The question of the canon of the Bible, which concerns which books are inspired by God and thus the final rule of faith and practice, has recurred over the centuries, and is especially important for Protestant Christians, since for them it is the “norma normans” (the norm of norms). The identification and authority of the Christian canon was reviewed by the Third Prince Georges Conference on Reformed Theology at Greenbelt Baptist Church in Greenbelt, Maryland on September 27 and 28. Steven Wellum, Professor of Christian Theology at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky, Miles Van Pelt, Professor of Old Testament and Biblical Languages at Reformed Theological Seminary in Jackson, Mississippi, and Steven Fix, Senior Pastor at Reformed Presbyterian Church in Bowie, Maryland reviewed the various aspects of this question.
Wellum emphasized the historic Reformed Christian doctrine of the Bible’s self-authenticating nature as the ultimate justification for the identity and authority of Scripture. Van Pelt appealed to the covenantal structure of the Old Testament, or Hebrew Bible, as a testimony to its canonicity. He noted that Meredith Kline identified the covenantal structure of the Book of Deuteronomy as like that of other ancient treaties in the second millennium B.C. This form was used by ancient kings to spell out the relationship between lord and vassal, and includes the giving of a law, with promises of protection for obedience and threats of punishment for disobedience. The Old Testament then recounts Israelite history as one of faithfulness by God and disobedience by his people. The same structure is seen in the New Testament, as Van Pelt later spelled out in greater detail. But the formation of the Hebrew Bible (the Protestant Old Testament) was complete and received by the Jews of Jesus’ day, and by Jesus himself as the Word of God inspired by the Holy Spirit.
The Canon’s Covenantal Character
Quoting Michael Horton of Westminster Theological Seminary, Van Pelt said that “the particular architectural structure that we believe the Scripture fulfills … is the covenant.” Nevertheless, the Bible’s covenantal structure “is largely hidden from view.” To some degree it is hidden from Protestant view because the order of books in English Bibles does not follow the order of the Hebrew Bible. In the Hebrew Bible there are only three sections, the Torah, the Prophets, and the Writings. The historical books of the Old Testament are included among the Prophets, and the Writings include the poetic books of the English order, plus various other books from the English order historical books and prophets. Van Pelt proposed a covenantal structure for the Bible, with Genesis as prologue and Revelation as epilogue, the other books of the Torah corresponding to the Gospels, the prophetic books of the Old Testament corresponding to Acts, and the Writings corresponding to the New Testament epistles. The finality of the Book of Revelation, foretelling the last judgment and the new heavens and the new earth, is indicative of the closure of the canon, he said.
Van Pelt reviewed the covenantal aspects of the canon by comparing the similarities of the Old and New Testaments. Among them, Jesus appears as the “new Moses” of the new covenant. But in the New Testament, “the death of the covenant leader is not the final word.” In the Old Testament, the Former Prophets (the books of Joshua through Kings) recount the history of Israel’s unfaithfulness (in fulfillment of the Deuteronomic prophecy) and God’s faithfulness to Israel. The Latter Prophets (Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the Twelve or “Minor Prophets”) are covenant lawyers, prosecuting God’s covenant lawsuit against Israel. Thus, in the Old Testament there is the covenant (the Torah), covenant history (the Former Prophets), and covenant lawsuit (the Latter Prophets).
The Covenantal Unity of the Testaments
Bringing the two testaments together, Wellum referred to Stephen Dempster and his concept of “Canon I” and “Canon II.” Canon I is the Law of Moses, or the Torah. It was immediately functioning in the covenant community. Canon II is the list of books eventually accepted by all Christians as the Word of God. It is the history of the covenant community after the Law of Moses was given, and the further development of ideas in the Torah in the prophets and wisdom literature. The New Testament fulfills the messianic prophecies of the old. The exact list of books of the New Testament canon received today was given by Saint Athanasius in his Easter letter of 367 A.D., and by the Council of Carthage in 397 A.D. Some have claimed, Wellum said, that therefore there was no earlier functioning Christian canon in the church. But in fact, the New Testament writings were treated as divinely inspired and final before this time.
The closure of the canon is important for interpretation of the Bible, Wellum said, because it ensures that the revealed truth cannot be altered by later revelation. The whole Bible can then be used to develop a theological system. The Old Testament looks forward to the Messiah, and the New Testament is the revelation of the Jesus Christ, the Messiah, who is the fulness of God’s revelation. Thus, the canon is closed.
Stephen Fix added to this that a closed canon also helps us defend from “attacks that come from within,” and not just from with the church, but from within our own hearts. Young people, even very young people, may have questions and doubts about the gospel; apologetics defending a closed canon will help in giving a definite and final answer. Essentially, “the Spirit has to enable us to recognize the Word.” According to both the Westminster and London Confessions “the Spirit bears witness by and through the Word in our hearts.” The Spirit and the Word act together in the church.
