Lost scriptures: books that did not make it into the New Testament (87 page)

1This is probably not the Letter to the Laodiceans that survives. See p. 165. 2On the views of Marcion, see Ehrman,
Lost
Christianities,
103–109.

Translation by Bruce M. Metzger,
The
Canon
of
the
New
Testament:
Its
Origin,
Development,
and
Significance
(Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1987) 305–7; used with permission.

331

332

CANONICAL LISTS

. . . at which nevertheless he was present,

deeds of the Lord, in their order.

and so he placed [them in his narrative].

34
Moreover, the acts of all the apostles

2
The third book of the Gospel is that

35
were written in one book. For “most

according to Luke.
3
Luke, the well-

excellent Theophilus”4 Luke compiled

known physician, after the ascension of

36
the individual events that took place

Christ,
4–5
when Paul had taken him

in his presence—
37
as he plainly shows

with him as one zealous for the law,

by omitting the martyrdom of Peter
38
as

6
composed it in his own name, accordwell as the departure of Paul from the ing to [the general] belief. Yet he himself

city [of Rome]
39
when he journeyed to

had not
7
seen the Lord in the flesh; and

Spain. As for the Epistles of
40–1
Paul,

therefore, as he was able to ascertain

they themselves make clear to those deevents,
8
so indeed he begins to tell the siring to understand, which ones [they

story from the birth of John.
9
The fourth

are], from what place, or for what reason

of the Gospels is that of John, [one] of

they were sent.
42
First of all, to the

the disciples.
10
To his fellow disciples

Corinthians, prohibiting their heretical

and bishops, who had been urging him

schisms;
43
next,5 to the Galatians,

[to write],
11
he said, “Fast with me from

against circumcision;
44–6
then to the

today for three days, and what
12
will be

Romans he wrote at length, explaining

revealed to each one
13
let us tell it to

the order (or, plan) of the Scriptures, and

one another.” In the same night it was

also that Christ is their principle (or, main

revealed
14
to Andrew, [one] of the apostheme). It is necessary
47
for us to distles,
15–16
that John should write down cuss these one by one, since the blessed

all things in his own name while all of

48
apostle Paul himself, following the exthem should review it. And so, though ample of his predecessor
49–50
John,

various
17
elements may be taught in the

writes by name to only seven churches

individual books of the Gospels,
18
nevin the following sequence: to the Corinertheless this makes no difference to the thians
51
first, to the Ephesians second,

faith of believers, since by the one sovto the Philippians third,
52
to the Colosereign Spirit all things
20
have been desians fourth, to the Galatians fifth,
53
to clared in all [the Gospels]: concerning

the Thessalonians sixth, to the Romans

the
21
nativity, concerning the passion,

54–5
seventh. It is true that he writes once

concerning the resurrection,
22
concernmore to the Corinthians and to the Thesing life with his disciples,
23
and consalonians for the sake of admonition, cerning his twofold coming;
24
the first

56–7,
yet it is clearly recognizable that

in lowliness when he was despised,

there is one Church spread throughout

which has taken place,
25
the second glothe whole extent of the earth. For John rious in royal power,
26
which is still in

also in the
58
Apocalypse, though he

the future. What
27
marvel is it, then, if

writes to seven churches,
59–60
never

John so consistently
28
mentions these

theless speaks to all. [Paul also wrote]

particular points also in his Epistles,

out of affection and love one to Phile

29
saying about himself: “What we have

mon, one to Titus, and two to Timothy;

seen with our eyes
30
and heard with our

and these are held sacred
62–3
in the

ears and our hands
31
have handled,

these things we have written to you.?”3

32
For in this way he professes [himself]

3

to be not only an eye-witness and hearer,

1 John 1: 1–3. 4Luke 1: 3. 5The letter “b” in the

Latin text before “Galatians” may belong to “Corinthi

33
but also a writer of all the marvelous

ans” (pro¡ ß Korinui¬oyß bÓ).

THE MURATORIAN CANON

333

esteem of the Church catholic for the

of Rome,
75
while bishop Pius, his

regulation of ecclesiastical discipline.

brother, was occupying the [episcopal]

There is current also [an epistle] to
64
the

chair
76
of the church of the city of

Laodiceans, [and] another to the Alex

Rome.
77
And therefore it ought indeed

andrians, [both] forged in Paul’s
65
name

to be read; but
78
it cannot be read pubto [further] the heresy of Marcion, and licly to the people in church either among

several others
66
which cannot be re

79
the prophets, whose number is com-

ceived into the catholic church
67
—for

plete,7 or among
80
the apostles, for it is

it is not fitting that gall be mixed with

after [their] time.
81
But we accept nothhoney.
68
Moreover, the Epistle of Jude ing whatever of Arsinous or Valentinus

and two of the above-mentioned (or,

or Miltiades,
82
who also composed
83
a

bearing the name of) John are counted

new book of psalms for Marcion,
84–

(or, used) in the catholic [Church],6 and

5
together with Basilides, the Asian

[the book of] Wisdom,
70
written by the

founder of the Cataphrygians. . . .

friends of Solomon in his honor.
71
We

receive only the apocalypses of John and

Peter,
72
though some of us are not willing that the latter be read in church.

