The Writing of Scripture
Sermon • Submitted
0 ratings
· 3 viewsNotes
Transcript
What Did the Early Church have before the NT?
What Did the Early Church have before the NT?
The Early Church had the Old Testament, mainly the Greek Old Testament, called the Septuagint
The Septuagint was a translation during the time of Alexander the Great. The Jews had translated their Scriptures, as well as added new historical books to it to add more context for Greek readers. These included books like Esdras or the Macabees.
There is some debate over whether these books should be labeled as Scripture, but even very early, Jerome, the translator of the Vulgate Bible, did not accept these extra books as Scripture, nor did Jews of the time of the early church.
The texts of Paul’s writings were passed around between churches very early, and this is seen even in the text of his letters themselves.
Important: There was an understanding in the NT Authors that they were penning Scripture.
Support: 1 Tim 5:18 “For the Scripture says, “You shall not muzzle an ox when it treads out the grain,” and, “The laborer deserves his wages.””
“The laborer deserves his wages” is Luke 10:7 “And remain in the same house, eating and drinking what they provide, for the laborer deserves his wages. Do not go from house to house.”
2 Peter 3:16 “as he [Paul] does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures.”
Already, there is a notion that these books are Scripture while they were being written.
The Synoptics and John
The Synoptics and John
There are four gospels written. The word “gospel” comes, in English, from the words: “good spell.” The Greek word ευαγγελιον comes from the same word we get “angel” from. And angel is a messenger, and an evangelist is a messenger with good news.
The gospels, therefore, are not merely historical accounts. They are good news for the nations. They are unique in their genre and writing style. While they provide a biography of Jesus and His life on earth, they are more than that.
The first three are known as the “synoptics.” They recount much of the same content, and they have even word for word similarity at places. This has led many to believe that they had a similar source, or that they were aware of one another.
John, however, has a more “spiritual” tone, and a different style to the way that he writes. He has stories in his gospel that aren’t in any of the other four. As we will see, it is because of the purpose and perspective that he writes from that he writes in a different style.
As we will see with Eusibius, the Church, while taking some time figure out the canon of Scripture, there was general agreement quite early.
John’s Gospel
John’s Gospel
John’s Gospel is different. He begins in a much different manner, and has a different audience. Matthew and Luke begin with genealogies, tying Christ to the Old Testament promise of the one who would “crush the Serpent’s head” (Gen. 3:15).
John, on the other hand, begins with a prologue about The Word. As he then goes into the life of Jesus, he shows how Christ is that Word.
John is very clear in his gospel that Christ is God. The Trinity is on full display in his gospel, and there is no room for doubt. Liberals will use this fact as justification for their assertion of it being late. They will assume that Christ’s deity was a later invention, and thus John must have been later. But can they assume this?
John was accepted by Eusebius quite early in 325, a book we’ll get to next week. The Muratorian fragment seems to indicate that the four gospels were considered Scripture as early as 175. There are arguments in the Church Fathers very early for these four, and these four alone, as being authentic and from the Apostles.
The Apostles were Christ’s messengers. They were sent out by Christ Himself (αποστολος means “sent out”), and thus they carried the weight of a special authority. Just like the prophets of old could say “thus saith the Lord” so too could the Apostles. We do not have this ability now, and thus for early figures in the Church, it was important to prove that the books in the Scriptures were from these Apostles. Why do we presume that now, thousands of years later, we could have greater insight into when and where these books came from, when Church Fathers of the past were zealous to show that indeed they came from the Apostles, many of whom were taught by students of the Apostles.