as that of  
the ,palestinian ,jews1 remarking that  
some  put ,ruth and ,lamentations among 
the ,hagiographa1 so making twenty-four 
books4 ,all besides should be put among 
the ,apocrypha4 ,wisdom1 ,sirach1       
,judith1 ,tobit1 the ,shepherd are not  
in the canon4 ,the two books of         
,maccabees he regarded in the same      
light47#cjj7 ,but though ,jerome's words
  imply the apocryphal position of these
 extra-canonical books1 he allows of    
their being read in public for the      

edification of the people1 not to       
confirm the authority of doctrines2     
i4e41 they belong to 8the               
ecclesiastical books0 of ,athanasius4   
,his idea of 8apocryphal0 is wider and  
milder than that of some others in the  
,latin ,church4 ,it has been            
conjectured by ,welte17#cja7 that the   
conclusions of the ,african councils in 
#cic and #cig influenced ,jerome's views
 of the canon1 so that his later        
writings allude to the apocryphal works 
in a more favorable manner than  that of
 the ,prologus galeatus or the preface  
to ,solomon's books4 ,one  thing is     
clear1 that he quotes different passages
 from the ,apocrypha along  with others 
from the ,hebrew canon4 ,in his letter  
to ,eustochius1 ,sirach  iii4 #cc       
7,latin7 comes between citations from   
,matthew and ,luke2 and is  introduced  
by which is written1 in a letter to     
,pammachius2 and xxii4 #f  has divine   
,scripture applied to it47#cjb7 ,ruth1  
,esther1 and ,judith are  spoken of as  

holy volumes4 ,the practice of ,jerome  
differed from his  theory2 or rather he 
became less positive1 and altered his   
views somewhat  with the progress of    
time and knowledge4 ,as to the ,new     
,testament1 he gives  a catalogue of all
 that now belongs to it1 remarking of   
the epistle to the  ,hebrews and of the 
,apocalypse that he adopts both on the  
authority of  ancient writers1 not of   
present custom4 ,his opinion about them 
was not  decided47#cjc7 ,in another work
 he gives the ,epistle of ,barnabas at  
the end  of the canonical list4 ,he also
 states the doubts of many respecting   
the  ,epistle to ,philemon1 and about #b
 ,peter1 ,jude1 #b and #c ,john4        
,according to  him the first ,epistle of
 ,clement of ,rome was publicly read in 
some  churches47#cjd7    ,hilary of     
,poitiers7#cje7 seems to have followed  
,origen's catalogue4 ,he  gives         
twenty-two books1 specifying 8the       
epistle0 of ,jeremiah2 and remarks  that
 some added ,tobit and ,judith1 making  

twenty-four1 after the letters of  the  
,greek alphabet4 ,he cites ,wisdom and  
,sirach as 8prophets407#cjf7 ,in the    
,new ,testament he never quotes ,james1 
,jude1 #b and #c ,john1 nor #b ,peter4  
#b  ,maccabees 7vii4 #bh7 is introduced 
with 8according to the prophet207#cjg7  
,sirach 7xxxi4 #a7 is introduced with   
8nor do they hear the ,lord             
saying207#cjh7 ,wisdom is cited as      
,solomon's 7viii4 #b727cji7 ,judith     
7xvi4 #c7  is cited27#caj7 so is ,baruch
 7iii4 #cf727caa7 and ,daniel xiii4     
#db47cab7    ,optatus of ,mela7#cac7 has
 the usual canonical books1 but omits   
the epistle  to the ,hebrews4 ,he uses  
the apocrypha without scruple1          
introducing ,sirach  7iii4 #cj7 with 8it
 is written207#cad7 and ,wisdom 7i4 #ac7
 with 8it is  written in                
,solomon407#cae7    ,lucifer of         
,cagliari7#caf7 uses the apocrypha      
equally with the canonical  books4 ,thus
 #a ,maccabees 7i4 #dc7 is quoted as    
8holy ,scripture407#cag7 ,so is  #b     

,maccab4 7vi4 #a747cah7 ,judith 7ix4 #b7
 is cited17#cai7 as are also ,wisdom    
7xvii4 #a1 #b727cbj7 ,tobit 7iv4        
#f727cba7 and ,daniel 7xiii4 #bj747cbb7 
,ambrose of ,milan7#cbc7 had the same   
canon as most of the ,westerns in his   
time4 ,with some others1 he considered  
the ,epistle to the ,hebrews to have    
been written by ,st4 ,paul4 ,in the ,old
 ,testament he used the apocryphal      
books pretty freely4 ,wisdom 7vii4 #bb7 
is cited as authoritative               
,scripture47#cbd7 ,sirach 7xi4 #cj7 is  
also cited as ,scripture47#cbe7 ,baruch 
7iv4 #ai7 is quoted27#cbf7 ,daniel      
7xiii4 #dd1 #de7 is treated as          
,scripture and  prophetic27#cbg7 and    
,tobit is expounded like any other book 
of  ,scripture47#cbh7    ,rufinus7#cbi7 
enumerates the books of the ,old and    
,new ,testaments which 8are  believed to
 be inspired by the ,holy ,spirit       
itself1 according to the  tradition of  
our ancestors1 and have been handed down
 by the ,churches of  ,christ40 ,all the

 books of the ,hebrew canon and of the  
,new ,testament are  specified4 ,after  
the list he says1 8these are they which 
the fathers  included in the canon1 by  
which they wished to establish the      
assertion of  our faith40 ,he adds that 
there are other books not canonical1 but
  ecclesiastical--the ,wisdom of        
,solomon1 ,sirach1 ,tobit1 ,judith1 and 
the  books of the ,maccabees4 ,besides  
the usual ,new ,testament works1 he     
speaks  of the ,shepherd of ,hermas1 and
 the 8,judgment of ,peter0 as read in   
the  churches1 but not as authoritative 
in matters of faith47#ccj7              
,philastrius7#cca7 of ,brescia gives    
some account of the ,scriptures and     
their  contents in his time4 ,the       
canonical ,scriptures1 which alone      
should be read  in the ,catholic        
,church1 are said to be the law and the 
prophets1 the  gospels1 ,acts1 thirteen 
epistles of ,paul1 and seven others1    
i4e41 two of  ,peter1 three of ,john1   
one of ,jude1 and one of ,james4 ,of the

 ,old ,testament  apocrypha he asserts  
that they ought to be read for the sake 
of morals by  the perfect1 but not by   
all4 ,he speaks of heretics who reject  
,john's  gospel and the ,apocalypse4    
,respecting the ,epistle to the ,hebrews
 which is  omitted in his canon1 he     
speaks at large1 but not very decidedly1
  affirming that some attributed its    
authorship to ,barnabas1 or ,clement of 
,rome1 or ,luke4 8,they wish to read the
 writings of the blessed apostle1 and   
not rightly perceiving some things in   
the epistle1 it is not therefore  read  
by them in the church4 ,though read by  
some1 it is not read to the  people in  
the church2 nothing but ,paul's thirteen
 epistles1 and that to  the ,hebrews    
sometimes407#ccb7 ,the influence of the 
,east upon the ,west  appears in the    
statements of this father upon the      
subject4 ,he had several  canonical     
lists before him2 one at least from an  
,oriental-,arian source1  which explains
 some assertions1 particularly his      

omission of the  ,apocalypse4           
,innocent ,i4 of ,rome wrote to         
,exsuperius 7#dje ,a4,d471 bishop of    
,toulouse1  giving a list of the        
canonical books4 ,besides the ,hebrew   
canon1 he has  ,wisdom and ,sirach2     
,tobit1 ,judith1 the two ,maccabees4    
,the ,new ,testament  list is identical 
with the present4 ,he also refers to    
pseudepigraphical  writings which ought 
not only to be rejected but             
condemned47#ccc7    ,a canonical list   
appears in three different forms bearing
 the names of  ,damasus 7#cff-chd71     
,gelasius ,i4 7#dib-dif71 and ,hormisdas
 7#ead-ebc74  ,according to the first1  
the books of the ,old ,testament are    
arranged in  three orders4 ,in the first
 are the ,pentateuch1 ,joshua1 ,judges1 
,ruth1 four  ,kings1 two ,chronicles1   
,psalms1 ,proverbs1 ,ecclesiastes1      
,canticles1 ,wisdom1  and               
,ecclesiasticus2 in the second1 all the 
prophets1 including ,baruch2 in  the    
third1 ,job1 ,tobit1 ,judith1 ,esther1  

,esdras1 two ,maccabees4 ,the ,new      
,testament books are the four gospels1  
fourteen epistles of ,paul1 the         
,apocalypse1 and ,acts1 with seven      
,catholic epistles4    ,that which is   
called the ,decree of ,gelasius is      
almost identical with the  preceding4   
,it wants ,baruch and ,lamentations4 ,it
 has also two ,esdrases  instead of one4
 ,in the ,new ,testament the epistle to 
the ,hebrews is absent4    ,the         
,hormisdas-form has the ,lamentations of
 ,jeremiah3 and in the ,new  ,testament 
the ,epistle to the ,hebrews4    ,the   
,,mss4 of these lists present some      
diversity2 and ,credner supposes the    
,damasus-list a fiction4 ,but ,thiel has
 vindicated its authenticity4 ,it is    
possible that some interpolations may   
exist in the last two2 the first1  which
 is the shortest1 may well belong to the
 time of ,damasus47#ccd7    ,in #dai    
,a4,d4 another council at ,carthage1 at 
which ,augustine was present1  repeated 
the former list of books with a single  

alteration1 viz41 fourteen  epistles of 
,paul 7instead of thirteen747#cce7      
,the preceding notices and catalogues   
show a general desire in the ,western   
,church to settle the canon4 ,the two   
most influential men of the period  were
 ,augustine and ,jerome1 who did not    
entirely agree4 ,both were unfitted  for
 a critical examination of the topic4   
,the former was a gifted spiritual  man1
 lacking learning and independence4     
,tradition dominated all his ideas      
about the difficult or disputed books4  
,he did not enter upon the question     
scientifically1 on the basis of certain 
principles2 but was content to  take    
refuge in authority--the prevailing     
authority of leading churches4 ,his     
judgment was weak1 his sagacity         
moderate1 and his want of many-sidedness
  hindered a critical result4 ,jerome1  
again1 was learned but timid1 lacking   
the courage to face the question fairly 
or fundamentally2 and the  independence 
necessary to its right investigation4   

,belonging as he did to  both churches1 
he recommended the practice of the one  
to the other4 ,he1  too1 was chiefly    
influenced by tradition2 by ,jewish     
teachers in respect to  the ,old        
,testament1 and by general custom as to 
the ,new4 ,the question was  not        
susceptible of advancement under such   
manipulation2 nor could it be  settled  
on a legitimate basis4 ,compared with   
the eastern ,church1 the  western       
accepted a wider canon of the ,old      
,testament1 taking some books  into the 
class of the canonical which the former 
put among those to be  read4 ,in regard 
to the ,new ,testament1 all the         
,catholic epistles and  even the        
,apocalypse were received4 ,the ,african
 churches and councils  generally       
adopted this larger canon1 because the  
old ,latin version or  versions of the  
,bible current in ,africa were daughters
 of the ,septuagint4  ,if the ,latins   
apparently looked upon the ,greek as the
 original itself1 the  apocryphal books 

would soon get rank with the canonical4 
,yet the more  learned fathers1 ,jerome1
 ,rufinus and others1 favored the       
,hebrew canon in  distinguishing between
 canonical and ecclesiastical books4    
,the  influence of the ,eastern upon the
 ,western ,church is still visible1     
though  it could not extinguish the     
prevailing desire to include the        
disputed  books4 ,the ,greek view was to
 receive nothing which had not          
apparently a  good attestation of divine
 origin and apostolic authority2 the    
,latin was  to exclude nothing hallowed 
by descent and proved by custom4 ,the   
former  ,church looked more to the      
sources of doctrine2 the latter to those
 of  edification4 ,the one desired to   
contract those sources1 so as not to be 
too rich2 the other to enlarge the      
springs of edification1 not to be too   
poor4 ,neither had the proper resources 
for the work1 nor a right  perception of
 the way in which it should be set      
about2 and therefore they  were not     

fortunate in their conclusions1         
differing as they did in regard  to     
points which affect the foundation of a 
satisfactory solution4                  
,notwithstanding the numerous endeavors 
both in the ,east and ,west to settle   
the canon during the #dth and #eth      
centuries1 it was not finally closed4   
,the  doubts of individuals were still  
expressed2 and succeeding ages testified
  to the want of universal agreement    
respecting several books4 ,the question1
  however1 was practically determined4  
,no material change occurred again  in  
the absolute rejection or admission of  
books4 ,with some fluctuations1  the    
canon remained very much as it was in   
the #dth and #eth centuries4  ,tradition
 shaped and established its character4  
,general usage gave it a  permanency    
which it was not easy to disturb4 ,no   
definite principles guided  the course  
of its formation1 or fixed its present  
state4 ,it was dominated  first and last
 by circumstances and ideas which       

philosophy did not  actuate4 ,its       
history is mainly objective4 ,uncritical
 at its commencement1  it was equally so
 in the two centuries which have just   
been considered4    ,the history of the 
canon in the ,syrian church cannot be   
traced with much  exactness4 ,the       
,peshito version had only the ,hebrew   
canonical books at  first2 most of the  
apocryphal were rendered from the ,greek
 and added in  the ,nestorian recension4
 ,in the ,new ,testament it wanted four 
of the  catholic epistles and the       
,apocalypse4 ,ephrem 7,a4,d4 #cgh7 uses 
all the books  in our canon1 the        
apocryphal as well as the canonical4    
,the former are  cited by him in the    
same way as the latter4 ,sirach ii4 #a  
is quoted with  as the ,scripture       
says27#ccf7 and ,wisdom iv4 #g with it  
is written47#ccg7  ,daniel xiii4 #i1    
belonging to the ,greek additions1 is   
also cited with as  it is written47#cch7
 ,it should be observed that the        
quotations given are  all from ,ephrem's

 ,greek1 not ,syriac1 works2 and that   
suspicions have been  raised about the  
former being tampered with4 ,the ,syrian
 version of the ,new  ,testament made by
 ,polycarp at the request of ,philoxenus
 of ,mabug1 had the  four catholic      
epistles wanting in the ,peshito4 ,it   
had also the two  epistles of ,clement  
to the ,corinthians1 if we may judge by 
the ,harclean  recension1 ,a4,d4 #faf2  
for a ,,ms4 in the ,cambridge           
,university ,library  contains those    
epistles immediately after the ,catholic
 ones1 and before  those of ,st4 ,paul2 
so that they are put on an equality with
 the canonical  writings4 ,the          
,apocalypse is wanting4 ,junilius1      
7though an ,african bishop  about #eej  
,a4,d471 says that he got his knowledge 
from a ,persian of the name  of ,paulus 
who received his education in the school
 of ,nisibis4 ,he may1  therefore1 be   
considered a witness of the opinions of 
the ,syrian church at  the beginning of 
the #fth century4 ,dividing the biblical

 books into those  of perfect1 those of 
intermediate1 and those of no authority1
 he  makes the first the canonical2 the 
second1 those added to them by many     
7plures72 the third1 all the rest4 ,in  
the first list he puts  ,ecclesiasticus4
 ,among the second he puts #a and #b    
,chronicles1 ,job1 ,ezra and  ,nehemiah1
 ,judith1 ,esther1 #a and #b ,maccabees2
 and in the ,new ,testament1  ,james1 #b
 ,peter1 ,jude1 #b and #c ,john4 ,he    
also says that the ,apocalypse of  ,john
 is much doubted by the ,orientals4 ,in 
the third list i4e41 books of  no       
authority added by some 7quidam7 to the 
canonical1 are put ,wisdom and          
,canticles47#cci7 ,the catalogue is     
confused1 and erroneous at least in one 
respect1 that ,jerome is referred to1 as
 sanctioning the division given of  the 
,old ,testament books2 for neither he   
nor the ,jews agree with it4    ,the    
canon of the ,abyssinian church seems to
 have had at first all the  books in the
 ,septuagint1 canonical and apocryphal  

together1 little  distinction being made
 between them4 ,along with the contents 
of the ,greek  ,bible there were ,enoch1
 #d ,esdras1 the ,ascension of ,isaiah1 
the ,jubilees1  ,asseneth1 c4 ,that of  
the ,new ,testament agrees with the     
present ,greek one4  ,at a later period 
in the ,arabic age a list was made and  
constituted the  legal one for the use  
of the church1 having been derived from 
the ,jacobite  canons of the apostles4  
,this gives1 in the ,old ,testament1 the
 ,pentateuch1  ,joshua1 ,judges1 ,ruth1 
,judith1 ,kings1 ,chronicles1 ,ezra and 
,nehemiah1  ,esther1 ,tobit1 two books  
of ,maccabees1 ,job1 ,psalms1 five books
 of ,solomon1  minor and greater        
prophets4 ,the ,wisdom of ,sirach 7for  
teaching children7  and the book of     
,joseph ben ,gorion1 i4e41 that of the  
,maccabees1 are  external4 ,the ,new    
,testament has four gospels1 ,acts1     
seven apostolic  epistles1 fourteen of  
,paul1 and the ,revelation of ,john4    
,later catalogues  vary much1 and are   

often enlarged with the book of ,enoch1 
#d ,esdras1 the  ,apocalypse of ,isaiah1
 c4 ,the canon of the ,ethiopic church  
was  fluctuating47#cdj7    ,the canon of
 the ,armenians had at first the        
,palestinian books of the ,old          
,testament1 twenty-two in number1 and   
the usual ,new ,testament ones1 except  
the ,apocalypse4 ,it was made from the  
,syriac in the fifth century by ,sahak  
and ,mesrob4 ,the deutero-canonical     
books and additions were appended1 after
  the disciples of those two men who had
 been sent by them into different       
places1 brought back authentic copies of
 the ,greek ,bible from the  patriarch  
,maximian1 by which the version already 
made was interpolated and  corrected2 as
 it was subsequently corrected by others
 despatched to  ,alexandria and ,athens1
 who1 however1 did not return till their
 teachers  were dead4 ,the ,,mss4 of    
this version were afterwards            
interpolated from the  ,vulgate2 ,oskan 
himself translating for his edition     

