What about the Canon of Scripture?
Introduction:
Everyone hold up their Bible, please? Do you believe this entire book bares the weight of divine revelation and hence divine authority? Yes? Well, turn to the Table of Contents. Is this page divine, inspired, and hence authoritative? Well, no, technically the Table of Contents is not inspired (nor are the commentary notes or the cross-references!). You say this is just semantics. Well, no, it’s not. This list tells you what belongs in your bible thus determining what does not belong in your Bible. Did you know there are Christians who’s Bibles have a different list? Well, then, how do we know which books belong in this list and which do not? This is the question at hand, thus this is necessarily a matter epistemology.
I. Approach
How we approach the canon (the nature of our attitude) must first be established before we ask, “How do we know” what belongs in the canon? Two predominant approaches divide the task of how we go about discerning whether or not there is a so-called canon. We can approach the issue from a faith perspective or we can approach the canon from a skeptical perspective. Principles of scientific verification will not apply to the search for an answer because, though science and its abilities are often helpful, knowledge based upon a scientific method will not apply in the broad sense. Certainly we can go about the study of the canon using an orderly, objectively (to a degree) and historically vigorous lens, but the certainty that the scientific method would like to establish will not apply. The question then is “How do we know?” So then, we begin at a fork in the road. Depending on which fork you take, you will likely end up at differing, and incompatible destinations.
A. Skeptical Perspective
The skeptical perspective will require “scientific proof” or “scientific verification” before something is affirmed. A skeptical perspective will rarely allow for any form of fideism. If however, one begins his or her approach to the issue of the Biblical canon (or the Bible in general for that matter) by being skeptical of any knowledge based on faith (even a reasonable faith) and requiring that all knowledge be verified by scientific methodology then he or she will likely remain in a consistent state of skepticism toward the Scriptures. Those who begin their search by assuming the non-existence of a “higher power” will most certainly declaim any evidence that suggest that a “higher power” has communicated with humans. A conclusion will be reached, “If there is no God, there certainly is no authoritative Scriptures.” Though scientific knowledge by its very nature must be skeptical, not all science must take an over-all, all-consuming posture of skepticism. Being a skeptic is one thing, but founding your life upon skepticism is another. Said differently, delaying judgment upon an issue until you have acquired sufficient reason is warranted to a degree, but inevitably delaying judgment because of one’s skepticism is absurd. That person, who ever he or she may be, who remains inevitably skeptical must sooner or later, if he or she is true the their philosophy, become skeptical of their skepticism. This, like I said, is absurd and leaves one with stones to eat instead of bread.
B. Faith Perspective
Fideism is the idea that spiritual truth is based on faith rather than on reasoning or evidence. Some have taken the principle too far and will completely ignore reason and evidence in their search for truth. Reason and evidence must be considered if we are to be honest with ourselves in order to avoid unwarranted bias. A Seeker-of-truth must be open to the idea of error in their understanding. Fideism at this level is probably not warranted or even necessary (God is reasonable), but rather a more moderate and balanced fideism is warranted such as the type that will say, “I believe, help thou mine unbelief,” or “I believe in order that I may understand.” Just as in salvation, we must rely upon and believe in God, so also in the matter of receiving His word. We are in complete reliance upon God for truth. How we approach what belongs in the Biblical canon should, in my view, be established upon a similar principle – the faith that God is fundamentally able to, and has by the agency of his Holy Spirit, worked through his own people (i.e. the community of faith) to reveal, preserve, and illuminate His truth. This is not unreasonable and even highly probable if you begin with the assumption that God is all-powerful.
II. The Approach: Faith Perspective
We must all begin somewhere and so I will begin by assuming a faith perspective, though I do not discount the role of reason and evidence in the search for an answer. I would even apply matters of scientific investigation concerning understanding the history behind the compiling of the Scriptures. Christian understanding of the Bible has never suggested that the Bible fell from heaven on plates of gold and simply happened upon it. Rather, Christianity believes that the process by which we have received our Bible is one that includes both natural and supernatural means; one that includes both the infallible abilities of God and the fallible abilities of men.
