If You Believe Any Bible to Be Canonical, Your Faith Is on Shaky Ground
Posted: Tuesday, April 14, 2009
by Jeff Brown
Inner Projection
First of all, what does "canon" mean? It is a list of books that are considered to be authoritative as scripture by a particular religious community, generally Judaism and Christianity. These lists, or canons, have been developed through debate and agreement by the religious authorities of those faiths.
Keep in mind that the lists of books are not ordained of God as those that are best representatives of His Word. He has not spoken directly to any of these religious groups and ordained the selected books as representative of His word. By and large, they have been selected by a minority leadership of imperfect, politically minded men with specific and often times controlling agendas.
Also, keep in mind that there are different lists, depending on the religion and sect. Some Christian groups have made lists with canonical books that other Christian sects or denominations found non-canonical and visa versa. These various groups of "believers" who created these lists in the early history of Christianity were, initially at least, self-ordained leaders or decision makers who've passed their arbitrary "beliefs" onto the majority members who've accepted the same as "authoritative" or inspired of God. There are various theologians of the 2nd and 3rd centuries that wrote a great deal of works and used the letters of the apostles as foundation and justification for their own personal beliefs. On top of all this is the fact that the differing criteria and processes of canonization dictate what the leaders regard as inspired books.
As a point of note, I once wrote an article that spoke to the point that the beliefs many cling to-social, political, religious-are oftentimes merely hand-me-downs from parents, caregivers, authorities and so forth that have been accepted by children or underlings at an early age and have merely been taken as, if I may, gospel. The same phenomenon occurs here with large groups of believers who've accepted a particular faith's arbitrary beliefs (religion, sect) for whatever reason and have made an emotional attachment to the same that is difficult if not impossible to break free of without great discipline and honesty. Not that one needs to or should break free from beliefs, but if they have not been examined honestly, rigorously then this should be done before lifelong attachment sets in.
The crux of the issue here is that if you believe, how solid is the ground upon which you base that belief and why? Can you honestly, truthfully, thoroughly prove your belief superior to any other and why? Points many if most never consider in their emotional attachments to a particular faith. Those whose faith or beliefs come under attack very rarely have examined them and based on a mere emotional, hand-me-down attachment do not intellectualize opposition but fight it tooth and nail with emotional gusto.
So let's consider the arbitrariness of belief-often times belief that leads to heated argument if not attacks and all out war.
Some believe that certain canons are closed--nothing can be added, revelation is complete--while others believe that canons are open and that revelation will continue. Considering that there were 100s of works written by theologians with potential to be canonized a few hundred years after Christ's death and that now there is nothing may seem to some rather off, for why would God's imperfect children amongst great wars, problems, and difficulties not require continuing guidance and inspiration?
Why has God stopped talking to His children? Has mankind reached perfection? no longer in need of guidance? The great contention between religions and even within sects, as in Christian against Christian, would have one believe otherwise. Why would one God, one Creator authorize so many differing interpretations of His Word? Even allow and authorize differing religions, religions that have oftentimes clashed over difference merely ending in death with little regard for one of His greatest commandments, "Love one another as I have loved you." And even though to a great degree, most Christian sects accept the current Christian Bible as canon, why some 20,000 interpretations? Why so many sects? However, this article will not delve into this issue in detail, an issue that requires separate treatment.
There was great debate for centuries over what was to be canonical and what was non-canonical or apocrypha in Judaism and Christianity. (For now, I will deal with the larger issue, differing canons of Christianity.) However, mostly through attrition and the acceptance of the familiar, by the 17th century, the canons were closed for the Roman Catholics, Church of England, British Calvinists, and Greek Orthodox.
Just like most problems, if there is no reason to rock the status quo then best to go with what has become accepted. But also keep in mind that the majority were merely followers, followers who were often threatened with life and limb if they opposed doctrine. For example, consider that in 1633 Galileo was put under house arrest for the remainder of his life for following the position of Copernicus that the earth moved and the sun did not. Here was someone who differed and was taught by those in charge not to oppose "Holy Scripture" or, more accurately, the arbitrary beliefs of the powerful minority theologian leaders in charge. Another human phenomenon is that humans have a difficult time with change and the familiar, the safe (especially that which has been around for centuries) if altered would appear to most be blasphemous regardless of the accuracy or importance of any new doctrine that may come forth.
