A Brief History of Doctrine
Doctrine is Christian belief. Sound doctrine, or orthodoxy, reflects in summary form what Scripture affirms and what the church is bound to believe, in contrast to heresy, which contradicts it. From its beginning, the church has constructed and lived out sound doctrine while opposing heresy. Indeed, in one sense, the history of the church is the history of its doctrine, now told in brief.
The Early Church
The church is commanded to “contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 3). It obeys this order by receiving “the faith” from its Lord through Scripture, formulating its doctrines, and contending against heresies. The apostolic fathers—Christian leaders after the period of the apostles—wrote letters and composed manuals to encourage, correct, and guide the churches. The apologists, intellectually skilled protectors of Christianity, defended the faith against accusations and misunderstandings that were afoot. An early example of doctrinal formulation was the “rule of faith” or “canon of truth,” a digest of beliefs about the Father as almighty Creator, the Son as incarnate Savior, and the Holy Spirit as Revealer of gospel truths.
As the church expanded and confronted challenges to its emerging beliefs, its leaders convened general councils to articulate those doctrines more robustly. The first councils affirmed (1) the eternal reality of the triune God—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; (2) the deity of the Son against Arianism, which taught that he was a created being, not eternal, and of a different essence than the Father; (3) the full humanity of the Son in the incarnation against Apollinarianism, which held that he took on only a body but not a soul; (4) the deity of the Holy Spirit against the Pneumatomachi (“Spirit-fighters”), who denied his personhood and equality with the Father and the Son; and (5) the hypostatic union, the joining together of two natures—one fully divine, one fully human—in the one person, Jesus Christ, thereby opposing Nestorianism, which denied the union of these two natures, and Eutychianism, which believed that the two natures fused into one nature in the incarnation. These councils composed creeds (e.g., the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed, the Chalcedonian Creed) that set forth these orthodox doctrines and condemned departures from them.
The early church based these emerging beliefs on divine revelation, which came in two forms: (1) general revelation, through creation, the human conscience, God’s providential care, and an innate sense of God; and (2) special revelation, through direct speech, historical events, dreams and visions, Jesus Christ, and Scripture. Regarding this last mode of revelation, the church held a very high view of Scripture’s inspiration, truthfulness, authority, sufficiency, necessity, clarity, and power. It also gradually recognized through the Holy Spirit that in addition to the Old Testament (the 39 writings inherited from the Jews), its canon, or list of books belonging to Scripture, should include the 27 writings of the New Testament. This canon was eventually expanded to include the Apocrypha, seven other writings and additional sections of Esther and Daniel (though these apocryphal writings were not officially proclaimed as canonical for the Catholic Church until the Council of Trent in 1546; Protestants exclude these books from their canon).
The early church believed God created the heavens and the earth in six days in the not too distant past. At the apex of this creative work were human beings made in the image of God, variously understood to refer to human rationality, free will, moral consciousness, representative role, differentiation from animals, and relationship to God. Creation in the divine image confers dignity and significance upon people. Tragically, the parents of humanity, Adam and Eve, sinned horribly, thereby plunging the entire race into sin. Specifically, the church developed the doctrine of original sin: all people are born with (1) the liability to suffer death and eternal condemnation because of their solidarity with the guilt of Adam and (2) corruption because of the sinful nature received from Adam and Eve. This doctrine was articulated by Augustine and stood in opposition to Pelagianism, which denied any relationship between Adam’s sin and the human race, and semi-Pelagianism, which denied the inheritance of guilt from Adam and the complete corruption of human nature.
The solution to the disaster of sin was Christ and his atoning sacrifice. This atonement was understood according to various models in the early church, including: (1) the recapitulation model: the life of Jesus summed up all the life-stages and events of sinful humanity, with Jesus’ obedience reversing Adam’s disobedience; (2) the ransom to Satan theory: Christ’s death functioned as a payment offered to Satan to release sinful people from his dominion over them; (3) the substitution model: in love, Christ, as the sinless substitute for sinful people, took upon himself their sins and granted his righteousness to justify them. Application of Christ’s salvation centered on the gospel and adherence to it by faith, but the church eventually underscored the necessity of baptism. As for the recipients and manner of baptism, the church baptized believers and children by immersion, pouring, and sprinkling. Eventually, baptism became associated with regeneration and cleansing from original sin.
