Timeline of the Biblical Canon | The Bible That Built the Church

One of the most common misunderstandings among Christians today — especially among Protestants — is the idea that the Bible's table of contents has always been obvious and uncontested. Many of us grew up assuming that the 66-book Protestant Bible simply fell from heaven fully formed, that there was never any real debate about which books belong in the Old Testament, and that the question was settled once and for all before the time of Jesus. As we have seen throughout this book, that assumption is deeply mistaken.

The story of how we got our Bible — and especially how we got our Old Testament — is a long, complicated, and sometimes surprising tale. It stretches across more than two thousand years, involves Jewish rabbis and Christian bishops, popes and Reformers, church councils and Bible publishing societies. It touches on politics, theology, economics, and even anti-Catholic prejudice. And at the center of this story stands one fundamental question: Which books belong in the Bible?

This appendix presents a chronological timeline of the key events in the history of the Old Testament canon, from the translation of the Septuagint in the third century BC to the modern era. For each event, I have included a brief description explaining its significance for the canon question. My goal is to give you a single, easy-to-reference overview of the entire story — a story that, as we have argued throughout this book, leads to a conclusion most Protestants do not expect: that the Bible which built the church was bigger than the Bible most Protestants use today.

Part I: The Ancient Period — The Birth of the Septuagint and the Diversity of Jewish Scriptures (c. 330 BC – AD 70)

We begin our story in the ancient world, during the period when the Jewish Scriptures were still being written, translated, and collected. This was a time of enormous diversity — different Jewish communities used different collections of sacred books, in different languages, and there was no single, universally recognized "canon" in the modern sense of the word. Understanding this diversity is essential for understanding why the question of canon became so complicated in later centuries.

Part II: The Apostolic and Early Patristic Period — The Church Receives Its Bible (AD 30 – c. 325)

The early church did not create a new Bible. It inherited one — the Septuagint, in all its breadth. The apostles and their immediate successors quoted the Greek Old Testament extensively, including the deuterocanonical books. Meanwhile, in the aftermath of the destruction of the Temple in AD 70, the rabbinic establishment began a long, gradual process of narrowing the Jewish canon — a process that would eventually exclude the very books the church was using as Scripture.

Part III: The Fourth and Fifth Centuries — Canon Lists, Councils, and the Jerome-Augustine Debate (c. 325–450)

The fourth and fifth centuries represent a critical period in the history of the canon. This is when the first formal canon lists were produced, when the great ecumenical and regional councils began to address the question of which books belong in the Bible, and when the famous debate between Jerome and Augustine over the deuterocanonical books took place. The picture that emerges is clear: while a few voices — most notably Jerome — questioned the canonicity of the deuterocanonical books (largely under the influence of Jewish informants), the overwhelming consensus of the church was that these books are Scripture.

Part IV: The Medieval Period — A Millennium of Consensus (c. 450–1400)

For approximately one thousand years after the North African councils, the canon of the Old Testament was not a significant area of controversy in the church. The Vulgate — which included the deuterocanonical books — was the standard Bible of the Western church. The Eastern churches continued to use the Septuagint. While a few scholars during this period expressed reservations about the deuterocanon (usually by quoting Jerome), the vast majority of medieval theologians accepted these books as Scripture. The deuterocanonical books were read in worship, used in catechesis, cited in theological debates, and featured in art and devotion throughout the Christian world.

Part V: The Councils — Formal Ecumenical Affirmation of the Canon (1442–1546)

In the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, the church's ecumenical and general councils formally addressed the question of the canon at the highest level of ecclesiastical authority. These conciliar decisions are critically important because they demonstrate that the affirmation of the deuterocanonical books as Scripture was not a late, reactionary innovation — it was the formal codification of what the church had always practiced.

Part VI: The Reformation and Its Aftermath — The Removal of the Deuterocanon (c. 1517–1827)

The Protestant Reformation brought the question of the canon back into the spotlight for the first time in over a millennium. The Reformers did not simply accept the canon they had inherited from the medieval church. Instead, they returned to Jerome's minority position and began to question the deuterocanonical books — initially relegating them to a secondary status, and eventually removing them from the Bible altogether. But this removal happened gradually, over the course of three centuries, and its final step was driven not by theology but by economics.

Part VII: The Modern Era — Recovery and Reassessment (c. 1827–Present)

The story does not end with the BFBS decision. The modern era has brought several developments that have fundamentally challenged the Protestant consensus on the canon — most notably the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, which dramatically reshaped our understanding of the textual diversity of the Second Temple period, and the growing ecumenical awareness that the Protestant 66-book canon is not as self-evident as most Protestants assume.

Summary: The Canon at a Glance

The following condensed timeline provides a quick-reference summary of the key events covered in this appendix:

Concluding Reflections

When we step back and survey this timeline as a whole, several things become clear.

First, the deuterocanonical books were part of the church's Bible from the very beginning. They were included in the Septuagint — the Bible of the apostles. They were used by the church fathers from the earliest post-apostolic writings. They were included in the great codices. They were affirmed by every church council that addressed the canon question — from Hippo in 393 to Florence in 1442 to Trent in 1546. For more than 1,500 years, no ecumenical council, no pope, no major creed, and no mainstream theological tradition rejected these books.

Second, the rejection of the deuterocanon is a relatively recent development — and one that was driven as much by economics and anti-Catholic prejudice as by theology. Luther initiated the process by relegating these books to a secondary status in 1534. The Westminster Confession hardened the rejection in 1646. But the books remained physically present in Protestant Bibles until the Bible societies removed them in the 1820s. The final cut was made not by theologians but by a publishing committee trying to save money on paper and printing.

Third, the narrowing of the Jewish canon — which Protestants often cite as the basis for their shorter Old Testament — was itself a product of the rupture between Judaism and Christianity. The rabbis narrowed their canon after the destruction of the Temple, under the leadership of Akiba, in part to distance themselves from the Christians who were using the broader Septuagint canon. When Protestants appeal to the rabbinic canon as normative for Christians, they are unwittingly accepting the canon decisions of rabbis who made those decisions, at least in part, precisely to undermine Christian claims. This is deeply ironic.

Fourth, the Dead Sea Scrolls have confirmed that there was no single, fixed Jewish canon before the time of Jesus. The diversity of textual traditions and scriptural collections at Qumran — including copies of deuterocanonical books — proves that the question of "which books belong in the Bible" was still open and contested in the Second Temple period. The idea that "the Jews had already settled their canon before Christ" is a myth.

I believe the evidence presented in this timeline — and argued throughout this book — points to a clear conclusion: the Protestant church would do well to recover the Bible that built the church. The Septuagint, with the deuterocanonical books, is not a Catholic addition to the Bible. It is the original Christian Bible — the Bible the apostles used, the fathers quoted, the councils affirmed, and the church treasured for more than a millennium and a half.

The question we must now ask ourselves is whether we have the humility to put them back.

