“Early Christians Often Used Non-Canonical Writings.” (7/10)

Canon Fodder ^ | May 20, 2013 | Michael J Kruger

[Gamecock]

For Christians struggling to understand the development of the New Testament canon, one of the most confusing (and perhaps concerning) facts is that early Christian writers often cited from and used non-canonical writings.   In other words, early Christians did not just use books from our current New Testament, but also read books like the Shepherd of Hermas, the Gospel of Peter, and the Epistle of Barnabas.

Usually Christians discover this fact as they read a book or article that is highly critical of the New Testament canon, and this fact is used as a reason to think that our New Testament writings are nothing special.  The literary preferences of the earliest Christians were wide open, we are told.  Or, as one critic put it, early Christians read a “boundless, living mass of heterogenous” texts.[1]     

Because this fact is used to criticize the integrity of the New Testament canon, then all Christians should be keen to learn it.   While the fact itself is true—early Christians did read and use many writings not in the canon—the conclusions often drawn from this fact are often not.

When scholars mention the Christian use of non-canonical writings, two facts are often left out:

1.       The manner of citation.  It is important to note that while Christians often cited and used non-canonical literature, they only rarely cited them as Scripture.  For the most part, Christians were simply using these books as helpful, illuminating, or edifying writings.  This is not all that different than practices in our modern day.  A preacher may quote from CS Lewis in a sermon, but that does not mean he puts Lewis’s authority on par with Scripture itself.

A good example of this phenomenon is the use of the Gospel of Peter by the church at Rhossus at the end of the second century.  Scholars often appeal to this story as evidence that early Christians had no established gospel canon.  However, there is no evidence that the church there used the book as Scripture. 

When we ask the question about which books early Christians cited most often as Scripture, then the answer is overwhelmingly in favor of the books that eventually made it into the New Testament canon.

2.       Frequency of citation.  Another often overlooked factor is the relative degree of frequency between citations of New Testament books and citations of non-canonical books.   For example, scholars often appeal to Clement of Alexandria as the standard example of an early Christian that used non-canonical literature equally with canonical literature.   But, when it comes to frequency of citation, this is far from true. 

J.A. Brooks, for instance, has observed that Clement cites the canonical books “about sixteen times more often than apocryphal and patristic writings.”[2]  When it comes to gospels, the evidence is even better.  Clement cites apocryphal gospels only 16 times, whereas, he cites just the gospel of Matthew 757 times.[3]

In sum, Christians need to memorize this simple fact about the New Testament canon: early Christians used many other books besides those that made it into our Bibles.  But, this should not surprise us.  For, indeed, we still do the very same thing today even though we have a New Testament that has been settled for over 1600 years.

[1] Dungan, Constantine’s Bible, 52.[br]

[2] Brooks, “Clement of Alexandria,” 48.[br]

[3] Bernard Mutschler, Irenäus als johanneischer Theologe (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2004), 101.

[Gamecock]

Ten Basic Facts about the NT Canon that Every Christian Should:

1. The New Testament Books are the Earliest Christian Writings We Possess
2. The New Testament Books are the Earliest Christian Writings We Possess
3. The New Testament Books Are Unique Because They Are Apostolic Books
4. Some NT Writers Quote Other NT Writers as Scripture
5. The Four Gospels are Well Established by the End of the Second Century
6. At the End of the Second Century, the Muratorian Fragment lists 22 of our 27 NT books

[Forward the Light Brigade]

Some of those early books that are not in the canon still might be true Gospels—the selection was made by men and as such subject to error or fallacy. Politics might have weighed in as well. Gospel of Thomas might be honest account. Hymn of the Shepard might also be cannon. Some Like the Gospel of Pilot, and Mary are Egyptian works trying to square Christian doctrine with Egyptian Paganistic views. Still, one must use their heart and realize that their may well be great truths locked in the early writing that we should study. Trying to turn the teachings of Christ into a State Religion for the Roman Empire might have purged a few true writings.

