Conspiracies And Competing Gospels: The Canon

CONSPIRACIES AND COMPETING GOSPELS: THE RISE AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE NEW TESTAMENT CANON

BY JEFF SCOTT KENNEDY SUNDAY, MAY 8, 2009

TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents

2

Introduction

3

The Precedent for a New Testament

4

The Old Scriptures Anticipate the New

4

The New Scriptures Authenticate Each Other

5

The Apostolic Fathers Affirm the New Scriptures

6

Clement of Rome

6

Polycarp Bishop of Smyrna

7

Ignatius of Antioch

8

Papias of Heirapolis

8

The Canon and Response to Heresy

10

Justin and Tatian

10

Marcion

10

Montanism

11

A Preliminary Canon: The Emergence of A Definite Authoritative Word.

12

Irenaeus

12

Muratorian Canon

13

Tertullian

13

Conclusion

14

2

Introduction The majority of Evangelical believers today uncritically accept the twenty-seven books of the New Testament (hereafter NT) as authoritative and inspired scripture.1 Yet, few are motivated to understand how these books came to be, and the factors that lead to their acceptance by the early church. It is easy for the believer to imagine that shortly after the close of the first century, the early church unanimously endorsed these books with little discussion or controversy. Upon further investigation, it becomes apparent to the student of history that this view is grossly over-simplified. However, the view that there was a centralized conspiracy to suppress competing Gospels is equally fraught with educated imagination.2 Today, the exclusive status of NT books is routinely challenged through popular literature, blockbuster films, and cable documentaries.3 When readers or viewers encounter sweeping claims about ancient documents such as the Nag Hammadi Texts or the Gospel of Judas, it may leave them with the impression that the currently accepted NT list is the result of some kind of ecclesiastical lottery. To be sure, only the twentyseven documents included in Christian scripture have come to be accepted as the “canon,” or the rule of faith and practice. But how did these books gain this exclusive distinction?4 This study will seek to show that the eventual establishment of a closed canon of NT scripture was an organic process that later developed into an official position of the church, not the other way around. In order to do this, it will first be necessary to track the initial progression 1

George Barna, Growing True Disciples (Colorado Springs: Waterbrook Press, 2001), 62. Barna points out that 95% of Christians say they believe the Bible is inspired and inerrant, and 62% of Evangelical believers stated they read the Bible outside of Sunday regularly. 2

Darrell Bock, The Missing Gospels (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2006), 206-207.

3

Bart Ehrman, Lost Scriptures: Books That Did Not Make it Into the New Testament (London, New York: Oxford University Press, 2003). 2-4. See also Lost Christianities by Ehrman. 4

F.F. Bruce, The Canon of Scripture (Downers Grove: Intervarsity Press, 1988), 18.

3

of the scriptures’ authoritative status, and then to briefly explore the criteria and cultural forces that lead to the inclusion or exclusion of certain books. The Precedent for a New Testament Originally the Greek word kanon meant “reed, stick, or ruler.” Similar to the modern ruler, these ancient rods were marked with a series of measuring units, which lead to its general use as a series or a list.5 In order to fully appreciate the application of the term “scripture” and “canon” to apostolic writings, one must first understand the high view of Hebrew Scripture that first century Christians possessed. The Old Scriptures Anticipate the New The Christian notion of “scripture” was inextricably linked to that of the Old Testament (hereafter OT) sacred writings.6 Though not considered to be a closed canon, the Hebrew scriptures were the source material for Jesus’ authority and that of the early church as well.7 In a sense, the OT was an established text but not a finished one. By virtue of its prophetic nature, the Jewish scriptures anticipated the need for a future and final authoritative word from God.8 Steven Sheeley remarks, “Both Jesus and Paul seem to take advantage of this open view of the scriptures. Certainly Paul interprets and re-interprets Scripture in the light of God’s new revelation in Jesus.”9 For this reason, Jesus’ statement that he had come to fill the Torah full 5

Bruce, The Canon of Scripture,18.

