Introduction:
Every book has a text, but not every book has a Canon. Only a book
like the Bible, which is also a collection of books, has a Canon. The formation
and the development of the New Testament canon have involved certain issues and
problems in the process of canonization. In this paper the
formation of the New Testament Canon, the problem and issues involved in the
formation will be dealt briefly starting from the apostolic age to the period
when it was completed.
1. Etymology of the word ‘Canon’:
The word ‘Canon’ comes
from the Greek word κανών “Kanon”
that means a ‘measuring rod’. The Canon of the scripture thus represents the
yardstick by which the church’s belief and practice is to be measured: its norm
the list of writing accepted as authoritative and binding. It was in the fourth
century that the term came to refer to the list of books that constitute the
Old and New Testaments.[1]
According to Henry Clarence Thiessen, Canon literally meant a straight rod or
bar, metaphorically meant that which serves to measure a rule, norm or standard
and passively meant that which has been measured and accepted. In the New
Testament the term occurs in Gal. 6:16 where it refers to the standard or norm.[2]
This ‘rule’ or ‘norm’ is the gospel which Paul holds out as a standard of
living. The second occurrence is in 2 Corinthians 10:13-16, in which the term
‘kanon’ occurs three times. In this passage many translator and commentators
take the word ‘kanon’ here as a geographical reference to the region of
missionary work allotted to Paul. However it is best understood as the ‘norm’
of his missionary work.[3] So,
the term Canon that refers to the Bible means the collection of books, which
are divinely inspired and authoritative for faith and life.[4]
2. How Canonization took place?
The first known Canon to be adopted consciously by any sizable unitary
group of people was the Canon of Marcion.[5]
Gnostics heretic named Marcion seems to have played a provocative role. He
teaches that a harsh God of the Old Testament and Judaism and a loving God
oppose each other that Jesus came as a messenger of the loving God. The Jesus
was killed at the instigation of the harsh God that Jesus entrusted to the
twelve apostles his message from the loving God, that they failed to keep it
from corruption and that Paul turned into that sole preacher of the uncorrupted
message. To support this teaching Marcion selected only those books that he
considered free from and contrary to the Old Testament and Judaism.[6]
Irenaeus attracted him and Tertulian wrote five books against this Canon. A
second list of great importance was the Muratorian Canon. The writer of
Muratorian fragment rejected the epistles of Paul to the Laodiceans and to the
Alexandrians.[7]
Another attempt was made by Eusabias (c.AD 265-340) of Caesaria. He
placed in the category of accepted books the Gospels, fourteen epistles of
Paul, including Hebrew, Peter, the Act, I John, 14 epistles of Paul, including
Hebrews and Revelation.[8]
The first council at which the subject was
introduced was the Council of Loadicea in AD 363. The third Council of Carthage
in AD 397 issued a decree similar to that of the Synod of Laodicea and
submitted a list of writing identical with the 27 books of the present
New Testament. The Council of
Hippo in AD 419 reiterated the same decision and then came the list.[9]
By the 4th and 5th centuries all our New
Testament books were generally recognizes. The Church Council of those
centuries merely formulized existing belief and practice concerning the New
Testament Canon.[10]
3. Marcion and Canon:
Marcion is the first
person scholars recognize as having gathered together a fixed set of books to
be considered as the inspired word of God. Marcion “canon” was different from
the current New Testament. Marcion’s canon contained no other epistles than the
ten Pauline epistles[11] Marcion viewed Paul as the only faithful apostle
of Christ and even went on to say that the original apostles had corrupted
their Master’s teaching with an admixture of legalism. “He embraced with
intelligence and ardour Paul’s gospel of justification by divine grace, apart
from legal works.”[12] Yet
even all of Paul’s writings didn’t make the grade with Marcion. Wherever there appeared
to be a contradiction between Marcion’s theological opinion and Paul’s
writings, including in those epistles he accepted as part of his canon, Marcion
chose to eliminate those writings from his canon. The only gospel included in
Marcion’s canon was an edited version of Luke. He also eliminated the entirety
of the Old Testament because he saw the New Testament and gospel of grace as an
overriding authority to the Old Testament and law.[13]
Marcion’s theology held to a dualism in which the God of the Old Testament was
different from the Father of the New. Marcion’s “canon” was more based on his
own theological beliefs than on an objective determination of which writings
were indeed part of Holy Scripture.[14]
Some argue that Marcion
was a heretic who only caused harm to the church and created his own competing
church that lasted several generations. At times we can see how God uses the
lives of evil men or those with impure motives to complete his own work.[15]
Joseph of the Old Testament understood the sovereignty of God to use the evil
deeds of his brothers for good when he said to them, “But as for you, you meant
evil against me; but God meant it for good, in order to bring it about as it is
this day, to save many people alive.” (Genesis 50:20). It would be impossible
to judge the motives of Marcion in creating his canon, and it can be said that the
church at large disagreed with his choices. In a similar way that Joseph saw the
hand of God in the evil deeds of his brother, we can also see how God used
Marcion as his own tool and impetus to prod the church in defining the New
Testament canon of Scripture.[16]
4. Development of the New Testament Canon:
There are various
stages and period for the development of the New Testament canon throughout the
centuries. In the following, we will look at the different period which has
taken place for the formation and development of the NT Canon.
