Restoring The Original Bible

Home Page  |  Restoring the Original
Bible  |  Order

Chapter 2: The Biblical Keys to
Canonization

This book is about the design and development of the Old and New
Testaments. It differs substantially from other studies made over the last 150
years. In this work, a principle has been adopted which has the potential for
solving a great number of perplexing problems now confronting any scholarly
investigation in the field of biblical canonization. I will use a procedure
which should be used to evaluate any historical account, but strangely,
in major studies involving scripture canonization, it has not been emphasized
as a main guideline. Its lack of use is especially apparent in matters
concerning the original design and development of the Holy Scriptures. In this
book, however, this proper principle will be placed in a prime position of
interpretation. The results can lead us away from the present guessing game of
theologians and give us a satisfying and stimulating advance towards a real
understanding of what books belong in the Holy Bible and in what order they
should appear.

The method involves a recognition of environmental elements which governed
the social, political, and religious conduct of the people who formulated the
Bible. It is a well-known fact that people find it psychologically difficult,
if not impossible, to keep from absorbing social concepts and moral principles
which permeate the environment in which they live and function. This certainly
applies to those who canonized the Bible. When the external surroundings
influencing the canonizers are recognized, and those factors are employed in
the interpretation of their writings, a fuller comprehension of what the Bible
teaches can result.

The Religious Environment for Canonization

The age in which the New Testament was written and canonized was very
different from that of modern times. This is especially true when one compares
our present world with the religious atmosphere of the peoples who once
existed in the Roman and Parthian Empires. Preeminent among all others in
their desire to promote religious teachings were the Jewish people. Their
society was dominated by scriptural teachings and interpretations maintained
by the rabbis and priests. There has never been a communal existence more
regulated by rigorous biblical customs and philosophies than that of the
1st century Jews.

Though their reliance on Old Testament standards may seem unreasonable to
many modern people, early Jewish mentality regarded the performance of their
religious duties as natural and normal. Their principal source for the manners
and customs they exhibited was the Law of Moses. They were most interested in
keeping what they called the Torah (the Law). In fact. they went beyond the
strictness of Moses (Matthew 23:1–3), and created a hidebound religious
community which the apostle Paul called a society of (Galatians 4:25).
Peter and the other apostles agreed (Acts 15:10).

Nevertheless, that uncompromising religious system, and the principles that
governed it, played a profound role in the canonization of the New Testament.
A lack of comprehension of its major features (to which all the apostles were
subjected) is a prime reason why some scholars are at a loss to explain how or
why the books of the New Testament were selected and positioned within the
canon. In this chapter I describe some of the important aspects of that
1st century Jewish environment which will help show why the
manuscript order of the Old and New Testament writings is proper.

Seven Environmental Factors

There were seven major factors that affected the Jewish people in the
1st century.

First, a social feature which influenced all historical
periods covered by the Bible is that involving the recognition and respect for
eldership. Let me explain the importance of this concept. It simply
means that anyone older than someone else was accorded a superior respect in
all matters concerning the social graces. And though this principle could be
put aside if someone younger was of more political or religious importance,
the general feeling of all ancient people was that those who were older in age
were given a position of prestige and honor. A good example of this is the
account of Elihu in the Book of Job. When Elihu desired to give his opinion on
why Job had suffered misfortunes, the Bible is clear that Elihu (the younger
man) waited until the older and supposedly wiser men had their opportunities
to instruct the patriarch Job. Only after the discourses of the elders
were completed did Elihu speak (Job 32:1–9).

This principle of elders having the first chance to be heard is one which
monopolizes all historical narratives of the Bible from beginning to end. Are
we to imagine that the canonizers of the Bible would disallow this principle
of elder supremacy when they thought of positioning the books of the Bible? It
would seem highly unlikely that any respectful Jewish person in the
1st century would disallow such manners of custom involving
eldership. In fact, when one looks at the arrangement of the biblical
books, it is obvious that the New Testament writers and canonizers held to
this principle in a definite way.

