A Journey to Discover the Early Christian Church, Part III

The New Testament scriptures exist as the first century writings by the apostles, by Jude, and by Luke that describe and record what Jesus taught and instructed them and what they faithfully delivered to the early Church’s converts. These writings function to preserve some of the written apostolic teachings, which early Church Fathers were able to interpret based upon what they had also been taught by Jesus’ disciples through oral traditions. This was the method used by the early Church Fathers: the Church Fathers instructed the faithful through the use of oral and written apostolic teachings. 

A time came; however, when false teachers began to spread heretical doctrines for which were deceitfully claimed apostolic authority. Such false teachings were eventually put in writing in what is known as pseudo writings. Examples include Pseudo-Peter, Pseudo-Matthew, Pseudo-Clement, and many others. The process of and the need for a canon (or collection) of authentic scriptures is complex and beyond the scope of this document. The need to assemble a church canon of Scripture became urgent for various reasons, and the Church Fathers undertook this significant task in the mid-fourth century.

In AD 363 at the council of Laodicea in Asia Minor the Old Testament and the New Testament canonical books to be used in the Church were listed and the enumeration of the books in the Bible (minus the book of Revelation) was established. This was followed by the earliest listing of all twenty-seven New Testament books in AD 367 by St. Athanasius. Finally it was at the Third Council of Carthage, which took place in AD 397, when the full Old Testament and New Testament canonical book list of Scripture was finalized. 

The Church's purpose of establishing an authoritative list of books did not intend to make obsolete or to replace the Holy Tradition's other three attributes of apostolic teaching, of the Church, and of the church fathers. Instead the New Testament canon of scripture served to protect the Church from false teachings. The canon of scripture was added to the other attributes of Holy Tradition to help preserve and to safeguard. 

The New Testament was never to be perceived as an all-inclusive collection of all teachings on every aspect of the Christian life given by the Lord Jesus Christ, the Apostles, or the Church Fathers as shown in the following Scriptures:

The “signs” mentioned in John 20:30 and the “things” mentioned in 21:25 include what the Lord Christ revealed and delivered to the apostles but were not recorded. So the Canon of Scriptures work together as an integral part of Holy Tradition and together they form a seamless barrier against false teaching. 

It is important to also note that the canonization of Scripture occurred after the Roman Emperor Constantine made Christianity the official religion of the Empire. Many assert that the Christian Church was corrupted and committed apostasy after this decree was established by the Emperor. However, as mentioned previously, there is no evidence in the writings of the Church Fathers before, during, or after this decree which supports an apostasy. Furthermore, if there was an apostasy, then it would mean that the canonization of Scriptures is not trustworthy because the canonization of Scriptures happened after the period of time in which the apostasy is asserted to have happened. The processes undertaken by a church that had committed apostasy would not be trustworthy to create a canon of Scriptures; thus, the current canon of Scriptures used by most modern Christians would be flawed. However, since there never was an apostasy, the processes used by the early Church Fathers during the late fourth century are trustworthy as they utilized the Holy Traditions as a guide and filter to determine which texts should and should not be included in the Canon. 

Many believe that the Scriptures are subject to individual and private interpretation. However, consider the following Scripture:

“knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation, (2 Peter 1:20).”

This means that no one person can interpret Scripture alone by himself or herself. Why? Because it is only the Church that can correctly interpret Scripture. The Church interprets scripture because it is the pillar and ground of truth:

“I write so that you may know how you ought to conduct yourself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth, (1 Tim. 3:15).”

The Church is guided by the Holy Spirit into all truth (Jn 14:26 and Jn 16:13), and the Church is the dwelling place of God in spirit (Eph. 2:22). As such the Church serves as the keeper and protector of apostolic teaching, which, in part, involves written Scriptures. Thus to turn from the Church must also result in departing from what the Body of Christ has always believed and in replacing that corporate belief with mere personal opinion. And, in turn, this undermines the authority of the Bible itself because if one does not trust the Tradition that produced it, then one cannot trust the Bible either. Thus, it is a logical contradiction to trust the Bible while denying the Traditions that composed and canonized the texts in the Bible.

The collection of individual writings and texts into a book was done by the Church and by the Church Fathers to help preserve the truth of Apostolic teachings and to eliminate writings that were not authentic. It is the Church that gave authority to the selected Scriptures, not the other way around. It is the Church, not a writing itself, that gives credibility and authority to a writing. Therefore, only the Church has the authority to correctly interpret that which it has authorized. 