6

Randall Price, Searching for the Original Bible (Eugene: Harvest House, 2007), 139. 7

Bruce Metzger, The Canon of the New Testament: It’s Origin Development and Significance (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1987), 2. Both Jesus and Paul refer to the OT as h grafh, ai grafai, meaning “the scriptures.” 8

The Jewish council of Jamnia in AD 90 officially closed the canon of the OT. A century or more later, the Mishnah and the Talmud became the codified “Oral Torah” of the rabbis. This ongoing commentary on Torah was viewed by many Jewish sages as on par with the written Torah. 9

Steven Sheeley, “From Scripture to Canon: The Development of Scripture as Canon, in Review and Expositor, 95 (1998), 514. See also Metzger, The Canon (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1987), 2.

4

(complete it) was well received by his listeners. The NT scriptures claim to fulfill the old, and to re-interpret it in light of an already high messianic expectancy. The New Scriptures Authenticate Each Other In addition to this, the Jews viewed their ongoing interpretations of Torah as an extension of Torah’s authority.10 Both Jesus and Paul argue that the oral traditions of the pious Jews were not sufficiently authoritative to warrant a reversal of God’s commands (Matt. 5:3-6; Mark 7:313; Gal. 1:14; Col. 2:8).11 However, it is curious to note that both Jesus and Paul claim to speak authoritatively for God, and at times amend and augment the Jewish Scriptures (Matt. 5-7; Lk. 6; Mk 13:31; see Paul below).12 As well, other writings closely associated with the Apostles were beginning to be accepted by the early church. In his epistle to Timothy, Paul stated in chapter 5 verse 18, “For the scripture says, ‘Do not muzzle the ox while it is treading out the grain’ and ‘The worker deserves his wages.’” The first quote is from the book of Moses, and the second statement regarding the worker is an unambiguous quote from Luke 10:7. Both quotes are prefaced with the phrase “for the scripture says.” The implication is that Paul knew about Luke’s Gospel, and that he puts Luke’s Gospel on par with the Torah itself. Again, Peter states in 2 Pet. 3:15-16, that Paul’s writings were difficult to understand as were the “other scriptures.” Therefore, Peter viewed the well-known Pauline corpus as equal to Torah. Additionally, 1 Cor. 4:1; 2 Cor. 5:20; 1 Thess. 2:13 all show that Paul viewed his own 10

Birger Gerhardsson, Memory and Manuscript: Oral Tradition and Written Transmission in Rabbinic Judaism and Early Christianity (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), xi. The halakah and the issue of authority was a very circuitous matter filled with legalisms and much protocol. Typically the rabbis viewed it as their prerogative to affirm, relax, or amend the law. 11

Philip Comfort, The Origin of the Bible, (Wheaton: Tyndale Publishing House, 1992), 63.

12

Kate Turabian, A Manual for Writers of Research Papers, Theses, and Dissertations, 7th ed., 2007, sections 17.5.2 and 24.6.1-4. All abbreviations of Biblical books taken from Turabian’s guide for abbreviations.

5

writings to be on par with the very words and commands of God himself.13 Thus, Jesus and the Apostles had a very low view of the rabbi’s expansive Midrashic amendments to Torah but a very high view of the Jewish scriptures and their own teachings, commands, and writings. However, it is fair to note that these NT books did prevail in a contest for scriptural supremacy. Bart Ehrman, for example, makes much of the fact these scriptures were the “winners,” while others were the “losers” in the battle for orthodoxy.14 Therefore, he argues, it begs the question somewhat to quote from the scriptures that emerged from the conflict. However, as F.F. Bruce has asserted, we must be open to the possibility that these scriptures “won” because they deserved to win.15 In other words, it is somewhat misleading to say that the controversy was between books that were qualitatively equal. Therefore, an appeal to the internal witness of the NT can partially be adjudicated by examining the use of it among prominent early church leaders. The Apostolic Fathers Affirm the New Scriptures Clement of Rome Christian writings that began to quote the NT books started to emerge toward the end of the first century and the beginning of the second. Clement was an influential leader in the church at Rome and wrote to the Corinthian church in his epistle called I Clement (AD 95), to persuade them to repent and re-install their leaders.16 This lengthy epistle makes many quotations from 13

Peter Richardson, “I Say, Not the Lord: Personal Opinion, Apostolic Authority, and the Development of Early Christian Halakah,” 68. The Thess. Passage is interesting. Paul states that there is a qualitative difference between God’s word and Man’s word, then proceeds to tell them that he has God’s word, not man’s. 14

Ehrman, Lost Scriptures, 2-3.

