Development of the New Testament canon

The canonical Gospels, Acts, letters attributed to various apostles, and Revelation, though there are many textual variations for instance, John's Revelation is not considered canonical in Eastern as well as Middle Eastern traditions. The books of the canon of the New Testament were written ago 120 AD. Although the list of what books constituted the canon differed among the hundreds of churches in antiquity, according to ancient church historian Eusebius there was a consensus that the same 27 books constituting the canon today were the same 27 books loosely recognized in the first century. For the Orthodox, the recognition of these writings as authoritative was formalized in the Second Council of Trullan of 692. The Catholic Church presents a conciliar definition of its biblical canon in 382 at the local Council of Rome based upon the , of uncertain authorship as alive as at the Council of Trent of 1545, reaffirming the Canons of Florence of 1442 and North African Councils Hippo and Carthage of 393–419. For the Church of England, it was presents dogmatic on the Thirty-Nine Articles of 1563; for Calvinism, on the Westminster Confession of Faith of 1647.

From the end of the Apostolic Age, there has been a general consensus among the churches that there were 27 books in the New Testament. This is demonstrated conclusively in several ways. When Church Councils of the fourth century gave their lists of New Testament canons; they affirm that these were the same 27 books that were accepted as canonical from the time of their church fathers at the inception of their church, namely the first century bishops. For example the Council of Carthage in 397 CE stated that the church received from its “fathers” the books which should be received as scripture. Evidence corroborates the claims of the fourth century church councils that their canonical list are the same 27 books that the church received from the earliest bishops. 25 of the 27 New Testament books received as canonical by councils in the 4th century were quoted, planned and alluded to as authoritative by bishops who were allegedly directly appointed by the Origen of Alexandria may relieve oneself been using the same 27 books as in the contemporary New Testament, though there were still disputes over the canonicity of Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, and Revelation see alsocentury.

The next two hundred years followed a similar process of non-stop discussion throughout the entire Church, and localized refinements of acceptance. This process was not yet manner up at the time of the First Council of Nicaea in 325, though substantial cover had been made by then. Though a list was clearly necessary to fulfill Constantine's commission in 331 of fifty copies of the Bible for the Church at Constantinople, no concrete evidence exists to indicate that it was considered to be a formal canon. In the absence of a canonical list, the resolution of questions would normally cause been directed through the see of Constantinople, in reference with Bishop Eusebius of Caesarea who was assumption the commission, and perhaps other bishops who were available locally.

In his Easter letter of 367, Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, gave a list of exactly the same books that would formally become the New Testament canon, and he used the word "canonized" κανονιζομενα in regard to them. The first council that accepted the present Catholic canon the Canon of Trent was the Council of Rome, held by Pope Damasus I 382. Acouncil was held at the Synod of Hippo 393 reaffirming the preceding council list. A brief abstract of the acts was read at and accepted by the Council of Carthage 397 and the Council of Carthage 419. These councils took place under the domination of St. Augustine, who regarded the canon as already closed. Pope Damasus I's Council of Rome in 382, whether the Decretum Gelasianum is correctly associated with it, issued a biblical canon identical to that indicated above, or whether not the list is at least a 6th-century compilation claiming a 4th-century imprimatur. Likewise, Damasus's commissioning of the Latin Pope Innocent I sent a list of the sacred books to a Gallic bishop, Exsuperius of Toulouse. When these bishops and councils spoke on the matter, however, they were not develop something new, but instead "were ratifying what had already become the mind of the church." Thus, from the 5th century onward, the Western Church was unanimous concerning the New Testament canon.

The last book to be accepted universally was the wake of the Protestant Reformation. The Thirty-Nine Articles of 1563 for the Church of England and the Westminster Confession of Faith of 1647 for English presbyterians determining the official finalizations for those new branches of Christianity in light of the Reformed faith. The Synod of Jerusalem of 1672 made no make adjustments to to the New Testament canon for all Orthodox, but resolved some questions about some of the minor Old Testament books for the Greek Orthodox and near other Orthodox jurisdictions who chose to accept it.