Some may claim that the Holy Spirit provides each individual with an accurate interpretation of Scripture. This idea, however, contradicts 2 Peter 1:20, as stated above. Additionally, this claim creates many insurmountable problems. These problems can be seen in the many contradictory understandings of passages among Believers and Denominations. For example consider, to name a few, the controversies on infant baptism, on allowing or disallowing divorce, on the various views of creation and evolution, on the nature of the elements of the Eucharist, and on the various views on the End Times. Other practices and teachings on drinking, smoking, and dancing with some groups saying these things are sinful while other groups saying these things are not sinful, and each side uses proof-texts from Scripture to support their viewpoints and claims. The list of disagreements and variants of interpretation increases significantly when considering teachings between the “liberal” and the “conservative” lines. Also consider the question of how “literal” is Scripture? Within many groups there is never a definite answer but merely a claim of authority of various mini-traditions. 

Scripture states in Psalms 119:89:

“Forever, O Lord,

Your word is settled (stands firm) in heaven.”

The teachings and laws of God are settled, firm, and unchanging. Also consider Hebrews 13:8:

“Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever.”

So in these verses it is shown that the teachings of Jesus are firm and do not change. This means that there can only be one valid and firm interpretation of the teachings of Scripture. And, as shown above, it is only the Church that holds the valid interpretation of the teachings of Scripture. 

When the Church is not the valid interpreter of Scripture, then there becomes a perplexing predicament of the Holy Spirit being said to provide hundreds of different meanings and interpretations of Scripture between various individuals and groups. Such a variety of interpretations creates and causes fractures and disunity. Scripture, however, condemns such fracturing:

“Now I plead with you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment, (1 Cor. 1:10).”

“For first of all, when you come together as a church, I hear that there are divisions among you, and in part I believe it, (1 Cor. 11:18).” 

“But God composed the body, having given greater honor to that part which lacks it, that there should be no schism in the body, but that the members should have the same care for one another, (1 Cor. 12:24-25).”

Early Church Fathers, such as Clement and Ignatius, also condemn division and schism:

“We refer to the abominable and unholy schism, so alien and foreign to those whom God has chosen, (Clement, The Letter of the Church of Rome to the Church of Corinth, Chapter 1).”

“Why is it that you harbor strife, bad temper, dissension, schism, and quarreling? Do we not have one God, one Christ, one Spirit of grace which was poured out on us? And is there not one calling in Christ? Why do we rend and tear asunder Christ's members and raise a revolt against our own body? Why do we reach such a pitch of insanity that we are oblivious of the fact we are members of each other? … Your schism has led many astray; it has made many despair; it has made many doubt; and it has distressed us all. Yet it goes on! (Clement, The Letter of the Church of Rome to the Church of Corinth, Chapter 46).”

“Do not err, my brethren. If any man follows him that makes a schism in the Church, he shall not inherit the kingdom of God. If any one walks according to a strange opinion, he agrees not with the passion [of Christ,] (Ignatius, Epistle to the Philadelphians, Chapter 3).”

Some seem to recognize the impropriety of a fragmented condition. Attempts have been made, for example, to minimize doctrinal differences, in part, by asserting that such differences of no real significance. The concept of Christian unity may also be downplayed through conjecture such as the impossibility of there being one universal interpretation of Scripture, or one Faith. A belief that there is only one Faith can be seen by some as either “legalistic” or “absent of Christian love.” Yet in Ephesians 4:5 Paul writes, 

“There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism.” 

“One faith” is not merely a belief in Jesus that provides a membership in the Church, but “one faith” is being one and unified in doctrine and in interpretation of Scriptural teachings, which includes belief in Jesus. Unity and singularity of doctrine and interpretation is shown through a single body, a single Spirit, a single Lord, a single faith, and a single baptism. 

One consequence of private interpretation often includes the acceptance of Jesus Christ as Savior and then ignoring the authorities Jesus has placed over us within His Church. 

“Obey those who rule over you, and be submissive, for they watch out for your souls, as those who must give account. Let them do so with joy and not with grief, for that would be unprofitable for you, (Heb. 13:17).”

“Likewise you younger people, submit yourselves to your elders, (1 Peter 5:5).”

In addition to the rejection of and the disregard of Church authority, which Christ and His apostles have established, there is the abandonment of Holy Tradition and its attributes. Private interpretation deviates from what has been believed since the beginning of Christianity, namely, that the apostles and their successive leaders maintain the authority to interpret scripture (Heb. 13:17 and 2 Peter 1:20). Furthermore, the teachings are not to be changed:

“Now I praise you, brethren, that you remember me in all things and keep the traditions just as I delivered them to you, (1 Cor. 11:2).” 

