Recently I’ve been re-reading the excellent book ‘Is the New Testimony History?’ by Paul Barnett. I read it many years ago as a new believer but I’m hitting it again as someone whose been following Jesus for just on 3 decades. I’m finding it even more insightful and just as fresh as I remember. I want to commend it to you.
I want to share with you one of the fresh insights. There is a lot of argument and debate about when the New Testament documents were written and when they were authoritative. But there probably shouldn’t be.
3 Christians leaders wrote significant Christian works early in the 2nd Century. These leaders were the next generation or perhaps in some cases two generations after the apostles. And how early did they write? Very. Polycarp about 112 AD, Ignatius about 108 AD and Clement close to 96 AD.
In their writings to make their points and arguments they quote or refer to the Scriptures of the New Testament. Not that they were likely collected as such. But that makes it even more significant. These Christian leaders are writing around 95-112 AD and we can see they already consider the letters and gospels they cite as Scripture or at the very least as carrying very significant authority.
The quotes aren’t long or comprehensive but that’s not the point.
Below I’ve laid out each Christian leader and the books they referred to in their writings following Paul Barnett.
Polycarp c. 112AD (Letter the the Philippians)
| Gospel | Historical Narrative | Apostle Paul's writings | Other writings |
|---|---|---|---|
| Matthew | Acts | Romans | Hebrews |
| Mark | 1 Corinthians | 1 Peter | |
| Luke | 2 Corinthians | 1 John | |
| John | Galatians | ||
| Ephesians | |||
| Philippians | |||
| Colossians | |||
| 2Thessalonians | |||
| 1 Timothy | |||
| 2 Timothy |
IGNATIUS c. 108AD (In 7 Short Letters)
| Gospel | Historical Narrative | Apostle Paul's writings | Other writings |
|---|---|---|---|
| Matthew | Acts | Romans 1 | Hebrews |
| Mark | 1 Corinthians | James | |
| Luke | 2 Corinthians | 1 Peter | |
| John | Galatians | 2 Peter | |
| Ephesians | 1 John | ||
| Philippians | 3 John | ||
| Colossians 1 | Revelation | ||
| 1 Thessalonians | |||
| 1 Timothy | |||
| 2 Timothy | |||
| Titus | |||
| Philemon |
CLEMENT c. 96 (In letters Written from Rome to Corinth)
| Gospel | Historical Narrative | Apostle Paul's writings | Other writings |
|---|---|---|---|
| Matthew | Romans 1 | Hebrews | |
| Mark | Corinthians | James | |
| Luke | Ephesians | 1 Peter | |
| 1 Timothy | |||
| Titus |
Online copies of these documents can be found here.
That’s 25 out of the 27 New Testament documents! The two missing are 2 John and Jude. This doesn’t mean these books were not written by this time. It just means they weren’t quoted in the above letters.
So what is the Significance?
Many want to argue that the writings / books of the New Testament were not settled until the 4th Century by the major Church councils. But this shows that the New Testament texts were already considered authoritative by the start of the 2nd Century. This is within 70-90 years of Jesus’ life and death.
This shouldn’t surprise us, given that the writers of the New Testament claimed to be eye witnesses, or have access to the eye witnesses or were set apart by God for the great task of sharing Jesus, such as the Apostle Paul. (Paul starts most of his letters saying he is an apostle sent from God.)
Consider this letter from the Apostle Peter , referring to the apostle Paul’s writings.
Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. 16 He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.
2 Peter 3:15-16
Paul’s writings are consider equivalent to the other Scriptures.
This also helps explains why there are so many copies of the New Testament documents. They were considered authoritative very early. And so, every little church that sprang up would have sort copies of these documents. For the the standard practice in the early church, as shown by Paul Barnett, was that each church met weekly for the public reading of Scripture. To do that you need your own copy. So, if as a church you heard of one these texts being available that wasn’t in your collection, no doubt, if you could afford it, you would have commissioned a copy.
Where does this take us? It seems that very early on the texts/ writings that were collected into the New Testament were well established in authority and sought by churches. This really does challenge the idea that the New Testament got its authority from the church councils and only in the seemingly late time of the 4th century.
Bibliography
Is the New Testament History by Paul Barnett