[ARA]

Any writing that didm’t support the Pauline version of Christ was given the boot.

[Salvation]

You must be talking about these doctors of the Church.

Name	Religious Order	Lived From	Lived To
ST. ALBERT THE GREAT Patron of natural scientists; called doctor universalis, doctor expertus.	Dominican	1200	1280?
ST. ALPHONSUS LIGUORI Patron of confessors and moralists. Founder of his order.	Redemptorists	1696	1787
ST. AMBROSE One of the four traditional Doctors of the Latin Church. Opponent of Arianism in the West. Bishop of Milan.		340	397
ST. ANSELM Archbishop of Canterbury. Father of Scholasticism.		1033	1109
ST. ANTHONY OF PADUA Evangelical Doctor.	Franciscan	1195	1231
ST. ATHANASIUS Bishop of Alexandria. Dominant opponent of Arianism. Father of Orthodoxy.		297	373
ST. AUGUSTINE Bishop of Hippo. One of the four traditional Doctors of the Latin Church. Doctor of Grace.		354	430
ST. BASIL THE GREAT Father of monasticism in the East.	Cappadocian	329	379
ST. BEDE THE VENERABLE Benedictine priest Father of English history.	Benedictine	673	735
ST. BERNARD OF CLAIRVAUX Called Mellifluous Doctor because of his eloquence.	Cistercian	1090	1153
ST. BONAVENTURE Franciscan theologian. Seraphic Doctor.	Franciscan	1217	1274
ST. CATHERINE OF SIENA Mystic. Second woman Doctor.	Dominican	1347	1380
ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA Patriarch. Opponent of Nestorianism. Made key contributions to Christology.		376	444
ST. CYRIL OF JERUSALEM Bishop and opponent of Arianism in the East.		315	387
ST. EPHRAEM THE SYRIAN Biblical exegete and ecclesiastical writer. Called Harp of the Holy Spirit.		306	373
ST. FRANCIS DE SALES Bishop, leader in Counter- Reformation. Patron of Catholic writers and the Catholic press.		1567	1622
ST. GREGORY I THE GREAT Pope. Fourth and last of the traditional Doctors of the Latin Church. Defended papal supremacy and worked for clerical and monastic reform.		540	604
ST. GREGORY OF NAZIANZUS Called the Christian Demosthenes because of his eloquence and, in the Eastern Church, The Theologian.	Cappadocian	330	390
ST. HILARY OF POITIERS Bishop. Called The Athanasius of the West.		315	368
ST. ISIDORE OF SEVILLE Archbishop, theologian, historian. Regarded as the most learned man of his time.		560	636
ST. JEROME One of the four traditional Doctors of the Latin Church. Father of biblical science.		343	420
ST. JOHN CHRYSOSTOM Bishop of Constantinople. Patron of preachers and called Golden-Mouthed because of his eloquence.		347	407
ST. JOHN DAMASCENE Greek theologian. Called Golden Speaker because of his eloquence.		675	749
ST. JOHN OF THE CROSS Joint founder of the Discalced Carmelites along with St. Theresa of Avila. Doctor of Mystical Theology	Carmelites (Discalced)	1542	1591
ST. LAWRENCE OF BRINDISI Vigorous preacher of strong influence in the post-Reformation period.		1559	1619
ST. LEO I THE GREAT Pope. Wrote against Nestorian and Monophysite heresies and errors of Manichaeism and Pelagianism.		400	461
ST. PETER CANISIUS Jesuit theologian. Leader in the Counter-Reformation.	Jesuit	1521	1597
ST. PETER CHRYSOLOGUS Bishop of Ravenna. Called Golden-Worded.		400	450
ST. PETER DAMIAN Ecclesiastical and clerical reformer.	Benedictine	1007	72
ST. ROBERT BELLARMINE Defended doctrine under attack during and after the Reformation. Wrote two catechisms.	Jesuit	1542	1621
ST. TERESA OF AVILA Spanish  nun and mystic. First woman Doctor. Joint founder of the Discalced Carmelites along with St. John of the Cross.	Carmelites (Discalced)	1515	1582
ST. THERESE OF LISIEUX French Carmelite nun. Known as The Little Flower, her autobiographical "Story of a Soul" has become a spiritual classic, inspiring millions to follow her "Little Way" of holiness. Already Patroness of the Missions, she was proclaimed the third woman Doctor of the Church by Pope John Paul II on October 19th, 1997.	Carmelites	1873	1897
ST. THOMAS AQUINAS Philosopher and theologian. Called Angelic Doctor. Patron of Catholic schools and education.	Dominican	1225	1274

