Summary: Despite the mystique of recently discovered Gnostic documents, said by some to represent the real Jesus, the evidence shows that our New Testament documents were recognized through a slow, careful process as inspired by the Holy Spirit. The Muratorian Canon furnishes corroborating evidence that the list of New Testament writings is faithful to Christ.
Timothy, guard the deposit entrusted to you. Avoid the irreverent babble and contradictions of what is falsely called “knowledge…” – 1 Timothy 6:20 (ESV)
Can You Prove That It Didn’t Happen?
At the conclusion of the cult classic film, “Plan Nine from Outer Space,” still considered by many to be the worst movie ever made, the announcer Criswell says: “You have seen this incident, based on sworn testimony. Can you prove that it didn’t happen?” That “sworn testimony” is to “grave robbers from outer space.” Atrocious as the logic is in Criswell’s statement, it parallels the logic some use now to challenge the legitimacy of the New Testament.
Dan Brown, in his best-selling novel The Da Vinci Code (2003), led his vast audience to believe that the Roman Emperor Constantine wished to suppress Gnostic writings about Jesus. Constantine wanted Christianity to unify the empire, and if people knew the real truth about Jesus, the Gnostic teacher, it wouldn’t work. So, Constantine promoted the Gospels: Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. The New Testament became in the 4th century what Constantine wanted it to be, not about the true Jesus. As this thinking goes, Gnostic texts, like The Gospel of Thomas, were legitimate representations of Jesus and his teaching, rather than the books and letters that comprise our New Testament.
The question arising from this conspiracy theory is implied: Can you prove that it didn’t happen? As a matter of fact we can, though not to the satisfaction of everyone. It’s because the evidence points to a New Testament we can trust.
False Teachers in Early Christianity
The early Church was plagued by false teachers. The message about Jesus was new. Those wishing to corrupt it, or blend it with other religions and philosophies like Zoroastrianism and Platonism, did not face the obstacle of long-established doctrine. There’s evidence already in the New Testament of false teachers and imposters. For instance…
O Timothy, guard the deposit entrusted to you. Avoid the irreverent babble and contradictions of what is falsely called “knowledge…” – 1 Timothy 6:20 (ESV) (“Knowledge” is gnosis in the Greek text, possibly a reference to proto-gnostic teaching.)
Now when Simon saw that the Spirit was given through the laying on of the apostles’ hands, he offered them money, saying, “Give me this power also, so that anyone on whom I lay my hands may receive the Holy Spirit.” But Peter said to him, “May your silver perish with you, because you thought you could obtain the gift of God with money! – Acts 8:18-20 (ESV)
I, Paul, write this greeting with my own hand. This is the sign of genuineness in every letter of mine; it is the way I write. – 2 Thessalonians 3:17 (ESV)
I am astonished and extremely irritated that you are so quickly shifting your allegiance and deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different [even contrary] gospel; which is really not another [gospel]; but there are [obviously] some [people masquerading as teachers] who are disturbing and confusing you [with a misleading, counterfeit teaching] and want to distort the gospel of Christ [twisting it into something which it absolutely is not]. – Galatians 1:6-7 (AMP)
Development of Gnosticism
In 1945 at Nag Hammadi in Egypt, a jar of ancient texts was discovered that is now known as the Nag Hammadi Library. From these texts scholars attempt to reconstruct Gnosticism and its development. Among the texts was Plato’s Republic, changed to accommodate Gnostic beliefs. That alone should caution us about finding the true Jesus in these documents.
Some scholars contend there were two kinds of Christianity that existed side by side in the early years of the 1st century. The Gnostic form included at least some of Jesus’ teaching and was different from the Orthodox form. Orthodox belief finally brought Gnostic belief to an end, and the winners wrote the history. Gnosticism was called evil and heretical, though it really wasn’t. Its writings were to be destroyed. (Can you prove it didn’t happen?) But what is known of Gnosticism demonstrates a profoundly different kind of belief system than one would find in a Jewish teacher from Galilee during the 1st century.
