Constantine's Bible: Politics and the Making of the New Testament [Paperback]

David L. Dungan (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: October 1, 2006

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 used-and not used-to make these decisions. Finally he describes the consequences of the emperor Constantine's tremendous achievement in transforming orthodox, Catholic Christianity into imperial Christianity.

Editorial Reviews

From Publishers Weekly

Beginning with a meticulous study of just what a canon is, Dungan offers a panoramic view of the first three centuries of Christian history and how the major players, both ecclesiastical and civil, contributed to defining the collection of writings we call the New Testament. One of the claims of the bestselling novel The Da Vinci Code is that the institution of theCatholic Church suppressed some writings that challenged its own views and agendas. Dungan, professor of religion at the University of Tennessee in Knoxville, finds this view untenable and offers as evidence a long and detailed examination of the scripture selection process as documented by the fourth-century church historian Eusebius. While various schools of Christianity exerted pressure to either include or exclude certain works, he concludes that the selection process produced "a minimalist canon, but one that is as hard as rock: all regional agendas have been intentionally ignored, all personal proclivities of prominent theologians or bishops dispensed with, every possible taint of 'politicking' avoided." Although written for the general reader, the book's detail can be overwhelming. But while his case for an orthodox canon is not unassailable, he succeeds in providing a wealth of information to enable readers to decide for themselves. (Oct.)
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

About the Author

David Dungan is Professor of Religion at the University of Tennessee in Knoxville and author, with David R. Cartlidge, of Documents of the Study of the Gospels, rev. and enlarged edition (1994, 0-8006-2809-8).

Product Details

• Paperback: 240 pages
• Publisher: FORTRESS PRESS; 1 edition (October 1, 2006)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0800637909
• ISBN-13: 978-0800637903
• Product Dimensions: 8.3 x 5.5 x 0.7 inches
• Shipping Weight: 12 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.1 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (17 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #784,282 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

43 of 47 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Canonization as an Official Action, December 16, 2006

By 

Virgil Brown (White Oak, Texas USA) - See all my reviews
(VINE VOICE)    (REAL NAME)   

Amazon Verified Purchase

This review is from: Constantine's Bible: Politics and the Making of the New Testament (Paperback)

Dungan begins by saying that it is a frequent misunderstanding to equate "scripture" and "canon." Scripture refers to a semidurable and evolving conglomeration of texts. A canon results when somebodies impose a boundary around a subset of these writings. Such action is not an obscure event. Since it requires strenuous, official action that is easily detectable because of the impact upon the religious community from that moment onward. Such action and impact can not be seen in the Vedic Upanishads, Taoism, etc., but it can be seen in Judaism and then Christianity. Later such action and impact can be seen in Islam as well (in the 7th century under the third Caliph, Uthman).

This is where Dungan starts to get fancy. He asserts that the range of meaning for the term "canon" needs to be understood as a part of the rise of the Greek city-state. Fancy or not, that is what etymology is. No doubt one would want to study the uses of the term canon in order to understand its etymology. Etymology of the term canon shows that it meant more than a reed as a measuring stick. For example, in the sixth century BCE Pythagoras applied measurement to musical tones and came up with kanonikoi or "standard tones." Such measurement permeated Greek philosophy as well. In a Hellenistic culture, early Christianity adopted the idea of canon as measurement, but Clement of Rome and Origen of Alexandria know no idea of a canon as a set of official doctrines. In fact, according to Dungan, no Christian scholar before the 4th century refers to "the canon."

At just about the turn of the era, Greek philosophical thought rebelled against the idea of pseudonymous authorship. A novel practice began in the first century BC/BCE. Dionysius of Halicarnassus made a biography of an Athenian orator and concluded it with a grading of the 60 books ascribed to the orator. By 230 AD/CE Diogenes Laetius uses a tripartite division of genuine, disputed, and spurious. So Eusebius was on firm *philosophical* grounds when he argued for the authenticity of books. To this he added apostolic succession. Apostolic succession has become a religious tenet among some Christians, but at the time of Eusebius it was also a solid philosophical argument.

Eusebius' work is not a singular opinion but a compilation of the work of other scholars from the previous two centuries. This is the high point of Dungan's book. Because every book now in the New Testament canon had been challenged, it had to be defended. Just before the Council of Nicaea, Eusebius had published his _Ecclesiastical History_. After the Council of Nicaea and Constantine's order of 50 Bibles, Eusebius' analysis of the selection of scripture became the last word. Writers began to refer to "the canon" and the debate withered and disappeared. It was not until the 18th century that Eusebius began to be reassessed.

