Biblical Canon Research Paper

LIBERTY UNIVERSITY

THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT CANON

A RESEARCH PAPER SUBMITTED TO DR. SMITHER IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE COURSE CHHI 520 LIBERTY BAPTIST THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY BY JOEL ALAN DORMAN

LYNCHBURG, VIRGINIA JULY 3, 2009

TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction......................................................................................................................................1 Definitions........................................................................................................................................1 Scripture...............................................................................................................................2 Canon...................................................................................................................................2 Historical Events Leading to the New Testament Canon................................................................2 The Documents....................................................................................................................4 The Necessity of a Canon....................................................................................................5 Marcion Heresy....................................................................................................................6 The Church Fathers..............................................................................................................8 Criteria for Inclusion in the Canon......................................................................................9 Orthodoxy................................................................................................................9 Apostolicity............................................................................................................10 Universality............................................................................................................10 Official Recognition...........................................................................................................11 Final Thoughts...............................................................................................................................11 Bibliography..................................................................................................................................12

i.

2

Rare is the pastor, teacher, or evangelist who has not been asked the simple, yet profound question, “Where did the Bible come from?” Perhaps those doubting their faith have asked, “How do we know we can trust the Bible?” Dangerously, many have gotten half-information at best and misinformation at worst on the subject of the canonization of Scripture. Many of these questions, in the Christian world, do not center on the Old Testament but the New Testament. Perhaps this doubt stems from its (relative) young age (around 1,900-2000 years old) or perhaps the stigma associated with the word “New”. Regardless, the issues related to authority and canonization are ever-present in regards to the New Testament. As McDonald so clearly stated: No credible person today seriously believes that the Bible fell out of heaven fully bound in its current state with gilded edges and with a highly precise interpretation from God in it.1 This immediately presents a problem as to the methods and formulae used in determining what is and is not Scripture and therefore what should and should not be included in the canon. This paper, then, seeks to review the process of the formation of the canon of New Testament Scriptures using research and faith. Beginning with definitions of the words used in the process of the discussion, this paper will then move through the historical information that led to what we now call the canon of the New Testament. Included in the historical account will be process by which a text was determined to be included in the canon. Concluding this historical account is the councils where the canon was ratified. Definitions As stated, someof the misinformation begins at what the words associated with the Biblical canon mean. One cannot proceed into discussion of the history of the canon without first rendering definitions to common (although often misused and reinterpreted) terms. 1

Lee Martin McDonald, The Biblical Canon: Its Origin, Transmission, and Authority. 3rd ed. (Peabody: Hendrickson Publishers, 2007), 5.

Scripture Literally, “scripture” means “writing”—as in “it is written down”.2 In this case, the “writings” are that of authors moved by the Holy Spirit to write what modern Christians would call the Bible. McDonald gives four essentials for the defining the term “scripture”: 1. Scripture is a written record. 2. This information is given by Divinity. 3. This written information is given to convey the “will and truth of God”. 4. This supplied text is given to serve as a continual means of practice and living.3

Canon “Canon”, in the Christian community, refers to the collection of Scripture known as the Bible.4 The word, metaphorically speaking, refers to a measuring rod. The canon then is the tool by which all other things are measured or a tool by which the life of the reader is measured.5 The Biblical canon refers to the sixty-six books of the Old and New Testament (for Evangelicals) and is the measure of practice and faith. Historical Events Leading to the New Testament Canon The story of the formation of the New Testament canon is a story of reception and refutation. It is story of action and reaction. Nicole states, “It takes note of the hesitations, the

2

James Orr, ed., International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia, 1915 ed., s.v. “scripture”, PC Study Bible, v. 5.0E [CD-ROM]. McDonald, 21-22.

3

4

Ibid., 38.

