The Foundations of Canon

Throughout the early church's formation and progression, certain inscrutable doctrines gave way to a multiplicity of interpretations. Inevitably, a division formed, and the need for uniform recognition regarding the authority of scriptures arose. Amid such divisions and teachings, many honorable church fathers spent years investigating and preserving the integrity and authority of the New Testament Canon.

Following the ascension of Jesus, the apostles acted as the church’s leadership (Acts 2:42). Naturally, as years passed, the church spread culturally and geographically away from apostolic roots and into an era of authority not always based on Scripture, but instead on opinion and relative interpretation. The need for a standard, or canon, became apparent. The original term canon meant “rule” or “authority.”[1] Thus, as the definition suggests, the process of forming a New Testament Canon dealt mainly with identifying and defining what consisted of God's authoritative scripture. As we will see, identifying, compiling, and preserving God's word proved to be "a long and gradual process."[2]

 

Criteria for Canon

Throughout this process, the specific criteria for inclusion in the Canon required the document to be "authoritative, inspired, and apostolic."[3] More specifically, for a book to be part of the Canon, it must have been written by a prophet or Spirit-led person, written for all generations, and could not contradict previous writings that meet the first two criteria.[4] The sources of comparison when evaluating if such standards were met became Old Testament writings (Septuagint) and "oral traditions relating to what Jesus had said and done."[5]

 

Opponents of Orthodoxy

Marcion (A.D. 80 – 160) settled in Rome and probably began his work around 140 A.D. He started by compiling what is known today as Marcion’s Gospel. Marcion was not a proponent of the Old Testament and expressed his disdain by editing out any references or quotations from within the Gospel of Luke and the Pauline epistles. He felt "that the God of the Old Testament and the Creator of the Universe were very like each other and very unlike the God and Father of our Lord Jesus."[6] He taught that the Creator in Genesis “had been replaced in the NT by the Father of Jesus.”[7] According to the works of Epiphanius and Tertullian, Marcion altered approximately seven percent of Luke’s Gospel.[8] Based on the above criteria for Canon, this action alone would disqualify Marcion’s Gospel from canonical inclusion.

Marcion is commonly agreed upon as the first individual to present an exclusive canon, which included Luke, ten Pauline epistles, and his editing of each. Heretical as he may have been, Marcion’s canon did provoke a response and provided a sort of catalyst for the formation of the New Testament Canon. While his view of God and Jesus are unique, nearly unto himself, some considered Marcion to have been a Gnostic.[9]

The compilation of gnostic writings indicates pre-Christian origins.[10] Gnosis means "knowledge" and holds to the belief that all individuals need "knowledge and enlightenment . . . to understand who they truly are."[11] A person that claimed to be a Christian gnostic adopted the belief that Jesus was a "wisdom-type figure and came to help us realize who we are."[12] As Gnostics attempted to blend the new Christian movement with their previous beliefs of enlightenment, a chasm in Christology became a defining dichotomy between the two parties.

Aside from the opposing views of Jesus’ identity, the Gnostics also viewed themselves differently than the Synoptic Gospels would suggest. Gnostics believed themselves to be divine and that “one who achieves gnosis becomes no longer a Christian, but a Christ.”[13] This belief contrasts with what Peter declared when he told Jesus, “Thou art the Christ” (Matthew 16:16). The Synoptic Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke oppose the Gnostic gospels of Thomas, Phillip, and Truth in other distinguished ways. The Synoptic Gospels present Jesus eating with sinners, the God-man who worked in everyday settings to accomplish and establish the Kingdom of Heaven. The Gnostic gospels emphasize divinity and the necessity for those striving to achieve gnosis to abstain from the world and common sinners.

Conversations and Characters in the Recognition of Canon

Such contrasting commandments from the Synoptic Gospels and the Gnostic writings led many people to follow a false gospel. This tragic outcome led church leaders to begin conversations about canonization as early as the late second century. Most notable among the discussions were those between Irenaeus of Lyons and Serapion of Antioch.[14]Fortunately, by the early second century, Paul's letters and the Synoptic Gospels were widely accepted[15] , providing a foundation for such conversations. Other notable individuals contributing to the apostolic foundation within the Canon include Papias of Hierapolis, Eusebius of Caesarea, Hermas of Rome, and Clement of Rome.

Papias' early second-century writings are preserved by Eusebius.[16] It appears that Papias concerned himself with determining true, authoritative scripture long before the term canon was used to describe today’s New Testament. According to Eusebius, Papais "had a high regard for oral tradition [and] made an effort to discover what was taught by the elders or disciples of the Lord . . . from what men still alive were teaching."[17] His recognition of Matthew, Mark, 1 John, and 1 Peter provide canonical credibility to the works and contribution to their future inclusion as books of the New Testament.