4.1. The Period of Use and
Collection (AD 90-180):
There are two important
observations to notice about the canonical story. First, Jesus himself wrote no
book. Second, all stories about Jesus initially were plain word of mouth
testimony. The material was all oral tradition. In simple words, these were
wonderful stories about Jesus, but not necessarily thought of as “Scripture”
immediately. The same could be said for the correspondence of Paul. These
letters were used and read in the churches of Paul’s labours, but not
necessarily thought of as “Scripture” immediately.[17] The
stories of Jesus have started to be written down and also collecting the
letters of Paul. These oral traditions circulating about Jesus became the
backbone of written Gospels, and the letters of Paul were collected, and from
that point on, the journey to canonicity were on in earnest.[18] The
Bible claims that its authors were holy men of God who were moved by God’s Spirit
to speak God’s message. Paul was one of the main contributors to the New
Testament canon.[19]
Paul is accredited with
writing thirteen epistles of the New Testament which make up almost one-fourth
of this segment of the Bible. Paul’s contribution to the New Testament and to
the history of the church at large is so significant that he has at times been
referred to as the second founder of Christianity.[20] In
nine of his thirteen letters, Paul makes reference to his apostleship. “To
which I was appointed a preacher and an apostle, a teacher of the Gentiles in
faith and truth” (1 Timothy 2:7). His boldness of speech to the churches testify
to his own belief that his words were authoritative in nature and from the
heart of God. F.F. Bruce points out that Paul at times directly spoke of his
words being originated from Christ himself (2 Corinthians 13:3), but in other
instances when speaking on marriage and divorce, Paul clarifies that he is
giving his own opinion on the matter. “But to the rest I, not the Lord says…” (1
Corinthians 7:12) Paul’s writings indicate that in these instances he was expressing
his own personal opinion and not writing as a commandment from God himself.[21]
4.2. The Period of Emerging Canon
(AD 180-225):
In this period of
Emerging canon there were some three great writers that were there during the
time and also the shaping of the Muratorian canon have taken place. We will
discuss in brief as follows.
4.2.1.
Muratorian Canon: The Muratorian Canon is
another example showing that the criteria used for establishing the authority
of a book in the second century CE was apostolic authenticity. This is a
document dated about 170 CE that was found by Muratori in the mid-eighteenth
century. It is a list of books used as Scriptures in Roman Church about
180-200. The books included are the four Gospels, Paul’s letters including
Hebrews, 1–2 John, Jude, and Revelation.[22] The
document is fragmentary and badly translated into Latin, but lists the following
books: four gospels, Acts, 13 letters of Paul (omitting Hebrew), Jude, 1-2
John, the Wisdom of Solomon, Revelation, and Apocalypse of Peter. The omission
of most of the Catholic Epistles is notable and so is the inclusion of the Wisdom
of Solomon in a list of Christian books. The rejected ones on the list are the
Shepherd of Hermas and some unnamed books of heterodox groups. We have here
then a list of 24 documents accepted for reading in the church, including that
did not finally become canonical, but excluding five that did.[23]
4.2.2.
Irenaeus of Lyons (AD 190): This third century church father
was by no means the originator of the concept of a canon of scripture different
from the Old Testament.[24] Prior
to Tertullian, we see how God used the work of Irenaeus of Lyons in forming the
canon. “Irenaeus was one of the leading figures in establishing the canon of
scripture.”[25]
Gnostics in the time of Irenaeus had claimed to possess secret knowledge that
was of apostolic origins. Irenaeus argued against this belief by attesting to
an apostolic faith that was handed down by the apostles and successfully passed
on through an unbroken succession of bishops.[26]
Irenaeus himself had a direct chain link back to the apostles. As a youth, he
had listened to Polycarp who was a disciple of the Apostle John.[27] Irenaeus
held to a four book gospel as we know in today’s New Testament and rejected the
removal or addition of any other gospel accounts.[28]
This is significant in light of the fact that there were possibly a dozen or
more gospel accounts written. Irenaeus cited practically every book of our
current New Testament in order to disprove the heretics. While not using the
term “New Covenant”, Irenaeus is
possibly the first person to recognize a separate set of inspired holy books
that were distinct from the Old Testament. God used Irenaeus to draw clearer
lines between pseudonymous and canonical writings and to pave the way for a
closed canon.[29]
4.2.3. Clement of
Alexandria (AD 215): Clement was converted to Christian
faith and studied at the Catechetical school in Alexandria. Later on he became
the director of the school (190-200AD). He added to the schools original
catechetical aims of educating new converts to the goal of becoming a training
centre “for the cultivation of theologies”.[30]
Clement referred many of the writings of the New Testament as scriptures such
as, four canonical Gospels, Acts, fourteen epistles of Paul, 1 & 2 John, 1
Peter, Jude, and Revelation. But he did not mention James, 2 Peter or 3 John. However,
Clement also holds as Scripture 1
Clement, Didache, Epistle of Barnabas, Shepherd of Hermas, Apocalypse of Peter, and Preaching of Peter. Thus, Clement
illustrates how numerous other documents continue being regarded as authoritative
even at the beginning of the third century.[31]
Metzger says that, Clement “delighted to welcome truth in unexpected places and
even though he did not acknowledge them as scripture, he also knew the Gospel
of the Hebrews, the Gospel of the Egyptian, and the Tradition of Matthians and
did not condemn them as heretical.”[32]
4.2.4.
Tertullian: Tertullian played a vital role in the
canonization process of the New Testament. Tertullian’s highest criteria in
deciphering which books were parts of the inspired word of God were that of
apostolic authorship.[33]
“Since Jesus himself left nothing in writing, the most authoritative writings
available to the church were those which came from his apostles.”[34]
Like Irenaeus and Clement, Tertullian acknowledged all four canonical Gospels,
but he said that they were written by the apostles or those whose masters were
apostles. For him apostolicity was the chief criteria for recognizing the
authority of the Gospels. This same apostolic authority which was passed on by
them through the succession of bishop’s guaranteed the truthfulness of each
Gospel. So, for him the NT consisted of four Gospels, thirteen epistles of
Paul, Acts, 1 John, 1 Peter, Jude and Revelation. However he himself did not
produce a closed or fixed list of these books, though he cited them frequently
in an authoritative manner.[35] Tertullian
never used the word “canon”, however he have a clear concept of a set of literature
in mind. Tertullian fought off anti-Christian writings and heretical teachings
in defence of true apostolic work. Litfin writes, “Certainly he was a deeply
flawed character. He could be harsh and moralistic, especially later in his
life.”[36]
In this way, we can see how God used Tertullian to perform His work.
4.3. The Period of Closed Canon (AD
225-400):
During this period
another set of writers have come up in the likes of Origen, Dionysius of
Alexandria, Eusebius of Caesarea, and Athanasius of Alexandria.