7which was the first  printed one1      
,a4,d4 #afff71 ,sirach1 #d ,esdras and  
the ,epistle of ,jeremiah from  the     
,latin4 ,the book of ,revelation does   
not seem to have been translated  till  
the eighth century4 ,zohrab's critical  
edition 7#ahje7 has ,judith1  ,tobit1   
the three books of ,maccabees1 ,wisdom1 
and the ,epistle of ,baruch  among the  
canonical books2 and in an appendix1 the
 fourth book of ,esdras1  the prayer of 
,manasseh1 the ,epistle of the          
,corinthians to ,paul and his  answer1  
the ,rest 7end7 of the apostle and      
evangelist ,john1 the prayer of         
,euthalius4 ,like the edition of ,oskan1
 this has all the deutero-canonical     
books1 which were derived from the      
,septuagint1 and incorporated by the    
first translators with their original   
version4 ,another edition published  at 
,st4 ,petersburgh 7#ahag71 for the use  
of the ,jacobite ,church1 has the       
prayer of ,manasses and #d ,esdras after
 the ,apocalypse4    ,the ,georgian     

version consisted of the books and      
additions in the ,greek  translation    
from which it was made4 ,the ,new       
,testament has the canonical  books in  
the usual order4 ,jesus ,sirach and two 
books of the ,maccabees 7#b;d  and #c;d7
 were not in the ,georgian ,,ms4 used by
 ,prince ,arcil for the edition  of     
#agdc1 but were rendered out of the     
,russian4 ,the ,moscow ,bible printed   
under the direction and at the cost of  
,arcil1 ,bacchar and ,wakuset1 is the   
authorized edition of the ,georgian     
,christians4    ,the ,bible canon of the
 ,eastern church in the middle ages     
shows no real  advance4 ,endeavors were 
made to remove the uncertainty arising  
from the  existence of numerous lists2  
but former decisions and decrees of     
councils  were repeated instead of a    
new1 independent canon4 ,here belongs   
the  catalogue in the ,alexandrian      
,,ms41 of the fifth century1 which is   
peculiar4  ,after the prophets come     
,esther1 ,tobit1 ,judith1 ,ezra and     

,nehemiah1 #d  ,maccabees1 ,psalms1     
,job1 ,proverbs1 ,ecclesiastes1         
,canticles1 the  all-virtuous ,wisdom1  
the ,wisdom of ,jesus of ,sirach4 ,in   
the ,new ,testament1  the ,apocalypse is
 followed by two epistles of ,clement4  
,the list was  probably made in ,egypt4 
,that of ,anastasius ,sinaita17#cda7    
patriarch of  ,antioch1 is similar to   
,nicephorus's ,stichometry1 which we    
shall mention  afterwards4 ,baruch is   
among the canonical books2 ,esther among
 the  antilegomena4 ,the ,apocalypse is 
unnoticed4 ,the #heth of the ,apostolic 
canons gives a list of the ,old and ,new
 ,testament books1 in which the usual   
canonical ones of the former are        
supplemented by ,judith and #c          
,maccabees2  those of the latter by the 
two epistles of ,clement1 with the      
,apostolic  constitutions4 ,this        
catalogue cannot be put earlier than the
 fifth or  sixth century1 and is subject
 to the suspicion of having been        
interpolated4 ,we have also             

,nicephorus's ,stichometry              
7#hjf-hae277cdb7 of  which we may remark
 that ,baruch is among the canonical    
books of the ,old  ,testament2 while the
 ,revelation is put with the ,apocalypse
 of ,peter1 the  epistle of ,barnabas   
and the ,gospel according to the        
,hebrews1 among the  antilegomena of the
 ,new ,testament4 ,it is also surprising
 that the  ,apocalypse of ,peter and the
 ,gospel according to the ,hebrews are  
not among  the ,apocrypha1 where        
,clement's epistles with the productions
 of ,ignatius1  ,polycarp1 and ,hermas  
appear4 ,the list is probably older than
 that of the  ,antioch patriarch        
,anastasius ,sinaita4 ,cosmas           
,indicopleustes 7#ece7 never  mentions  
the seven ,catholic epistles of the ,new
 ,testament or the  ,apocalypse4 ,the   
,trullan council 7,a4,d4 #fib7 adopts   
the eighty-five  ,apostolic canons1     
rejecting1 however1 the ,apostolic      
,constitutions4  ,photius1 patriarch of 
,constantinople17#cdc7 follows the      

eighty-fifth  ,apostolical canon of the 
,trullan ,council47#cdd7 ,but in his    
,bibliotheca7#cde7  he speaks           
differently regarding the epistles of   
,clement1 and does not  treat them as   
canonical4 ,though the first was thought
 worthy to be read in  public1 the      
second was rejected as spurious2 and his
 own opinion was not  altogether        
favorable to them4 ,john of             
,damascus27#cdf7 the second ,nicene     
council 7#ghg72 the ,synopsis divin     
,scriptur ,vet4 et ,novi ,test4 7about  
#ajjj72 ,zonaras 7about #aabj72 ,alexius
 ,aristenus 7about #aafj72 and          
,nicephorus ,callistus 7#accj71 call for
 no remark4    ,in the ,western church  
of the ,middle ,ages1 diversity of      
opinion respecting  certain books       
continued4 ,though the views of         
,augustine were generally  followed1 the
 stricter ones of ,jerome found many    
adherents4 ,the canon was  fluctuating1 
and the practice of the churches in     
regard to it somewhat  lax4 ,here belong

 ,cassiodorus 7about #eej72 the list in 
the ,codex ,amiatinus  7about #eej72    
,isidore of ,seville7#cdg7 who1 after   
enumerating three classes  of ,old      
,testament books gives a fourth not in  
the ,hebrew canon4 ,here he  specifies  
,wisdom1 ,ecclesiasticus1 ,tobit1       
,judith1 #a and #b ,maccabees1 saying   
that the church of ,christ puts them    
among the divine books1 honors and      
highly esteems them47#cdh7 ,there are   
also the fourth council of ,toledo      
7#fcb72 ,gregory the ,great7#cdi7       
,notker ,labeo27#cej7 ,ivo 7about       
#ajib72  ,bede27#cea7 ,alcuin27#ceb7    
,rabanus ,maurus27#cec7 ,hugo de ,st    
,victor27#ced7 ,peter  of ,clugny27#cee7
 ,john of ,salisbury27#cef7 ,thomas     
,aquinas27#ceg7 ,hugo de ,st            
,cher27#ceh7 ,wycliffe27#cei7 ,nicolaus 
of ,lyra17#cfj7 c41 c4 ,several of      
these1 as ,hugo de ,st ,victor1 ,john of
 ,salisbury1 ,hugo de ,st ,cher1 and    
,nicolaus of ,lyra1 followed ,jerome in 
separating the canonical and  apocryphal

 books of the ,old ,testament47#cfa7    
,the ,reformers generally returned to   
the ,hebrew canon1 dividing off the     
additional books of the ,septuagint or  
those attached to the ,vulgate4 ,these  
they called apocryphal1 after ,jerome's 
example4 ,though considered of no       
authority in matters of doctrine1 they  
were pronounced useful and  edifying4   
,the principal reason that weighed with 
the ,reformers was1 that  ,christ and   
the apostles testified to none of the   
,septuagint additions4    ,besides the  
canonical books of the ,old ,testament1 
,luther translated  ,judith1 ,wisdom1   
,tobit1 ,sirach1 ,baruch1 #a and #b     
,maccabees1 the ,greek  additions to    
,esther and ,daniel1 with the ,prayer of
 ,manasseh4 ,his judgment  respecting   
several of these is expressed in the    
prefaces to them4 ,with  regard to #a   
,maccabees1 he thinks it almost equal to
 the other books of  ,holy ,scripture1  
and not unworthy to be reckoned among   
them4 ,of ,wisdom1 he  says1 he was long

 in doubt whether it should be numbered 
among the  canonical books2 and of      
,sirach that it is a right good book    
proceeding  from a wise man4 ,but he    
speaks unfavorably of several other     
apocryphal  productions1 as of ,baruch  
and #b ,maccabees4 ,it is evident1      
however1 that he  considered all he     
translated of some use to the ,christian
 ,church4 ,he  thought that the book of 
,esther should not belong to the canon4 
,luther's judgment respecting some of   
the ,new ,testament books was freer     
than most ,protestants now are disposed 
to approve4 ,he thought the epistle  to 
the ,hebrews was neither ,paul's nor an 
apostle's1 but proceeded from an        
excellent and learned man who may have  
been the disciple of apostles4 ,he  did 
not put it on an equality with the      
epistles written by apostles            
themselves4 ,the ,apocalypse he         
considered neither apostolic nor        
prophetic1  but put it almost on the    
same level with the #dth book of        

,esdras1 which he  spoke elsewhere of   
tossing into the ,elbe4 ,this judgment  
was afterwards  modified1 not retracted4
 ,james's epistle he pronounced         
unapostolic1 8a  right strawy epistle40 
,in like manner1 he did not believe that
 ,jude's  epistle proceeded from an     
apostle4 ,considering it to have been   
taken from  #b ,peter1 and not well     
extracted either1 he put it lower than  
the supposed  original4 ,the ,reformer1 
as also his successors1 made a          
distinction between  the books of the   
,new ,testament similar to that of the  
,old2 the generally  received           
7homologoumena7 and controverted books  
7antilegomena72 but the  ,calvinists    
afterwards obliterated it1 as the ,roman
 ,catholics at the  ,council of ,trent  
did with the old ,testament47#cfb7 ,the 
epistle to the  ,hebrews1 those of ,jude
 and ,james1 with the ,apocalypse1      
belong to the  latter class4 ,the       
distinction in question proceeded from  
genuine critical  tact on the part of   

the early ,lutheran ,church which had   
canonical and  deutero-canonical        
writings even in the ,new ,testament    
collection4 ,nor did  the ,reformers    
consider it a dangerous thing to bring  
the fact before the  people4 ,to make it
 palpable1 ,luther attached continuous  
numbers to the  first twenty-three books
 of his version1 bringing the four      
antilegomena  after these1 without      
numbers2 and this mode of marking the   
difference  continued till the middle of
 the #agth century47#cfc7 ,luther was   
right in  assigning a greater or less   
value to the separate writings of the   
,new  ,testament1 and in leaving every  
one to do the same4 ,he relied on their 
internal value more than tradition2     
taking the word of ,god in a deeper  and
 wider sense than its coincidence with  
the ,bible4    ,bodenstein of ,carlstad 
examined the question of canonicity more
 thoroughly  than any of his            
contemporaries1 and followed out the    
principle of private  judgment in regard

 to it4 ,he divides the biblical books  
into three  classes--#a4 ,books of the  
highest dignity1 viz41 the ,pentateuch  
and the  ,gospels2 #b4 ,books of the    
second dignity1 i4e41 the works termed  
prophetic by the ,jews1 and the fifteen 
epistles universally received2 #c4      
,books of the third and lowest          
authority1 i4e41 the ,jewish            
,hagiographa  and the seven             
,antilegomena epistles of the ,new      
,testament4 ,among the  ,apocrypha he   
makes two classes--such as are out of   
the canon to the ,hebrews  yet          
hagiographical 7,wisdom1                
,ecclesiasticus1 ,judith1 ,tobit1 the   
two  ,maccabees71 and those that are    
clearly apocryphal and to be rejected   
7third and fourth ,esdras1 ,baruch1     
,prayer of ,manasseh1 a good part of the
  third chapter of ,daniel1 and the last
 two chapters of ,daniel477#cfd7        
,zwingli asserts that the ,apocalypse is
 not a biblical book47#cfe7             
,oecolampadius says--8,we do not despise

 ,judith1 ,tobit1 ,ecclesiasticus1      
,baruch1 the last two ,esdras1 the three
 ,maccabees1 the last two chapters of   
,daniel1 but we do not attribute to them
 divine authority with those            
others407#cff7 ,as to the books of the  
,new ,testament he would not compare    
the ,apocalypse1 ,james1 ,jude1 #b      
,peter1 #b and #c ,john with the        
rest47#cfg7    ,calvin did not think    
that ,paul was the author of the epistle
 to the  ,hebrews1 or that #b ,peter was
 written by the apostle himself2 but    
both in  his opinion are canonical4     
,,chapter ,,viii4 ,,order ,,of ,,the    
,,new ,,testament ,,books4      ,i4 ,the
 arrangement of the various parts       
comprising the ,new ,testament was      
fluctuating in the second century2 less 
so in the third4 ,in the fourth  century
 the order which the books had commonly 
assumed in ,greek ,,mss4 and  writers   
was2 the ,gospels1 the ,acts1 the       
,catholic ,epistles1 the ,pauline1  and 
the ,apocalypse4 ,this sequence appears 

in the ,vatican1 ,sinaitic1             
,alexandrian and ,ephrem 7,c7 ,,mss42   
,cyril of ,jerusalem1 in the #fjth      
,canon of  the ,laodicean ,council1     
,athanasius1 ,leontius of ,byzantium1 c4
    ,,ii4 ,another order prevailed in   
the ,latin ,church1 viz41 the ,gospels1 
the  ,acts1 the ,epistles of ,paul1 the 
,catholic ,epistles1 and the            
,apocalypse4  ,this appears in ,melito1 
,irenus1 ,clement of ,alexandria1       
,origen1 ,augustine1  ,jerome1 the      
,vulgate1 the ,councils of ,carthage1   
held in ,a4,d4 #cig and #dai2  and is   
now the usual arrangement4    ,within   
the limits of the two general           
arrangements just mentioned1 there  were
 many variations4 ,thus we find in      
relation to the gospels4    ,,iii4 7a7  
,matthew1 ,john1 ,luke1 ,mark2 in the   
,,mss4 of the old ,italic marked  a1 b1 
d1 e1 ff1 and in the cod4 argenteus of  
,ulfila's ,gothic  version4    7b7      
,matthew1 ,john1 ,mark1 ,luke2 in the   
council of ,ephesus ,a4,d4 #dca1 ,cyril 

of ,alexandria1 ,theodoret1 the         
stichometry of the ,clermont ,,ms4 ,such
 was the  usual order in the ,greek     
,church of the fifth century4    7c7    
,mark is put first1 followed by         
,matthew2 in the fragment of a ,bobbian 
,,ms4 of the ,itala at ,turin marked k4 
7d7 ,matthew1 ,mark1 ,john1 ,luke2 in   
the ,curetonian ,syriac gospels4 ,they  
are mentioned in the same order in      
,origen's ,i4 ,homily on ,luke4    ,the 
reason of the order in1 7a7 and 7b7 lies
 in apostleship4 ,the works  of apostles
 precede those of evangelists4 ,the     
established sequence1 which  is already 
sanctioned by ,irenus and ,origen1 has  
respect to the supposed  dates of the   
gospels4 ,clement of ,alexandria says   
that ancient tradition  supposed those  
gospels having the genealogies to have  
been written before  the others4        
,,iv4 ,as to the ,acts of the ,apostles1
 not only is this work put  immediately 
after the gospels1 which is the order in
 the ,muratorian canon1  but we find it 

in other positions4    7a7 ,gospels1    
,pauline ,epistles1 ,acts2 in the       
,sinaitic ,,ms41 the  ,peshito17#cfh7   
,jerome17#cfi7 and ,epiphanius4    7b7  
,gospels1 ,pauline ,epistles1 ,catholic 
,epistles1 ,acts2 in ,augustine1  the   
third council of ,toledo1 ,isidore1     
,innocent ,i41 ,eugenius ,,iv41 and the 
,spanish ,church generally4    7c7      
,gospels1 ,pauline1 ,catholic ,epistles1
 ,apocalypse1 ,acts2 in the  stichometry
 of the ,clermont ,,ms4    ,v4 ,as to   
the ,epistles of ,paul1 besides the     
place they now occupy in our  ,bibles1  
they sometimes follow the gospels       
immediately4    7a7 ,gospels1 ,pauline  
,epistles2 the ,sinaitic ,,ms41 ,jerome1
 ,epiphanius1  ,augustine1 the third    
council of ,toledo1 ,isidore1 ,innocent 
,i41 ,eugenius  ,,iv41 the stichometry  
of the ,clermont ,,ms4    7b7 ,the usual
 order of the ,greek ,church is1        
,gospels1 ,acts1 ,catholic  ,epistles1  
,pauline1 c41 as in ,cyril of           
,jerusalem1 the ,laodicean ,council     

