Understanding the New Testament Canon: Definitions and Perspectives
Devotional
Sermon Summary
Sermon Clips
"Whoever controls the terminology, controls the debate, right? And this is an important fact of any discussion, and you see this in our culture. I mean, you look out in the culture you see certain phrases and certain changes of words that are used, and it just reframes everything, and people use words in different ways." [00:01:28]
"One of the big hot topics in discussions today is, 'Well, when did this happen? How early did Christians have a New Testament canon?' Well, it depends what you mean by canon. And here's a phenomenon you probably don't know about, and I want to share it with you. There is an odd sort of phenomenon in scholarship where scholars have all these wide-ranging views on the date of canon, but they're all looking at the same evidence." [00:02:30]
"The data only makes sense when you read it through a certain lens, and you reach certain conclusions from the data based on where you start. And when it comes to the definition of canon, what we learn very quickly is the definition you start with, determines what date you give the canon. But here's the trick. The historical evidence doesn't determine your definition." [00:04:00]
"The definition of canon is not something that comes from the historical evidence, it's something that determines how you interpret the historical evidence. We've got to get that definition from somewhere else. And, of course, as we'll argue here in just a second, part of what informs our definition is the Bible's own view of these books." [00:05:31]
"The first definition we want to talk about is defining the New Testament canon as a fixed, final, closed list. Okay? Some have defined the New Testament canon as a list of books that's fixed, closed, and you can't add anything to it, and you can't take anything away. When you have that, so the first definition says, then you can say you have a canon." [00:07:37]
"The positive of this definition, one thing that's good about this definition is it reminds us of something very important, and that is the canon took time. Okay? Before all was said and done and all the dust is settled, that didn't happen overnight. It took some time, probably about the fourth century before you could say, kind of the edges have solidified and we have this sort of clear unanimity around these books." [00:09:22]
"The second definition is that you have a canon when you see books of the New Testament being used as Scripture by Christians. When you see books of the New Testament being used by Christians as Scripture. Even if the boundaries aren't finalized, even if the edges are still a little fuzzy of the canon, do we see New Testament books being used as Scripture?" [00:13:06]
"This definition rightly reminds us that long before the fourth century there was a core collection of books functioning as Scripture quite nicely. In fact, probably about 22 out of 27 books were pretty established by the second century and being used fully authoritative Scripture. And then there's a few books that kind of hovered around the edges, books that typically are smaller, books like 2 Peter, 2, 3 John, Jude, tiny books, right?" [00:14:39]
"Neither the first definition nor the second definition of canon address what we might call the ontology of canon. Now, I know what's in your head right now. You're thinking, 'Did you have to really use that word? Really? Yeah, I was doing just fine. Here we're clicking along, and you use this word 'ontology of canon,' and I'm gone. I'm checked out.' But hang with me for a moment." [00:17:37]
"Do we believe that when Paul wrote Romans that it was nothing, really, of significance until the church did something with it? Or do we believe that when Paul wrote Romans it was already something special, already inspired, already, in effect, canon before anyone ever read it? Or let me put it a different way. Let's imagine that God gave His canon to His church and no one ever knew it existed. Could we still say it was there?" [00:18:37]
"The ontological definition, you could sort of say, looks at the canon from God's perspective. Leaving aside reception, leaving aside when people begin to acknowledge and receive these books. Before that even started, what we want to acknowledge theologically is that if God gave these books, and He inspired these books, and His intent was that these were the authoritative books that would guide His church, and there's something we can say that's true about them before anyone even knew they existed." [00:19:54]
"When you realize those three definitions as a package, you know what you see? You see a nice full-orbed picture of the way the canon developed, and here's how it goes. God gave His books as inspired books. You had a canon, in a sense, then. His church begins to use these books as inspired Scripture, and you have a sense of a canon then. And then His church finally reaches a full consensus on these books in the fourth century and in a sense you have a canon then." [00:22:35]
Ask a question about this sermon
"One of the big hot topics in discussions today is, 'Well, when did this happen? How early did Christians have a New Testament canon?' Well, it depends what you mean by canon. And here's a phenomenon you probably don't know about, and I want to share it with you. There is an odd sort of phenomenon in scholarship where scholars have all these wide-ranging views on the date of canon, but they're all looking at the same evidence." [00:02:30]
"The data only makes sense when you read it through a certain lens, and you reach certain conclusions from the data based on where you start. And when it comes to the definition of canon, what we learn very quickly is the definition you start with, determines what date you give the canon. But here's the trick. The historical evidence doesn't determine your definition." [00:04:00]
"The definition of canon is not something that comes from the historical evidence, it's something that determines how you interpret the historical evidence. We've got to get that definition from somewhere else. And, of course, as we'll argue here in just a second, part of what informs our definition is the Bible's own view of these books." [00:05:31]
"The first definition we want to talk about is defining the New Testament canon as a fixed, final, closed list. Okay? Some have defined the New Testament canon as a list of books that's fixed, closed, and you can't add anything to it, and you can't take anything away. When you have that, so the first definition says, then you can say you have a canon." [00:07:37]
"The positive of this definition, one thing that's good about this definition is it reminds us of something very important, and that is the canon took time. Okay? Before all was said and done and all the dust is settled, that didn't happen overnight. It took some time, probably about the fourth century before you could say, kind of the edges have solidified and we have this sort of clear unanimity around these books." [00:09:22]
"The second definition is that you have a canon when you see books of the New Testament being used as Scripture by Christians. When you see books of the New Testament being used by Christians as Scripture. Even if the boundaries aren't finalized, even if the edges are still a little fuzzy of the canon, do we see New Testament books being used as Scripture?" [00:13:06]
"This definition rightly reminds us that long before the fourth century there was a core collection of books functioning as Scripture quite nicely. In fact, probably about 22 out of 27 books were pretty established by the second century and being used fully authoritative Scripture. And then there's a few books that kind of hovered around the edges, books that typically are smaller, books like 2 Peter, 2, 3 John, Jude, tiny books, right?" [00:14:39]
"Neither the first definition nor the second definition of canon address what we might call the ontology of canon. Now, I know what's in your head right now. You're thinking, 'Did you have to really use that word? Really? Yeah, I was doing just fine. Here we're clicking along, and you use this word 'ontology of canon,' and I'm gone. I'm checked out.' But hang with me for a moment." [00:17:37]
"Do we believe that when Paul wrote Romans that it was nothing, really, of significance until the church did something with it? Or do we believe that when Paul wrote Romans it was already something special, already inspired, already, in effect, canon before anyone ever read it? Or let me put it a different way. Let's imagine that God gave His canon to His church and no one ever knew it existed. Could we still say it was there?" [00:18:37]
"The ontological definition, you could sort of say, looks at the canon from God's perspective. Leaving aside reception, leaving aside when people begin to acknowledge and receive these books. Before that even started, what we want to acknowledge theologically is that if God gave these books, and He inspired these books, and His intent was that these were the authoritative books that would guide His church, and there's something we can say that's true about them before anyone even knew they existed." [00:19:54]
"When you realize those three definitions as a package, you know what you see? You see a nice full-orbed picture of the way the canon developed, and here's how it goes. God gave His books as inspired books. You had a canon, in a sense, then. His church begins to use these books as inspired Scripture, and you have a sense of a canon then. And then His church finally reaches a full consensus on these books in the fourth century and in a sense you have a canon then." [00:22:35]
Chatbot
-
I'm an AI bot trained specifically on the sermon from Jul 24, 2024. Do you have any questions about it?