Let us first look at the order of the books in the New Testament. Notice
the books which followed the four Gospels and the Book of Acts. The
manuscripts have: James, 1st and 2nd Peter,
1st, 2nd and 3rd John, Jude, all of which
scholars normally call the “Catholic Epistles” because of the general nature
of their subject matter. In the official manuscripts, these seven epistles
were placed before the four igned to the apostle Paul. But why? One of
the reasons is because of this principle of eldership. Note that the
four men who wrote these seven books were men who personally heard Christ
teach while he was in the flesh, and they were ordained to preach the Gospel
before the apostle Paul was converted on the road to Damascus. Simply put,
they were elders of Paul. The apostle Paul recognized this fact and
said that they were ministers “before me”
(Galatians 1:17). Paul considered himself as the “least
of the apostles” (1 Corinthians 15:9). Indeed, he even demoted
himself in personal rank to the position of being “less
than the least of all saints” (Ephesians 3:8).

If one had to rely solely upon the statements of Paul in his epistles (and
comprehending the principle of eldership preeminence) then the writings
of those men who were apostles before Paul should by all the social
customs of the time have had their teachings positioned before those of Paul.
Interestingly, this is precisely the position in which we find them in the
early manuscript order of the New Testament books. There is no guessing
in this fact. There can be no doubt that this advancement of the seven
epistles of these early “Jewish” apostles before the fourteen of the
apostle Paul is correct.

The Second Environmental Factor

Second, another environmental factor should be taken into
consideration, and it is socially akin to the first. This is the deference
afforded those who were in high positions of government and/or to those who
occupied august religious offices, no matter what their ages might be. A
notable example of this is found in the actions of the apostle Paul. The New
Testament shows that Paul was at one time extremely critical of the decisions
by one of his persecutors. But when he found out that the person was the High
Priest (who was probably not wearing his pontifical robes at the time), Paul
respected his rank and apologized for speaking to him abusively (Acts
23:1–5).

Many such examples of esteem for authorities (no matter if they were good
or evil) can be cited throughout Scripture. Even today in Jewish circles, if a
member of a synagogue possesses a name associated with the priesthood (Cohen,
Kahn, Conn, etc.), that person has the inalienable right to read the lessons
before anyone else. This rule also applies to Jews having Levitical
names (Levi, Levine, etc.). These men are only a step removed from priesthood
positions in rank of importance. However, if no one attending the synagogue
has names of sacerdotal significance, then any Israelite male today can assume
the duties of reading the scriptural lessons.

This courtesy to those possessing prestigious administrative (or family)
ranks is sustained consistently throughout all parts of the Old and New
Testaments. An example of this is found in the order of the three divisions
which make up the Old Testament. The first section is composed the five books
of the Law Written by Moses (who was the highest ranking man of the Old
Testament, followed by his brother Aaron who was the first High Priest). The
second section of the Old Testament contains the six books titled “the
Prophets.” This part was called “the Prophets” because men of prophetic rank
wrote it. The third section of eleven books was called “the Writings.” We will
later see that these books were composed by or written about
kings, queens, and statesmen. It came to be called “the Royal Division."

Now note this. In matters of rank, Moses and the Law which he was
commissioned to write were head and shoulders above all succeeding prophets,
priests, or kings. All Israelites were expected to be subservient to Moses.
But, on the other hand, all kings and rulers were inferior in rank to the
prophets (most of whom were priests). Recall that Nathan the prophet had
authority over David (2 Samuel 12:1–15), and that Elijah and Elisha were in
supreme power over Gentile as well as Israelitish rulers as far as the
teaching of the Bible is concerned (2 Kings 5:1–19). And this rank of
authority (Moses over prophets and prophets ahead of rulers) is shown in the
order of the three divisions of the Old Testament. First comes “the Law of
Moses” (five books), then “the Prophets” (six books), and finally “the Royal
Division” (the last eleven books).

For a further example of this recognition of rank, note that the apostle
Paul’s name always follows that of Barnabas (who was a Levite, see Acts
4:36) until Paul later took over the apostolic leadership at Antioch of
Pisidia (Acts 13:14, 46). Paul’s primacy in rank is then upheld, except when
he and Barnabas were in the presence of the “pillar” apostles while they were
both in the society at Jerusalem. At Jerusalem, the Levitical rank of Barnabas
reassumed its elevated position over Paul, who was of the leastborn tribe of
Benjamin (Acts 15:12).

