How would you explain canonization and how can Protestants have confidence about which writings belong in the inspired Word of God?
A distinguishing mark among Christians is that the Canon is “fixed” [1] For Protestants, canonization is not the result of councils, nor an intellectual or methodological process.[2] Among Christians there is little debate about the canon of the New Testament and the consensus is a standard 27 books. However, the debate continues regarding the Old Testament.[3] Protestants can have confidence about the content of the Bible by understanding three characteristics of canonicity: (1) Scripture testifies to other scripture.[4] This means that the canon itself acknowledges works that belong in it. As an example, in AD 65-66[5] the Apostle Peter referred to Paul’s writings as scripture (2 Peter 3:15-16).
Protestants can confidently reject the Apocrypha’s place in the canon because it was never part of the Jewish canon (Tanach)[6]—when Jesus was alive he would not have acknowledged these books as scripture, nor would the apostles. (2) As a result of providential exposure[7], there was widespread and early adoption of canonical books within Christian communities.[8]That is to say, the early Christian communities rejected some books (due to their false nature) and were never exposed to others. (3) Canonical books cannot be contradictory because scripture is inerrant and infallible. Therefore, the Apocrypha and pseudepigrapha aren’t canonical because they contradict clear teaching found in the rest of the Bible.[9] In addition to these three marks, Protestants can have confidence in the canon of scripture because it is ultimately the Holy Spirit within us that affirms the truth of God’s Word (1 Cor. 2:10-14). The canon is ultimately God’s means of special revelation testifying to Jesus Christ and is therefore inspired by God and useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness (2 Tim 3:15-16) providing the way to salvation.
[1] This sets Christians irreconcilably apart from Mormons who believe that the canon is not only open, but includes the Book of Mormon, Pearl of Great Price and Doctrines and Covenants. See Alexander B. Morrison, “The Latter-day Saint Concept of Canon,” in Historicity and the Latter-day Saint Scriptures, ed. Paul Y. Hoskisson (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 2001), 1–16.
[2]Daniel L. Akin et al., A Theology for the Church (Nashville, Tennessee: B&H Academic, 2014), 138.
[3] The Catholic Church argues that the Old Testament should include the Apocrypha. The Eastern Orthodox church has an entirely different canon, the Peshitta. Protestants consider the canon closed at a total of 66 books.
[4]It should be noted that simply referencing a book within scripture does not mean it is canonical. E.g. Paul references pagan literature, poets and even an alleged pagan-prophet, which of course are all not inspired or authoritative sources (see Acts 17:28, 1 Cor. 15:33 and Titus 1:12).
[5]Andreas J. Köstenberger, L. Scott Kellum, and Charles L. Quarles, The Cradle, the Cross and the Crown: An Introduction to the New Testament, 2nd ed. (Nashville, Tennessee: B&H Academic, 2016), 854.
[6] Timothy H. Lim, “Modern and Ancient Views of the Canon,” in The Formation of the Jewish Canon (Yale University Press, 2013), 14–15, https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt5vkx5p.5. In fact, the Apocrypha was not canonized by the Catholic church until the Council of Trent in response to the Reformation.
[7] Dr. Michael J. Kruger argues that providential exposure is required as a means for the church to adopt a canonical work, this is because the church cannot adopt what it does not have. Michael J. Kruger, Canon Revisited: Establishing the Origins and Authority of the New Testament Books (Wheaton, Il.: Crossway, 2012), 102, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ggbts-ebooks/detail.action?docID=1062333.
[8]Typically, this argument refers to the books of the NT, since the OT was established canonically during the Jewish period prior to Jesus. For more on this, one must consult sources to better and more fully understand the Jewish canon. There is not enough space to go into this topic here. This is especially important regarding the translation of LXX, since Jerome’s LXX included (though he did not want it to) the Apocrypha. Though old, See William Frederic Bade, “The Canonization of the Old Testament,” The Biblical World 37, no. 3 (1911): 151–62; and for more contemporary scholarship see Dale B. Martin, “The Development of the Canon,” in New Testament History and Literature (Yale University Press, 2012), 15–33, https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1nq081.6.; and A Theology for the Church, 138-139.
[9]There are numerous examples within the Apocrypha that indicate false teaching that is impossible to reconcile with the rest of scripture. For examples of salvation by human effort, magic and spells, angels openly lying, and prayers for the dead see Tobit 4:11, 12:9; Ecclesiasticus 3:3-4, 2; Maccabees 12:43-46; Judith 8:5-5, 9:2. For a treatment of non-canonical pseudepigrapha, see Everett Ferguson, “Pseudepigraphy: Post-Canonical Letters,” in The Early Church at Work and Worship, Vol I, 1st ed., Volume 1: Ministry, Ordination, Covenant, and Canon (The Lutterworth Press, 2013), 234–46, https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt1cgf18p.22.
Life With Jesus Now 
Leave a comment