Canon

image from here

The below is a transcript of a talk I plan to give at an upcoming retreat.  The quotes below are taken from FF Bruce or Bruce Metzger; some general thoughts are credited to the same.  Their books- and summaries of them- are presented below.

The Canon of Scripture

INTRODUCTION
The canon of scripture refers not to divine artillery, but rather the collection of texts we receive and recognize as authoritative, the measuring stick of our belief and behavior. We call it the Bible- here's how it came to be.

OLD TESTAMENT
Remember that from the beginning, the Christian Church possessed a canon of sacred writings. In those days, it was referred to as the Scriptures or by its traditional divisions- the law, the prophets, and the writings. Today, we call it the Old Testament. This collection of Hebrew and Aramaic texts had been used for centuries and was well established by Jesus’ day. To Jews, these writings had authority. Jesus Himself “regularly appealed to the Hebrew scriptures [both specific passages and the collection as a whole] to validate his mission, his words and his actions.” Indeed, he is the fulfillment of them (Luke 24:44). And in debates, scripture was the common authority, acknowledged even by His opponents. So Christians accept the Old Testament because Jesus did.

Were the exact boundaries of the Old Testament canon established during Jesus day? We think so. Three books- Esther, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs- were discussed at a council in Jamnia in AD 70, but the debate concerned their right to remain in the canon, and of course they did.

APOCRYPHA
Some Churches recognize an additional collection, called the apocrypha. This was because the Septuagint, a widely-used Greek translation of the OT, had come to include books not found in the original Hebrew canon. Because these extra books had become tradition, the Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches accept them. Because they were added later, most Protestant Churches do not.

NEW TESTAMENT
On to the New Testament. Christians, by definition, follow Jesus as Lord. Jesus left no written record, but His words and deeds were witnessed by a select group called the apostles, to whom He granted understanding (Mark 4:11, Luke 24:45), authority, and the command to teach others (Matthew 28:20). The apostles and some of their close companions would produce a new set of writings, which were collected and would become the New Testament.

Most NT books were written before AD 70* and received without dispute as authoritative. And yet, the early Church did not think much about a new canon, perhaps due to a strong cultural preference for oral tradition left by the apostles. Attitudes changed about 100 years later- in the second century- when heretics (like Marcion and Montanists) and popular movements (like Gnosticism) encouraged the early church fathers to start explicitly listing books received as authoritative. Though produced from diverse cultures and backgrounds, it is remarkable how similar their lists were. 20 of the 27 NT books were accepted universally; the remaining 7 (Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, 2 & 3 John, Jude, Revelation) were accepted by some but not others. These were debated largely due to questions of authorship (apostolic or not?), though orthodoxy (agreement with accepted texts) and consensus among churches also played a role.

In 367, Athanasius was the first to articulate the NT canon as we have it today. Within decades, Jerome and Augustine’s concurrence would cement the collection. At that point the canon was considered closed and seldom discussed for over 1000 years, until the Reformation revisited earlier uncertainties about those 7 NT books. The reformers left it unchanged, however, because they recognized an important truth: The Church does not have authority over the Scriptures; the Scriptures have authority over the Church.

NT APOCRYPHA
As with the OT, there were other writings from this era that were ultimately not accepted as canon and called apocryphal. In general, these works are clearly inferior theologically and historically to the canonical accounts. Some have obvious problems like late authorship or false teachings (like denying the OT). Others are simply amalgamations of verses from canonical works. Some are even antagonistic, perhaps due to competing philosophical influences of the day. In short, these "books excluded themselves from the canon."

CHAPTERS & VERSES
As an aside, the books of the canon have been set for centuries, but the presentation has changed- chapters were added ~AD 1200, and verses ~1550. Though such numbering makes locating passages easier, some argue these additions encourage de-contextualization and misinterpretation.

CONCLUSION
Though grounded in evidence and history, the canon of Scripture is ultimately a statement of belief. As we believe individual books were inspired by God, so too we believe the assembling of the collection was from the Lord. As the Reformers found, doubting the canon can reveal the human tendency to put personal preference (and cultural bias) above the word of God. So “Taste and see that the Lord is good” (Psalm 34:8a), “for the Word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword.” (Hebrews 4:12a)


Resources

Two books set the standard in discussions of canon:

• Bruce, F.F. The Canon of Scripture. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1997. (Summary)
• Metzger, Bruce. The Canon of the New Testament: Its Origin, Development, and Significance. Oxford: Clarendon, 2009. (Summary)

Two free online pdf documents are quick and valuable reads:

• Haykin, Michael A.G. The Canon of the New Testament. Originally published in the The Fellowship for Reformation and Pastoral Studies Vol. 29, No. 7.  March 2001.
• Keating, Cory. The Criteria Used for Developing the New Testament Canon in the First Four Centuries of the Christian Church. December 2000.

In many ways, the New Testament validates the Old.  See my blog post here for a summary of the argument.

*approximate dates of authorship for all NT books