Fittingly, the church defined itself doctrinally: It is (1) one, not many churches or heretical sects, but united around the apostolic faith; (2) holy, consecrated for God’s purposes, with its members living in accord with true doctrine; (3) catholic, or universal, extending over the whole world by its teaching of sound doctrine; and (4) apostolic, adhering to the teachings of the apostles. Accordingly, Christians confessed, “We believe in one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church.” This church would continue until Christ’s second coming, which would initiate his thousand year reign on earth, to be followed by Christ’s ultimate defeat of Satan and the new heaven and earth. This widespread premillennialism eventually gave way to amillennialism, which denied a future reign of Christ on earth prior to the renewal of all things.
The Medieval Period
Doctrinal development flourished in the medieval period as theology became the “queen of the sciences.” Guided by its commitment to “faith seeking understanding,” the church advanced proofs for the existence of God, explored the nature and works of angels, solidified the doctrine of the Trinity, and more. A new model of the atonement—the satisfaction theory—viewed sin as robbing God of his honor, and thus salvation was its restoration. Such satisfaction had to go beyond anything sinful people could accomplish; thus the God-man, Jesus Christ, offered his death as a satisfaction for sin, restoring God’s honor. This model was opposed by the moral influence theory, which held that Christ’s life and death provide a persuasive exhibition of God’s love that kindles a reciprocating love in people. This model changed the atonement from an objective work accomplished on the cross to a subjective influence in people’s hearts.
Important doctrinal formulations paved the way for both the advancement and the retreat of the church:
1. The procession of the Holy Spirit. Whereas the church in the East believed the Spirit proceeds from the Father, the church in the West believed he proceeds from both the Father and the Son. This doctrinal disagreement contributed to the division of the church into the Orthodox Church and the Catholic Church, respectively.
2. The nature of the presence of Christ in the Eucharist. Whereas the early church understood this rite in various ways—a sacrifice, an act of commemoration, the medicine of immortality, a symbol, the body and blood of Christ—the medieval church eventually proclaimed the doctrine of transubstantiation: Christ’s “body and blood are truly contained in the sacrament . . . under the forms of bread and wine” as those elements are changed through divine power. This position would be opposed by all of the Protestant Reformers.
3. The sacramental system. The seven sacraments—baptism, confirmation, Eucharist, penance, anointing of the sick, holy orders, and matrimony—were seen to cover the whole of the faithful’s life and infuse grace into it.
4. The extent of the church’s authority. As the influence of the bishop of Rome increased steadily, the papacy developed not only theologically but also politically. Papal authority reached its height in the medieval period, as the popes declared their superiority over secular powers, claimed infallibility for themselves (made dogma by Vatican Council I in 1870) and indefectibility for the church, and asserted authority over Scripture itself. This last development was bolstered by claims that the church had determined the canon of Scripture and was the conveyor of tradition, a mode of divine revelation of equal authority to Scripture. Around that time, the church was rocked by political disasters (the papacy’s removal to France for seventy years), internal divisions (the election of two or three popes simultaneously), moral bankruptcy (the rise in sexual immorality among the priesthood), and spiritual impoverishment (the hawking of indulgences in place of preaching). All this created a climate for renewal.
The Reformation
The Reformation arose in this desperate situation and developed Protestant doctrines through close attention to Scripture, careful consideration of early church beliefs, and rejection of unsubstantiated dogmas and practices of the Roman Catholic Church. The formal principle of Protestantism was sola Scriptura: Scripture alone—not Scripture plus tradition, not Scripture plus church authority, not Scripture plus the apocryphal writings—is the supreme authority for doctrine and practice. While agreeing with the historic position that Scripture is divinely inspired and completely true, Protestant theology broke from Catholic theology by affirming Scripture’s sufficiency, necessity, and clarity.
