Grudem's "Sytematic Theology" | Chapter 3: The Canon of Scripture

What belongs in the Bible and what does not belong?

  • Since the words of God in the Bible are important (Deut. 32:47), it is important to know which writings belong in the Bible.
  • The canon of Scripture is the list of all the books that belong in the Bible.
  • We should not add or subtract from God’s words for it would prevent God’s people from obeying him fully. (Deut. 4:2)
  • The canon is important in that if we are to trust and obey God absolutely, we must be able to trust in the certainty of God’s own words.

A. The Old Testament Canon

  • Scripture itself bears witness to the historical development of the canon.
  • Throughout Israel’s history, this collection of absolutely authoritative words from God grew in size.
  • Moses wrote words to be deposited in the ark of the covenant (Deut. 31:24-26; Ex. 17:14; 24:4; 34:27; Num. 33:2; Deut. 31:22).
  • Joshua added to the collection of written words of God. (Josh. 24:26)
  • Those who fulfilled the office of prophet wrote additional words from God. (1 Sam. 10:25; 1 Chron. 29:29; 2 Chron. 20:34; 1 Kings 16:7; 2 Chron. 26:22; 2 Chron. 32:32; Jer. 30:2)
  • The Old Testament canon continued to grow until the end of the writing process approximately 435 B.C.
  • The belief that divinely authoritative words from God had ceased is clearly attested in Jewish literature outside the Old Testament. (1 Macc. 4:45-46; 1 Macc. 9:27; cf. 14:41)
  • Josephus, the greatest Jewish historian of the first century, considered the writings of the Apocrypha not worthy to be credited as the words of God.
  • Rabbinic literature states that the Holy Spirit’s function of inspiring prophecy departed from Israel.
  • The view that the writings subsequent to the 435 B.C. did not have equal authority with the rest of Scripture was accepted by Jewish people such as the Qumran community.
  • Jesus, his disciples, the Jewish leaders and people were in full agreement on the extent of the canon.
  • The Apocrypha was never accepted by the Jews as Scripture, but in the early history of the church there was divided opinion on whether it should be part of Scripture.
  • Even though Jerome never considered the Apocrypha part of the canon, the inclusion of these books in his Latin Vulgate gave some support for inclusion into the canon.
  • However, lack of the original Hebrew behind them, exclusion from the Jewish canon, and lack of citation in the NT led many to reject their authority.
  • The earliest list (written about A.D. 170) of OT books that exist today by Melito includes all our present OT books except Esther and none of the Apocrypha.
  • There are doctrinal and historical inconsistencies with a number of these books.
  • Roman
  • Catholics hold that the church has the authority to call a literary work “Scripture,” while Protestants hold that the church cannot make something to be Scripture, but can only recognize what God has already caused to be written as his own words.
  • The Apocrypha should not be regarded as Scripture since:
    • They do not claim for themselves the same authority as other OT writings
    • They were not regarded as God’s works by the Jews from whom they originated
    • Jesus and the NT writers did not consider them Scripture
    • Their teachings are not consistent with the rest of the Bible
  • While the Apocrypha does have historical and linguistic value, they are merely human words and have no binding authority.
  • Nothing has been left out of the OT canon and everything in the OT canon is God’s words.

