How the Bible Came to Be

by John Barton

In a clear and concise way, John Barton describes the development of the Bible. He explains how the Bible came to be written and collected into the authoritative Scriptures of the Christian Church. Barton untangles the web of history and lets the reader appreciate the journey from spoken word to written word.

Genres: Religion, History, Christianity, Nonfiction, Judaism, Christian

100 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1998

About the author

John Barton is Oriel & Laing Professor of the Interpretation of Holy Scripture, University of Oxford. His publications include The Theology of the Book of Amos (Cambridge University Press, 2012) and Oracles of God: Perceptions of Ancient Prophecy in Israel after the Exile (2007).

For the Canadian poet, see John Barton.

Reviews

[Lee Harmon · Rating 4 out of 5]

John Barton spent 15 years studying the making of the Bible. This brief booklet (less than 100 pages) presents his findings. He first gives a short synopsis of each of the 66 books of the Bible, and then dives into probable authorship and dating. From there, he discusses how the books were selected and collected into scripture, including an interesting discussion of what was considered “scripture.” Finally, he explains how the two canons (Old Testament and New) were derived.

Barton is not going to tell you Paul wrote Hebrews or that Moses wrote the Torah. His purpose is not to present traditional, conservative teachings, but to bring you up to date on current Bible scholarship, and he writes in a manner that non-technical readers can comprehend. There is no unified understanding between scholars, and some of Barton’s views are his own, yet all in all I think he does a great job of introducing the formation of the Bible.

In my opinion, the book’s greatest value is for conservative Christians! If you don’t want to spend weeks learning about biblical scholarship, but need to be aware of the thinking and conclusions of critical scholarship, this is a perfect overview. Two hours will give you the basics.

[Ned · Rating 3 out of 5]

This subject has always held my interest, even as a very young child passively listening but not quite comprehending the interpretations from this “book” as told from the pulpit of my “evangelical” church. I use the quotes because by most standards our sect of protestant religion, as I have long since learned, was rather unusual in its interpretation of what this book has to say about the good life. What was taught was that, other than Jesus Christ, we are all born “in sin”, though largely spared from hell as children until reaching the “age of accountability” (i.e. an undefined time, depending on the intellect of the child, when “knows” he is sinful, and thus must act to avoid hell). Hell was a place all of us were bound, unless we accepted salvation as delivered by Jesus, the most approachable of the mysterious trinity of God. Being fairly precocious, I learned early on to be terrified that my standing with the Lord was in jeopardy and should I die (before I wake, e.g.) without the security of salvation, I would immediately be sent to a place of everlasting torment, where ones flesh would burn in unquenchable fire, and the sinner in a state of pain beyond comprehension, for all eternity. As a child, the torture of these thoughts seemed unendurable, yet children are resilient – and I observed some bizarre behaviors in other parishioners, and my relatives, Sunday School friends, that shall remain un-named at this point in time. The other fear was that Jesus would finally return for a second time and collect the “saved” – and a whole body of literature and film was devoted to showing the horrors of being “left behind”. This fear was always there, especially should one inadvertently “backslide”, i.e. “lose” salvation and slip beyond the protection of our lord and savior. As a result, I was on pins and needles and as adolescence advanced, with hormones entering the picture, the fear settled in… the worst part was it was my decision, my “will” that condemned me, so I only had myself to blame. The peculiar logic of all this was, if the teaching were true, I was incredibly, incredibly lucky to have been born in the “true” religion, where escape from the horror was possible through instruction in how to “follow” the true will of God (salvation and a second work of grace which is another full subject). On the flip side, if not true, this self-flagellation was a tragic situation from which I needed escape.

I say all this to explain why I read this book. It is but the most recent of several I’ve read on the topic. It never quite made sense to me that the particular edition (e.g. the King James Version) of the Bible was the “inerrant word of God” where not one “jot nor tittle” could be changed. For one thing, it was in English, translated from Greek, which was translated from Hebrew and Greek, which was written 2000+ years ago from copies of transcriptions from (mostly) spoken oral tradition. Even the English books vary in content and wording – so how is it possible that one of these is inerrant and the perfect will of God? The fallacy in this reasoning came to me as a young man, and in my late teens I embarked on a reading and thinking exercise, even taking a course in English Bible in a conservative Christian college. My journey continues to this day, as I ponder these writings as fragments of inspired literature, from which violent disagreement between clergy over the centuries has continued unabated. The basic teaching of Jesus of Nazareth, in the New Testament, do speak to me and I still believe many of those teachings to be valuable instruction on how to live a peaceful life. But I no longer idolize the words in the many variants of the books which my elders have forced upon me. Their arguments are not hollow and uninformed – it turns out they never asked the questions themselves or were intimidated enough through social conditioning to tamp them to dust, that I started asking at the age of about 9, when I began to feel responsible for what I believed.

