The Formation of the Bible Cannon

zafer

Newbie
Oct 28, 2011
4
0
✟15,586.00
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Private
Since when do we have the Bible cannon? Was it established through church decrees some centuries after the death of the apostles, or can we trace it back at an earlier time? The implications of these answers are quite important. If the cannon was established by the authority of the official RC church, than she must be entitled to change the content of the Bible as well. If the cannon was established by Christ's apostles under the direct guidance of the Holy Spirit, that God alone has this authority to change the sacred text. But we know that God doesn't change. Moreover, He promised that He will preserve His sacred text, so that not one of His words will pass away.

The 2nd episode of the documentary at the link bellow deals especially with this topic: the formation of the Bible cannon. It is entitled Reformation's Fountain of Life and it's in Romanian with English subtitles.

 

Citizen of the Kingdom

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jan 31, 2006
44,327
14,493
Vancouver
Visit site
✟304,048.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Since when do we have the Bible cannon? Was it established through church decrees some centuries after the death of the apostles, or can we trace it back at an earlier time? The implications of these answers are quite important. If the cannon was established by the authority of the official RC church, than she must be entitled to change the content of the Bible as well. If the cannon was established by Christ's apostles under the direct guidance of the Holy Spirit, that God alone has this authority to change the sacred text. But we know that God doesn't change. Moreover, He promised that He will preserve His sacred text, so that not one of His words will pass away.

The 2nd episode of the documentary at the link bellow deals especially with this topic: the formation of the Bible cannon. It is entitled Reformation's Fountain of Life and it's in Romanian with English subtitles.

That's fallacy that anything about the bible is changable by anyone.
 
Upvote 0

TuxAme

Quis ut Deus?
Supporter
Dec 16, 2017
2,422
3,264
Ohio
✟169,197.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Celibate
The implications of these answers are quite important. If the cannon was established by the authority of the official RC church, than she must be entitled to change the content of the Bible as well.
That doesn't follow.
 
Upvote 0

~Anastasia~

† Handmaid of God †
Dec 1, 2013
31,133
17,452
Florida panhandle, USA
✟922,745.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Why do you mention "Roman Catholic"? There was no such thing when the canon of Scripture was established. It was established officially by Church council when there was but one Church that Christ Himself established. And the books that were recognized as canonical were recognized in part because the ekklesia (all the people) who were initially taught by the Apostles could recognize true documents from fakes and forgeries. That determined early on which were accepted, read, and circulated.

It was a dynamic, organic process spanning centuries before its official completion, involving the Church as a whole, both clergy and laity, centuries BEFORE the start of a "Roman Catholic Church".

It's actually quite fascinating. More importantly, perhaps, is how did the Church function and remain in truth for the decades preceding the writing of anything that would become New Testament Scripture? :)
 
Upvote 0

TuxAme

Quis ut Deus?
Supporter
Dec 16, 2017
2,422
3,264
Ohio
✟169,197.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Celibate
Why do you mention "Roman Catholic"? There was no such thing when the canon of Scripture was established. It was established officially by Church council when there was but one Church that Christ Himself established. And the books that were recognized as canonical were recognized in part because the ekklesia (all the people) who were initially taught by the Apostles could recognize true documents from fakes and forgeries. That determined early on which were accepted, read, and circulated.
The Church back then referred to itself as the Catholic Church (not Roman, of course- that wouldn't "exist" until later because "Roman" was used as a slur). But the OP is referring to my particular Church, unless your church or anyone else's has "adopted" the term.
 
  • Like
Reactions: anna ~ grace
Upvote 0

Monna

Well-Known Member
Feb 5, 2017
1,196
961
75
Oicha Beni
✟105,254.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
That's fallacy that anything about the bible is changable by anyone.

How do you think we got the Bible?
There are at least two "versions" of the biblical canon (not cannon - that's a heavy-duty armament) in common use today - one with and one without Apocyphal writings, which were texts that were included in the Latin Vulgate and the Septuagint but not in the Hebrew Bible. Which particular Apocryphal writings are accepted as authoritative I believe also varies according to tradition - for example among Anglicans, Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox (Eritrean and Ethiopian). Members of those communions may correct me if I am wrong.

(NB I use the term "Apocryphal" meaning nothing other than as a reference to the texts that some churchs include as part of the Old Testament, and that some do not.)
 
Upvote 0

Rubiks

proud libtard
Aug 14, 2012
4,293
2,259
United States
✟137,866.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
What's a "Bible cannon" ?

EDIT: found this on google
latest
 
Upvote 0

mark kennedy

Natura non facit saltum
Supporter
Mar 16, 2004
22,024
7,364
60
Indianapolis, IN
✟549,630.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
What's a "Bible cannon" ?