5

John McClintock and James Strong, eds., McClintock and Strong Encyclopedia, 2006 ed., s.v. “canon”, PC Study Bible, v. 5.0E [CD-ROM].

consensus and the occasional errors of Jews and Christians.”6 This story begins with the texts themselves and ends around A.D. 400. These writers were, as Smith asserts, most likely not aware they were writing what is now known as the “New Testament”. Generally, most scholars agree the New Testament documents were written to certain audiences at certain times. It was the Holy Spirit Who made the difference between a simple letter and Holy Scripture.7 At the beginning of his account of the story of Jesus, Luke writes: 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.8 The process of writing and compilation of the New Testament canon did not happen in a vacuum. Specific events transpired which caused their writing, assemblage,and distribution. Even in the previously referenced Biblicaltext, Luke states “many have undertaken” a summary of this sort. Luke even goes on to write he has researched this issue and investigated it to ensure precision. This attention to detail and accuracy, as history reflects, followed the church as the Holy Spirit guided the process of discovering the New Testament canon. It must be constantly remembered: all of the New Testament documents were originally hand-written on individual scrolls. These scrolls were in all capital letters, had no spaces, sporadic punctuation and had to be copied manually. The method of copying was labor intensive

6

Roger R. Nicole, 1997, "The Canon of the New Testament." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 40, no. 2: 199-206. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed June 21, 2009). 7

D Moody Smith, 2000. "When did the gospels become scripture?." Journal of Biblical Literature 119, no. 1: 3-20. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed June 25, 2009). Luke 1:1-4, NIV

8

and expensive: someone would read the text and one or more copyists would write what they heard. Some zealous Christians bypassed the professional route and copied the texts themselves. This often proved problematic, as a common person would have been much more likely to make errors in copying. Fortunately, the professional and nonprofessional copying and recopying of these textspreserved God’s Word. Without it, the Word of God might not have ever reached the twenty-first century Christian.9 The Documents Further complicating the process of investigation into the formation of the New Testament canon: none of these original documents are still in existence. The oldest manuscripts are second century documents. Currently, there are ninety-nine of these second through seventh century documents that were written on papyrus and in all capital letters. Of these documents, all are fragments but there are five of these documents that contain “substantial portions of Luke, John, the Pauline Epistles, 1 and 2 Peter, Jude, and Revelation.”10 Then there are the so-called uncials. There are around 300 of these documents whose ages range from the third to eleventh centuries. There is one of these uncials, called Codex Sinaiticus, which currently contains the New Testament in its current form.11 The next set of documents are the minuscules. The minuscules are written in cursive (minuscules type) on parchment (the older ones) and even paper (the more recent ones). Although there are more than 2,800 of these documents, they are not considered as important due to their comparatively late date of writing.12 9

D.A. Carson and Douglas J. Moo, An Introduction to the New Testament. 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005), 24. 10

Bruce Corley, Steve Lemke, and Grant Lovejoy, eds., Biblical Hermeneutics: A Comprehensive Introduction to Interpreting Scripture. (Nashville: Broadman and Holman, 1996), 254. Ibid.

11

Ibid.

12

Dating from the sixth century and later are around 2,300 lectionaries. These were the worship documents of the early church. They contain only parts of Scripture that were included in public reading.13 These were would be akin to the worship documents printed today: they may contain Scripture but they themselves are not. The documents are the underlying texts that are used in translating the Scriptures from language to language. Through centuries of research, they have been broken down into “more” and “less” important manuscripts.

The Necessity of a Canon In spite of misinformation given throughout recent years, there was not a single church council that dictated the inclusion or exclusion of documents within the Bible. These church councils merely ratified what was already happening in the local churches and the church in general. The necessity of a canon, then, did not start with a committee but rather in the church.14 The first century church did not appear to need a canon of New Testament Scripture. McDonald reminds the readers that even into the second century, “there were no authoritative Christian texts”. The only texts the early church (at that point) seemed to have considered authoritative were the Old Testament Scriptures. A student of the New Testament certainly sees this in the New Testament texts themselves as the Old Testament is often quoted. Even when not quoted, the ideas from the Old Testament are certainly presumed.15 What happened between the first century (and early second century) church and the church that had the Bible containing the closed canon of Scripture? It should be noted: the first Ibid.

