Body: |
Criteria used by Apostolic Fathers to determine canon
A conservative, bible believing perspective!
God's providence gave us the 27 book New Testament Canon, not the church.
God, not men decided the canon. This providence does not mean that church
leaders were inspired in their selecting the canon, only that God had his
eye on the scriptures the whole time and brought about His will to form the
Bible we see today!
Criteria used by apostolic
fathers to determine canon
Go to: "Canon of the Bible" Home Page
I. Written by an apostle vs. non-apostles:
Tertullian, the "Father of Latin Theology" (ca. 160-225), witnesses
to the authority of writings in the Western church. He stressed the
criterion of apostolicity. For example, in his writing Against Marcion he
clearly distinguishes gospels of apostolic origin and gospels written by
disciples of apostles. He writes: "Of the apostles, therefore, John and
Matthew first instill faith into us; whilst of apostolic men, Luke and Mark
renew it afterwards."" Tertullian did not produce a list of what was in his
Old Testament and New Testament, but it is significant that he refers to
the two parts of the Christian Bible in a collective way as totttm
instrumentum utriusque testamenti. It seems that what we may call his "New
Testament canon" included the four gospels, thirteen Pauline letters, Acts,
1 John, 1 Peter, Jude, and Revelation. He referred to these writings in an
authoritative manner, and called them an "entire volume."" He names the
main parts of the New Testament "Gospels" and "the Apostles," the latter
phrase probably denoting the apostolic letters .41 Once again, we note that
the boundaries of the apostolic letters are not defined with certainty, but
this should not prevent us from seeing that for Tertullian the Bible was a
"fixed entity." (Lee Martin McDonald, James A. Sanders, Editors: The Canon
Debate; Peter Balla, Evidence for an Early Christian Canon: Second and
Third Century, p 382, 2002)
II. What was read aloud in weekly assemblies:
What was read in the congregation was probably a key factor in most
cases, but even this phenomenon needs differentiation. We have seen that
books not in our canon today were widely read by early Christians. However,
this does not necessarily mean that they too were regarded as
authoritative. The Muratorian Fragment shows that the Shepherd of Hermas
was suggested as reading-matter, yet it was accorded a lesser authority and
was not to be read "publicly in the church," because it had been written
more recently (lines 77-78). Even the Festal Letter of Athanasius (from 367
C.E., containing a clear acknowledgement of the New Testament canon of
twenty-seven books) permits the reading of other literature, including the
Shepherd of Hermas. The early church possessed literature edifying as
reading matter as well as writings with a higher authority. (Lee Martin
McDonald, James A. Sanders, Editors: The Canon Debate; Peter Balla,
Evidence for an Early Christian Canon: Second and Third Century, p 385,
2002)
Use: The regular use of writings in the ancient churches was also an
important factor in their selection for the New Testament canon. This is
what Eusebius had in mind when he mentioned that certain writings were
"recognized" (homolegoumena) among the churches and became "encovenanted"
(endiathekoi = "testamented" or "canonical"). 64 The wide-spread use of the
New Testament writings in the churches may have been the most determinative
factor in the canonical process. The fact that the authorship of Hebrews
was strongly questioned, yet it made it into the New Testament canon,
suggests that churches were reluctant to dismiss a useful and cherished
document. An important factor was who was favorable toward the acceptance
of a document and who was not. Athanasius and Epiphanius, for instance,
would have had a greater influence on the church than many lesser known
figures. Also, larger churches in the metropolitan centers such as Antioch,
Alexandria, Rome, Ephesus, and the New Rome, Constantinople, were more
likely to have a greater influence on which books were included than were
the smaller churches in rural areas. While most New Testament writings were
known and used by most of the churches in Eusebius's day, doubt lingered
over others. These "disputed" (antilegomena) writings included James, 2
Peter, 2 and 3 John, Jude, probably Revelation, and possibly Hebrews.
