Question for pastors and seminarians

The Wiki article is basically correct. Except for the Antilogomena (cannonicity of some books that were disputed) there was a functioning cannon by early 3rd century. A good resource document is Early Christian Doctrines by J.N.D. Kelly. Kelly does a good job of explaining the formation of the New Testament cannon.

 

Regardless if it is correct or not -- and quite frankly, given it is Wikipedia, I'd be amazed if it actually is -- I wouldn't use this absurd excuse for an online encyclopedia for anything. If I found someone had printed it out and it was the only source of paper in the house, I wouldn't even use it for bathroom tissue.

 

I'd agree, and add that while we have evidence that most of the canon was in general agreement by the end of the 2nd century and the "functioning canon" by mid 3rd, that merely sets a limit on the latest those events could have occurred. Given the vagaries of historic preservation over 18+ centuries, the actual assemblage was almost certainly earlier; we just don't have evidence - yet - of earlier dates.

 

There are writings from the patristic fathers* that quote from substantially most of what is now the NT canon. Marcion and Tertullian are most notable among them. Marcion assembled a functioning canon that that contained a majority of the books that make up our canon. This was done in the in the AD 140's (mid-2nd century).

*keep in mind that the patristic fathers were a mixed bag. Marcion was a rank heretic, although his work on the canon has proven useful from a historical perspective.

 

Hi Quantum,

For the most part the article gives a helpful summary of the development of both biblical canons and their remaining differences among Christian traditions today.

If you're interested in the development of the canon, the most helpful book I've come across is Lee Martin McDonald's The Biblical Canon: Its Origin, Transmission, and Authority. Another study that is much briefer and only focuses on the development of the NT canon is Craig D. Allert's A High View of Scripture?

 

wasn't the OT canon though a;ready decided by the time of jesus, as the jewish people had a canon that was what we as baptists see as being the OT?

They refused to accept as inspired scripture any of the so called Deutocanoncial/Apocrapha books?

And wasn't it also the truth that all but belive 4 books werer already being passed around and being read/used to establish NT truths, so by beginning of the second century already pretty much the canon established, just formally ratified later on?