The Canon: Internal and External Evidence - Sola Scriptura, Pt 5
In Part 4 of Sola Scriptura on “the Canon: Defining, Dating and Quoting”, I defined some terms and showed why the NT Scriptures were written. I then attempted to show the dating of the NT Gospels, and finally I provided some information of how often the NT was quoted by the early church fathers. All of this was to show the importance of Scripture to the early church, and that they thought of the NT books written by Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul and Peter as “Holy and infallible Scripture” from the moment they were written. It wasn’t the gradual acceptance over 300 yr that we were always told was the case, and it wasn’t the “church” or some council that was responsible for selecting the NT books.
It is vital that Christians understand the importance of Scripture. Too many believers are far too cavalier about the Bible they own. They are too quick to believe anything they are told that undercuts the authenticity and authority of Scripture, which is one of the reasons for my previous post on Gnosticism and why I included the warnings in Part 4 about those that will seek, if possible, to deceive the elect. As demonstrated by the number of times the NT was quoted by the early church fathers, Scripture is necessary to keep us from being tossed around like rag dolls by “every wind of doctrine” that blows our way. It is not just cults that we have to be on our guard for, it is sometimes well meaning people who call themselves “christians”, but teach beliefs that are NOT found in Scripture.
So let's address some of the internal and external evidence that demonstrates that the NT writings were considered “Scripture” by the Apostles as well as the early church fathers.
Internal Evidence
Some might be surprised that there is actually internal evidence of the immediate acceptance of the NT. So here are some verses that demonstrate this.
First, we know that Jesus Himself authenticated the Apostles in Luke 10:16; and Mat 10:40,
Jesus pre-authenticated the divine authority of the apostles. He told his disciples, “The one who listens to you listens to Me, and the one who rejects you rejects Me; and he who rejects Me rejects the One who sent Me” (Lk. 10:16; cf. Mt. 10:40). Toward the end of his life, he said, “But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you” (Jn. 14:26; c.f. Jn 15:26-27; 16:13). The New Testament Canon
And His 11 disciples were, of course, the Apostles after Jesus’ ascension. But this ‘bringing to remembrance by the Holy Spirit’ allowed the Apostles to both teach and inscripturate the words and teachings of Jesus.
We also see in 1 Cor 14:37 that Paul considered his own writings as Scripture,
If anyone thinks he is a prophet or spiritual, let him recognize that the things which I write to you are the Lord’s commandment.
That might not be compelling, but remember that people already had at least two Gospels, likely Mark and Luke (and maybe even Matthew), and as we saw above, the content of these books that Mark and Luke wrote down were likely straight from the mouths of Peter and Paul, and were already considered “Scripture”.
There is also this about Paul and John,
The apostles considered themselves to be writing Scripture, and considered one another’s letters Scripture too. Paul writes, “What I am writing to you is the Lord’s command” (1 Cor 14:37). He told the Thessalonians, “When you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men, but as it actually is, the word of God” (1 Th 2:13). The apostle John frequently argued that his apostolic teaching was from God, while his Gnostic opponents were not (1 Jn. 4:4-6). The New Testament Canon
The NT also records that Peter referred to Paul’s writings as Scripture in 2 Pet 3:15-16.
and regard the patience of our Lord as salvation; just as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you, as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction.
The point here is the internal evidence shows that Scripture self-authenticates itself. Jesus said that the Apostles would receive the Holy Spirit and He would make them remember the teachings of Christ so that they would be able to accurately communicate the very words of God Himself. So, for the Apostles, there would never be any fear that they would get the message of salvation wrong.
And lastly, another quote from The New Testament Canon,
Another verse is germane to this discussion: 2 Timothy 4:13. Paul asks Timothy to bring “the books (biblia), especially the parchments (membranas).” Scholars widely believe that the biblia are scrolls (i.e. the Old Testament). But what are the parchments? This is a loan word from Latin (membrana). Kruger writes, “Not only does Quintilian use the term to refer to parchment notebooks, but the Roman poet Martial (writing AD 84-86) refers to a small codex called membrana that can be easily carried on journeys and held in one hand.”(10) Other works from Homer, Virgil, and Cicero were put into this format, according to Martial.(11) Cicero kept copies of his own letters, in case they were damaged or lost (Fam. 7.25.1; 9.26.1).(12) [see link above for author's footnotes]
This last quote is quite interesting, because it would mean the Apostles did in fact consider each others’ writings as Scripture and always wanted to have those writings, those Scriptures, with them wherever they traveled.