Gnosticism took numerous forms. Perhaps we should call them denominations. Bishop Irenaeus enumerated them in his Against Heresies. Common to them were ideas such as… (1) The belief that matter is evil, and must be overcome by secret knowledge. (2) More gods exist than just one. The deity who created the physical world did people no favors, because matter is evil. (3) Jesus was not really physical. He only seemed that way as he revealed the secret knowledge for overcoming the physical in order to achieve salvation. Clearly, that means he did not really die on a cross, or rise from the dead.
Developing Safeguards
With beliefs like these challenging the teachings of Peter, Paul, and the rest of Jesus’ Apostles, Christians began to develop safeguards and strategies to maintain right teaching. One of these practices was ordaining new pastors only at the hands of older pastors who could trace their ordinations to the Apostles, especially Peter. This “apostolic succession” or “historic episcopate” was put in place for a good reason, but it is not required in the Scriptures. In fact, Paul says specifically that it does not apply to him (Gal. 1:11-20).
It makes sense that all four of the Gospels in the New Testament were written to some extent to maintain the truth about the real Jesus over what false teachers were saying. Within the Gospels we find occasional statements like these. [Jesus said,] “See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself. Touch me and see. For a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have” (Luke 24:39). And, The Word became flesh and dwelt among us… (John 1:14).
When it came to the acceptance of the New Testament writings, leaders of the church took their time. They did not simply decide that certain writings were to be accepted and others were not. That would come officially much later. Instead, they recognized a difference in writings with the passing of time. The genuine books and letters tended to be: (1) used in the churches universally; (2) considered orthodox, i.e., right teaching; and (3) traceable to a trusted, apostolic source. These criteria were used to test the various writings available to the churches. (Explore the development from ancient scrolls to modern Bibles.)
More Evidence for the New Testament Canon
We have another item of evidence in favor of our present New Testament canon. It is called the Muratorian Fragment, or Muratorian Canon. Lodovico Antonio Muratori discovered the existing manuscript of the Fragment and published it in 1750. The manuscript is from the 8th century, but scholars believe the original comes from the 2nd century, because it mentions Pope Pius 1 (142-157) as recently living. The Fragment is a listing of the currently accepted writings used in the churches, with information supplied about them. Clearly, the churches reflected by the Fragment were using what is basically our New Testament. The Fragment specifically rejects writings by the heretic, Marcion, and Gnostic teachers, Valentinus and Basilides.
The first part of the manuscript is missing; this is the reason the document is called a fragment. Still, almost the entire New Testament is accounted for in the Muratorian Canon. Missing are Hebrews, James and the letters of Peter. Mentioned favorably are the Wisdom of Solomon, the Shepherd of Hermas, and the Apocalypse of Peter, which were omitted by the later church.
This list shows us the state of affairs in the churches, long before Constantine’s supposed creation of a false New Testament made in order to misrepresent Jesus by erasing the Gnostic truth about him. The later church made the final decision about the New Testament Canon at the Councils of Carthage in 397 and 419, after the canon had been recognized and faithfully used for many years. (See the Thinker Update on bias and prejudice in scholarly paradigms.)
Conclusion
As Ben Witherington III has written, Jesus was not a “talking head,” saying things no one understood in that time or place. Jesus’ context was 1st century Judaism, not the world of the Platonic philosopher or the Zoroastrian priest. His words must be understandable in terms of that 1st century Jewish world, or else they are probably not really his words. It is certainly true that Jesus spoke in parabolic language. But the parables deal with the Kingdom of God, not secret knowledge. An old saying among preachers is, “A text without a context is a pretext.” That is what challengers to the New Testament have done by removing Jesus from his own context, presenting him as truly a Gnostic teacher, and then silently putting the question to us: can you prove that it didn’t happen? Yes, we can. Keep thinking!
TOP PHOTO: Bronze head of Constantine, 4th century. (Credit: public domain)
NOTE: Not every view expressed by scholars contributing Thinker articles necessarily reflects the views of Patterns of Evidence. We include perspectives from various sides of debates on biblical matters so that readers can become familiar with the different arguments involved. – Keep Thinking!
