Fast Link Index:

Obviously what God speaks must be received without question and without compromise. Therefore its extremely important that we know what God has spoken, and where we can find an accurate and reliable record of what he has said.

One of the great cries of the Reformation was "Sola Scriptura" which means "Scripture alone." The reformers saw the Bible as the one unquestioned standard by which all matters of faith and practice must be examined.

Since the direct means of Special Revelation have ceased, the Bible is the only way we have of knowing what God has revealed about morality and redemption. We must know with confidence that all of the Bible and only the Bible is the authoritative Word of God.

The Books of the Bible form a Canon
Before we can discuss the Bible as a whole we need to be assured that the books it contains all belong there. We call the inspired books of the Bible "canon." The word comes from a Greek word "kanon" which means "a measure", "a rule for judgment", or "an authoritative standard." This word is brought over into English by a slight change in spelling, "canon."

The way Paul uses this word in one of his letters illustrates its meaning:
2 Corinthians 10:13-16 "but we will not boast as to unmeasurable things, but according to the thing measurable by the canon which God apportioned to us as a measure." [this is my own translation]

Here the word "canon" is used as a metaphor taken from the athletic contests at Corinth (the Isthmian Games). The running lanes were marked out by a line that kept each runner in his assigned lane. The line was called a "kanon".

The Apostle was telling the Corinthian Christians that God marked out such a lane to guide the apostle into truth. Paul was led by God in all his writings. The false teachers that opposed him did not speak for God. They were not divinely called but were self-appointed. Instead of remaining within clearly defined boundaries they wandered without such clear standards of truth. They were like runners who wandered outside the lines into wrong paths.

Paul also used this word when writing to the Galatians;
Galatians 6:15-16 "neither is circumcision anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation. And those who will walk by this rule (canon), peace and mercy be upon them, and upon the Israel of God."

Canon is the authoritative rule by which things must be measured or tested. For us, this standard is the collection of biblical books we call the inspired Scriptures, or more simply "the Bible".

Summary of the Problem of Canon
What is our rule or absolute standard against which all claims of truth and of practice ought to be measured? What books are inspired by God and intended by Him to be a part of our Bible? The Westminster Standards name the present 66 books as we commonly receive them. They state what Christians have always understood as the written word of God. (see WCF I:2,10)

How then is the biblical canon established? If we base our confidence that these books are the Word of God on the authority of a church council, then that council becomes our ultimate standard for determining truth!

Instead the Bible must be received because God gave it. The present books of the Bible have always been received by the covenant people as God's word. Each book, from the time it was written, was received as Canon. The Holy Spirit guided those born of Christ, and the appointed prophets of God and the Apostles spoke God's own approval because God supernaturally spoke to them and guarded them from error.

Councils did meet at times to form answers to those who doubted God's word. But they did not decide what belongs in our Bible. They merely stated what believers had always known and accepted. There are some legends that came along claiming that official councils met to determine canonicity, but there are no actual records of any such authorized council. All the records we have confirm that they did not take upon themselves to decide what books should be in the Bible.

The Old Testament Canon
All our present books from Genesis through Malachi are included in the Old Testament canon. The order of the books was not inspired. They were originally written on scrolls which have no unique fixed sequential order. Some scrolls came to contain several biblical books selected to be published together by their themes or by their use in worship. They included as many books as would fit together without making the scroll too large to handle. Scrolls were often kept in groups but were not bound together. When they were assembled into book form they were arranged in logical order in groups. The books in the Hebrew Bible are not published in the same order we find in our modern English versions.

The Old Testament books have always been received as canon. There was never any question by the Rabbis or the Jewish people as to which books were considered part of God's standard. Only spurious groups that broke off argued about the place of certain books in the canon.

Talmud tractate Baba-Bathra (2nd to 5th century AD) defends the accepted Hebrew canon against disputes that had been raised. It shows that the Rabbis accepted the same books we have today as always having been the ones received historically by the Hebrew people. They were grouped in three basic divisions:

1. The books of LAW: Torah
   They were later called the Pentateuch (the five).
   
2. The books of the PROPHETS: Navi'im
   
3. The books of the WRITINGS: Cetuvim
   These were later called the Hagiographa (holy writings)

These divisions were presented as collections of books which were not disputed among the people of God and the rabbis. They include the same writings the Christian church calls the Old Testament.

