1516 | The Formation of the New Testament
The first criterion is apostolicity . While this could mean that a document was written by an apostle , it was not necessarily essential . Some of our New Testament documents were received as written by an apostle ( e . g ., Paul ’ s letters ). But other documents gained wide acceptance because of a direct link to the apostles . Some documents experienced difficulty when it came to widespread acceptance by the church . The best-known example is the book of Hebrews — as Origen of Alexandria ’ s ( ca . AD 184 – 253 ) comments illustrate : “ If I gave my opinion , I should say that the thoughts are those of the apostle , but the style and composition belong to someone who remembered the apostle ’ s teachings and wrote down at his leisure what had been said by his teacher . Therefore , if any church holds that this Epistle is by Paul , let it be commended for this also . For it is not without reason that the men of old time have handed it down as Paul ’ s . But who wrote the Epistle in truth , God knows .” 11 Although Origen believed those who accept Hebrews as written by Paul to be mistaken , he did not dismiss Hebrews on that basis — rather , because it is apostolic in teaching , he accepted Hebrews .
The second criterion is orthodoxy . Orthodoxy indicates the congruity of a document with the apostolic faith . To see how this criterion functioned in the life of the church , it is helpful to see how Serapion of Antioch dealt with such a document in the early third century . Eusebius tells us that Serapion wrote a refutation of the Gospel of Peter , the content of which had led a parish in his jurisdiction astray . 12 The church at Rhossus was using the Gospel of Peter in their teaching and worship . Initially , this did not trouble Serapion ; he believed that they held “ the true faith ” and could discern this gospel ’ s doctrine . However , he soon came to learn that he was mistaken after securing a copy of the document . He found that it taught Docetism — which was viewed as a heresy by the orthodox church . Thus , the document denied “ the true faith .”
This illustrates orthodoxy being applied as a criterion for a document ’ s acceptance . Serapion did not appeal to a New Testament Canon to see if the Gospel of Peter was included ; his appeal was to “ the true faith ” to discern its teaching . Serapion ’ s issue was not that the church was using a document outside of a Canon but that they did not discern the heterodoxy of the document . The “ rule of faith ” was used in this way in the early church as its standard of orthodoxy — something against which teaching and documents were measured . R . P . C Hanson calls it a “ graph of the interpretation of the Bible by the church of the second and third centuries .” 13 Even the Chris tian writings that were eventually included in the New Testament Canon were subjected to this rule of faith . 14
The third criterion is catholicity ( or universality ) and traditional use . This criterion is best illustrated in Augustine ( AD 354 – 430 ): “ Now , in regard to the canonical Scriptures , he must follow the judgment of the greater number of catholic churches ; and among these , of course , a high place must be given to such as have been thought worthy to be the seat of an apostle and to receive epistles . Accordingly , among the canonical Scriptures he will judge according to the following standard : to prefer those that are received by all the catholic churches to those which some do not receive . Among those , again , which are not received by all , he will prefer such as have the sanction of the greater number and those of greater authority , to such as are held by the smaller number and those of less authority . If , however , he shall find that some books are held by the greater number of churches , and others by the churches of greater authority ( though this is not a very likely thing to happen ), I think that in such a case the authority on the two sides is to be looked upon as equal .” 15
For Augustine , widespread use of a document carried considerable weight for its acceptance . Some churches — like Rome , Antioch , Alexandria and Constantinople — were given preference over
11 Origen , Homilies on Hebrews , in Eusebius , Ecclesiastical History , 6.25.11 – 14 ; quoted in Craig D . Allert , A High View of Scripture ?: The Authority of the Bible and the Formation of the New Testament Canon ( Grand Rapids : Baker Academic , 2007 ), 54 . 12 Eusebius , Ecclesiastical History , 6.12.1 – 6 . 13 R . P . C . Hanson , Tradition in the Early Church ( London : SCM Press , 1962 ), 127 . 14 Craig D . Allert , A High View of Scripture ?: The Authority of the Bible and the Formation of the New Testament Canon ( Grand Rapids : Baker Academic , 2007 ), 54 – 56 , 78 – 84 , 121 – 26 . 15 Augustine , On Chris tian Doctrine , in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers 1.2 : St . Augustin ’ s City of God and Chris tian Doctrine , ed . Philip Schaff , trans . J . F . Shaw ( Buffalo : The Chris tian Literature Company , 1887 ), 2.8.12 .