(ACD Bible Study Notes February 27, 2007)

The First Christian Canon

by Brian Knowles

The early Apostolic Church had no "New Testament" and only part of what is now called "The Old Testament." Yet, it did possess "the faith once for all delivered to the saints" (Jude 3). This period of church history is known as the "primitive" era – the time largely prior to the formation of the Christian Bible. Some define "primitive" as the era of the apostles – approx. 30-100 AD.

When Paul wrote to Timothy: "…from infancy you have known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus," (II Timothy 3:15), he was referring to the Scriptures Timothy had heard read in the synagogue from childhood. The term "holy Scriptures" did not, during the time of Timothy’s childhood, officially include at least five of the books that are now a part of the Old Testament (TaNaKh): Ezekiel, Proverbs, Esther, Ecclesiastes and Song of Solomon. Together, these megillot (Heb., scrolls) were referred to as antilegomenoi (Greek, lit., spoken against). They existed of course, and they were read; but the Jewish religious leadership was still debating their legitimacy as official components of the TaNaKh.

Following the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D., the leaders of the Jews were forced to rethink their religious practices. This process included reexamining the objections to accepting the canonicity of the above five books. These discussions allegedly took place at Jamnia (also known as Yavneh or Jabneh) around 90 A.D. The leader of the Jewish scholars assembled at Yavneh was R. Johanan ben Zakkai, who had received special permission from the Romans to settle there. Yavneh was located on the coast just below Joppa. According to Paul D. Wegner, "Even though the canonicity of these books was questioned, it is doubtful that the scholars at Jamnia had the authority to modify the canon of Scripture; either way the Old Testament canon remained the same," (The Journey from Texts to Translation, p. 116).

When Paul wrote to Timothy, the documents that later came to constitute "The New Testament" had not yet been written or assembled into a collection. The first person to attempt to create a Christian canon was Marcion. Note Wegner’s comments on him:

"Some people have argued that the Old Testament has been superseded by the New Testament and is thereby rendered unnecessary. One of the earliest to do so was Marcion, a native of Sinope in Asia Minor, who came to Rome about A.D. 140 and founded a sect contending that the Old Testament had been made obsolete by the New Testament. He argued that the Creator God, who manifested himself as Yahweh in the Old Testament, was inferior to the good and loving God in the New Testament, who revealed himself as a Father. Marcion further argued that the Old Testament ought not to be regarded as part of the Christian canon," (ibid. p. 33).

When we consider that the New Testament, as we have it today, includes 176 quotations from the Old Testament (14 in John and 162 from Acts 15:36 to the end of the NT), this is a remarkable assertion. Jesus, in his teaching and in his living, often referred or alluded to the TaNaKh. Without access to it, many of his teachings would make little sense. Put simply, the New Testament is founded upon the Old. It is part of a literary continuum that hangs together. To cherry pick within it is to do editorial violence to its fundamental fabric.

Marcion was wrong in rejecting the Old Testament. Jesus himself quoted it and lived by it. He pointed out to his own disciples that he did not come to do away with the TaNaKh (through misinterpretation or otherwise), but rather to fulfill it. Jesus was a living Torah. He personified its precepts. He never once violated, and consistently exemplified, its correct interpretation and application for Jews. He did not, as some have asserted, violate the Sabbath Day – he simply observed it correctly. Some religious leaders of his time begged to differ, but that was their problem, not his. They had built their "fence around Torah" too far out.

Marcion broke down any "fences" and did away with much of the Bible. According to Church historian Philip Schaff, "Marcion formed a canon of his own, which consisted only of eleven books, an abridged and mutilated Gospel of Luke, and ten of Paul’s epistles." (History of the Christian Church, Vol. II, p. 486). Marcion placed Galatians first in order and labeled Ephesians "the epistle to the Laodiceans." He rejected entirely the Pastoral epistles, Hebrews, Matthew, Mark, John and Acts, along with the seven general (so-called "catholic") epistles and Revelation.

A sect of pseudo-Christianity formed around Marcion and his teachings, many of which were quite bizarre. It spread within Italy, Egypt, North Africa, Cyprus and Syria. After that, it fragmented into many pieces, according to Schaff. "Remains of them are found as late as the tenth century. Some of their principles revived among the Paulicians, who took refuge in Bulgaria, and the Cathari in the West" (Schaff, ibid., p. 487).

Marcion and his followers, despite their antinomianism (the view that there is no need for the law of God in Christian life), abstained from marriage, refused to eat flesh (except for fish) or drink wine, and experienced persecution. "He admitted married persons to baptism only on a vow of abstinence from all sexual intercourse," (Schaff, ibid., p. 486).

Put in modern terms, the man who first attempted to form a Christian canon was an odd duck, a Gnostic, a heretic, an antinomian, and a pseudo-Christian. Had his views prevailed, the Church today would look quite different than it does. The Lord’s supper would not include wine and newly baptized members would be given milk & honey at baptism. Some Marcionites practiced what is now a Mormon practice: vicarious baptism for the dead. Converts would be consigned to sexless marriages. Jews, and all things Jewish, would be hated by the Church (of course some Christians today do just that by embracing Replacement Theology). The God of the Old Testament would be viewed as unrelated to the God of the New. For Marcion, the God of the Old Testament was as "harsh, severe and unmerciful as his law…" (Schaff, p. 485).

Fortunately for all of us Marcion’s canon was never adopted by the winners of early ecclesiastical battles, nor were his strange teachings. Yet, even today we can detect odiferous whiffs of his doctrines in various parts of the larger Church. We still see vicarious baptism for the dead in the cults. We see virulent anti-Semitism and anti-Judaism in various parts of the Body. Some churches do not permit their members to drink alcohol. Some hold celibacy as a higher state that marriage, even though the New Testament says, "Marriage is honorable in all and the bed undefiled…" (Hebrews 13:4).

Many Christians proudly carry around a "New Testament & Psalms" as if the rest of the Scriptures had little or no significance for today. Those who do editorial violence to whole blocks of Scripture in this manner might justifiably be labeled "Neo-Marcionites." Writes Schaff of Marcion: "Marcion was the most earnest, the most practical, and the most dangerous among the Gnostics, full of energy and zeal for reforming, but restless, rough and eccentric. He has a remote connection with modern questions of biblical criticism and the canon," (Schaff, p. 483).

Marcion’s bastardized canon is no more – thank God. But some of his more toxic ideas live on. They must be recognized for what they are: aberrations. Meanwhile, we have the 27 books of the New Testament to add to the 39 of the Old giving us a 66-book Canon that serves us well.

1