Note: This section is for works consulted by lookup—background commentaries keyed to the biblical text (e.g., the IVP and Zondervan background commentaries, etc.), cultural handbooks, and daily-life references. For monographs arguing a case about the Old or New Testament from ancient evidence, see “Ancient Near Eastern Backgrounds of the Old Testament” and “Greco-Roman Backgrounds of the New Testament” in “IV. Biblical Studies.” For the ancient sources themselves and the scholarship devoted to them, see “III. Primary Sources and Their Study.”

Note: This section holds methodological reflection on the use of ancient sources in biblical interpretation: the comparative method, its gains, and its abuses (e.g., parallelomania, parallelophobia, chronological snobbery, backgrounding the foreground, selective and prejudicial use of backgrounds, history-of-religions approaches, and the debates surrounding them).

Note: This section is for anthologies that gather texts from more than one tradition. For anthologies confined to a single tradition, see the “Text Collections and Anthologies” heading within that tradition below.

Note: This section is for the Septuagint studied as a Jewish translation of the Hebrew Scriptures (i.e., its origins, translators, revisions, and reception). For Septuagint editions used as working texts, together with their lexica, concordances, and parsing keys, see “Septuagint Old Testaments and Language Resources” in “IV. Biblical Studies.”

Note: See “Appendix A” for a list of Old Testament apocryphal / deuterocanonical books. Separately bound apocrypha belonging to a Bible translation family (e.g., the RSV, NRSV, JB apocrypha, etc.) are filed with their translation family under “I. Bibles.” These books are canonical Scripture in some traditions and extra-canonical literature in others; this classification reflects that dual standing rather than resolving it.

Note: See “Appendix B” for a list of Old Testament pseudepigrapha.

Note: See “Appendix C” for a list of Dead Sea Scroll manuscripts. For the Scrolls as witnesses to the text of the Hebrew Bible, see “Text Collections and Manuscript Histories” under “Bible Texts, Manuscripts, and Canon Formation” in “IV. Biblical Studies.”

Note: See “Appendix D” for a list of Philo’s works.

Note: For the Targums as witnesses to the text of the Hebrew Bible, see “Text Collections and Manuscript Histories” under “Bible Texts, Manuscripts, and Canon Formation” in “IV. Biblical Studies.”

Note: This section is for post-rabbinic Jewish literature treated as a literature in its own right—the writings themselves and the scholarship devoted to them. For the history, practice, and institutions of the Jewish people in these same periods, see “Judaism” in “VII. Historical Studies.”

Note: See “Appendix J” for a list of New Testament apocryphal books.

Note: Nag Hammadi texts belonging to the apocryphal gospel, acts, epistle, and apocalypse genres (i.e., the Gospels of Thomas, Judas, Mary, Philip, and the Egyptians, the Apocalypse of Adam, the two Apocalypses of James, and the Letter of Peter to Philip) are classified under “New Testament Apocryphal Writings” above and listed in “Appendix J.” This section is for the remainder of the Gnostic corpus (i.e., the Gospel of Truth, the Apocryphon of John, the Tripartite Tractate, Pistis Sophia, the Books of Jeu, and the like), for the Nag Hammadi codices treated as a collection, and for scholarship on Gnosticism.

Note: This section is for manuscripts and versions treated as witnesses to the biblical text. The same bodies of literature considered in their own right (i.e., the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Targums, the Septuagint as a Jewish translation) are classified in “III. Primary Sources and Their Study.”

Note: This section treats literary features synchronically (i.e., the forms, genres, and devices of the biblical text in its final shape) as an aid to reading. For genre analysis used diachronically (i.e., as an index to a text’s oral prehistory and social setting), see “Form Criticism” under “Critical Disciplines” below. So, for example, for the exegesis of individual parables, see “Parables Jesus Told” under “The Life of Christ” below; the theory of parable as a literary genre belongs here.

Note: These writings are classified under “New Testament Apocryphal Writings” in “III. Primary Sources and Their Study,” together with the Apostolic Fathers and the other early Christian sources. See “Appendix J” for a list. This section is retained for New Testament scholarship engaging the apocryphal material—canon-formation debates, comparative studies, and treatments of the apocryphal gospels in relation to the four canonical gospels.

Note: For the normative and applied treatment of these same issues, see “VI. Ethics and Public Faith.”

Note: This section is for the doctrine of angels, Satan, and the demonic. For the practice of spiritual conflict in ministry, see “Spiritual Warfare” under “Christian Ministry (Local Parish)” in “VIII. Applied Theology.”

Note: This section is for doctrinal and/or systematic treatments (prescriptive). See “The Life of Christ” section in “IV. Biblical Studies” for exegetical, biographical, and/or narrative treatments (descriptive).