Date	Event	Significance for the Canon
c. 333–323 BC	Conquests of Alexander the Great	Alexander's conquests spread Greek language and culture across the ancient Near East, creating what historians call the Hellenistic world. Greek became the common language (koine) of commerce, diplomacy, and learning from Egypt to Persia. This transformation is the essential background for the Septuagint — without the spread of Greek, there would have been no need for a Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures. Alexander founded the city of Alexandria in Egypt in 331 BC, which would become the greatest center of learning in the ancient world and the home of the largest Jewish community outside Palestine.¹
c. 285–246 BC	Translation of the Greek Pentateuch (the beginning of the Septuagint)	Under the patronage of Ptolemy II Philadelphus, king of Egypt, the first five books of the Hebrew Bible — the Torah, or Pentateuch — were translated into Greek in Alexandria. According to the Letter of Aristeas, seventy-two Jewish scholars (six from each of the twelve tribes) were brought from Jerusalem to Alexandria to produce the translation. They completed the work in seventy-two days. While many details of the Letter of Aristeas are likely legendary or embellished, the basic historical claim is widely accepted by scholars: the Greek Pentateuch was produced in Alexandria in the mid-third century BC, probably under some form of royal patronage. This is the origin of the name "Septuagint" (from the Latin septuaginta, "seventy," abbreviated LXX). The translation was produced from a Hebrew text (Vorlage) that, in many places, differed from the Hebrew text that would later be standardized by the rabbis as the Masoretic Text.²
c. 250–150 BC	Translation of the Prophets and Writings into Greek	Over the next century or more, the remaining books of the Hebrew Bible — the Prophets (Nevi'im) and the Writings (Ketuvim) — were translated into Greek by various translators in Alexandria and possibly other locations. Different books were translated at different times by translators of varying skill and approach. Some translations are quite literal (close to the Hebrew); others are more paraphrastic (interpreting and adapting the text for the Greek-speaking audience). By approximately 132 BC — the date of the Prologue to the Greek translation of Sirach (Ecclesiasticus), which refers to "the Law and the Prophets and the other books" in Greek — the major portions of the Hebrew Bible had been rendered into Greek.³
c. 200–100 BC	Composition of the Deuterocanonical Books	During this same period, several of the books that Protestants call "the Apocrypha" and Catholics call "the Deuterocanon" were composed. These include the Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach (Ecclesiasticus), Tobit, Judith, Baruch, the Letter of Jeremiah, and 1 and 2 Maccabees. Some were written in Hebrew or Aramaic and then translated into Greek; others were composed in Greek. These books circulated widely among both Palestinian and diaspora Jews. The fact that several of these books were found among the Dead Sea Scrolls (including Tobit, Sirach, Baruch, and the Letter of Jeremiah) demonstrates that they were considered important by at least some Jewish communities in Palestine as well as in the diaspora.⁴
c. 200–100 BC	Composition and Circulation of 1 Enoch and Jubilees	Other important Jewish writings were also being composed and circulated during this period, including 1 Enoch (portions of which date to the third century BC) and Jubilees (second century BC). Both were found in multiple copies at Qumran, indicating their importance and widespread use. 1 Enoch would later be directly quoted as Scripture by the Apostle Jude (Jude 14–15). Jubilees preserves a chronological tradition closer to the Septuagint than to the Masoretic Text. The Ethiopian Orthodox Church would eventually include both books in its canon.⁵
c. 167–164 BC	The Maccabean Revolt	The Jewish revolt against the Seleucid king Antiochus IV Epiphanes, who had desecrated the Temple and outlawed Jewish religious practices. The revolt — led by Judas Maccabeus and his brothers — resulted in the rededication of the Temple, celebrated in the festival of Hanukkah. These events are recorded in 1 and 2 Maccabees, which are part of the Septuagint and the deuterocanonical collection. Jesus himself observed the festival of Hanukkah (John 10:22–23), a feast whose origin is recorded only in the books that Protestants later removed from their Bibles.⁶
c. 150 BC – AD 70	The Dead Sea Scrolls Period	The community at Qumran (near the Dead Sea) produced and collected a vast library of biblical and non-biblical texts. Manuscripts of every Old Testament book except Esther have been found among the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS). Critically, the DSS reveal that in the Second Temple period, multiple versions of the biblical text circulated simultaneously — some aligning more closely with what would become the Masoretic Text, others with the Septuagint, and still others representing independent textual traditions. This proves that the Hebrew text was not yet standardized during this period. Additionally, the DSS community treasured and used books that would later be excluded from the rabbinic canon, including Tobit, Sirach, 1 Enoch, and Jubilees — found in multiple copies. The DSS demonstrate beyond any reasonable doubt that there was no fixed, universally agreed-upon Jewish canon before the time of Jesus.⁷
c. 132 BC	The Prologue to Sirach	The grandson of Jesus ben Sira (author of the book of Sirach, or Ecclesiasticus) wrote a prologue to his Greek translation of his grandfather's work. In this prologue, he refers to "the Law and the Prophets and the other books of our ancestors" — a threefold division of Jewish Scripture that is sometimes cited as evidence for a fixed canon. However, the phrase "the other books" (ta alla biblia) is vague and undefined. It tells us that various sacred writings existed beyond the Law and the Prophets, but it does not tell us which books were included or excluded. This is the earliest known reference to a threefold division of the Jewish Scriptures, but it provides no evidence for a closed canon.⁸
c. 4 BC – AD 30	The Ministry of Jesus	Jesus of Nazareth taught, preached, and fulfilled the Scriptures. He referred to "the Law and the Prophets" (Matt. 5:17; 7:12; Luke 16:16) and once to "the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms" (Luke 24:44). He never provided a list of canonical books, and he never explicitly excluded any book from the canon. The Scriptures Jesus used were not the Masoretic Text — that did not yet exist in standardized form — but the diverse textual traditions circulating in first-century Palestine and the diaspora. The New Testament overwhelmingly follows the Septuagint when citing the Old Testament — a point of enormous significance for the canon question (see Chapters 6–11).⁹

