|
Constantine's Bible: Politics and the Making of the New Testament | 
| Author: David L. Dungan
Publisher: Augsburg Fortress Publishers
Category: Book
List Price: $17.00
Buy New: $14.04
You Save: $2.96 (17%)
Rating:  14 reviews
Sales Rank: 78543
Media: Paperback
Edition: 1
Pages: 240
Number Of Items: 1
Shipping Weight (lbs): 0.8
Dimensions (in): 8.3 x 5.5 x 0.7
ISBN: 0800637909
Dewey Decimal Number: 220.12
EAN: 9780800637903
ASIN: 0800637909
Publication Date: October 1, 2006
Availability: Usually ships in 24 hours
| |
| Editorial Reviews:
Product Description
Most college and seminary courses on the New Testament include discussions of the process that gave shape to the New Testament. Now David Dungan re-examines the primary source for this history, the Ecclesiastical History of the fourth-century Bishop Eusebius of Caesarea, in the light of Hellenistic political thought. He reaches startling new conclusions: that we usually use the term "canon" incorrectly; that the legal imposition of a "canon" or "rule" upon scripture was a fourth- and fifth-century phenomenon enforced with the power of the Roman imperial government; that the forces shaping the New Testament canon are much earlier than the second-century crisis occasioned by Marcion, and that they are political forces. Dungan discusses how the scripture selection process worked, book-by-book, as he examines the criteria usedand not usedto make these decisions. Finally he describes the consequences of the emperor Constantine's tremendous achievement in transforming orthodox, Catholic Christianity into imperial Christianity.
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 9 more reviews...
 The Davidci Making of the New Testament July 18, 2008
TheoGnostus (Sketes,Theognostic America)
3 out of 3 found this review helpful
"For, since there are four zones of the world in which we live, and four principal winds, ... it is fitting that she should have four pillars ... . From which fact, it is evident that the Word, [...] who was manifested to men, has given us the Gospel under four aspects, but bound together by one Spirit." (III. xi. 8; Ante-Nicene Fathers, 1:428)
Constantine's Bibles:
To start my comments on the 'Davidci' Dungan insightful book, it may be helpful to remember that Emperor Constantine, baptized by Eusebius at his death bed, had nothing to do with the selection or collation of the New Testament's twenty-seven books. By the late second century, Christians throughout the world had accepted twenty books, including the four gospels, as authoritative guidelines for life. Debates about the other seven did persist into the fourth century; however, the final canon emerged from a consensus of church communities and their leaders, not from an imperial decree. After the Council of Nicaea (325), Constantine authorized the copying and distribution of fifty Bibles, but the editions copied before these fifty do not differ significantly from the editions copied after, something that should have been well clarified by the author.
Constantine's Canon:
Neither Constantine nor the Council of Nicea, had virtually anything to do with addressing the canon of scripture, that was not even discussed at Nicea. In his 39th Paschal letter, St. Athanasius, the infamous defender of orthodoxy, wrote to the heads of Churches in East and West, the list of the Canon of scripture. The Old testament contained the books of the Septuagint, the Alexandrian Greek translation of the Hebrew bible, and the twenty seven books of the New Testament as we have them now. By the time of Athanasius, or shortly before, the church had reached an informal consensus about most of the writings to be included in the "New" Testament, with various other post Apostolic writings. In fact, agreement on main books of the NT on this list had been reached in the main centers of early Christianity, more than a century earlier. The process of exhaustive study of most of the books forming the canon had begun even earlier in Alexandria by Clement and origen. However, long before Constantine, 21 books were acknowledged by mostly all Christians (the 4 Gospels, Acts, 13 of Paul, 1 Peter, 1 John. Hebrew in Alexandria and Revelation in Rome. There were other disputed books (James, 2 Peter, 2-3 John, Jude, Ps-Barnabas, Hermas, Didache, Gospel of the Hebrews) and several that were considered heretical (Gospels Thomas, Matthaias, Acts of Peter, Andrew, John, etc.)
Thirty years later, in 397, the council of Carthage confirmed Athanasius Alexandrine Canon, sixty years after Constantine's death. Concerning allusions of manuscripts that were burned at the order of Constantine, there is really no mention of such edict either at the order of Constantine or the minutes of the Council of Nicea.
Tests for NT Book Canonicity:
Two main tests were imposed on any book to be part of the New Testament. Did it come from the time of the apostles? Based on this principles some of the most admired writings, as the Shepherd of Hermas, or the Epistles of Clement, Ignatius, or Polycarp were excluded. Did it agree with what was already known of apostolic teaching and tradition? The second criterion, was the motivation of early church fathers to refute Gnostic Christian writings. This is very articulately stated By Julio Barrera, "If the canonical nature of the NT books lies more in their apostolic origins than in mere inclusions in the conciliar lists, it has to be said that the NT was already established from the moment when the various books it comprises were written. However, the compilation of the lists of the councils required a long period and underwent a complex historical process until it had been defined which books were to belong to the canon and which were to remain outside it."
