Scripture and God in Christianity

Luke the secretaries to Peter and Paul. 36 On the other hand B. B. Warfield, 37 Charles Hodge,
Geisler, and a number of other scholars argue that it was the apostolic authority or apostolic approval
that was used as the criterion for canonicity. Geisler, for instance, argues, that "The term
"apostolic" as used for the test of canonicity does not necessarily mean "apostolic authorship," or
"that which was prepared under the direction of the apostles," unless the word "apostle" be taken
in its non-technical sense, meaning someone beyond the twelve apostles or Paul. In this nontechnical
sense, Barnabas is called an apostle (Acts 14:14; cf. v. 4), as is James (Gal. 1:19), and
evidently others too. (Rom. 16:7; II Cor. 8:23, Phil. 2:25). It appears rather unnecessary to think
of Mark and Luke as being secretaries of apostles, or to argue that the writer of James was an
apostle, to say nothing of Jude or the writer of Hebrews. In fact, the writer of Hebrews disclaims
being an apostle, saying that the message of Christ "was attested to us [readers and writers] by
those [the apostles] who heard him." (Heb. 2:3)" Geisler concludes, that "it is apostolic authority,
or apostolic approval, that was the primary test for canonicity, and not merely apostolic authorship."
38
There is a different line of approach taken by Papias, a second century bishop of Hierapolis.
Though not suspicious of the intention or sincerity of Mark, he does raise some questions about
the direct authority and order of Marcan Gospel. He observes, that "The elder [John] used to say,
Mark, having become Peter's interpreter, wrote accurately all that he remembered; though he did
not [record] in order that which was either said or done by Christ. For he neither heard the Lord
nor followed him; but subsequently, as I said [attached himself to] Peter, who used to frame his
teachings to meet the [immediate] wants [of his hearers]; and not as making a connected narrative
of the Lord's discourses." 39 It is difficult to fully accommodate these traditional claims of apostolic
authorship and authority for most of the New Testament books in the light of what the
modern scholarship has proved. The fact of the matter is, as Westcott observes, that "The recognition
of the Apostolic writings as authoritative and complete was partial and progressive." 40
Contemporary critical scholars, following form-criticism, 41 redaction criticism, 42 literary criticism,
43 and historical approach to the New Testament, disagree with the above sketched traditional
view of the authenticity and divine nature of the New Testament writings. They argue, that
the New Testament books were not the works of the immediate disciples of Jesus. They were
compiled long after the disciples by the authors mostly unknown to us. Hans Conzelmann argues
that, "the circumstances of composition (author, time, place, occasion, and any of the more specific
circumstances) are not known for any of the New Testament writings other than Paul's letters."
44 These scholars further argue, that Jesus never asked his disciples to put any thing in writing.
After his resurrection the disciples were busy preaching the end of the world and arrival of
the Kingdom of God, "The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand" (Mk. 1:15);
therefore, the disciples were least interested in writing the words of Jesus. The first Christians,
observes R. L. Fox, "were people of faith, not textual fundamentalists: to hear Peter or Paul was
to hear a man with a conviction, not a Bible, and a new message which old texts were quoted to
back up. We can take this message back to within four years of Jesus' death through the personal
testimony of Paul: he 'received,' he tells the Christians in Corinth, that 'Christ died for our sins in
accordance with the scripture, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance
with the scripture,' and he then appeared to Peter and then to others in a sequence which
does not match the stories of the appearances in our Gospels.." 45 In the words of J. D. Crossan,
5