13

14

Wilber T. Dayton, 1967, "Factors promoting the formation of the New Testament canon." Bulletin of the Evangelical Theological Society 10, no. 1: 28-35. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed July 2, 2009). McDonald, 248.

15

century church did not have the New Testament because it was in the process of being written and once written it took time for the books (letters) to circulate. The first century church had the Old Testament teachings, the eyewitness accounts of Jesus (from the Apostles themselves in many cases) and immediate Apostolic tradition. As the church matured into the second century, they were only one generation removed from the Apostles who taught them and their bishops.16 Marcion Heresy Midway into the second century (between A.D. 140-144), when the documents modern Christians know as the New Testament Scriptures were well in circulation, a man named Marcion entered canonistic history. Marcion was the son ofthe bishop of Sinope in Pontus and was raised in Christianity. In spite of this background, he had a “profound dislike” of Judaism. Additionally, he alleged the world was evil. The result of this belief was Marcion thought the creator of this word was either evil or uninformed. This led Marcion to a dual view of deity: he believed the God of the Old Testament was not the God of the New Testament. He further postulated the evil (or ignorant) god of the Old Testament created this evil, physicalworld while the Father of Jesus wanted a spiritual world (which presumably would have been good). All of these beliefs led Marcion to discard the Old Testament since, in his belief system, it was the story and work of a lesser god. He firmly believed it should not be used in teaching Christians. Marcion then compiled a list he considered “true Christian Scriptures”.17 Included in his list—which he was one of the first Christians to make—included some of Paul’s writings and a heavily edited gospel of Luke. Since Marcion believed the Old Testament was unreliable, he felt the need to edit Luke to remove the passages which had been “corrupted

16

Thomas D. Lea and David Alan Black, The New Testament Its Background and Message. (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2003), 72-73. 17

Justo L. González, The Early Church to the Dawn of the Reformation. Vol. 1 of The Story of Christianity, (New York: HarperCollins, 1984), 61-62.

by Jewish thought”. Furthermore, he deleted much of Luke’s writing about Jesus’ birth since Marcion took issue with Jesus being born of a woman.18 To say this drew strong reaction from the church would be a tremendous understatement. The actions of Marcion were the vehicle the Lord used to catapult the church into the long-awaited formation of the completion of His story: the New Testament. The orthodox church had to respond to this heresy. If there was not a perceived need for an authoritative canon of Scripture before Marcion, there was certainly a perceived need after Marcion. The four gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) received very early acceptance. In addition to the four gospels, the book of Acts and the Pauline epistles were acknowledgedearly in the process. As such, before the close of the second century (within a few decades of the Marcion heresy), the early church had already acknowledged the core of the New Testament canon. With a mild exception to the Gospel of John (which was resolved rather quickly), there is virtually no evidence that these books were ever in dispute. 1 and 2 Peter, James, John’s epistles, and Jude enjoyed later consensus although there was never truly much debate. John’s Revelation, which was accepted by the third century, was investigated again after the conversion of Emperor Constantine to Christianity. Eventually, of course, it was reaffirmed as a member of the canon.19 The Church Fathers The writings of the apologist Justin Martyr, who wrote around A.D. 150-160, offered early support for the Scriptural status of the four Gospels.20 In his Dialogue with Trypho, Justin quotes and explains Matthew 11:27 as evidence of the Gospels’ Scriptural rank: 18

Steven M. Sheeley, 1998, "From "Scripture" to "Canon" : The Development of the New Testament Canon." Review & Expositor 95, no. 4: 513-522. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed June 22, 2009). 19

González, 63.

20

McDonald, 285.

