A Study Of The New Testament Canon IV.
In our last article, we studied how the canon of the New Testament was formed between the years 100-150 A. D. -- the "Apostolic Fathers Age." This period of time was important to the formation of the canon because it illustrated through the production of so many "pseudo-inspired" works, that the canon of the New Testament had to have limits.
In this article, we are going to watch the development of the New Testament canon between 150-397 A.D. These 250 years cover the three remaining periods of our study--"The Greek Apologists Age" (150-180 A.D.), "The Later Ante-Nicene Fathers Age" (181-325 A.D.), and "Early Church Council Age" (ca. 397 A. D. )
The "Apologists", who are defined by Webster as men "who speak or write in defense of a faith, a cause, or an institution," were concerned with two very important problems:
(1) The settlement of the relation of Christianity to Judaism;
(2) The separation of Christianity from Paganism. Justin the Martyr, the most outstanding apologist, was born of Greek descent probably at the close of the first century in Samaria. After a long search for the truth in pagan philosophies, he finally became a Christian in 130 A.D. Justin widely travelled and finally settled in Rome. He wrote a number of works --three of which have come down to us in their complete form. Justin, in one of his several works, listed those books which he believed to have been inspired, thus mentioning one of the earliest canons of which we have a record. This list is important for two reasons:
(1) Justin was a scholar in this area.
(2) Justin travelled widely before settling in Rome; thus, his list of accepted books is a "universal view" of the canon of his time.
Scholars, after a thorough investigation of the works of Justin, conclude that he accepted the following books as canonical: Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Acts, Romans, I Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Colossians, II Thessalonians, Hebrews, I Peter, and the Apocalypse (or, Revelation). Now remember this is a representative canon of ca. 160 A. D.
Before a discussion of this "apologist age" is closed, there is one more important factor relating to the formation of the canon that should be discussed --the Muratorian Fragment. Although it was not, as far as we know, the product of an apologist, it was written during that time and, for that reason, should be discussed at this point. The Muratorian Fragment of the canon was written ca. 170 A. D. It derives its name from Muratori, an Italian, who discovered the document in the Ambrosian Library at Milan in 1740. Both the beginning and the end of it are torn off, and it is disfigured throughout. It is still, however, very important because enough remains to indicate the limits which its author assigned to the canon. The canon begins by making a reference to the Gospel of Mark. The omission of Matthew is due more than likely to the absence of the very beginning of the Fragment. Then the author mentions: the other Gospels, Acts, Romans, I & II Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, I & II Thessalonians, I & II Timothy, Titus, Philemon, I John (in another place aside from the specific list), Jude, and Revelation. You will notice that six books that are in our present New Testament are missing from the above list taken from the Fragment. The books are: Hebrews (because of unknown authorship), James (again because of uncertain authorship), I & II Peter, and II & III John. One book only was attached to the list of the canon in the Fragment that is not in our New Testaments: the Apocalypse of Peter. Even here, the Fragment stated that this book was not universally accepted. This, then, was the universally accepted canon of ca. 170 A.D. --21 of the 27 books of our New Testament were in it.
At the beginning of the third century, there is undeniable evidence that there existed a canon of the New Testament. There were, however, areas of wide agreement and wide disagreement on the extent and limits of the canon. The four Gospels, the thirteen letters of the Pauline collection, and the book of Acts were all beyond dispute. At the beginning of the third century, the Apocalypse was equally well-established; its canonicity, however, was to be challenged before the end of the third century. Hebrews, James, I & II Peter, II & III John, and Jude were still not strongly supported by the surviving evidence. The fixing of the precise limits of the canon in the Greek and Latin churches was to be the work of the great Biblical scholars of the third and fourth centuries -- the "Later (or, last of) Ante- (or, before) Nicene (refers to Conference of Nice, France -- 325 A. D.) Fathers (or, leaders)." For convenience, the discussion of these men will be divided into two sections: first, those considered Greek "Fathers", and second, those considered Latin "Fathers."
Clement of Alexandria, first of the great Great "Ante-Nicene Fathers," was exceedingly well read in his time (155-215 A. D. ). This makes his canonical list all the more valuable and revealing. Of the six disputed books, Clement, surprisingly enough, accepted all of them as being inspired. Origen of Alexandria, who lived from about 185-253 A. D. , was one of the greatest Biblical scholars of the Ante-Nicene period. Origen was the first to distinguish between what he termed, the "homologoumena", the universally accepted books, and the "antilegomena," the ones more or less disputed. In what he called the "homologoumena", he listed the four Gospels, the thirteen epistles of Paul, I Peter, I John, Acts, and the Apocalypse; in his "antilegomena", he grouped Hebrews, II Peter, II & III John, James, Jude, the Epistle of Barnabas, the Shepherd of Hermas, the Didache, and the Gospel of the Hebrews. He personally, like Clement of Alexandria, believed all 27 books that now compose our New Testament were inspired but, he also accepted two too many books as inspired; the Shepherd of Hermas and the Didache. Eusebuis of Caesarea, the last of the Greek "Ante-Nicene Fathers," lived ca. 265-340 A.D. To him we owe a large part of our knowledge of the first three centuries of Christianity. Like Origen, he distinguished between the "homolonoumena" and the "antilegoumena," but divided the "antilegoumena" into those books merely disputed (i. e. , Epistle of Barnabas, Shepherd of Hermas, the Didache, and the Gospel of Hebrews). You see, then, that man is getting closer and closer to the true New Testament canon.
Now we must back up a bit and study the other side of the world -- the Latin "Ante-Nicene Fathers". Irenaeus, the first of these great "fathers" lived ca. 140-203 A. D. In his writings, he was silent on Philemon, Hebrews, James, II Peter, and III John. although this does not necessarily mean that he rejected them as inspired books. Tertullian of Carthage, who lived in ca. 150-222 A. D. , was a lawyer of great influence, and a voluminous writer in Latin, although he wrote some in Greek. Tertullian rejected Hebrews as being canonical and inspired (he believed Barnabas wrote the book). He does not mention or quote from James, II Peter, and II & III John, although this, once again, does not necessarily indicate that he rejected them, as he did Hebrews.
Athanasius of Alexandria, although not an "ante-Nicene Father," was, nevertheless, of Latin descent. Athanasius in 367 A.D. was the first man to apply the term "canonical" to the exact 27 books that we now have in our New Testament. Due to the influence of Athanasius, in the East the New Testament took on a certain fixity of form from this time on. However, to find the first universally accepted correct canon, we must look still further in history.
As anyone can see, there was a need for a universal acceptance of the same canon. This was where the "church councils" served a practical purpose. After the examination of general usage, the councils (and more specifically, the Third Council of Carthage in 397 A. D.) reflected a general crystallization of thinking on the true New Testament canon. Now, stop! Did I say that a church council (termed by some as the Roman Catholic Church at this point) gave us the Bible? No! I said what was true -- i.e., the church councils reflected the general public's thinking and acceptance of the true canon of the New Testament. Thus, we have the complete universally accepted canon in 397 A.D.
If you have earnestly engaged yourself in this study, you can see, I'm sure, that gradually each book of our New Testament, on its own merit and with God's Providence, of course, took its place in the true and universally accepted canon of New Testament Scripture.
-501 Sexton Court Campbellsville, Kentucky 42718