Incidentally, after Constantine called the Council of Nicaea, Eusebius was put on the spot by being asked by the Emperor if he would accept the idea that Jesus was "of one substance" with the Father. There is no record of any objection by Eusebius or any other bishop to the Emperor's involvement into the affairs of the Christian Church.

22 of 26 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars well-written, thought-provoking, but missing a little something, August 5, 2007

By 

the eclectic extrovert (PA USA) - See all my reviews

This review is from: Constantine's Bible: Politics and the Making of the New Testament (Paperback)

I don't blame anyone for giving this 5 stars, but I'm going against the trend and giving it four. Why? Well, let me begin with its good points:
First, it does an excellent job suggesting a cultural/philosophical, and primarily Hellenistic, basis for the process of canonization. This one will undoubtedly stir discussion, if not derision, among some Evangelicals. On the other hand, showing just how thorough the legitimization of the eventually canonized texts was, through the rigorous historical work of Eusebius, should please Bible-lovers by showing that the choice of books which was selected was far from arbitrary, rooted in purely historical motives, etc.
Dungan does well here in capturing an angle that will both irritate, but also comfort, sola scriptura folks. On the one hand, all of this nonsense about conspiracy can be done away with in discussions about gnostic and questionable works, which Dungan shows clearly don't pass historical muster. On the other hand, what we are left with as "canon" is the result of alleged politicization of the church through Constantine, and this brings me to some of the mild drawbacks of the book.

In a nutshell, it has become fashionable in recent years to use Constantine as a whipping boy in church history, thereby raising a cloud of suspicion over every project to which his name can be attached--an influence which gave the Church "power," and all too likely, we are led to believe, tainted the "purity" of an early age (and also one with many more loose ends--enough to allow for the disintegration of the Christian faith, one is often led in these discussions to suspect--though not necessarily by Dungan--if it wasn't for the artificial solidification of the Christian cultural base through the assertion of crass political force). While Dungan somewhat avoids the temptation to pass judgment on the unarguable political influence of Constantine, it is clear that he wishes for us to be left wondering about any decisions regarding the canon that evolve after the time of Eusebius. And this leaves a HUGE question completely unaddressed--the inclusion of the various deuterocanonical works in earlier Bibles, and their expulsion after the Reformation. This is a major divinding point in Christendom, and it is really not even mentioned by Dungan. One can connect the dots--these books were approved after the Constantinization of the church, so therefore, "draw your own conclusions as to whether or not this process was legit." It's an important point to consider, but Dungan's failure to address it seems a bit fishy to me.

One very very small final point. At the end, he tacks on a short discussion about how the development of the concept of Scriptural canon impacted Islam. This is an interesting question, but one that has the "feel" of being added primarily because an editor suggested to "put something in there about Islam...that's a hot topic nowadays." It is a fun teaser, but the subject is raised, and dropped, so suddenly that it seems like it would have been better off not being mentioned at all--or being brought in a paranthetical or a footnote. It left the book with a "tacked on" feeling--albeit it provocative one.

In all, a worthwhile read, but one that should be read with full awareness of the tendency to use Constantine (and "Constantinian Christianity") as an easy, and oversimplified, topic these days. On hte other hand, the work excels in showing just how well grounded the selection of texts at least through the time of Eusebius was, thereby "hushing" much of the noise that is raised these days by those trying to revive the "suppressed" secrets of gnostic works.

9 of 11 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars A scholarly, well-researched and succinctly reasoned treatise, March 4, 2007

By 

Midwest Book Review (Oregon, WI USA) - See all my reviews

This review is from: Constantine's Bible: Politics and the Making of the New Testament (Paperback)

Written by David L. Dungan (Professor of Religion, University of Tennessee in Knoxville), Constantine's Bible: Politics and the Making of the New Testament is an inquiry into accepted canon of the New Testament that explores the social-historical context of the Greek polis ideology. Chapters examine the precise definition of what is and is not canon, the influence of Greek philosophy upon early Christianity, defense of Catholic scriptures against "pagans and heretics", how the intervention of an Emperor reshaped religious history, and much more. A scholarly, well-researched and succinctly reasoned treatise, shedding new light on our understanding of ancient scriptures, highly recommended for religious studies shelves.