Date	Event	Significance for the Canon
c. AD 45–100	Composition of the New Testament	The books of the New Testament were composed during this period. When the NT authors quoted the Old Testament, they overwhelmingly followed the Septuagint — in many cases, even when the LXX differed significantly from the Hebrew. Scholars estimate that approximately two-thirds to three-fourths of the Old Testament quotations in the New Testament align with the Septuagint rather than the Masoretic Text (see Chapter 6 and Appendix C for detailed documentation). Additionally, the New Testament contains numerous allusions to and echoes of the deuterocanonical books — Hebrews 1:3 echoes Wisdom 7:26; Hebrews 11:35 alludes to 2 Maccabees 7; James 1:19 echoes Sirach 5:11; Jude 14–15 directly quotes 1 Enoch 1:9. The apostolic authors clearly regarded the broader Septuagint collection as Scripture (see Chapter 20).¹⁰
AD 70	Destruction of the Second Temple by Rome	The Roman general Titus destroyed the Jerusalem Temple, ending the sacrificial system and the Temple-centered priesthood that had defined Judaism for centuries. This catastrophe forced a radical restructuring of Judaism. With the Temple gone, the priestly and Sadducean parties disappeared. The Pharisaic movement — which emphasized the oral Torah, the synagogue, and rabbinic interpretation — emerged as the dominant form of Judaism. This restructuring, centered at the academy at Yavneh (Jamnia), would eventually lead to the narrowing of the Jewish canon and the rejection of the Septuagint.¹¹
c. AD 70–100	The Academy at Yavneh (Jamnia)	After the destruction of the Temple, the rabbinic leader Yohanan ben Zakkai established an academy at Yavneh (Jamnia in Greek), near the Mediterranean coast. For decades, scholars spoke of a "Council of Jamnia" that supposedly closed the Jewish canon around AD 90. However, modern scholarship has thoroughly debunked this claim. The influential article by Jack P. Lewis (1964), "What Do We Mean by Jabneh?" demonstrated that no formal council convened at Yavneh to close the canon. The rabbis at Yavneh did discuss the status of certain books — particularly Ecclesiastes and Song of Solomon — but there was no formal decree defining a closed list of canonical books. The narrowing of the Jewish canon was a gradual process that extended over several centuries, not a single event. Nevertheless, Yavneh represents the beginning of an important shift: the emerging rabbinic establishment was moving toward a narrower canon that excluded the deuterocanonical books.¹²
c. AD 93–94	Josephus's Against Apion	The Jewish historian Flavius Josephus, writing in Rome, described a collection of 22 sacred books that he regarded as authoritative. However, Josephus did not list these books by name, and scholars disagree about which books his count includes. It is possible that his 22-book count included some deuterocanonical materials (e.g., Baruch combined with Jeremiah, additions to Daniel with Daniel). Furthermore, Josephus was describing the emerging rabbinic consensus of late-first-century Palestinian Judaism — not a pre-existing universal norm. His testimony reflects the same narrowing trend visible at Yavneh, not a fixed canon that had existed for centuries.¹³
c. AD 50–135	Rabbi Akiba ben Joseph and the Standardization of the Hebrew Text	Akiba was arguably the most important figure in the formation of Rabbinic Judaism. He developed the hermeneutical methods that would define rabbinic biblical interpretation for centuries. According to the Jewish Encyclopedia, "Akiba was the one who definitely fixed the canon of the Old Testament books." Under Akiba's influence, the rabbinic establishment adopted a single normative Hebrew text (the proto-Masoretic Text), repudiated the Septuagint (which had become identified as the Christian Bible), and produced replacement Greek translations. The Mishnah records Akiba's declaration that "he who reads the external books [sefarim hizonim] has no share in the world to come" (Sanhedrin 10:1) — a pronouncement generally understood to refer to the deuterocanonical books and other writings the rabbis wished to exclude. Akiba's canon decisions were motivated not merely by scholarship but by the desire to draw clear boundaries between Judaism and the rapidly growing Christian movement (see Chapter 12).¹⁴
AD 132–135	The Bar Kokhba Revolt	The catastrophic second Jewish revolt against Rome, led by Simon bar Kokhba. Rabbi Akiba endorsed Bar Kokhba as the Messiah — a disastrous error that led to massive Jewish casualties, the destruction of Jerusalem, and the Roman renaming of the province as "Syria Palaestina." The failure of the revolt intensified the rupture between Judaism and Christianity and accelerated the rabbinic program of textual standardization and canon restriction. Christians, who refused to join the revolt because they could not recognize Bar Kokhba as the Messiah, were persecuted by the Jewish rebels. After the revolt's failure, the rabbinic establishment had even stronger motivation to distance itself from anything associated with Christianity — including the Septuagint and the broader canon it contained. Akiba was martyred by the Romans around AD 135.¹⁵
c. AD 130–150	Aquila's Greek Translation	Aquila, a proselyte to Judaism and a disciple of Akiba, produced a new, hyper-literal Greek translation of the Hebrew text to replace the Septuagint. Aquila's translation slavishly followed the Hebrew to the point of distorting Greek grammar and syntax. Its purpose was explicitly anti-Christian: to provide the Jewish community with a Greek translation that could not be used to support Christian theological claims. The replacement translations (Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion) are strong evidence that the rabbinic establishment rejected the Septuagint precisely because Christians used it — and that the rabbinic canon decisions were, at least in part, a reaction against Christianity (see Chapter 13).¹⁶
c. AD 150	Justin Martyr's Dialogue with Trypho	Justin Martyr, one of the earliest Christian apologists, engaged in a dialogue (real or literary) with a Jewish interlocutor named Trypho. In this dialogue, Justin explicitly accused the Jewish establishment of altering their Scriptures to remove passages that pointed to Jesus. "They have taken away many Scriptures from the translations made by those seventy elders who were with Ptolemy," Justin wrote (Dialogue 71). While some of Justin's specific claims are debatable, his general accusation — that the Jewish establishment altered their Scriptures to combat Christian claims — is consistent with the pattern of LXX-MT differences documented in Chapters 14–15 and Appendix B. Justin's testimony is important because he was writing within living memory of Akiba's program of textual revision.¹⁷
c. AD 96–250	The Apostolic Fathers and Early Patristic Writers Use the Deuterocanon as Scripture	From the very earliest post-apostolic writings, the church fathers quoted the deuterocanonical books as Scripture. Clement of Rome (c. AD 96) quotes Wisdom and Judith. The Didache (c. AD 100) reflects Sirach. Polycarp (c. AD 110) alludes to Tobit. Irenaeus (c. AD 180) quotes Wisdom, Baruch, Susanna, and Bel and the Dragon as Scripture. Clement of Alexandria (c. AD 200) treats the deuterocanonical books as fully canonical. Tertullian (c. AD 200) cites them as authoritative. Cyprian of Carthage (c. AD 250) quotes extensively from Wisdom and Sirach. The pattern is overwhelming: the earliest Christian writers, across multiple regions and traditions, treated the deuterocanonical books as part of their Bible (see Chapter 26).¹⁸
c. AD 240–250	Origen's Hexapla	Origen of Alexandria (c. 185–254) compiled the Hexapla, a massive work placing six versions of the Old Testament in parallel columns: the Hebrew text, a Greek transliteration of the Hebrew, and four Greek translations (Aquila, Symmachus, the Septuagint, and Theodotion). The Hexapla is one of the most ambitious works of textual criticism in antiquity. Origen's position on the canon is complex: he acknowledged that some books were not in the Hebrew canon but nevertheless used the deuterocanonical books as Scripture in his own writings. In his letter to Africanus, Origen defended the canonicity of the additions to Daniel (Susanna and Bel and the Dragon) against Africanus's objections, arguing that the church should not be bound by the rabbinic Hebrew canon. Origen's nuanced position represents the earliest Christian engagement with the tension between the broader Septuagint canon and the narrower Hebrew canon.¹⁹

