THE CANON, AS OF 200 AD
THE CANON, AS OF 200 AD
Let’s pause to consider the status of the Apocrypha in the second century. After all, what date we use to end our inquiry into the “early Church” is arbitrary. I end at 450, Gallagher and Meade at 400, but we could just as easily pick 200. If we did, then what would the canon be?
As of the year 200, all the evidence shows that Susanna and Baruch were accepted as Scripture, with no evidence to dispute it.[1] Melito’s canon list would seem to include them both.
Meanwhile, Wisdom may be on canon lists, possibly even all of them, depending on the dating of lists, whether they are Christian lists, and whether the word Wisdom on Melito’s list really means the Book of Wisdom.
The other five Apocrypha do not show up on lists, which might be meaningful or might not, depending on the nature of Melito’s list; in addition they may show up on a list if we accept Clement’s list as a list (since it includes Sirach) or expand it to add the Apocrypha that Clement considered Scripture but that Eusebius did not list as “disputed” (I found such cites to at least Baruch, Judith, Tobit, and 2 Maccabees; he also cites to 1 Maccabees but not expressly as Scripture).
Regardless, Apocrypha had been referenced in the New Testament (using Stewart’s standards), and in the earliest extra-Biblical writings of the earliest Christians. They had all been clearly cited by the year 200 (or 203). Citations from Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, etc. are the same people we rely on for acceptance of the fourfold Gospel and numerous Epistles. The evidence for the acceptance of the Apocrypha comes from different geographies; the Fathers are known to have direct connections to the even more distant past, and their testimony is corroborated by earlier allusions. All these are considered good reasons to trust that they are passing on truths and documents that were passed down to them—or so it is said, when the topic is the Gospels.
We can compare the Apocrypha to other canonical Books. Melito leaves Esther out, which is a “bad fact” for Esther, as it is for the Apocrypha not mentioned on Melito’s list (but which is a relatively “good fact” for Wisdom, Susanna, and Baruch, since they were/may have been included when Esther was not). Otherwise, it is unclear whether Lamentations is considered part of Jeremiah or what he means by “Esdras” (and other such quibbles). These involve issues comparable with the claims made for Baruch and Susanna.
Not all the canonical Books have been cited by Christians—some take until after the year 200. In fact, a few have not even been alluded to yet, let alone cited.
We can also compare with the canon of the Jews at 200. There is some Jewish citation evidence for the canonical Books.[2] The Christian citation evidence also supports Jewish acceptance of some of the Books of the Jewish canon. But the Jews also provide citation evidence for the Apocrypha (see Sirach below; Josephus references the longer parts of Esther; etc.), and there is physical evidence from Qumran and other sites supporting the acceptance of both the modern Jewish canon and Apocrypha (see Sirach and Tobit below, etc.). Josephus provides the number (22) of Books but not the names he means to include. Melito’s list is either direct or indirect evidence of what (he claims) the Jews accepted. It supports some of their canon, but not Esther, and may indicate that the Jews accepted Wisdom, Susanna, and Baruch. The Talmud’s list may also be evidence, if truly written by 200 AD. But Melito’s list and the Talmud conflict—as do Melito and Josephus. Melito’s list does not equal the “from 22 to 39” logic that is so often attributed to Josephus’ number (given at least Esther, Ruth, Wisdom, Susanna, and Baruch).
[1] In addition to the evidence discussed earlier, before 200 AD, Athenagoras cites to Baruch, and Tertullian to Susanna. There is another line of evidence relating to the Church’s use of the Septuagint. Also remember the possible Biblical argument about Baruch as part of Jeremiah earlier, although that is debatable. On the other hand, there is no evidence of any Christian denying or rejecting these Books until Jerome. The closest we come is Africanus, well after the year 200, but even he only asks for instruction on Susanna.
[2] I have no idea what it is specifically, but I presume it exists. I know Josephus, Philo, the Dead Sea Scrolls, etc. refer to a lot of the Books, but whether they (and others) mention all of them would be the question.
