Libertine behavior, existential dread, and political intrigue:
For a book that appears in every hotel room across America, The Bible
features some seriously controversial sections. Stay tuned to find out more.
The Book of Esther is the rousing tale of a Jewish woman who uses her beauty
to convince the King of Persia that he should not commit genocide against the Jewish people.
It's a tight and engaging story, and it serves to explain the history behind the festival of Purim,
which is often reductively described as ‘Jewish Halloween.’
This is a major source of the trouble The Book of Esther faced in getting confirmed as canon.
The first five books of the Bible lay out all the obligatory holidays of the Jewish faith,
such as Passover, Rosh Hashanah, and Sukkot. The fact that The Book of Esther claimed
to institute a new mandatory festival quickly became a problem amongst rabbis,
as there were problems with the book that made theologians question its legitimacy.
Among Esther’s other issues, the book never explicitly mentions God,
and it contradicts multiple points of known history. There are six additional chapters
in the Greek version of this book, not included in the Hebrew original,
which try to rectify these points — characters pray to God for intervention, for example. But,
they really only created more issues of scholarly debate. Ultimately, Jews and Protestants accepted
the original version, while Catholic and Orthodox churches use the longer Greek version.
Make no mistake: The Book of Ecclesiastes is one of the most beautifully written
books of the Bible, and is among the greatest pieces of literature in human history. It is,
for example, the source of numerous common expressions and literary allusions, such as
"eat, drink, and be merry,"
and
"the sun also rises,"
It is also a book about existential depression, exploring the inevitability
of death and the perceived futility of existence. The book’s narrator goes so
far as to say that the living should envy the dead, and the dead should envy the unborn who
have never had to bear the injustice of existence. Beautiful, but bleak stuff.
“The dread of something after death… the
undiscovered country from whose bourn no traveler returns…”
The desolate worldview has led to continued concerns over the canonicity of the book.
Ecclesiastes seems to suggest that there is no justice in the afterlife — a message
that contradicts pretty much the rest of both Jewish and Christian scripture.
The main things that have kept the book in canon are its attribution to King Solomon,
and its final two verses, which say that the only thing worth doing is following God's commands.
The Song of Songs, also known as The Song of Solomon, or Canticles, is a unique work within
the biblical canon, in that it is not at all concerned with God's law, his covenant with the
people of Israel, or even wisdom in general. Together with the original version of Esther,
in fact, it is one of only two books in the Bible that doesn’t mention God at all.
Instead, The Song of Songs is concerned with the ecstasy of two lovers as they
join together in physical intimacy. She unlocks her metaphorical garden so he can
enter and taste her metaphorical fruits — it’s surprisingly explicit for a religious text.
The book's unabashed dedication to sexual themes has created an issue among some religious leaders,
especially those who consider sexuality to be innately sinful. Debate raged among both Jewish
and Christian leaders about its continued inclusion in canon, but two main conditions
saved it. First, like Ecclesiastes, the work has long been attributed to King Solomon.
And, second, the sensual tale functions as an allegory for the relationship — depending on
your perspective — between God and the Jewish People, or between Christ and the church.
The Epistle to the Hebrews is the longest of the General Epistles — the letters in the New
Testament not written by the Apostle Paul. However, the possibility that
this letter actually was written by Paul is what lies at the center of its controversy.
As the Encyclopedia of the Bible explains, Hebrews was pretty much universally accepted
as a work of Paul by the Eastern church in the second century. The Western church, however,
did not unanimously agree. For them, canonicity relied heavily on apostolic authorship, and while
some were willing to accept Hebrews as the work of Paul, not everyone was convinced. By the late
fourth century, however, Hebrews was accepted on the strength of its writing and theology.
This wasn't good enough for Martin Luther, who felt the book's theology contained some, quote,
"wood, hay, and stubble," — the Renaissance equivalent of trash. He relegated it,
with some other New Testament books, to a lesser status. John Calvin didn't think Paul wrote it,
but thought it was good enough to be in the Bible anyway. There is still no consensus on
the authorship of Hebrews, but theories include rivals of Paul, such as Barnabas and Priscilla.