A. Supernatural Means
If God is all-powerful, then he is able to communicate with humanity and not only that he is able to preserve what he has communicated, and further he is able to continuously illuminate truth to humanity throughout time. God, the Holy Spirit, is according to the Bible the primary agent in humanity receiving divine Scripture. This is not unreasonable. That God inspired the Bible is also explicitly taught in the Bible. We are not told on occasion in the Scriptures that God is the primary Author, rather we are told repeatedly that “God said” and “the Scriptures say.” Peter tells us that “Holy men of old spake as they were moved by the Spirit.” Jesus appeals to the authority of the Law, Prophets, and Psalms. Paul tells us that “all Scripture is given by inspiration.” The earliest of fathers of the Christian faith held the view that the Scriptures held the weight of divine authority because God is their Author. The body of believers across the centuries has believed this to be true.
B. Natural Means
God used humans to pen the Scriptures. The Scriptures span the time of thousands of years and several authors. The Scriptures are technically a library of several books not one big book. They have been copied and repeatedly copied, they have been “lost,” they have been burned, and they have been manipulated all at the hands of men. The Scriptures bear the stamp of humanity. They preserve culture and show human depravity. They are written in human language, they are representative of specific times and places and peoples. Tradition has passed on that Moses “wrote” the first five books, that Isaiah wrote Isaiah, that John wrote Revelation, yet our faith also teaches that the Holy Spirit is ultimately responsible for their penning and the preservation and their illumination. It is easy to see why that if one does not allow for the supernatural, then the Scriptures are just a collection of ancient writings with no inherent universal authority, only localized authority.
III. Faith Perspective
Approach to the Biblical Canon Before we can begin understanding “how we got the Bible” in the form that it is today we must understand what is meant by “Canon.”
A. Canon
Greek/Hebrew word meant something like a “reed.” It then became associated with a “measuring reed” and hence a “standard” or “rule.” It then referred more technically to a “list.” It also developed another meaning in the first three centuries of the church. It had the idea of the “normative doctrinal and ethical content” referring to an agreed upon set of doctrine and truth. By the fourth century it more specifically referred to the closed collection of books comprising the Old and New Testaments. The word is used twice in the NT but in the sense of the first definition: as some measuring device.
B. Canonization is concerned primarily with the finished product, or the “closed” canon. To say the church took a long time recognizing the authority of the books is misleading. The books were recognized as possessing authority from the beginning of their writing. It was a matter of recognizing and receiving the extent of the canon that took time.
C. The issue of the canon is primarily one of authority. What books are authoritative and what should be read in the church as binding on all faith and practice? The process develops: first, the notion of authoritative Scripture; second, the recognition of authoritative Scripture; and third, the fixing of authoritative Scripture.
D. There are other faith traditions that have a different canon. The primary difficulty is not the fact of a canon, but the extent of the canon. Judaism limits the authoritative Scripture to the OT. Protestantism includes the OT and the 27 books of the NT. Roman Catholicism and Orthodox traditions include Apocryphal writings, however each not to the same extent.
IV. The Old Testament
A. The Old Testament Canon is often referred to as the Tanak. This represented the Torah (Law), the Nebi’im (Prophets), and the Ketuvim (Writings). (Luke 24:44)
B. The development of the Old Testament canon is of an entirely different nature than the New Testament because canon has come to mean a closed list. There is no sense of a “closed list” because God was continuously speaking to the people through his Prophets. Around the first century A.D. there is a common sense in Judaism that prophecy has ceased.
C. Judaism considered the Torah to be the primary source of authority. This dates back to the 5th century B.C. No one could “add to the books of the Law.”
D. The Prophets are then accepted as authoritative scripture around the 2nd century B.C. E. The Writings do not gain wide spread acceptance in the sense of gaining authoritative weight as the Torah and the Prophets possessed until approximately the 1st century A.D. There is a supposed council of Jamnia that is said to have established the Jewish canon around 70 A.D., however that council is highly suspect in the majority of scholarship.