Date	Event	Significance for the Canon
AD 331	Emperor Constantine Orders Fifty Bibles	Emperor Constantine commissioned Eusebius of Caesarea to produce fifty copies of the Scriptures for the churches of Constantinople. While we do not know exactly which books these copies contained, the great codices that have survived from this period — Codex Vaticanus (c. 325–350), Codex Sinaiticus (c. 330–360), and Codex Alexandrinus (c. 400–440) — all include deuterocanonical books interspersed among the other Old Testament writings, not segregated into a separate section. Vaticanus includes Wisdom, Sirach, Judith, Tobit, Baruch, and the Letter of Jeremiah. Sinaiticus includes Tobit, Judith, 1 and 4 Maccabees, Wisdom, and Sirach. Alexandrinus includes Tobit, Judith, 1–4 Maccabees, Wisdom, Sirach, and the Psalms of Solomon. These are our earliest complete (or near-complete) Christian Bibles, and they all include the deuterocanonical books as part of the Old Testament.²⁰
AD 367	Athanasius's Festal Letter 39	Athanasius, the bishop of Alexandria and the great champion of Nicene orthodoxy, published his 39th Festal Letter, which contains the earliest known list of the 27 books of the New Testament as we know it today. However, his Old Testament list is complex and sometimes misunderstood. Athanasius distinguished between "canonical" books and books that are "not canonized but appointed by the Fathers to be read by those who join us." In this latter category he placed Wisdom, Sirach, Esther, Judith, and Tobit. Athanasius's list is often cited by Protestants as evidence that the early church rejected the deuterocanon, but this is a misreading. Athanasius himself quoted the deuterocanonical books as Scripture elsewhere in his writings. His distinction was between books that could be used for doctrinal instruction and books for edification — not between inspired and uninspired writings. Furthermore, Athanasius's list is unusual in several respects (he includes Baruch and the Letter of Jeremiah among the canonical books, and he places Esther among the non-canonical readings), which suggests his categories do not map neatly onto the modern Protestant distinction (see Chapter 26).²¹
AD 382	Council of Rome (Decree of Damasus)	Pope Damasus I convened a council in Rome that produced a canon list including the deuterocanonical books. While the attribution and date of this decree are debated by some scholars, the list it contains matches the canon that would be affirmed at Hippo and Carthage. The decree lists the books of both the Old and New Testaments, and includes Wisdom, Sirach, Tobit, Judith, 1 and 2 Maccabees, and the other deuterocanonical writings without qualification or distinction from the other Old Testament books.²²
AD 382–405	Jerome Translates the Vulgate	At the request of Pope Damasus, Jerome (c. 347–420) produced a new Latin translation of the Bible, known as the Vulgate. Jerome was the most accomplished biblical linguist of his era, fluent in Latin, Greek, and Hebrew. During his years in Palestine, Jerome came into contact with Jewish scholars who informed him about the rabbinic Hebrew canon. Under their influence, Jerome adopted the position that only the books found in the Hebrew canon should be considered "canonical" in the strict sense — a principle he called Hebraica veritas ("the Hebrew truth"). He referred to the deuterocanonical books as useful for edification but not for establishing doctrine. Despite his personal reservations, Jerome nevertheless translated the deuterocanonical books and included them in the Vulgate — at least in part because the church demanded it. His prefaces, however, expressed his reservations. Jerome's position was the minority view, vigorously opposed by Augustine and the mainstream of the church. Jerome is the only major church father before the Reformation who clearly denied the canonicity of the deuterocanon — and even he included the books in his translation (see Chapter 27).²³
AD 393	Council of Hippo	The Council of Hippo Regius (in modern-day Algeria) was the first church council to produce a formal list of canonical books. The list included the deuterocanonical books — Wisdom, Sirach, Tobit, Judith, 1 and 2 Maccabees, and the additions to Daniel and Esther — without any distinction from the other Old Testament books. Although this was a regional council (not an ecumenical one), its canon list reflected the universal practice of the church. Augustine, the most influential theologian of the Western church, was present and influential at this council.²⁴
AD 397	Council of Carthage (Third Council)	The Third Council of Carthage confirmed and ratified the canon list from Hippo. The council decreed: "It has been decided that nothing except the canonical Scriptures should be read in the Church under the name of the divine Scriptures," and then listed the protocanonical and deuterocanonical books together without distinction. The Protestant theologian F. F. Bruce acknowledged that the formal pronouncements of these African councils "did not impose any innovation on the churches; they simply endorsed what had become the general consensus of the churches of the West and of the greater part of the East." In other words, the councils confirmed what the church had always practiced — not what Jerome argued for (see Chapter 28).²⁵
c. AD 397–426	Augustine's On Christian Doctrine and City of God	Augustine (354–430), the bishop of Hippo and the most influential theologian of the Western church, vigorously defended the canonicity of the deuterocanonical books. In On Christian Doctrine, he presented a canon list identical to the one affirmed at Hippo and Carthage. In City of God (Book 18), he argued that the Septuagint was an inspired translation — that the translators were guided by the Holy Spirit and that where the LXX differs from the Hebrew, the LXX may preserve a deeper or divinely intended meaning. Augustine's position on the deuterocanon and the LXX is essentially the position defended throughout this book. His canon was the church's canon (see Chapter 27).²⁶
AD 405	Pope Innocent I's Letter to Exsuperius	Pope Innocent I responded to a question about the canon from Exsuperius, the bishop of Toulouse (who was a personal friend of Jerome). Innocent provided a canonical list that included the deuterocanonical books, mirroring the lists of Hippo and Carthage. This papal letter is significant because it directly corrects Jerome's position: even Jerome's own friend, when he sought authoritative clarification on the canon, was told by the pope that the deuterocanonical books are Scripture.²⁷
AD 419	Council of Carthage (Fourth Council, or Synod of 419)	A further council at Carthage reaffirmed the canon list of Hippo and the previous councils. This council's decisions were later received by the broader church, including the Eastern churches. The African Code, as it was known, was accepted by the Council of Trullo and given quasi-ecumenical authority by the Seventh Ecumenical Council (Second Council of Nicaea, AD 787). The Protestant historian Henry Percival acknowledged that the African Code "was always in greatest repute in all churches next after the Code of the Universal Church."²⁸

Date	Event	Significance for the Canon
c. AD 500–1100	The Masoretic Text is Standardized	Over a period of several centuries, Jewish scribes known as the Masoretes (from the Hebrew masorah, "tradition") standardized the Hebrew text of the Jewish Bible. The Masoretes added vowel pointings, accent marks, and marginal notes to the consonantal Hebrew text, producing the text that modern scholars call the Masoretic Text (MT). The oldest complete manuscript of the MT — the Leningrad Codex — dates to approximately AD 1008. This means that the standardized Hebrew text on which Protestant Old Testaments are based was not finalized until nearly a thousand years after Christ. The Aleppo Codex, slightly older (c. AD 930), is mostly extant but was damaged. Before the Masoretes, the Hebrew text existed in various forms, as the Dead Sea Scrolls demonstrate. The process of Masoretic standardization involved editorial decisions — including the selection of certain textual readings over others — that Christians have no obligation to accept as authoritative (see Chapter 18).²⁹
c. AD 160	The Seder Olam Rabbah	The Seder Olam Rabbah ("Great Order of the World") is a chronological work attributed to Rabbi Yose ben Halafta, a student of Akiba, composed around AD 160. This work compressed the biblical timeline by approximately 1,500 years compared to the Septuagint's chronology — and by about 165 years in the Persian period. Woodward argues persuasively that the Seder Olam was part of the same program of textual revision as the other changes made by Akiba and his circle. The chronological compression served to redirect Messianic expectations away from the time of Jesus and toward a future date more favorable to rabbinic calculations. If Daniel's seventy weeks (Dan. 9:24–27) begin with the decree to rebuild Jerusalem and end 490 years later, the correct chronology places the terminus at approximately AD 30 — the time of Jesus. The Seder Olam's compressed chronology shifts the calculation so that the 490 years end in the early second century AD — the time of Bar Kokhba (see Chapters 16–17).³⁰
c. AD 600–900	The Deuterocanon in Liturgical Use Throughout the Church	Throughout the early medieval period, the deuterocanonical books were used extensively in the church's worship. Readings from Wisdom, Sirach, Tobit, Judith, and the Maccabees were included in the liturgical lectionaries of both East and West. The books were not relegated to an appendix or treated as secondary — they were read alongside the protocanonical books in the same liturgical context. This universal liturgical use is powerful evidence that the church regarded these books as Scripture. Liturgy reflects what the church actually believes and practices, not merely what individual scholars argue about in their studies.³¹
c. AD 700–1200	Medieval Scholars and the "Jeromist" Minority	During the medieval period, a small number of scholars expressed reservations about the deuterocanonical books, usually by quoting Jerome's prefaces to the Vulgate. These include Hugh of St. Victor (d. 1141), John of Salisbury (d. 1180), Nicholas of Lyra (d. 1349), and William of Occam (d. 1347). However, these scholars represent a clear minority. The vast majority of medieval theologians — including major figures like Burchard of Worms, Ivo of Chartres, Gratian, Rupert of Deutz, Peter of Cluny, and Thomas Aquinas — accepted and used the deuterocanonical books as Scripture. As Michuta observes, four scholars over a period of four hundred years do not constitute a "scholarly tradition" of rejecting the deuterocanon. If there is a scholarly tradition, it is overwhelmingly in favor of these books (see Chapter 27).³²

