The study of how a text came to be placed in a Canon of Scripture. Questions about whether a text should be included in the canon are off-topic here.
I am wondering if both are off topic here at BH.SE, as canonicity is an issue decided by specific religious traditions. Answering these questions generally requires ecclesiastical history and specific doctrinal statements of individual religious traditions. Not all Christians nor even all Jews agree on which books are canonical. I think those issues are best hashed out at C.SE and MY.SE, respectively. I know that C.SE considers these questions to be on topic.
So for clarification, should the following should be off topic?
- Questions about how a text came to be placed in a canon of Scripture.
- Questions about whether a text should or should not be included in a canon.
- Questions about non-canonical works (it is fine to indicate that a work is disputed or not accepted by all traditions, but it should be labeled as "extra-biblical" or a more scholarly term rather than using doctrinal language such as "non-canonical").
Along the same lines, we have a canon-criticism tag and a few questions under it that also need to be reviewed. One of those questions seems on topic to me since it deals with canon-criticism as an abstract field of study, but the other questions may need to be reviewed for relevance.
It is my opinion that many questions along these lines could redirect their focus from a specific religious tradition to the text itself. For instance, a question about whether or not a given reading should be considered canonical could be rephrased to ask if it was original to the work or penned by the purported author.
Overall, are issues of canonicity as specified above theological and thus off topic? This is especially pertinent since as of right now we have no defined books which are considered "biblical" (note that the current top answer leaves this very open-ended).
Thoughts? Agree? Disagree?