4.3.1. Origen: Origen
replaced Clement of Alexandria as director of theological school and began his
career. It was claim that the transition from the authority of oral tradition
to the authority of written traditions began with Irenaeus and was completed
with Origen. Origen also used the four canonical Gospels, fourteen epistles of
Paul, 1 Peter, 1 John and Revelation.[37]
It was argued that Origen’s NT ‘canonical list’ was created by Eusebius in the
fourth century almost a hundred years after the death of Origen. This list was
made by Eusebius’ depending on his collection of references or citation to the
NT literature in Origen’s writings. Kalin says that canonical lists were
produced in the fourth century and later. He also says that the second century
heresies in the church were not addressed in the second and third centuries
with a canon of scripture, but with the canon of faith. He also adds that it
was “the canon of truth, the canon of faith, those confessional statements
about God and about Jesus Christ in which the church centred its faith and
life”.[38]
4.3.2. Dionysius of Alexandria:
Dionysius studied under
Origen in Alexandria and later on became the head of the catechetical school in
231 AD. He became the bishop of Alexandria in 248 AD. Dionysius illustrates the
problem of the book of Revelation. Dionysius created questions about the book
of Revelation’s assumed authorship by John the Apostle. He applied linguistic
analysis to the Gospel of John and Revelation and concluded the same author
could not possibly have written both. Even though Dionysius regarded Revelation
as authoritative, his study on authorship provoked long debate about the
canonical status of Revelation in the East. In fact, in the East, whereas the
book of Revelation eventually was included in the NT, to this day the Eastern
Church will not use the book for liturgy or doctrine.[39]
4.3.3. Eusebius of Caesarea:
He
was also known as Eusebius Pamphili and he was a Greek historian of
Christianity. His greatest work is on “Ecclesiastical History.” He was also a
scholar of biblical canon and was regarded as an extremely well learned
Christian of his time. Eusebius was the first to set forth a clearly
identifiable list of NT writings or ‘canon’. His canon was not very precise and
it leads to confusion in the “churches at the initial stages of the closed
biblical canonical lists”. In his famous work Ecclesiastical History, he lists
consist of four Gospels, Acts, fourteen epistles of Paul, 1 Peter, 1 John and
possibly Revelation.[40] He
also listed some disputed books that were known to most of the churches, like
Hebrews, James, Jude, 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, and Revelation. These books were
still doubted by many church leaders. But twenty books were widely recognized
as authoritative and formed undisputed core of the NT by the agreement of the
church. From the time Eusebius list of authoritative NT writings began
circulating in the churches and it was possible that he was the leader of a
move towards stabilization of the biblical canon in the eastern churches. The
circulation of the list to the churches could be the result of Constantine
asking Eusebius to produce fifty copies of the church’s scripture and to
identify precisely what those scriptures were.[41]
4.3.4. Athanasius of Alexandria:
Athanasius issued
forty-five “festal letters” during his position as bishop. In his thirty-ninth
letter, Athanasius dealt with the canon of both the Old and New Testament.[42]
He was also the first to recognize the twenty-seven books of the New Testament
as known in the current canon of Scripture. Church fathers in the following centuries
confirmed this selection of books as authoritative.[43]
Furthermore, Athanasius is credited as being the first person to use the word
canon in the sense of the word as used today.[44] While
Athanasius defined a “closed canon” in the sense that he identified these books
to be “inspired”, he did commend other books to be edifying for reading, but
not part of the Holy Scriptures. These books included the Wisdom of Solomon,
Wisdom of Sirach, Esther, Judith and Tobit. It was this church father’s concern
with heretical and spurious works (which he called “apocryphal”) that led him
to this definitive act of defining the canon.[45]
5. Theological Issues involved in
the process:
5.1.
Inspiration:
The first issues involved in the process of canonization include the
issue of inspiration. The question arises: Were books included or excluded
because of their inspirational quality? The Church Fathers “did not seem to
have regarded inspiration as the ground of the Bible's uniqueness.”[46]
Rather, inspiration was just one of many aspects of the life of the church and one
could regularly speak and write under inspiration. McDonald says it:
“There is no question that the early church
believed that its scriptures were inspired by God, but...the canonical
scriptures were not the only ancient literature that was believed to be
inspired by God.”[47]
So it is Justin, for example, who believed that “inspiration and the
Holy Spirit's power were the possessions of the whole church.”[48]
Inspiration was a corollary of it such that something that was inspired could
be canonical, but something not inspired could never be canonical.[49] Church
Fathers use the concept of inspiration in reference to the Scriptures and they
seldom describe non-Scriptural writings as non-inspired. When such a
distinction is made, the designation ‘non-inspired’ is found to be applied to
false and heretical writings. In other words, the concept of inspiration was
not used in the early Church as a basis of designation between canonical and
non-canonical orthodox Christian writings.[50]
According to the early Fathers, scriptures are authoritative because
they are the extant literary deposit of the direct and indirect apostolic
witness on which the later witness of the Church depends. According to modern
theologians, the canonical books are one and the same as the inspired books.