Like Papias, Hermas and Clement provided similar early contributions to evaluating scriptures. Hermas of Rome was a Jewish Christian who valued Matthew, Mark, John, and Ephesians. Clement wrote two documents recognizing the importance of Paul's letters to Corinth and Ephesus, the Synoptic Gospels, and the authority of the Old Testament.[18] By placing the Synoptic Gospels next to the Old Testament sayings, Clement was one of the first to hint at the equal authority of both the older Hebrew texts and the New Testament. While such a byproduct may have been unintentional, Clement’s works may have restored the integrity of the Old Testament that Marcion attempted so vigorously to diminish.

Despite such meaningful contributions through the early second century, “it was not until about 180 that a Christian writer came close to speaking of a New Testament book as scripture.”[19] Theophilus of Antioch is the one "speaking" with such a notion. Irenaeus advanced this concept by explicitly recognizing the four Gospels, Acts, thirteen Pauline epistles, 1 Peter, 1-2 John, and Revelation as scripture.[20] The previously mentioned conversations of Irenaeus and Serapion of Antioch contributed to the establishment of this list. As concise as it was, the original list of New Testament scripture remained eligible for further modifications.

 

Such frequent changes were addressed by many church leaders, but “the most important and influential early Christian writer on the question of Canon was Eusebius of Caesarea.”[21] An array of adjustments, additions, and alterations were made to Irenaeus' compilation up to the point of Eusebius' fourth-century work. Eusebius sought to clarify the often changing opinions and relied mainly on Origen for his content. After Eusebius' investigation, his canonical picture proved too imprecise as he left James, Jude, 2 Peter, 2-3 John, and Revelation open for dispute.[22]

           

Conclusion

The attempts to discern and decipher what texts were to be accepted and rejected as scripture during a period when many available candidates existed is a remarkable accomplishment, a testimony of God’s faithfulness and transcendence. The project "was essentially a slow and gradual process of sifting, ratification, and rejection."[23] The after-effects of this endeavor are on the Table of Contents of every Holy Bible. The importance of the work of Irenaeus, Tertullian, Eusebius, and many others among them cannot be overstated. While giving credit to their dedication, the formation and preservation of the New Testament Canon are impossible without the sovereign hand of God. It is impossible to preserve a word not spoken, and thankfully God entrusted His voice, His thoughts, and His desires to such tenacious scholars. Their work is a testimony of God's faithfulness, whose Canon states, "The grass withers, the flower fades, but the Word of our God stands forever" (Isaiah 40:8).

Notes

  [1] C E, Hill, “The New Testament Canon: Deconstructio Ad Absurdum?” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society (Mar 2009): 101, accessed November 4, 2014. http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.liberty.edu:2048/docview/211237338?pq-origsite=summon

 

            [2] R.M. Grant, The Cambridge History of the Bible (Cambridge University Press, 1970), 284.

 

            [3] Grant, 284.

 

[4] Bill T. Arnold and Bryan E. Beyer, Encountering the Old Testament: A Christian Survey (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2015), 22.

 

            [5] Grant, 286.

 

            [6] Thomas M. Lindsay, The Church and the Ministry in the Early Centuries (London: London Hodder and Stroughton, 1903) 220.

 

[7]John Frame, A History of Western Philosophy and Theology (Phillipsburgh, NJ: P&R Publishing, 2015).

 

            [8] W. Sanday, “Marcion’s Gospel” Fortnightly Review Vol. 17, Issue 102 (Jun 1875): 861, accessed November 5, 2014, http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.liberty.edu:2048/docview/2464195?pq-origsite=summon

 

            [9] Sanday, 856.

 

            [10] Robert McLachlin, “Gnostic Origins” Vigiliae christianae Vol. 9, Issue 3 (1955): 194.

 

            [11] Joseph A. Grassi., “The Gnostic View of Jesus and the Teacher Today” Religious Education Vol. 77, Issue 3 (May-June 1982): 336.

 

            [12] Grassi, 337.

 

            [13] Grassi, 338.

 

            [14] Grant, 284.

 

            [15] Grant, 285.

 

            [16] Grant, 290.

 

[17] Grant, 291.

[18] Grant, 291-292.

  [19] Grant, 294.

 

[20) Grant, 295.

[21] Grant, 304.

 

[22] Grant, 305.

[23] Grant, 308.