The material principle of Protestantism was the doctrine of justification, God’s declaration that sinful people are “not guilty” but “righteous instead,” not because of any inherent goodness or any good works they do, but because of the righteousness of Christ imputed (credited) to them, giving them forgiveness and acquittal before God. Such divine work is by grace alone, not by grace enabling people to cooperate with it so as to merit eternal life; by Christ alone, not by the sacrifice of Christ plus the church; through faith alone, not faith together with good works and love; and for God’s glory alone, not glory to God and special honor to, for example, Mary. Thus Protestant theology became characterized by the five solas: Scripture, grace, Christ, faith, and God’s glory are the ultimate causes of salvation.
As Protestant churches broke free from the Catholic Church, they defined themselves doctrinally. In addition to affirming the four historic characteristics of the church—unity, holiness, catholicity, and apostolicity—Protestant theology held that the true church bears two (for some, three) marks: (1) the preaching of the Word of God; (2) the celebration of the sacraments, of which there are only two—baptism and the Lord’s Supper; and (3) the exercise of church discipline. In terms of the atonement, Protestantism developed the penal substitutionary theory. Unlike the satisfaction theory, which grounded the atonement in the honor of God, the penal substitutionary model grounded it in his holiness, justice, and love. Because he is holy, God hates sin and prescribes an eternal penalty to pay for it. As the substitute for sinful people, Christ died as a sacrifice to pay the penalty for their sins, thus justly removing their eternal condemnation forever. Such atonement is the highest expression of the love of God for sinful people.
The Modern and Postmodern Ages
Due to the rise of many challenges to the Christian faith, all doctrines have been and continue to be under attack. Below are four key doctrines and various recent claims challenging them:
1. The doctrine of Scripture: the Bible is not inspired, truthful, or authoritative.
2. The doctrine of God: the Trinity is incomprehensible; God is not sovereign over all things; a loving God would not punish people for their sins; human language is inadequate to speak about God; God does not exist.
3. The doctrine of creation: evolution explains the origin and development of all that exists; God did not specially create people in his own image; Adam and Eve never existed.
4. Christology: the historicity of Jesus is unimportant; the incarnation is a myth; the penal substitutionary theory must be false because it depends on a wrathful God who demands punishment for sin; it would be unfair for faith in Christ to be the only means of salvation.
Despite these challenges, Christian doctrine demonstrates its resiliency. For example, through the expansion of Pentecostal theology and the charismatic movement, churches are giving much needed attention to the work of the Holy Spirit. Through the influence of Karl Barth, theologians are refining all doctrines in light of the doctrine of the Trinity. Christian philosophers and apologists are defending the faith. And evangelical churches are flourishing worldwide through focus on the gospel, which they are taking to every corner of the globe.
Accordingly, as it has from its beginning, the contemporary church faithfully continues to construct and live out sound doctrine in order to “contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 3).
Theological Traditions within Christendom
Christendom is the religion and churches of the three traditions of Christianity: Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, and Protestantism. While all three derive from the one trunk of the Christian faith and church, the three branches developed through major divisions. Because of their shared origin, the three traditions possess many commonalities, and because of their separation, their many differences are quite pronounced.
One Church
Filled with love for the world that he created, the Father sent his Son to accomplish salvation for sinful people and, through the Holy Spirit, to incorporate those who believe the gospel into the church. Consisting of both Jews and Gentiles and stirred by the vision of ransomed people “from every tribe and language and people and nation” (Rev. 5:9), the church was designed to be “one flock” (John 10:16), “one body” (1 Cor. 12:12–13). Indeed, the early church defined itself as “one, holy, catholic, and apostolic”—united in doctrine, life, mission, and worship.
As the church expanded, the Eastern and Western churches became characterized by different languages, theological emphases, and liturgies. For example, the Eastern church employed Greek, while the Western church used Latin. Also, the Eastern church believed that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father alone, while the Western church maintained that the Spirit proceeds from both the Father and the Son. These smoldering divergences, when fueled by political machinations and ecclesiastical power plays, ignited into full flame. The flashpoint occurred in a.d. 1054, when Christendom split into Eastern Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism. The decay of the latter tradition over the next five hundred years stimulated a clamor and climate for renewal. The Reformations of the sixteenth century developed in response to this desperate situation, and Western Christendom again split into Roman Catholicism and Protestantism, with the latter tradition expressing itself in different denominations, such as Lutheranism, Presbyterianism, Anglicanism, the Anabaptists and Baptists, and Methodism.