The first century Christians did not have the privilege of a bound copy of New Testament texts and the majority were illiterate. Yet they still lived the apostolic faith. This apostolic faith was passed on from the leadership of the apostles to their disciples, who were given authority by the apostles to teach and to lead as they were taught. 

The core of Sola Scriptura argues that “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work, (2 Tim. 3:16-17).” All Scripture is indeed given by God for doctrine and the things listed, but not only Scriptures. Church Traditions and Church teachings are also profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, and for instruction. 

In 2 Tim. 3:16-17 the phrase, “all Scripture,” is not exclusive (note that the word, “only” is missing from the passage.) but rather inclusive and in-addition-to. This is proven by the context through the verses preceding it:

“But you must continue in the things which you have learned and been assured of, knowing from whom you have learned them, (2 Tim. 3:14).” 

Correct doctrine requires correct instruction. In this passage “in the things” means doctrines and teachings while “you have learned” and “been assured of” originate in the verbal teachings and tradition as given by the apostles. The “things” were learned “from whom,” which indicates a person or persons, specifically the apostles (including Paul) to Timothy. So in 2 Tim. 3:13-17 Paul is echoing what he said in his other writing, which is to hold steadfast to the teachings and traditions that have been conveyed in both verbal and written form:

“Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by word or our epistle, (2 Thessalonians 2:15).” 

Many who advocate for a private interpretation of scripture often criticize and even condemn extraneous first and second century Church Father writings and teachings. Such criticizing and condemnation is done while not realizing that these Church Fathers were discipled, taught, and given authority by the apostles of Jesus Christ to correctly carry out the mission of Christ and His Church. Polycarp and Ignatius, for example, were taught and mentored by the apostle John. Thus, to condemn such Church Fathers is to criticize Jesus himself by criticizing and condemning those who he authorized to implement His Great Commission. 

Although many advocate for private interpretation of Scriptures, most do not truly believe in it. For if someone else has an interpretation that is significantly different or opposite than that of his or her own, then a theologian or pastor will be cited in support of his or her belief. This disallows and even, at its core, denies private interpretation because if private interpretation is true, then there can be no basis for denying any interpretation of Scripture. Here the underlying question is: who has the authority to correctly interpret scripture? 

But as 2 Peter 1:20 states, there is no private interpretation of Scripture. Scripture can only be interpreted by the authority of The Church as only The Church is the pillar of truth as authorized by Jesus and His apostles and its Overseers. 

Many have replaced the teachings of those who learned directly from Jesus and from His apostles. They have replaced the teachings of the Church Fathers with more modern books written by individuals who are separated by centuries from the teachings and traditions of the Church Fathers. But it was the teachings and traditions of the Church Fathers that were the criteria by which texts and writings were analyzed in order to determine which texts would be included in the Biblical canon and which would not be included. If one does not trust the teachings and traditions of the Church Fathers, then how can one trust their process of the canonization of the New Testament? The rejection of the teachings and traditions of the Church Fathers means to reject the canonization of Scriptures and, therefore, to reject the modern New Testament. If the traditions and teachings of the Church Fathers are not trustworthy, then neither are the texts, which were chosen and based upon such traditions, they selected for the New Testament canon. 

Jesus did not use the scriptures to create the church, the Lord created the church and the church created the scriptures. Jesus gave authority to the Apostles (not scripture) to teach, to disciple, and to baptize. Jesus’ disciples collectively make up the church. Therefore, the church has the authority to interpret the scriptures that its inspired Apostles wrote and that, by the church’s authority and its Overseers, decided which texts to include in the canon of scripture. 

The harmony of the apostolic churches, though spread throughout the Roman world, was proclaimed by St. Irenaeus in the second century when he wrote:

“As I have already observed, the Church, having received this preaching and this faith, although scattered throughout the whole world, yet, as if occupying but one house, carefully preserves it. She also believes these points [of doctrine] just as if she had but one soul, and one and the same heart, and she proclaims them, and teaches them, and hands them down, with perfect harmony, as if she possessed only one mouth. For, although the languages of the world are dissimilar, yet the import of the tradition is one and the same. For the Churches which have been planted in Germany do not believe or hand down anything different, nor do those in Spain, nor those in Gaul, nor those in the East, nor those in Egypt, nor those in Libya, nor those which have been established in the central regions of the world. But as the sun, that creature of God, is one and the same throughout the whole world, so also the preaching of the truth shines everywhere, and enlightens all men that are willing to come to a knowledge of the truth, (Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book 1, Chapter 10).”

Continue to Part IV