Jewish historian Josephus in Contra-Apion (66 AD) shows these same three divisions (Moses, Prophets, Songs of praises and counsel). He calls them "books justly believed to be divine." By this he meant that he accepted the rabbinic definition of which writings belonged in each group. Philo (prior to 40 AD) shows the same divisions and groupings as Josephus. This same canon is confirmed in the Qumran finds (Dead Sea Scrolls - the details of the findings there go far beyond the scope of this lesson). While many other writings were read and used by God's people, just as today we read helpful books by believing authors, only these listed were considered as canonical by God's covenant people.

Jesus and the New Testament writers consistently refer to the Hebrew Scriptures as the authoritative and only God-given test for truth. The New Testament books consider the Old Testament to be the Word of God given to and through divinely chosen spokesmen. This is where they found the prophesies of Messiah which are fulfilled in the person of Jesus. It formed the foundation for their beliefs. For example, Jesus quoted Psalm 82:6 as authoritative Scripture that cannot be broken (John 10:31-36). The New Testament directly treats the Old Testament books as a unified body of truth, as the only authoritative canon. It views the Bible, as an inspired whole (2 Timothy 3:14-17, 2 Peter 1:19-21 These texts will be taken up in more detail in a later lesson).

What about the Apocryphal Books?
Some other books, written after the completion of the Hebrew Scriptures, are sometimes included in ancient copies of the Bible. They are: Ecclesiasticus, Wisdom of Solomon, I & II Maccabees, Judith, Tobit, Baruch, and additions to Esther & Daniel. These books contain some good material which is historically helpful and consistent with revealed truth. They also contain some fanciful and questionable material that is in open conflict with the canonical books.

The Apocryphal books are included in the Latin Vulgate which was translated by Jerome. That version adds I & II Esdras, and the Prayer of Menassah. Jerome translated the Vulgate around the year 400 AD, Yet he speaks of a canon identical with ours. He personally rejected the Apocryphal books as authoritative. He translated Tobit and Judith in one day (not much time invested), then refused to do any more. Other apocryphal books were added to the Vulgate at a later time by other translators.

Early copies of the Bible and Septuagint (the Greek version of the Hebrew Scriptures, often abbreviated LXX) often include the Apocrypha. These early versions regarded the Apocryphal books as good writings of value for reading (like Bible notes or appendices) but not as infallible, inspired writings.

St. Augustine (393 - 397 AD) listed the apocryphal writings along with other books he felt were acceptable for Christians to read for edification. He never said that he accepted them as "inspired".

The valuable Leningrad Manuscript of the Hebrew Scriptures (a 9th century copy said to have been based on copies by ancients) contains the same books as our Old Testament canon.

Historic testimony shows that the apocryphal books were never regarded as part of the Christian canon by the church. There is universal testimony to the reception of our present Old Testament canon. It comes to us without serious question or debate. (see the Westminster Confession of Faith I:3)

The New Testament Canon
All our present New Testament books, Matthew through the Revelation, have been consistently received by the Church as authoritative.

The New Testament has its foundation in the Old Testament Canon. Christianity has always accepted the Hebrew Scriptures as divinely authoritative. The early church understood itself to be an expression of the new covenant in fulfillment of that which God promised in the Old Testament. The Old Testament was always used as a canon by which the truth and the teachings of Jesus and his followers were to be tested.

NOTE: Perhaps the terms "Old Testament" and "New Testament" are not the best choices. These titles are not applied to the parts of Scripture anywhere in the Bible. The books written before the birth of Jesus were written primarily in Hebrew with some portions in the related Aramaic. The books written after Jesus' birth are in a dialect of Greek known as Koine, the common Greek spoken by the average person.

The Hebrew word "berit" and the Greek word "diathaekae" were at first commonly translated as "testament." The idea of a last will and testament was assumed to be implied. But that meaning did not come from their use in Scripture, but rather from the common use of the term diathaekae in later years. Recent archaeological and linguistic studies confirm what reformed thinkers had long predicted. Berit means "covenant", not "testament." The later idea of a last will and testament was not a known legal form in ancient times.

The concept of covenant was that of a conquering king sovereignly imposing his mercy and protection on subjugated people demanding in exchange for their loyalty and obedience. The treaty was sealed with the shedding of the blood of animals representing the penalty that would come upon covenant breakers. The rituals used to confirm the ancient covenants were like the one used by God in sealing his covenant with Abraham in Genesis 15. O. Palmer Robertson has summarized the biblical meaning of covenant as "a bond in blood, sovereignly administered."