Barton’s book is a history of how the books of the Bible came to be written, then collected in their various forms, and finally “listed” as scriptural (i.e. canonized, although he dislikes that word). He covers this up through about the time of 367 AD, just after Constantine in Rome legalized Christianity, and when Christianity began to spread worldwide. Not included is the history how “books” proliferated after the first printed version, the Gutenberg Bible, was able to be mass produced in the 15th century, thanks to the invention of the printing press. Since that time the Bible, and all books, became the primary factor in amassing large volumes of “books” (or codices) and the proliferation of knowledge and the renaissance period which led to where we are today. Barton also shows how malleable were the books of the Bible until they became relatively “fixed” in structure with less deviation, after Constantine’s rule. I’ve always been perplexed as to why an omniscient, all-powerful God would “fix” his revelations to mankind in a physical collection of either the Bible or the Torah – forcing us today to understand an archaic language out of context with today’s state of knowledge (e.g. clearly the authors were unaware of, say, the fact that the earth is round and a plethora of other truths that we now understand). As when I was 9, it still boggles the mind. Although I was chided as being “difficult” with all my questions, isn’t that the point of using my God-given brain, to better understand the creation? This argument still finds no traction even today when I try to engage with certain believers.

Well, this review diverged into myriad rabbit holes, and yet did not begin to scratch the surface of what I want to say. I can’t write, so I’ll just recede and keep my eyes and ears and brain open – I do appreciate Barton’s scholarship as I did gain many new bits of information whilst reading his impressive scholarship. He could have used an editor, some of his points get muddled. But who am I to criticize, this murky review itself evidence of my own inability to articulate. I’ll just say thanks to the author for helping me on my journey.

[Daniel · Rating 2 out of 5]

Something every Christian should be knowledgeable in... the development and collecting of the Holy Scriptures.

[Natalie · Rating 5 out of 5]

Awesome! Quick read, good knowledge!

[Howard · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book a very short summation of the author's more scholarly works on the bible. He writes about how controversial his thesis is although it seems pretty reasonable to me. I suppose if your view of the Bible's creation is a set of individuals writing down their message from God, then this more historical approach would be disturbing if not blasphemy.
Barton argues that the development of the bible went through various stages. First they were written; then they were collected into a set of works. Then "such collections came to be read in special ways which do not apply to secular books - allegorically, for example, or aw universally relevant, or as full of hidden meaning." [p 87] The final stage is "where some competent authority pronounces that the category of scriptural books is not full, and draws a line under the collection to turn it into The Holy Bible." [p 87] This step is called canonization but "is less important than it sounds for either the Old or the New Testament." [p 87] It is less important because in the life of the church some books are more important than others. For example "ecclesiastical committees still debate whether it is appropriate to read Revelation in church." [p 85].
All in all this is a good book with some interesting insights into the Bible. I was surprised by the lack of drama.

[Diane Glover · Rating 3 out of 5]

For being a small book, this packs a lot of information. Barton has done a decent job of taking us through history in the formation of what we currently call THE BIBLE. And while he points out how hand copying may have included various mistakes, changes and edits.. It still seems that even slight slips of the pen, poor editing, poor interpretation has not influences the greater message found within its pages. As he points out the OLD TESTAMENT has been confirmed to be have been around for a very long time, though even the Jewish Scholars argue of come of the books contained in certain versions of it. (i.e. Wisdom of Solomon, etc). The New Testament seems to have more issues with its origin. It also seems to have more questions as to the actual authors of various books. (Hebrews comes to mind). Overall The BIBLE as we have it has been the accepted version for a very long time. And without the original WORDS OF GOD to go by we have to have the FAITH to believe in the MESSAGE contained therein.
Interesting book. It didn't make me believe in the Bible less, though it does draw into question is it the WORD OF GOD, INFAILABLE? For me. Its more about the overall message of the Bible. The truth about Jesus and his life and death. That is all that matters to me. The rest is arguing over issues.. Salvation and Faith.. those are the things to hang on to.

[Wendy · Rating 3 out of 5]

I enjoyed this book, but would recommend it only to those reading for a specific purpose, thus three stars. It explores from an historical and literary perspective who wrote the books of the Bible and the process by which the writings came to be considered “Scripture”. For me, it was valuable context on a faith and spiritual journey.

[Joshua Serrano · Rating 5 out of 5]

I would recommend this book to anyone wondering how we get the Bible in it's present form. Barton does a good job of leading people through the knowns and unknowns of authorship, acceptance, and development. Good for people who want something short and concise.

[Brian Hull · Rating 4 out of 5]

Rounded up from 3.5

[Nancy Graham · Rating 4 out of 5]

Though Barton seems to embrace a profound disregard for divine "mystery," his book compactly reveals many of the steps along the pathway to defining the canon of scripture. Curiously, though, he never mentions the Council of Trent -- a late century gathering to affirm and close the canon.