New Testament Canon
The question of the New
Testament canon is no less significant than that of the Old Testament. The most
important concept of this discussion is framing it in a way that is consistent
with the Christian doctrine of Scripture so that our view is a true reflection
of the teachings of Scripture. The protestant-reformed view of Scripture
demands that the Scripture itself inform our view of the canon.
As I stated above, the canon and
the Scripture are one and the same. The Church, as of late has suffered from
several deficient models of the canon. Michael Kruger writes, "What is
needed, then, is a canonical model that does not ground the New Testament canon
in an external authority, but seeks to ground the canon in the only place it
could be grounded, its own authority."[1]
In his mastery work on the Institutes, Francis Turretin quotes Cardinal
Bellarmine, "Nothing is better known, nothing more certain than the sacred
Scriptures contained in the writings of the prophets and apostles, so that he
must be in the highest degree foolish who refuses to believe in them."[2]
The evidence strongly suggests
that the NT canon began to form almost immediately. 1 Tim. 5:18 reads, For the
Scripture says, “You shall not muzzle the ox while he is threshing,” and “The laborer
is worthy of his wages." In this instance, Paul is referring to Deut. 25:4
and to Luke 10:7. In other words, Paul has deliberately, and under the
inspiration of the Holy Spirit placed Luke on the same level with the Jewish
Torah. Paul's identification of Luke as Scripture points toward his recognition
of that gospel as such and indicates canonical recognition at a very early
stage in the Church.
Peter is another apostle that
places NT writings on par with Scripture and indicates that a collection of
Paul's letters had already taken place as early as his second epistle in 2
Peter 3:16. He uses the phrase pasais
tais epistolais or "all the letters." This suggests a collection
of Paul's letters since they were all originally sent directly to churches all
over the region. This also suggests that copies of Paul's letters were produced
either at the very start or very close to the start of his ministry among the
churches.
In the second century we see
four significant pieces of evidence that demonstrate the NT canon was formed
much earlier than the fourth century, even though this view is commonly held by
those who either have not studied the subject well enough or perhaps fail to
comprehend from the start the nature of the Scriptures. The first piece of
evidence is from a man named Marcion. Marcion lived sometime during the late
first into the second century. His theology drove his view of Scripture. Of
course, this is the case with each one of us. Because Marcion held to heretical
views of God, he excluded the OT from his canon and in the NT only permitted
the letters of Paul and the gospel of Luke. He denied that Christ came in the
flesh and believed that the God of the OT was inferior to the Father of Jesus.
The significance of Marcion is that he created a list of books that he regarded
as Scripture. It contained a healthy portion of our current canon, but his
heresy led him to cut out much of it. The point is that as early as Marcion we
have evidence of a canon. Moreover, it is unlikely that Marcion created the
first list. What is more likely is that he took an existing list and cut out
what he did not like. We should not be surprised. Men are still excising those
pieces of Scripture they despise to this very day.
Valentinus
Valentinus lived in Rome between
135-160. He is thought to have written the Gospel
of Truth, which alludes to most of our current NT and refers to these
writings in terms which presuppose that they are authoritative.[3]
Hence, Valentinus, also a first-century gnostic heretic, provides our second
witness to the NT Canon from the second century. The fragment mentioned above
alludes to Matthew, Luke, the gospel and first letter of John, Paul's letters
excluding the Pastorals, Hebrews and Revelation.
The Anti-Marcionite Prologues
As one might expect, the Church
responded to the heresy of Marcion and heretics like Valentinus. This response
came in the form of certain prologues attached to some of the NT gospels. These
prologues are dated to the late second and early third century. They address
some of the heresies associate with Marcion's theology.
The Muratorian Fragment
The Muratorian Fragment is a
Latin list of NT books dated to somewhere around the end of the second century.
According to F.F. Bruce, The document is best regarded as a list of New
Testament books recognized as authoritative in the Roman Church at the time.[4]
This list contains 21 books from our current canon.
It is important that one
remember the purpose of referring to this evidence. The historical evidence is
not intended to prove that the canon was the canon. It is not used to show how
the Church determined or decided upon the canon. It is merely a witness to the
fact that the idea of canon and Scripture are bound up together from the very
beginning of the gospel. This evidence has produced too many errors when it is
combined with deficient reasoning inconsistent with the Christian doctrine of
Scripture. There is much more than could be said by way of these brief
accounts, but I think this is sufficient to the purpose.
Athanasius
One of the most important
figures from all of Church history is the former bishop of Alexandria, Egypt.
Athanasius was not only a great champion of Christian orthodoxy during the
Arian controversy at the council of Nicea. He is also a very important witness
to the history of the NT Canon. In his thirty-ninth festal letter in the year
367, Athanasius lists out our present NT Canon. The question this brings to
bear is how long had this list been in place. Indeed, this is a very important
witness to the historical development of the NT Canon.
The first synod in the Church to
officially recognize and speak about the canon was the Synod of Hippo 393. We
only know this because of the reference made to this council at the Synod of
Carthage in 397.
No comments:
Post a Comment