Quote:
Originally Posted by photon
There was no canon at that point, so to say Marion only accepted 11 of the 27 books is misleading. Marcion chose those 11 not out of 27, but out of many gospels, letters, and apocalypses.
The whole idea of a "canon" of Christian writings may have even originated with Marcion, certainly the earliest list of writings that the list's author thought were authoritative was from Marcion.
After that various lists circulated for hundreds of years before settling on the set used by many churches today (not all though, there's still disagreements about which NT books are canonical). Of course each person's list is going to reflect their outlook on various doctrinal questions, that's why there were generations of many different lists.
|
You are assuming that because their was no collectively published canon until the Council of Hippo in 393 A.D. that a canon didn't exist. History doesn't work like that. When it comes to history more will always be unknown then known. The Synod of Laodicea(363 A.D.) forbade the reading of non-canonical books. They obviously believed that the canon was already extablished. The Council of Nicea(325 A.D.) refers to the canon. The Synod of Antioch(266 A.D.) denounced the doctrine of Paul of Samosata as foreign to the ecclesiastical canon. Again niether council felt the need to declare a canon. It already existed and although not formally declared in a council of churches was spoken of as already extablished. The trail becomes more difficult in the second century because of extreme persecution and the lack of any organizational structure beyond the local church. The New Testament books were being copied and collected in the different regions of Christian influence. I don't know the date whenever one church finally collected all 27 books but, it more than likely belonged to the second century.
Of course because of geographical differences in distribution some books were received with reservations. Fortunately being within a hundred years of the source provided amply evidence to support the inclusion or exclusion of these epistles. We don't have the living testimony of the original churches or very many letters from the first century like they did. It should have been very easy in the second century to trace the transmission of and the distribution of all of the epistles.
The fact is the 27 epistles were recognized and elevated to scriptures shortly after they were written. IPet 3:15-16 supports this as well as the ealiest letters of the church Fathers who use them as their authority. IIThess 1:1-3 also gives evidence that the Apostles were aware of counterfeits and no doubt took measures to protect themselves from misrepresentation. Perhaps the New Testament habit of sending letters of recomendation with someone who travelled to unfamilar churches were part of this effort.
The origin of the Pastorial epistles weren't seriously disputed until the 19th century. All you've been able to present is two heretics-one in the second century and one in the third who rejected these epistles and both did so because they conflicted with their own personal teachings. Niether were excommunicated for questioning certain books of the Bible. They were both excommunicated by their own religious institutions for teaching things contrary to extablished doctrine. These doctrine's authority and source was the New Testament scriptures.