There is one covenant of God through all the ages since the fall of Adam. What is "new" about it after the birth of Christ is that his coming has fulfilled the symbols of its old administration, and has brought about the reality of that which was formerly only promised. The writers of the New Testament used the word diathaekae to translate the Hebrew word berit. The Jews commonly used that Greek word to represent God's covenant with His people. Those not familiar with the established use of the idea in the existing Scriptures might make the error of reading the later Greek idea of "testament" into diathaekae instead of the meaning the original readers would have assumed.

Alternatives for naming the two major divisions of the Bible are: The Hebrew and Greek Scriptures, The Old and New Covenant, and The Pre-Messianic and Post-Messianic Scriptures. None of these have much of a chance to overthrow the entrenched historic terms. To eliminate unnecessary confusion, we generally continue to use the accepted terms Old and New Testament (commonly abbreviated OT/ NT).

Claims of the New Testament
The New Testament rests its authority upon that of Jesus Christ. It is Christ's authority upon which the teachings of the apostles were based. He chose his apostles, supernaturally enabled them, appointed them, and taught them. It is that Christ-given apostolic authority which guided the church to know which writings were authoritative.

Paul's testimony:
The Apostle Paul had an awareness of the divine authority of his own inspired writings and those of the other New Testament
1 Thessalonians 5:27 "I adjure you by the Lord to have this letter read to all the brethren"

2 Thessalonians 3:14 "And if anyone does not obey our instruction in this letter, take special note of that man and do not associate with him, so that he may be put to shame."

A particularly helpful text is 1 Timothy 5:18

1 Timothy 5:18 "for the Scripture says, 'you shall not muzzle the ox while he is threshing,' and 'the laborer is worthy of his wages'"

Here Paul makes two quotations and identifies the source of each as "Scripture." The first Scripture reference Paul made in this text is a quote from Deuteronomy 25:4, the second is from Luke 10:7. Both are equally and clearly referred to as authoritative Scripture.

Peter's testimony:
Peter directly sets the writings of Paul on an equal authoritative plane with the "rest of the Scriptures."
2 Peter 3:15-16 "...our brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you, as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction."

The authoritative tone of all the New Testament books speaks boldly and with confidence that its truths were expressed by God Himself. There is an awareness on the part of all the New Testament writers that they wrote with divine authority.

Claims of the early church
The non-biblical book of 1st Clement (95 A.D. written from Rome to Corinth) speaks of the biblical book of 1st Corinthians saying, "with true inspiration he (Paul) charged you concerning himself and Cephas and Apollos..." Clement shows the same high regard for all the New Testament books.

Ignatius of Antioch (120 A.D.) said that the New Testament does not require the attestation of the Old Testament. It is inherently authoritative on its own.

Other ancient church scholars such as Papias, Justin Martyr and others make it clear that they accept the entire body of Scripture as canon on the basis of its being God's revealed truth.

Why do we accept the Bible as Canon?
We do not accept the Bible because of human scholarship or church councils. Such things are fallible and changeable. If these were the ground of our confidence in Scripture, we could not be certain of God's word.

The Romanist's view is that the church authorizes the Canon. This idea makes the church the final authority in all matters. It elevates the tradition of the church to stand along side the Bible. Since they see the church as the authority by which we know which books are canon, that church in reality sets itself above the Scriptures!

If the Bible is God's Word, then it must alone be authoritative. By the inward testimony of the Holy Spirit at work in regenerate believers, there is full assurance that the authoritative Scriptures are the Word of God.

1 Corinthians 2:14 "But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God; for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them because they are spiritually appraised."

We are driven to the Bible as a thirsty man is driven to water: not questioning its ability to help us, not awaiting the word of scholars to assure us, not wondering if it is what it appears to be. But grasping at it, clinging to it with all assurance, knowing that we are clinging to the revealed truth of God.

What we find in our study of history about the acceptance of the canon that the record is consistent with what we would expect to find on the basis of what Scripture says about itself. Given the biblical promise of the guidance and testimony of the Holy Spirit in the heart of the believer, we can understand why the Bible has been received in the true church as the Canon of God.

Questions for Review and Thought
1. What is the meaning of the word "canon?"
2. How do we know which books of Scripture are canon?
3. Why can there be no church council or group of scholars who are looked to for authenticating which books belong in our Bible.
4. What New Testament passages affirm the full acceptance of the Hebrew Scriptures as canon?
5. Why do protestant Bibles not include the books of the Apochrypha?
6. What New Testament passages cite other New Testament passages as being fully authoritative as the word of God?
7. When Paul wrote to Timothy in 2 Timothy 3:15 about the Scriptures he had studied from his youth, to what writings must he have been referring?