 

[Springfield Reformer]

Ping for reference.

[omega4412]

Modern Christians often use non-canonical writings — for example, articles and comments in the religion section of FR.

[HarleyD]

What you say has possible merit but where is God in all of this? Doesn’t God guide the affairs of men? Isn’t He capable of handing down those things that He deems necessary?

[HarleyD]

You forgot about these doctors as well:

John MacArthur
John Piper
R.C Sproul
Jonathan Edwards
Charles Sprugeon

The list could be quite long.

[Gamecock]

Dr Martin Luther.

[Old Yeller]

Some of those early books that are not in the canon still might be true Gospels—the selection was made by men and as such subject to error or fallacy

So you're saying God had no control over the matter?

[Greetings_Puny_Humans]

“Some of those early books that are not in the canon still might be true Gospels—the selection was made by men and as such subject to error or fallacy. Politics might have weighed in as well. Gospel of Thomas might be honest account.”

---

Which tells me you’ve never read the Gospel of Thomas or any of these other works. The first thing that comes to mind is that the Gospel of Thomas is a bad copy of the Gospel of Matthew, except it takes random quotes from Matthew, very simple and innocent sentences but sound a bit catchy, and then connects something entirely new to it and completely meaningless. Mysticism for mysticism’s sake, basically. It also concludes by announcing that women cannot be saved unless they are spiritually transformed into male spirits.

The simple test for any of these works really is to see if they are Jewish or not. If you pick up any of the Gospels, you will see wither quotations from the Old Testament, or references to Jewish or Old Testament ideas, hundreds upon hundreds of times.

These works have no such relation, and often times they are outright hostile to the God of the Old Testament, making him out to be the Demiurge, and denying that Christ even had a body (which is another reason why they disliked women— they give birth).

[redleghunter]

I don’t know what you mean by “Paul’s version of Christ.” However Paul has this to say in Galatians 1:

11 But I make known to you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man. 12 For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came through the revelation of Jesus Christ.(NKJV)

So either Paul is telling us the truth on how he received the Gospel or he lied.

[redleghunter]

Amen brother Harley. The Sovereign Hand of God leads us to His Truth.

[redleghunter]

Physicians heal thy selves.

[Cronos]

The Shepherd of Hermes was quoted and nearly made the final cut to scripture, being edged out by the apocalypse of st. John

[Cronos]

The gospel of Thomas is conclusively a work from the second century and contradicts the gospels of Matthew Mark and Luke which were held as sacred right from the start. The idea that the canon was selected purely due to roman politics forgets that the Assyrian church has a similar canon despite being in enemy Sassanian territory

[Lakeshark]

Some of those early books that are not in the canon still might be true Gospels—

I'm guessing you have simply not read the books you claim could be Gospels. Anyone who actually has, realizes none of them had the strength, the consistency, the authenticity, the history, nor the power of what we know as the New Testament.

It's not even close, I've read them (trust me, it's hard), and they're a joke, masquerading as truth. The vast majority of believers, when presented with all these books, would choose the New Testament as was chosen, it's simply a no brainer if you actually read them, study them, and have any knowledge of the history of each book.

Sorry, that's the simple truth.

[Ciexyz]

That list is a great reference. Thanks for posting.