Auguste Lecerf, acknowledges: “We do not deny that God inspired other writings
than those which constitute the canon.”[51] A
writing is not canonical because the author was inspired, but rather an author
is considered to be inspired because what he has written is recognized as
canonical, i.e. is recognized as authoritative in the Church.[52]
5.2.
Distinction between Scripture and Tradition:
Another problem of the
New Testament Canon set by modern criticism is that it has broken down the hard
and fast distinction between scripture and tradition. Form criticism and traditional historical
criticism generally have shown that the New Testament is the tradition of the
church between 30 to 125 CE. Further, the New Testament is only a selection of
the available traditions of that period.[53] The
history of the canon indicates clearly enough that the contents of the New
Testament were determined by the church on the basis of tradition. Perhaps the
most powerful force was the tradition of ecclesiastical usage, but the writings
which came to canonical standing on this account were buttressed by traditional
ideas of authorship and validated through traditional conceptions and
formulations of the faith. Therefore to acknowledge the authority of the canon
is to acknowledge the authority of the tradition which gave birth to it. One
cannot have scripture without also having tradition. This point has been
regularly made by the Catholic scholars against the protestant habit of
opposing scripture to tradition, and it is a point increasingly admitted by
protestant scholars.[54] Historically
speaking tradition precedes scripture and then comes the scriptures. The
documents of the canon are themselves the products of tradition.[55]
5.3. The Authority of the Church
It
is the contention of the Roman Catholic Church that it is the prerogative of
the Church to establish the canon. And that those who reject the Church’s
authority have cut themselves off from the principle that alone undergirds the
appropriateness of the NT canon. They say Scripture was produced by and
attested in the Church not the Church by Scripture. It is true that God gave
his word to his people and that the question of the canon is to be settled in
the community of faith. And for all our disagreements, the Roman Catholic
Church certainly does have an appropriate NT canon in that it contains the 66
books of the canon and sets the Apocryphal books in a separate section.[56]
However,
there are several fallacies in the Roman Catholic argument: (i) The Church is
under the authority of the Word and has no authority over the Word. (ii) Any
authority the Church may have is designated to her by God.[57] There
was an issue with the argument that the authority of Scripture is dependent
upon the authority of the church. The Roman Catholic Church defined
canonization as an act of respectful deference to the primary authority of Scripture.
The Holy Scriptures are canonical in themselves because they are inspired by
God, and they are canonical with regard to us because they have been received
and accepted by the church.[58]
5.4. Canon- Issue of Closed or
Opened:
The problem of the canon of being closed or open is another debate. To
say that the canon is open implies that it is possible for the Church today to
add one or more books to the canon, or to remove one or more books that have
been regarded as canonical. The discovery of several dozen texts from the early
Church at Nag Hammadi such as the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Philip, the
Epistle of Peter to Philip, and the Apocryphon of John, has greatly increased
the number of candidates for possible inclusion in a revised form of the canon.
Will the presence within such a document of possibly genuine ‘agrapha’ not be weighed over against
the presence also of Gnostic and semi-pantheistic elements?[59] On the
other hand, the question may be raised to the possibility of removing one or
more of the twenty-seven books from the NT canon. Is the Church today bound by
the decisions of the early Church as to the number and identity of the books of
the New Testament? To remove one or more books from the NT canon would sever
bonds that have united groups of believers, and would result in still greater
fragmentation of the Church.[60] The canon
by which the Church has lived over the centuries emerged in history, the result
of a slow and gradual process. The several parts have all been cemented
together by usage and by general acceptance in the Church, which has recognized
that God has spoken and is speaking to her in and through this body of early
Christian literature. With regards this social fact, nothing can be changed;
the Church has received the canon of the NT as it is today. In short, the canon
cannot be remade and changed– for the simple reason that history cannot be
remade.[61]
5.5. The canon: collection of authoritative books
or authoritative collection of books:
In the former case i.e. collection
of authoritative books, the books within the collection are regarded as
possessing an intrinsic worth prior to their having been assembled, and their
authority is grounded in their nature and source. In the latter case i.e. authoritative collection of books, the
collection itself is regarded as giving the books an authority they did not
possess before they were designated as belonging to the collection. That is to
say that the canon is invested with dogmatic significance arising from the
activity of canonization. In one case the Church recognizes the inherent
authority of the Scriptures; in the other she creates their authority by
collecting them and placing on the collection the label of canonicity.[62] If the
authority of the NT books resides not in the circumstance of their inclusion
within a collection made by the Church, but in the source from which they came,
then the NT was in principle complete when the various elements coming from
this source had been written. That is to say, when once the principle of the
canon has been determined, then ideally its extent is fixed and the canon is
complete when the books which by principle belong to it have been written.[63]
Conclusion:
As we have looked into
the lives of the early disciples of Jesus, the life of Marcion and the lives of
several church fathers we can see how God used ordinary people of various
times, backgrounds, education and spiritual motives to formulate the canon of
the New Testament. We also see how challenges to the church namely the
teachings of Gnosticism and other pseudonymous writings and movements were
actually used by God to instigate action in the church body to define the
canon. As we look at the lives of the several characters discussed in this
paper, we see how God used imperfect men in the formation of the canon. Peter
had denied the Lord three times. Luke was a non-Jew and also not an Apostle.