B. The New Testament Canon

  • Since the writings of Scripture primarily occurs in connection with God’s great acts in redemptive history, it is no surprise that no further Scripture would be written between the closing expectation of the Messiah (Mal. 3:1-4; 4:1-6) and the next and greatest event in the history of redemption occurred—the coming of the Messiah.
  • The New Testament consists of writings of the apostles who were given the ability from the Holy Spirit to accurately recall and interpret the words and deeds of Jesus.
  • Jesus promised the disciples amazing gifts that would empower them to write Scripture (John 14:26; 16:13-14).
  • Apostles in the early church are seen to claim an authority equal to that of the OT prophets which is to speak and write the very words of God. (2 Peter 3:2; Acts 5:2-4)
  • The claim to be able to speak the words of God himself is especially frequent in the writings of Paul. (1 Cor. 2:9, 13; 14:37; 2 Cor. 13:3; Rom. 2:16; Gal. 1:8-9; 1 Thess. 2:13; 4:8, 15; 5:27; 2 Thess. 3:6, 14)
  • The apostles (like the OT writers) then had the authority to write God’s own words for the record, interpretation, and application of the truths concerning the life, death, and resurrection of Christ.
  • The apostles placed NT writings with the OT scriptures as part of the canon. (2 Peter 3:15-16; 1 Timothy 5:17-18; cf. Deut. 25:4; Luke 10:7)
  • Because the apostles had the authority to write Scripture, their authentic written teachings of the apostles were accepted to be part of the canon and makes up most of the New Testament (Matthew; John; Romans to Philemon; James; 1 and 2 Peter; 1, 2, and 3 John; and Revelation).
  • The details of how the remaining five books that were not written by apostles (Mark, Luke, Acts, Hebrews, and Jude) came to be counted as Scripture is scarce.
  • Mark, Luke, and Acts were commonly acknowledged probably because of their close associations to some of the Apostles while Hebrews intrinsic qualities must have convinced early readers of its divine authorship.
  • For a book to belong in the canon it needed to have divine authorship which explains why the early church accepted and preserved the written teachings of the apostles.
  • The existence of some NT writings not authored by apostles show that there were others to whom God gave the ability to write God’s own words.
  • It is possible the early church used a combination of factors to decide if a writing was worthy of inclusion in the canon such as:
    •  apostolic endorsement
    • consistency with the rest of Scripture
    • the major perception of the writing as “God-breathed” (self-attesting)
  • The Thirty-ninth Paschal Letter of Athanasius and the decision of the Council of Carthage represents the earliest final lists of our present-day canon.
  • The opening of Hebrews (Heb. 1:1-2) puts into historical perspective if any more writings should be added to the canon.
  • There is a finality to the revelation of God in Christ and once this revelation has been completed, no more is to be expected.
  • The NT writings of the apostles and their authorized companions contain the final, authoritative, and sufficient interpretation of Christ’s work of redemption and since their writings is completed, the canon is now closed.
  • Though the warning in Revelation 22:18-19 refers to the book of Revelation itself, it is no accident that this statement comes at the end of the last chapter of the last book of the NT.
  • Since the events in Revelation are subsequent to the events in the rest of the NT (which is why Revelation has to be placed last in the canon), it is not inappropriate to have this strong warning placed appropriately at the end of the canon to apply to the whole canon.
  • How do we know or be confident that we have the right books in the canon of Scripture we now possess?
    1. Our confidence should be based on the faithfulness of God. This is demonstrated by:
      • God loving his people enough to ensure that they have what they need
      • The severity of punishments in Revelation 22:18-19
      • The assembling and preservation of the canon being apart of the history of redemption itself.
    2. We are persuades that the books we have in the canon are the right ones by:
      • The conviction of the Holy Spirit. Christians testify to the power, persuasiveness, and authority that the Bible speaks to them with in a way that no other writing does. (Heb. 4:12)
      • Historical data. Today, there exists no strong candidates for addition to the canon and no strong objections to any book presently in the canon. All other existing writings that had any possibility in the early church of being included in the canon contain either explicit disclaimers of canonical status or doctrinal aberrations that make them unworthy of inclusion into the canon.
  • The ultimate criterion of canonicity is divine authorship, not human or ecclesiastical approval.
  • What should happen if another one of Paul’s epistles were discovered? There are two conflicting considerations involved:
    1. Though such a writing found to be authentic should be considered God’s words, the fact that it was not preserved as part of the canon would indicate that it was not among the writings the apostles wanted the church to preserve.
    2. In addition to the difficulty in imagining the availability of historical data needed to demonstrate that a lost 1,900 year old letter was genuinely authored by Paul, it is more difficult to understand how our sovereign God could have faithfully cared for his people for that long with them being deprived of something he intended them to have.
  • The canon of Scripture today is exactly what God wanted it to be, and it will stay that way until Christ returns.
Notes from Wayne Grudem's "Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine"

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Grudem's "Systematic Theology" | Chapter 1: Introduction to Systematic Theology

Image
Definition of systematic theology Systematic theology is the study on what the whole Bible teaches about any given topic. This is discovered by collecting, understanding, and summarizing relevant teachings passages in the Bible regarding each topic. Relationship to Other Disciplines Systematic theology is different from historical theology, philosophical theology, and apologetics in that systematic theology interacts directly with the biblical text to understand what the Bible itself says about various theological subjects Systematic theology makes Scripture the final authority on what we are to believe…not history, philosophy, or logic Systematic theology is different from Old Testament theology, New Testament theology, and biblical theology in that these three disciplines organize their topics historically and in the order the topics are presented in the Bible Biblical theology focuses on the historical development of the biblical authors, original hearers and reade...
Read more

Advantages seminarians have over non-seminarians

Seminary. That word stirs up different things in different people. To some it could be a far off thing due to tuition costs and even admission requirements. To others, it could be the security of knowing that the one feeding your flock is sound in what he teaches since he is backed by a college board of directors. And even to others, like me, it could be memories of spiritual enrichment and community along with frustration and pressure over exams, lectures, assignments, etc. Whatever thoughts seminary conjures, it is universally accepted for the most part that higher education is important in the religious arena—as in all other arenas. This belief isn’t foreign to the church. After all, bible study and Sunday school emphasizes a church’s importance on education. Now there are those who say, “I don’t need no seminary” or “The Holy Spirit and the Bible is my teacher”. While it is possible to be well versed in the Bible and theology without seminary, one need only to take brief tours ...
Read more