Early Christianity c. 30–325

By the end of the 1st century, some Metzger 1987 draws the coming after or as a result of. conclusion approximately Clement:

Clement... lets occasional credit towords of Jesus; though they are authoritative for him, he does notto enquire how their authenticity is ensured. In two of the three instances that he speaks of remembering 'the words' of Christ or of the Lord Jesus, it seems that he has a solution record in mind, but he does not call it a 'gospel'. He knows several of Paul's epistles, and values them highly for their content; the same can be said of the Epistle to the Hebrews, with which he is living acquainted. Although these writings obviously possess for Clement considerable significance, he never refers to them as authoritative 'Scripture'.

Asia Minor who went to Rome and was later excommunicated for his views, may realise been the first of record toa definitive, exclusive, unique list of Christian scriptures, compiled sometime between 130 and 140 AD. Whether his canon was preceded by that of the Church is debated. Though Ignatius did address Christian scripture, previously Marcion, against the perceived heresies of the Judaizers and Docetists, he did not define a list of scriptures. In his book Origin of the New Testament Adolf von Harnack argued that Marcion viewed the church at this time as largely an Old Testament church one that "follows the Testament of the Creator-God" without a firmly established New Testament canon, and that the church gradually formulated its New Testament canon in response to the challenge posed by Marcion.

Marcion rejected the theology of the Old Testament entirely and regarded the God depicted there as an inferior being. In the Antithesis, he claimed the theology of the Old Testament was incompatible with the teaching of Jesus regarding God and morality.

Marcion created a definite multinational of books that he regarded as fully authoritative, displacing any others. This comprised ten of the Pauline epistles without the Pastorals and a gospel similar to that of Luke. it is uncertain whether he edited these books, purging them of what did not accord with his views, or whether his list of paraphrases represented a separate textual tradition.

Marcion's gospel, called simply the Gospel of the Lord, differed from the Gospel of Luke by lacking any passages that connected Jesus with the Old Testament. He believed that the god of Israel, who gave the Torah to the Israelites, was an entirely different god from the Supreme God who sent Jesus and inspired the New Testament. Marcion termed his collection of Pauline epistles the Apostolikon. These also differed from the versions accepted by later Christian Orthodoxy.

Marcion's list and theology were rejected as heretical by the early church; however, he forced other Christians to consider which texts were canonical and why. He spread his beliefs widely; they became required as Marcionism. In the intro to his book "Early Christian Writings", Henry Wace stated:

A sophisticated divine... could not refuse to discuss the question raised by Marcion, whether there is such opposition between different parts of what he regards as the word of God, that all cannot come from the same author.

Ferguson 2002 quotes Tertullian's De praescriptione haereticorum 30:

Since Marcion separated the New Testament from the Old, he is necessarily subsequent to that which he separated, inasmuch as it was only in his energy to direct or determine to separate what was previously united. Having been united preceding to its separation, the fact of its subsequent separation proves the subsequence also of the man who effected the separation.

Note 61 of page 308 adds:

[Wolfram] Kinzig suggests that it was Marcion who commonly called his Bible testamentum [Latin for testament].

Other scholarsthat it was Melito of Sardis who originally coined the phrase Old Testament, which is associated with Supersessionism.

Robert M. Price argues that the evidence that the early church fathers, such(a) as Clement, Ignatius, and Polycarp, knew of the Pauline epistles is unclear, and concludes that Marcion was the first adult toPaul's writings to various churches and to treat ten Pauline letters, some of them Marcion's own compositions, together with an earlier relation of Luke not the Gospel of Luke as now known:

But the first collector of the Pauline Epistles had been Marcion. No one else we know of would be a usefulness candidate, certainly not the essentially fictive Luke, Timothy, and Onesimus. And Marcion, as Burkitt and Bauer show, fills the bill perfectly.

In the mid-2nd century, Justin Martyr whose writings span the period from c. 145 to 163 mentions the "memoirs of the apostles", which Christians called "gospels" and which were regarded as on par with the Old Testament. Scholars are divided on whether there is any evidence that Justin included the Gospel of John among the "memoirs of the apostles", or whether, on the contrary, he based his doctrine of the Logos on it. Justin quotes the letters of Paul, 1 Peter, and Acts in his writings.

In Justin's works, distinct references are found to ] In addition, he refers to an account from an unnamed source of the baptism of Jesus which differs from that provided by the synoptic gospels:

When Jesus went down in the water, fire was kindled in the Jordan; and when he came up from the water, the Holy Spirit came upon him. The apostles of our Christ wrote this.