External Evidence
By external evidence I mean evidence of external sources who understood the current NT Scriptures to be authoritative. All of these sources are from the early church fathers within the first 300 yr because these sources are the closest to the death and resurrection of Jesus. These church fathers were the leaders that took over after the death of the Apostles and did not feel the freedom to add or remove anything from the writings of the Apostles.
The Didache is an important historical document because it is likely the first or one of the very first extra-biblical Christian manuscripts. It contains a lot of practical encouragement for Christians based on Scripture (Didache with Scripture References) and also contains the Lord’s Prayer as quoted from Matthew 6. With Matthew being dated in the 60’s AD, it is quite possible that it was written in the 70’s AD, although the article I quote dates it to around 95 AD. It is laced throughout with partial quotes from many OT books as well as from Matthew, Luke, Acts, Romans, 1 Corinthians, and James, and possibly 1 and 2 Timothy, 2 Thessalonians, Ephesians and Colossians.
Didache (AD 95): The Didache is most likely the earliest extra-biblical manuscript. In 8.2, it quotes the Lord’s Prayer in Matthew 6.
Clement of Rome had actually talked with some of the Apostles, and wrote about it. He recognized Paul’s writings as Scripture in 95 AD.
Clement of Rome (AD 95): Irenaeus said that Clement had seen the “blessed apostles” (Irenaeus Against Heresies, Books 3, Chapter 3). Clement stated, “Take up the Epistle of the blessed Paul the apostle, what did he write to you at the time the Gospel began to be preached? Truly under the inspiration of the Spirit he wrote to you” (Letter to the Corinthians, Chapter 47). Harris comments, “This from a leading figure in the church of Antioch which was the oldest center of the faith aside from Jerusalem and which was the third largest city in the Roman Empire. Ignatius was a prominent churchman as is clear from the six letters he wrote to other churches, but he claims the apostles were far superior to him.”(17)
Polycarp also recognized Paul’s writings as Scripture.
Polycarp (AD 110): Polycarp writes, “Let us therefore so serve him with fear and all reverence as he himself gave commandment and the apostles who preached the gospel to us and the prophets who proclaimed beforehand the coming of our Lord” (To the Philippians, chapter 6). Polycarp cites Ephesians 4:26 and Psalm 4:4 as Scripture (To the Philippians, 12.1).(18)
The Epistle of Barnabas (AD 130): This epistle cites Matthew 22:14, where Jesus says, “Many are called, but few are chosen” (4.14). The passage is “nearly identical Greek.”(19)
Papias gives us a couple of gems. First, he recognizes Mark’s Gospel as coming from Peter, and thus supporting it as Scripture. Second, by distinguishing the difference between 1st century Apostles and 2nd century elders, we can clearly see that there was no “apostolic succession.” This is important for a number of reasons: 1) it disproves some of the Protestant groups that claim to have modern day Apostles, and 2) it disproves the Catholic Apostolic succession handed down from Peter to the modern day Popes. This in and of itself destroys the concept of papal infallibility. Not a single early church father ever claimed to be on the same level or even close to the same level as the Apostles. Without exception they all claimed to be inferior to them.
Papias (AD 140): Papias distinguished between first generation apostles and second generation elders (Eusebius Historia Ecclesiastica, 3.39.3). He also viewed Mark’s authority as coming from the apostle Peter (Eusebius Historia Ecclesiastica, 3.39.15).
Justin Martyr quotes from all 4 Gospels.
Justin Martyr (AD 150): “The apostles, in the memoirs composed by them which are called Gospels, have thus delivered to us what was enjoined upon them” (Justin Martyr First Apology, chapter 66). Martyr cites from all four gospels, and refers to Mark as “Peter’s memoirs” (Dialogue with Trypho, 106), demonstrating that he knew Peter supervised Mark.