For I have showed already that Christ is called both Jacob and Israel; and I have proved that it is not in the blessing of Joseph and Judah alone that what relates to Him was proclaimed mysteriously, but also in the Gospel it is written that He said: 'All things are delivered unto me by My Father; 'and, 'No man knoweth the Father but the Son; nor the Son but the Father, and they to whom the Son will reveal Him.' Accordingly He revealed to us all that we have perceived by His grace out of the Scriptures, so that we know Him to be the first-begotten of God, and to be before all creatures; likewise to be the Son of the patriarchs, since He assumed flesh by the Virgin of their family, and submitted to become a man without comeliness, dishonoured, and subject to suffering.21 Irenaeus of Lyons, who wrote around 170-180, was the first of the church fathers to promote a canon consisting of the four gospels. This pastor was not interested in debates of philosophies or cerebral exercises; instead, he wanted his congregation to live a life worthy of the name of Christ. Despite his marked lack of interest in philosophical arguments, his writing against heresies and instruction to Christians presented valuable information regarding what he (and apparently his contemporaries) considered Scripture.22 McDonald states Irenaeus was the first Christian to claim that the message of Christianity “was somehow incomplete if less than four Gospels were used to articulate the Christian faith.”23 A fragment dating from the end of the second century demonstrates an evolving canon which amazing resembles the one Christians have today. Named after the one who discovered it, the Muratorian fragment contains Luke and John (referred to as the third and fourth gospels, respectively), Acts, thirteen of Paul’s letters, Hebrews (referred to as to the Alexandrians but is believed by many scholars to be Hebrews) and both John’s and Peter’s Apocalypses (although a notation in the fragment acknowledges the known objection to Peter’s Apocalypse).

21

Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho “Chapter 100 - In What Sense Christ is [Called] Jacob, and Israel, and Son of Man” Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume 1, PC Study Bible, v. 5.0E [CD-ROM], verses 1-2. 22

González, 68.

McDonald, 290.

23

There were many the early church Fathers compiling lists and writing about what should and should not be included in the canon. They were not merely compiling lists, but in their writings to the churches, they would cite Old and New Testament passages that give the readers glimpse into what the early church already considered Scripture. 24 Almost certainly, the most important source for canonical discussion was the writings of Eusebius of Caesarea (circa 260-340). His primarily influences were Clement and Origen, from Alexandria. Eusebius gave the process of canonization a three-part system for the books in consideration: the books already recognized, the books considered in dispute, and the pseudepigraphal books presented by heretics that were, of course, rejected.25 The ultimate expression of canonical acceptance of the books of the New Testament came from the Bishop of Alexandria, Athanasius, in a publication in 367. In this Festal Epistle, Athanasius included a listing of the canonical books of the Old and New Testaments.26 Although in a slightly different order, the books listed in the New Testament are the same as today. These twenty-seven books became the accepted canon of the New Testament Scripture.27 Criteria for Inclusion in the Canon The aforementioned lists and individuals were not randomly choosing books and letters. There were criteria and methodologythat formed the decision. Many documents could have been included and, over time,they were included or excluded due to the criteria that emerged. The factors assisting the early church in discovering the canon of Scripture reside in at least three key areas: orthodoxy, apostolicity, and universality. 24

Carson and Moo, 732-734.

Carson and Moo, 734.

25

26

Although it is beyond the scope of this writing, it is of significance to note the Old Testament books listed are the same as the Bible held by Evangelicals today. 27

Sheeley, "From "Scripture" to "Canon".

