Canonical Books of the Bible

Discussion in 'Sacred Scripture' started by PDL, Aug 2, 2021.

  1. PDL

    PDL Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    528
    Likes Received:
    388
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    Religion:
    Church of England
    I know that Anglicans, Catholics, Orthodox, Protestants, etc. do not agree on the canonical books of the Old Testament.

    What I am interested to know is if we all agree of the canon of the New Testament. I think we do. I know of no Christian church that does not have the four gospels, Acts and Revelation. Thus, if we do differ it could only be about certain epistles.
     
  2. Ananias

    Ananias Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    410
    Likes Received:
    365
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    ACNA
    Among Christians, I think only the Antiochan Orthodox (and maybe the Coptic Christian church) has a different New Testament canon in that they reject the book of Revelation as part of the canon. I may be wrong about this, however.
     
    PDL likes this.
  3. PDL

    PDL Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    528
    Likes Received:
    388
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    Religion:
    Church of England
    Oh I am surprised. I believe you but was surprised to learn that those eastern churches do not accept Revelation. It seems I was wrong because I thought it was one of the books we all accepted, as I said in my OP. I'll now have to do some research because your answer has intrigued me. I want to know why they don't accept it as part of the Canon.
     
  4. Carolinian

    Carolinian Member

    Posts:
    82
    Likes Received:
    69
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    Christian
    The Antiochian Orthodox Church says on its website that it holds to the Biblical canon defined by the Council of Rome in 382.

    "Likewise the order of the writings of the New and Eternal Testament, which only the holy and Catholic Church supports. Of the Gospels, according to Matthew one book, according to Mark one book, according to Luke one book, according to John one book.

    The Epistles of Paul the Apostle in number fourteen. To the Romans one, to the Corinthians two, to the Ephesians one, to the Thessalonians two, to the Galatians one, to the Philippians one, to the Colossians one, to Timothy two, to Titus one, to Philemon one, to the Hebrews one.

    Likewise the Apocalypse of John, one book. And the Acts of the Apostles one book. Likewise the canonical epistles in number seven. Of Peter the Apostle two epistles, of James the Apostle one epistle, of John the Apostle one epistle, of another John, the presbyter, two epistles, of Jude the Zealut, the Apostle one epistle."
     
    Ananias likes this.
  5. Ananias

    Ananias Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    410
    Likes Received:
    365
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    ACNA
    I was wrong, then. I'm certainly not aware of any other Christian churches that have a divergent NT canon.
     
  6. PDL

    PDL Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    528
    Likes Received:
    388
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    Religion:
    Church of England
    @Carolinian: Do you have a link for your source? I have just googled The Antiochian Orthodox Church but there are numerous hits and I cannot know from which of these you derived your information.
     
  7. PDL

    PDL Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    528
    Likes Received:
    388
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    Religion:
    Church of England
    The plot thickens!
     
  8. Carolinian

    Carolinian Member

    Posts:
    82
    Likes Received:
    69
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    Christian
    http://ww1.antiochian.org/1123705782

    "A local council, probably held at Rome under Saint Damasus in 382, set forth a complete list of the canonical books of both the Old and New Testaments."
     
  9. Shane R

    Shane R Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    786
    Likes Received:
    843
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    Anglican
    I saw a meme making the rounds about someone wanting to know what new books to read and Jesus replying something like, "There are 26 books you have not read." Now when I was a lad I was drilled on the names of the 27 books of the NT. Hmm. Although it wouldn't bother me if the Gospel of Luke and Acts were counted together.

    I was talking to a local pastor while my children were at VBS and he has been preaching a year long series with a lesson from each book of the Bible. I said to him, "Pastor, you've shorted yourself eight weeks of material." It took him a moment to realize what I was implying and then he responded, "Oh, know. I didn't even enjoy those books in seminary!"

    We've been talking about seminary in a couple of the other threads and I will note, at most schools it is not difficult to pass the Apocrypha class or inter-testamental period, whichever it's called in the catalogue, without reading the disputed books. Of course, too many schools are passing students through the other Biblical survey courses without the students needing to read those documents methodically either.
     
  10. Ananias

    Ananias Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    410
    Likes Received:
    365
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    ACNA
    It's a shame, because even if the books of the deuterocanon are not Scripture, they are still required reading for a full contextual understanding of the intertestamental period. And Jude's canonical letter quotes the book of Enoch, so often Bible study will require knowledge of the deuterocanon as well. I even advocate for reading the early patristic works from Clement, Irenaeus, and Justin Martyr, and for the same reason: they provide valuable context on the early church.
     
    Shane R likes this.