Dionysius was clear that anything he wrote was inferior to Scripture.
Dionysius of Corinth (AD 170): Distinguishes his letter from the “Scriptures of the Lord,” and he calls his letters “inferior” (Eusebius, Hist. eccl. 4.23.12).
The Muratorian fragments were the first compilation of a canonical NT containing 22 of the 27 books of the NT.
Muratorian Fragment (AD 180): Contains 22 of 27 canonical books. Excludes Hebrews, James, 1 Peter, 2 Peter, and possibly 3 John—though this is disputed. Kruger writes, “The fragment rejects the pseudonymous epistle to the Laodiceans because it was ‘forged’ in Paul’s name—a clear affirmation, once again, of the preeminence the early church placed upon apostolicity.”(20) It also calls Luke “one whom Paul had taken along with him as a legal expert,” and it rejected the very popular Shepherd of Hermas, because it was written “very recently, in our own times” (Muratorian Canon, 74).
Irenaeus is my personal favorite of the early church fathers because of his apologetic writings against Gnosticism. And here we see that Irenaeus refers to these NT books as “revealed truth”. In true apologetic form, Irenaeus points out that it is Scripture - the revealed truth - that judges the truthfulness of all Christian teachings, and is what he used to refute both the Valentinians and the Gnostics. Scripture is the standard that all writings, all teachings and all doctrines have to line up with.
Irenaeus (AD 180): (21) Irenaeus acknowledges that Mark and Luke were not apostles, but he calls them “apostolic men.”(22) He refutes false teachers by writing, “When however, they are confuted from the Scriptures, they turn around and accuse these same Scriptures as if they were not correct nor of authority” (Against Heresies, 3.2.1). He writes, “Thus did the apostles, simply and without respect of persons, deliver to all what they had themselves learned from the Lord” (Against Heresies, 2.14.2). He writes, “The apostles, likewise being disciples of the truth, are above all falsehood” (Against Heresies, 3.5.1). He writes, “For the apostles… certainly did not address them in accordance with their opinion at the time, but according to revealed truth” (Against Heresies, 3.5.2). He argued against the Valentinians by writing, “It agrees in nothing with the Gospels of the apostles… For if what they have published is the Gospel of Truth, and yet is totally unlike those which have been handed down to us from the apostles, any who please may learn… that that which is handed down from the apostles can no longer be reckoned the Gospel of Truth” (Against Heresies, 3.2.9).
All of this shows that the NT writings, the gospels and letters, were in wide circulation very early in the history of the church, and were being quoted extensively,
The three earliest church fathers that we have are Clement of Rome (A.D. 96), Ignatius (A.D. 108), and Polycarp (A.D. 110). These three wrote between A.D. 96 and 110, and they quote 25 of the 27 New Testament books.(23) This demonstrates that these were in circulation before their time.(24) Geisler and Nix write, “The apostolic Fathers may be cited as referring to all of the New Testament books within about a century of the time they were written.”(25) The early Christians quoted the NT so much that they quoted all but eleven verses.(26)
See: The New Testament Canon for the historical quotes above; [emphasis added; see this link for author's footnotes]
The point of all of the internal and external evidence is to show you as conclusively as possible using the current historical information, that the NT books were considered ‘Scripture’ as soon as they were written. Yes, there were a few books of the NT that may not have gotten that immediate acceptance, but the historical record clearly shows that 22 of the current 27 books of the NT were considered ‘Scripture’ as soon as they were written. So, there was no ‘tradition’ in the acceptance of the NT Canon.
And tradition is extremely important to Catholic church teachings. Without tradition, all of those extra-biblical teachings like indulgences, penance, praying to saints and Mary have no legs to stand on, since they cannot be found in Scripture. And if these other teachings, these other traditions, are not mentioned or found in Scripture, they shouldn’t be taught or believed as equal to the authority of Scripture. And the Apostles would be the first to proclaim that these beliefs are examples of “every wind of doctrine” and “false doctrines”.