Outstanding Review:
Didaskalex, Eusebius Alexandrinus review of 'Constantines Bible,' has some very interesting points which support his catechetical standing. I have to add that Constantine's fifty bibles constituted the Alexandrine Sepuagint, quoted by most NT writers, together with the NT twenty seven books. OT/NT based on Jeremiah 31:31 prophecy was an Alexandrine tradition, spearheaded by Origen's great work of the Hexapla. the NT books cotain some of the popular post apostolic fathers, and were produced most probably in the Alexandrian Scriptorium. For professor Dungan to neglect those pivotal points in debating his thesis, especially Dedymus the blind torah finding is strange. His discussion of Dionysius argument on the Apocalypse (pp. 75) is refreshing. Meanwhile he did not even mention why did Athanasius include it, together with the epistle to the Hebrews. Was it a balanced Canon to preserve the unity of the Catholic (Universal Orthodox) church, as mentioned by some scholars. the book remains to be apetizing to the general reader and fresh seminarian.
Informed Review:
"In the first place, it downplays the differences among early Christian communities that regarded each other as orthodox in those early centuries by implying that their collections of scriptural materials--and therefore their ideas of normative Christianity--were virtually the same. ... It would be unfortunate, however, if the contrast the book draws between pre-canonical or non-canonical uses of scripture and canonical uses were to lend support to a false opposition between two major and mutually supportive roles that scripture plays in the life of Christian communities-nurturing the life of faith and aiding the community in distinguishing between genuine and inauthentic teachings." Charles Wood, Perkins School of theology
NT Canonical History Should be Searched and Proved without doubt July 5, 2008
Didaskalex (Kellia on Calvary, Carolina, USA)
3 out of 4 found this review helpful
"I mean John, Who left one Gospel, in which he confesses that he could write so many that the world would not contain them. ... We might allow also a second and a third epistle from him, as many claim, but not all agree that they are genuine." Origen
Canon of NT Scripture:
The Gospels, acts of the apostles and Paul's letters were written within the first century AD. While the remainder of the New Testament books while being written, other early Christian (Post Apostolic) writings were produced, including the Didache, or, Teachings of the Twelve, Ca. AD 70, I Clement (Ca. 95), the Epistle of Barnabas (Ca. 100), and few letters of Ignatius of Antioch (Ca. 110). According to the Muratorian list, Rome, Ca. AD 200, the basic NT books are the four gospels; the Acts; and letters of Paul. Hebrews, was not included); 1&2 John and Jude; and also the Apocalypse of Peter (Gnostic).
The earliest extant list of the books of the NT, where the word Canon was used, dates half a century after Constantine's Edict of Toleration. Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, wrote in his Paschal letter of 367, in the exact same books in number but not exact order of our Bibles (The Catholic letters precede Paul's Epistles). Bishop (First Pope borrowed the Title in 523) Damasus, followed suit, in 382 a letter listing the New Testament books, in their present form, to a bishop in Gaul. Athanasius' defense of orthodoxy and authority which extended for 56 years, never yielding to Arian Emperors, superceded any of his contemporary Roman Bishops, was the key to settling the overlapping alternative Cannons. All Eastern Churches, including those of John's Church, where John the elder wrote his Apocalypse, followed Dionysius the Great, Athanasius predecessor who proved by form and textual criticism that it was not written by the beloved disciple. Athanasius, in his church tradition, where its theology was based on the Gospel of John, and the letter to the Hebrews, a key book in the Alexandrine early theological tradition, facilitated that transaction, to keep the unity of the Church. There is no readings in any of the Eastern Orthodox churches from the Apocalypse to this day.
Post-Apostolic Writings:
Early Christian works of the Post-Apostolic Church Fathers open a window into the Early Church. The most important epistles included are the Shepherd of Hermas, First Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians; The Epistle of Ignatius to the Ephesians, Romans, Philadelphians, etc. and to Polycarp; The Epistles of Polycarp to the Philippians; the Epistles to Diognetus and Barnabas, and the martyrdom of Polycarp. The Didache crowns them all, being the most ancient surviving, out of the canon, teaching document. An instructional handbook for Catechumens (new Christian converts), derived directly from the teachings of Jesus, possibly from Q document, or the synoptic Gospels. This work could have been a consequence of the first Apostolic Council, c.50 C. E. (Acts 15:28). Many early Church experts agree that the original version of the Didache circulated possibly as early as mid first century C. E. Additions, modifications, or even re-composition may have taken place well into early third century, by the Church teachers of the Catechetical school of Alexandria. Never rejected by any local Church, it was excluded from the canon of scripture, for its lack of apostolic authorship.