It is also a fact that in the New Testament, Peter’s name always precedes
that of John in contexts involving both apostles (Luke 22:8; Acts 3:1, etc.),
simply because Peter was given a higher rank than John (Matthew 16:18–19). And
when the “pillar” apostles are mentioned together, it is James (the Lord’s
brother, and leader of the Jerusalem church) who precedes Peter and John
(Galatians 2:9).

This positioning of names within the text of the New Testament is both a
conscious (and even an unconscious) show of honor and respect to the ranks of
the men involved. Such a procedure represents the normal perceptions of
protocol in Middle Eastern societies. What is important to our present study
is that this principle (without doubt) was one which prevailed in the
psychological makeup of the men who wrote and canonized the books of the
Bible. And, in this appraisal, there is no guessing involved. This is a
biblical and societal principle that all people recognize. It is also a
principle that involves the canonization of the New Testament books.

Note that the seven general epistles of James, Peter, John, and Jude
precede the fourteen of the apostle Paul’s in the original manuscript order of
the books. And even within the positioning of those seven epistles, James is
placed before Peter, while Peter appears before John, and John
is before Jude. The arrangement of these books in these various
fashions is precisely as one would expect if the ranks of the men were
being considered. And recall that even the apostle Paul, when referring to the
three Jerusalem apostles, mentioned them in the order of their positions of
authority in the Jerusalem church, “James, Cephas
(Peter), and John, who seemed to be pillars”
(Galatians 2:9). This courtesy of mentioning the apostles in this
manner was no arbitrary incident in the writing of Paul. It was a deliberate
and conscious effort in Paul’s mind in stating this, as anyone studying the
customs of the biblical periods would realize. The order of the scriptural
books also echoes the use of this social formality, and this principle does
not involve any guessing. It is a fact of history that all
recognize

The Third Environmental Factor

There is yet a third factor that must be considered. There
was in the 1st century among the Jewish community (of which the
apostles were a part) a distinct belief that those who could claim a
connection with the race of Israel had a special relationship with God that no
other ethnic group possessed. The apostle Paul shared this belief. He stated
most assuredly that only Israelites retained the sonship, the Shekinah glory,
the personal covenants, the Mosaic law, the right to perform the Temple
services, and were the only ones in the world who had the promises of
salvation afforded to them in an ethnic sense (Romans 9:4). Paul insisted to
his Gentile readers that before the introduction of Christianity, all other
races were completely cut off from “the commonwealth of
Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and
without God in the world” (Ephesians 2:12).

There is no doubt that Paul’s recognition of the Jews’ special association
with God was the universal belief among Jews of the early 1st
century, and even Gentiles who then wanted to be in covenant with God also
felt the need to join the society of Israel. And though in Christ, Paul taught
that all peoples in God’s eyes were on an equal status alongside Israel
(Galatians 3:28), the apostles in the sense of responsibility never forgot the
spiritual ascendancy of the favored nation over all Gentiles, and this
included Paul himself. Notice what he said to the Gentile Romans.

“What advantage then has the Jew? or what profit
is there in circumcision? Much every way: chiefly because that unto
them were committed the oracles of God.”

Romans 3:1–2,
underlines mine

The Old Testament had been placed in the hands and care of the Jewish
people to teach to the world by their example in life and by their doctrinal
stance for the teaching of the Torah. The apostles felt this special
responsibility gave the Jews a superior position. This covenant relationship
with God that Jews had was never diminished in the eyes of the apostle Paul
(nor among the other apostles who at first were commissioned to preach only to
Jews). Paul readily acknowledged the principle of responsibility that the Jews
were to have first choice in receiving the Gospel. They were actually
recognized by the apostles to be in a legal position ahead of the
Gentiles.

“Glory, honor, and peace, to every man that
works  good, to the Jew first, and also to the
Gentile.”

Romans
2:10

This first rank for the Jewish people in regard to responsibility was
always given by the New Testament writers, even in matters involving judgment
(Romans 2:9). But in regard to Christ’s salvation, Paul was adamant that the
message of the Gospel should go to the Jews first.