EDIT: found this on google
latest

A biblical canon or canon of scripture is a set of texts (or "books") which a particular religious community regards as authoritative scripture. The English word "canon" comes from the Greek κανών, meaning "rule" or "measuring stick". (Biblical canon, Wikipedia)
 
Upvote 0

Rubiks

proud libtard
Aug 14, 2012
4,293
2,259
United States
✟137,866.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
A biblical canon or canon of scripture is a set of texts (or "books") which a particular religious community regards as authoritative scripture. The English word "canon" comes from the Greek κανών, meaning "rule" or "measuring stick". (Biblical canon, Wikipedia)

The joke
---------
your head
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Citizen of the Kingdom

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jan 31, 2006
44,327
14,493
Vancouver
Visit site
✟304,048.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
How do you think we got the Bible?
There are at least two "versions" of the biblical canon (not cannon - that's a heavy-duty armament) in common use today - one with and one without Apocyphal writings, which were texts that were included in the Latin Vulgate and the Septuagint but not in the Hebrew Bible. Which particular Apocryphal writings are accepted as authoritative I believe also varies according to tradition - for example among Anglicans, Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox (Eritrean and Ethiopian). Members of those communions may correct me if I am wrong.

(NB I use the term "Apocryphal" meaning nothing other than as a reference to the texts that some churchs include as part of the Old Testament, and that some do not.)
Canon is actually a musical melody in harmonious tune. The Apocyphal writings are also authoritatively accepted as not being of Godly inspiriation tho, is it not?
 
Upvote 0

Presbyterian Continuist

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Mar 28, 2005
21,810
10,792
76
Christchurch New Zealand
Visit site
✟827,333.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
A biblical canon or canon of scripture is a set of texts (or "books") which a particular religious community regards as authoritative scripture. The English word "canon" comes from the Greek κανών, meaning "rule" or "measuring stick". (Biblical canon, Wikipedia)
Yes. There is a difference between a canon and a cannon. Once could say that a Canon in the Anglican Church is one of the big guns there! :)
 
Upvote 0

TuxAme

Quis ut Deus?
Supporter
Dec 16, 2017
2,422
3,264
Ohio
✟169,197.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Celibate
Canon is actually a musical melody in harmonious tune. The Apocyphal writings are also authoritatively accepted as not being of Godly inspiriation tho, is it not?
Depends on who you ask.
 
Upvote 0

~Anastasia~

† Handmaid of God †
Dec 1, 2013
31,133
17,452
Florida panhandle, USA
✟922,745.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
The Church back then referred to itself as the Catholic Church (not Roman, of course- that wouldn't "exist" until later because "Roman" was used as a slur). But the OP is referring to my particular Church, unless your church or anyone else's has "adopted" the term.
Yes, I'm sure the OP is referring to your Church.

However, not to be argumentative, but the historical facts are that the Church at that time consisted of five holy sees. One of which was Rome, which was eventually in schism from the other four and thus became the Roman Church. It is unfortunate (IMO) that the "Roman" part became a slur. Because the Church from the time of the Apostles was location-based it is the name that makes the most sense.

But when the canon of Scripture was recognized, there was only THE Church - not synonymous with Rome today - for whatever good or negative points could be made.

God be with you.
 
Upvote 0

TuxAme

Quis ut Deus?
Supporter
Dec 16, 2017
2,422
3,264
Ohio
✟169,197.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Celibate
Yes, I'm sure the OP is referring to your Church.

However, not to be argumentative, but the historical facts are that the Church at that time consisted of five holy sees. One of which was Rome, which was eventually in schism from the other four and thus became the Roman Church. It is unfortunate (IMO) that the "Roman" part became a slur. Because the Church from the time of the Apostles was location-based it is the name that makes the most sense.

But when the canon of Scripture was recognized, there was only THE Church - not synonymous with Rome today - for whatever good or negative points could be made.

God be with you.
I agree that there was only one Church at the time- I disagree (obviously) that this Church isn't the same as the Catholic Church today. The fact that the other sees distanced themselves from the Pope doesn't mean that the Catholic Church of yesteryear isn't the same Catholic Church we have today. It just means some of our brethren are separated.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

~Anastasia~

† Handmaid of God †
Dec 1, 2013
31,133
17,452
Florida panhandle, USA
✟922,745.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
I agree that there was only one Church at the time- I disagree (obviously) that this Church isn't the same as the Catholic Church today. The fact that the other sees distanced themselves from the Pope doesn't mean that the Catholic Church of yesteryear isn't the same Catholic Church we have today. It just means some of our brethren are separated.
Obviously we are going to disagree. But that isn't the point of this thread.

One of the results that I dislike seeing is when people have a bias against Catholicism and so speak against the Church as a whole - before Rome was separated.

But yes, we who are still in communion with the other four sees (and those added through the spread of the Gospel) would of course have a different view of the identity of the early Church.

The most accurate view is that it was all of the Bishops.
 
Upvote 0

Radagast

comes and goes
Supporter
Dec 10, 2003
23,821
9,817
✟312,047.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
The 2nd episode of the documentary at the link bellow deals especially with this topic: the formation of the Bible cannon. It is entitled Reformation's Fountain of Life and it's in Romanian with English subtitles.

I can't think of anything less helpful.
 
Upvote 0

~Anastasia~

† Handmaid of God †
Dec 1, 2013
31,133
17,452
Florida panhandle, USA
✟922,745.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
It's not a slur; it simply means "in union with the Bishop of Rome."

As opposed to say, Antiochian.
Well I would agree, but I've been told some Catholics find it offensive so I try to avoid saying "Roman Catholic" and instead try to say just "Catholics" or mention being in communion with Rome.

But I don't think it should be a slur - you're right. We still identify our jurisdictions by location, though we are all in communion with one another.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums