Lost scriptures: books that did not make it into the New Testament (88 page)

which the gates of hell will not prehis teacher at his leisure. And so any vail [Matt. 16:18], left behind one

church that considers the epistle to

letter that is acknowledged, and posbe Paul’s should be approved for sibly a second, for it is disputed. And

their view; for the ancients had good

336

CANONICAL LISTS

reason to pass it on as his. But as to

whereas others think it was Luke,

who wrote the epistle, truly God

the one who wrote the Gospel and

knows. We have heard a report from

Acts. . . . . (Eusebius,
Church
His-

some that it was written by Clement,

tory,
6. 25, 3–14).

who become bishop of Rome;

The Canon of Eusebius

Eusebius of Caesarea is commonly known as the “Father of Church History.”

His famous ten-volume work,
Church
History,
originally published in 311

ce, was the first full sketch of the history of the church, from the days of Jesus down to Eusebius’s own time. As a result, Eusebius is an incomparable source for historians interested in the first three centuries of Christianity.

For not only does he narrate events that transpired during this period and discuss its key figures, but he also quotes extensively many of the primary texts that Christians had written. A number of these texts have otherwise been lost to history, so that when Eusebius quotes them at length and accurately (which he often does), he provides us with unparalleled access to the Christian literature of the period.

Eusebius’s account is, of course, told from his own perspective, with his biases affecting both his selection of material and the spin that he puts on it. Moreover, on occasion Eusebius explicitly intervenes in his historical narrative to express his own understanding of the developments he describes.

One place that he does so involves his discussion of the books that he considered to be canonical Scripture. The passage is important for showing that even by his time, some 200–250 years after the earliest surviving Christian writings, there were still vibrant debates over the contours of the canon, even within orthodox circles.1

Eusebius’s listing of books is somewhat complicated, as he indicates that the status of several books was still under dispute. In any event, he indicates that books making a claim to being canonical fall into four categories: (a) “acknowledged books,” that is, those accepted as canonical by all proto-orthodox churches, (b) “disputed books,” that is, those recognized by some churches but not others, (c) “spurious books,” that is, orthodox books that are in fact pseudonymous and so not to be accepted, and (d) rejected books, that is, heretical forgeries.

1See further, Ehrman,
Lost
Christianities,
164–68; 172–76.

Translation by Bart D. Ehrman, based on the Greek text of Gustave Bardy,
Eusèbe
de
Ceśaree´,
Histoire
Eccleśiastique
(SC, 41; Paris: Cerf, 1951).

337

338

CANONICAL LISTS

Having reached this point, it is reasoning to the Hebrews, which is particularly able to summarize the writings already

celebrated among those who have acreferred to as belonging to the New Tescepted Christ from among the Hebrews.

tament. Among the first books must be

All these should be counted among the

located the holy quaternion of the Gosdisputed books; but nonetheless we have pels, which are followed by the Acts of

felt compelled to make a list of them,

the Apostles. After this must be reckoned

distinguishing between writings that are

the epistles of Paul. Then to be confirmed

acknowledged as true and genuine by the

are the first epistle bearing the name of

tradition of the church and those that are

John and likewise that of Peter. After

not—books that do not belong in the New

these is to be placed, if it seems right, the

Testament but are disputed, yet are

Apocalypse of John; we will set forth

known to the majority of church people.

other opinions about it at the appropriate

In this way we are able to know which

time. These, then, are among the acare in that category and which are set knowledged books.

forth by heretics in the names of the

But among the disputed books, which

apostles, whether Gospels allegedly by

are nonetheless known by many, are

Peter, Thomas, Matthias, and of some

found the epistle of James, as it is called,

other than these, or Acts allegedly of

that of Jude, the second epistle of Peter,

Andrew, John, and other apostles. No one

and those called the second and third

standing in the succession of the true

epistles of John, whether they come from

churches ever thought it worthwhile to

the evangelist or from someone with the

mention any of these in any of his treasame name.

tises. And their literary character differs

Among those that are spurious are to

greatly from the style characteristically

be placed the Acts of Paul and the book

found in the apostolic writings; while the

called the
Shepherd,
the Apocalypse of

opinions they express and their choice of

Peter, the surviving Epistle of Barnabas,

material clearly reveal that they are as

and the book called
Teachings
[� the

different as possible from truly orthodox

Didache]
of
the
Apostles,
and, as I have works, since they are, after all, fabricasaid, the Apocalypse of John, if that tions of heretics. For that reason they

seems right—a book that some reject but

should not be counted even among the

others judge to belong to the acknowlspurious works, but are to be rejected in edged books. But some people also numevery way as absurd and godless. (Euber among these the Gospel accord-sebius,
Church
History
, 3. 25, 1–7)

The Canon of Athanasius

of Alexandria

Athanasius was one of the most important figures in orthodox Christianity of the fourth century. As a young man he attended the first “ecumenical”

church council, the Council of Nicea in 325 ce, called by the Emperor Constantine, in part, to resolve theological differences that were splitting the church. The creed that came out of the Council became instrumental in the formation of later Christian theology, and developed into what is now called the “Nicene Creed,” still recited in churches today. Throughout the fourth century Athanasius was an outspoken proponent of the doctrinal resolutions of Nicea and wrote numerous theological treatises that explicated his views.