“For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for
it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believes; to the
Jew first, and also to the Greek.”

Romans
1:16

The apostle Paul never deviated from his belief that the Jews should have
his first attention in receiving the Gospel. And though the apostle Paul had
the commission of Christ to be our Gentile apostle (the apostle to the
Gentiles), he also was told that he was to preach both to Israelites and
Gentiles (Acts 9:15). And Paul never shirked his responsibility of going to
the Jews first. Note Paul’s example.

When Paul went to the Gentile island of Cyprus, he spoke first to
the Jews (Acts 13:5).

When he went to the central area of Galatia, he first preached in
the synagogues of the Jews (Acts 13:14), and only secondarily did he speak
to the Gentiles (Acts 13:42).

The Jews were also the first at Iconium (Acts 14:1), and

Later in Macedonia (Acts 16:1–13; 17:1, 10).

At Corinth (Acts 18:4),

Ephesus (Acts 19:8), and

The Jews were first even at Rome itself (Acts 28:17–27).

Only at places where the Jewish community almost totally rejected him did
Paul turn exclusively to the Gentiles (Acts 13:46; 18:6; 28:28).

It is also shown in the Book of Acts that the Gospel of Christ went
first to the Jews at Jerusalem, and then progressively it got to the
Gentiles at Rome. Jerusalem was first and it came to Rome last.
Indeed, the first few years the Gospel was taught “to
Jews only” (Acts 11:19) without a thought that the Gentiles would
one day be graced with the Gospel message.

Even when it became clear that the Gentiles were also meant to share in the
Gospel message, Paul said: “It was necessary
that the word of God should first have been spoken to you
[Jews]” (Acts 13:46). This
primal position to the Jews was of utmost importance to the apostles,
and especially to Paul (who was the apostle to the Gentiles). Paul even stated
he would give up his own salvation in Christ if that would mean the salvation
of his own people the Jews (Romans 9:1–3).

This singular importance of the Jewish people in receiving the Gospel
first is also reflected within the design of the New Testament canon.
This is because the psychological motives dominating the thinking of the
apostles demanded that the Gospel of salvation must, in all cases, be
presented to the Jewish people first. This is another reason why the
canonizers of the New Testament followed the conviction that the first
position among the 27 Christian books within the divine New Testament library
must in all cases be awarded to the books designed primarily for the Jews.
This is why the seven general epistles (the “Catholic Epistles”) of James,
Peter, John, and Jude (who were commissioned to preach to the Jews, see
Galatians 2:7–9) should logically precede the fourteen of the apostle
Paul who was the apostle to the Gentiles (2 Timothy 1:11).

There can be no doubt that the early Christian apostles (when presented
with the responsibility of forming a New Testament canon from the available
writings) would have placed the apostles specially assigned to the Jews
before those of Paul who was the apostle to the Gentiles. This is not
guessing. It is the simple and plain teaching of the New Testament. All
the apostles were well aware of the doctrinal teaching of Christ that the
Gospel was to go to the Jew first. And interestingly, that is
exactly how the majority of early manuscripts of the New Testament have
the books arranged.

The Fourth Environmental Factor

The fourth factor which motivated the thinking of the
biblical writers and canonizers was their perception of the manner that people
gained their proper religious conversions. Nothing is more important to people
with deep religious persuasions than recognizing the methods by which
individuals achieve a proper relationship with God. In the New Testament we
have the methodology clearly delineated. The step-by-step procedure by which
Christian conversion is accomplished is found in the Book of Hebrews. The
apostle Paul in Hebrews records seven stages that will lead a person
into a full, adult relationship with Christ. These seven phases are
revealed in a harmonious story flow from beginning to end.

In the Bible, it is sometimes the case that the desired result of a context
is indicated first. Paul, in the Book of Hebrews, mentions the seventh
and final stage of salvation first. He considered it as having a priority
position. This conclusion to the salvation process is what Paul called the
attainment of perfection (Hebrews 6:1). He then follows it by the
step-by-step means through which salvation is finally reached. Paul mentions
first the most important factor (other than the initial statement of the
concluding phase called perfection). He then shows a sequence of six
primary steps of doctrinal accomplishment which have to be executed before a
person can achieve that final and seventh stage called perfection
(salvation). Paul indicates that when one fulfills the first requirement, then
one can proceed to the second, the third, and progressively all the way to the
seventh stage which is perfection (salvation).