Date	Event	Significance for the Canon
AD 1442	*Council of Florence — Cantate Domino* (Bull of Union with the Jacobites)**	The ecumenical Council of Florence issued the papal bull On the Unification of the Jacobites (February 4, 1442), which included a formal list of the canonical books of Scripture. This list includes all the deuterocanonical books, intermixed with the protocanonical books without any distinction. The bull states that all the books of the Old and New Testaments are inspired by the Holy Spirit and are to be "accepted and venerated." This is the first time an ecumenical council promulgated a list of inspired Scriptures at this level of solemnity. Florence did not qualify its acceptance of the deuterocanon or place it in a separate category. The council also used the deuterocanonical books authoritatively in its own sessions — quoting Sirach 18:23, Wisdom 10:19, Tobit 12:20, Susanna (Daniel 13:9), and Wisdom 5:21 without qualification. This is critically important: the Council of Florence affirmed the deuterocanon 77 years before Luther publicly rejected these books, and 104 years before the Council of Trent. The claim that Trent "added" books to the Bible in reaction to Luther is historically untenable (see Chapter 28).³³
AD 1546	*Council of Trent — Sacrosanctis* Decree**	The Council of Trent, in its fourth session (April 8, 1546), solemnly defined the canon of Scripture, including all the deuterocanonical books, and attached an anathema (formal condemnation) to anyone who rejected them. Trent's decree was not an innovation — it was, in the words of the council fathers themselves, a reaffirmation of what had been decreed at Hippo, Carthage, and Florence. The Acts of the Council show that the council fathers deliberated carefully and decided to accept the canon "pure and simple, as the Church had done in other councils, and especially in the Council of Florence." When two council fathers proposed distinguishing between protocanonical and deuterocanonical books (following Jerome), the proposal was rejected. Trent's addition of the anathema was new, but the canon it affirmed was ancient. The deliberations clearly demonstrate that Trent was acting conservatively — rubber-stamping the judgments of previous councils, not innovating. The common Protestant claim that Trent added books to the Bible in a "polemic against Luther" has no basis in the historical record (see Chapter 28).³⁴

Date	Event	Significance for the Canon
AD 1519	The Second Leipzig Disputation — Luther Rejects 2 Maccabees	During the debate with Johann Eck at Leipzig, Martin Luther publicly rejected the canonicity of 2 Maccabees when Eck cited it in support of prayers for the dead. This appears to have been a turning point for Luther. Before Leipzig, Luther had used and quoted the deuterocanonical books positively — including in his early writings. But when confronted with a text that supported a doctrine he opposed (prayers for the dead and, by extension, purgatory), Luther rejected the book's authority. Bruce Metzger suggests this was "doctrinally motivated." Luther had previously been Augustinian on the canon; after Leipzig, he moved decisively toward the Jeromist position. This shift illustrates a troubling principle: Luther did not reject 2 Maccabees because he discovered it was uninspired — he rejected it because it taught something he found uncomfortable (see Chapter 29).³⁵
AD 1534	Luther's German Bible	Luther published his complete German Bible, which included the deuterocanonical books in a separate section between the Old and New Testaments, with a preface stating that they were "not held equal to the Holy Scriptures" but were "useful and good to read." This was a compromise: Luther did not entirely remove the books (recognizing that "the simplest peasants knew they were part of the Bible"), but he demoted them to a secondary status. Luther also famously questioned the canonicity of several New Testament books — including James ("an epistle of straw"), Hebrews, Jude, and Revelation — placing them at the end of his New Testament. The principle underlying Luther's canon decisions was his criterion that a book must "preach Christ" to be canonical — a subjective criterion that the church had never used.³⁶
AD 1534–1560	Other Reformed Bibles Follow Luther's Pattern	Other Protestant translations followed Luther's lead in relocating the deuterocanonical books to a separate section. Zwingli's Zurich Bible (1534) included them as "Church Books" — not canonical but useful. Calvin's Geneva Bible (1560) included them with a note that they could not be used to establish doctrine. The Coverdale Bible (1535), the Great Bible (1539), the Bishops' Bible (1568), and the King James Version (1611) all included the deuterocanonical books between the Testaments. In other words, for the first century and a half of Protestantism, the deuterocanonical books remained physically present in Protestant Bibles — relegated, demoted, but not yet removed.³⁷
AD 1563	The Anglican Thirty-Nine Articles	The Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion of the Church of England stated that the deuterocanonical books could be "read for example of life and instruction of manners" but should not be used "to establish any doctrine." However, the official Anglican Book of Homilies (which the same Articles endorsed as containing "godly and wholesome doctrine") cited the deuterocanonical books as Scripture — quoting the Wisdom of Solomon as "the infallible and undeceivable word of God" and citing Baruch as a prophet. This internal contradiction illustrates the theological tension within early Protestantism regarding the canon.³⁸
AD 1611	The King James Version Published — With the Deuterocanon	The Authorized Version (King James Version) was published with the deuterocanonical books included between the Old and New Testaments. For the first 150 years of its printing, the KJV included these books as a standard feature — just as Luther's German Bible had. Modern advocates of the KJV who disparage the "Apocrypha" often do not realize that their beloved translation originally included the very books they reject. The KJV translators included the deuterocanon because it was part of the church's traditional Bible — and because both the Church of England's Articles and its lectionary prescribed readings from these books.³⁹
AD 1646–1648	The Westminster Confession of Faith	The Westminster Confession, produced under Puritan influence during the English Civil War, stated that the deuterocanonical books "not being of divine inspiration, are no part of the canon of Scripture; and therefore are of no authority in the Church of God, nor to be any otherwise approved, or made use of, than other human writing." This was a radical departure — not just from Catholic teaching but from previous Protestant usage as well. Luther, Calvin, and Zwingli had all granted the deuterocanonical books at least some secondary status as useful for reading. The Westminster divines went further, reducing them to the level of purely human composition — no more authoritative than Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress. The Westminster Confession marks the point where the most radical Calvinist wing of Protestantism formally rejected the deuterocanon entirely. This position would eventually become the dominant Protestant view, but it took centuries to prevail (see Chapter 30).⁴⁰
AD 1804	Founding of the British and Foreign Bible Society (BFBS)	The British and Foreign Bible Society was founded in London as the largest Bible distribution society in the world, with the mission of distributing Bibles as widely and cheaply as possible. In its early years, the BFBS printed Bibles with the deuterocanonical books included, following the standard format of the King James Version. Foreign auxiliary societies — particularly in Germany, Switzerland, France, and Scandinavia — also produced Bibles with the deuterocanonical books, following the tradition of Luther's German Bible. The BFBS's interdenominational, non-sectarian mission meant it had to accommodate different Protestant traditions regarding the scope of the Bible.⁴¹
AD 1813–1826	The "Apocrypha Controversy" in the BFBS	When foreign auxiliary societies began printing Bibles with the deuterocanonical books, opposition arose from Scottish Calvinist members of the BFBS — particularly the Edinburgh and Glasgow Bible Societies, who were deeply hostile to the "Apocrypha." Robert Haldane, a Presbyterian preacher, launched a speaking crusade against the BFBS's tolerance of Bibles containing the deuterocanon. The Edinburgh Bible Society's committee statements are revealing: they opposed the deuterocanon primarily because its teachings (prayers for the dead, the merit of good works) supported Catholic doctrine. The Scottish committee candidly argued that distributing Bibles with the deuterocanon amounted to "countenancing and supporting the Church of Rome." The controversy simmered for over a decade, with compromises offered and rejected. The Scottish societies ultimately threatened to withhold all funding from the BFBS unless the deuterocanon was entirely eliminated.⁴²
AD 1826–1827	The BFBS Removes the Deuterocanon — The Final Cut	In 1826, after years of internal controversy, the British and Foreign Bible Society capitulated to the Scottish demands. In 1827, the BFBS adopted a resolution that no aid, financial or otherwise, would be given to any Bible society that produced Bibles containing the "Apocrypha." The American Bible Society (founded 1816) followed suit, ceasing to print the deuterocanonical books in 1827 as well. The decision was driven by three factors: cost concerns (printing the extra books added significant expense, and removing them made Bibles cheaper to produce); pressure from Scottish Calvinist members who threatened to withhold funding; and the theological argument (building on Westminster) that these books were not Scripture. The irony is devastating: the books that the apostles read, the church fathers quoted, the councils affirmed, and even the Reformers initially retained were ultimately removed not by a theological council or a careful scholarly assessment, but by a publishing society's cost-cutting measure. The decision was made by a business committee, not by bishops or theologians (see Chapter 30).⁴³