15

F.F. Bruce, The Canon of Scripture, 277.

16

Clement, I Clement, accessed www.newadvent.org/fathers.

6

the OT, and some from the New.17 Curiously, Clement quotes very precisely from the established Septuagint OT (LXX), prefacing his citations with the typical formulas of “it is written” or “the scriptures says.”18 However, he does not preface his NT citations with these familiar designations. Instead, he seems to paraphrase apostolic and Lukan writings.19 It should be noted that some of his NT quotes come on the heals of OT citations which he has already identified as scripture. Moreover, in some cases Clement quotes an OT passage through a NT one.20 Polycarp Bishop of Smyrna Polycarp was Bishop of Smyrna (AD 110) and is well known for his Philippian correspondence.21 At the request of the Philippian church, Polycarp sent the letters of the martyred Ignatius, including a cover letter of his own.22 In his letter to them, Polycarp unambiguously shifts the authority of Christian life and practice to the New Scriptures. In this brief epistle, he quotes the NT 100 times and the OT only 12 times.23 Several places in the correspondence, Polycarp unambiguously refers to the four Gospels and the Pauline corpus as “the Word of the Lord,” and “Scripture.” His quotations are a veritable pastiche of scriptural allusions, which combine passages from Peter, Paul and the 17

Metzger, The Canon of the New Testament, 41.

18

Ibid.

19

A.J. Carlyle, The New Testament in the Apostolic Fathers (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1905), 36-51. 20

Ibid. 48. Namely, the citations of Numbers 12 via the Hebrews 3 quote. Also, the Psalm 88 and 1 Sam. 13 quotes in Acts 13. Clement surely quotes these OT passages through the Acts passage, which also conflates the two texts. See 1 Clement 18.1. 21

Polycarp, Letter to the Philipians. accessed www.newadvent.org/fathers

22

Metzger, The Canon of the New Testament, 59.

23

Ibid.

7

Gospels.24 Ignatius of Antioch. Eusebius mentions that Ignatius was the third Bishop following Euodius, who followed Peter.25 The information we have about him comes primarily through Polycarp’s testimony, and the letters that he presumably wrote en route to his demise and Martyrdom in 110 AD. Apparently cited from memory, the Pauline writings are the very fiber of his thoughts.26 Likewise, he mentions the “scriptures” in three OT allusions, and states that Jesus is the “foundation” of the Christian faith. He quotes from Matthew, Luke, and John, and unambiguously cites Romans, Ephesians, I Corinthians, Hebrews and 1 Peter, and vaguely references the Pastoral Epistles.27 Ignatius’ primary authority for the church was clearly the NT documents.28 Papias of Heirapolis Born shortly after the 60’s, Papias was called by Irenaeus “the hearer of John, the man of old. The friend of Polycarp.”29 Papias is also known for being a very early inquirer to the “living voices” of the Gospel. His primary concern was to find those still living who had migrated from Jerusalem to Asia Minor. If they had sat under an Apostle, his aim was to commit 24

Paul Hartog, Polycarp and the New Testament: Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2. Reihe. 134, (Tubingen: Mohr Siebek, 2002), 191. 25

Metzger, The Canon of the New Testament, 43. 26

Brooke Foss Westcott, A General Survey of the History of the Canon of the New Testament (London: McMillan and Co., 1881) 30. 27

Metzger, The Canon of the New Testament, 45-49. 28

Henry Chadwick, The Church in Ancient Society (New York: Oxford University Press, 2001), 65. Chadwick mentions that the Ignatius texts are preserved for us in three editions. 29

Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses, 33. 3-4 (Oxford: James Parker and Co, 1872). Irenaeus’ phrase “man of old” refers to more than his age. It is likely a reference to his eldership in the church as well.

