The Integrity of the Biblical Canon in Light of Its Historical ...

102 Bulletin for Biblical Research 6
will often attribute to ancient writers a canon 2 notion when in fact
they are only dealing with a canon 1 authority, that is, one that is
fluid and open to change even though it is functioning as an authority.
I will be using these distinctions (fluid vs. fixed) in what follows
and will argue that what is called "canonical" (canon 2) by some
scholars is often much less fixed (canon 1). For example, the Prophets
(Nebiim) and most of the Writings (Ketubim) were recognized as
canon 1 authorities long before they were finally acknowledged as a
fixed part of the Hebrew Scriptures (the OT). There are many canon 1
texts in antiquity. Undoubtedly, for some in Israel and for some of
the early Christians also, this included the acceptance of apocryphal
and pseudepigraphal writings as sacred authorities. In the case of the
OT, only the Law and the Prophets appear to fall under the category
of canon 2 before the time of Christ. In the case of the NT writings,
only a few were generally accepted in a canon 2 fashion before the
end of the second century CE (the Gospels and most of the letters of
Paul). The Former Prophets were a recognized authority in the time
of Ezra, and the people of Israel were judged because they failed to
listen to the prophets who witnessed to or proclaimed the message of
the Law (Ezra 9:10ff.). 18 In the time of Ezra, however, only the Mosaic
codes were given a canon 2 recognition, and the prophets themselves
were not yet brought into that arena of fixed authority. There is no
such recognition given to the writings of the classical prophets at this
time, even though they were mentioned occasionally. All references
to the prophets in these works have to do with the prophets' public
proclamation in their ministry, that is, in their work on the temple,
but there is nothing said about their literary productions (see Ezra
5:1-2 where Haggai and Zechariah are mentioned; see also Ezra 9:11;
Neh 6:7, 14; 9:26, 30, 32). It is also not clear whether the prophets in
these contexts are equal to the writing prophets of either the Former
or Latter Prophets. If the Prophets as a written collection had been
recognized as sacred Scripture (canon 2) in the days of Ezra, this
would have been a perfect time and place to introduce these writings
to the people, but only the Books (or laws?) of Moses were acknowledged
as canon 2 by Ezra and the people at that time. In the Qumran
community, it was not uncommon to have additions and alterations
made to the text of Scripture and even deletions as in the case of the
scroll of Isaiah. Does this suggest that for them many of these writings
had not yet become canon 2, that is, inviolable? The evidence is
not clear enough to make that point, but it is suggestive.
18. The prophets witnessed to or reminded the people of the Law of Moses in
regard to intermarriage (cf. Exod 34:15-16 and Deut 7:1-5). The judgment of God came
as a result of the people's failure to listen to the message from Moses. Moses' message
was viewed as canon 2, but it is not clear that other writings were so recognized. The
writings of the prophets are not in view in Ezra.