7#fj71 ,athanasius1 ,leontius of        
,byzantium1 the ,,mss4 ,a4 ,b41 but not 
4 ,the  critical ,greek ,testaments of  
,lachmann and ,tischendorf adopt this   
order4    7c7 ,they are placed last of  
all in a homily attributed to ,origen1  
but  this does not necessarily show that
 father's opinion47#cgj7    7d7 ,they   
stand first of all in a ,gallican       
,sacramentarium cited by  ,hody47#cga7  
,,vi4 ,with respect to the order of the 
individual epistles1 the current one    
has been thought as old as ,tertullian  
and ,clement of ,alexandria4 ,but the   
proof of this is precarious4 ,it appears
 in the fourth century1 and may  have   
been prior to that4 ,it is in           
,epiphanius1 who supposes that the      
arrangement was the apostle's own4 ,not 
only was it the prevalent one in  the   
,greek ,church1 but also in the ,latin  
as we see from the codex  ,amiatinus1   
and the ,vulgate ,,mss4 generally4 ,it  
rests upon the extent of the  epistles  
and the relative importance of the      

localities in which the  believers      
addressed resided4    7a7 ,marcion had  
but ten ,pauline epistles in the        
following order3  ,galatians1 #a and #b 
,corinthians1 ,romans1 #a and #b        
,thessalonians1 the  ,laodiceans1       
7,ephesians71 ,colossians1 ,philemon1   
,philippians4    7b7 #a and #b          
,corinthians1 ,ephesians1 ,philippians1 
,colossians1 ,galatians1  #a and #b     
,thessalonians1 ,romans1 ,philemon1     
,titus1 #a and #b ,timothy1 to the      
,laodiceans1 the ,alexandrians 7the     
,epistle to the ,hebrews72 in the       
,muratorian canon4    7c7 ,romans1      
,corinthians1 ,galatians1 ,ephesians1   
,philippians1  ,thessalonians1          
,colossians1 ,timothy1 ,titus1          
,philemon1 ,hebrews2 in  ,augustine1 and
 several ,,mss4 of the ,vulgate in      
,england47#cgb7    7d7 ,romans1         
,corinthians1 ,galatians1               
,thessalonians1 ,ephesians1             
,philippians1 ,colossians1 ,timothy1    
,titus1 ,philemon1 ,hebrews2 in the     

so-called decree of ,gelasius in the    
name of ,hormisdas1 in ,labbe's text4   
,but here different ,,mss4 vary in      
regard to the position of the           
,thessalonian  epistles4    ,,vii4 ,the 
,laodicean letter was inserted either   
before the pastoral  epistles1 as in    
several ,,mss4 of the ,vulgate in       
,england2 or before the  ,thessalonian  
epistles preceding them2 or at the end  
of the ,epistle to the  ,hebrews1 as in 
a ,,ms4 of the ,latin ,bible at         
,lembeth4 ,its insertion in  copies of  
the ,vulgate was owing to the authority 
of ,gregory the ,great1 who  looked upon
 it as authentic4    ,,viii4 ,the       
position of the ,epistle to the ,hebrews
 usually was either before  the pastoral
 epistles1 i4e41 immediately after those
 to the  ,thessalonians2 or after the   
pastoral ones and ,philemon4 ,the former
 method  was generally adopted in the   
,greek ,church from the fourth century4 
,the  latter prevailed in the ,latin    
,church from ,augustine onward4    7a7  

,pauline epistles to churches 7the last 
being the second to the                 
,thessalonians71 ,hebrews1 ,timothy1    
,titus1 ,philemon2 in the ,,mss4 1 ,a4  
,b4 ,c4  ,h41 ,athanasius1 ,epiphanius2 
,euthalius17#cgc7 ,theodoret4 ,jerome   
mentions it  after the epistles of ,paul
 to the seven churches as an eighth     
excluded by  the majority1 and proceeds 
to specify the pastoral ones4 ,but      
,amphilochius  and ,ebedjesu the ,syrian
 have the western order1 viz41 the      
following--    7b7 ,pauline ,epistles1  
,hebrews 7following immediately that to 
,philemon72  in ,augustine and the      
,vulgate version generally4 ,it is so in
 the canons of  the councils at ,hippo  
and ,carthage 7,a4,d4 #cic and #cig71   
and in the ,,mss4 ,d4  and ,g41 in      
,isidore of ,spain1 and the council of  
,trent4    ,,ix4 ,with respect to the   
order of the ,catholic ,epistles1 which 
were not  all adopted into the canon    
till the end of the fourth century2     
,eusebius  putting all except #a ,john  

and #a ,peter among the antilegomena2   
while  ,jerome1 and the council of      
,carthage 7,a4,d4 #cig7 admit them      
unreservedly2  the usual order1 viz41   
,james1 #a and #b ,peter1 ,john1 ,jude1 
prevailed in the  ,eastern ,church4 ,it 
is in the ,peshito or old ,syriac       
version1 ,eusebius1  ,cyril of          
,jerusalem1 ,epiphanius1 the #fjth of   
the ,laodicean canons1  ,athanasius1    
,gregory of ,nazianzus1 ,amphilochius1  
the stichometry of  ,nicephorus1 the    
,,mss4 4 ,a4 ,b4 ,c41 and most ,greek   
,,ms4 ,but the #gfth of the  ,apostolic 
canons has ,peter1 ,john1 ,james and    
,jude4 ,the canon1 however1 is          
comparatively late4    7a7 ,peter1      
,john1 ,jude1 ,james2 in ,philastrius of
 ,brescia4 ,if we may rely  on          
,cassiodorus's account of ,augustine1   
the ,african father followed the  same  
arrangement4    7b7 ,peter1 ,james1     
,jude1 ,john2 in ,rufinus4    7c7       
,peter1 ,john1 ,james1 ,jude2 in the    
councils of ,carthage1 ,a4,d4 #cig1     

#dai1 ,cassiodorus1 and a ,gallican     
,sacramentarium4 ,the ,vulgate and      
council  of ,trent follow this          
arrangement4    7d7 ,john1 ,peter1      
,jude1 ,james2 in the list given by     
,innocent ,i41 and the  third council of
 ,toledo4    ,the ,eastern church       
naturally set the ,epistle of ,james1   
who was ,bishop of  ,jerusalem1 at the  
head of the others2 while the ,western  
put ,peter1 the  ,bishop of ,rome1 in   
the same place4    ,x4 ,the ,revelation 
varied little in position4    7a7 ,in   
the decree of ,galasius1 according to   
its three recensions1 the  ,revelation  
follows ,paul's epistles1 preceding     
those of ,john and the other  ,catholic 
ones4    7b7 ,in ,d or the ,clermont    
,,ms4 it follows the ,catholic epistles1
 and  precedes the ,acts2 which last is 
thrown to the end of all the books1 as  
if  it were an appendix to the writings 
of the apostles47#cgd7                  
,,chapter ,,ix4 ,,summary ,,of ,,the    
,,subject4      7a7 ,in relation to the 

,old ,testament1 the prevailing tendency
 in the  ,greek ,church was to follow   
the ,palestinian canon4 ,different lists
 appeared  from time to time in which   
the endeavor there to exclude           
apocryphal1  i4e41 spurious works1 was  
apparent4 ,in addition to the canonical1
 a  class of ecclesiastical books was   
judged fit for reading in the           
,church1--a class intermediate between  
the canonical and apocryphal4 ,the      
distinction between the canonical and   
ecclesiastical writings appears in      
,cyril of ,jerusalem1 ,athanasius1      
,epiphanius1 c4 ,the ,latin ,church     
showed a  disposition to elevate the    
ecclesiastical books of the ,greek      
,church to the  rank of the canonical1  
making the line between the two         
indistinct2 as we  see from the acts of 
the councils at ,hippo and ,carthage1 in
 the end of the  fourth and beginning of
 the fifth century1 where ,augustine's1 
influence  was predominant4 ,but        
notwithstanding this deviation from the 

stricter  method of the ,greeks1 learned
 men like ,jerome adhered to the        
,palestinian  canon1 and even styled the
 ecclesiastical books apocryphal1       
transferring  the epithet from one class
 to another4 ,hilary and ,rufinus also  
followed  the ,greek usage4    ,during  
the sixth and following centuries1 it   
cannot be said that the canon  of the   
,greek ,church was definitely closed1   
notwithstanding the decrees of  councils
 and references to older authorities4   
,opinions still varied about  certain   
books1 such as ,esther2 though the      
,palestinian list was commonly          
followed4 ,during the same period1 the  
enlarged canon of the ,alexandrian      
,jews1 which went far to abolish the    
distinction between the canonical and   
deutero-canonical books1 prevailed in   
the ,west1 at least in practice2  though
 some followed the shorter one1         
sanctioned as it had been by ,jerome4   
,as both lists existed1 no complete or  
final settlement of the question was    

reached in the ,latin ,church4 ,neither 
in the ,east nor in the ,west was the   
canon of the ,old ,testament really     
closed2 for though the stricter         
principle of separation prevailed in    
theory1 it was not carried out in       
practice consistently or universally4   
,the two men most influential about  the
 canon were ,jerome and ,augustine2 the 
one representing its ,palestinian1  the 
other its ,alexandrian type4 ,after them
 no legal or commanding voice  fixed    
either1 to the absolute exclusion of its
 rival4    7b7 ,the charge of           
,constantine to ,eusebius to make out a 
list of writings  for the use of the    
,church and its performance may be      
considered as that  which first put the 
subject on a broad and permanent basis4 
,its  consequences were important4 ,if  
it cannot be called the completion or   
close of the ,new ,testament canon1 it  
determined it largely4 ,eusebius made  a
 ,greek ,bible containing the usual     
books1 except the ,revelation4 ,though  

the historian of the church was not well
 fitted for the task1 being  deficient  
in critical ability and trammeled by    
tradition1 he doubtless  used his best  
judgment4 ,hence1 about the year #ccg1  
the ,constantinian  ,church received a  
,bible which had an influential origin4 
,no binding  authority indeed attached  
to the list of the ,christian books it  
presented2  but it had weight in the    
,greek ,church4 ,it did not prevent     
different  opinions1 nor deter          
individuals from dissent4 ,thus         
,athanasius1 who  disliked ,eusebius and
 his party1 issued a list of the sacred 
writings  which included the            
,revelation4 ,the canon of the          
,laodicean ,council 7,a4,d4  #cfc7      
agreed with the ,constantine one4       
,that variations still existed in the   
,eastern ,church is shown by the lists  
which vied with one another in          
precedence4 ,the apostolic canons       
adopted  the seven general epistles1    
while the apostolic constitutions       

excluded  them4 ,the ,alexandrian ,,ms4 
added to the ordinary books of the ,new 
,testament1 ,clement's two epistles2 and
 ,cosmas ,indicopleustes omitted the    
general epistles as well as the         
,apocalypse4 ,at length the ,council of 
,constantinople1 usually called the     
,trullan 7,a4,d4 #fib71 laid down       
positions that fixed the canon for the  
,greek ,church4 ,the endeavor in it  was
 to attain to a conclusion which should 
unite ,east and ,west4 ,this  council   
did not enumerate the separate books1   
but referred to older  authorities1 to  
the eighty-five canons of the apostles1 
the decrees of the  synods of ,laodicea1
 ,ephesus1 ,carthage1 and others2 to    
,athanasius1 ,gregory  of ,nazianzus1   
,amphliochius of ,iconium1 ,cyril of    
,alexandria1 ,gennadius1 c4  ,after the 
fourth century there was a general      
desire to fall back on  apostolic times1
 to appeal to the ,church1 to ascertain 
the opinion of  synods or assemblies2 in
 a word1 to rely on authority4    ,less 

discrepancy and activity were manifested
 about the canon in the  ,western       
,church4 ,here the chief doubts were    
directed to the epistle to the  ,hebrews
 and the seven general ones4 ,the former
 was early excluded1 and  continued to  
be so even in the time of ,jerome4 ,the 
latter were adopted  much sooner4 ,the  
impulse given by ,constantine to        
determine the books of  ,scripture      
re-acted on the ,west1 where the ,church
 considered it its own  privilege4      
,augustine's influence contributed much 
to the settlement of the  question4 ,the
 synods of ,hippo 7,a4,d4 #cic7 and of  
,carthage 7,a4,d4 #cig7  received the   
epistle to the ,hebrews and the seven   
general ones1 thus  fixing the ,new     
,testament canon as it now is4 ,in #dai 
the ,african bishops1  in the presence  
of a ,papal delegate1 repeated their    
former decision4 ,after  the ,west      
,goths joined the ,catholic ,church in  
the sixth century1 the ,romish  and     
,spanish ,churches gave prominence to   

the fact of accepting both the          
,apocalypse and the epistle to the      
,hebrews4 ,the canon of the ,west was   
now  virtually closed2 the fourth       
,council of ,toledo 7,a4,d4 #fcb7 at    
which ,isidore  was present1 agreeing   
with the ,augustinian list1 ratified as 
that list had  been by ,innocent the    
,first4 ,the reception of the epistle to
 the ,hebrews  was facilitated by the   
objections of the ,arians and           
,semiarians2 while  opposition to the   
,priscillianists in ,spain strengthened 
adherence to the  traditional canon4    
,augustine and the ,trullan ,council    
fixed the number of  the ,new ,testament
 books as they are now4    ,with regard 
to the ,bible canon in general1 we see  
that councils had weight  when they     
enumerated the sacred books2 that       
prominent teachers delivered  their     
opinion on the subject with effect1 and 
that tradition contributed  to one      
result2 but no general council closed   
the canon once for all1 till  that of   