In the earliest days of the Christian church, there were two general flavors of Christianity.
One was the Gentile-centric approach of the missionary Paul, in which faith in Christ can
supersede the Jewish law. The second was the style of the Jerusalem church and its leader,
James the Just, which said you had to actually, like, do good things to be a good person.
You may be able to piece together which side ‘won’ by the fact that half of the New
Testament is made up of Paul’s writings, while James only has one brief letter.
The Epistle of James is widely considered the most Jewish book in the New Testament.
It focuses on fulfilling Christ's message with the fruits of one's actions,
rather than the Pauline message of seeking redemption and eternal life.
“What was it he said that got everyone so upset?” “Be kind to each other” “Oh, yeah, that’ll do it.”
This Jewish approach to Christianity withered on the vine in favor of Paul's more universal style.
The letter was also, crucially, not attributed to any of the Twelve Apostles, leading to centuries
of canonical neglect. Martin Luther considered it of secondary canonical rank for suggesting
faith alone isn't enough. This, despite the small fact James the Just was Jesus's brother.
You'd think the most controversial book in the entire biblical canon would be Revelation,
due to its wild and abstract apocalyptic visions,
but The Second Epistle of Peter is even more contentious. As with most controversies over
canonicity within the New Testament, the crux of the debate was over the question of authorship.
As Bible.org puts it:
"The history of the acceptance of 2 Peter into the New Testament canon has
all the grace of a college hazing event. This epistle was examined,
prayed over, considered, and debated more than any other New Testament book [...]"
There were a few different issues at play. The language of 2 Peter does not closely match that
of 1 Peter — which was more readily accepted as written by the real Peter. The name Peter had
already been applied to numerous heretical texts, such as the Gnostic Apocalypse of Peter. Thus,
the fathers of the church were hesitant to tarnish the integrity of St. Peter’s writings any further.
Nevertheless, while most modern scholarship says 2 Peter is definitely not by the St. Peter,
the church accepted its apostolic authority.
There is an overabundance of dudes named John in the New Testament. There's John the Baptist,
John the Apostle, John the Evangelist, John the Elder , and John of Patmos — the author of
Revelation. The traditional view held by much of mainstream Christianity today is that all
non-Baptist Johns are the same guy. However, it was not an easy consensus to arrive at.
The canonicity of the second and third epistles of John were considered questionable for a while.
The books of 2 and 3 John reference being written by an Elder. The historian Eusebius
argued John the Elder was not the same person as John the Apostle, thereby calling the apostolic
authority of 2 and 3 John into question. The fact these letters were extremely short
and generally unrelated to universal issues of the church was also a cause for concern.
After the fourth century, however, general consensus agreed on their apostolic origin.
The Epistle of Jude is one of the shortest books in the Bible, with one chapter made up
of just 25 verses. It managed to cram in quite a bit of controversy in those few verses, even
though there's a chance that, like the Epistle of James, it was written by one of Jesus's brothers.
Jude references, and even directly quotes, two different apocryphal books.
The first is the Assumption of Moses, which discusses the archangel Michael and Satan fighting
over Moses' corpse. And the second is the Book of Enoch, about the final fate of fallen angels.
“We were hunted, most of us killed.”
The brevity of the book, and the fact that it wasn't attributed to one of the apostles,
were also concerns for some Church Fathers.
While the association with Jude, the brother of Jesus, existed early on, some of the phrasing
in the book — such as referring to Paul's letters as scripture, and the implying that
some or all of the apostles had died — caused doubt that it was written in Jude's lifetime.
If you've read the Book of Revelation, it might not surprise you that it has
one of the most contentious paths to canonicity of any book of the Bible.
What might surprise you, however, is that the controversy was not about the book’s
acid trip content. You know, that bit where a beast with seven heads and ten
horns comes out of the sea and no one can agree on whether that's a metaphor or not.
Some New Testament books were met with a lukewarm response, with the Church Fathers
warming up to them over time. Revelation was initially met with enthusiastic reception,
largely thanks to the idea that the author of the book was John the Apostle. This idea was accepted
for quite a while, until a third century author claimed it was a forgery by the heretic Cerinthus,
and others disagreed with its message of a literal thousand-year reign by Christ on Earth.
Revelation was affirmed by Church Fathers, but many early Protestant leaders like Martin Luther
and John Calvin rejected its apostolic and prophetic authenticity. Even today,
it is the only New Testament book not read in the Divine Liturgy of the Eastern Orthodox Church.
For mainstream American Protestants, the Bible has 66 books, with 39 in the Old Testament and 27 in
the New. Catholic and Orthodox Bibles, however, contain several more. The best known of these
additions are a group of 15 books, called the Apocrypha by Martin Luther, and the deuterocanon —
i.e., later canon — by Catholics. Luther said the books of the Apocrypha were good and worth
reading, but not equal to real scripture because of their late composition. These books include,
among others, 1 and 2 Maccabees, Susanna, Bel and the Dragon, and The Book of Tobit, among others.
Protestants are missing out, because many of these books completely rule. Tobit is the
story of a young man named Tobias teaming up with the disguised archangel Raphael. With Raphael’s
guidance, he hopes to find a cure for his father Tobit's blindness, caused by birds defecating in
his eyes. The young Tobias ultimately has to battle the demon Asmodeus, a despicable
villain who delights in murdering grooms on their wedding night. Definitely worth a read!
The Greek Orthodox Church used the Septuagint as the basis for their Old Testament canon. Thus,
the Eastern Orthodox Bible includes all of the books from the Roman Catholic deuterocanon,
with less of a stark contrast between canon and non-canon works. Their canon includes
additional books such as 3 Maccabees and 1 Esdras. This gives the Orthodox Old
Testament a total of 49 books, versus the 39 found in the Protestant canon.
The Catholic and Orthodox Bibles both contain the books of 1 and 2 Maccabees,
which tell of the revolt led by Judah Maccabee against the Greek Seleucids,
resulting in the rededication of the temple in Jerusalem — i.e.,
the story of Hanukkah. Only the Orthodox canon, however, includes 3 Maccabees, which tells a tale
of Jewish resistance in Egypt that actually has nothing to do with Judah Mac or the Seleucids.
Instead it’s about… Ptolemy IV trying to wipe out the Jewish people with … drunk elephants?
According to Catholic Answers, the Western Church rejected it because they deemed it a work of
fiction, totally unrelated to the Maccabees. There are actually eight books of Maccabees,
all considered fictional after the fourth, which is canon only in the Georgian Orthodox Church.
The widest canon of them all can be found within the Oriental Orthodox Churches of
Ethiopia and Eritrea. The “narrow” canon of the Ethiopian church contains 81
books, including all the books of the Septuagint, as well as books of 1 Enoch,
Jubilees, 2 Esdras, the Paralipomena of Baruch, and three books of Meqabyan. Meqabyan is known
as the Ethiopian Maccabees … despite also having nothing to do with the Maccabees.
But, the Ethiopian New Testament also includes what is known as the "broader" canon,
which contains books of church practices, church ordinances, and a history of the Jews
based on the writings of Flavius Josephus. It's a lot of books.
Besides the somewhat psychedelic Book of Enoch, the best known book exclusive to the Ethiopian
canon is the Book of Jubilees. Jubilees is also known as Little Genesis, because it
is a retelling of the events of the canonical book of Genesis, and the beginning of Exodus.
“Just after the beginning — it starts,
as it will end, with a garden. In this case, the garden of Eden.”
It does, somewhat ironically, add more details, thereby making it actually bigger
than Genesis. The book contains some pretty clear contradictions of both Old and New
Testament theology, which probably took it out of the running for most canons.
Check out one of our newest videos right here! Plus,
even more Grunge videos about controversial history are coming soon. Subscribe to our
YouTube channel and hit the bell so you don't miss a single one.