8

to memory their accurate teaching concerning Christ. Referring to this he states, If, then, any one who had attended on the elders came, I asked minutely after their sayings—what Andrew or Peter said, or what was said by Philip, or by Thomas, or by James, or by John, or by Matthew, or by any other of the Lord's disciples: which things Aristion and the presbyter John, the disciples of the Lord, say. For I imagined that what was to be got from books was not so profitable to me as what came from the living and abiding voice.30 It seems that there at least two observations from this quote that are inescapable. First, Papias stated that he preferred the quality of the oral teaching concerning Christ by those hearers of the disciples. This accentuates the role of oral proclamation in that culture, and the high degree of accuracy through community memorization.31 Second, Papias’ preference for the oral tradition over the “books” presupposes that these books were available very early to the church. Conclusion The Apostles placed their words, teachings, and writings on the same level as OT words and prophecy. Likewise, the Apostolic Fathers recognize the New Testament as having an authoritative status, and are transitional figures between peripatetic proclamation and epigraphic transmission of the Gospel. It is significant that this elevation of the NT documents occurs before the encroachment of internal heresy, which will force the church to accelerate its recognition of a set collection of authoritative books.

The Canon and Response to Heresy Justin and Tatian Responding to external threats to Christianity preoccupied much of Christian apologetics early on, which delayed the establishment of the NT canon. At first, Christian apologists such as 30

From Eusebius’ History of the Church, 39.4.

31

James D.G. Dunn, Remembering Jesus, vol. I (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003) 238-241. See also Birger Gerhardsson, Memory and Manuscript: Oral Tradition and Written Transmission in Rabbinic Judaism and Early Christianity, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998).

9

Justin the Philosopher (also known as the “Martyr”) wrote to Emperor Antoninius Pious, and to Trypho the Jew.32 These were polemical defenses of the Christian faith to outsiders. It is curious to note that Justin refers to the Gospels as the “memoirs of the Apostles.”33 Likewise, Tatian, the student of Justin, defended the faith against outsiders. However, his apologies were far more terse and sarcastic than Justin’s defenses. Justin attempted to placate his opponents by acknowledging that there was some overlap between the best of philosophy and Christian thought.34 However, Tatian cleverly articulated a full frontal assault on Greek philosophy, showing it to be internally incoherent and self-refuting.35 While the church was preoccupied with staying alive and defending its existence to Greco-Roman culture and oppression, internally it was facing a heresy that would threaten to genetically alter Christianity if not dealt with. Marcion Marcion grew up in a Christian family. Though his father was a bishop at Sinope in Pontus, Marcion quickly developed a disdain for the OT and leaned toward the anti-materialist philosophy, viewing the phenomenal and sense world as evil. He gained followers and began to teach his peculiar strain of Christianity in Rome. His teaching was characterized by a brand of Gnosticism that was less speculative, revered some NT books, and represented an “anti-Jewish and pseudo-Pauline” school of thought.36 His teachings were utterly bereft of historical continuity, and he viewed Christ as a divine singularity rather than the fulfillment of ancient OT 32

Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1910), 710.

33

Justin Martyr to Athenogoras, Ante-Nicene Christian Library (Edinburgh: T &T Clark, 1871), 64-65. 34

Justo L. Gonzalez, The Story of Christianity, (Vol. 1) (New York: Harper, 1984), 54-55. 35

Ibid. Schaff, History of the Christian Church, 483. Though Schaff states that his system was more critical and rationalistic than mystical. 36

