Development of the Canon of Christianity

Bruce offers a solid explanation of the formation of the canon chronologically starting with the Hebrew scriptures (p. 21) until the 4th century where church councils started to present the first spoken finished canon (p. 97). Bruce shows the importance of the Old Testament scriptures, but writes most about the New Testament. He not only shows how the New Testament came to be a canon but offers a deep analysis of non-canonical scripture called the Apocrypha (pp. 48, 90-93).

The foundation of the Christian faith is cradled within truth of the virgin birth, life, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. As diverse as the world-wide Christian culture is, the truth in the birth and life of Jesus stands without border and language limitations. Just as each individual life story can be adapted to be relevant for a variety of audiences, the birth story of the Messiah was also. The Gospels of Matthew and Luke are an example of the well-rounded and diverse narration of the birth story of Jesus—Matthew’s narration spoke to the history of the Jewish people and Luke presented to the citizen of Rome.

The ministry of Jesus brought about a new religion: Christianity. Jesus’ teachings were apocalyptic in that he preached the nearness of the Kingdom of God. He also taught, “To love your neighbor as yourself” Mark 12:31[NIV]. “Since Jesus was a Jew and preached to Jews, Christianity was closely linked to Judaism.” “Early Christian missionaries, being Jews, interacted at first with the Jewish communities in the empire’s cities.” “This was only natural and gave them common ground with other groups in the provinces in which Jews were a minority.” “Among the Jews, however, resistance to Jesus being the Messiah was often encountered, and early on, the Christians or the church gained converts from non-Jews.” “Christianity in its early stages used the Jewish synagogues, allowing it access

It is possible to write on the life of Jesus from the information gathered from the bible. I will be dividing my essay into three parts. In the first part of the paper, I will talk about the nature of the gospels, John’s views vs. the Synoptic, discuss if the authors of the gospels are eyewitnesses and how they used written sources. Also I will talk about the Q source. Then I will elaborate on the topic of how Matthew and Luke were similar. Then I will continue on by discussing how the Old Testament uses Moses, Samuel and Elijah to interpret Jesus, and finally whether or not the Sermon on the Mount happened. In the second part of my paper, I will talk about Jesus’s birth and childhood, his miracles, his resurrection, and what Jesus did to cure people, spirits and how they are interpreted to the prophet, magician and the mad man compared to Saul and Elijah. The final part of the paper I will talk about what Jesus talked about as regards to the Kingdom of God vs. the Kingdom of the Romans and what he intended by speaking of the end of the world. I will also speak of the reasons behind the Romans executing him. My sources for this paper will be the New Jerusalem Bible Readers edition as my primary source and lecture notes from Professor Trumbach.

One of the many things that puzzle people even today; is how Jesus was portrayed and how he became a part of history throughout the centuries. Fortunately, within the book Jesus Through the Centuries, written by Jaroslav Pelikan, readers are able to get a sense of what societies viewed Jesus as and how he was/is important to many aspects of the world such as; the political, social, and cultural impact he had left. As Pelikan discusses this very topic and theme in his book, we see how there’s a connection between his audience in this book and Jesus’s are closely similar. When he got his motivation to write about Jesus through the Centuries, Jaroslav had an open audience, which was intended for anyone of all ages, races, and beliefs to read

The evidence that exists to prove the diversity of the early Christian community is the many other writings which have been discovered by historians from the same time period (Harris 2014). In addition, the writings reveal that each separate group of Christians from this era had their own understanding of what Jesus was teaching His followers. The “fifth gospel” of Thomas paints the picture of Jesus as a guide towards His disciples by enlightening them with the message that God’s Kingdom already rules, but many people would not believe him. The portrait that Thomas provokes is an example of the diversity of the early writers and several of his ideas are similar to Matthew, Mark, and Luke (Harris 2014).

Longenecker’s The Lost Letters of Pergamum encapsulates the socio-historical, cultural, and political atmosphere of the first-century setting in which Mark’s Gospel would have been experienced. Understanding Jesus in context of this background alters the way I understand the Gospel of Mark. Specific passages in Mark can be reflected upon based on the socio-historical, cultural, and political aspects of the setting described in Longenecker’s book. In The Lost Letters of Pergamum, readers see Euphemos and Antipas admonishing Luke against associating himself with Christians for they worship and follow a different lord than the emperor as well as endorse an empire other than Rome.

