Thank you for the question on canonicity and Bible study, “How does an awareness of development of the Canon impact our approach to studying the Bible?”
Here are two thoughts on Canonicity and Bible Study:
A. If a person holds to the view that the Canon was a late development by men, then there is no reason to study the Bible. That person would reject the inspiration and inerrancy of the Scriptures as being from God but written by men hundreds of years after the event. The Scriptures are not authoritative for life but suggestions if one wishes to follow it.
Modern scholars attribute the writing of the Old Testament after the Babylonian Captivity and the New Testament compiled in the last 2nd or early 3rd century. The Search for the Historical Jesus denies that the Gospel recorded the words or acts of Jesus. The primary reason is that there is “no” external historical record that Jesus ever existed. If he didn’t exist, then the words are not of Jesus but of a person or a group of men attributing those words to Jesus. Thus, in their view, there is no need to study the Bible except to demonstrate its unreliability.
B. If a person holds to the view that the Scriptures are divinely inspired by God without error in the original autographs, being faithful preserved through the centuries, then there is reason to study and to apply the Scriptures to one’s life.
The discussion of Canonicity has been debated over centuries since the Early Church Fathers to our period including textual criticism. Dr. Bart Ehrman and Dr. Daniel Wallace are the primer scholars in the field of textual criticism. One can see their debates online and make one’s own conclusion.
The discoveries of the Dead Sea Scrolls with all its various scrolls point that the Qumran Community read and cherished the 39 books of the Old Testament except for Esther. The absence of Esther may be due to the absence of the name of God in the text. The Dead Sea Scrolls have been dated to the 2nd or 1st century BCE.
It appears by the time of Jesus if not beforehand the Jews held to a three-fold division of Scriptures: The Law, The Prophets, and The Psalms.
Luke 24 says this, “He said to them, “This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms” (NIV).
There can be the debate about what scrolls are in each of the Old Testament division. As one reads the Gospels, the citations of scrolls reflect the Jewish belief in the authority of the Scriptures. The Pharisees being known for the zealousness of the Law would have preserved the Scriptures even as Gamaliel and Nicodemus being of the foremost teachers.
One can conclude that the present listings of the 39 books of the Old Testament was accepted by Jews and later by the Christians. Whether other books should be in the Canon can be debated as one compare those writings with the “accepted” 39 books of the Old Testament.
Regarding the New Testament, it would be reasonable that Jews and Greeks would want to know about the words and works of Jesus even his life. Luke 1 records that others have sought to write about the things that happen among them and his account is an orderly one after he had investigated it for himself. The acceptance of the Four Gospels is recognized by the bishops and churches while other scrolls were read and may not have been viewed as Scripture. One can read about those pseudepigraph books.
In the Muratorian Canon being dated to the 2nd century already reflects that bishops or church leaders were beginning to recognize which letters were authentic or non-authentic. The Muratorian Canon lists this person belief of what should be recognized as being authoritative.
With scattered persecution through the 1st–4 th century BCE, bishops in geographical location were given great latitude in reading the Old and New Testament letters. As persecution ended, the formation of councils began in debating heresies and the canon of Scriptures.
The Sinai Codex is the earliest surviving “book” dating to the fourth century. If the Christians were able to compile a book around about 325 CE, then one can reasonable assume that there were some consensuses of the books of the Bible prior to 325 CE. There is the recognition of the 27 letters in the New Testament even though other letters were read in the churches.
With the 39 scrolls in the Old Testament and the 27 letters in the New Testament, this became the standard Canon although the Catholic held to other books as being canonical.
Christians believe that the books of the Bible have been preserved by God and by careful comparison of the works, they were able to discern of other letters as being canonical. The accepted canonical books are viewed by Christians as being divinely inspired by God and without error in the original autograph (II Tim 3:16–17, I Pet. 1:16–21).
The development of topical studies led to systematic theology, biblical theology, and practical theology. Nearly every word in the Old Testament and New Testament have been written on by Bible scholars.
Summary: Depending on one’s view of canonicity, it will affect how one views the Scripture and interpret it. It is either from God or from man, authoritative or not authoritative on matters of faith and practice.
-Kingston