Notice for example, how Eusebius acknowledges wide acceptance of 1 John,
but is reluctant to accept 2 and 3 John and Revelation. For him, the Gospel
of John and 1 John have been "accepted without controversy by ancients and
moderns alike but the other two are disputed, and as to the Revelation
there have been many advocates of either opinion up to the present. This,
too, shall be similarly illustrated by quotations from the ancients at the
proper time ." [Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. 3.25.1-7] This shows his considerable
interest in what the majority of churches concluded about the matter of
canon. (Lee Martin McDonald, James A. Sanders, Editors: The Canon Debate;
Lee Martin McDonald, Identifying Scripture and Canon in the Early Church:
The Criteria Question, p 432, 2002)
III. What was consistent and contradiction free:
Third, Barton maintains that if a writing was believed to be
scripture, it was also was believed to be internally self-consistent and
not self-contradictory. For example, in Justin's famous Dialogue with
Trypho, he admonishes that if Trypho had spoken ill of the scriptures in
error or without ill intent, he would be forgiven, but, 'if you have done
so because you imagined that you could throw doubt on the passage, in order
that I might say the scriptures contradicted one another, you have erred.
But I shall not venture to suppose or to say such a thing, and if a
scripture that appears to be of such a kind be brought forward, and if
there be a pretext for saying that it is contrary to some other, since I am
entirely convinced that no scripture contradicts another, I shall admit
rather that I do not understand what is recorded, and shall strive to
persuade those who imagine that the scriptures are contradictory to be
rather of the same opinion as myself.' (Adapted from Trypho 65.2, ANF) (Lee
Martin McDonald, James A. Sanders, Editors: The Canon Debate; Lee Martin
McDonald, Identifying Scripture and Canon in the Early Church: The Criteria
Question, p 421, 2002)
IV. What reinforced the consensus of belief:
Orthodoxy: This theological concern led the early church to employ
the "rule of faith" as the criterion of "orthodoxy" to determine which
writings could be used in the church. Bishop Serapion (ca. 200) rejected
the reading of the Gospel of Peter in church because of this criterion of
truth. When asked by the church at Rhossus ... whether the Gospel of Peter
could be read in their services, he at first agreed because it had an
apostle's name attached. But later he reversed his decision saying, "since
I have now learnt, from what has been told me, that their [the authors']
mind was lurking in some hole of heresy, I shall give diligence to come
again to you; wherefore, brethren expect me quickly." His rejection was
based upon the book's divergence from what was generally accepted as true
in the churches. It was not because of its questionable authorship, though
that may have played a small role, but because the theology was considered
out of step with the "rule of faith" operating in the church. (Lee Martin
McDonald, James A. Sanders, Editors: The Canon Debate; Lee Martin McDonald,
Identifying Scripture and Canon in the Early Church: The Criteria Question,
p 428, 2002)
V. What was written during the apostolic age:
Antiquity: The traditional understanding of canon formation is that
the church at first recognized only the Old Testament writings as
scripture. Later, as the Gospels and Epistles (at first only Paul's) began
to circulate among the churches they too were accorded scriptural status.
Barton, however, challenges the traditional view, noting that in the first
two centuries Christians generally referred to their own writings more than
to the Old Testament. They did not cite the Old Testament equally until it
was becoming finalized for the church. He also notes that during the second
century, "all but a very few Old Testament books (such as Isaiah or the
Psalms) already play second fiddle to the Christians' own writings.""
Nevertheless, he acknowledges that antiquity played a significant role in
society in the ancient world; a religion's antiquity enhanced its
credibility. (Lee Martin McDonald, James A. Sanders, Editors: The Canon
Debate; Lee Martin McDonald, Identifying Scripture and Canon in the Early
Church: The Criteria Question, p 430, 2002)
VI. Augustine indicates a balance between "scale of use" between smaller
vs. larger, more prominent churches:
"Accordingly, among the canonical Scriptures he will judge according
to the following standard: to prefer those that are received by all the
catholic churches to those which some do not receive. Among those, again,
which are not received by all, he will prefer such as have the sanction of
the greater number and those of greater authority, to such as are held by
the smaller number and those of less authority. If, however, he shall find
that some books are held by the greater number of churches, and others by
the churches of greater authority (though this is not a very likely thing
to happen), I think that in such a case the authority on the two sides is
to be looked upon as equal." (Augustine, Book 2, Chapter 8, The Canonical
Books)
By Steve Rudd: Contact the author for comments, input or corrections.
Click Your Choice
Go To Start: WWW.BIBLE.CA
|