Let us notice those seven levels of development. They are, according to
Paul,

a repentance from dead works [v.1];

having faith toward God [v.1];

understanding the doctrine of baptisms [v.2];

the laying on of hands (for receiving the Holy Spirit) [v.2];

doctrines concerning the resurrection from the dead [v. 2];

a recognition of matters concerning the judgment (rewards) from
God [v.2]; and

finally Paul shows that the last phase of Christian attainment is the
desired perfection, which represents salvation [v. 1].

The foregoing procedure for acquiring salvation under the New Covenant (as
given by Paul) was so a part of the psychological makeup of those who wrote
and canonized the Bible that we find it cropping up in a stage-by-stage
fashion even in the theological books of the New Testament. This sevenfold
doctrinal attainment provides the clear sequence of Paul’s subjects which he
discussed in the first canonical book of his collection, the Book of Romans.
That information in Hebrews 6:1–2 actually constituted the outline for
the logical presentation of Paul’s theological teachings in all the other
writings in the New Testament.

Notice that the first subject Paul spoke about in Romans is
repentance. See the first chapter of Romans leading up to Romans 2:4
(“the goodness of God leads you to
repentance”). Paul’s second topic dovetails precisely with his
second topic in Hebrews: faith. Indeed, Paul’s discussion on faith in
Romans occupies all of chapters 3 to 5. Then Paul in Romans chapters 6 and 7
(and also in the sequence of Hebrews 6) proceeds with a discourse on
baptism and its spiritual consequences.

Paul in Hebrews then followed with the mention of “the laying on of hands.” This doctrine concerned
factors associated with the Holy Spirit and its functions. And remarkably,
Paul in the Book of Romans chapter 8 continues with the same sequential theme
(a major discourse on the attributes and role of the Holy Spirit) that he did
in the Book of Hebrews.

But it does not stop there. The fifth and sixth subjects in Hebrews
concerned the resurrection and judgment, and in Paul’s teaching in
Romans chapters 9 through 11 Paul presented his account of how Israel, though
temporarily cast aside, will experience a thorough salvation and a judgment
(their allotted rewards) when Christ finally returns to rescue them. This
redemption (that Paul spoke about in Romans) will lead to what he said in Book
of Hebrews was, seventhly, called perfection. This perfection is
what Paul in Romans corresponds to the prophesied salvation which will be
extended to all Israel (Romans 11:25).

We find that the doctrinal theme of progressive revelation found in Hebrews
6:1–2 (and in the Book of Romans) is also seen in First Corinthians. Whereas
the Book of Romans concentrates primarily on the first three subjects of

(1)   repentance
(2)   faith, and

(3)   baptism

(with lesser emphasis on the Holy Spirit, the resurrection, judgment, and
perfection), Paul in the Book of 1st Corinthians reverses the order
with only scant attention to those first three topics but fully elaborates
(with major discussions) on the doctrines of

(4)   the Holy Spirit (chapters 12 to
14),
(5)   and the resurrection (chapter 15).

In 1st Corinthians Paul, like in Romans, touches upon the
subjects of

(6)   judgment and
(7)
perfection,

but these matters are more thoroughly treated in the later books of
Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, and (of course) in the Book of Hebrews
itself, which Paul admitted contained very much mature doctrines. Paul
said he was giving advanced teaching in Hebrews since he was then going to
teach a mature approach to the Gospel. Paul said: “leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go
on to perfection” (Hebrews 6:1).

When one looks at the canonical order of the books of Romans and
1st Corinthians (followed by the remainder of Paul’s letters), it
will be seen that all the doctrinal subjects (which Hebrews calls the
elementary teachings) are sequentially dealt with—in an orderly and
step-by-step fashion.