Date	Event	Significance for the Canon
AD 1870	First Vatican Council — Dei Filius	The First Vatican Council reaffirmed the Tridentine canon of Scripture in its dogmatic constitution Dei Filius (1870), confirming that the deuterocanonical books are inspired Scripture. This reaffirmation was part of a broader statement on divine revelation and the authority of Scripture. For the Roman Catholic Church, the question of the canon has been settled since Trent and is no longer open for debate.⁴⁴
AD 1947–1956	Discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls	The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls at Qumran, beginning in 1947, transformed biblical scholarship. The scrolls, dating from the third century BC to the first century AD, provided manuscripts a thousand years older than the oldest surviving Masoretic manuscripts. Several findings are directly relevant to the canon question. First, the scrolls demonstrate that multiple textual traditions of the Hebrew Bible circulated simultaneously in the Second Temple period — some closer to the MT, others closer to the LXX, and still others independent of both. This proves that the Masoretic Text was not "the" original Hebrew text; it was one tradition among several. Second, deuterocanonical books were found at Qumran: Tobit (in both Hebrew and Aramaic), Sirach (in Hebrew), Baruch, the Letter of Jeremiah, and Psalm 151 — along with many copies of 1 Enoch and Jubilees. This demonstrates that these books were valued and used by at least some Jewish communities in Palestine. Third, the scrolls show that the Genesis 5 and 11 chronological figures in some cases align more closely with the LXX than with the MT, providing independent support for the LXX's longer chronology (see Chapter 4).⁴⁵
AD 1964	Jack P. Lewis's "What Do We Mean by Jabneh?"	Scholar Jack P. Lewis published his landmark article demonstrating that there was no "Council of Jamnia" that formally closed the Jewish canon around AD 90. Lewis showed that the scholarly consensus about a "council" was based on a misreading of later rabbinic texts and had taken on a life of its own in the secondary literature. Lewis's article has been widely accepted and its conclusions have become the scholarly mainstream: the narrowing of the Jewish canon was a gradual process that extended over centuries, not a single event at a single location. This finding undermines the common Protestant argument that "the Jews had already settled their canon before the time of Christ" — they had not.⁴⁶
AD 1965	Second Vatican Council — Dei Verbum	The Second Vatican Council's Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation (Dei Verbum) reaffirmed the inspiration and canonicity of all the books of the Old and New Testaments, including the deuterocanonical books. Dei Verbum also endorsed the study of the Septuagint and other ancient versions as important witnesses to the biblical text, and it encouraged Catholic scholars to use all available tools of textual criticism — including the Dead Sea Scrolls — in their study of the Old Testament.⁴⁷
AD 1973	The Common Bible (RSV with Deuterocanon)	The Revised Standard Version was published in an edition containing the deuterocanonical books, making it the first modern Protestant-initiated translation to include these books since the eighteenth century. This "Common Bible" was approved for Catholic, Protestant, and Orthodox use — a remarkable ecumenical achievement. The publication signaled a growing awareness among some Protestant scholars that the exclusion of the deuterocanon was historically problematic and that these books deserve serious engagement.⁴⁸
AD 1977	Publication of the New Oxford Annotated Bible with Apocrypha (NRSV predecessor)	Oxford University Press published annotated editions of major study Bibles including the deuterocanonical books, making these texts accessible to Protestant readers in modern English with scholarly notes. This contributed to a gradual revival of Protestant interest in the intertestamental literature and the deuterocanonical books.⁴⁹
AD 2006	*Publication of the New English Translation of the Septuagint* (NETS)**	The NETS project produced the first major English translation of the entire Septuagint in over a century. This made the LXX accessible to a new generation of English-speaking scholars and students, facilitating comparative study of the LXX and the MT. The publication of NETS has contributed to a growing awareness — even among Protestant scholars — that the Septuagint is an essential witness to the Old Testament text, not merely a secondary translation to be consulted when the MT is unclear.⁵⁰
AD 2013–2021	Growing Protestant Scholarly Interest in the Septuagint	The early twenty-first century has seen a remarkable growth of Protestant scholarly interest in the Septuagint. Major works include Timothy Michael Law's When God Spoke Greek (2013), which argued powerfully that the Septuagint — not the Masoretic Text — was the Bible of the earliest church, and Gregory Lanier and William Ross's The Septuagint: What It Is and Why It Matters (2021), published by Crossway (a major evangelical publishing house). Timothy Miller's "An Evangelical Apology for the Septuagint" (2017) appeared in the Detroit Baptist Seminary Journal. These publications signal a growing recognition among Protestant scholars that the traditional Protestant reliance on the Masoretic Text alone is historically and theologically insufficient.⁵¹