Depending on one’s perspective, one may focus on the many commonalities that still unite these three traditions, emphasize the many differences that still divide them, or—as this article does—face squarely both the commonalities and the differences.
Commonalities
In obedience to Scripture’s command to “contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 3), the church has formulated a common core of belief, a theological consensus embraced by Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, and Protestantism. These commonalities derive from the major emphases of Scripture, from the early creeds, and from beliefs assumed by the church from the beginning and regularly and extensively expressed in its liturgies, sermons, catechisms, and writings.
Scripture. The three traditions uphold the God-breathed nature, or inspiration, of the Bible; the truthfulness of what it affirms; its authority (in some measure); the transformative power of Scripture; and its centrality for salvation, Christian living, and worship.
God. The three traditions affirm the existence of God; his knowability through both general and special revelation; and the divine attributes of independence, immutability, eternity, simplicity, spirituality/invisibility, omnipresence, omnipotence, omniscience, wisdom, truthfulness, faithfulness, goodness, love, grace, mercy, patience, holiness, jealousy, wrath, righteousness/justice, glory, and peace.
Trinity. The three traditions maintain the essential elements of the doctrine of the triunity, or three-in-oneness, of God: God eternally exists as three persons (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit); each of the three persons is fully God; yet there is only one God.
Creation and providence. The three traditions believe that God created the entire universe ex nihilo (out of nothing) and sustains his creation while directing it to its divinely designed goal, often through secondary causes (e.g., he sends rain to water the earth; he holds the king’s heart in his hand).
Angelic beings. The three traditions acknowledge the reality and activity of created beings whose nature is immaterial. They believe that these spiritual beings include angels who worship God, communicate his will, and serve Christians, and also Satan and demons, those originally good angels who rebelled and now seek to resist God and his will.
Human beings. The three traditions teach that God created human beings in his image, thereby conferring dignity and significance on all people, that he gave these image-bearers a divine mandate to engage in building civilization (Gen. 1:28), and that they have a complex nature, consisting of both body and soul/spirit.
Sin. The three traditions acknowledge that all human beings are sinful, being associated with Adam in his fall and committing personal sin; thus, both original (or ancestral) and actual sin contribute to human sinfulness.
Jesus Christ. The three traditions confess that the eternally existing Son of God took on human nature in the incarnation, being conceived by the Holy Spirit and born of the Virgin Mary; the resulting God-man is fully divine and fully human, two natures united in the person of Jesus Christ. The three traditions uphold this doctrine of Christ in accordance with the Chalcedonian Creed (a.d. 451).
Salvation accomplished. The three traditions believe that Jesus Christ, through his incarnation, holy life, death, burial, resurrection, and ascension, accomplished salvation on behalf of sinful humanity.
Holy Spirit. The three traditions hold that the Holy Spirit is a divine person, coequal in nature, power, and glory with the Father and the Son, and that he should be worshiped together with them.
Salvation applied. The three traditions affirm that salvation is a gracious, mighty work of God that includes the forgiveness of sins, regeneration, and conversion.
Church. The three traditions portray the church as the people of God, the body of Christ, and the temple of the Holy Spirit. The church is further characterized by its unity, holiness, catholicity/universality, and apostolicity; and it exists to worship God, build up Christians, and engage non-Christians with the gospel.
Sacraments/ordinances. The three traditions administer specific rites, or ceremonies, that communicate or express in a concrete manner God’s grace to his people. The two rites practiced by all three traditions are baptism and the Lord’s Supper, or Eucharist.
Personal eschatology. The three traditions affirm that death is the penalty for sin and, thus, the destiny of all sinful people; still, life continues after death in the intermediate state, the period between personal death and the return of Christ.
Cosmic eschatology. The three traditions express hope in the return of Jesus Christ, the resurrection of the body, the last judgment, eternal life for the righteous and eternal punishment for the wicked, and the renewal of all creation in the new heaven and new earth.
