I was recently asked about scripture and the Bible. The questions revolved around how much we can trust scripture if it was written by man, and how much did Rome influence what we have in our Bible. With topics like these, the answers can be very involved as there are whole areas of study dedicated to the historicity of the Bible and textual criticism. As I thought about my own struggle with these topics, I found the following helpful:
First, it is important to keep in mind that the Bible is a collection of writings and books, 66 total for the protestant Bible and 73 for Catholics. That comes out to be 39 in the Old Testament, 27 in the New Testament, and 7 Deuterocanonical books.
Why is this important? Keeping this in mind is one, among many, ways that scripture points to its divine nature. The Bible was written down over a span of 1500 years by 40+ people with diverse backgrounds. As far as “authorship,” I find it helpful to think about it as guided and inspired by God, through the words and personalities of man.
Second, the timeline is important when thinking about Rome and a possible influence they would have had on scripture. At the time of Jesus death, AD 33, through AD 313 with the Edict of Milan, Christians, and the Christian movement, were often persecuted and suppressed by the Roman empire. During this time, Rome was a pagan nation, and they would have sooner eradicated Christianity than try to manipulate its theology. The time from AD 303 to AD 313 was known as the Great Persecution. This time, mainly helmed by Diocletian and Galerius, was the last and most systematic attempt to wipe out Christianity. In AD 313, with the Edict of Milan, Christianity was legalized, allowing people to freely worship without fear of persecution. It is important to keep in mind, it was not until AD 380, with the Edict of Thessalonica under Emperor Theodosius I, that Christianity was made the official religion of Rome. Until AD 380, Rome was a pagan nation.
Why is this important? Knowing the difficulties and struggles of the early church and its people, within these first 350 years, helps to show how God chose to preserve His Word in a way that could not be eradicated. Despite threats of death, early Christians chose to copy and distribute the writings we now call the Bible. If there was only one line of distribution, Rome could have easily found and destroyed it, but there were thousands of copies being shared across many countries. There are over 24,000 New Testament manuscripts and fragments of manuscripts that have been discovered. God’s Word was preserved because of this method of distribution, and having so many copies allows scholars to track scribble errors and get back to what was originally written.
Lastly, since Rome would have preferred to wipe out the Christian movement during those early years, I think it is important to look at the early church fathers and what they considered scripture. Prior to AD 380 when Christianity was made the official religion of Rome, which of the 27 New Testament books did the church consider canon? What was their criteria for determining canonicity, and what was their process of determining which ones were divinely inspired?
According to scholars like F.F. Bruce and Bruce Metzger, the three main categories for determining canonicity are: apostolicity, orthodoxy, and catholicity.
- Apostolicity: This focuses on if the letter or book was written by an Apostle, or someone closely associated with an apostle. According to Acts 1:21-22 and John 14:26, those disciples’ authority was seen as unique.
- Orthodoxy: Does the writing align with core apostolic teachings already received? If it does NOT, it is rejected. For example, there is a writing named “Gospel of Thomas” that is determined to be written between AD 130 – AD 250. Since this was a later writing, determined not to have been written by an Apostle or someone closely associated with an apostle, and has teachings that do not align with the core apostolic teachings, it was rejected.
- Catholicity (universal use during worship): Was the writing used in liturgy across the early churches? Was it included in prayers and readings? The overall thought is that the Holy Spirit would lead the body of the church and its people to have persistent and unified use.
With these categories in mind, it would be beneficial to look at four early church fathers and note how many New Testament books they referenced in their writings as well as the year and method of their death.
- Clement of Rome: Referenced 8-11 of the New Testament writings. He died as a martyr around AD 99 – AD 101, drowned with an anchor in Crimea.
- Ignatius of Antioch: Referenced 13-17 of the NT writings. He died as a martyr around AD 107 – AD 110, killed by wild beasts in the Roman amphitheater.
- Polycarp of Smyrna: Referenced 15-17 of the NT writings. He died as a martyr around AD 155 – AD 156, burned at the stake and then stabbed to death.
- Justin Martyr: Referenced 5-8 of the NT writings. He died as a martyr AD 165, beheaded in Rome after refusing to sacrifice to pagan gods.
Out of these four early church fathers, all of which were martyred prior to AD 200, only four New Testament books were not mentioned, either directly quoted or alluded to, in their writings. The missing four books is not evidence against canonicity, but more so reflects limited access due to how God chose to preserve His word and how writings were circulated.
Why is this important? Having knowledge of what the early church fathers wrote and their martyrdom, it is not a far stretch to say that they would not change their beliefs just because Rome wanted them to. In many cases, like the ones above, all they would have had to do is deny God and lived, yet they chose to hold to the truth that Jesus was the Messiah, and they were killed for it. Going back to the question “Did Rome influence scripture?”, we can say with a high amount of certainty that the early Christians were not willing to change or give up their beliefs to appease Rome.
The final point I would like to mention is canonicity. The first two canons of scripture listed below were documented prior to Rome making Christianity its official religion in AD 380, and the third was following its acceptance in AD 380.
- Muratorian Canon: AD 170 – AD 200. Earliest known NT list, showing emerging consensus of the Gospels, Paul’s writings, and Revelation. Lists 22 of the 27 New Testament books.
- Athanasius Canon: AD 367. Earliest known list to include all 27 books of the New Testament. Athanasius did not invent the canon but confirmed which were considered canonical.
- Carthage Canon: AD 397. Earliest council to affirm the 27 books of the New Testament.
In conclusion, when looking at the timeline of the early church, the persecution of it and its followers, and the dates Christianity was legalized and then accepted by Rome, it can be concluded that Rome did not determine what books and letters were accepted as canon. We can also see that there were great measures put into place to determine what writings were accepted. I once heard it described this way: Man did not determine what scripture was canon. It was God who determines canon, but it took man time to discover that canon due to our ignorance and hardened heart. Praise God that He is patient and loving!
God bless.