Paul had once persecuted the church. When Marcion couldn’t convince the church
of his devious doctrines, he started his own church. Tertullian did not receive
the title of “saint” because of his rough and at times abrasive character.
Athanasius had a fiery and stubborn personality. Thus the study of the formation
of the New Testament shows that an omnipotent and all wise God is able to use
the events of human history and the workings of fallible creatures to perform a
good and perfect work.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bibliography:
Barr,
J. Holy Scripture. Philadelphia:
Westminster, 1983.
Brooks,
James A. The Text and Canon of the New
Testament. Broadman Bible Commentary. Nashville:
Broadman, 1969.
Bruce,
F.F. The Canon of Scripture. Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity,
1988.
Burkett,
Delbert. An Introduction New Testament
and the Origins of Christianity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002.
Carson,
D.A., and Moo, Douglas J. An Introduction to the New Testament. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 2005.
Carson,
D.A., and Woodbridge, John. Scripture and Truth. Grand Rapids, Michigan:
Academic, 1983.
Childs, Brevard S. The New Testament Canon:
An Introduction. London: SCM, 1984.
Eade,
Pierre M. The Development of the New Testament Canon. Maitland: Christian Growth Network, 2012.
Farmer,
William R., and Farkasfalvy, Denis M. The Formation of the New Testament Canon.
Toronto: Paulist, 1983.
Ferguson,
Everett. Church History Volume One: From Christ to Pre-Reformation. Grand
Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 2005.
Gaebelein,
Frank E. The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, vol. 1. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan,
1979.
Gamble,
Harry Y. “Canon.” In The Anchor Bible
Dictionary. Vol.1. Edited by David Noel Freedman.
New York: Doubleday, 1992. 852-856.
_______. The New Testament Canon. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1985.
Gundry, Robert H. A Survey Of the New Testament. Grand Rapids, Machigan: Zondervan, 1997.
Kalin,
Everett R. “Re-examining New Testament Canon History, 1: The Canon of Origen.”
In Currents in Theology and Mission 17 (1990): 272-283.
Lecerf, Auguste. An Introduction to
Reformed Dogmatics. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 1981.
Litfin,
Bryan M. Getting to Know the Church
Fathers: An Evangelical Introduction. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Brazos, 2007.
McDonald, Lee M. The Formation of the Christian Biblical Canon. Peabody:
Hendrickson, 1995.
Metger,
B. Metzer. The New Testament its Background, Growth and Content.
Nashville: Abingdon, 1965.
_______.
The Canon of the New Testament: Its
Origin, Development, and Significance. Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 1997.
_______. The Canon of the New Testament.
Oxford: Clarendon, 1987.
Nicole,
Roger. “The Canon Of The New Testament.” In Journal of the Evangelical Theological
Society 40/2 (March
1997): 1-7.
Schnabel,
Eckhard. “History, Theology and the Biblical Canon: an Introduction to Basic
Issues.” In Themelios 20/2
(1995): 16-24.
Stevens,
Gerald L. History of the Canon. New
Orleans: NOBTS, 2014.
Sundberg,
Albert C. “The Making of the New Testament Canon.” In The Interpreter’s Commentary on
the Bible. Edited by Charles M. Laymon. Nashville: Abingdon, 1971.
Tenny,
Merill C. New Testament survey. Grand
Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmanns, 1989.
Thiessen,
Henry Clarence. Introduction to the New Testament. Grand Rapids,
Michigan: Eerdmans, 1943.