Date	Event
c. 285 BC	Greek Pentateuch (beginning of LXX) translated in Alexandria
c. 250–100 BC	Remainder of the Hebrew Bible translated into Greek; deuterocanonical books composed
c. 167–164 BC	Maccabean Revolt; events of 1–2 Maccabees take place
c. 150 BC – AD 70	Dead Sea Scrolls period: multiple text types and a broad scriptural collection in use
c. AD 45–100	New Testament composed; NT authors overwhelmingly follow the LXX
AD 70	Destruction of the Second Temple by Rome
c. AD 70–100	Academy at Yavneh (Jamnia); rabbinic canon discussion begins
c. AD 50–135	Rabbi Akiba standardizes Hebrew text, repudiates LXX, narrows the canon
AD 132–135	Bar Kokhba revolt; Akiba endorses Bar Kokhba as Messiah; catastrophic failure
c. AD 130–150	Aquila produces replacement Greek translation for the LXX
c. AD 160	Seder Olam Rabbah compresses biblical chronology
c. AD 96–300	Church fathers universally use deuterocanonical books as Scripture
c. AD 325–350	Great Codices (Vaticanus, Sinaiticus) include deuterocanonical books
AD 367	Athanasius's Festal Letter 39 (complex canon list)
AD 382	Council of Rome (Decree of Damasus) lists the canon with deuterocanonical books
AD 382–405	Jerome translates the Vulgate (includes deuterocanon despite his reservations)
AD 393	Council of Hippo — first formal canon list includes deuterocanonical books
AD 397	Council of Carthage III confirms Hippo's canon list
AD 405	Pope Innocent I confirms the canon (with deuterocanon) for Bishop Exsuperius
AD 419	Council of Carthage IV reaffirms the canon
c. AD 500–1100	Masoretic Text gradually standardized by Jewish scribes
AD 1442	Council of Florence formally affirms the canon including the deuterocanon
AD 1519	Luther rejects 2 Maccabees at Leipzig
AD 1534	Luther's German Bible relegates deuterocanon to a separate section
AD 1546	Council of Trent solemnly defines the canon (reaffirming Florence, Hippo, Carthage)
AD 1563	Anglican Thirty-Nine Articles classify deuterocanon as secondary
AD 1611	KJV published — with the deuterocanonical books included
AD 1646	Westminster Confession rejects the deuterocanon entirely
AD 1804	British and Foreign Bible Society founded
AD 1826–1827	BFBS and ABS remove the deuterocanon from their Bibles
AD 1947	Discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls begins
AD 1964	Lewis demolishes the "Council of Jamnia" myth
AD 2006	Publication of NETS (English translation of the Septuagint)
AD 2013–2021	Growing Protestant scholarly interest in the LXX and the deuterocanon

Notes

¹ Gregory R. Lanier and William A. Ross, The Septuagint: What It Is and Why It Matters (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2021), 47–51. See also Timothy Michael Law, When God Spoke Greek: The Septuagint and the Making of the Christian Bible (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013), 15–19. ↩

² Lanier and Ross, The Septuagint, 47–52. See also S. Douglas Woodward, Rebooting the Bible: Exposing the Second Century Conspiracy to Corrupt the Scripture and Alter Biblical Chronology (Oklahoma City: Faith Happens, 2019), chap. 1, "How the Septuagint Got Its Start." ↩

³ Lanier and Ross, The Septuagint, 53–56. Law, When God Spoke Greek, 47–52. ↩

⁴ Law, When God Spoke Greek, 62–70. Gary G. Michuta, Why Catholic Bibles Are Bigger: The Untold History of the Bible, rev. 2nd ed. (El Cajon, CA: Catholic Answers, 2017), chap. 2, "The Deuterocanon in the Ancient World." ↩

⁵ Woodward, Rebooting the Bible, Part 2: Reconciling Primeval Biblical History with Archaeology and Alternate History (Oklahoma City: Faith Happens, 2019), chap. 2, "The Book of Jubilees and the Samaritan Pentateuch: Birds of a Feather." On 1 Enoch at Qumran, see George W. E. Nickelsburg, 1 Enoch: A Commentary on the Book of 1 Enoch, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2001). ↩

⁶ Michuta, Why Catholic Bibles Are Bigger, chap. 2, "The Deuterocanon in the Ancient World." ↩

⁷ Law, When God Spoke Greek, 62–70. Lanier and Ross, The Septuagint, 29–33. Emanuel Tov, Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible, 3rd ed. (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2012), 114. ↩

⁸ Lanier and Ross, The Septuagint, 53–54. ↩

⁹ See the detailed statistical analysis in Chapter 6. Lanier and Ross, The Septuagint, 73–82. ↩

¹⁰ Gary G. Michuta, The Case for the Deuterocanon: Evidence and Arguments, 2nd ed. (2017), chap. 1, "New Testament Use." See also Chapter 20 of this book for a full treatment. ↩

¹¹ Leibel Reznick, Rabbi Akiba's Messiah: The Origins of Rabbinic Authority (Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson, 1999), chap. 3, "From the Great Revolt to the Bar Kokhba Rebellion." ↩

¹² Jack P. Lewis, "What Do We Mean by Jabneh?" Journal of Bible and Religion 32, no. 2 (1964): 125–32. See also Michuta, Why Catholic Bibles Are Bigger, chap. 3, "The Closing of the Rabbinic Bible." ↩

¹³ Josephus, Against Apion 1.38–42. See the discussion in Michuta, Why Catholic Bibles Are Bigger, chap. 3. ↩

¹⁴ Woodward, Rebooting the Bible, chap. 2, "Rabbi Akiba, the Bar Kokhba Revolt, & the LXX Attack Begins," under "Was Akiba Really Important to Rabbinic Judaism?" Louis Ginzberg, "Akiba ben Joseph," Jewish Encyclopedia. Michuta, Case for the Deuterocanon, chap. 3, "Akiba's Rejection and Its Implications." ↩

¹⁵ Reznick, Rabbi Akiba's Messiah, chaps. 5–6. Woodward, Rebooting the Bible, chap. 2. ↩

¹⁶ Law, When God Spoke Greek, 74–80. Woodward, Rebooting the Bible, chap. 3, under "Aquila's Replacement Translation." ↩

¹⁷ Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, 71–73. See Chapter 12 for full discussion. ↩

¹⁸ Michuta, Case for the Deuterocanon, chaps. 4–9. See Chapter 26 for the full survey. ↩

¹⁹ Origen, Letter to Africanus. Law, When God Spoke Greek, 96–103. ↩

²⁰ Lanier and Ross, The Septuagint, 29–33. Law, When God Spoke Greek, 83–87. ↩

²¹ Athanasius, Festal Letter 39. See the discussion in Chapter 26. ↩

²² Michuta, Why Catholic Bibles Are Bigger, chap. 6, "The Council of Rome and the Decree of Damasus." ↩

²³ Michuta, Why Catholic Bibles Are Bigger, chap. 8, "'As Jerome Saith...'" See Chapter 27 for the full Jerome vs. Augustine discussion. ↩