Note: For bioethical questions (e.g., cloning, genetic engineering, end-of-life issues, etc.), see the “Biomedical Ethics” section in “VI. Ethics and Public Faith.” For environmental questions, see the “Environmental Ethics” section in “VI. Ethics and Public Faith.” For AI-related questions, see the “Technology Ethics” section in “VI. Ethics and Public Faith.” For the doctrine of miracles and providence, see the “Providence” section under “Theology Proper” in “Dogmatic / Systematic Theology” above.

For Example: Honesty, Integrity, Respect, Fairness, Authenticity, Responsibility, Generosity, Loyalty, etc.

For Example: Accountability, Adherence to Laws and Policy, Competence, Confidentiality, Courteousness, Impartiality, Objectivity, Promptness, Sincerity, Trustworthiness, etc.

Note: This section covers ethical obligations within personal and communal relationships. Topics with a structural, legal, or policy dimension (e.g., poverty, immigration, discrimination, etc.) are classified under “Political Ethics (Policies)” below; the relational and pastoral dimensions of the same topics belong here.

A work is classified by the use it serves in this library, not by the category a publisher or general library might assign to it. So, for example, a general history of the ancient Near East acquired to illuminate the Old Testament is filed as background in “IV. I. 1. c. Ancient Near Eastern Backgrounds of the Old Testament” rather than as world history in “VII. A.”

Where a comparative argument ends determines where it is filed. For example, a study that gathers ancient Near Eastern material and concludes in the Old Testament is background (“IV. I. 1. c. Ancient Near Eastern Backgrounds of the Old Testament”). One that carries the same material through to the New Testament is biblical theology (“IV. L.”). Compare Walton’s “Ancient Near Eastern Thought and the Old Testament” with Niehaus’s “Ancient Near Eastern Themes in Biblical Theology.”

The body of evidence a work draws upon does not determine its classification; its subject does. So, for example, Cross’s “From Epic to Canon” uses Ugaritic evidence to explain Israel and is filed with Israel (“IV. I. 1. d. History, Literature, and Religion of Israel”), not with comparative backgrounds. Braun’s “Music in Ancient Israel/Palestine” argues from archaeology and is filed the same way.

A survey of ancient literature arranged by genre belongs to “III. Primary Sources and Their Study” when it treats that literature for its own sake and to “IV. Biblical Studies” when the biblical text stands beside it for comparison. The presence of the biblical column, not the presence of the ancient texts, decides the case.

A work advancing a disputed thesis is classified under the discipline competent to adjudicate it, so that it stands beside its critics. Thiede’s “Eyewitness to Jesus” is filed at “IV. A. 4. b. (1) Greek Manuscripts (Papyri, Uncials, Minuscules)” because its claim is paleographic. Jones’s “Misquoting Truth” stands next to Ehrman’s “Misquoting Jesus” at “IV. A. 5. Textual Criticism (Lower Criticism).”

Within a section, “Introduction and Overview” holds the work one would hand to a newcomer, and “History and Development” holds the work one would cite. Arnold’s “How We Got the Bible” belongs to the former; Comfort’s “The Origin of the Bible” and Wegner’s “The Journey from Texts to Translations” belong to the second.

To classify a reference work, locate the discipline it serves in categories “IV”–“VIII,” then use the corresponding heading in “II. General References.” So, for example, biblical theology is treated in “IV. L.,” so the IVP New Dictionary of Biblical Theology is filed at “II. A. 2. Bible Dictionaries, Encyclopedias, and Handbooks,” not with the theological dictionaries at “II. B. 3.”

The test governing “II. General References” is how a work is used, not what its title may suggest. So, for example, Casson’s “Everyday Life in Ancient Egypt” is a continuous narrative and is read straight through, so it is filed under “IV. I. 1. c. Ancient Near Eastern Backgrounds of the Old Testament.” However, Bertman’s “Handbook to Life in Ancient Mesopotamia” is a lookup tool that is consulted rather than read straight through, so it is filed under “II. A. 3. Bible Backgrounds, Culture, and Daily Life References”).

If a work does not place itself within ten seconds, the placement likely does not matter. Choose a heading, record it, and proceed. Once the holdings are cataloged and searchable, retrieval no longer depends upon shelving alone.

A heading is added when its absence misroutes a class of works, not when a single volume sits awkwardly. So, for example, “Historicity / Reliability of the New Testament” is needed because the relevant titles by Bruce, Blomberg, and Bauckham would otherwise drift into apologetics.

A heading is removed when it competes for works that already have a home elsewhere. So, for example, “Textual Apparatuses” is unnecessary because the critical editions sit well with their language resources, and the method belongs with textual criticism. An unused heading is harmless, but a rival one tends to produce misfiles.

Duplicate copies are one record with two copies, not two placements, though a second copy should be checked in case it is in fact a different edition. Works whose central claim is not credited by the field are flagged as such in the record. Works sharing a title are distinguished by author and date. Section letters are positional and will shift if a heading is inserted above them, so the notation should be stored in the catalog as fixed text rather than derived.