We’re spending some time these days talking about how the canon of the Bible was identified. I want to talk a little about what went on during the first century. During the first century, more than being concerned about what writings were scriptural, the church was focused on what teachings were inspired. Through the apostles and prophets, God was communicating messages to His church. They didn’t have the New Testament in written form; there were certainly congregations that didn’t even have the Old Testament writings. They were receiving teachings orally.
For the most part, it came to be recognized that the apostles taught with authority. From what we see in the book of Acts, that was somewhat relative. The Jews in chapter 11 had no problem in challenging Peter. The meeting in Acts 15 showed respect to the apostles, but didn’t concede them the right to decree on the question at hand. Yet, we can tell that their teachings carried weight.
I’m convinced that God used miracles to confirm the teachings of the apostles. I’ve discussed that theory before and won’t go into it again. Let’s just say that one of the ways the church could tell that someone had been in the presence of the apostles was by the miracles that they did.
God used the church itself as a control on teachers and prophets. There are numerous commands to weigh teachings and examine prophecies. 1 Corinthians 14 describes the process in a bit more detail. False teachers and false prophets were common in the ancient world (unlike today… ha!), and the church was not exempt from their influence.
The writers of the New Testament didn’t write with an awareness that they were writing Scripture. They certainly wouldn’t have laid their teachings alongside the Torah, for example. Yet Paul could quote Luke and call it Scripture, and Peter could refer to Paul’s writings along with “the other scriptures.”
Their was a concern about counterfeit messages, writings sent in the name of the apostles that weren’t really from them. The concept of authorship was a bit different in the ancient world. People saw nothing wrong in someone writing the teachings of another person and ascribing that person’s name to it. If I admire Will Rogers, for example, I could write a book of what I see to be his views and put his name on it. That was accepted in the ancient world. Unfortunately, people sent out messages in the name of Paul, for example, that never came from him. He seemed to take some steps to prevent that, adding unique touches to his letters that were to give them a mark of authenticity. (2 Thessalonians 3:17)
The question of which writings of the apostles and church leaders were to be considered as scripture was principally a question for a later age. In the first century, the focus was on the authenticity of the teaching.
Again, this isn’t an area that I consider myself to have much expertise. I welcome any and all educated insights.
I think this point is key. The popular notion of inspiration seems to be that the writer was the pen in God’s hand, but the nature of the content New Testament Scriptures (the letters in particular) seems to be more incidental. The focus was on getting the teaching right, because it provided the correct perspective (and way of life found in Jesus), not on the words individually being dictated by God. Thus I can truthfully say that I believe wholeheartedly that the canon as we’ve received it is truly God’s special revelation in written form without affirming a literal dictation theory that has more in common with Islam than Christianity.
Adam: Do you believe that it is also the specific revelation, as well as special revelation?
In the early fourth century Christianity was made the official religion of the Roman Empire and it became possible for the bishops to meet without being imprisoned or killed by the pagan authorities.
Beginning in the late fourth century and continuing until the very early fifth century the Catholic Church met at a number of councils where the canon of the Bible was debated. These councils produced canons which were identical to the current 73 book Roman Catholic canon.
As can clearly be seen the canon of the Bible was produced by the Catholic Church. The Church also existed long before the Bible – it was the early fifth century before the Bible existed as we might recognize it today, and none of the books of the Bible were even written until around 50 AD. But the Catholic Church began 20 years earlier, at Pentecost when the Holy Spirit descended on the apostles.
The Christians who wrote the New Testament were Catholic – they were Catholic for two reasons. One, they believed everything which the current Catholic Church (and only the Catholic Church) teaches (as is shown by the writings of the Church Fathers).
And they were Catholic because there was no other church at the time. Myths such as the “Trail of Blood” simply do not hold water – the Catholic Church was, quite literally, the only game in town.
Sorry Michael. That’s just inaccurate historical data. The canon was in common use well before the Catholic councils.
As for the early Christians being Catholic… well, that’s a debate for another day. Let’s just say that history says otherwise.
Grace and peace,
Tim Archer