This same kind of procedure is also seen in the positioning of all the New
Testament books. The four Gospels give the basic teaching of Christianity (and
we will observe later that Matthew gives the Jewish approach, while Mark
presents the Jewish/Gentile thrust, while Luke provides a Gentile/Jewish
theme, and then John concludes with a thoroughly universal theme of
application).

The design of the four Gospels in their manuscript order is to give
teaching which progresses from the physical approach (the expected Jewish
kingdom of the Messiah) to the real spiritual outcome (the universal, heavenly
Kingdom of God). After this, we find that the Gospels and Acts are followed by
the seven general epistles (called the “Catholic Epistles”). The subjects
discussed in those seven books are primarily non-theological, and are intended
to give an introduction to the fourteen epistles of Paul where the doctrinal
subjects of repentance, faith, baptism, the Spirit, resurrections, judgment,
and perfection are rehearsed in detail. The Book of Revelation finally ends
the canon with a prophetic account of eschatological events concerning
Christ’s Second Advent which will usher in the hopes and promises which were
mentioned in the preceding books of the New Testament.

What we find in the manuscript order of the New Testament books is a
progressive account of doctrinal teaching. This is not guessing. The
principle of progressive revelation accords with all academic methods of
teaching and the Bible is no exception. If the books of the New Testament were
left in the order that the canonizers intended, the matter of doctrine would
be understood much better. But our modern Bibles have misplaced books (which
were intended to give elementary and preliminary teaching) into a later
position, and elevated the epistles of Paul (which are more doctrinally
mature) into a location ahead of the introductory ones. This causes confusion.
Reason demands that it is far better to leave the books in the order that the
majority of manuscripts have them.

The Fifth Environmental Factor

There was a fifth factor which pervaded the consciousness of
the writers of the Bible, particularly those of the New Testament. Though
there are many virtues of the Holy Spirit mentioned in the Bible, the apostle
Paul mentioned three prime ones (stated in order of importance): called them
faith, hope, and love (1 Corinthians 3:13).

And note this! The first eight chapters of Romans essentially cover the
matter of faith, while chapters 9 to 11 emphasize the hope of Israel, the
final chapters (12 to 16) focus on the concept of love to mankind in general,
the brotherhood within the group in particular, and to God especially. But it
does not stop there.

In the canonical order of the epistles of James, Peter and John, it will be
seen that the first epistle emphasizes true faith and religion (James),
the second hope in suffering (Peter), and the third underlines love
for the brotherhood (John).

The positioning of those books in this way is not an accident. There is
actually a conscious design in operation relative to the order of these books.
It reflects a method of education in which the first principles of
teaching used by the Holy Spirit are mentioned first and then the more
mature doctrines of God are progressively emphasized later. I will have more
to say about this type of design within the books of the Bible as we progress
through this book.

The Sixth Environmental Factor

The sixth factor which dominated the thinking of the men of
the Bible (and this certainly applied to those who wrote and formulated the
New Testament) concerns proper academic methods for teaching. It is well known
that the best way to instruct people is to begin with the elementary aspects
of a subject and then the teacher can proceed to the more advanced matters. We
find this principle very much in action in the arrangement of the biblical
books. The primary (or general) writings were placed first to give the
“kindergarten” teaching as an introduction. These books are followed by “grade
school” books, then “high school” books, “college” books, and then the student
is given his or her “post-graduate studies”

This can be easily demonstrated by the writings of the apostle Paul. His
first book in the canonical order is Romans. This book clearly represents the
ABCs of Christian doctrine on a level for those not having heard much about
the plan of salvation. Recall that Paul had never been to Rome before. He
wrote the book for people who needed to “be
established” (Romans 1:11). Then Paul proceeded to give the Romans
the elementary doctrinal teachings of Christianity. This is a principal reason
why the Book of Romans comes first in the canonical epistles of Paul.

First Corinthians followed the Book of Romans. Though some progress was
being made in doctrinal understanding (Paul had taught the Corinthians for 18
months, unlike the Romans whom he had never taught), Paul’s emphasis in
Corinthians was on corrective measures. The epistle reveals how new and
immature the Corinthians were in their Christian faith. In fact, Paul made the
plain statement that they were still spiritual babes in the faith.