10

prophecy.37 Marcion was the first to contrive a canon list of authoritative books. He preferred the Gospel of Luke and select documents among the Pauline Corpus. However, even these he edited to erase any traces of their Jewish background. It is interesting to note that this first canon list is a reductionist list, meaning that he actively rejected known literature, reducing it to a minimal canon in support of his theology. Though some would characterize the canon list of Marcion as the “Big Bang” of canon discussion, it is clear that this was more a defining moment for an already existing process. Gonzalez states, “But Marcion’s challenge required a response, and thus the church at large began to compile a list of sacred writings.”38 The collection of writings that Marcion had to alter already existed and had already experienced ubiquitous acceptance among the church. Montanism Though Marcion challenged established Christianity by reducing and distorting their sacred writings to a few select books, Montanus took just the opposite approach. The Montanists rejected the rationalism of the Gnostics and also rejected the indulgence of the universal church.39 Though they were doctrinally close to the universal and established church in many ways, they referred to themselves as the pneumatics, meaning the “spiritual” church. As a result, they had a very open view of God’s continuing voice. Their highly charged apocalypticism and charismatic theology shaped their view of God’s ongoing activity through the ecstatic utterance of living prophets. Though most of their writings and records of these 37

Ibid. 38

Gonzalez, The Story of Christianity, 62. 39

Schaff, History of the Christian Church, 417.

11

ecstatic prophetic messages have disappeared (likely due to having been burned later by the Catholic Church), it was clear to the early church that a continuing revelation through prophetic inspiration was incompatible with the established Word of God in the Scriptures. Metzger remarks, “By rejecting the extravagances of Montanism, the Church took the first step toward the adoption of a closed canon of Scripture.”40 It will now become clear that the church’s response to ever increasing internal threats undoubtedly shaped the development and recognition of the canon, which ultimately lead to an official proclamation of canon. A Preliminary Canon: The Emergence of A Definite Authoritative Word. Irenaeus Irenaeus, a student of Polycarp, was the Bishop of Lyons and the chief opponent of Gnostic heresy. In his monumental work Against Heresies, Irenaeus asserts that the Gnostic claim to have esoteric knowledge as passed down by the disciples was false.41 In his defense of the Christian faith against various heresies, Irenaeus reveals a simple but elegant “rule of faith.”42 He established that the original Gospel that was orally proclaimed was faithfully transmitted in writing. He argued that because he and the other Christian bishops were the true lineage of the apostles, that there existed no extra-biblical tradition or revelation. Had Jesus left any such tradition, he would certainly have left it through his Apostles and their successors.43 In 180 AD he recognized 22 books and a clearly defined “canon,” which he equated with OT writings, and this collection he believed to be materially sufficient for faith and practice.44 40

Metzger, The Canon of the New Testament, 106.

41

Bruce, The Canon of Scripture, 171-172. 42

Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses, Book I.5. Gonzalez, The Story of Christianity, 65.

43 44

Irenaeus, Adversus Haeresus, III.3.

12

The Muratorian Canon Published in 1740 by Lodovicio Antonio Muratori, the Muratorian Canon contains 21 of the 27 books of the NT, excluding James, 1 and 2 Peter, and Hebrews. It was composed around AD 170 in Latin45 and reflects the books accepted as scripture by the Roman church.46 The Muratorian commentary in the fragment reveals that the rule of faith employed by the compiler was the general and universal recipere (recognition), the apostolicity (apostolic origin), and the ecumenicity (universal acceptance by the church).47 Tertullian Tertullian was an intellectual giant who had become a believer in 195 AD. It is with Tertullian that we have the unambiguous use of the term regula fedei, or “rule of faith.” He believed the churches teachings to be descended from the Apostles, and stated that the belief of Christians as taught in the scriptures and reflected in their baptismal creed was the rule of faith.48 Tertullian employed many of the same arguments of Irenaeus, but because of his legal Roman background, he was able to ground them in a forensic form unrivaled in the Ante-Nicene period.49 Though he was certainly not alone. Space does not permit the mention of others such as Hippolytus, Novatian, Cyprian, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and Dionysius. All of these

45

Hill, C.E. “The Debate Over the Muratorian Fragment and the Development of the Canon.” Westminster Theological Journal 57, (1995). It is fair to note that the date of the Muratorian fragment is disputed. However, Metzger views it as no later than the end of the 2nd century, and Bruce puts dates it slightly earlier. 46

Bruce, The Canon of Scripture, 158-160.