The Recognition of the Canon
Wellum distinguished between theological and historical issues. The theological status of the canon is established by its being the revelation of the God-man, Jesus Christ. The historical issue is how the canon was recognized.
He said that this happened “under God’s providence.” He held that “God led his people, Israel and the church, to recognize authoritative Scripture.” The inspiration of Scripture given to its writers “is an extraordinary act of divine providence.” The recognition of the canon under divine providence is both extraordinary, meaning supernatural, and ordinary. It is extraordinary in that the people of God come to recognize Scripture by “the self-attesting nature of Scripture and the internal testimony of the Spirit.” He referred to Jn. 10:27-28 in which Jesus says “my sheep hear my voice.” The “inward testimony of the Spirit” is essential for individual believers in recognizing the canon. The ordinary providence of God resulted in the historic and public recognition of the canon. It is reliance on the ordinary providence of God that gives us confidence that the existing Christian canon is correct.
How as a matter of historical fact did the church come to recognize the particular books of the Bible as canonical, Wellum asked. Jesus himself said that the Hebrew Bible – what is to Christians the Old Testament – is inspired by God. It is thus authoritative. Jesus spoke of the Scripture as extending from Genesis to Chronicles, which indicates that he recognized the order of books in the Hebrew Bible, ending with the Book of Chronicles. For the New Testament, we do not have the testimony of Jesus to its canonicity, but it is testimony to Jesus.
The writings of the apostles, who were “chosen by Christ,” and their associates are the inspired writings which tell us about Jesus. John chapters 14 through 16 are important for establishing a theological justification for the development of the New Testament canon. In John 14:26 Jesus declares that when “the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things.” He would remind the apostles of what Jesus had taught. In John 16:12-15 Jesus declares that “when he, the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, he will not speak on his own, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will disclose to you what is to come. He will glorify me, for he will take of mine and will disclose it to you.”
As an illustration of how this development worked in the early church, Wellum turned to I Thessalonians 2:13 in which Paul said “we also constantly thank God that when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men, but for what it really is, the word of God, which also performs its work in you who believe.” The apostles were enabled by the Spirit of God to “unpack the revelation of Christ” to the New Testament church, and to future generations. In the II Pet. 3:1-2, the apostles are put on the same level as the Old Testament prophets. Paul elsewhere emphasizes that “I did not receive this word from man, I received this word from God.” (Gal. 1:12), and also that “if any man is preaching to you a gospel contrary to what you have received, let him be accursed.” (Gal. 1:9). Col. 4:16 indicates that epistles were read in the churches. The witness of the apostles, or the associates of the apostles, were confirmed by miracles. The New Testament in fact does quote its own documents as Scripture in the epistles of I Timothy and II Peter. These things confirm that the apostolic writings were presented as revelations from God, and thus Scripture no less that the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament).
While there was no ecclesiastical action acknowledging the canon in the first three centuries, the canon existed and was recognized at the end of the first century, Wellum said. Despite disagreement concerning certain books (mainly II Peter, II and III John, Jude, and Revelation), “overall of the 27 books we have in the New Testament, 22 or 23 or so are never” in question, but were “immediately received as Holy Scripture.” In particular, “there is no dispute about the four gospels.”
There were many references to the four gospels and Paul’s epistles in the second century, Wellum observed. The Muratorian canon at the end of the second century contains 22 of the 27 books of the New Testament. The Muratorian fragment which records the Muratorian canon not only said what is Scripture, but what is not Scripture. It says that Gnostic and Marcionite writings are not Scripture. Some writings in the early church (such as the Shepherd of Hermas) were highly regarded, and might be read privately, but were not read in church, and were not regarded as inspired Scripture.
It was only felt necessary to list the canonical books of the New Testament after Marcion of Sinope questioned much of the New Testament writings in the second century. Also in the second century, the Montanists claimed new revelation. The church then had to deny that new revelation was possible. Wellum added that the same situation occurred concerning the deity of Christ. Only after Christ’s deity was denied did the church feel the need to define the doctrine of Christ’s deity.
Wellum said that the organization and very names of the books in the New Testament indicate canonicity. The gospels appear at the beginning (as the Torah did in the Old Testament), and the epistles are named by the city of the church to which they were written, with a numerical order if a church received more than one epistle. There are three epistles of John, and two of Peter. This naming indicates that it was thought that these documents were part of the canon of Scripture, Wellum maintained.