Interpretation of Scripture. Roman Catholicism holds that the prerogative to establish the true and authoritative interpretation of the Bible belongs to its magisterium, or teaching office, which consists of the pope and bishops. Protestantism rejects the papacy and its claim to possess the sole right to interpret the Bible. It emphasizes instead the clarity and necessity of Scripture, the illumination of the Holy Spirit, and the responsibility of elders, or pastor-teachers, to encourage Christians to read Scripture with a proper understanding. Eastern Orthodoxy underscores the importance of the Spirit’s leading the church to understand Scripture in accord with the church’s tradition.
Trinity. Roman Catholicism and Protestantism confess that the Holy Spirit proceeds from both the Father and the Son (filioque), while Eastern Orthodoxy confesses his procession from the Father alone. According to Catholic and Protestant theology, the eternal procession of the Spirit does not mean that he was created, nor that he derives his deity from the Father and the Son; rather, the Father and the Son grant to the Holy Spirit his personhood. Orthodox theology maintains that the Spirit receives his deity from the Father. Orthodoxy also makes a distinction between the essence of God and his energies, affirming that the latter can be known, but not the former. Catholic and Protestant theologies minimize or reject the doctrine of energies.
Sin. Roman Catholicism holds to original sin as consisting of both the guilt inherited from Adam and the corruption of human nature. Eastern Orthodoxy denies inherited guilt, emphasizing mortality as what is inherited and sinfulness as the consequence of mortality. Protestantism considers original sin as consisting of both inherited guilt and the corruption of human nature, with many Protestants going beyond Catholic and Orthodox theology on this latter aspect, affirming both total depravity and total inability.
Mary and the saints. Roman Catholicism accords high honor to Mary, embracing her immaculate conception, sinlessness, perpetual virginity, sufferings as she endured her Son’s crucifixion and joined herself to his sacrifice, motherhood of all humanity and especially of the Church, and bodily assumption into heaven. The Catholic Church affirms her as theotokos, or bearer of God, and gives her the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix. Following her example and invoking her intercession, as they are to do with all the saints, the Catholic faithful venerate the saints and supervenerate Mary. Eastern Orthodoxy similarly acknowledges Mary as theotokos, but not the other Catholic doctrines concerning her, and it encourages its faithful to request the intercession of Mary and the saints. Protestantism embraces Mary as theotokos as an affirmation of the deity of the Son whom she bore, but it rejects the Catholic doctrines about Mary as well as the invocation of Mary and the saints.
Salvation. Roman Catholicism defines justification as “not only the remission of sins, but also the sanctification and renewal of the interior man,” thereby joining justification, sanctification, and regeneration. Accordingly, salvation is initiated by divine grace infused into sinful people through the sacraments, which renders them capable of cooperating with grace through love and good deeds to merit eternal life. Salvation, therefore, is synergistic, a work involving both God’s grace and human effort. Protestantism defines justification as the mighty act of God by which he declares sinful people “not guilty” but “righteous instead,” not on the basis of any inherent goodness or personal virtue merited through good works, but because the perfect righteousness of Christ is imputed, or credited, to them. Such salvation, which is monergistic (wrought by God alone), is by grace alone, accomplished by Christ alone, and embraced through faith alone. Justification by faith alone is the material principle of Protestantism and signifies that this mighty declarative act of God is appropriated by trust in Christ’s saving work and not earned by good deeds nor prompted by grace infused through the sacraments. Eastern Orthodoxy has avoided the Catholic-Protestant controversy over justification. It emphasizes deification, or theosis, the process not of becoming God by taking on his essence, but of becoming like him, permeated by his energies. One aid to deification is icons, which are windows into the divine realm; thus, they promote worship and spiritual virtues. Neither Catholicism nor Protestantism is favorable to icons.