Orthodoxy This was a measurement of a book against the “rule of faith”. For a book to receive consideration, it had to promote truth considered orthodox by the churches. This issue increased in importance with the passage of time. Often Galatians 1:8-9 was used as proof of the “rule of faith” test: But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned!28 Apostolicity The Apostles were appointed by Jesus to carry out his teaching ministry and did so by the aid of the Holy Spirit. As such, for any writing to be considered canonical, it would have an Apostle as an author or a close relation to an Apostle (e.g. Mark and Luke were associates of Peter). This insistence on an Apostolic connection to each book in consideration also severely limits the scope of consideration to documents written during the first century. This aided early Christians by helping eliminate much of the pseudepigraphal books due to their late writing.29 Universality As stated previously, the canon did not simply fall out of sky prebound, nor was it haphazardly selected. This particular method of determining canonicity was often considered the most important. As the Holy Spirit guided individuals and churches, the books they used in worship and private study were considered of great important in the canon process. Books that did not make it into the canon, based on this method, were ones which were too limited for the church at large. Perhaps they were documents written to a specific congregation and had no

Galatians 1:8-9, NIV

28

29

Nicole, "The Canon of the New Testament"

universal application beyond their limited circumstance. In addition, this criterion demonstrates the desire of the churches to move and make decisions as unit and not simply as mavericks.30

Official Recognition With the aforementioned criteria for inclusion in the canon, the inherited tradition of the Apostles, and most importantly, the guidance of the Holy Spirit, the New Testament canon was discovered. There were three church councils that officially recognized the canon of the New Testament. These took place in Laodicea in 363, at Hippo 393, and finally in Carthage in 397. It should always be noted: these councils did not invent the canon; they were merely recognizing the process that had been taken place since the second century.31 Final Thoughts The canonization of Scripture was an amazing, complex process that demonstrates God’s hand guiding the process so that His Word would bepreserved for all time. Throughout this remarkable process of the second through early fourth centuries, the reader should note the following: There was no ecclesiastical machinery like the midievil papacy to enforce decisions, nevertheless the world-wide church almost universally came to accept the same twenty-seven books. It is not so much that the church selected the canon as that the canon selected itself.32 May that message resonate with modern readers of the New Testament: no one selected or chose the books to be included in the canon. Guided by the Holy Spirit, these leaders and churches were discovering exactly what the Lord intended. Revealed and affirmed through time

McDonald, 414-415.

30

Sheeley, "From "Scripture" to "Canon".

31

32

Carson and Moo, 735.

and through the church of Jesus Christ, His bride, the Bible stands unique in all history as the ultimate canon.

Bibliography Carson, D.A. and Douglas J. Moo. An Introduction to the New Testament. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005. Corley, Bruce, Steve Lemke, and Grant Lovejoy, editors. Biblical Hermeneutics: A Comprehensive Introduction to Interpreting Scripture. Nashville: Broadman and Holman, 1996. Dayton, Wilber T. 1967. "Factors promoting the formation of the New Testament canon." Bulletin of the Evangelical Theological Society 10, no. 1: 28-35. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed July 2, 2009). González, Justo L.. The Early Church to the Dawn of the Reformation. Vol. 1 of The Story of Christianity. New York: HarperCollins, 1984. Lea, Thomas D.and David Alan Black. The New Testament Its Background and Message. Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 2003. Martyr, Justin. Dialogue with Trypho “Chapter 100 - In What Sense Christ is [Called] Jacob, and Israel, and Son of Man” Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume 1, PC Study Bible, v. 5.0E [CD-ROM]. McClintock, John and James Strong, eds.. McClintock and Strong Encyclopedia, 2006 ed. PC Study Bible, v. 5.0E [CD-ROM]. McDonald, Lee Martin. The Biblical Canon: Its Origin, Transmission, and Authority. 3rd ed. Peabody: Hendrickson Publishers, 2007. Nicole, Roger R. 1997. "The Canon of the New Testament." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 40, no. 2: 199-206. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed June 21, 2009). Orr, James, ed. International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia, 1915 ed. PC Study Bible, v. 5.0E [CD-ROM]. Sheeley, Steven M. 1998. "From "Scripture" to "Canon" : The Development of the New Testament Canon." Review & Expositor 95, no. 4: 513-522. ATLA Religion Database

with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed June 22, 2009). Smith, D Moody. 2000. "When did the gospels become scripture?." Journal of Biblical Literature 119, no. 1: 3-20. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed June 25, 2009).