,trent promulgated its decrees4 ,this   
body1 however1 could only  settle the   
subject for ,romanists1 since1 while the
 right of private  judgment is          
exercised1 no corporation can declare   
some books inspired and  others not1    
some authoritative in matters of faith1 
others not1 without  presumption4       
,though the present ,bible canon rests  
upon the judgment of  good and learned  
men of different times1 it can never be 
finally or  infallibly settled1 because 
the critical powers of readers differ1  
and all  do not accept church authority 
with unhesitating assent4    ,it is the 
way of men to defer unduly to the       
opinions expressed by synods  and       
councils1 especially if they be         
propounded dogmatically2 to acquiesce   
in their decisions with facility rather 
than institute independent  inquiry4    
,this is exemplified in the history of  
the canon1 where the  fallibility of    
such bodies in determining canonicity is
 conspicuous4 ,it is  so in the general 

reception of the book of ,esther1 while 
the old poem1 the  ,song of ,songs1 was 
called in question at the synod of      
,jamnia2 in the  omission of the        
,revelation from the canonical list by  
many belonging to  the ,greek ,church1  
while the epistles to ,timothy and      
,titus were received as  ,st4 ,paul's   
from the beginning almost universally4  
,,chapter ,x4 ,,the ,,canon ,,in ,,the  
,,confession ,,of ,,different           
,,churches4      ,the second ,helvetic  
,confession 7,a4,d4 #aeff7 speaks of the
 apocryphal books  of the ,old          
,testament as those which the ancients  
wished to be read in the  churches1 but 
not as authoritative in matters of      
faith47#cge7    ,the ,gallic ,confession
 7,a4,d4 #aeei7 makes a distinction     
between canonical  and other books1 the 
former being the rule and norm of faith1
 not only by  the consent of the        
,church1 but much more by the testimony 
and intrinsic  persuasion of the        
,spirit1 by whose suggestions we are    

taught to  distinguish them from other  
ecclesiastical books1 which1 though     
useful1  are not of the kind that any   
article of faith can be constituted by  
them47#cgf7    ,the ,belgic ,confession 
7,a4,d4 #aefa7 makes a distinction      
between the sacred  and apocryphal      
books4 ,the latter may be read by the   
,church1 but no  doctrine can be derived
 from them4 ,in the list of ,new        
,testament books  given there are       
fourteen epistles of ,paul47#cgg7       
,the canon of the ,waldenses must have  
coincided at first with that of the     
,roman ,church2 for the ,dublin ,,ms4   
containing the ,new ,testament has      
attached  to it the ,book of ,wisdom and
 the first twenty-three chapters of     
,sirach2  while the ,zurich codex of the
 ,new ,testament has marginal references
 to the  ,apocrypha2 to ,judith1 ,tobit1
 #d ,esdras1 ,wisdom1 ,sirach1 and      
,susanna4 ,the  ,nobla ,leyczon         
containing a brief narration of the     
contents of the ,old  and ,new          

,testaments confirms this opinion4 ,it  
opposes1 however1 the old law  to the   
new1 making them antagonistic4 ,the     
historical document containing  the     
articles of 8,the ,union of the         
,valleys10 ,a4,d4 #aega1 separates      
indeed  the canonical and apocryphal    
books1 purporting to be founded on a    
,confession of ,faith as old as ,a4,d4  
#aabj2 but the latter is mythical1 as   
appears from a comparison of it with the
 epistle which the legates of the       
,waldensians gave to colampadius4 ,the  
articles of that 8,union0 are copied    
from ,morel's account of his            
transactions with colampadius and ,bucer
 in  #aecj4 ,the literature of this     
people was altered by ,hussite          
influences and  the ,reformation2 so    
that though differing little from the   
,romanists at  first except in          
ecclesiastical discipline1 they diverged
 widely afterwards  by adopting the     
,protestant canon and doctrines47#cgh7  
,hence1 the ,confession  issued in #afee

 enumerates as ,holy ,scripture nothing 
but the ,jewish  ,palestinian canon1 and
 the usual books of the ,new            
,testament47#cgi7    ,the canon of the  
,anglican ,church 7#aefb71 given in the 
sixth article of  religion1 defines holy
 ,scripture to be 8those canonical books
 of the ,old  and ,new ,testament1 of   
whose authority was never any doubt in  
the ,church40  ,after giving the names  
and number of the canonical books1 the  
article  prefaces the apocryphal ones   
with1 8,and the other books 7as ,hierome
 saith7  the ,church doth read for      
example of life and instruction of      
manners2 but  yet doth it not apply them
 to establish any doctrine8 ,such are   
these  following10 c41 c4 ,at the end it
 is stated that 8all the books of the   
,new ,testament1 as they are commonly   
received1 we do receive and account     
them canonical40 ,the article is        
ambiguous4 ,if the canonical books      
enumerated are those meant in the phrase
 8of whose authority was never any      

doubt in the ,church10 the statement is 
incorrect4 ,if a distinction is  implied
 between the canonical books and such   
canonical ones as have never  been      
doubted in the ,church1 the meaning is  
obscure4 ,in either case the  language  
is not explicit4    ,the ,scottish or   
,westminster ,confession of ,faith gives
 a list of all the  books of the ,old   
and ,new ,testaments as the ,word of    
,god written2 adding  that those called 
the apocrypha are not of divine         
inspiration1 and no part  of the        
canon1--of no authority in the ,church1 
nor to be approved or made  use of      
otherwise than human writings4    ,the  
,roman ,catholic canon was finally      
determined at the ,council of ,trent    
7#aedf71 which adopted all the books in 
the ,vulgate as sacred and  canonical1  
without distinction4 ,third and fourth  
,esdras1 third ,maccabees1  and the     
prayer of ,manasseh were not included2  
though the first and last  appeared in  
the original ,clementine edition of     

#aeib1 but apart from the  canonical    
books4 ,they are not in the ,sixtine    
edition of #aeij47chj7 ,a  council at   
,florence in #adda had set the example  
which was followed at  ,trent4 ,but this
 stringent decree did not prevent       
individual ,catholics from  making a    
distinction between the books1 in       
assuming a first and second  canon or   
proto-canonical and deutero-canonical   
books2 as did ,sixtis  ,senensis1 ,b4   
,lamy1 ,anton a matre ,dei1 ,jahn1 and  
others2 though it is  hardly consistent 
with orthodox ,catholicism or the view  
of those who  passed the decree4 ,when  
the writings are said to be of different
  authority--some more1 others less--the
 intent of the council is violated4     
,the ,vatican council 7#ahgj7 confirmed 
the ,tridentine decree respecting the   
canon4    ,the ,greek ,church1 after    
several ineffectual attempts to uphold  
the old  distinction between the        
canonical and ecclesiastical books by   
,metrophanes  ,critopulus patriarch of  

,alexandria in #afbe1 and ,cyril        
,lucaris patriarch of  ,constantinople  
7#afch ,a4,d4717#cha7 came to the same  
decision with the  ,romish1 and         
canonized all the apocrypha4 ,this was  
done at a ,jerusalem  synod under       
,dositheus in #afgb4                    
,,chapter ,,xi4 ,,the ,,canon ,,from    
,,semler ,,to ,,the ,,present ,,time1   
,,with ,,reflections ,,on  ,,its        
,,readjustment4      ,semler7#chb7 was  
the most conspicuous scholar after the  
,reformation who  undertook to correct  
the prevailing ideas respecting the     
canon4 ,acquainted  with the works of   
,toland and ,morgan1 he adopted some of 
their views1 and  prosecuted his        
inquiries on their lines chiefly in     
relation to the ,new  ,testament4 ,he   
had no definite principles to guide him1
 but judged books  chiefly by their     
christian value and use to the ,church4 
,though his views  are sometimes        
one-sided and his essays ill-digested1  
he placed the subject  in new lights1   

and rendered a service to truth which   
bore abundant fruit  in after           
years47#chc7 ,he dealt tradition severe 
blows1 and freed theology  from the yoke
 of the letter4 ,he was followed by his 
disciple ,corrodi1 by  ,g4 ,l4 ,oeder1  
,j4 ,d4 ,michaelis1 ,herder1 ,lessing1  
and ,eichhorn1--most of whom            
recommended their views by a freshness  
of style which ,semler did not  command4
 ,the more recent works of ,gesenius1   
,de ,wette1 ,zunz1 ,ewald1 ,hitzig1     
,geiger and ,herzfeld have contributed  
to form a juster opinion of the true    
position which the books of the ,bible  
occupy4    ,in the ,new ,testament1 the 
writings of ,f4 ,c4 ,baur have opened up
 a new  method of investigating the     
canon1 which promises important and     
lasting  results4 ,proceeding in the    
track of ,semler1 he prosecuted his     
researches  into primitive ,christianity
 with great acuteness and singular power
 of  combination4 ,though his separation
 of ,petrine and ,pauline christianity  

is  not new1 he has applied it in ways  
which neither ,toland nor ,morgan was   
competent to manage4 ,these writers     
perceived the difference between the    
leading principle of the twelve and that
 of ,paul1 they had some far-seeing     
glimpses of the origin and differences  
of the ,new ,testament writings17#chd7  
but they propounded them in an          
unsystematic way along with untenable   
conjectures4 ,it was reserved for the   
,tbingen professor to elaborate the     
hypothesis of an ,ebionite or primitive 
christianity in contra-distinction  from
 a ,pauline1 applying it to the origin  
and constitution of christian           
literature2 in a word1 to use a         
tendenz-kritik for opening up the genius
  of the sacred writings as well as the 
stages of early christianity out of     
which they arose4 ,the head of the      
,tbingen school1 it is true1 has carried
  out the antagonism between the        
,petrine and ,pauline christians too    
rigorously1 and invaded the authenticity

 of the sacred writings to excess2  for 
it is hazardous to make a theory        
extremely stringent to the  comparative 
neglect of modifying circumstances1     
which1 though increasing  the difficulty
 of criticism1 contribute to the        
security of its processes4  ,yet he has 
properly emphasized internal evidence2  
and many of his  conclusions about the  
books will stand4 ,he has thrown much   
light on the  original relations of     
parties immediately after the origin of 
,christianity1 and disturbed an organic 
unity of the ,new ,testament which  had 
been merely assumed by traditionalists4 
,the best ,introductions to  the ,new   
,testament must accept them to some     
extent4 ,the chief  characteristic of   
the school is the application of        
historic criticism to  the genesis of   
the ,new ,testament writings1           
irrespective of tradition--a  striving  
to discover the circumstances or        
tendencies out of which the  books      
originated4 ,baur's tendenz-principle   

judiciously applied cannot  but produce 
good results4    ,we have seen that     
sound critical considerations did not   
regulate the  formation of the three    
collections which made up the entire    
canon of the  ,old ,testament4 ,had it  
been so1 the ,pentateuch would not have 
been  attributed to ,moses4 ,neither    
would a number of latter prophecies have
 been  accepted as ,isaiah's and        
incorporated with the prophet's         
authentic  productions4 ,all the        
,proverbs1 the book of ,ecclesiastes1   
and the ,song of  ,songs would not have 
been assigned to ,solomon2 ,jonah would 
have been  separated from the prophets1 
and ,daniel must have had a later       
position in  the ,hagiographa4 ,we      
cannot1 therefore1 credit the collectors
 or editors of  the books with great    
critical sagacity4 ,but they did their  
best in the  circumstances1 preserving  
invaluable records of the ,hebrew       
people4 ,in like  manner1 it has        
appeared1 that the ecclesiastics to whom

 we owe the ,new  ,testament collection 
were not sharp-sighted in the literature
 with which  they had to do4 ,it is true
 that well-founded doubts were          
entertained by  the early ,christians   
about several portions1 such as the     
second ,epistle of  ,peter1 the ,epistle
 to the ,hebrews1 c41 but the           
,revelation was needlessly  discredited4
 ,they accepted without hesitation the  
pastoral epistles as  ,pauline1 but     
doubted some of the ,catholic ,epistles1
 which bear the impress  of authenticity
 more strongly1 such as ,james4 ,it is  
therefore incorrect to  say that #b     
,peter1 #b and #c ,john1 ,james1 ,jude1 
,epistle to the ,hebrews1 and  the      
,apocalypse 8have been received into the
 canon on evidence less  complete0 than 
that belonging to the others4 ,the very 
general admission of  the fourth gospel 
as the apostle ,john's1 is a curious    
example of facile  traditionalism4      
,biblical criticism1 however1 scarcely  
existed in the first  three centuries4  

,it is for us to set the subject in     
another light1 because  our means of    
judging are superior4 ,if the resources 
of the early fathers  were inadequate to
 the proper sifting of a copious        
literature1 they should  be mildly      
judged4    ,the question of the canon is
 not settled4 ,it is probably the work  
of  successive inquirers to set it on a 
right basis1 and adjust the various     
parts in a manner consistent with       
historic criticism1 sound reason1 and   
religion4 ,the absolute and relative    
worth of books2 the degrees in which    
they regulate ethics and conduct2 their 
varying values at the times of  their   
first appearance and our own2 their     
places in the general history of  human 
progress--all these must be determined  
before the documents of  ,judaism and   
,christianity be classified aright4     
,their present arrangement  is external4
 ,based on no interior principle1 it    
furnishes little help  toward a thorough
 investigation of the whole4 ,those who 

look upon the  question as historical   
and literary take a one-sided view4 ,it 
has a  theological character also4 ,it  
needs the application1 not only of      
historic  criticism1 but the immediate  
consciousness belonging to every        
,christian4  ,the two ,testaments should
 be separated1 and their respective     
positions  assigned to each--the ,old   
having been preparatory to the ,new4    
,should it be  said bluntly1 as it is in
 the #gth ,article of the ,anglican     
,church1 that the  ,old is not contrary 
to the ,new ,testament8 ,luther at least
 expressed his  opinion of the          
difference between them pretty          
clearly27#che7 though the  theologians  
of ,germany after him evinced a desire  
to minimise the  difference47#chf7      
,should the general opinion of the      
,protestant ,church that  the authority 
of the ,old ,testament is not           
subordinate to that of the ,new1  be    
rigidly upheld8 ,according to one aspect
 of the former it may be so1  viz41 its 

prophetic and theological aspect1 that  
in which it is brought  into close union
 with the latter2 the essence of the one
 being  foreshadowed or implied in the  
other1 as ,justin ,martyr supposed4 ,and
 this  view has never lost supporters1  
who by the help of double senses1 types1
  and symbols1 with assumed prediction  
of the definite and distant future1     
transform the old dispensation into an  
outline picture of the new2 taking  into
 it a body of divinity which is alien   
from its nature4 ,according to  another 
aspect1 viz41 the moral and historical1 
the equality can scarcely  be allowed4  
,schleiermacher is right in saying that 
the ,old ,testament seems  to be nothing
 but a superfluous authority for        
doctrine2 an opinion  coinciding with   
that of the early ,socinians1 who held  
that it has a  historical1 not a        
dogmatic1 value4 ,only such of our pious
 emotions as are  of a general nature   
are accurately reflected in the ,old    
,testament2 and all  that is most       

decidedly ,jewish is of least value to  
christians4 ,the alleged  coincidence of
 the ,old ,testament with the ,new must 
be modified by the  doctrine of         
development4 ,it has been fostered by   
types and prophecies  supposed to refer 
to christian times2 by the assumed      
dictation of all  ,scripture by the     
,holy ,spirit2 by fancied references of 
the one  dispensation to the other2 by  
the confounding of a ,jewish ,messiah   
sketched  in various prophets1 with     
,jesus ,christ1 as if the latter had not
 changed1  exalted and purified the     
,messianic idea to suit his sublime     
purposes of  human regeneration4 ,the   
times and circumstances in which the    
,old ,testament  ,scriptures appeared1  
the manners1 usages1 civilization1      
intellectual and  moral stage of the    
,semitic race combine to give them a    
lower position than  that of the ,new   
,testament books which arose out of a   
more developed  perception of the       
relations between ,god and men4         