E. The authority of the Old Testament canon is taught in the Scriptures. First, they claim innate authority. Then: a. NT writers quote OT as Scriptures. b. Other writings outside OT canon cited in the NT not viewed as authoritative. c. No hint in NT that OT should be disregarded. Jesus, Apostles, or early church leaders all make use of the OT. d. Both sides (Traditional Jewish theology and Christians theology) have in common the “Scriptures.” e. The early church fathers prefaced quotations of the OT which statements like: “the holy writings saith,” “for thus it is written,” “for thus saith God,” and “for the Scripture saith.”
F. Conclusion: There is adequate evidence to support the view that there was a (closed) canon of Old Testament Scripture to serve as a model in the formation of the New Testament canon.
V. The New Testament
A. The Early Church (1st Century): The Old Testament is the primary authoritative collection of books. The writings of the Apostles were quickly received by the churches as authoritative. This can be seen in 1 Cor. 15; 2 Tim. 2; and 2 Peter 3. Authority was primarily vested in the church leadership, its relation to the Apostles and Christ, as well as adherence to the Rule of Faith.
B. The Early Church (2nd Century): Due to external and internal heresies the church and its leaders were under compulsion to more firmly establish which books were authoritative and which books should be ignored. Three heresies threatened to spoil the orthodox teachings of the Apostles and Christ.
a. Marcionism threatened to diminish the OT canon and limit the new authoritative writings to books to a very few select writings. Marcion produces the first “canon” by definition which included a edited version of Luke and 10 Pauline Epistles.
b. Montanism threatened to open the authoritative books to writings beyond what the apostles wrote and sanctioned. Montanus thought that he was revealing new prophecy. During this time the church is recognizing and pursuing to establish that which documents are authoritative and which are in error.
c. One other heresy threatened the church. Gnosticism was a system of belief that incorporated Jesus and the God of the OT into its system. Gnosticism taught a salvation through special knowledge and that Jesus was one who reached that plane of knowledge. The production of “gospels” by the Gnostics is interesting for us to help us see that there were books believed to possess authority. The Christians had “their” gospels, so the Gnostics produced “their” own gospels.
d. The Muratorian Fragment is believed to be a product of the 2nd century and if so it is the first list that represents our canon of 27 books of the NT. It is produced in response to Marcionism. It did not include 1 John., 1 & 2 Peter, Hebrews and James. Also, it did not include Shepherd of Hermas. The fragment makes several distinctions between books that are received and books that should not be received. So as early as the 2nd century several NT books are being received and recognized as possessing the authority of Jesus and true doctrine, thus they are authoritative for all believers. Some of the books that were esteemed authoritative are not in the Canon today. The second century church is organizing and highly interested in a normative body of Scripture, though it cannot be said that they had a “canon” in the technical sense.
C. Two Important 2nd / 3rd century lists
a. Irenaeus was a 2nd century bishop in modern day France. He alludes to all of the NT books except Jude, 2 Peter, James, Philemon, 2 and 3 John, and Revelation.
b. Origen, a Christian scholar and widely traveled man, listed the majority of the NT books as being authoritative but listed Hebrews, 2 Peter, 2 & 3 John, James, and Jude as being disputed.
c. By this time the 4 gospels, Acts, Paul’s 13 Epistles, 1 John, 1 Peter are all very well established as authoritative. There were some books that were generally received, but disputed. Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, 2 & 3 John, Jude, and Revelation are received with mixed reviews. Primarily because their authorship by the actual person is suspect or not listed (Hebrews).
D. Early Church (3rd / 4th Century)
a. Eusebius of Caesarea, a well know church historian and church bishop, devoted much of his time to understanding the canon of the NT. He gathered a lot of information and prepared lists based upon what the church had received and disputed.
b. He listed the accepted works and disputed works and false works. The recognized works were unquestioned from the beginning such as the four Gospels. The disputed works were broken into two categories (accepted generally and not genuine). He lists James, Jude, 2 Peter, 2 & 3 John as generally accepted and then Shepherd of Hermas and Didache as not genuine. The false writings were primarily Gnostic gospels.