Church. The Roman Catholic Church claims to be the one true church, because it alone possesses the creed (a common faith), the liturgy (the worship of God), and apostolic succession (the papacy). Moreover, the Catholic Church identifies itself as the continuation of the incarnation of Christ, so that he in his totality—his divine and human natures, together with his body—exists in the Church. This Church is governed by the pope and the bishops and is the universal sacrament of salvation. Protestantism emphasizes that the true church exists where the gospel is preached and the sacraments are administered. Thus, Protestants assemble in churches, not just in ecclesial communities as Catholicism maintains, and deny that Christ conferred his authority on the pope as successor of Peter and Vicar of Christ. Protestant churches are characterized by gospel preaching, regular celebration of two sacraments/ordinances, discipleship, missional endeavors like evangelism and mercy ministries, and leadership consisting of two offices (pastors/elders and deacons) or, for some, three offices (bishops, pastors/elders, and deacons). Eastern Orthodoxy, which also claims to be the one true church, emphasizes the unity of all bishops and denies papal supremacy; indeed, its repudiation of the supreme authority of the pope is the key ecclesial point of separation between Catholicism and Orthodoxy. It consists of various self-governing church bodies, theologically and liturgically united but geographically distinct: patriarchates, autocephalous churches, and autonomous churches.
Sacraments/ordinances. Roman Catholicism considers the sacraments to be elements in nature—water, oil, bread, wine—capable of receiving and transmitting divine grace when consecrated by the Church. Thus they are visible, concrete signs of an invisible yet real grace. Necessary for salvation, the sacraments are effective ex opere operato: they automatically communicate grace as they are administered. There are seven sacraments: baptism, confirmation, the Eucharist, penance, anointing of the sick, holy orders, and matrimony. Protestantism denies this nature-grace interdependence, the validity of the sacraments ex opere operato, and the number of sacraments, maintaining that Christ ordained only two sacraments, or ordinances: baptism and the Lord’s Supper. These rites are effective because they are gospel realities, associated with the Word of God and the Spirit of God and embraced by faith. Eastern Orthodoxy has never formalized the number of sacraments, or holy mysteries, but does administer the Eucharist as the “sacrament of sacraments,” along with the other six found in Catholicism. These sacraments are means by which the Orthodox faithful are mystically united to Christ, thus attaining theosis.
Personal eschatology. All three traditions concur about the two eternal destinies: eternal life for the righteous and eternal punishment for the wicked. Roman Catholicism adds a temporal destiny—purgatory—for its faithful members who die in the grace of God yet are imperfectly purified; they must undergo purification, rendering satisfaction for their forgiven sins, so as to achieve the holiness needed to enter heaven. Protestantism rejects the doctrine of purgatory, finding no biblical basis for it and appealing to the finished work of Christ and justification as dispelling any need for purification after death. Eastern Orthodoxy cautions against speculation regarding the afterlife, denying the notion of purification by purgatorial fire while still encouraging prayers for the dead.
Divided Christendom
As the religion of the churches of three traditions, Christendom is divided into Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, and Protestantism. A core of commonalities unites these traditions, yet even these family resemblances may mask the great divide separating these three very diverse systems. Followers of all three traditions should rejoice over genuine agreements and honestly and frankly face their disagreements.
As churches, especially of the evangelical kind, engage in proclaiming the gospel and planting churches among people who have never before heard of Jesus Christ, the vision of Christians being ransomed “from every tribe and language and people and nation” (Rev. 5:9) underscores Christ’s promise that he is building his church (Matt. 16:18) and fosters hope that the Great Commission (Matt. 28:18–20) will one day be fulfilled.
The Origin and Authority of the Biblical Canon
The Bible is not like other books. While most books (generally speaking) are written by a single author in a single location, the Bible is composed of 66 smaller books written by a variety of different authors. And these authors represent a wide range of historical contexts, geographical settings, and theological perspectives. Such a scenario raises a number of natural questions. What do all these books have in common? And what is the process by which they were gathered together? And why does the Bible contain just these 66 books? All of these questions have to do with the origins of the biblical canon—that collection of books recognized as Scripture by God’s people.
The complexities associated with the development of the Canon have led biblical critics to attack the authority of Scripture at precisely this point. Since the Canon was formed over such long periods of time, it is argued, how can we be sure it contains the right books? This uncertainty about the boundaries of the Canon has been fueled by discussions about the authorship of biblical books—and whether some may have been composed by forgers—as well as by the discovery of apocryphal books such as the Gospel of Thomas and the Gospel of Peter.
