Adventist Online

Since when do we have the Bible cannon? Was it established through church decrees some centuries after the death of the apostles, or can we trace it back at an earlier time? The implications of these answers are quite important. If the cannon was established by the authority of the official RC church, than she must be entitled to change the content of the Bible as well. If the cannon was established by Christ's apostles under the direct guidance of the Holy Spirit, that God alone has this authority to change the sacred text. But we know that God doesn't change. Moreover, He promised that He will preserve His sacred text, so that not one of His words will pass away. 

The 2nd episode of the documentary at the link bellow deals especially with this topic: the formation of the Bible cannon. It is entitled Reformation's Fountain of Life and it's in Romanian with English subtitles.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3VeIwoYTC4

Views: 309

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

PSALMS 81 IMPLIES GOD WANTS!!! TIMBRLES.  THERE ARE SOME "HAPPY CLAPPER" CHURCHES OUT THERE USING THEM DURING WORSHIP.

PSALMS 81 IMPLIES GOD WANTS!!! TIMBRLES.  THERE ARE SOME "HAPPY CLAPPER" CHURCHES OUT THERE USING THEM DURING WORSHIP

Do you want the old testament worship style?

DOES NOT BOTHER ME EITHER WAY. 

SEEMS TO HAVE DELIGHTED GOD THOUGH.

The temple had a full orchestral type plethora of instruments including cymbals and drums, which of course have been traditional middle eastern instruments time immemorial. Drums, like guns, can be used for both good and evil. I am a drummer, I have played in Christian bands for two different religious organizations. The Devil was not involved there as far as the music was concerned, and the music had Biblical lyrics and edified the people.

COOL.  

During the second century, most churches came to possess and acknowledge a collection of inspired books that included the four Gospels, the book of Acts, 13 of Paul’s letters, 1 Peter, and 1 John. The other seven books (Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, Jude, and Revelation) took longer to win general acceptance. The early church fathers—for example, Clement of Rome (flourished ca. 100), Polycarp (ca. 70–155), and Ignatius (died ca. 115)—quoted from most of the New Testament books (only Mark, 2 and 3 John, and 2 Peter are not attested) in a manner indicating that they accepted these books as authorita­tive. In this process, however, the authority that the books of the New Testament had was not subsequently attributed to them but inherently present in them from the beginning.

Reasons for the New Testament canon. Over a period of about four centuries when the New Testament canon took shape (specifically defin­ing the list of books), a number of factors played a significant role. While the primary reason for the inclusion of the New Testament books in the canon was the self-authenticating nature of the books (i.e., their inspira­tion), other issues contributed to it.

One key motivating factor for establishing the New Testament canon was that during the second century several heretical movements developed in Christianity. Marcion, a prominent heretic, broke with the church around A.D. 140, and drew up his own list of Christian books that would provide a canon for faith and worship. Marcion accepted only a modified version of Luke’s Gospel and ten of the Pauline epistles as inspired. At the same time, a grow­ing number of Christian writings appeared that claimed to relate unknown details about Christ and the apostles. Many of these books were written by individuals who belonged to a heretical movement called Gnosticism. The Gnostics stressed salvation through secret knowledge (Greek gnosis). A number of “infancy” gospels supplied details from the hid­den years of Christ’s life. Numerous apocryphal books of Acts related the deeds of Peter, Paul, John, and most of the other apostles, and several apocalypses described accounts of personally conducted tours of heaven and hell by the apostles. Today, these writings are known collectively as the New Testament apocrypha.

This period also saw the publica­tion of lists of books known to have been written by the apostles or their associates. Among these lists were the Muratorian Canon, dated towards the end of the second century, the list of Eusebius of Caesarea from the early part of the fourth century, and the list of Athanasius of Alexandria from the middle of the fourth century. The first two lists were still incom­plete, containing only about 20 of the 27 New Testament books. The complete New Testament canon is set out in detail in Athanasius’s Easter letter of 367, which contains the 27 New Testament books to the exclu­sion of all others. During the fourth century, several church synods, such as the Councils of Rome (382), Hippo (393), and Carthage (397), accepted all 27 books of the New Testament as canonical.

While heretical movements and church councils played a certain role in the formation of the canon, the desire to preserve faithfully the events of what God had done through Christ, already evident in the New Testament, means that the driving force behind the history of the New Testament canon was the faith of the church. In fact, “much of what became the core of the New Testament canon . . . had already been unofficially and generally recognized as Scripture as the church began to consider making and approving a list that would set the limits of Christian Scripture.”5 In reference to the New Testament canon, Bruce M. Metzger correctly says of the Synod of Laodicea: “The decree adopted at this gathering merely recognizes the fact that there are already in existence certain books, generally recognized as suitable to be read in the public worship of the churches, which are known as the ‘canonical’ books.”6

Conclusion

Who decided which books should be included in the Bible? Our brief discussion has shown that for both Testaments the books that came to be part of the biblical canon had their own self-authenticating authority. The Old Testament books carried their own authoritative cre­dentials by virtue of the writers who unequivocally declared that what they said and wrote was from God. The New Testament books had immediate authority as faithfully witnessing to the events and mean­ing of God’s action through Christ.

The Old Testament canon was, for the most part, settled within Judaism by the second century B.C., though discussions concerning it continued for several centuries. From history we know that the final shape of the New Testament canon existed by the fourth century A.D. Although heretical movements and church councils played a role in the actual formation of the New Testament canon, the church did not decide which books should be included in the canon. The church recognized and acknowledged the inspiration and self-authenticating authority of the 27 New Testament books and limited the canon to these books.link

There is only one quote from Metzger in the entire article:

 The decree adopted at this gathering merely recognizes the fact that there are already in existence certain books, generally recognized as suitable to be read in the public worship of the churches, which are known as the ‘canonical’ books.”

Can you explain what is wrong with that statement and why you dismiss the entire article just because Metzger is quoted?

I am not sure you read  what the brother said: He said that the entire article just has  a single quote form Metzger, and i believe that even you see nothing wrong with the quote right? 

Yes he was just one example, but can you tell us what's so wrong with what he said in this quote that you are prepared to dismiss the entire article? hat is so evil about this quote?

  The decree adopted at this gathering merely recognizes the fact that there are already in existence certain books, generally recognized as suitable to be read in the public worship of the churches, which are known as the ‘canonical’ books.”

Ok, that's a pretty bad attitude.

You won't explain what's wrong with the quote yet you appear to dismiss the entire article because of it. You refuse explain to why due to a "spirit displayed on this board" but what does that mean?

If it is a waste of time to clarify, why bother to post in the first place? This is a place for discussion, not unquestioning acceptance of whatever is posted?

It looks like our friend has picked up his bat and ball and gone home. 

RSS

Site Sponsors

 

Adventist Single?
Meet other Single
Adventists here:
Join Free


USA members:

Support AO by
using this link:
Amazon.com

 

© 2018   Created by Clark P.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service