Two Ways To Dive In

Description text Some people use “canon” to refer to the complete works of an author. It’s a closed list, a done deal, clearly defined and quantified. This is what a lot of us have in mind when we talk about the Bible.

But “canon” also refers to a statement or a body of statements concerning faith or morals proclaimed by a church. It has more to do with how something functions among believers and less to do with a closed authoritative list. If a church regularly uses such-and-such writing, teaches on it, and believes that it helps them connect with God, that writing functions as canon for them, whether it’s on any official list or not.

Hebrews 4:12 tells us that God’s Word - His logos, His message - is living and active. I emphasize this because the answers we’re looking for about the Bible aren’t going to fit in neat little boxes with bows on them, no matter how much we want them to. Much of the misinformation and myth out there comes from efforts to over-simplify what really is an organic and complex process for how religious communities decide what is sacred and what isn’t.

I bet you can guess where the complications came up. People are very messy, and this is a people-based process. From the beginning, folks disagreed on what was truly inspired by God and what should rise to the level of Scripture. I suppose it was a bit easier when they saw Moses going into the Tent of Meeting and coming out all shiny saying, “Here’s what God said.” (Exodus 34:29-35) For others, and especially for prophets who didn’t bring pleasant messages, things got complicated and quick.

It wasn’t any easier when the New Testament writers came along. People like Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John wrote what they did to build up the early church, but no one is certain that they knew they were writing SCRIPTURE FOR ALL GENERATIONS as they put pen to page. In time, their words proved to be inspired by God and helpful to the churches and therefore used in church worship and teaching. But it didn’t start that way. That meant the pages might not have been preserved or copied as carefully as other more sacred texts.

Some people think that church councils deliberated and determined what books should be included in the biblical canon, but a more accurate view is that the church councils of the fourth and fifth centuries acknowledged those books that had already obtained prominence from widespread usage among the various Christian churches in their areas….In other words, church councils did not create biblical canons, but rather reflected the state of affairs in such matters in their geographical location. The Eastern churches appear to have been more conservative in such matters than those in the West.

McDonald, Lee Martin. The Biblical Canon: Its Origin, Transmission, and Authority (p. 209). Baker Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.

Apostolicity: Did the message (even if transmitted orally) originally come from one of the Apostles or a member of their community?

Orthodoxy: Did it conform to the core beliefs of the early church as they were taught directly by Jesus and the Apostles?

Antiquity: How close to the time of Jesus and the Apostles was the document written?

Use: Are a large number of churches using this writing for worship and instruction?

Adaptability: Does the message stand the test of time and adapt to the changing circumstances of believers and churches?

Inspiration: Do we recognize God’s voice and the inspiration of the Spirit?