The Ancient Criteria of Canonicity
The criteria used for canonicity by the early church included first apostolic authority (i.e., writing either by an apostle or an associate of an apostle), and secondly “is the book true to the tradition of the church.” This in particular included Jesus’ messiahship, death, and resurrection (Lk. 24:44-47, I Cor 15:1-7). A third criterion was reception of the book by the universal church. The widespread recognition of the substantial majority of the canon by churches throughout the Roman Empire is remarkable, and indicative of the people of God hearing the voice of their shepherd, Wellum said.
Wellum emphasized that if a lost writing of an apostle were discovered today, it would not be included in the canon. The Holy Spirit has already led the Christian church into all the truth.
But he pointed to the studies by Ligonier Ministries of the religious opinions of the American people and Evangelical responses to the same questions to show there is a widespread misunderstanding of the gospel (Trinity, incarnation, original sin – and thus the need for salvation). This highlights that Scripture must be understood and put “into practice in the church.” It has long been the strategy of theological liberalism (aided by a public that wants a convenient gospel) to “make the gospel malleable.” The Bible is made to “fit with the culture.” Instead, the canon should “govern our life.”
Questions about the Canon
A questioner asked what canonical significance there is in the fact that when Christ and the apostles are reported in the New Testament as quoting the Old Testament, it is the Greek version of the Old Testament, the Septuagint, which is quoted. Van Pelt said that the Septuagint was repeatedly revised. The New Testament’s quotations of the Septuagint can be assumed to be like using a modern English translation of the Bible today. The Septuagint “was the Bible at the time.” Thus, he seemed to say that the Septuagint need not be the basis for modern translations of the Old Testament.
Another questioner asked whether the fact that non-canonical books are quoted in the New Testament (such as the First Book of Enoch) means that those books are canonical. Wellum said that when non-canonical sources are cited, such as Paul referring to a Greek poet (Acts 17:28), the New Testament never uses the words “Scripture says.” Books are quoted, but not referred to as Scripture. In the case of I Enoch, although the reference to a future judgment is correct, it is not an assertion that the entire book is inspired scripture. The other explanation is the Epistles of 2 Peter and Jude are simply stating something known to be true. It is known that “the Jewish community did not accept the Apocrypha.” Therefore, the use an apocryphal (or in this case, Pseudepigraphal) book does not indicate belief in the canonical status of the book.
It was asked how it is possible to know that the Scriptures are self-authenticating, if we use textual criticism to compare different texts to arrive at the most probable text of the original. Wellum said that what is held to be divinely inspired is the original text. We try through textual criticism to get as close as possible to that. There is high confidence that the meaning, if not the exact words of the original can be known, and it is this meaning which is self-authenticating. Fix said that it seems that the originals themselves may have been carefully re-worked and edited before they were published, for instance, to a particular church. The writing and authorship of Old Testament documents are generally harder to discern than New Testament documents.
Also asked was how Evangelicals “functionally tend to divide” the canon and how might we correct problems in this. Fix said that Christ is the center of the Scriptures. This should unify them. Wellum said that Christ’s atonement for sin is another point that can serve to unify Scripture. We must insist that judgment and punishment, even as they appear in the Old Testament, is a manifestation of God’s righteousness. Van Pelt said that “Marcionite tendencies” can be found among today’s Evangelicals, and the Old Testament may be de-emphasized. But it remains a revelation from God, and thus eternally true.
Conclusion
Fix said that the unity of the canon reinforces the faith of the Christian church. The epistles of the New Testament, however, are particularly useful in the life of the church, because they are “instructions for the church.” Looking at the whole of the canon, we can more correctly apply its instructions. The command to put Sabbath breakers to death is modified by Christ’s fulfillment of the law, and he clearly sanctioned what the Westminster Confession calls “acts of necessity and mercy” on the Sabbath. Yet Sabbath keeping is part of the Ten Commandments, the core of the moral law which is clearly binding in the New Testament (most notably in the vice lists of Christ and the apostles). Thus, the civil law and its judicial penalties and the ceremonial law of Moses are not binding, but we are still bound by the moral law. Therefore, the original command to put sabbath breakers to death is not binding, yet we should “put to death Sabbath breaking in our hearts” Fix said. This is “the mortification of the flesh.” He said that because Jesus asserted that the Old Testament speaks of Jesus, we may use it, with a full view to the New Testament, to learn the things Jesus wants from us.
In addition to applying the whole canon to our lives, Fix said, the Holy Spirit enables his people to hear the voice of Jesus. Indeed, hearing the voice of Jesus is necessary for an individual to be saved. We then are led particularly by prayer. Fix referred to Matt. 7:7-8 “ask and it shall be given, seek and you will find, knock and it will be opened. For everyone who asks receives, everyone who seeks finds, and to him who knocks, it will be opened.” Jesus’ sheep hear his voice (Jn. 10:27-28). He is with them by the Holy Spirit to the end of the age.
The post The Question of the Biblical Canon appeared first on Juicy Ecumenism.