But it really conceals an attitude for which there is a technical theological term: Gnosticism. Gnosticism was one of the early Church's chief rivals. Unlike biblical creationism and the more optimistic views of nature found in some pagan philosophers, Gnostics saw the world as the product of an evil or, at best, indifferent, god; the true God was to be found only beyond material things. Evil was built in the foundations of this world.

For years, the dispute about what is fact and what is opinion has been present in the church. This debate is seen, in modern day, through the different denominations that are under the Christianity banner. Under the banner of Christianity there are Catholic, Baptist, Presbyterian, Apostolic, Methodist, Seventh-Day Adventist, Church of God in Christ (C.O.G.I.C), and Lutheran.

The purpose of the paper is to differentiate between Christ of faith and Jesus of history. New Testament biblical scholars from the 19th Century have been preoccupied by the notion of Christ of faith versus Jesus of History. Jesus of history can be described as the quest for historical Jesus, while the Christ of Faith is the Christ of Christian belief either through the Church or historically. Some traditions even went ahead to argue that the Jesus of History could never be found and therefore the Christ of faith is the only way forward for Christians. On the other hand, those who have been promoting the Jesus of History have often assumed that the historical Jesus is much superior as compared to the Christ of Faith. Despite the key differences between Christ of faith and the historical Jesus, both these aspect have an implication for Western Christianity.

The books of Matthew and John though have many similarities, also have many differences due to the goals that they are trying to achieve and the importance of points/events they are trying to get across. The reason behind the initial portrayals of Jesus helps achieve the goals of each book; whereas Matthew’s book tries to ‘convince’ the educated readers and quarrelers (Pharisees), John’s book does not care much about reputation per se. For example, Jesus turns on the Jews who believe in him to generate a readers response to him as the definitive expression of God 's will or revelation as opposed to Matthew’s intentional readers response to God 's will as expressed in the Mosaic Law. While there are many qualities I could delve into regarding the difference in characters of Jesus, my essay in particular will look at what each book views is especially important with regard to Jesus and his intentions. Specifically, my main focus will be on the presentation of Jesus and reasons for doing so; setting in context what the book is basically about.

Gnosticism, which was viewed as a threat to early Christian beliefs can be defined as the “thought and practice especially of various cults of late pre Christian and early Christian centuries distinguished by the conviction that matter is evil and that emancipation comes through gnosis (King, p.5).” Besides the dictionary’s condensed definition summarizing Gnosticism, “Gnosticism” is a much more complex belief composed of numerous myths defining humans and God and viewed as an ancient Christian heresy. Gnosticism is rather a term invented in the early modern period to aid in defining the boundaries of normative Christianity. Yet, it has been mistakenly come to be thought of as a distinctive Christian heresy or seen as a religion in its own

In his book The Question of Canon, Michael Kruger disputes the overriding image in a good deal of modern-day biblical scholarship, which regards the concept of canon as something completely extraneous from early Christian religion and as merely an ecclesiastical production of the second through fourth centuries. While answering different tenets of this view; what he defines as the extrinsic model, Kruger proposes the merits of an mutually exclusive model, which he defines as the intrinsic model, which comprises “that the idea of Canon is not something imposed from the outside but develops more organically from within the early Christian religion itself”. (21) Kruger carefully surveys the extrinsic model by locating five of its major tenets and disclosing its major trouble. Each chapter critiques the extrinsic model and opens up the threshold for the intrinsic model.

Throughout history, Christianity always had a reputation, or a “name” following it. Different perspectives approached the reputation that was attached to Christianity in different manners. Justin Martyr and Porphyry had objectives when defining whether this “name” really defined Christianity and the past. They wondered whether the past really represented Christianity. Additionally they honed in on the question of was the past that people represented as Christianity really the roots of Christianity? All around Porphyry and Justin was perceptions of what Christianity rooted from and stood for.

This essay will show contrasts in views on the Gospel of John regarding authorship,dates, and the relationship between John's Gospel and the Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke. Some comparison of thought, concerning composition and life setting, will also be presented.