Christian/Muslim ThreadsA Logical Problem in the BiblePeace to all Have you ever heard how Paul's epistles were accepted as Scripture by the Church? In the very early church, the writings most commonly used were the OT passages that pointed to Christ. These were the writings Christ Himself pointed to, and the Apostles then also continued to use as the basis for their teaching. the Greek Septuagint version of the OT was normally used. Later in the second century AD the Latin translations became available in the West. Matthew's Gospel and the letter to the Hebrews were also widely used amongst all the churches. Some sections of the early church used other writings that had been included in the Septuagint, such as the Wisdom of Solomon and Ecclesiasticus , who are now known as the Apocrypha. At the same time as the "established" and "queried" OT books were being used in the churches, there were also many epistles being written by the apostles such as Paul. Some of them were obviously intended for public use and for circulating amongst the churches. The first Gospels were not produced until the 60's, but their contents had been written down and circulated before this time. Paul's letters were brought together first of all, probably around the end of the first century. The first canon-list for these circulating letters were collected in 140AD and consisted of the Gospel of Luke, and ten of Paul's letters, but not his pastoral epistles to Timothy and Titus. The Acts of the Apostles were produced a few years later. there was intense curisity around at this time, about the childhood of Jesus, and a number of gospels were written to satisfy this curiosity. Most of these were written by fringe Christian groups. By the conclusion of the second century AD, Christians felt it vital to spell out which books were accepted by the church. A list known as the Muratorian Canon was dated around 200 AD, and it had 13 letters of Paul, Acts, two letters of John, Jude and the Revelation of John, as well as the 14 Gospels. Interestingly at this point, Hebrews was missing, despite being extensively used in the early church, and other books such as the Wisdom of Solomon and another book "the revelation of Peter" were included with reservation. During the third century, a consensus was reached throughout the church. Hebrews and Revelation of John, were still disputed, but being read. The main reason for the dispute, was in relation to the authorship of these two books, rather than doctrinal problems with them. At the beginning of the fourth century, only James, 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John and Jude were disputed. All of Paul's epistles that were to be included had been included... and all dispute ended at the Council of Hippo in 393 and the Council of Carthage in 397. Now, the arguement is, that churchman in a very literal sense, created the canon, but they were only recognizing the books that had their own authority stamped on them. The criteria was very complex. Above all, they had to be written or sponsored by a recognized Apostle. Known forgeries, such as the Acts of Paul, which would have given credence to a corrupted Bible claim, were rejected as heretical teaching. Paul himself, though he had been known as a Christian hater and persecutor was converted when he saw a vision of the risen Lord on the road to Damascus. (a very common occurence amongst Muslim converts) He was well known to Peter who himself was an Apostle. Paul was by no means less than controversial a figure amongst the early church leaders, than he is today, however, his writings were highly valued during his lifetime, and wre probably collected around the time of his death in or around AD 64. His writings were collected and accepted on an equal basis to OT scripture by AD 95 and ongoing controversy of his teaching, were the result of a heretic leader called Marcion, who rejected the OT and much that was jewish in the NT and he used many of Paul's writings to support many of his own views. As long as Marcion's heresy was a threat, the mainstream church did not stress Paul's distinctive doctrines of law and grace." Augustine in the fourth century was the first to develop these doctrines to their full meaning. Note, that whilst the early church itself did not produce the canon, all books used in the canon had been in circulation since before all those who knew Jesus personally had died. Now, please remember the early church covered not just one small group of followers of Jesus in a localised area. Corrupting or changing doctrine was no easy matter, and much of the early church history, even until the time of Muhammad is full of stories of various heretical teachings that splinteed the church. Had these circulating letters and their doctrines been changed by any one group, the rest would soon have known and recognized it. Within three days of his resurrection rumours were being circulate. Within a couple of months of his ascension back to heaven, thousands of Jews and others who were in Jerusalem following the passover, heard and took the message back to other parts of the Roman Empire where they lived. Before the end of the life of the last of the apostles (John) the teachings were already in a written form and being circulated in much of the Middle East, Europe and Northern Africa. The apostles themselves travelled all over Europe confirming their writings in person with the new churches. No war or fighting was necessary to extend the faith, for the words they spoke, and the signs and wonders that accompanied it, confirmed the faith to those thousands who heard and responded. When the churces of the roman empire came together to confirm the Canon of the NT, they used only those books that were universally seen and known to confirm the Apostles teaching. this makes interesting research.. Carol |
🌈Pride🌈 goeth before Destruction
When 🌈Pride🌈 cometh, then cometh Shame