New Testament Comparison But let’s compare against the New Testament Books in more detail. The only New Testament canon list that could be from this period (given Gallagher and Meade’s dating ranges and list selection) is the Muratorian Fragment. Whatever support it provides would simultaneously apply to the Book of…

THE CANON, AS OF 200 AD Let’s pause to consider the status of the Apocrypha in the second century. After all, what date we use to end our inquiry into the “early Church” is arbitrary. I end at 450, Gallagher and Meade at 400, but we could just as easily…

Clement of Alexandria’s List There is one other list—which is only considered a list when it is useful. It is another reference in Eusebius, that Clement of Alexandria (writing 190-203 AD, so right at the end of our timeframe here) “has not only treated extensively of the Divine Scripture, but…

The Muratorian Fragment The Muratorian Fragment[1] is our last (allegedly) second-century canon list. I include it here because Professor Bart Ehrman once gave implicit support for this dating,[2] and (as a frequent opponent of Christianity) I consider him neutral enough to arbitrate this one, since I do not see why…

Melito’s List The earliest certain date for a list is Melito’s, which is dated at 170 AD.[1] The main issue with this list is a debate as to whether it is just a list of the Jewish canon or intended as the list for Christians as well. We do not…

The Mistaken Bryennios List: 20/20 Hindsight Gallagher and Meade are the best resource I have found for all the early canon lists.[1] So we start with their first Christian entry, the Bryennios List, allegedly the earliest canon list. They date it from 100-150 AD.[2] In fact, Gallagher and Meade (writing…

33 AD TO 200 AD We begin with canon lists, where a Father from the early Church may have provided a list of the Books of the Bible. From Gallagher and Meade (p. 27): The Greek canon lists from the first four centuries attest a very stable collection that consistently…

PART II: THE EARLY CHURCH INTRODUCTION: THE CERTAIN EXPLAINS THE UNCERTAIN There is a basic rule to follow when we encounter something ambiguous in someone’s writing. We are told to do it with such famous authors as Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John—consult any book on interpreting the Bible, such as…

SIDEBAR 6: REASONABLE STANDARDS OF PROOF, PART II The case for Christianity is usually framed as a debate among scholars. This book began as the very first footnote in a different book that would have explained how ridiculous that is (in the real world, when they need to save their…

SIDEBAR 5: CONTRADICTORY PROOFS From Geisler and Saleeb, Answering Islam: Insisting that the Qur’an must be divine revelation because it is self-consistent and noncontradictory is also not convincing. Some critics raise significant questions about how totally consistent the Qur’an is. For one thing, they point out that the most blatant…