But to this day, not everyone believes that the most popular version of the Bible is correct or properly canonized. For example, the Ethiopian and Syriac Christian churches which did not participate in these councils (those sects mentioned above who closed their canons) developed their own biblical traditions. These groups believe that, in spite of the disagreements about certain books in early Christianity and, indeed, still today, the New Testament supports the view that Paul (2 Timothy 4:11–13), Peter (2 Peter 3:15–16), and ultimately John (Revelation 22:18–19) finalized the canon of the New Testament.
What of those books currently accepted by most Christians as canonical or non-canonical? (Keep in mind that different denominations have different ideas about what is canonical and what is apocrypha or false doctrine). There are not only books that have been left out of the current Bible that in the early years of the church were popular but they were also seen as canonical. Meaning that these books that were left out were not left out because of authoritative issues but for other lesser reasons.
Consider The Life of Adam and Eve, a very popular work in the early years of the church that goes into great detail but was left out for it would have to go before Genesis and Genesis explains the creation of the earth and then Adam and Eve. In this version, the problem of Adam and Eve in Genesis only having sons (Cain, Able, Seth) to populate the earth tells of 30 sons and 30 daughters. The current story in the more accepted canonized version of the Bible of Adam and Eve is problematic, for these first parents only have sons. There is no mention of a woman; however, later the reader is told that Cane took a wife and bore children. This sudden appearance of a woman for Cane to take as wife is never explained in the Bible.
There also appear in Genesis giants or Nephilim of which the giant Goliath is a descendant. However, their appearance or origins are never explained. In the Book of Enoch, which is not considered canonical by most Christian sects, except for the Ethiopian Orthodox Church, the origin of these giants is explained. In the Book of Watchers, fallen angels mate with human females whose offspring are the Nephilim or giants. And even for those who don't consider the Book of Enoch canonical, it is explicitly quoted in the New Testament (Letter of Jude 1:14-15) and by many early Church Fathers or influential theologians in the first five centuries of the church.
Then we have the Gospel of Mary. There is debate as to the Mary spoke of is Mary Magdalene or the mother of Jesus. Some scholars believe that it is Mary, the mother of Jesus, in which the Roman Catholic tradition believes that Jesus loved her more than the other disciples, that she was the greatest disciple. If this is true, then one can see that the Church Fathers would not want to encourage this positioning of women above men as leaders of the church and consider the Gospel of Mary non-canonical.
Amongst the great contradictions, missing information and errors in your bible of choice there is also disagreements as to canon, even procedures to determine canon. So one can see that one who is set in their ways about belief or interpretation has some opening up to do to the truths of diversity in all that is deemed sacred text.
Keep in mind that the lists of books are not ordained of God as those that are best representatives of His Word. He has not spoken directly to any of these religious groups and ordained the selected books as representative of His word. By and large, they have been selected by a minority leadership of imperfect, politically minded men with specific and often times controlling agendas.
As a point of note, I once wrote an article that spoke to the point that the beliefs many cling to-social, political, religious-are oftentimes merely hand-me-downs from parents, caregivers, authorities and so forth that have been accepted by children or underlings at an early age and have merely been taken as, if I may, gospel. The same phenomenon occurs here with large groups of believers who've accepted a particular faith's arbitrary beliefs (religion, sect) for whatever reason and have made an emotional attachment to the same that is difficult if not impossible to break free of without great discipline and honesty. Not that one needs to or should break free from beliefs, but if they have not been examined honestly, rigorously then this should be done before lifelong attachment sets in.
The crux of the issue here is that if you believe, how solid is the ground upon which you base that belief and why? Can you honestly, truthfully, thoroughly prove your belief superior to any other and why? Points many if most never consider in their emotional attachments to a particular faith. Those whose faith or beliefs come under attack very rarely have examined them and based on a mere emotional, hand-me-down attachment do not intellectualize opposition but fight it tooth and nail with emotional gusto.
So let's consider the arbitrariness of belief-often times belief that leads to heated argument if not attacks and all out war.
Some believe that certain canons are closed--nothing can be added, revelation is complete--while others believe that canons are open and that revelation will continue. Considering that there were 100s of works written by theologians with potential to be canonized a few hundred years after Christ's death and that now there is nothing may seem to some rather off, for why would God's imperfect children amongst great wars, problems, and difficulties not require continuing guidance and inspiration?
Why has God stopped talking to His children? Has mankind reached perfection? no longer in need of guidance? The great contention between religions and even within sects, as in Christian against Christian, would have one believe otherwise. Why would one God, one Creator authorize so many differing interpretations of His Word? Even allow and authorize differing religions, religions that have oftentimes clashed over difference merely ending in death with little regard for one of His greatest commandments, "Love one another as I have loved you." And even though to a great degree, most Christian sects accept the current Christian Bible as canon, why some 20,000 interpretations? Why so many sects? However, this article will not delve into this issue in detail, an issue that requires separate treatment.
