Rush City Baptist Church

The New Testament Canon

Sunday, February 10, 2008

The fictional novel by Dan Brown, “The Da Vinci Code,” created a renewed interest in the formation of the New Testament canon as it concerns the collection of the Gospels.  The author’s desire was to create a seed of doubt in the reader’s mind by describing a conspiracy that took place centuries earlier to suppress certain Gospel accounts because their message threatened the authority of the Church. As the mystery deepens, the character Teabing makes the following statement, “Constantine commissioned and financed a new Bible, which omitted those gospels that spoke of Christ’s human traits and embellished those gospels that made him godlike.  The earlier gospels were outlawed, gathered up, and burned.”  But we do know that the first official recognition of the 27 books of the present New Testament canon as being the New Testament canon of the church did not occur until A.D. 367.  Until then the whole process of collection and ultimate canonization was one that often saw a given book accepted in some churches and rejected in others, with verdicts often hanging in the balance or changing as time moved on.

There were four focal points of authority when it came to the formation of the New Testament canon.  First there was the Old Testament canon.  Recall the words of Jesus recorded in Luke 24:44, “He said to them, ‘This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms.’”  Likewise read the statement made by the apostle Paul concerning the Old Testament Scriptures, “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work” (2 Timothy 3:16-17).  Second, note the role of the Holy Spirit in the inspiration of the New Testament.  Peter wrote in his second letter, “Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation.  For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit” (1:20-21). Third, there are the words of the Lord. Paul made the following statement in Acts 20:35, “In everything I did, I showed you that by this kind of hard work we must help the weak, remembering the words the Lord Jesus himself said: ‘It is more blessed to give than to receive.’”  And the fourth focal point was apostolic authority.  Jesus told his disciples, “But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you” (John 14:26).

Let’s look at the formation of the gospels. Luke begins his gospel with the following statement, “Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught” (1:1-4).  And John concluded his gospel account with this statement, “This is the disciple who testifies to these things and who wrote them down.  We know that his testimony is true.  Jesus did many other things as well.  If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written” (21:24-25).  The historian Eusebius recorded the following statement concerning the writing of Mark’s gospel and the role of Peter, “And the Elder (Papias, bishop of Hierapolis until about A.D. 130) said this also: ‘Mark, having become the interpreter of Peter, wrote down accurately whatever he remembered of the things said and done by the Lord, but not however in order." For neither did he hear the Lord, nor did he follow him, but afterwards, as I said, Peter, who adapted his teachings to the needs of his hearers, but not as though he were drawing up a connected account of the Lord's oracles.  So then Mark made no mistake in thus recording some things just as he remembered them.  For he took forethought for one thing, not to omit any of the things that he had heard nor to state them falsely.’”

Next, we can examine the collection of Paul’s letters.  Peter makes a fascinating statement about the letters of Paul.  “Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him.  He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters.  His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction” (2 Peter 3:15-16).  Two facts stand out.  First, by Peter’s day there was a collection of Paul’s letters.  Second, Peter views Paul’s writings as equal in authority with the Old Testament Scriptures.  When Clement of Rome sent his ‘godly admonition’ to the church of Corinth about A.D. 96, he plainly had access to a copy of 1 Corinthians, and probably to copies of some other Pauline letters.  He was able to remind the Corinthian Christians of Paul’s warning against party spirit, addressed to their church 40 years back. Then, look at a statement made by Paul in 1 Timothy 5:17-18.  “The elders who direct the affairs of the church well are worthy of double honor, especially those whose work is preaching and teaching.  For the Scripture says, ‘Do not muzzle the ox while it is treading out the grain,’ and ‘The worker deserves his wages.’”  What is interesting about this quotation is that the first statement comes from Deuteronomy 25:4, but the second quotation is a statement made by Jesus in Luke 10:7.

Another thing that is interesting about the letters of Paul is that not all of his letters made it into the canon.  First, there is the “previous letter” of 1 Corinthians 5:9, “I have written you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people—not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world.”  Second, there is the “severe letter” of 2 Corinthians 2:4, “For I wrote you out of great distress and anguish of heart and with many tears, not to grieve you but to let you know the depth of my love for you.”  Third, there is the letter to Laodicea mentioned in Colossians 4:16, “After this letter has been read to you, see that it is also read in the church of the Laodiceans and that you in turn read the letter from Laodicea.”