6It may be, as Zahn (
Geschichte,
ii, 66) and others
73
But Hermas wrote the
Shepherd

have supposed, that a negative has fallen out of the

text here. 7Perhaps the Fragmentist means that there

74
very recently, in our times, in the city

are three major Prophets and twelve minor Prophets.

The Canon of Origen

of Alexandria

Origen was the most brilliant, prolific, and influential author of the first three centuries of Christianity. Born in 185 ce, he was raised by Christian parents in Alexandria, Egypt. Already as a child, Origen was recognized as a prodigy. While still a teenager, according to the church historian Eusebius, he was appointed to be head of the famous Catechetical School in Alexandria, a kind of institution of Christian higher learning. Origen soon became the leading proto-orthodox spokesperson of his day, with extensive writings that included detailed expositions of Scripture, sermons, theological treatises, defenses of the faith against its cultured despisers, and refutations of heretics. His inventive theological explorations were seen as acceptable by the proto-orthodox of his day; but he was later condemned as a heretic, largely because of the ways his views were developed by his successors.

As a result of this condemnation, many of his writings were destroyed. But a good many also survive, revealing the true brilliance of Origen’s mind.

None of these surviving writings provides a full listing of the books that Origen considered to belong to the New Testament canon. He does make scattered references to the canon, however, and these can help show how the canon was taking shape in the early third century in proto-orthodox circles of Alexandria. The following partial lists are drawn from Origen’s Commentaries on Matthew and John and his Homilies on the Epistle to the Hebrews, as these are quoted in the writings of Eusebius (see below).

As can be seen, Origen accepted the four Gospels that were eventually agreed upon: the Pauline epistles (which he does not enumerate in this fragment), one letter of Peter, allowing for the possibility of a second, one letter of John and possibly two more, and the Apocalypse of John. In the final fragment given here, he addresses the problem posed by the book of Hebrews, accepting it as canonical, but expressing his opinion that Paul was not its actual author.

Translation by Bart D. Ehrman, based on the Greek text in Gustave Bardy,
Eusèbe
de
Ceśaree´,
Histoire
Eccleśiastique
(SC, 41; Paris: Cerf, 1951).

334

THE CANON OF ORIGEN OF ALEXANDRIA

335

Now in the first volume of his
Commen-

why do we need to speak of the one

tary
on
the
Gospel
of
Matthew,
[Origen]

who reclined on Jesus’ breast, John,

defends the canon of the church, testifywho left behind one Gospel, while ing that he recognizes only four Gospels.

admitting that he could produce so

This is what he says:

many that the world would not be

Among the four Gospels—the

able to contain them [John 21:25]?

only ones not disputed by the church

He also wrote the Apocalypse, after

of God under heaven—I have

being ordered to be silent and not to

learned from the tradition that the

write what was spoken by the voices

first written was that according to

of the seven thunders [Rev. 10:3–4].

Matthew, the former tax collector

He also left behind an epistle of a

and then apostle of Jesus Christ, who

very few lines, and possibly a secdelivered it to believers coming out ond and third. For not everyone

of Judaism, drawing it up in Hebrew

agrees that these are genuine. But

letters. Second was that according to

taken together, both do not contain

Mark, who recorded it as he was

a hundred lines.

instructed by Peter, who acknowl

In addition to these, he says the following

edges him as his son in the Catholic

about the letter to the Hebrews in his

epistle he wrote, where he says,

Homilies
on it:

“The church in Babylon, chosen

The writing style of the epistle

with you, sends you greetings, as

entitled “To the Hebrews” does not

does my son Mark,” [1 Pet. 5:13].

have the unskilled character of the

The third was that according to

apostle, who admitted that he was

Luke, the Gospel praised by Paul

an unskilled writer [2 Cor. 11:6], at

and made for those among the Genleast with regard to style. The epistle tile Christians. And after all these

is better Greek in its composition, as

was that according to John.

everyone able to evaluate differ

And in the fifth volume of his
Expositions

ences in style will admit. At the

on
the
Gospel
of
John,
the same author same time, everyone who attends

[Origen] said these things concerning the

closely to the reading of the aposapostolic epistles:

tolic text will agree that the thoughts

Paul was made worthy to be a

of the epistle are marvelous and in

minister of the new covenant, a covno way inferior to the acknowledged enant based not on the letter but the

writings of the apostle.

Spirit [2 Cor. 3:6]; and he spread the

After a few other matters he adds the

gospel from Jerusalem and its vicinfollowing:

ity, as far as Illyricum [Rom 15:19].

But I would say that the thoughts

He did not write to all the churches

of the epistle appear to be those of

he had taught; but to those he did

the apostle, whereas the style and

write, he sent letters of just a few

composition of the letter are those

lines. But Peter, on whom the church

of someone who had his writings in

of Christ was built and against

mind, and wrote down the words of