Despite these many challenges—which cannot be fully addressed in this brief article—there are still good reasons for Christians to be confident the books we have in the biblical canon are the ones God intended.
The Divine Qualities of Canonical Books
From the very beginning of the church, Christians have argued that books can be recognized as divinely inspired by their own internal characteristics. In other words, the books themselves give evidence that they are from God. The third-century church father Origen argued in precisely this way: “If anyone ponders over the prophetic sayings . . . it is certain that in the very act of reading and diligently studying them his mind and feelings will be touched by a divine breath and he will recognize the words he is reading are not utterances of man but the language of God” (On First Principles 4.1.6). Reformed thinkers such as Calvin, Owen, Turretin, and Bavinck made similar arguments, along with confessions like the Westminster Confession of Faith (1.5) and the Belgic Confession (5.2).
This conviction that the biblical books have such divine qualities flows naturally from the belief that they are constituted by the Holy Spirit. Moreover, the Christian belief that natural revelation bears evidence that it is the work of God—“The heavens declare the glory of God” (Ps. 19:1)—suggests we should expect the same of special revelation.
The existence of these divine qualities reminds us there was a tangible, objective way for canonical books to be recognized. Books did not find their way into the Canon for arbitrary reasons, nor on the whims of some person or group who happened to bear influence or power. Instead, these books found their way into the Canon on the basis of their own merits and qualities. They were simply the books that proved to be more compelling than all the other books available—a process not too unlike the survival of the fittest. In this way, we can say that biblical books, in some sense, really chose themselves.
What exactly are these divine qualities indicating a book is from God? That subject cannot be explored in detail here, but some examples would include the beauty and excellency of Scripture (Ps. 19:8; 119:103), its power and efficacy (Ps. 119:50, 98, 105, 111; Heb. 4:12–13), and its unity and harmony.
The Internal Testimony of the Holy Spirit
Even if these objective internal qualities are present, one might wonder what assurance we can have that the church has rightly recognized them. What if the church got it wrong? Moreover, if these qualities are really present, then why do not more people see them? Why do so many reject the Bible if the books therein really are so unique? The answer is that people’s ability to see these qualities is correlative to their own spiritual situation. If one is to recognize spiritual qualities, he has to be an individual filled with the Spirit.
Because people are fallen and corrupted by sin, they must have the testimonium spiritus sancti internum, the internal testimony of the Holy Spirit, if they are to recognize rightly the qualities of scriptural books. To be clear, the testimonium is not some private revelation—as if the Spirit were whispering in our ear a list of canonical books. Instead, the testimonium should be understood as the powerful work of the Spirit to overcome the noetic (mind-related) effects of sin and help a person see the qualities of Scripture that are objectively present.
Since God has given the Holy Spirit not only to individuals, but also to his corporate church, we can have a great deal of confidence the church has rightly recognized the books of the biblical canon. If so, the consensus of the church regarding the Canon—a consensus spanning thousands of years—can provide an additional layer of certainty about whether we have the right books. This church consensus does not mean, of course, that the church is infallible or somehow “creates” the Canon. Rather, this consensus shows that the church, with the help of the Holy Spirit, is compelled to respond to the powerful internal qualities objectively present in these books.
Ridderbos sums it up: “Christ will establish and build His church by causing the church to accept just this canon and, by means of the assistance and witness of the Holy Spirit, to recognize it as His” (Redemptive History and the New Testament Scriptures, 37). Or, even better, “My sheep hear my voice, . . . and they follow me” (John 10:27).
Historical Confirmation
The existence of divine qualities in these books and the help of the Holy Spirit to recognize them (not to mention the consensus of the church), already provide excellent reasons for us to be confident we have the right books in the biblical canon. On top of this, the historical evidence about how the OT and NT developed provides even further confirmation.
In regard to the OT, there is solid evidence that the boundaries of the Canon were already in place by the time of Jesus. Josephus, a first-century Jewish historian, actually lists the books of the OT canon (Against Apion 1.38–42)—a list that appears to match the 39 books in our Canon today. This has led scholars to suggest that the OT canon in the first century was universal and well defined. In this same time period, Philo, a Jewish philosopher from Alexandria, shows that the Jewish canon was already divided into an established threefold division when he refers to “[the] Law, [the] words spoken by God through the Prophets, and [the] Psalms” (Contemplative Life 25).
