With the divine qualities of the canon now established, we can now begin to explore what is known as the apostolic origins of the canon. To understand this, we must first understand certain implications of the Old and New Covenants.
Whenever covenants were enacted between two parties in the Near East, there would be an accompanying set of covenant documents, detailing the stipulations that both parties had to abide by. God’s covenants were the same way. Under the Old Covenant, God spoke through his prophets, who then wrote what God told them. These documents, written over centuries, eventually became what we now know as the Old Testament. The books that we call the Old Testament explained God’s acts in the lives of his people and what he expected of them, preserving them for coming generations.
Although the Jews had these books for centuries, they knew that they could expect more written revelation, as God had promised them that a New Covenant was coming. During the Babylonian exile, Jeremiah wrote, “Behold, the days are coming, declares the LORD, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah” (Jeremiah 31:31). In this New Covenant he promised, “I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people. And no longer shall each one teach his neighbor and each his brother, saying, ‘Know the LORD,’ for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest, declares the LORD. For I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more” (Jeremiah 31:33b-34). This New Covenant would bring about something even better that the Old Covenant could not accomplish – all members of the covenant would know God and would have their sins completely forgiven, something that could only be accomplished through Jesus’ death and resurrection. Thus, when Jesus enacted the New Covenant, believers could expect to receive the documents of the New Covenant, just like the Old, which is now our New Testament.
When we examine the writings of the apostles, we can see that they were aware of their authority, not because they were self-appointed leaders, but because it was Christ’s message spoken through them, just like God spoke through the Old Testament prophets.
Mark’s gospel begins, “The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ the Son of God” (Mark 1:1). He begins by saying that what he writes isn’t simply his own personal gospel – this is the gospel of Jesus. This is Jesus’ message that he is giving to his readers.
This idea is further emphasized by Paul in 1 Thessalonians 2:13 where he writes, “And we thank God continually because when you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men, but as it actually is, the word of God.” Paul’s message isn’t true simply because Paul said it. It’s true because it’s God’s message preached to the Thessalonians through Paul.
In light of the importance of apostolic authorship, how does a Christian respond to modern critical scholarship that claims that these books are falsely attributed to apostles or are forgeries? Firstly, many scholars who are not Christians still accept traditional authorship, so apostolic authorship is not universally questioned by unbelievers. Additionally, much of the criticism uses questionable methodologies, including Enlightenment philosophy which is biased against Christianity. Further, many of the claims rely on subjective arguments based on varying styles and vocabulary between particular books, failing to realize that an author may write in different styles depending on his audience and message.
Because the books were written by people specifically commissioned by God to bring the message of the New Covenant to the world, God’s people knew that their message was authoritative in the same way the Old Testament was, which brings us to the final attribute of canonicity – Corporate Reception.