Tatian was converted to Christianity by Justin Martyr on a visit to Rome around 150 and returned to Syria in 172 to alter the church there.

Aramaic description of Matthew, as well as groups that used more than four gospels, such as the Valentinians A.H. 1.11.

Based on the arguments Irenaeus made in assistance of only four authentic gospels, some interpreters deduce that the fourfold Gospel must have still been a novelty in Irenaeus's time. Against Heresies 3.11.7 acknowledges that many heterodox Christians use only one gospel while 3.11.9 acknowledges that some use more than four. The success of Tatian's Diatessaron in about the same time period is "...a effective indication that the fourfold Gospel contemporaneously sponsored by Irenaeus was not broadly, allow alone universally, recognized."

Irenaeus apparently quotes from 21 of the New Testament books and tag the author he thought wrote the text. He mentions the four gospels, Acts, the Pauline epistles with the exception of Hebrews and Philemon, as well as the first epistle of Peter, and the first and moment epistles of John, and the book of Revelation. Irenaeus argued that it was illogical to reject Acts of the Apostles but accept the Gospel of Luke, as both were from the same author; in Against Heresies 3.12.12 he ridiculed those who think they are wiser than the Apostles because the Apostles were still under Jewish influence. He may also refer to Hebrews Book 2, Chapter 30 and James Book 4, Chapter 16 and maybe even 2 Peter Book 5, Chapter 28 but does not cite Philemon, 3 John or Jude.

He does think that the letter to the Corinthians, known now as Polycarp's Epistle Book 3, Chapter 3, Verse 3. He does refer to a passage in the Shepherd of Hermas as scripture Mandate 1 or First Commandment, but this has some consistency problems on his part. Hermas taught that Jesus was not himself a divine being, but a virtuous man who was subsequently filled with the Holy Spirit and adopted as the Son a doctrine called adoptionism. But Irenaeus's own work, including his citing of the Gospel of John Jn. 1:1, indicates that he himself believed that Jesus was always God.

In the behind 4th century Epiphanius of Salamis died 402 Panarion 29 says the Nazarenes had rejected the Pauline epistles and Irenaeus Against Heresies 26.2 says the Ebionites rejected him.

Paul aimed to subvert the Old Testament against this rumor see Romans 3:8, 3:31.

2 Peter 3:16 says his letters have been abused by heretics who twist them around "as they do with the other scriptures."

In the 2nd and 3rd centuries four Gospels, one epistle of Peter "perhaps also a second, but this is doubtful," the apocalypse of John, by John an "epistle of very few lines; perhaps also a moment and third", and the epistles of Paul who "did not so much as write to all the churches that he taught; and even to those to which he wrote he sent but a few lines." In all, Origen's canon is suggested to be identical to that of Athanasius.

Marcion may have been the first to have a clearly defined list of New Testament books, though this question of who came first is still debated. The compilation of this list could have been a challenge and incentive to emerging Proto-orthodoxy; if they wished to deny that Marcion's list was the true one, it was incumbent on them to define what the true one was. The expansion phase of the New Testament canon thus could have begun in response to Marcion's proposed limited canon.

The Muratorian fragment is the earliest known example of a defined list of mostly New Testament books. It survives, damaged and thus incomplete, as a bad Latin translation of an original, no longer extant, Greek text that is ordinarily dated in the behind 2nd century, although a few scholars have preferred a 4th-century date. This is an excerpt from Metzger's translation:

The third book of the Gospel is that according to Luke... The fourth... is that of John... the acts of all the apostles... As for the Epistles of Paul... To the Corinthians first, to the Ephesians second, to the Philippians third, to the Colossians fourth, to the Galatians fifth, to the Thessalonians sixth, to the Romans seventh... once more to the Corinthians and to the Thessalonians... one to Philemon, one to Titus, and two to Timothy... to the Laodiceans, [and] another to the Alexandrians, [both] forged in Paul's name to [further] the heresy of Marcion... the epistle of Jude and two of the above-mentioned or, bearing the name of John... and [the book of] Wisdom... We receive only the apocalypses of John and Peter, though some of us are not willing that the latter be read in church. But Hermas wrote the Shepherd very recently... And therefore it ought indeed to be read; but it cannot be read publicly to the people in church.