Philo’s threefold division is an echo of Luke 24:44, where Jesus, speaking of the OT, refers to “the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms.” This threefold division also appears in much earlier texts, such as the Jewish work Sirach (Ecclesiasticus) and the Qumran fragment 4QMMT. This matrix of historical testimony led Stephen Chapman to suggest, “By the turn of the millennium, a Jewish canon of Scripture was largely in place, if not absolutely defined and delimited in scope” (“The Old Testament Canon and Its Authority for the Christian Church,” Ex Auditu 19 [2003]: 137).
The stability of the OT canon at this point is exemplified by the fact that the NT is utterly silent regarding any canonical disagreements among the many factions in first-century Judaism. The various Jewish sects—Pharisees, Sadducees, Essenes—disagreed about a great many things in the Scriptures. And Jesus was often drawn into these debates. But it is noteworthy that, in the midst of these debates, there is never even a hint of disagreement or discussion about which books were considered Scripture. Jesus often cites from OT books as Scripture, and expects that his opponents believe (and read) the same books. Indeed, Jesus holds them accountable to the very teaching in these books. Moreover, there is not a single instance where Jesus or any NT author cites a book as Scripture that is not in our current OT—a stunning fact that deserves more attention than it typically receives (Jude 14–15 cites 1 Enoch but never refers to it as Scripture).
When it comes to the NT, the historical evidence is just as (if not more) compelling. It is clear that by the middle of the second century, a “core” collection of NT books was already regarded (and used) as Scripture by early Christian communities. This core collection would have consisted of approximately 22 of the 27 books of the NT, including the four Gospels, 13 epistles of Paul, Acts, 1 Peter, 1 John (and maybe 2 John), Hebrews, and Revelation. The fact that this “core” was in place at such an early time suggests substantial unity around most NT books from the very start. Moreover, it also tells us most of the disputes within early Christianity centered on only a small number of books, such as 2 Peter, James, Jude, and 3 John.
Even the NT itself provides some clues about the development of a new canon of writings. Most notably, 2 Peter 3:16 tells us Paul’s letters were already viewed as Scripture on par with the OT, and 1 Timothy 5:18 contains a possible citation of Luke 10:7 as “Scripture.” Both of these texts suggest an early canonical consciousness already present in the first century. It should also be observed that the NT writings often present themselves as authoritative documents for the church. For instance, Paul regularly presents his words as the very words of God (e.g., 1 Cor. 14:36–38; Gal. 1:1; 1 Thess. 2:13; 2 Thess. 3:6, 14) and asks that his letters be read in the public worship of the church (2 Cor. 10:9–11; Col. 4:16; 1 Thess. 5:27; cf. Rev. 1:3).
In the second century, a number of historical sources confirm the trend already present in the NT itself. Papias, bishop of Hierapolis (writing c. a.d. 125), plainly received Mark and Matthew, and there are good reasons to think he also knew 1 John, 1 Peter, Revelation, and perhaps even some of Paul’s letters. Justin Martyr (writing c. 150) appears to adopt all four Gospels and informs us they were read publicly in worship alongside the OT. Irenaeus (writing c. 180) exemplifies the “core” canon present in the second century as he received the four Gospels, Acts, the Pauline collection (minus Philemon), Hebrews, James, 1 Peter, 1 and 2 John, and Revelation. Our earliest canonical list, the Muratorian fragment, dates from about the same time as Irenaeus and affirms the canonicity of the four Gospels, Acts, the 13 epistles of Paul, Jude, 1 and 2 John (and possibly 3 John), and Revelation.
In sum, there is tremendous evidence for an early acceptance of the books of both the OT and the NT. That historical evidence, combined with the internal qualities of these books and the internal testimony of the Holy Spirit, provides a solid foundation upon which our confidence can rest. And, on top of this, we can appeal to the providence and sovereignty of God who presided over the entire process. If God intended his people to have his Word, we can be confident he could work in the midst of historical circumstances to make sure they did so.