To my knowledge, disputes about genuine Bible books began to occur in the second century: the first-century assembly evidently did not have these dissensions. Nor did the Primitive EKKLHSIA need a "list" (KANWN) of authoritative works: such a move was necessitated by the Christian APOSTASIA foretold in Acts 20:28-31 (see Frend, The Rise of Christianity, 250ff; C.C. Ryrie, Basic Theology, 105-107). It is anachronistic to use the term KANWN in the sense of a "list" to describe first-century Christian Scripture. The term "canon" as a list qua list of divine Christian books possibly was not employed that way until 367 CE by Athanasius--prior to that time, a KANWN was simply a rule or measuring standard, not a list per se. The word's denotations progressively unfolded. So one problem stems from the fact that some Bible readers attempt to superimpose a fourth-century usage on a first-century anthologia. But that is synchronically unsound and highly problematic.
See http://www.tyndalehouse.com/Bulletin/63=2012/01-Kruger20.pdf for a discussion of the relevant issues surrounding the term "canon."
What books constituted Scripture for the first-century EKKLHSIA? Were the so-called Deuterocanonicals part of the inspired texts?
It is a little misleading to assert that the Deuterocanonicals belonged to the early Septuagint Version. The evidence for this claim is scant: "While the New Testament writers all used the Septuagint, to a greater or lesser degree, none of them tells us precisely what the limits of its contents were. The 'scriptures' to which they appealed covered substantially the same range as the Hebrew Bible [which did not contain the apocrypha]" (F.F. Bruce, The Canon of Scripture, pp. 50ff).
See http://www.etsjets.org/files/JETS-PDFs/33/33-1/33-1-pp075-084_JETS.pdf
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deuterocanonical_books#Dead_Sea_scrolls
ReplyDeleteWhile it's true that the formal recognition of the New Testament canon took time, the process of recognizing inspired Scripture began much earlier than the 4th century. Early Christians regarded certain texts as authoritative from the apostolic era. Paul’s letters were circulated and read in the churches alongside the Old Testament Scriptures (Colossians 4:16; 1 Thessalonians 5:27), and Peter referred to Paul’s writings as “Scripture” (2 Peter 3:16). This shows that from the first century, Christians were already treating certain writings as inspired and authoritative, even though a formal canon had not yet been finalized.
ReplyDeleteFurthermore, the Muratorian Fragment, dating to around 170 CE, lists most of the New Testament books, showing that by the second century, there was already a recognized set of authoritative Christian texts. This demonstrates that the idea of a canon was not simply a 4th-century invention but a gradual recognition of what had been considered inspired Scripture since the early church.
While there is debate about the precise contents of the Septuagint at different times, early Christians, including the apostles, frequently used the Septuagint, which did include the Deuterocanonical books. Many early Church Fathers, such as Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Augustine, quoted from these books as authoritative Scripture. For example, the Book of Wisdom is referenced by early Christian writers, and the New Testament alludes to the Deuterocanonical books on several occasions (e.g., Hebrews 11:35 refers to the martyrdom described in 2 Maccabees 7).
The Councils of Hippo (393) and Carthage (397), which took place well before the time of Athanasius, affirmed the inclusion of the Deuterocanonical books in the canon, indicating that they had been regarded as part of Scripture for centuries. The Catholic Church’s recognition of these books in the canon was not a later addition but rather a formalization of what had been used in Christian worship and teaching since the earliest centuries.