Why These and Not Those?

In another important respect Josephus' description of the canon is wrong. Josephus states, and his view is supported by 4 Ezra and rabbinic tradition, that all the books in the biblical canon were written before the time of Artaxerxes. It is easy to see how the Jews came to this view, because none of the books in the Hebrew canon explicitly refers to the period after Ezra and Nehemiah. But in fact, many books in the Bible were written long after that period. The late books certainly include Chronicles, Ruth, Ecclesiastes, Esther, and, of course, Daniel which was written (utilizing older material in the first part) only in the 160s B.C.E. Several others may be late as well: Job, Song of Songs, Jonah, Joel, sections of Proverbs, the second half of Zechariah, and many of the psalms. The date of all these works must have been forgotten by the first century C.E., so that Josephus could claim that the entire Bible predates the reign of Artaxerxes. The Jews represented by the Christian canons of the Bible did not agree with Josephus and rabbinic tradition. These Jews included in their Bible books that were written even later than Daniel (1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, Wisdom of Solomon), and works that did not even pretend, as Daniel did, to be the product of the Persian period (Ben Sira, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees). Furthermore, these Jews obviously did not believe that a book had to be divinely inspired (or eternally valid) in order to be included in the Bible.

The entire process of the canonization of the Tanak raises the question, Why were these books included but not those? Why Ecclesiastes but not Ben Sira? Why Ruth but not Tobit? Why Esther but not Judith? Why Daniel but not Enoch? Why Chronicles (a rewrite of Samuel-Kings) but not the Temple Scroll (a rewrite of the laws of Exodus-Deuteronomy)? There are no objective and absolute criteria that will distinguish the works which were included from those which were not. The biblical books were not the only ones that claimed divine inspiration. Some nonbiblical books were written in Persian or early Hellenistic times (Tobit, 1 Enoch, Ben Sira), and thus are virtually contemporary with many of the works that were included in the Writings. The latest book in the Bible, Daniel, is contemporary with Jubilees, Judith, and a host of other works. Why these but not those?

Part of the answer is provided by the social setting of the literature. Fourth Ezra remarks that the twenty-four books (of the Tanak) are to be read by "the worthy and the unworthy" alike, while the seventy other works which Ezra re-created through divine inspiration were to be read only by "the wise among your people" (4 Ezra 14:45-46). In other words, the books of the Bible are not esoteric. Even if Isaiah 65, Nehemiah 10, and Daniel 11-12 were originally the products of small and distinct groups, by the time the books entered the biblical canon they were the proud possession not of an elite few but of the entire people. Works that remained the esoteric possessions of sects and other such groups were never canonized. Many cultures in antiquity (especially in the East) venerated "sacred writings," and these works usually were esoteric or under the exdusive domain of the priests (as in Egypt). In Judaism, however, the "sacred writings" were the possession of the entire community, not the jealously guarded preserve of any one group. Hence Jubilees, the Temple Scroll, the Essene writings known from Qumran, and the "apocalyptic" literature (except Daniel) were not incorporated into the Bible. Why exoteric works like Ben Sira and Judith were excluded is not as clear. Of course, even in the pre-exilic period certain works were excluded from the emerging biblical tradition. The Tanak itself refers to several works that are now lost. These include, for example, the Book of Yashar (Josh. 10:13 and 2 Sam. 1: 18); the Book of the Wars of the Lord (Num. 21:14); the Chronicle of the Kings of Judah (1 Kings 14:29, etc.); the Chronicle of the Kings of Israel (1 Kings 14:19, etc.). Why did no one care to preserve them? Why weren't these books "canonized"? Centuries later, why weren't Tobit, Ben Sira, and Judith canonized? We do not know.

Shaye Cohen from From the Maccabees to the Mishnah (Westminster, 1987)