There was great debate for centuries over what was to be canonical and what was non-canonical or apocrypha in Judaism and Christianity. (For now, I will deal with the larger issue, differing canons of Christianity.) However, mostly through attrition and the acceptance of the familiar, by the 17th century, the canons were closed for the Roman Catholics, Church of England, British Calvinists, and Greek Orthodox.
Just like most problems, if there is no reason to rock the status quo then best to go with what has become accepted. But also keep in mind that the majority were merely followers, followers who were often threatened with life and limb if they opposed doctrine. For example, consider that in 1633 Galileo was put under house arrest for the remainder of his life for following the position of Copernicus that the earth moved and the sun did not. Here was someone who differed and was taught by those in charge not to oppose "Holy Scripture" or, more accurately, the arbitrary beliefs of the powerful minority theologian leaders in charge. Another human phenomenon is that humans have a difficult time with change and the familiar, the safe (especially that which has been around for centuries) if altered would appear to most be blasphemous regardless of the accuracy or importance of any new doctrine that may come forth.
But to this day, not everyone believes that the most popular version of the Bible is correct or properly canonized. For example, the Ethiopian and Syriac Christian churches which did not participate in these councils (those sects mentioned above who closed their canons) developed their own biblical traditions. These groups believe that, in spite of the disagreements about certain books in early Christianity and, indeed, still today, the New Testament supports the view that Paul (2 Timothy 4:11–13), Peter (2 Peter 3:15–16), and ultimately John (Revelation 22:18–19) finalized the canon of the New Testament.
What of those books currently accepted by most Christians as canonical or non-canonical? (Keep in mind that different denominations have different ideas about what is canonical and what is apocrypha or false doctrine). There are not only books that have been left out of the current Bible that in the early years of the church were popular but they were also seen as canonical. Meaning that these books that were left out were not left out because of authoritative issues but for other lesser reasons.
Consider The Life of Adam and Eve, a very popular work in the early years of the church that goes into great detail but was left out for it would have to go before Genesis and Genesis explains the creation of the earth and then Adam and Eve. In this version, the problem of Adam and Eve in Genesis only having sons (Cain, Able, Seth) to populate the earth tells of 30 sons and 30 daughters. The current story in the more accepted canonized version of the Bible of Adam and Eve is problematic, for these first parents only have sons. There is no mention of a woman; however, later the reader is told that Cane took a wife and bore children. This sudden appearance of a woman for Cane to take as wife is never explained in the Bible.
There also appear in Genesis giants or Nephilim of which the giant Goliath is a descendant. However, their appearance or origins are never explained. In the Book of Enoch, which is not considered canonical by most Christian sects, except for the Ethiopian Orthodox Church, the origin of these giants is explained. In the Book of Watchers, fallen angels mate with human females whose offspring are the Nephilim or giants. And even for those who don't consider the Book of Enoch canonical, it is explicitly quoted in the New Testament (Letter of Jude 1:14-15) and by many early Church Fathers or influential theologians in the first five centuries of the church.
Then we have the Gospel of Mary. There is debate as to the Mary spoke of is Mary Magdalene or the mother of Jesus. Some scholars believe that it is Mary, the mother of Jesus, in which the Roman Catholic tradition believes that Jesus loved her more than the other disciples, that she was the greatest disciple. If this is true, then one can see that the Church Fathers would not want to encourage this positioning of women above men as leaders of the church and consider the Gospel of Mary non-canonical.
Amongst the great contradictions, missing information and errors in your bible of choice there is also disagreements as to canon, even procedures to determine canon. So one can see that one who is set in their ways about belief or interpretation has some opening up to do to the truths of diversity in all that is deemed sacred text.
This Article has been viewed 687 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
Top-level comments on this article: (7 total)Far worse.Its far worse than you ever remotely hinted at;Much worse than the blind ,unthinking bible thumpers are the inescapable,indigestible creeping realizations that predominately reveal the Jewish book of fairytales to be what it is(Not the true book of the one true God,but,mostly nonsense tales of a vengeful God and one,only one chosen people).The all loving God creates universes and star systems and worlds and sentient entities,throughout,but does NOT write or dictate books!Paul,
Thanks for reading and commenting. My intent was not to discredit the Bible, canonical, or even non-canonical texts but to help people to see to the deeper truths that lie behind the sad nature of humankind to find difference--in this case religious--and to pull rank based on difference when there is no just cause. Thanks for reading.
