The other day at the High Noon men's study, we were discussing the first chapter of the Westminster Confession. The chapter on scripture. We were talking about how the canonical scriptures came to be accepted as canon. Lane correctly made the point, and Westminster backs him up, that there is no way to prove that scripture is inspired, inerrant, etc... That it is the working of the Holy Spirit that convinces each man of the inspiration of scripture.
.
But it's not like a group of old dead saints just got together and each chose five personal favorite texts to include in the Bible. There were several rules that they followed when they chose the books that were eventually canonized.
- The Rule of Internal Consistency - says that a document must not contradict itself. If you were to find a document that said that it was written during the reign of a certain known king but it quotes (not prophesies) later events, that document would lack internal consistency. All of the books of the canonical bible are perfectly internally consistent.
- The Rule of External Consistency - says that a document must not contradict other texts that are already considered canon. All of the books of the Christian canon are perfectly in accord with each other.
- Aristotle's Dictum - says that if you think there is an inconsistency or inaccuracy in a text but you think you may not understand the context perfectly, you have to give the benefit of the doubt to the text. An imperfect individual cannot declare the Bible to be in error based on his own limited understanding of it.
- The Bibliographic Rule - says that you want to use texts as close to the source as possible to avoid error. Texts were selected for the canon that had some direct tie to the apostles of Jesus because they were first-hand witnesses. Most of the NT canon was written within one lifetime of the events that took place. The Dead Sea scrolls demonstrated that the OT canon had not changed appreciably in 1000 years, lending validity to it based on the bibliographic rule.
3 comments:
Seems like one of the most important factors on determining the canon was Apostolic origin, including St. Paul (who counts himself an Apostle of Jesus Christ). There were other books around, Christian texts, that were commonly read and accepted by the Church, but not included in the canon. Not because they missed the mark on some of your points, but because they were not penned by the first generation of those who knew Christ. They were not Apostolic in origination. Just a thought! And the biggest factor (in my opinion)--the direction of the Holy Spirit!
Thank you so much for your comment. I love getting comments and other, frequently better perspectives on my posts.
One thing I should add is, it is unclear to me from the texts I've read, whether these rules were explicitly set forth before the canonization or whether they represent several trends that emerged as the canon coalesced over the first few centuries.
I'm pretty sure that Apostolic origin was a preset rule, and I suspect that Aristotle's Dictum, since it was attributed to Aristotle, was pre-canon (unless it was named after Aristotle Onassis ;-). If Aristotle's Dictum was, in fact, pre-canon, then that suggests that the two consistency rules were in play early-on. They were at least thinking about consistency.
But in any case, whether the rules were pre-determined or emergent, they represent pretty distinct characteristics of the canon.
I also agree that your two rules (Apostolic origin and direction of the Holy Spirit) are much better than the four rules that I posted. But, looking back through a couple thousand years, it seems easier to discern whether or not a text is contradictory to itself or the rest of the canon than to discern the inspiration of the author by the the Holy Spirit.
That doesn't make the guidance of the Holy Spirit any less real or crucial - but the two consistency rules seem easier to apply. Discerning that the text is inspired is a work of the Holy Spirit within each reader in the present time.
As times have progressed and science has grown, we now can look at the method outlined in Romans 1:20. When a cell replicates there are sometimes errors or extra material that is made during replication. The cell checks this material against its internal genetic code and when it has corrected strands and segments records the genetic information. Sounds a lot like what they did at the time Scripture was checked. The genetic code and Scripture are both means of setting order in their area. One is physical and one is spiritual, but both are made and watched over by God.
Post a Comment