²⁴ Michuta, Case for the Deuterocanon, chap. 10, "The Findings of the North African Councils (Ubiquity)." See Chapter 28. ↩

²⁵ F. F. Bruce, The Canon of Scripture (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1988), 97. Michuta, Why Catholic Bibles Are Bigger, chap. 7, "The Councils of Hippo and Carthage." ↩

²⁶ Augustine, On Christian Doctrine, 2.8.12–13. Augustine, City of God, 18.42–44. See Chapter 27. ↩

²⁷ Pope Innocent I, Letter to Exsuperius (February 20, 405). Michuta, Why Catholic Bibles Are Bigger, chap. 7, "Pope Innocent I." ↩

²⁸ Henry R. Percival, The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series, Vol. 14, 438, 453–54. Michuta, Why Catholic Bibles Are Bigger, chap. 7, "The Council of Carthage IV." ↩

²⁹ Woodward, Rebooting the Bible, chap. 3, under "The Late Standardization of the Masoretic Text." See Chapter 18. ↩

³⁰ Woodward, Rebooting the Bible, chap. 5, "Akiba's Seder Olam — More Years Trimmed." See Chapter 16. ↩

³¹ Michuta, Why Catholic Bibles Are Bigger, chap. 8, "'As Jerome Saith...'" ↩

³² Michuta, Why Catholic Bibles Are Bigger, chap. 8, "'As Jerome Saith...'" See Chapter 27 for the full discussion. ↩

³³ Michuta, Why Catholic Bibles Are Bigger, chap. 9, "Florence, Trent, and the Renaissance." See Chapter 28. ↩

³⁴ Michuta, Why Catholic Bibles Are Bigger, chap. 9, "Florence, Trent, and the Renaissance," under "The Council of Trent." The Acts of the Council are discussed in detail. See Chapter 28. ↩

³⁵ Bruce M. Metzger, An Introduction to the Apocrypha (New York: Oxford University Press, 1957), 180. Michuta, Why Catholic Bibles Are Bigger, chap. 10, "Why Protestant Bibles Are Smaller." See Chapter 29. ↩

³⁶ Michuta, Why Catholic Bibles Are Bigger, chap. 10. Michuta, Case for the Deuterocanon, chap. 14, "Implausibility of the Contrary." See Chapter 29. ↩

³⁷ Michuta, Why Catholic Bibles Are Bigger, chap. 10, "Why Protestant Bibles Are Smaller." S. Douglas Woodward, A Biography of the Christian Bible: And How We Defend the Protestant Scriptures in the 21st Century (Oklahoma City: Faith Happens, 2020), chap. 5, "The Evolution of the Protestant Bible." ↩

³⁸ Michuta, Why Catholic Bibles Are Bigger, chap. 10, under "The Thirty-Nine Articles." See Chapter 30. ↩

³⁹ Woodward, Rebooting the Bible, chap. 3, under "The King James Version and the Apocrypha." ↩

⁴⁰ Michuta, Why Catholic Bibles Are Bigger, chap. 10, under "The Westminster Confession." See Chapter 30. ↩

⁴¹ Michuta, Why Catholic Bibles Are Bigger, chap. 11, "The Deuterocanon in Exile." Wilhelm Gundert, "The Bible Societies and the Deuterocanonical Writings," in The Apocrypha in Ecumenical Perspective, UBS Monograph Series (New York: United Bible Societies, 1991), 135. ↩

⁴² Michuta, Why Catholic Bibles Are Bigger, chap. 11, "The Deuterocanon in Exile," under "The Edinburgh Crusade." ↩

⁴³ Michuta, Why Catholic Bibles Are Bigger, chap. 11, "The Deuterocanon in Exile." See Chapter 30. ↩

⁴⁴ First Vatican Council, Dei Filius, chap. 2 (1870). ↩

⁴⁵ Law, When God Spoke Greek, 62–70. Tov, Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible, 114. See Chapter 4. ↩

⁴⁶ Jack P. Lewis, "What Do We Mean by Jabneh?" Journal of Bible and Religion 32, no. 2 (1964): 125–32. ↩

⁴⁷ Second Vatican Council, Dei Verbum (1965), chaps. 3, 6. ↩

⁴⁸ Bruce M. Metzger, "The RSV Common Bible," in The Bible in Translation: Ancient and English Versions (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2001). ↩

⁴⁹ See the various editions of the New Oxford Annotated Bible (Oxford University Press), which include the deuterocanonical books with scholarly annotations. ↩

⁵⁰ Albert Pietersma and Benjamin G. Wright, eds., A New English Translation of the Septuagint (New York: Oxford University Press, 2007). ↩

⁵¹ Law, When God Spoke Greek. Lanier and Ross, The Septuagint. Timothy E. Miller, "An Evangelical Apology for the Septuagint," Detroit Baptist Seminary Journal 22 (2017): 37–60. ↩

Bibliography

Augustine. On Christian Doctrine. Translated by D. W. Robertson Jr. New York: Macmillan, 1958.

Bruce, F. F. The Canon of Scripture. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1988.

Gundert, Wilhelm. "The Bible Societies and the Deuterocanonical Writings." In The Apocrypha in Ecumenical Perspective, UBS Monograph Series, 135–52. New York: United Bible Societies, 1991.

Josephus, Flavius. Against Apion. Translated by William Whiston. Various editions.

Justin Martyr. Dialogue with Trypho. Translated by Thomas B. Falls. Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 2003.

Lanier, Gregory R., and William A. Ross. The Septuagint: What It Is and Why It Matters. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2021.

Law, Timothy Michael. When God Spoke Greek: The Septuagint and the Making of the Christian Bible. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.

Lewis, Jack P. "What Do We Mean by Jabneh?" Journal of Bible and Religion 32, no. 2 (1964): 125–32.

Metzger, Bruce M. An Introduction to the Apocrypha. New York: Oxford University Press, 1957.

Michuta, Gary G. The Case for the Deuterocanon: Evidence and Arguments. 2nd ed. 2017.

Michuta, Gary G. Why Catholic Bibles Are Bigger: The Untold History of the Bible. Rev. 2nd ed. El Cajon, CA: Catholic Answers, 2017.

Miller, Timothy E. "An Evangelical Apology for the Septuagint." Detroit Baptist Seminary Journal 22 (2017): 37–60.

Nickelsburg, George W. E. 1 Enoch: A Commentary on the Book of 1 Enoch. Hermeneia. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2001.

Pietersma, Albert, and Benjamin G. Wright, eds. A New English Translation of the Septuagint. New York: Oxford University Press, 2007.

Reznick, Leibel. Rabbi Akiba's Messiah: The Origins of Rabbinic Authority. Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson, 1999.

Tov, Emanuel. Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible. 3rd ed. Minneapolis: Fortress, 2012.

Woodward, S. Douglas. A Biography of the Christian Bible: And How We Defend the Protestant Scriptures in the 21st Century. Oklahoma City: Faith Happens, 2020.

Woodward, S. Douglas. Rebooting the Bible: Exposing the Second Century Conspiracy to Corrupt the Scripture and Alter Biblical Chronology. Oklahoma City: Faith Happens, 2019.

Woodward, S. Douglas. Rebooting the Bible, Part 2: Reconciling Primeval Biblical History with Archaeology and Alternate History. Oklahoma City: Faith Happens, 2019.