“And I brethren, could not speak unto you as unto
spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ. I have
fed you with milk: for hitherto you were not able to bear it, neither yet
now are you able.”

1 Corinthians
3:1–2

The Corinthians at that stage in their Christian development were only
capable of receiving elementary teachings from Paul. Not only were they acting
like “children” (see a further reference in 1 Corinthians 14:20), but their
spiritual performances were more like baptized heathens. Paul demanded that
they grow up and behave like mature Christians. Thankfully, the Corinthians
learned some vital lessons by the time Paul wrote his second epistle, but in
spite of their progress, Paul still said in 2nd Corinthians: “I speak unto you as children” (2 Corinthians
6:13).

As for the Galatians, the next book in the canonical order after the two to
the Corinthians, Paul was upset with them for returning so quickly to an
“infancy” in Christ, and resorting to the rule of the “schoolmaster” (the
Mosaic law, Galatians 3:24–29; 4:1–10). The Galatians were reinstituting
“elementary” teachings (Galatians 4:9). They were going back to a “grade
school” type of instruction in Christ, returning to the lowest level of
Christian development—to the keeping of the Law in order to “earn” salvation.
The Galatians were retreating into Mosaic rules and trying to live like the
Jewish people in Palestine: observing weekly and annual sabbath days, new
moons and months, and sabbatical years. These doctrines were intended for
spiritual children who were in “grade school,” and not (as Paul looked at it)
befitting mature Christians.

Thus, the epistles of Paul to the Romans, Corinthians, and Galatians in the
regular canonical order of the manuscripts were designed for people just
coming into a knowledge of Christ. And note:

The message in the Book of Romans was for people Paul had never
instructed before,

His teaching to the Corinthians was for those whom he had taught for
18 months, and

The epistle to the Galatians was designed for those who had been
taught the Gospel for more than four years.

In all of these first four epistles, the messages of Paul were intended for
spiritual children. But when it comes to the next three epistles of
Paul in the New Testament canon (Ephesians, Philippians, and Colossians), they
were designed to give instruction to mature and fully developed Christians. In
Ephesians the subjects are directed to those who are “no more children.”

The teachings of Paul in these three epistles were advanced doctrinal
discourses. Note that Paul spoke to these people in a mature language.

“For the perfecting [maturing] of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the
edifying of the body of Christ: till we all come in the unity of the faith,
and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man [a
fully mature man], unto the measure of the stature of
the fullness of Christ: that we henceforth be no more children tossed
to and fro, and carried about with every wind of
doctrine.”

Ephesians
4:12–14

There could hardly be any plainer teaching. The readers of these latter
epistles were far advanced in spiritual knowledge than the early Romans,
Corinthians, and Galatians. Paul was even able to write the latter three
epistles in very sophisticated language.

Paul’s letters to the first three churches in the canonical order of the
manuscripts (Romans, Corinthians, Galatians) were arranged to provide the ABCs
of doctrinal teaching, while the teaching in the latter three epistles
(Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians) provided the XYZs of one’s knowledge in
Christ.

These seven letters to six different church congregations are followed in
the manuscripts by two epistles to a seventh church (1 and 2 Thessalonians).
And what is the subject matter of those two epistles? It is teaching about the
appearance of the Man of Sin, the second advent of Christ back to this earth,
and the resurrection from the dead which will accompany Christ’s advent.

The number seven (as is evident) has the ring of completion
and finality in its symbolic meaning. Thus, the seven church epistles
discuss the end of the age and the completion of the church age. While
the first six churches had epistles which described the doctrines of the
church from the ABCs to the XYZs (and how one must walk in the Christian
life), the seventh church had two epistles (1 and 2 Thessalonians) which have
information about the conclusion of the church age and the attainment of the
promises which the previous epistles talked about.

The next book in the manuscript order is Hebrews. It is very mature
teaching. Paul even stated that this treatise (rather than a “letter”) was
intended for very mature Christians. Note what Paul stated in regard to the
mature message that he was giving in the Book of Hebrews. “Leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go
on to perfection” (Hebrews 6:1–2). Its commentary explains how the
Temple and physical rituals were types of things to come, but how the reality
is found in Christ. It discusses the true kingdom of God which is to appear on
earth. Emphasis is also given to “the sabbath to
come”—the millennial age (Hebrews 4:9) and the new Jerusalem
(Hebrews 12:22–23).