47

Metzger, The Canon of the New Testament, 199-201. 48

Schaff, History of the Christian Church, 830-832. However, it is clear that Irenaeus used the phrase regula fedei, and regula veritas as well. 49 Schaff, History of the Christian Church, 830-832. Though Tertullian became a Montanist later, and was certainly thought of as a Charismatic, he largely defected because of the intolerable moral laxity he encountered in the universal church. It is further interesting to note that the phrase testamentum began to be used by him first – likely due to his legal background.

13

men contributed to the progression of the canon.50 Conclusion This brief survey has shown that a general sense of what ought to be and what ought not to be considered sacred scripture was evident from the beginning of the second century, and arguably from the books of the NT themselves. Later ecclesiastical councils, synods and official lists would further define and codify the canon. However, Eusebius and Athanasius (4th cent.) did not have to pull these books out of thin air, or contrive an ad hoc process of determining authoritative books. Similarly, when it came time to officially recognize the canon, they did not have to invent the terminology “rule of faith” for it was already in use. Nor did they have to hatch the criteria for canonization ex nihilo, but instead they drew from a rich history of debate, defense and application of an already authoritative body of literature among the bishops and churches. The official process under Constantine and the post-persecution era would have much to draw from. This study ends where it began. It has been shown that the Old anticipated the New, the New authenticated itself, the Apostolic Fathers implicitly recognize the authority of the New, the Ante-Nicene Fathers accelerated an already unfolding process, which would lead inexorably to the recognition and establishment of an official canon in the fourth century. Though the church certainly had many books from which to choose, not all these books proved to be authentically apostolic in origin, consistent in doctrine and quality, and accepted by the church universal. It is also fairly clear, that the 27 books currently found in the modern NT did meet this criteria.

50

Philip Comfort, The Many Gospels of Jesus, (Carol Stream: Tyndale House, 2008), 12.

14

WORKS CITED Barna,George. Growing True Disciples. Colorado Springs: Waterbrook Press, 2001. Bock, Darrell. The Missing Gospels. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2006. Bruce, F.F. The Canon of Scripture. Downers Grove: Intervarsity Press, 1988.

15

Carlyle, A.J. The New Testament in the Apostolic Fathers, (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1905), 3651. Chadwick, Henry. The Church in Ancient Society. New York: Oxford University Press, 2001. Comfort, Philip. The Origin of the Bible. Wheaton: Tyndale Publishing House, 1992. _____________. The Many Gospels of Jesus. Carol Stream: Tyndale House, 2008. Dunn, James D.G.. Remembering Jesus, vol. I. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003. Ehrman, Bart. Lost Scriptures. Books That Did Not Make it Into the New Testament. New York: Oxford University Press, 2003. Gerhardsson, Birger. Memory and Manuscript: Oral Tradition and Written Transmission in Rabbinic Judaism and Early Christianity. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998. Gonzalez, Justo L. The Story of Christianity. vol. 1. New York: Harper, 1984. Hartog, Paul. Polycarp and the New Testament: Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2. Reihe. 134. Tubingen: Mohr Siebek, 2002. Hill, C.E. “The Debate Over the Muratorian Fragment and the Development of the Canon.” Westminster Theological Journal 57, (1995). Irenaeus’ Adversus Haereses. Oxford: James Parker and Co, 1872. Justin Martyr to Athenogoras. Ante-Nicene Christian Library. Edinburgh: T &T Clark, 1871. Metzger, Bruce. The Canon of the New Testament: Its Origin, Development, and Significance. New York: Oxford University Press, 1987. Price, Randall. Searching For The Origin of the Bible. Eugene: Harvest House Publishers, 2007. Peter Richardson, “I Say, Not the Lord: Personal Opinion, Apostolic Authority, and the Development of Early Christian Halakah,” The Annual Lecture of the Institute of Biblical Research. 68, no. 1 (1978): 68. Polycarp, Letter to the Philipians. accessed www.newadvent.org/fathers Schaff, Philip. History of the Christian Church. Vol. 1 Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1960. Sheeley, Steven M. From Scripture to Canon: The Development of the New Testament Canon. Review and Expositor, 95 (1998). Westcott, Brooke Foss, A General Survey of the History of the Canon of the New 16

Testament. Cambridge and London: McMillan and Co., 1881.

17