M
mclr_1397
Guest
is it true that the development of Sacred Scripture//Canon took almost 5 centuries to compose or put together the books which later constituted as the Bible??
- Status
G
garysibio
Guest
Close, but no cigar.
The biblical canon was decided near the end of the 4th century at the (non-ecumenical) Councils of Carthage and Hippo. Since they were not ecumenical councils, this canon - which corresponds to the one in use in Catholic Bibles today - was not binding on all believers. That did not happen until the 16th century Council of Trent when the Protestant rejection of the deuterocanonical books made it an issue. On the other hand, I’m not aware of any significant variation on the accepted canon prior to the Reformation. Even St. jerome, who previously rejected the deuterocanonical books as canonical, seems to have changed his mind afterwards.
D
diggerdomer
Guest
No. The books of the New Testament were well known and regarded as such in the 2nd century (though not unanimously).
If you’re talking about the Old Testament, it was written (most likely) over a period of about 1000 years but was definitively defined in the 1st or 2nd century A.D.
O
Omyo12
Guest
Hebrew, James, 1 & 2 Peter, 1-3 John, Jude and Revelation where disputed well into the 4th century. Most didn’t regard them as canonical in the early years.
They were rarely mentioned in the 2nd century and while mentioned they were disputed in the 3rd century.
Its not until the 4th century when lists with the modern NT canon appear. One of the earliest canon lists with the modern NT canon is in the Letter of Athanasius (Bishop of Alexandria) in 367 AD.
Cyril of Jerusalem (about 348 AD) does not list Revelation. Same at the Council of Laodicea-- Revelation is omitted.
D
diggerdomer
Guest
I acknowledged there were disputes in the 2nd century.
O
Omyo12
Guest
I know,
However it just seemed as if though you were saying they were seen as canonical but there were some that disagreed when in reality most didn’t consider them canonical at all. Many didn’t even mention them.
D
diggerdomer
Guest
The earlier the period we’re talking of, the harder it is to know for sure. The historical evidence gets slighter, so I think we have to be careful in making statements about knowing what “most” or “all” people did or thought. We can say what we know from the historical evidence we have, and that certainly gives us some indication of what most or all may have done/thought…but there’s a significant difference.
ANyway. I think I’m just saying that all the books we have in the NT were known and considered Scripture by Christians in the 2nd century. As far as we know. Some books were disputed for a long period of time (as you note) and maybe only gradually became accepted by the majority.
- Status