[1] Frank E. Gaebelein, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, vol. 1
(Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 1979), 631.
[2] Henry Clarence Thiessen, Introduction to the New Testament
(Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 1943), 3.
[4] B. M. Metzger, The New Testament its Background, Growth and
Content (Nashville: Abingdon, 1965), 273.
[5] Merill C.
Tenny, New Testament survey (Grand
Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmanns, 1989), 407.
[11] F.F. Bruce, The Canon of Scripture (Downers Grove, Illinois:
InterVarsity, 1988), 134.
[12] Bruce, The Canon of Scripture, 135.
[13] William R. Farmer and Denis M. Farkasfalvy, The Formation of the New Testament Canon (Toronto: Paulist, 1983),
136.
[14] D.A. Carson, and John Woodbridge, Scripture and Truth (Grand
Rapids, Michigan: Academic, 1983), 201.
[15] Bruce, The Canon of Scripture, 136.
[16] Bruce, The Canon of Scripture, 136.
[17] Delbert Burkett, An
Introduction New Testament and the Origins of Christianity (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2002), 106.
[18] James A.
Brooks, The Text and Canon of the New
Testament (BBC; Nashville: Broadman, 1969), 15-18.
[19] Pierre M. Eade,
The
Development of the New Testament Canon (Maitland: Christian Growth Network, 2012), 3.
[20] D.A. Carson & Douglas J. Moo, An Introduction to the New
Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan:
Zondervan, 2005), 354.
[21] Bruce, The Canon of Scripture, 120.
[22] B. M. Metzger, The Canon of
the New Testament: Its Origin, Development, and Significance (Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 1997), 253.
[23] Harry Y. Gamble, “Canon,” in TABD,
vol.1 (ed. David Noel Freedman; New York: Doubleday, 1992), 856.
[24] Everett
Ferguson, Church History Volume One: From Christ to Pre-Reformation (Grand
Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 2005), 115.
[25] Bryan M.
Litfin, Getting to Know the Church
Fathers: An Evangelical Introduction (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Brazos,
2007), 78.
[26] Bruce, The Canon of Scripture, 172.
[27] Carson & Moo, An Introduction to the New Testament, 35.
[28] Bruce, The Canon of Scripture, 175.
[29] Ferguson, Church History Volume One, 116.
[30] Bruce, The Canon of Scripture, 176.
[31] McDonald, The Formation of the Christian Biblical Canon, 199.
[32] Metzger, The Canon of the New Testament, 124.
[33] Litfin, Getting to Know the
Church Fathers, 110.
[34] Bruce, The Canon of Scripture, 256.
[35] Bruce, The Canon of Scripture, 182.
[36] Litfin, Getting to Know the
Church Fathers, 113.
[37] Albert C. Sundberg, “The Making of the New Testament Canon,” in ICB (ed. Charles M. Laymon; Nashville:
Abingdon, 1971), 1222.
[38] Everett R. Kalin, “Re-examining New Testament Canon History, 1: The
Canon of Origen,” in CTM 17(1990):
277, 282.
[39] Gerald L. Stevens, History of
the Canon (New Orleans: NOBTS, 2014), 4.
[40] Stevens, History of the
Canon, 5.
[41] McDonald, The Formation of
the Christian Biblical Canon, 207-209.
[42] Bruce, The Canon of Scripture, 77.
[43] Carson, and
Woodbridge, Scripture and Truth, 202.
[44] Bruce, The Canon of Scripture, 17.
[45] Bruce, The Canon of Scripture, 78.
[47] Lee M. McDonald, The
Formation of the Christian Biblical Canon (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1995),
240.
[50] Eckhard
Schnabel, “History, Theology and the Biblical Canon: an Introduction to Basic
Issues,” in Themelios 20/2 (1995): 17.
[51] Auguste Lecerf, An Introduction to Reformed Dogmatics (Grand
Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 1981), 318.
[53] J. Barr, Holy Scripture
(Philadelphia: Westminster, 1983), 50-73; cited by Gamble, The New Testament Canon, 89.
[56] Schnabel, “History, Theology and the Biblical Canon: an
Introduction to Basic Issues,” 18.
[57] Roger Nicole,
“The Canon Of The New Testament,” in JETS 40/2 (March 1997): 3.
[61] Nicole, “The Canon Of The New Testament,” 6.
No comments:
Post a Comment