Didymus Wider Canon:
Didymus the Blind, who was appointed by Athanasius to head the glorious Catechetical school, was revered as the foremost Christian scholar of the fourth century and an influential spiritual director of ascetics. Didymus uncensored voice was recovered through the commentaries among the Turah papyri, a massive set of documents discovered in an Egyptian quarry in 1941. This neglected corpus offers an unprecedented glimpse into the internal workings of a Christian philosophical academy in the most vibrant and tumultuous cultural center of late antiquity. By exploring the social context of Christian instruction in the competitive environment of fourth-century Alexandria, Richard A. Layton elucidates the political implications of biblical interpretation. In his commentaries discovered in 1941, Didymus refers to four Apostolic Fathers with frequency. In addition to the 'Shepherd of Hermas', and 'I Clement, which he highly valued, he considered these writings, in a quasi canonical status, and some of which you could read in Codex Sinaiticus, are not in our present New Testament
Fifty Bibles for Constantine:
Few years after the council of Nicea (325), Constantine, wishing to unify Christian worship in the Roman Empire, authorized Eusebius to have 50 Bibles of the holy Scripture, in Greek, copied by professional scribes on fine parchment. In Eusebius own words: "Such were the emperor's commands, which were followed by the immediate execution of the work itself, which we sent him in magnificent and elaborately bound volumes of a threefold and fourfold form." (Vita Const. 4.36.37)
Eusebius has not uttered a word, on where they were made, but there was no alternative other than to turn to the Alexandrine Church, which had the greatest scriptorium and best trained scribes. Codices Vaticanus and Sinaiticus readily admit they are remarkably similar, to compel experts in the field of manuscripts, to believe that they have a common origin. Dr. Gregory, states, "This Manuscript (Vaticanus) is supposed, as we have seen, to have come from the same place as the Sinaitic Manuscript. I have said that these two show connections with each other, and that they would suit very well as a pair of the fifty manuscripts written (at Caesarea) for Constantine the Great." Gregory, The Canon and Text of the NT, pp. 345. Only that Professor FF Bruce's comment should be carefully read, "There are several unanswered questions about these assumptuous copies "a quarter of a century earlier, the Christian scriptures were being assiduously sought out and destroyed by imperial authority... What type of text has been used in these copies? It has frequently been surmised that the Vatican and Sinaitic codices of the Greek scriptures are survivors from this consignment. That is unlikely; apart from some indications that the Vaticanus codex may have been produced in Alexandria, Egypt."
A brief commentary:
Dr. Dungan who in intellectual telepathy with Coote's, "Power, politics, and the making of the Bible," adopted the concept, and found role players in Constantine, a Pagan Emperor, and Eusebius, an Arian Bishop of Caesarea, Palestine, created un-based doubt to the Canonization process. NT Canon is of ecclesiastical history, that could be searched but has to be proven without doubt. Even an influential writer as John AT Robinson, could not have concensus on his redating of NT books, let alone a fiction story on canonizing the New Testament.
Dr. Dungan who admitted in the preface, that he kept changing the focus of his book, expanded the strong core of the Christian canonization of 90 pages, to include a non proven social thesis, of Greek Polis. He then slipped into praising Greek Philosophy, as a prelude to his explanation on the Hellenistic influence on Christianity. Although the writer elaborated on the selection of and defense of each of the 'Catholic' canon of NT books. As if after decades of writing serious scholarly books, has decided to go with the new American wave of Ehrman, Pagel et al to share the attention of general fiction readers of limited background in the field.
The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable?The Canon of the New Testament: Its Origin, Development, and Significance
 More Interesting Than the Da Vinci Code June 27, 2008
Jay Young (Austin, TX USA)
3 out of 4 found this review helpful
If you've read the Da Vinci Code, forget what you learned about Constantine and the bible. The real story is far more fascinating, and the splendid little book "Constantine's Bible" is the perfect place to start.
Dungan starts off by noting that the notion of a "canon" of scripture is actually unique to the monotheistic religions. When people talk about the "Taoist Canon" or the "Pali Canon" or the "Vedic Canon," that's a little misleading, since in those instances there was never an external authority that definitively set the rule for what and what was not scripture. In the pre-Constantinian Christian world, scripture was an amorphous term, as different regional churches used different scriptures in their liturgies, and considered different writings inspired. The notion of a canon of scripture was influenced, according to Dungan, by Greek political ideology, which sought mathematical precision in knowledge. The term canon is derived from the Greek word "Kanon," which literally means "rule." The Greeks used the analogy of the "Kanon" of a carpenter for the precision of knowledge required in human endeavors. In addition, Greek philosophical schools, with their emphasis on preserving the writings of a founder, succession to the founder, and correct interpretation, influenced the idea of a need for a canon.
After Constantine's famous conversion, he felt that he needed to unify the empire. Specifically, Constantine believed that if the Christian church continued to quarrel over scriptures and doctrines then God would punish him. That was the main impetus for the selection of a "canon" of scripture that would eventually be adopted as the bible. Dungan notes that once Constantine gave grants and privileges, at state expense, to churches and clergy, the church adopted the legal machinery of the Roman empire.
I would highly recommend this book for anyone wanting a short, readable, and accurate introduction to how the bible as we know it came about. To make a church history book a page-turner is not an easy task, but Dungan succeeds in doing so. Readers will also be interested in the appendix listing the scriptures that were considered inspired at one point or another.
Constantine's Bible: Politics and the Making of the New Testament June 18, 2008
Ronald R. Kemple
A excellent read about the affairs of the 3rd century Christian Church and how the New Testament came into being. The first 5 chapters however could be skimmed over quickly as it take this book a bit long to cut to the chase.
|
|
|
Can't find the right gift? Try a Gift Certificate
| |