,spiritual apprehension  had got beyond 
,jewish particularism1 especially in the
 case of the apostle  ,paul1 who gave   
the new religion a distinct vitality by 
severing it from  its ,jewish           
predecessor4    ,the agreement of the   
,new ,testament books with themselves   
must be modified  by the same doctrine  
of development4 ,jewish and ,pauline    
christianity  appear in different works1
 necessarily imparting a difference of  
views and  expression2 or they are      
blended in various degrees1 as in the   
epistles to  the ,hebrews and the first 
of ,peter4 ,hence1 absolute harmony     
cannot be  looked for4 ,if the          
standpoints of the writers were so      
diverse1 how can  their productions     
coincide8 ,the alleged coincidence can  
only be  intersected with varieties     
proportioned to the measures in which   
the  authors possessed the ,spirit of   
,god4 ,these varieties affect the matter
 as  well as the manner of the writings4
 ,it is therefore unphilosophical to    

treat the ,bible as a whole which was   
dictated by the ,spirit and directed  to
 one end4 ,its uniformity is chequered  
with variety2 its harmony with          
disagreement4 ,it is a bundle of books2 
a selection from a wider  literature1   
reflecting many diversities of religious
 apprehension4 ,after  the two          
,testaments have been rightly estimated 
according to their  respective merits1  
the contents of each should be duly     
apportioned--internal evidence being the
 test of their relative importance1     
irrespective of a priori assumptions4   
,their traditional origin and  authority
 must be subordinated to the inherent   
value they bear1 or the  conformity of  
the ideas to the will of ,god4 ,the     
gradual formation of both  canons       
suggests an analysis of the classes into
 which they came to be put2  for the    
same canonical dignity was not          
attributed by the ,jews to the books    
contained in the three divisions2 and   
the controverted writings of the ,new   

,testament found gradual recognition    
very slowly4 ,luther made important     
distinctions between the canonical      
books27#chg7 and ,carlstadt put the     
,antilegomena of the ,new ,testament on 
a par with the ,hagiographa of the      
,old4    ,in the ,old ,testament the    
three classes or canons have been       
generally  estimated by the ,jews       
according to their respective antiquity2
 though the  sacrificial worship        
enjoined in the ,pentateuch never formed
 an essential  part of the ,jewish      
religion2 the best prophets having set  
small value upon  it4 ,the pure         
monotheistic doctrine of these last     
writers1 chiefly  contained in the      
second canon1 lifts that class up to the
 highest rank2  yet the ,decalogue in   
the ,pentateuch is sufficient to stamp  
the first canon  with great worth4 ,it  
must be confessed1 however1 that the    
,mosaic law was  meagre1 in the domain  
of pure ethics2 and that it promoted    
among the  people a slavish spirit of   

positivism by laying more stress on acts
 than  dispositions1 and insisting on   
small regulations4 ,for this reason1 the
  prophets combated its narrow          
externality4 ,the three canons were     
regarded  with a degree of veneration   
corresponding to the order in which they
  stand4 ,to apportion their respective 
values to the individual parts of  them 
is a difficult task4    ,as to the ,new 
,testament writings1 we think that some 
of them might  conveniently occupy the  
position of deutero-canonical1          
equivalent to  those of the ,old        
,testament having that title4 ,we allude
 to #b and #c ,john1  ,jude1 ,james1 #b 
,peter1 the ,revelation4 ,it is true    
that a few of these were  prior in time 
to some of the universally-received     
gospels or epistles2 but  time is not an
 important factor in a good             
classification4 ,among the  ,pauline    
epistles themselves1 classification     
might be adopted2 for the  pastoral     
letters are undoubtedly post-,pauline1  

and inferior to the  authentic ones4 ,in
 classifying the ,new ,testament        
writings1 three things  might be        
considered--the reception they met with 
from the first1 their  authenticity1    
above all1 their internal excellence4   
,the subject is not  easy1 because      
critics are not universally agreed about
 the proper rank and  authenticity of a 
few documents4 ,the ,epistle to the     
,colossians1 for  example1 creates      
perplexity2 that to the ,ephesians is   
less embarrassing1  its post-,pauline   
origin being tolerably clear4    ,what  
is wanted is a rational historic        
criticism to moderate the  theological  
hypothesis with which the older         
,protestants set out1 the  supernatural 
inspiration of the books1 their internal
 inseparability1 and  their direct      
reference to the work of salvation4 ,it 
must be allowed that  many points are   
independent of dogmatics2 and that the  
right decision in  things historical may
 be reached apart from any              

ecclesiastical standpoint4    ,again1   
should the distinction between the      
apocryphal and canonical books  of the  
,old ,testament be emphasized as it is  
by many8 ,should a sharp line  be put   
between the two1 as though the one      
class1 with the period it  belonged to1 
were characterized by the errors and    
anachronisms of its  history2 the other 
by simplicity and accuracy2 the one1 by 
books written  under fictitious names2  
the other1 by the power to distinguish  
truth from  falsehood or by honesty of  
purpose8 ,should the one be a sign of   
the want  of truthfulness and           
discernment2 the other1 of religious    
simplicity8 ,can  this aggregation of   
the ,apocrypha over against the         
,hagiographa1 serve the  purpose of a   
just estimate8 ,hardly so2 for some of  
the latter1 such as  ,esther and        
,ecclesiastes1 cannot be put above      
,wisdom1 #ast ,maccabees1  ,judith1     
,baruch1 or ,ecclesiasticus4 ,the       
doctrine of immortality1 clearly        

expressed in the ,book of ,wisdom1 is   
not in ,ecclesiastes2 neither is ,god   
once named in the ,book of ,esther as   
author of the marvelous deliverances    
which the chosen people are said to have
 experienced4 ,the history narrated  in 
#ast ,maccabees is more credible than   
that in ,esther4 ,it is therefore       
misleading to mark off all the          
apocryphal works as human and all the   
canonical ones as divine4 ,the divine   
and the human elements in man are  too  
intimately blended to admit of such     
separation4 ,the best which he  produces
 partakes of both4 ,the human element   
still permeates them as long  as ,god   
speaks through man2 and ,he neither     
dictates nor speaks otherwise4  ,in the 
attributes claimed for the canonical    
books no rigid line can be  drawn4 ,it  
may be that the inspiration of their    
authors differed in degree2  that the   
writer of ,ecclesiastes1 for example1   
was more philosophical than  ,jesus1 son
 of ,sirach2 but different degrees of   

inspiration belong to the  canonical    
writers themselves4 ,undue exaltation of
 the ,hebrew canon does  injustice to   
the wider ,alexandrian one4 ,yet some   
still speak of 8the pure  ,hebrew       
canon10 identifying it with that of the 
,church of ,england4 ,we admit  that    
history had become legendary1 that it   
was written in an oratorical  style by  
the ,alexandrian ,jews1 and was used for
 didactic purposes as in  ,tobit and    
,judith4 ,gnomic poetry had survived in 
the book of ,sirach2  prophecy1 in      
,baruch and the ,epistle of ,jeremiah1  
though here the language  is already    
prosaic4 ,imitation is too observable in
 the matter and manner  of the          
,apocrypha4 ,they have parallels1       
however1 among the ,hagiographa1  which 
originated in an age when the genuine   
breath of prophetic  inspiration had    
ceased2 when history and prophecy had   
degenerated2 so that  the transition    
from ,esther and ,malachi to ,judith and
 ,baruch1 as also from  ,proverbs to    

,wisdom1 is not great4    ,the ,talmudic
 canon is generally adopted at the      
present day4 ,it was not1  however1     
universally received even by the ,jews2 
for ,esther was omitted out  of it by   
those from whom ,melito got his         
catalogue in ,palestine2 while  ,sirach 
was annexed to it as late as the        
beginning of the #dth century4  ,baruch 
was also added in several ,jewish       
circles1 doubtless on account of  its   
supposed authorship4 ,thus 8the pure    
,hebrew canon0 was not one and the  same
 among all ,jews2 and therefore the     
phrase is misleading4 ,neither is it    
correct to say that it is the only canon
 distinctly recognized during the  first
 four centuries1 unless the usage of the
 early fathers be set over  against     
their assumed contrary judgment2 nor can
 all who followed the  ,alexandrian     
canon be pronounced uncritical1         
including ,origen himself4 ,a           
stereotyped canon of the ,old           
,testament1 either among ,jews or       

,christians of  the first four          
centuries1 which excluded all the       
apocryphal books and  included all the  
canonical ones1 cannot be shown4 ,and in
 regard to 8the  critical judgment0 of  
,jews and ,christians in that period it 
is arbitrary  to suppose that such as   
adopted the present canonical books     
alone were  more discerning than others4
 ,they were more traditional and        
conservative2  their discriminating     
faculty not corresponding to the degree 
of their  reliance on the past4    ,the 
aim of the inquirer should be to find   
from competent witnesses--from          
contemporaneous or succeeding writers of
 trustworthy character--the authors  and
 ages of the biblical books4 ,when      
evidence of this kind is not  available 
as often happens1 the only resource is  
the internal4 ,the  external evidence in
 favor of the canon is all but          
exhausted1 and nothing  of importance   
can be added to it now4 ,its strength   
has been brought out2  its weakness has 

not been equally exhibited4 ,the problem
 resolves itself  into an examination of
 internal characteristics1 which may be 
strong  enough to modify or             
counterbalance the external4 ,the latter
 have had an  artificial preponderance  
in the past2 henceforward they must be  
regulated  by the internal4 ,the main   
conclusion should be drawn from the     
contents of  the books themselves4 ,and 
the example of ,jews and ,christians1 to
 whom we  owe the ,bible canon1 shows   
that classification is necessary4 ,this 
is  admitted both by ,roman ,catholic   
writers and orthodox ,protestants4 ,a   
gloss-writer on what is usually called  
the 8decree of ,gratian10 i4e41  the    
,bolognese canonist of the #abth        
century1 remarks about the canonical    
books1 8all may be received but may not 
be held in the same estimation40  ,john 
,gerhard speaks of a second order1      
containing the books of the ,new        
,testament1 about whose authors there   
were some doubts in the ,church27#chh7  

and ,quenstedt similarly specifies      
proto-canonical and  deutero-canonical  
,new ,testament books1 or those of the  
first and second  order47#chi7 ,what are
 degrees or kinds of inspiration assumed
 by many1 but  a tacit acknowledgment of
 the fact that books vary in intrinsic  
value as  they are more or less         
impregnated with divine truth or differ 
in the  proportion of the eternal and   
temporal elements which commingle in    
every  revealed religion8 ,doubtless the
 authors from whom the separate books   
proceeded1 if discoverable1 should be   
regarded2 the inspiration of an  ,isaiah
 is higher than that of a ,malachi1 and 
an apostle is more  authoritative than  
an evangelist2 but the authors are often
 unknown4  ,besides1 the process of     
redaction through which many of the     
writings  passed1 hinders an exact      
knowledge of authorship4 ,in these      
circumstances  the books themselves must
 determine the position they should     
occupy in the  estimation of those who  

are looking at records of the past to   
help their  spiritual life4 ,and if it  
be asked1 ,what principle should lie at 
the basis  of a thorough classification8
 the answer is1 the normative element   
contained in the sacred books4 ,this is 
the characteristic which should         
regulate classification4 ,the time when 
a book appeared1 its author1 the        
surrounding circumstances that          
influenced him1 are of less consequence 
than its bearing upon the spiritual     
education of mankind4 ,the extent of    
its adequacy to promote this end        
determines the rank4 ,such books as     
embody  the indestructible essence of   
religion with the fewest accidents of   
time1  place and nature--which present  
conditions not easily disengaged from   
the  imperishable life of the soul1     
deserve the first rank4 ,whatever       
,scriptures  express ideas consonant    
with the nature of ,god as a holy1      
loving1 just and  good ,being--as a     
benevolent ,father not willing the      

destruction of any of  his children2 the
 ,scriptures presenting ideas of ,him   
consistent with pure  reason and man's  
highest instincts1 besides such as set  
forth our sense of  dependence on the   
infinite2 the books1 in short1 that     
contain a revelation  from ,god with    
least admixture of the human conditions 
under which it is  transmitted--these   
belong to the highest class4 ,if they   
lead the reader  away from opinion to   
practice1 from dogma to life1 from      
non-doing to  obedience to the law of   
moral duty1 from the notion that        
everything in  salvation has been done  
for him to the keeping of the           
commandments1 from  particularist       
conceptions about the divine mercy to   
the widest belief of  its overshadowing 
presence--such books of ,scripture are  
in that same  proportion to be ranked   
among the best4 ,in regard to the ,old  
,testament1  conformity to ,christ's    
teaching will determine rank2 or1 which 
is  tantamount1 conformity to that pure 

reason which is ,god's natural          
revelation in man2 a criterion which    
assigns various ranks to such           
,scriptures as appeared among a ,semite 
race at a certain stage of its          
development4 ,in the ,new ,testament1   
the words and precepts of ,jesus have a 
character of their own1 though it is    
very difficult to select them from  the 
gospels4 ,the supposition that the      
apostles' productions possess a  higher 
authority than those of their disciples1
 is natural4 ,but the  immediate        
followers of ,christ did not all stand  
on one platform4 ,differing  from one   
another even in important principles1 it
 is possible1 if not  certain1 that some
 of their disciples' composition may be 
of higher value4  ,the spirit of ,god   
may have wrought within the apostles    
generally with  greater power and       
clearness than in other teachers2 but   
its operation is  conditioned not merely
 by outward factors but by individual   
idiosyncrasy2  so that one who had not  

seen the ,lord and was therefore not an 
apostle  proper1 may have apprehended   
his mind better than an immediate       
disciple4  ,paul stood above the        
primitive apostles in the extent to     
which he fathomed  the pregnant sayings 
of ,jesus and developed their latent    
germs4 ,thus the  normative             
element--that which determines the      
varying degrees of authority  belonging 
to the ,new ,testament--does not lie in 
apostolic authorship but  internal      
worth2 in the clearness and power with  
which the divine ,spirit  enabled men to
 grasp the truth4 ,by distinguishing the
 temporal and the  eternal in           
christianity1 the writings necessarily  
rise or sink in  proportion to these    
elements4 ,the eternal is the essence   
and gem of  revealed truth4             
,perfectibility belongs only to the     
temporal2 it cannot  be predicated of   
the eternal4    ,the multitudinous      
collection of books contained in the    
,bible is not  pervaded by unity of     

purpose or plan1 so as to make a good   
classification  easy4 ,least of all is  
it dominated by such substantial unity  
as has been  connected with one man2 for
 the conception of a ,messiah was never 
the  national belief of ,judaism1 but a 
notion projected by prophets into the   
future to comfort the people in times of
 disaster2 the forecasting of           
aspirations doomed to disappointment4   
,from the collection presenting  various
 degrees of intellectual and moral      
development1 it is difficult to  see a  
sufficient reason for some being        
canonized to the exclusion of  better   
works which were relegated to the class 
of the apocryphal4    ,mr4              
,jones's7#cij7 statement that the       
primitive ,christians are proper judges 
to determine what book is canonical1    
requires great modification1 being  too 
vague to be serviceable2 for 8primitive 
,christians0 is a phrase that  needs to 
be defined4 ,how far do they extend8    
,how much of the first and  second      

centuries do they cover8 ,were not the  
primitive ,christians divided  in their 
beliefs8 ,did the ,jewish and the       
,pauline ones unite in accepting  the   
same writings8 ,not for a considerable  
time1 until the means of  ascertaining  
the real authors of the books and the   
ability to do so were  lacking4    ,as  
to the ,old ,testament1 the ,palestinian
 ,jews determined the canonical  books  
by gradually contracting the list and   
stopping it at a time when  their       
calamities throwing them back on the    
past for springs of hope1 had  stiffened
 them within a narrow traditionalism2   
but their brethren in  ,egypt1 touched  
by ,alexandrian culture and ,greek      
philosophy1 received later  productions 
into their canon1 some of which at least
 are of equal value  with ,palestinian  
ones4 ,in any case1 the degree of       
authority attaching to  the ,biblical   
books grew from less to greater1 till it
 culminated in a  divine character1 a   
sacredness rising even to infallibility4

