The New Testament Canon

Hello, everyone! Sorry I had to miss this Sunday.

I just wanted to recap our discussion on the New Testament Canon. I think that the signifcant take aways for me are:

1. The NT canonization process wasn't really as smooth or cut and dry as we are often led to believe, or as I would be most comfortable with.

2. Even though this is the case, I think an objective look at history still gives us great confidence in the NT as we know it today. It is nothing short of miraculous, to me, that by the 3rd century AD the bulk of the NT was almost universally agreed upon by churches and pastors that were spread from the British isles, to Spain, to North Africa, to Ethipopia, to Italy, to Greece, to Turkey, to Syria, etc.

Here are the points from the summary slide listed below:


•At least 18 books of the NT were quoted and considered to have some authority within ~100 years of Christ’s life.
•20 of the NT books were fully accepted by the whole church by around the 3rd Century, while the other 7 were also known and had some support.
•Today, all major Christian groups accept the 27 books of the NT as inspired, genuine, and authoritative except: the Syrian church only use 22; and some Eastern churches exclude Revelation
•The 7 books that have been ‘disputed’ at times carry no essential doctrines that are not also found in the other 20 books.

The updated Bible 101 slides can be found here: http://www.sendspace.com/file/o5dkeg

Right in line with our discussion the oldest 'complete' copy of the New Testament we have made the news last week because it is being published online. I think some of the details of the story are particlarly interesting in light of our class last Sunday: http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/europe/07/24/online.bible/index.html?iref=newssearch


PEACE

- casey