In Hebrews Paul also states that the elementary Christian doctrines of
repentance, faith, baptisms, laying on of hands, the resurrection, and the
judgment (which Paul discussed thoroughly in Romans, Corinthians, and
Galatians) were to be left behind, and only subjects dealing with
perfection were then appropriate for him to discuss (Hebrews 5:11–14;
6:1–3).

The remaining four books in Paul’s canon as shown by the manuscripts were
instructions for the pastoral duties of ministers. Obviously, these later
teachings are most mature. After all, they were written from one professional
minister to other professional ministers. The teaching contained in them was
hardly for spiritual infants.

Finally, the manuscripts have the Book of Revelation last of all. This book
covers all aspects of the end of the age. Its contents pertain to the whole
world, not only to the Christian church (as the two to the Thessalonians do).
It is the most mature and difficult book to understand. It comes last, and is
a fitting conclusion not only to the New Testament but also to the Bible as a
whole.

When we get further into the body of this book, we will find that the
subjects of the various books of the Bible, plus the arrangement of the books
in relationship to one another, echo the principle of progressive revelation.
This is a teaching which begins with elementary (or general) matters and
proceeds to the more sophisticated (the particular and more advanced). This is
the normal way to teach.

When the apostle Peter said that Christians ought to grow in grace and
knowledge (2 Peter 3:18), he expected all people to progress in the normal
step-by-step fashion of doctrinal development that individuals throughout the
ages have been used to. It should not seem odd that the books within the canon
of the Bible were arranged in the same fashion. Proper teaching methods demand
this approach.

The Seventh Environmental Factor

A seventh and final factor in canonization involves the use
of symbolic numbers. The number seven was of prime consequence. It had
a special signification of which there was little ambiguity. Professor
Muirhead had this to say on the meaning of seven.

“Seven. Examples: [there were] 7 churches, spirits (Rev. 1:4, 11; 3:1), stars (1:16, 20),
candlesticks (1:13), lamps (4:5), seals (5:1; 8:1), horns and eyes (5:6),
trumpets (8:2), angels (8:2), thunders (10:30, heads (12:3; 17:3), angels
with plagues (15:1), vials full of the wrath of God (15:7), kings (17:10).
In view of this pervasiveness of 7, it is proof that 7 is preeminently the
number of perfection or completeness. Seven represents the
perfect of God in mercy and judgment in relation to men (as well as
the total works of creation).”

Dictionary of the Apostolic Church,
vol. II, p.93,
— underlines and words
in brackets are mine 1

One could take a whole chapter to show the wonders found in the symbolic
relevance of the number seven in the Bible and still not exhaust the subject.
It provides an accent of completion and perfection to any
theme.

One might wonder why I am mentioning this matter of symbolic numbers? This
is because the subject is important in regard to the canonization of the
Bible. The prime number associated with canonization is seven. The
number is found in a variety of ways in the symmetrical design which exists
within and between the books of the Old and New Testaments. The recognition
that numbers played an important symbolic part in the religious thinking of
the writers of the Bible will go a long way in helping to show just what books
represent the complete Scriptures.

Conclusion

In closing this chapter, let us remember the seven principles which
motivated the actions of the men who wrote and canonized the Bible. They are
important ones to consider if one wishes to know just what books represent the
Holy Bible in its earliest form. Throughout this book we will pay attention to
all these principles (and others which are akin to them) in order to determine
what the biblical writers themselves would say are the actual and authorized
books of the Bible, and in what order those books ought to appear in our
modern versions.

1 In James Hastings,  John A. Selbie,  John C.
Lambert, eds., Dictionary of the Apostolic Church (New York: C.
Scribner's sons, 1916–1918).

Order our Book: Restoring the Original
Bible to read all the chapters.

© 1976-2004 Associates for Scriptural Knowledge
~
ASK is
supported by freewill contributions

temple | books | commentary | prophecy |
doctrine |
video | audio | newsletter |
resources