 ,doubtless the  ,jews of ,palestine    
distinguished the canonical from the    
apocryphal or  deutero-canonical books  
on grounds satisfactory to themselves2  
but their  judgment was not infallible4 
,a senate of ,rabbis under the old      
dispensation  might err1 as easily as a 
synod of priests under the new4 ,though 
they may  have been generally correct1  
it must not be assumed that they were   
always so4 ,their discernment may be    
commended without being magnified4  ,the
 general feeling of leaning upon the    
past was a sound one1 for the best      
times of ,judaism had departed1 and with
 them the most original effusions2  yet 
the wave of ,platonism that passed over 
,alexandria could not but  quicken even 
the conservative mind of the ,jew4      
,greek thought blended with  echoes of  
the past1 though in dulled form4 ,still 
a line had to be drawn in  the national 
literature2 and it was well drawn on the
 whole4 ,the feeling  existed that the  
collection must be closed with works of 

a certain period  and a certain         
character2 and it was closed            
accordingly1 without preventing         
individuals from putting their private  
opinions over against authority1  and   
dissenting4    ,at the present day a new
 arrangement is necessary2 but where is 
the  ecclesiastical body bold enough to 
undertake it8 ,and if it were attempted 
or carried out by non-ecclesiastical    
parties1 would the churches approve  or 
adopt the proceeding8 ,we venture to    
say1 that if some books be  separated   
from the collection and others put in   
their place--if the  classification of  
some be altered1 and their authority    
raised or  lowered--good will be done2  
the ,bible will have a fairer degree of 
normal  power in doctrine and morals1   
and continue to promote spiritual life4 
,faith in ,christ precedes faith in     
books4 ,unless criticism be needlessly  
negative it cannot remove this          
time-honored legacy from the position it
 is  entitled to1 else the spiritual    

consciousness of humanity will rebel4   
,while the subject is treated           
reverently1 and the love of truth       
overrides  dogmatic prejudices1 the     
canon will come forth in a different    
form from  that which it has had for    
centuries--a form on which faith may    
rest without  misgiving4    ,the canon  
was a work of divine providence1 because
 history1 in a religious  view1         
necessarily implies the fact4 ,it was a 
work of inspiration1 because  the agency
 of the ,holy ,spirit has always been   
with the people of ,god as a  principle 
influencing their life4 ,it was not1    
however1 the result of a  special or    
peculiar act of divine inspiration at   
any one time1 but of  a gradual         
illuminating process1 shaped by         
influences more or less active  in the  
divine economy4    ,the canonical       
authority of ,scripture does not depend 
on any church or  council4 ,the early   
church may be cited as a witness for it2
 that is all4  ,canonical authority lies

 in ,scripture itself1 and is inherent  
in the books  so far as they contain a  
declaration of the divine will4 ,hence1 
there is  truth in the statement of old 
theologians that the authority of       
,scripture  is from ,god alone4 ,it was 
the early church indeed that made the   
canon1  selecting the books which       
appeared to have been written by        
apostles or  apostolic men1 and carrying
 over to them authority from alleged    
authenticity more than internal value4  
,but the latter is the real index of    
authority2 and ,god is the fountain from
 whom spiritual endowments              
proceed47#cia7 ,the canonicity of the   
books is a distinct question from  that 
of their authenticity4 ,the latter is a 
thing of historic criticism2  the former
 of doctrinal belief4 ,their            
ecclesiastical authority rests on       
outward attestation2 their normal1 on   
faith and feeling4                      
,,footnotes          #a 4        #b ,zur
 ,geschichte des ,kanons1 pp #c-fh4     

#c ,clement4 ,hom4 ap4 ,coteler1 vol4 i4
 p4 #fjh4        #d ,stromata1 vi4 #ae1 
p4 #hjc1 ed4 ,potter4        #e ,adv4   
,hres41 i4 #ie4        #f ,ap4 ,euseb4  
,h4 ,e41 v4 #bd4        #g ,de prscript4
 ,hreticorum1 chs4 #ab1 #ac4        #h  
,comment4 in ,mat4 iii4 p4 #iaf2 ed4    
,delarue4        #i  4       #aj        
,monumenta vetera ad ,donatistarum      
historiam petinentia1 ed4 ,dupin1       
p4 #afh4       #aa 4       #ab ,at the  
end of the ,iambi ad ,seleucum1 on the  
books of the ,new        ,testament1 he 
adds1               4       #ac         
,prologus galeatus in ii4 ,reg4         
#ad ,expos4 in ,symb4 ,apost41 #cg1 p4  
#cgd1 ed4 ,migne4       #ae 4       #af 
and 4       #ag 4       #ah ,such as 1 4
       #ai  or 4       #bj 4       #ba  
,orat4 de ,ordin41 vol4 ii4 p4 #dd4     
#bb 4 ,the ,jews applied the word       
genuzim to books withdrawn from         
public use1 whose contents were thought 
to be out of harmony with        the    
doctrinal or moral views of ,judaism    

when the canon was closed4        ,see  
,frst's ,der ,kanon des alten           
,testaments1 p4 #abg1 note2 and         
,geiger's ,urschrift1 p4 #bja4       #bc
 4       #bd ,h4 ,e4 ,il4 #bc1 ,,iii4   
#c-af4       #be ,stromata1 lib4 iii4 p4
 #aacd1 ed4 ,migne4       #bf ,prolog4  
ad ,cant41 opp41 vol4 iii4 p4 #cf4      
#bg 1 4       #bh ,see ,suicer's        
,thesaurus1 s4v4       #bi  1 libri     
ecclesiastici4       #cj ,in his epistle
 to ,laeta he uses the epithet in its   
customary sense1        of books        
unauthentic1 not proceeding from the    
authors whose names        they bear4   
,opp4 vol4 i4 p4 #hgg1 ed4 ,migne4      
#ca ,num4 xxi4 #ad4       #cb ,joshua x4
 #ab1 #ac2 #b ,sam4 i4 #ah4       #cc #b
 ,sam4 viii4 #af2 #a ,kings iv4 #c4     
#cd ,isaiah1 xl4-lxvi4       #ce ,chap4 
xiv4 #bc-ej1 c4 ,see ,hilgenfeld's      
,messias ,judrorum1 p4 #ajg4       #cf  
,see ,buxtorf's ,tiberias1 chap4 x41 p4 
#hh1 c42 and ,herzfeld's                
,geschichte des ,volkes ,israel1 vol4 i4

 p4 #chj1 c4 ,zwlfter        ,excursus4 
#cg ,chapter i4       #ch  4 ,does this 
mean for1 instead of1 as ,bloch         
understands it8        ,waehner inserts1
 to fill up the sense1 8some of which1  
however1 were        composed by20 but  
this is far-fetched4 ,see ,antiquitates 
,ebrorum1        p4 #ac4       #ci ,fol4
 #ae1 #a4       #dj 4       #da ,studien
 zur ,geschichte der ,sammlung der      
althebrischen ,literatur1        p4     
#abg1 c4       #db vii4 #ab1  1 not  4  
#dc ,that the ,scribes always adhered to
 the prohibition to write no            
religious laws and ordinances cannot be 
held1 even in the face of        the    
,talmudic saying1     7writers of       
,halacoth are        like a burner of   
the law74 ,this may apply to the late   
scribes or        bookmen1 not to the   
earlier4 ,the greater part of ,geiger's 
,urschrift is based on the opposite     
idea4 ,as the reverence for             
former scholars increased1 the ,talmudic
 saying might be accepted4        ,see  

,temura1 #ad b4       #dd ,chapter ix4  
#b4       #de ,chapter ii4 #ac4         
#df ,antiq4 xii4 #aj1 #a4       #dg     
,josephus's ,antiq41 xiii4 #e1 #h2 #a   
,maccab41 xii4 #ce4       #dh #a        
,maccab41 xiii4 #cf4       #di ,sota1   
#bd a4       #ej 1 ,nehemiah viii4 #c4  
#ea ,talmudic tradition1 which          
attributes the redaction of the book to 
the men of the great synagogue who are  
said to have acted under the            
influence of the divine spirit1         
separates the three apocryphal          
pieces from the rest2 but this arose    
from the desire of                      
discountenancing the idea that the work 
consists of romance and        legend4  
,such later tradition took curious ways 
of justifying the        canonicity of  
,daniel and the redaction of it by the  
great synagogue1        ex gr41 the     
assumption that the second part arose   
out of a series        of unconnected   
,megiloth which were not reduced to     
chronological        order4 ,still the  

,midrash maintains that ,daniel1 or the 
person        writing in his name1 was  
no prophet1 like ,haggai1 ,zechariah1   
and        ,malachi1 but a man of       
visions1 an apocalyptist4 ,it was a     
general        belief1 that visions had 
come into the place of prophecy when    
the book appeared4 ,the ,greek          
translation could not have been long    
after the original1 because it is used  
in the ,first ,book of                  
,maccabees4 ,the interval between the   
,hebrew and the ,greek was              
inconsiderable4 ,the translator not only
 departed from1 but added to1        the
 original1 inserting such important     
pieces as the ,prayer of                
,azarias1 the ,song of the ,three       
,children1 the history of ,susanna1 and 
that of ,bel and the ,dragon4 ,whether  
any of these had been written           
before is uncertain4 ,most of the       
traditions they embody were             
probably reduced to writing by the      
translator1 and presented in his        

peculiar style4 ,the assertion1 that    
,josephus was unacquainted with         
these additions is hazardous1 since the 
way in which he speaks of               
,daniel's fame 7,antiq4 x4 #aa1 #g71 and
 especially of the books he        wrote
 7 71 supposes some relation to them4   
,elsewhere he        speaks of one book 
7x4 #aj1 #d2 xi4 #h1 #e71 where he may  
have thought        of the canonical    
part4       #eb 1 translated by the     
,greek 1 hagiographa4       #ec ,it has 
been thought that the phrase   in the   
ninth verse        alludes to the great 
council or synagogue4 ,this conjecture  
is        plausible on various grounds4 
,the reasons for attributing the        
epilogue to a later time than the writer
 of the book appear to be               
stronger than those assigning it to the 
original author4 ,the #acth        and  
#adth verses in particular1 are unlike  
,coheleth4       #ed    2    4 ,the     
younger ,sirach does        not use 1   
which would have been a proper          

translation of        c'tubim4 ,does not
 this  imply the non-application of the 
specific title c'tubim to the           
hagiographa at that time1 and           
therefore the idea that the third canon 
was still open8       #ee ,contra       
,apion1 i4 #h4       #ef ,in ,maaser    
,sheni1 ,sota #bd4 #a1 the duumvirate or
 suggoth1 consisting        of the      
president1 ,nasi1 and vice-president1   
,ab-beth-din1 are        referred to    
,hyrcanus's creation4 ,zunz affirms that
 it originated in        the time of    
,simon1 son of ,mattathias1 #adb ,b4,c4 
#eg ,antiq41 xiv41 #i4       #eh ,der   
gerichtliche ,beweis1 p4 #fh4       #ei 
,the ,sanhedrim properly so called      
ceased under ,r4 ,judah ,i41            
,ha-,nasi1 when the council of seventy  
members which sat at ,sepphoris         
before his patriarchate1 transferred its
 privileges to him1 on his              
removal to that place4 ,the court was   
then merged in the patriarch4       #fj 
literally concealed1 withdrawn from     

public use4       #fa ,see ,frst's ,der 
,kanon des alten ,testaments1 u4s4w4 pp4
 #adg1 #adh4       #fb ,tract4 ,sabbat4 
ch4 i4       #fc ,because of its profane
 spirit and ,epicurean ideas2 see       
,adoyot v4 #c4       #fd ,yadayim v4 #c4
       #fe ,see ,graetz's ,kohelet1 pp4 
#afb1 #afc4       #ff ,the sages wished 
to pronounce ,coheleth apocryphal1      
because its        statements are       
contradictory4 ,and why have they not   
declared it        apocryphal8 ,because 
it begins with words of the law1 and    
ends with        words of the law1 for  
it opens with the words 8,what advantage
 has        man in all his labor        
wherewith he labors under the sun80 c41 
c4--,sabbat4 #cj b4          ,so also in
 the ,midrash3 8,the sages wished to    
pronounce ,coheleth        apocryphal10 
c41 c4--,vayyikra rabba #afa b4         
#fg ,r4 ,simeon ben ,asai said1 8,i have
 received it from the mouth of the      
#gb elders in the day that ,r4 ,eleasar 
ben ,asaria was appointed elder1        

that the ,song of ,songs and ,coheleth  
pollute the hands40--,yadayim v4        
#c4       #fh ,this language was based  
on a figurative interpretation of the   
,song4        ,one who said1 8,whoever  
reads such writings as ,sirach and the  
later        books loses all part in    
everlasting life10 can have no weight4  
,he        outheroded the ,palestinian  
tradition respecting the ,jewish        
productions of later origin1 which      
merely affirms that they 8do not        
pollute the hands40--7,toss4 ,yadayim1  
c4 #b7       #fi ,studien zur           
,geschichte1 u4 s4 w41 p4 #aej1 c4      
#gj ,geiger's ,urschrift1 p4 #bhh4      
#ga ,see ,de ,goeje in the ,theologisch 
,tijdschriff ,jaargang ,,ii4 7#ahfh7 p4 
#agi1 c4       #gb ,zunz's ,die         
gottesdienstlichen ,vortrge1 pp4 #aja1  
#ajb4       #gc ,v4 #bj1 p4 #abd1 ed4   
,ueltzen4       #gd ,dillmann1 in the   
,jahrbcher fr deutsche ,theologie1      
dritter ,band1        p4 #dbb4       #ge
 ,in his ,antiq41 x4 #d1 #e1 and xi4    

#a-e4       #gf iv4 #f1 sec4 #c1 and vi4
 #b1 sec4 #a4       #gg xi4 #h1 sec4 #e4
       #gh ,article 8,kanon0 in         
,herzog's ,encyklopdie1 vol4 vii41 p4   
#bec2 and        the same author's      
,prolegomena zur ,theologie des alt4    
,test41 pp4        #ia1 #ib4       #gi  
,see ,abulfatach's ,annal4 ,samar41 p4  
#ajb1 #i1 c4       #hj ,kirschbaum1     
,weisse1 and ,noack4       #ha          
,einleitung in das alte ,testament1 vol4
 i4 p4 #acc4       #hb ,de vita         
contemplativa1 ,opp4 ,tom4 ii41 ,p4     
#dge1 ed4 ,mangey4       #hc ,see       
,credner's ,zur ,geschichte des ,kanons1
 p4 #abd4       #hd ,de mens4 et pond41 
chapters #bb1 #bc1 vol4 ii4 p4 #ahj1 ed4
 ,petav4       #he ,baba ,bathra1 fol4  
#ad1 #b4       #hf ,see ,frst1 ,der     
,kanon u4 s4 w4 p4 #ad1 c4       #hg    
,studien zur ,geschichte der            
alttestamentliche ,literatur1 u4 s4 w41 
p4 #ah1 etc4       #hh ,hody ,de        
,bibliorum textibus originalibus1 p4    
#fdd4       #hi ,hody gives lists of the

 order in which the books stand in some 
early        printed editions and in a  
few ,,mss41 p4 #fde4       #ij ,die     
,apokryphen1 u4 s4 w41 p4 #ad1 c4       
#ia ,studien und ,kritiken for #ahec1 p4
 #bfg1 c4       #ib ,a ,scholastical    
,history of the ,canon1 p4 #bb4         
#ic ,see ,rothe1 ,zur ,dogmatik1        
,studien u4 ,kritiken for #ahfj1 p4 #fg1
 c4        ,the apostle's argument rests
 on the occurrence of the singular      
7seed1 7 in ,genesis xvii4 #h 7,,lxx471 
not the plural 7seeds1        72 though 
the plural of the corresponding ,hebrew 
word could        not have been used1   
because it has a different              
signification4        ,grammatical      
inaccuracy is made the basis of a       
certain theological                     
interpretation4 ,those who wish to see a
 specimen of labored        ingenuity   
unsuccessfully applied to the           
justification of ,st4 ,paul's           
argument in this passage1 may consult   
,tholuck's ,das alte ,testament         

in neuem ,testament1 p4 #fc1 etc4       
,vierte ,auflage4 7,epist4 to the       
,galatians iii4 #af47       #id ,died   
#bjb ,a4,d4       #ie ,advers4 ,hares41 
v4 #ce1 referring to ,baruch iv4 #cf1   
and v4 p4 #cce1        ed4 ,massuet4    
#if ,ibid41 iv41 #bf1 referring to      
,daniel xiii4 #bj in the ,septuagint4   
#ig ,died #bbj;,a4,d4       #ih ,pdagog4
 vi4 #c4       #ii ,stromata1 ii4 #bc4  
#ajj ,stromata1 iv4 #af4      #aja      
,ibid41 ii4 #g4      #ajb ,ex ,script4  
prophet4 eclogae1 c4 #a4      #ajc      
,stromateis1 ii4 #ae4      #ajd ,died   
#bfd ,a4,d4      #aje ,de ,natura2      
,routh's ,reliquiae ,sacrae1 vol4 iv4 p4
 #cef4      #ajf ,fragment4 ,nicet41 in 
,reliq4 ,sacrae1 vol4 ii4 p4 #djd4      
#ajg ,ibid41 p4 #djg4      #ajh ,ibid41 
p4 #djf4      #aji ,epistola ad4        
,dionys4 ,roman1 in ,reliq4 ,sacr41 vol4
 iii4 p4 #aie4      #aaj ,reliq4 ,sacr41
 vol4 ii4 p4 #djh4      #aaa ,died #bbj 
,a4,d4      #aab ,advers4               
,valentinianos4 ch4 #b4      #aac ,de   