Very early on in the history of the church individuals began to piece together their version of a canon.  The first canon was by a heretic named Marcion who lived A.D. 140-180.  Marcion believed the God of the Old Testament and the God of the New were not the same. To him the God of the Old Testament was the cause of the world and of evil.  He was legal–minded, violent, vindictive and the religion of this God was oriented around laws and demands.  The God of Jesus Christ, however, was the opposite.  He was the forgiving and saving God.  Marcion developed a canon of scripture that accepted only one Gospel, a highly edited version of Luke, because he was the friend and companion of Paul, and ten of Paul’s letters.  He either rejected the pastoral epistles or did not know of their existence.  In reaction to Marcion and other heretics, orthodox Christians were spurred on to set forth the true canon of Scripture.  They appealed to apostolic tradition and apostolic succession as the only reliable source through which the truth has been preserved and handed down in the church.  “Marcion formed his Bible in declared opposition to the holy scriptures of the church from which he had separated; it was in opposition to his criticism that the church in its turn first became rightly conscious of its heritage of apostolic writings.” (Zahn)

Irenaeus was the bishop of Lyons in southern France in A.D. 180.  His canon consisted of the four Gospels, Acts, 13 Pauline Epistles, 1 Peter, 1 and 2 John and the Apocalypse.  Although he knew of Hebrews, in keeping with the current practice of the WesternChurch he did not accord it full recognition. His citation of the Shepherd of Hermes with the formula “Scripture says” shows that other Christian writings were often accepted as Scripture during this period.  Then there is the Muratorian Fragment that is dated about A.D. 200.  It contained a list of New Testament books preserved in medieval Latin manuscripts that provides valuable evidence about the formation of the New Testament canon. Comprising 85 lines, the document is mutilated at the beginning and the end.  Luke is described as the third Gospel, along with the Gospel of John.  It also lists 1 John, Acts, 13 Pauline Epistles, Jude, two (additional?) epistles of John, the apocryphal Wisdom of Solomon, and the Revelation of John and the Revelation of Peter.  The Shepherd of Hermas is recommended for private reading and James, 1 & 2 Peter, and Hebrews are absent. 

Tertullian was a Latin theologian from Carthage, Africa who lived from A.D. 160-225.  He was the first one to use the designation “New Testament” for the second part of the Christian Bible.  For him a writing must be by an apostle or composed under apostolic authority in order to be acceptable.  His canon of 22 books includes the four Gospels, Acts, 13 Pauline Epistles, 1 Peter, John, Jude, and Revelation.  He ranked Hebrews with the apostolic books and thought it was written by Barnabas. Then there was the church father from Alexandria, Origen, who lived A.D. 185-254.  He notes three classes of Scripture.  The first consists of those books which are not subject to dispute or are “acknowledged.” These were the four Gospels, 13 Pauline letters, 1 Peter, I John, Acts, and Revelation.  The disputed books were 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, Hebrews, James, and Jude.  The position of the Shepherd of Hermas, the Letter of Barnabas, and the Didache was authoritative, but it is doubtful whether he recognized any of the three as possessing the full canonical status of the first class.  In the third group he sets books that are “false,” namely the heretical gospels in circulation.  Next we have the bishop and church historian Eusebius of Caesarea who lived around A.D. 260-340.  He divides the books into three classes.  22 books are generally acknowledged to be canonical, namely the four Gospels, Acts, 14 letters of Paul (including Hebrews, though he knew  the church in Rome did not agree), 1 John, 1 Peter, and the Apocalypse (with a disclaimer).  The second class is disputed books.  Five books are widely accepted, though disputed by some (apparently all were accepted by Eusebius himself), namely James, Jude, 2 Peter (earlier regarded by Eusebius as spurious), 2 and 3 John.  The third class of books is spurious.  Five books are not genuine, namely the Acts of Paul, the Shepherd, the Apocalypse of Peter, Barnabas, and the Didache.  Eusebius adds, “To these perhaps the Revelation of John should be added, as some reject it while others count is among the accepted books.”

Athanasius, the bishop of Alexandria, issued his annual Easter Letter in A.D. 367, the main purpose of which was to announce the dates of the holy days in the coming year.  He included a list of the books of Scripture, which is the New Testament as we have it today.  He was not making a new list, but was only using his authority to endorse a long-standing practice.  He made mention of the Shepherd and the Didache which are not included in the canon but beneficial to new converts.  The emergence of heretical sects having their own sacred books made it imperative for the church to determine the limits of the canon. Likewise, when Christians were persecuted for their faith it became a matter of utmost importance to know which books could not be handed over to the authorities.

One basic requirement for canonicity was conformity to the “rule of faith,” conformity between the document and orthodoxy, that is, Christian truth recognized as normative in the churches.  Paul wrote in 1 Timothy 6:3-5, “If anyone teaches false doctrines and does not agree to the sound instruction of our Lord Jesus Christ and to godly teaching, he is conceited and understands nothing.  He has an unhealthy interest in controversies and quarrels about words that result in envy, strife, malicious talk, evil suspicions.”  Perhaps the most commonly mentioned criterion in the church fathers is apostolicity, which as a criterion came to include those who were in immediate contact with the apostles.  For the same reason, wherever the Fathers suspect pseudonymity, writing under a false identity, they reject the work.  Note Paul’s warning in 2 Thessalonians 2:1-2, “Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers, not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by some prophecy, report or letter supposed to have come from us, saying that the day of the Lord has already come.”  Scarcely less important a criterion is a document’s widespread and continuous acceptance and usage by churches everywhere.  When consideration is given to the diversity in cultural backgrounds and in orientation to the essentials to the Christian faith within the churches, their common agreement is remarkable.