Hi Jeff, if we can't stand on the bible for truth, than God is not big enough to keep his promise, in that case we are all doomed, if in fact, there is even a God.. There is only one truth, of all the translations of the bible, they all teach the same doctrine. the only thing that is different and teaches extra-biblical doctrine is "watch tower" "the pearl of great price", "doctrines and covenants" and the "Catechism" of the catholic church. If everyone stuck to just the bible, the doctrine would be the same. The saying, "It is true, as far as it is translated correctly" makes no sense, it takes the authority away from the bible and who then decides what is translated correctly? Some writings within the same religion even contradict their own work, that to me is shakey ground. The bible never contradicts itself.It makes me so sad that extra biblical writings have taken the place "as gospel" over the Scriptures themselves. God told us he would preserve his word, I believe that wholeheartedly. That does not make my faith stand on shakey ground, it makes it solid. Not swayed by other doctrines outside the bible which cause doubt and confusion and contradict the Bible.Peace,TeresaTeresa,
"There is only one truth, of all the translations of the bible, they all teach the same doctrine."
Hate to say it, but that's hardly the truth. There are several bibles or interpretations of what is canon and what is not. And over the early centuries of the church, there were numerous books that were canonical but were left out for political reasons. And even if they all have the same doctrine or we all work from the exact same bible, why the 20,000 different Christian sects?
But my point is that because of this evident difference, why do so many believe that they have the only truth or that their bible or interpretation of the bible is correct? Lots of Christian churches out there and a lot of different doctrine. I know. I've become intimately familiar with many and they are as different as night and day as to their beliefs, interpretations, and understanding of the bible, even if they all used the same bible, it doesn’t matter. There is difference and there's no two ways about it.
I wrote this article to help people understand that they can't say there is sameness in all Christian beliefs, interpretation and understandings. But the most important thing is to not focus on the difference but to do the simplest of things the doctrine suggest: love your brothers and sisters. It doesn't say contend one wiht another, for that is of the devil. Just dealing with the facts ma'am, nothing but the facts, so help me God. ;=)
Thanks for stopping by and taking the time to read. Peace!
Yet another very good topic for discussion. I only have the Holy Spirit as my ultimate authority and I trust what He speaks to me about what I read that refutes what the King James Version states. I agree with Jeff in that not just any Bible is canonical. I also agree with Teresa in that there is only one Truth and that is based on the words Christ spoke that I read in the KJV first. I use parallel translations in study but am careful what I accept as the inspired Word of God outside of just a few translations. As a litmus test, I will use what is said in a red-letter edition of the KJV as my guide. If that gives me a totally different understanding leading to false doctrine, I do not consider it the infallible Word of God or Truth.
Because of God's grace and tender mercies, I would not go as far as to determine whose faith is on shaky ground based on what I have said and my knowledge of Christ. He knows the difference between a stony heart failing to accept Truth, a heart that has been manipulated by false teachers and one that is being destroyed for lack of knowledge.
God knows the heart. What I find remarkable about the Holy Scriptures is, Jesus Christ was more than a genius and He was surrounded by highly intelligent disciples. Jesus' parables were elementary so that they could be easily understood and so were Paul's letters etc. The book of John is an excellent place to start for anyone. Somehow, somewhere through time to the present, the trend is, "let me make a Bible."
I'm a woman of average intelligence and below that at times and I like the simple gospel Truths taught in the KJV Bible.
I don't have to convince you I'm no theologian or seminary grad, do I?
Blessings and Peace to you, Jeff. I enjoyed reading this and all of the comments.Avis,
You've got it. The message I was going for is one of caution what with all the various sects and their interpretations / understandings. And yes, the ultimate way is one on one with God where we are told spirit to spirit the truth. Thanks for stopping by.