,exhortatione ,castitatis1 ch4 #b4      
#aad ,contra ,gnosticos1 ch4 #h4        
#aae ,de ,habitu ,muliebri1 ch4 #c4     
#aaf ,epist4 #ee1 p4 #aaj1 ed4 ,fell4   
#aag ,de ,orat4 ,domin4 p4 #aec4        
#aah ,de ,exhortat4 ,martyrii1 ch4 #ab1 
p4 #ahb4      #aai ,de ,mortal1 p4 #afa4
      #abj ,de ,orat4 ,domin41 p4 #ada4 
#aba ,testim4 iii4 #d1 p4 #fb4      #abb
 ,de ,lapsis1 p4 #acc1 c4      #abc     
,adv4 ,noel4 v4      #abd ,see ,migne's 
edition1 p4 #fhi1 c4      #abe ,died    
after #aga4      #abf ,ap4 ,euseb4 ,h4  
,e41 lib4 iv4 ch4 #bf4      #abg ,died  
#bed1 ,a4,d4      #abh ,ap4 ,euseb4 ,h4 
,e41 lib4 iv4 ch4 #be4      #abi        
,comment4 in ,joann4 tom4 xxxii4 ch4    
#ad1 ed4 ,huet4 p1 #dji4      #acj      
,contra ,cels4 iii4 #gb2 vol4 i4 p4     
#did1 ed4 ,delarue4      #aca ,in       
,exodus1 ,hom4 vi4 i2 ,levit4 ,hom4 v4  
#b4      #acb ,in ,levit41 ,hom4 xii4   
#d4      #acc ,in ,lukam1 ,hom4 #ba4    
#acd ,de ,oratione1 ii4 p4 #bae4        
#ace ,opp4 ed ,delarue1 vol4 i4 p4 #ab4 

#acf ,died #caa4      #acg ,convivium   
decem virginum1 in ,combefis's          
,auctarium bibliothecae                 
,graecorum patrum1 p4 #fi4      #ach    
,ibid41 p4 #fi4      #aci ,ibid41 p4    
#aji4      #adj  4 ,ap4 ,euseb4 ,h4 ,e4 
iii4 #ci4      #ada ,davidson's         
,introduction to the ,study of the ,n4  
,testam4 vol4 x4 p4        #chh4        
#adb ,explanatio in ,epist4 ad ,titum1  
vol4 iv4 p4 #djg1 ed4 ,benedict4        
#adc ,die ,valentinianische ,gnosis und 
die heilige ,schrift1 p4 #ge4      #add 
,a good deal of manipulation has been   
needlessly employed for the             
purpose of placing these heretics as    
early as possible2 but nothing          
definite can be extracted from ,irenus's
 notices of them4        ,hippolytus's  
use of the present tense1 in speaking of
 them1 renders        it probable that  
they were nearly his contemporaries4    
#ade ,see the ,indexes to ,duncker and  
,schneidewin's edition4      #adf       
,bibliotheca1 cod4 #bcb4      #adg ,it  

is an unfounded assumption that ,paul   
cited the passage by 8mere              
accident20 on the contrary1 he gives it 
as canonical1 with 8as it is            
written0 7#a ,corinth4 ii4 #i74 ,it may 
be that the ,gnostics are               
referred to as using the objectionable  
passage2 but it is special              
pleading to limit it to them1 when ,paul
 has expressly used the        same1    
deriving it either from ,isaiah lxiv4   
#d1 or some unknown        document2    
just as it is special pleading to       
identify          standing beside   1   
with the ,new ,testament4 ,the          
word excludes ,paul's ,epistles from the
 canon2 nor is there any        evidence
 to the contrary1 as has been alleged1  
in the two ,syriac        epistles      
attributed to ,clement1 which ,wetstein 
published4 ,comp4        ,eusebius's ,h4
 ,e4 iv4 #bb1 ,photius's ,bibliotheca1  
#bcb4 ,apologists        have labored to
 prove ,hegesippus an orthodox ,catholic
 ,christian1        like ,irenus2 but in

 vain4 ,he was a ,jewish ,christian of  
moderate        type1 holding           
intercourse with ,pauline ,christians at
 the time when        the ,catholic     
,church was being formed4      #adh ,see
 ,hilgenfeld's ,zeitschrift for         
#ahge-ahgh4      #adi ,there is  instead
 of the ,septuagint's and ,mark's       
7,tischend47        4      #aej         
,geschichte ,jesu von ,nazara1 vol4 #a1 
p4 #add4      #aea ,see ,vision ii1 #c1 
#d1 with the prolegomena of ,de         
,gebhardt3 and        ,harnack1 p4      
lxxiii4      #aeb ,see ,holtzmann in    
,hilgenfeld's ,zeitschrift for #ahge1 p4
 #dj1 c4      #aec ,epist4 ch4 iv4      
#aed ,chapter xii4 pp4 #cj1 #ca1 ed4 #b1
 ,hilgenfeld4      #aee ,see ,chapter   
xv4 end1 with ,hilgenfeld's note1       
,barnabae epistula ed4        altera1   
pp4 #aah1 #aai4      #aef ,epis4 p4 #ac 
ed4 ,hilgenfeld4      #aeg ,zeitschrift 
fr wissenschaftliche ,theologie1 #ahga1 
,p4 #ccf1 etc4      #aeh ,chapters xvi4 
and iv4 ,in the former the reference is 

to ,enoch        lxxxix4 #ef1 #ff1 #fg1 
but the latter is not in the present    
book of        ,enoch1 though           
,hilgenfeld thinks he has discovered it 
in lxxxix4        #fa-fd and xc4 #ag4   
7,dillmann's ,das ,buch ,henoch1 pp4    
#fa1 #fc74 ,was        another          
apocryphal ,jewish book current in the  
time of ,barnabas1        under the name
 of ,enoch2 or did he confound one      
document with        another1 misled by 
the ,greek translation of an apocalyptic
 work        which had fallen into      
discredit8 ,see ,hilgenfeld's ,barnabae 
,epistula1 ed4 #b pp4 #gg1 #gh4         
#aei ,chapter xi4      #afj ,hist4      
,eccles4 iii4 #ci4      #afa ,a small   
body of literature originating in the   
fragment of ,papias        preserved by 
,eusebius 7,hist4 ,eccles4 iii1 #ci1    
#a-d7 has appeared2        though it is 
difficult to obtain satisfactory        
conclusions4 ,not only        have      
,weiffenbach and ,leimbach written      
treatises on the subject1 but           

other scholars have entered into it more
 or less fully1--,zahn1        ,steitz1 
,riggenbach1 ,hilgenfeld1 ,lipsius1     
,keim1 ,martens1 ,loman1                
,holtzmann1 ,hausrath1 ,tietz1 and      
,lightfoot4 ,the fragment is not of     
great weight in settling the            
authenticity of the four gospels4       
,indirectly indeed it throws some light 
on the connection of two                
evangelists with written memoirs of the 
life of ,jesus2 but it rather           
suggests than solves various matters of 
importance4 ,it is tolerably            
clear that the gospels1 if such they may
 be called1 of which he        speaks as
 written by ,matthew and ,mark1 were not
 identical with the        works now    
existing under the names of these       
evangelists2 and that no        safe    
conclusion can be drawn from ,papias's  
silence about ,john's and        ,luke's
 as not then in existence4 ,neither the 
present gospels nor any        other had
 been converted into ,scripture2 since  

he regarded oral        traditions as   
more credible than written memoirs4     
,those who hold        that the         
presbyter ,john was none other than the 
apostle1 ,eusebius        having        
misunderstood the fragment and made a   
different ,john from the        apostle1
 as well as the critics who deduce from 
the fragment the        fact that ,john 
suffered martyrdom in ,palestine1 have  
not established        these            
conclusions4 ,papias refers to the      
material he got for        explaining   
the 1 rather than the source whence they
 were drawn4        ,but whether he     
learnt directly from the elders1 or     
indirectly as the        preposition 77 
would seem to indicate1 and whether the 
sentence        beginning with 8,what   
,andrew10 c41 7  4 4 47 stands in       
apposition to the 8words of the elders10
 7          7 or not1 are things        
uncertain4      #afb ,epist4 ad         
,philadelph41 ch4 #e ,see ,hefele's note
 on the passage4 ,the        other      

well-known passage in chapter viii4 is  
too uncertain in        reading and     
meaning to be adduced here4      #afc   
,chapter iii4      #afd ,to the         
,ephesians1 chapter xii4      #afe      
,epist4 ad ,romanos1 iv4      #aff      
,testam4 ,benj4 #aa1 p4 #bja1 ed4       
,sinker4      #afg ,zeitschrift fr      
wissenschaftliche ,theologie1 #ahge1 p4 
#dij1 et        seq4      #afh   1      
4 ,sec4 #ajc4 ,here 8the                
apostles0 are not necessarily ,matthew  
and ,john4 ,apocryphal gospels          
then current bore the name of apostles  
or their attendants1--of        ,peter1 
,james1 ,nicodemus1 ,matthias1 c4       
#afi                      1   1 4 4 4   
,dial4 cum ,tryph41 #ajf4 ,here the     
pronoun  probably refers to             
,peter4 ,and the expression 8his        
memoirs0 can hardly mean ,mark's        
gospel1 since ,jerome is the first that 
calls it such4      #agj ,dialogus1 part
 ii41 p4 #cae1 ed4 ,thirlby4 ,comp4 on  
,justin1        ,tjeenk-,willink's      

,justinus ,martyr in zijne ,verhouding  
tot ,paulus4      #aga ,apolog4 i4 #ig1 
ed4 ,thirlby4      #agb ,hieronymi      
,prooem4 in ,epist4 ad ,titum4      #agc
 ,comp4 chap4 xii41 where  is applied to
 the apostolic epistles2        a title 
they did not receive so early as the age
 of ,polycarp4 ,zahn        himself     
admits this4      #agd ,chapter xiv4 #b4
      #age ,chapter ii4 #d4      #agf   
,see ,clementis ,romani ad ,corinthios  
quae discuntur epistulae1 ed4 de        
,gebhardt et ,harnack1 #b41 sec4 #aj1   
,prolegomena4      #agg ,legat4 pro     
,christ4 ,,ii1 #ab4      #agh ,ibid4    
#cc4      #agi ,chapter xviii4      #ahj
 ,ap4 ,euseb4 ,h4 ,e41 iv4 #bc4         
#aha ,ap4 ,euseb4 ,h4 ,e41 v4 #a1 p4    
#add1 ed4 ,bright4      #ahb  4 ,ad     
,autolycum1 iii4 #ad1 p4 #aada1 ed      
,migne4      #ahc ,ibid41 ii4 #bb4      
#ahd ,epist4 #aea1 ad ,algasiam4        
#ahe ,see ,overbeck's ,studien zur      
,geschichte der alten ,kirche1          
,abhandlung        ,i41 in which the    

date of the letter is brought down till 
after        ,constantine4 ,surely this 
is too late4      #ahf ,davidson's      
,introduction to the ,study of the ,new 
,testament1 vol4        ii4 p4 #ejh1 c4 
#ahg  4      #ahh  4      #ahi ,adves4  
,hres41 iv4 #bj1 #b4      #aij          
,stromateis1 ii4 #f1 p4 #ife1 ed4       
,migne4      #aia ,ibid41 iv4 #ag1 p4   
#acab4      #aib ,ibid41 i4 #bi1 p4     
#ibh4      #aic ,de ,oratione1 cap4 #ab4
      #aid ,de ,pudicitia1 cap4 #aj-bj4 
#aie ,g4 of ,st4 ,paul's epistles1 a    
,,ms4 of the ninth century according to 
,tischendorf4      #aif ,see ,anger's   
,ueber den ,laodicener ,brief1 #ahdc4   
#aig ,fertur etiam ad ,laudecences alia 
ad ,alexandrinos ,pauli nomine          
fincte ad hesem ,marcionis el alia plura
 qu in ,catholicam ecclesiam            
recepi non potest4 ,perhaps a comma     
should be put after nomine1        and  
fincte joined to what follows1 to the   
alia plura said to be        forged in  
the interest of ,marcion4      #aih     

,quarti evangeliorum ,johannis ex       
discipulis cohortantibus                
condiscipulis et episcopis suis dixit   
conjejunate mihi odie triduo        el  
quid cuique fuerit revelatum alterutrum 
nobis ennarremus eadem        nocte     
revelatum ,andre ex apostolis ut        
recogniscentibus cunctis                
,johannis suo nomine cuncta discriberet4
      #aii ,it is printed and largely   
commented on by ,credner in his         
,geschichte        des                  
neutestamentlichen ,kanon edited by     
,volkmar1 p4 #ada1 c41 and by           
,westcott ,on the ,canon1 ,appendix ,c1 
p4 #dff1 #b;d edition4 ,many others     
have explained it2 especially           
,hilgenfeld4      #bjj ,about ,a4,d4    
#aij4      #bja ,euseb4 ,h4 ,e4 vi4 #ab4
      #bjb ,tischendorf edited the      
,pauline epistles from this ,,ms4       
,lipsi1 #aheb4      #bjc ,died #bed     
,a4,d4      #bjd     1 1 4      #bje ,in
 one place1 however1 he calls it very   
useful and divinely        inspired4    

,comment4 in ep4 ad ,roman41 xvi4 #ad4  
#bjf 4      #bjg ,ap4 ,euseb1 ,hist4    
,eccles41 vi4 #be2 iii4 #be1 4      #bjh
 ,see ,euseb4 ,h4 ,e4 vi4 #be4 ,comment4
 in ,malth41 iii4 p4 #dfc2              
,ibid41 p4 #had2 ,comment4 in ep4 ad    
,roman41 iv4 p4 #fhc2 in        ,matth41
 iii4 p4 #fdd2 ,homil4 viii4 in ,numb41 
ii4 p4 #bid2 ,contra        ,cels41 i4  
#fc1 p4 #cgh2 ,de ,principiis prf41 i4  
p4 #di4 ,opp41 ed4        ,delarue4     
#bji ,died #cdj ,a4,d4      #baj ,hist4 
,eccles41 iii4 #be2 also #ca1 #ci2 vi4  
#ac1 #ad4      #baa 1 1 1 4      #bab 1 
1           1 4      #bac    2   7iii4  
#ca74      #bad ,this last with the     
qualification  4 ,in another place he   
states that it was rejected by some1 and
 therefore it is also along        with 
the  or 4      #bae 4      #baf 4       
#bag 4 ,hist4 ,eccles41 ii4 #bc4        
,christophorson1 ,schmid1 and ,hug      
think that ,eusebius gave the opinion of
 others in this word3 but it        is  
more likely that he gave his own1 as    

,valesius thinks4 ,see the        note  
in ,schmid's ,historia antiqua et       
vindicatio ,canonis1 c41 p4        #ceh4
      #bah ,ibid41 vi4 #ad4      #bai   
,see ,weber's ,beitrge zur ,geschichte  
des neutestamentlichen ,kanons1         
p4 #adb1 c4      #bbj 4 ,hist4 ,eccles41
 iii4 #af4      #bba ,adversus ,hres1   
iii41 ,,ii1 #h4      #bbb ,adv4 ,marc4  
iv4 #e4      #bbc ,de prscript4 hret4 c4
 #cf4      #bbd ,de prscript4 hret4 c4  
#cb4      #bbe ,ap4 ,euseb4 ,hist4      
,eccles4 ii4 #ae and vi4 #ad4      #bbf 
,ignatius von ,antiochien1 #ahgc2 and   
,prolegomena to the ,patrum             
,apostolicorum opera1 by de ,gebhardt1  
,harnack1 and ,zahn1 ,fasciculus1       
ii4      #bbg ,geschichte des neutest4  
,kanon1 p4 #bag1 c4      #bbh ,see      
,constit4 ,apostol41 p4 #fg1 ed         
,ueltzen4      #bbi ,died #chf ,a4,d4   
#bcj ,catech41 iv4 #bb1 pp4 #ff1 #fg1   
ed4 ,milles4      #bca ,ibid41 xi4 p4   
#adb4      #bcb ,ibid41 vi4 p4 #hj4     
#bcc ,ibid41 ix4 pp4 #aae1 #abb4        