Ok, so what was the objective standard that made NT books “scripture”?
"Did the book receive apostolic approval?", was the chief test of canonicity in the early church. This criterion is a logical result of knowing what an "apostle" was. The apostles were gifted by God to be the founders and leaders of the church, so it is reasonable to accept that through them came the Word governing the church. Canonicity of Scripture
As we saw above, virtually all of the current books of the NT (22 of the 27) were immediately accepted as ‘Scripture’. The four Gospels were immediately received as Scripture, as were all of Paul’s writings and Peter’s and John’s first 1 epistles.
So, what were the 5 books that didn’t immediately get recognized as Scripture? There are actually 2 lists. List one has 6 books: Hebrews, 2 Peter, 2 & 3 John, James, and Revelations. Of these 6 books, one could easily make the case that Revelations at a minimum was always considered Scripture. Its questioning came later on in history and only because of how early heretical groups misused this book. But misusing Scripture has a long history for a lot of groups. Concerning Hebrews, I should also point out that there were several early church fathers (Clement of Rome, AD 95, and Polycarp AD 110) that accepted and quoted from this book and understood it as being written by Paul, although it is very likely that it was penned by Luke under Paul’s supervision, as were the Gospel of Luke and Acts. Another list I have seen more often is: 2 Peter, 2 & 3 John, James and Jude. It really isn’t that helpful to delve into the specific reasons for these books being questioned. Ultimately, these 5 books (2 Peter, 2 & 3 John, James and Jude) were accepted as Scripture because they were historically tied back to an Apostle. But let’s say you want to exclude them, just to be safe. Are there any vital Chrisitan teachings that would be lost? Misunderstood? Corrupted? The definitive answer to that question is, “No!”
The purpose of my blogs on Sola Scriptura and the Canon of Scripture so far has been to drive home a few points:
- The importance and supremacy of Scripture in the eyes of Jesus, the Apostles and the early church fathers.
- That tradition does not have a co-equal level of authority with Scripture, and that Scripture holds that objective authority all by itself.
- That tradition cannot be claimed to have created the Canon of Scripture, nor can a 4th century church council or a 4th century Catholic [universal] church.
Although none of these have been conclusively proven, I have laid the groundwork for that proof in later blog entries. I also want to state that my intent here is not to trash the Catholic church, but to point out the errors it continues to propagate at the core of its beliefs. Most cults and unbiblical Christian teachings make their main errors right up front, where most people miss them. Everything else they say tends to sound logical and thus believable. When you know the truth of Scripture, it really isn’t that hard to see the errors, even if you can’t define where they stem from. It is when you take that step back and look at their initial statements and beliefs, that is when it becomes clear. My intent with these blogs was to take you back to the beginning and to step through those beginnings so that I could lay this groundwork, so I’m not accused of the same thing - making a mistake right up front.
As much as I like Augustine’s writings (i.e., City of God, et al), he and Origen created the framework of allegorical interpretation of Scripture, that only the ‘church’ would be able to interpret for the people, and thus taught that Christians could not be trusted to understand Scripture on their own. And with the fall of Rome, the western church proceeded to remove the Scriptures from the common man’s hands, for their own protection. Once illiteracy overtook society, it was easy to perpetuate this idea, expand it, and begin to introduce unbiblical ideas like papal infallibility, or praying to saints, or the perpetual virginity of Mary. At the very same time, this was not being taught in the eastern church (the concept that Christians were not able to understand Scripture). Granted, the eastern church drifted into their own set of errors but much later in time, thanks to John Chrysostom.
The internal and external evidence clearly shows that the Canon of Scripture came about without the aid of a church council or any formal church ecclesiastical authority. God inspired the Apostles to inscripturate Jesus’ words and teachings, and the early churches understood these writings to be holy and inspired Scripture, and immediately accepted them as such by copying and distributing them to all of their surrounding churches. Not only that, but it is quite possible that some of the Apostles themselves carried these NT writings around with them as they traveled preaching and teaching the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
Comments
Post a Comment
Insults will be deleted, so don't waste your time. Constructive criticism is always appreciated, even if you disagree.