Hi Jeff,I completely respect your position, but why would you say, "Your faith is on shakey ground" if you believe in the Bible as the source of truth? To me, that does not suggest your are trying to point out obvious differences in intrepretation. It suggests people should not trust the bible because it might not be true. Two opposing doctrines cannot be true, that makes no sense. There are different sects because of interpretation, not because there is different truth. Jesus said I am the way and the truth and the light. Not I am one of the truths and one of the lights...There is only one truth. I agree that no one religion can claim they have the one correct truth - there is so much to learn. yet, there are three mainstream religions that claim they are the only way to heaven and put their doctrines above the Bible, and will tell you that if you do not go to their church you are not in the right church. I disagree with this, it is about a relationship with God through Christ and repentance, not the name on the building. God never intended there to be denominations, this was man made.Okay, there are some different translations of the bible outside of the Christian faith, that is true and they definitely teach different doctrine, I have read those, but history proves those were translated by people who did not know greek or Hebrew and they actually rewrote and translated into their interpretation for religion they started.But I was talking about all the translations that were made directly from the greekm, aramaic, and hebrew texts. The Septuagent etc.. Like the NIV, NLT, KJV, NRSB, NKJV, Holman Standard, NASB, these all say the same thing, the just use different english words. These are the ones Christians use no matter what denomination. Obviously Paraphrases are the writers interpretation.I agree that we are to focus on what unites us as people, but some things are worth standing up for - Jesus did, and so did all the apostles. All the epistles discuss this at length. But we are not to fight and call eachother names over it. And this is a fact :-)I guess my real problem is with your title. Not that this is your problem :-)Thanks for listening. Blessings to you! TeresaTeresa,
Well, if you look at what is canon for some of the major sects, those I've mentioned in the article, the canon differs. My bottom line point is that there is ultimate truth, of course, but many have misread, misused, and abused that truth to their own ends, and that is very obvious as well. My point being that people get lost in the details and don't forget difference to seek sameness and that is Christ's message. He tells us that contention is of the evil one and this contention has been used for centuries to differentiate and destroy, a sad state of affairs for a message of One who only desires to bring together all through patience, long suffering, and love. Ultimately we will all be judged on our actions and deeds and that which is in our hearts. Whether or not we've believed the teachings of men and been mislead accordingly is another lesser issue. Thanks for stopping by and commenting.Hi Jeff, this is not at all the point you made in your article. Your last line says it all.But you did turn it around nicely in the comments to everyone else, thank you for that.Peace.Teresa,
Well, it's exactly the point I made. Read more closely. Thanks for reading. Peace!
Bottom Line- God is powerful and smart enough to get His message across.Ken,
That's my point that He will get His message across not man. Thanks for stopping by to read and comment.
The most important line I got from this was the following:". . . the arbitrary beliefs of the powerful minority theologian leaders in charge."That says it all. Very well-written article, Jeff. Thank you.That's the gist of it. Thanks for stopping by to comment. Happy Tax Week.
hello, today is Dec. 23,2009 In the last year my husband and I have come into allot of knowledge on the Word... yes, the Scriptures... I know there is an ALmighty One. the Father of all... But that MAN has re-written the so-called New Testament to all read as a zodiac horoscope. !! Our Father tells us to stay away from witchcraft and things of this nature... We were NEVER suppose to worship the creation... But rather the Creator... SO Rome the Beast... and her harlotts have found a way to make people worship a J.C charactor ( As the SUN ) not Son... and they don't even know it. !! Now I know there is ONE true Abba Father.. and thats it... No trinity or nothing to control the massed of people... and gain of greedy $$$ ..... Father even says, MY PEOPLE PARISH FOR A LACK OF KNOWLEDGE !! I know HE is real cause HE ( Almighty Father ) changed me not J.C.!! read some verses like LUKE 22:10 this is talking about Aquarius ( man holding a jug of water ) Or verses like my father has many houses !! yes, 12 !! aries, capricorn, Libra Etc.... or verses like ROCK OF AGES... this Year of 2000 is the year of Pisces... FISH... get it... J.C fish... goes and finds 2 men on the shore... or Matthew 24:30 You will see me coming in the clouds..!! " THE SUN" so..... It has been devistating to us... We didn't follow the J.C god of Sun day worship. day one. or eat unclean foods, or do the PAGAN holidays, the Father warned us on... We thought we knew the son Yahushuah. but now Im wondering if we created are own j.c (jesus )character but does the right stuff... hhhmmm in other words... the fairy tale is over... dumb Magi priest of the 3 wise man ! right 3 stars of Orion.. I really wonder were the TRUE writings are of the Word. !! so be careful of the new testamnet ... its all about worshipping the beast !! jesus said he would be with us till the END of the Age .. yes, when the zodiaz moves into the house of Aquarius and no longer Pisces the FISH... the christian fish !! man talk about being decieved.... Go back to the begininning ... thats all there is... Follow the ONE true Mighty one... and not graven images, holidays, eating unclean.... And stay in the Word... Repentance is just needed here... and HE will give you a NEW HEART... Ezekiel 36:26-28 !! thanks for this site.. I just found it... I pray for many... deni..
We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.