#bcd ,ibid41 ix4 p4 #aae4      #bce     
,ibid41 ii4 p4 #ca4      #bcf ,ibid41   
xvi4 p4 #bci4      #bcg ,athanasii ,opp4
 ed4 ,benedict4 i4 #b1 pp4 #ifb1 #ifc4  
#bch ,orat4 contra ,arianos1 ii4 #ce1   
vol4 i4 #ejc1 ed4 ,benedict4      #bci  
,ibid41 ii4 #db1 i4 p4 #eaj4      #bdj  
,ibid41 ii4 #gi1 i4 p4 #edf4      #bda  
,epist4 ad episcop4 gypt41 c41 i4 #a1 p4
 #bgb4      #bdb ,contra ,arian41 i4    
#ab1 i4 p4 #daf4      #bdc ,apolog4     
contra ,arianos1 ii4 vol4 i4 p4 #acc4   
#bdd ,praepar ,evan41 i4 #i4      #bde  
,ibid41 xi4 #ad4      #bdf ,ibid41 xii4 
#ah4      #bdg ,ibid41 vi4 #aa4         
#bdh ,demon4 ,evang41 vi4 #ai4      #bdi
 ,died #cgi ,a4,d4      #bej ,homil4 in 
princip4 proverb4 ,opp4 ed4 ,garnier    
altera1 vol4 ii4 p4        #adj4        
#bea ,constitutiones ,monast41 c4 iii4  
#b4 ,ibid41 p4 #ggi4      #beb ,adv4    
,eunom1 vol4 i4 p4 #dag4      #bec ,de  
,spiritu ,sancto1 c4 viii4 vol4 iii4 p4 
#bc4      #bed ,in ,princip4 ,proverb1  
vol4 ii4 p4 #aeb4      #bee ,died #chi  

,a4,d4      #bef ,opp4 ed4 ,migne1 vol4 
iii4 pp4 #dgc1 #dgd4      #beg ,gregorii
 ,nazianzeni1 ,opp4 ed4 ,migne1 vol4    
iii4 pp4 #dgc1 #dgd4      #beh ,died    
#cie ,a4,d4      #bei ,iambi ad         
,seleucum2 in ,greg4 ,naz4 ,opp4 ii4 p4 
#aid4      #bfj ,died #djc ,a4,d4       
#bfa 4 ,adv4 ,hres1 i4 p4 #ai4 ,see     
,hres1 iii4 tom4 i4 p4 #ida4        ,de 
ponder4 et mensur4 #bc4      #bfb       
,advers4 ,hres1 lib4 i41 tom4 #b ed4    
,petav4 ,paris1 #affb1 p4 #gb4      #bfc
 ,ibid41 lib4 ii4 tom4 ii4 p4 #gha4     
#bfd ,ibid41 lib4 ii4 tom4 i4 p4 #ehj4  
#bfe ,ibid41 lib1 ii4 tom4 i4 p4 #dha4  
#bff ,ibid41 lib4 i4 tom4 ii4 p4 #aeg4  
#bfg ,hres1 xxx4 #ae4      #bfh ,died   
#cib ,a4,d4      #bfi ,enarrat4 in ep4  
,s4 ,petri secundam1 p4 #aggd ed ,migne4
      #bgj ,died  #djg ,a4,d4      #bga 
,see ,montfaucon in his edition of      
,chrysostom's ,works1 vol4 vi4 pp4      
#cfd1 #cfe1 ed4 ,paris1 #ahce4      #bgb
 ,expos4 in ,psalm cix4 #g4 ,see also   
xi4 #a in ,genes1 where ,wisdom xiv4 #c 

is cited4      #bgc ,expos4 in ,psalm   
xlix4 #c4      #bgd ,de ,lazaro1 ii4 #d4
      #bge ,died #cib ,a4,d4      #bgf  
,de ,trinitate1 iii4 #b4 p4 #gib ed4    
,migne4      #bgg ,fragmenta in ,epist4 
#b ad ,corinthios1 when ,baruch1 iii4   
#c1 is quoted        like ,psalm #aja1  
p4 #afig4      #bgh ,de ,spirit4 sanct4 
i4 p4 #ajcc4      #bgi ,died #dbh ,a4,d4
      #bhj ,see ,leontius ,byzantinus   
contra ,nestorianos et ,eutychianos1    
lib4 iii4        in ,gallandi           
,bibliotheca1 xii4 p4 #fij4 ,comp4      
,fritzsche ,de ,theodori                
,mopsuesteni vita et scriptis1 ,hal1    
#ahcf4      #bha ,died #ddd ,a4,d4      
#bhb ,contra ,julian1 i4 p4 #eda1 ed4   
,migne4      #bhc ,ibid41 p4 #hae4      
#bhd ,ibid41 p4 #iba4      #bhe ,in     
,isaim1 ed4 ,migne1 p4 #ic4      #bhf   
,p4 #hei1 vol4 i4      #bhg ,p4 #iaj1   
vol4 i41 ed4 ,migne4      #bhh  1 1 1 4 
#bhi  4      #bij ,died #dcj ,a4,d4     
#bia ,the forty-four books are1 #e of   
,moses1 ,joshua1 ,judges1 ,ruth1 #d     

,kings1        #b ,chronicles1 ,job1    
,tobit1 ,esther1 ,judith1 #b ,maccabees1
 ,ezra1        ,nehemiah1 ,psalms1 #c of
 ,solomon1 ,wisdom1 ,ecclesiasticus1 #ab
 ,prophets1        #d greater do4 ,de   
,doctrina ,christiana ii4 #h4      #bib 
,contra ,gaudent4 i4 #ch4 ,opp4 ,paris1 
#ahcg1 vol4 ix4 p4 #ajjf4      #bic ,de 
,doctr4 ,christ4 ii4 #h4 ,civitat4 ,dei4
 xviii4 #bj1 #a4      #bid ,de          
,praesdest4 ,sanct4 i4 #aa4      #bie   
,retractt4 i4 #aj4      #bif ,de        
,peccat4 merit4 i4 #ej2 ,opp4 vol4 x4 p4
 #acg1 ed4 ,migne4      #big ,mansi1    
tom4 iii4 p4 #ibd4      #bih ,ibid41 p4 
#hia4      #bii ,died #dbj ,a4,d4       
#cjj ,prologus galeatus in ,libros      
,regum4 ,epist4 ad ,paulinum4      #cja 
,in ,herbst's ,einleit41 erster ,theil1 
p4 #cg4      #cjb ,opp4 ed4 ,benedict41 
,vol4 ,,iv41 pp4 #fgi1 #fhd1 #gej4      
#cjc ,ep4 ad ,dardan4 ,opp4 vol4 i4 ,p4 
#aajc1 ed4 ,migne4      #cjd ,see       
,onomastica ,sacra2 ,comment4 in ,ep4 ad
 ,philem2 ,de ,viris illustr4      #cje 

,died #cfh ,a4,d4      #cjf ,prolog4 in 
,psalm41 ,opp4 ed4 ,migne1 vol4 i4 p4   
#bda4      #cjg ,de ,trinitate iv4 #af4 
#cjh ,ex4 ,op4 ,hist4 ,fragmentum1 iii4 
vol4 ii4 p4 #fgb ed4 ,migne4      #cji  
,in cxxvii4 ,psalm4      #caj ,in ,psalm
 cxxvi4 #f4      #caa ,in ,psalm lxviii4
 #ai1 and ,de ,trinitate1 iv4 #db4      
#cab ,ibid41 iv4 #h4      #cac ,died    
about #cgj ,a4,d4      #cad ,de         
,schismate ,donatist1 iii4 #c4      #cae
 ,ibid41 ii4 #be4      #caf ,died about 
#cgj ,a4,d4      #cag ,de non parcendo1 
c41 ed4 ,coleti1 p4 #aij4      #cah     
,ibid41 p4 #bcf4      #cai ,ibid41 p4   
#ahg4      #cbj ,pro ,athanasio1 lib4 i4
 p4 #ih4      #cba ,ibid41 p4 #aje4     
#cbb ,ibid41 lib4 ii4 pp4 #abg1 #abh4   
#cbc ,died #cig ,a4,d4      #cbd ,de    
,spiritu ,sancto iii4 #ah4      #cbe ,de
 bono mortis viii4      #cbf ,in ,psalm 
cxviii41 ,sermo4 #aah1 #b4      #cbg ,de
 ,spirit4 ,sancto4 iii41 vi4 #ci4       
#cbh ,liber de ,tobia4      #cbi ,died  
#daj ,a4,d4      #ccj ,expos4 in        

,symbol4 ,apostol41 pp4 #cgc1 #cgd1 ed4 
,migne4      #cca ,died about #chg      
,a4,d4      #ccb ,de ,hres4 chs4 #fj and
 #fa1 in ,galland1 vii4 pp4 #dbd1 #dbe4 
#ccc ,apud ,mansi1 iii4 pp4 #ajdj1      
#ajda4      #ccd ,credner's ,zur        
,geschichte des ,kanons1 p4 #aea1 c41   
and ,thiel's        ,epistol ,romanorum 
,pontificum genuinae1 tom4 i4      #cce 
,mansi iv4 p4 #dcj4      #ccf ,opp4     
,grc41 tom4 ii4 ,p4 #cbg1 ed4 ,rom4     
#agdf4      #ccg ,ibid41 tom4 i4 p4     
#aja4      #cch ,tom4 iii4 p4 #fj4      
#cci ,galland1 xii4 p4 #gi1 c4      #cdj
 ,see ,dillmann in ,ewald's ,jahrbcher1 
v4 p4 #add1 c4      #cda ,died #eii     
,a4,d4      #cdb ,see ,credner's ,zur   
,gesch4 des ,kanons1 p4 #ig1 c4         
#cdc ,died #hia ,a4,d4      #cdd        
,nomocanon1 ,titulus ,,iii41 cap4 #b1   
vol4 iv4 pp4 #ajej1 #ajea ed4           
,migne4      #cde ,see ,codd4 #aac1     
#abf4      #cdf ,died #ged ,a4,d4       
#cdg ,died #fcf ,a4,d4      #cdh        
,etymolog4 vi4 #a4      #cdi ,died  #fjd

 ,a4,d4      #cej ,died #iab ,a4,d4     
#cea ,died #gce ,a4,d4      #ceb ,died  
#hjd ,a4,d4      #cec ,died #hef ,a4,d4 
#ced ,died #aada ,a4,d4      #cee ,died 
#aaef ,a4,d4      #cef ,died #aahb      
,a4,d4      #ceg #abgj ,a4,d4      #ceh 
,died #abfc ,a4,d4      #cei ,died #achd
 ,a4,d4      #cfj ,died #acdj ,a4,d4    
#cfa ,see ,hody1 p4 #fdh1 c4      #cfb  
,chemnitz calls seven books of the ,new 
,testament apocryphos1        because of
 their uncertain authorship 7see ,examen
 ,concilii        ,tridentini1 p4 #de1  
c47      #cfc ,see ,tholuck's ,kommentar
 zum ,briefe an die ,hebrer1 zweite     
,auflage1        pp4 #ee1 #hf4      #cfd
 ,carlstadt's treatise is reprinted in  
,credner's ,zur ,geschichte des         
,kanons4      #cfe ,werke1 edited by    
,schuler and ,schulthess1 vol4 ii4 p4   
#afi4      #cff ,ep4 ad4 ,valdenses1    
#aecj1 apud4 ,sculteti annal4 evang4    
renovat        decas secunda1 pp4 #cac1 
#cad4      #cfg ,ibid4      #cfh ,hug   
says that his copy of ,widmanstad's     

edition had the ,acts        immediately
 following the ,gospels4      #cfi      
,epist4 ad ,paulinum4      #cgj ,hom4   
vii4 in ,josua4      #cga ,de ,bibliorum
 textibus originalibus1 c41 p4 #fed4    
#cgb ,ibid41 p4 #ffd4      #cgc ,see    
,zacagni's ,collectanea monumentorum    
veterum ,praefat1 p4 lxxi41        c4   
#cgd ,see ,volkmar's ,anhang to         
,crednet's ,geschichte des ,n4 ,t4      
,kanon1 p4        #cda1 c42 and ,hody   
,de ,bibliorum textibus originalibus1 p4
 #fdd1 c4      #cge ,niemeyer's         
,collectio ,confessionum1 p4 #dfh4      
#cgf ,ibid41 p4 #ccj4      #cgg ,ibid41 
pp4 #cfa1 #cfb4      #cgh ,see ,herzog's
 ,die ,romanischen ,waldenser1 p4 #ee1  
c42 and his        programm ,de origine 
et pristino statu ,waldensium1 c41 pp4  
#ag1 #dj1        #da4      #cgi ,leger's
 ,histoire des ,eglises ,vaudoises1 vol4
 i41 p4 #aab1 c4      #chj ,the reason  
given for their being added as a        
separate appendix is        that they   
are cited by some fathers and found in  

some ,latin ,bibles4      #cha ,kimmel's
 ,monumenta fidei eccles4 orient1 part  
i4 p4 #dfg4      #chb ,died #gia ,a4,d4 
#chc ,abhandlung von freier             
,untersuchung des ,canons1 #d parts1    
,halle1        #agga-agge4      #chd    
,see ,toland's ,nazarenus1 p4 #be1 c41  
second edition2 and ,morgan's           
,moral ,philosopher1 vol4 i4 p4 #ef1 c4 
#che ,for example1 8,moses is dead2 his 
rule went out when ,christ came--he     
is of no further service here4444 ,we   
are willing to regard him as a          
teacher1 but we will not regard him as  
our lawgiver1 unless he        agree    
with the ,new ,testament and the law of 
nature40 ,smmtliche        ,schriften1  
ed4 ,walch4 dritter ,theil41 pp4 #g1 #h4
      #chf ,such as ,calovius1          
,chemnitz1 ,john ,gerhard1 ,w4 ,lyser1  
,quenstedt1        ,brochmand1 ,hollaz1 
c4 ,melancthon also makes no important  
distinction between the two ,testaments 
in his ,loci theologici4                
,calvin's theology was derived from the 

,old ,testament more than the           
,new4      #chg ,his full sayings are   
collected in ,bretschneider's ,luther an
 unsere        ,zeit1 pp4 #ahf-bbd2 and 
in ,krause's ,opuscula theologica1 pp4  
#bje-bda4      #chh ,loci ,theologici   
,tom4 i4 pp4 #ahf1 #ahg1 ed4 ,cotta1    
#agfb4      #chi ,theologia             
,didactico-polemica1 p4 #cdj4      #cij 
,see ,jones's new and full method of    
settling the canonical authority        
of the ,new ,testament1 ,vol4 ,i41 ,part
 i41 chap4 #e4 page #eb1 ed4 #agbf4     
#cia ,ecclesia sua autoritate nullum    
librum facit canonicum1 quippe          
canonica scripturae autoritas est a solo
 ,deo1 c4 ,gerhard's ,loci              
,theologici1 tom4 i4 p4 #d1 ed4 ,cotta4 
,autoritas scriptur quoad nos           
nihil allud est1 quam manifestatio et   
cognitio unic illius divin        et    
summ autoritatis1 qu scriptum est       
interna et insita4 ,ecclesia            
igitur non confert scriptur novam       
aliquam autoritatem quoad nos1          

sed testificatione sua ad agnitionem    
illius2 veritatis nos deducit4          
,concedimus1 ecclesiam esse scriptur    
sacr testem1 custodem1        vindicem1 
praeconem1 et interpretem2 sed negarnus1
 ex eo effici1        quod autoritas    
scriptur sive simpliciter sive quoad nos
 ab ecclesia        pendeat et quidem   
unice1 pendeat4--,ibid41 tomus secundus1
 p4 #ci1        ed4 ,cotta4