Athanasius became the bishop of the church of Alexandria in 328 ce.

In this position, every year he wrote the churches under his jurisdiction in order to establish for them the date on which Easter was to be celebrated.

He used the occasion of these letters to provide pastoral, practical, and theological instruction as well. Probably the most famous of these letters was the one he wrote in 367 ce, the thirty-ninth Festal letter, in which, among other things, he laid out for his churches the contours of the biblical canon, both Old and New Testaments. Here he indicates the books that were to be read in the churches, and indicates—both explicitly and by inference—the books that were not. “In these alone,” says Athanasius of the canonical writings, “the teaching of godliness is proclaimed. Let no one add to these; let nothing be taken away from them.”1

This is the first time—some three centuries after the earliest Christian writings were produced—that any Christian author of any kind listed as canonical the current twenty-seven books of the New Testament. It should not be thought, however, that even with Athanasius the matter was finally resolved. For other Christian leaders—including some within Athanasius’s 1See further, Ehrman,
Lost
Christianities,
230–31.

Translation by Bart D. Ehrman, based on the Greek text in Daniel J. Theron,
Evidence
of
Tradition
(Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1957) 118.

339

340

CANONICAL LISTS

own church—questioned the canonicity of several of the books he listed (e.g., 2 Peter) and maintained that some others should be included in the canon as well (e.g., the
Shepherd
of Hermas). Still, it was eventually the canon promoted first by Athanasius that became the accepted list of sacred Christian books, the New Testament.

And now without hesitation I should

add the following, indicating out of neagain speak of the books of the New cessity that there are books other than

Testament. For they are as follows. The

these that are not, on the one hand, infour Gospels according to Matthew, cluded in the canon, but that have none

Mark, Luke, and John. Then after these

theless been designated by the fathers as

the Acts of the Apostles and the seven

books to be read to those who have rebooks by the apostles called the Catholic cently come to the faith and wish to be

Epistles: one of James, two of Peter, then

instructed in the word of piety: the Wisthree of John, and after them one of Jude.

dom of Solomon, the Wisdom of Sirach,

In addition to these are the fourteen epis

Esther, Judith, Tobit, the book called the

tles of the apostle Paul, written in the

Teaching
[� Didache]
of
the
Apostles
and following order: first to the Romans, then

the
Shepherd.
Nonetheless, brothers,

two to the Corinthians, and after these to

while the former are in the canon and the

the Galatians and next to the Ephesians;

latter are to be read, there should be no

then to the Philippians and to the Colosmention at all of apocryphal books cresians, two to the Thessalonians and then ated by heretics, who write them whento the Hebrews; after these are two to ever they want but try to bestow favor on

Timothy, one to Titus, and, finally, one

them by assigning them dates, that by

to Philemon. In addition is the Apocasetting them forth as ancient, they can be, lypse of John.

on false grounds, used to deceive the

But for the sake of greater accuracy I

simple minded.

The Canon of the Third

Synod of Carthage

The New Testament canon was never ratified by an “ecumenical” council (i.e. a meeting of bishops from around the Christian world) in the early church. But there were several smaller synods and councils that pronounced judgment on which books should be accepted as canonical Scripture. Evidently the first to ratify the twenty-seven book canon propounded by Athanasius, and accepted by most churches still today, was a Synod in Hippo, North Africa, in 393 ce, where the greatest orthodox theologian of antiquity, Augustine of Hippo, threw his weight behind Athanasius’s list and pushed its acceptance. Unfortunately, we no longer have a record of the proceedings of the conference. But we do have the proceedings of the Third Synod of Carthage, held four years later, which summarized what had transpired at the earlier meeting. These latter proceedings are given here.

Even this synod’s affirmation of the canon was not universally binding, as indicated in the proceedings themselves, where it is noted that the church across the sea (i.e., Rome, on the other side of the Mediterranean) was to be consulted on the matter. And, as it turns out, different churches in other parts of the world never did agree on this twenty-seven book canon, despite its overwhelming acceptance in both Western and Eastern branches of Christendom.1

Besides the canonical Scriptures, noth-

canonical Scriptures are these: [then foling shall be read in church under the lows a list of Old Testament books]. The

name of divine Scriptures. Moreover, the

[books of the] New Testament: the Gos1See further Ehrman,
Lost
Christianities,
229–47.

Translation by Bruce M. Metzger,
The
Canon
of
the
New
Testament:
Its
Origin,
Development,
and
Significance
(Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1987) 315; used with permission.

341

342

CANONICAL LISTS

pels, four books; the Acts of the Apostles,

of John. Concerning the confirmation of

one book; the Epistles of Paul, thirteen;

this canon, the transmarine Church shall

of the same to the Hebrews, one Epistle;

be consulted. On the anniversaries of

of Peter, two; of John, apostle, three; of

martyrs, their acts shall also be read.

James, one; of Jude, one; the Revelation