E. Early Church (4th Century)
a. At this point the rejected works are becoming increasingly unavailable and unknown.
b. At this point the apocryphal writings are increasingly seen as having less than authoritative status in contrast with the commonly received books of the OT and NT.
c. Many church histories pinpoint the closing of the canon at the 4th century because of Athanasius’ Easter (Festal) Letter. It represents the view of the eastern churches and is the first known list naming exactly the 27 books of the NT as we have it today.
d. Jerome representing the views in the western church listed the 39 books of the OT and the 27 books of the NT. He also added apocryphal writings after the 66 books, but designated them as “not to be read in the churches.”
e. The Council of Carthage in North Africa will receive the 27 books of the NT.
F. Canon Beyond the 4th Century
a. Disputes remain into the 16th century until the three primary traditions each establish their own distinctive canon.
b. Roman Catholicism will determine Apocryphal writings as authoritative at the Council of Trent in 1546.
c. The Reformation view will not validate the authority of a council to determine what is Scripture and what is not. Rather the internal witness of the Holy Spirit and the resulting testimony of spiritual men and women will validate what is Scripture and what is not.
G. When was the Canon Closed?
a. 1st Century view?
b. 2nd Century view?
c. 4th Century view?
d. 5th Century view?
e. It can be argued that by the 2nd century the 27 books of the NT canon was generally received by believers. However, the idea of a technical “canon” cannot be defended until the 4th century.
f. Conclusion: Remember Councils/Creeds do not create doctrine(s) that have not already been earlier revealed (or present i.e. existence), rather they are stating that which the church has already believed in way in which has not been yet stated.
H. What are the criteria for determining authority?
a. Apostolic authorship or sanction
b. Received as authoritative by the early church and used widely and accepted widely.
c. The content of the book is in line with the books about which there is no doubt.
d. Christocentricity: Christ is the center of the book.
e. Internal witness of the Holy Spirit (Individually and Corporately)
f. Its spiritual and moral effect.
VI. What about the Apocrypha?
A. Jerome includes them in the Latin Vulgate but they are not included because they are authoritative Scripture, but because they are useful for edification.
B. Apocryphal writings are included in many codices, manuscripts, and early bibles (including the KJV), but they were not seen as authoritative, but as good for edification. It is not until many years later that the Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox traditions will accept the apocrypha as authoritative.
C. Beyond the 39 OT books and 27 NT books the only other books ever really considered for inclusion by the early church were 1 Clement, Shepherd of Hermas, and The Didache.
D. Views of Apocrypha in Protestant Traditions:
a. LUTHER BIBLE (1534): “Apocrypha - BOOKS WHICH ARE NOT TO BE ESTEEMED LIKE THE HOLY SCRIPTURES, AND YET WHICH ARE USEFUL AND GOOD TO READ.”
b. COVERDALE BIBLE (1535): “THE BOOKS AND TREATISES WHICH AMONG THE FATHERS OF OLD ARE NOT RECKONED TO BE OF LIKE AUTHORITY WITH THE OTHER BOOKS OF THE BIBLE, NEITHER ARE THEY FOUND IN THE CANON OF HEBREW.”
c. WESTMINISTER CONFESSION (1647): Rejects even the reading of human works along side Scripture.
d. BIBLE SOCIETIES (1825): Begin removing them from being published with the NT and OT.
E. Four problems with the Apocrypha include:
a. They do not claim for themselves the same kind of authority as the OT.
b. They were not regarded as God’s words by the Jewish people from whom they came.
c. They were not considered the Scripture by Jesus or the NT writers.
d. They contain teachings inconsistent with the rest of the Bible.
VII. Conclusion
A. The OT is received by Jesus, the Apostles, and the earliest leaders of the church.
B. The NT is received by a process whereby the writings apostolicity, its being received by the early church, its being widely accepted, its content being orthodox and in line with the books about which there is no doubt, it being witnessed to internally by the Holy Spirit, and its spiritual and moral effect all played a part in Christians recognizing and receiving the books of the Bible as authoritative.
C. The Apocrypha are not received by the church and are not witnessed to by the Holy Spirit, but are read early on as being good for edification but not for truth.
D. When we receive the canon of Scripture we are confessing with faithful believers through the centuries that we too also recognize and receive the word of God by faith given by the Holy Spirit.