# Paul's Canon



## Curt (Feb 1, 2010)

NOTE TO MODS: Not sure where to put this thread. It seems to defy the given categories.

During a discussion at our evening service last night regarding the phrase, "the Law and the Prophets," a question arose. Perhaps some of you brothers would like to share your thoughts on what was in Paul's Bible. What did he have? What books did he read?


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Feb 1, 2010)

The phrase, "law and the prophets" is a description of the entire Old Testament. Not having books bound together as we do, they had their writings chiefly upon scrolls. Those would be designated by some kind of classification.

2Ki.17:13 The LORD warned Israel and Judah through all his prophets and seers: "Turn from your evil ways. Observe my commands and decrees, in accordance with the entire *Law *that I commanded your fathers to obey and that I delivered to you through my servants the *prophets*."

All the OT was the product of the prophets, but the law was the special provenance of Moses, a unique figure; and it (and he) was foundational to all that followed, Dt.18:15ff.

Jesus refers to a three-part division of the OT in Lk.24:44, Now He said to them, " These are My words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things which are written about Me in the *Law *of Moses and the *Prophets *and the *Psalms *must be fulfilled." The last division correlates with what today is called in the Jewish understanding "the Writings" portion, or what we commonly call "Poetry" (but today they include others that we have concluded under the Prophets, e.g. Daniel, Lamentations). David, however, is clearly a prophet, Acts 2:30, Mt.22:43.

The OT was translated into Greek, and that version(s) was spread abroad the Gk speaking world, it being the lingua franca of the day. The Septuagint (so it was called, abbr. LXX) created the more common divisions we know today, Redemptive History, Poetry, and Prophets. Paul was no doubt familiar with both the Hebrew original and the Greek translation.

The fact that the LXX included other writings (Apocrypha) has led some to think that the OT was not long closed by the days of Christ and the Apostles. But it is clear from Josephus, Philo, and following the later development of Jewish religious thought, that this was not the attitude of those in Christ's earthly day.

A reasonable explanation for the additional material in the LXX is that it was not viewed as a purely inspired work, but partly as a cultural anchor for the Jewish diaspora. So, other Jewish literature of a religious/historic nature was included. But clearly, the Hebrew Scriptures were the recognized authority, and there is no evidence that after Malachi, other writings were considered prophetic. It is doubtful, then, that Paul would have considered any of the additional writings which came to be incorporated into the LXX had any religious authority (assuming that he even encountered them as part of the Gk OT, where he found it when going from place to place).


----------



## PuritanZealot (Feb 13, 2010)

Paul would have had access to all the scriptures, being a Pharisee by training and by birth. The scriptures were written down on scrolls in those days, and usually separated into their prophet or sections usually divided. For example the Dead Sea Scrolls horde (as displayed in the Museum in Israel) contained an entire copy of the Scroll of Isaiah and half copies, bits and pieces and miscopies of several other Biblical scrolls.
I think most synagogues at the time would have endeavoured to have most of the Old Testament but definitely the five books of Moses. Most middle to lower class houses wouldn't have been able to afford all the scrolls, especially not a Greek Septuagaint, so someone like Paul definitely had an orthodox upbringing and training as a fully fledged Pharisee (as he declares).


----------

