Original_To:  CHRISTIA
Original_cc:  HUTTER
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 11 Sep 1992 09:09:00 N
From:         Wolfgang Hutter <HUTTER@DULRUU51.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Dating the Canon

I found some notes in my study Bible which might be useful for the
present discussion on the canon. These are just citations. I didn't
check them for accuracy, but no information given apparently contradicts
what I have heard from other sources. This text was originally written
by Charles Caldwell Ryrie:

The Tests for Canonicity

First of all it is important to remember that certain books were
canonical even before any tests were put to them. That's like saying
that some students are intelligent before any tests are given to them.
The tests only prove what is already intrinsically there. In the same
way, neither the church nor councils made a book canonical or
authentic; either the book was authentic or it was not when it was
written. The church or the councils recognized and verified certain
books as the Word of God, and in time those so recognized were
collected together in what we call the Bible.
  What tests did the church apply?
  (1) There was the test of the authority of the writer. In relation to
the Old Testament, this meant the authority of the lawgiver or the
prophet or the leader in Israel. In relation to the New Testament, a
book had to be written or backed by an apostle in order to be
recognized. In other words, it had to have an apostolic signature or
apostolic authorization. Peter, for instance, was the backer of Mark,
and Paul of Luke.
  (2) The books themselves should give some internal evidences of their
unique character, as inspired and authoritative. The content should
commend itself to the reader as being different from an ordinary book
in communicating the revelation of God.
  (3) The verdict of the churches as to the canonical nature of the
books was important. There was in reality surprising unanimity among
the early churches as to which books belonged to the inspired number.
Although it is true that a few books were temporarily doubted by a
minority, no book whose autheticity was doubted by any large number of
churches was later accepted.

The Formation of the Canon

The canon of Scripture was, of course, being formed as each book was
written, and it was complete when the last book was finished. When we
speak of the "formation" of the canon we actually mean the recognition
of the canonical books by the church. This took time. Some assert that
all the books of the Old Testament canon were collected and recognized
by Ezra in the fifth century B.C. References by Josephus (A.D.95) and
in 2 Esdras 14 (A.D.100) indicate the extent of the Old Testament canon
as the thity-nine books we know. The discussions by the teaching-house
at Jamnia (A.D.70-100) seemed to assume this existing canon. Our Lord
delimited the extent of the canonical books of the Old Testament when
He accused the scribes of being guilty of slaying all the prophets God
had sent Israel from Abel to Zechariah (Luke 11:51). The account of
Abel's death is, of course, in Genesis; that of Zechariah is in 2
Chronicles 24:20-21, which is the last book in the order of the books
in the Hebrew Bible (not Malachi as in our English Bibles). Therefore,
it is as if the Lord had said, "Your guilt is recorded all through the
Bible - from Genesis to Malachi." And He did not include any of the
apocryphal books which were in existence at that time and which
contained the accounts of other martyrs.
  The first chuch council to list all twenty-seven books of the New
Testament was the Council of Carthage in A.D. 397. Individual books of
the New Testament were acknowledged as Scripture before this time (2
Peter 3:16; 1 Tim 5:17) and most were accepted in the era just after
the apostles (Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John and Jude were
debated for some time). The selection of the canon was a process that
went on until each book proved its own worth by passing the test of
canonicity.
  The twelve books of the Apocrypha were never accepted by the Jews or
our Lord on a par with the books of the Old Testament. They were
revered but were not considered Scripture. The Septuagint (the Greek
translation of the Old Testament done in the third century B.C.)
included the Apocrypha with the Old Testament canonical books. Jerome
c. A.D.340-420) in translating the Vulgate distinguished the canonical
books from the ecclesiatical books (the Apocrypha), which had the
effect of according them a secondary status. The Council of Trent
(1546) recognized them as canonical, though the Reformers rejected this
decree.

end of citation

Any comments?

Wolfgang <><
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU