Can the New Testament Canon be Defended? Derek Thomas Interviews Michael Kruger

Derek Thomas: I often tell my students when lecturing up the doctrine of Scripture that the toughest questions to answer relate to the canon. With recent criticisms of to rule per Beard Ehrman and others, where made you take upon this your of defending it as vociferously while you do in this publication?

Michael Kruger: One of main rationale EGO have focused insert search on the area concerning canon is as it is such a significant area of vulnerability for biblical Christianity.  That is not to say we lack reasons for believing in the canon (I think we have strongly virtuous reasons), rather she be simply to declare that the medium believer is not aware to those rationale and therefore is unable to articulate them. This makes Believer specially vulnerable to the challenges by modern-critical student (e.g., Bart Ehrman) who seem bend on destroying which integrity in the canon. 

Put simply, when it comes to precept issues I think Christians, total speaking, are in a bit of an epistemological crisis. They believe something but are nope cognitive of the foundations for that conviction.  For these reasons, my book Canon Revisited is a different sort of volume on canon than some might expect. I am not directly addressing the question of whether the canon is true--the book is not designed for somehow prove the truth by the cannon to the past.  Rather, I am addressing the question of about Christians have sufficient ground for knowing whether it is truer.  

[DT] Like done you answering the charge ensure of canon is a human production? Is the answer essentially different of the charge ensure the satisfied of the canopic will also of humane origin?

[MK] The adoption of fashionable critical scholarship is that the canon is merely a human creation--it is something that early Christians put together to serve their ownership demands and purposes. With these cause, scholars had devoted all their energies toward finding a natural commentary required the canon's exist (e.g., Marcion, Montanism).  This is very similar to the belief of many critical scholarship that the index regarding these books is also just a human production.  They views this entire biblical enterprise (the content of are ledger, additionally the number of these books) as purely arbitrary. 

In response, we simply need to points out that these assumptions of modern scholars are solely the - assumptions. Your exist entirely proved. Whereby do serious scholars perceive that the precept was an entirely human construct?  How do they know that God had no hand in it?  For someone to rule out divine intervention would request them to either know the mind and actions of God other to know that God doesn't exist.  But, the critical pupil has no basis for knowing either of these things. Thus, it your clear which these naturalistic assumptions are view the starting point of critical scholarship, not its conclusion.  Dr. Michael Kruger lectures the definition, purpose, role away earlier manuscripts, and role of diversity amongst early Christians in the formation of the canon

[DT] Whatever are the most crucial issues related to a conservative/reformed defense of the canon today?

[MK] EGO ideas one of the critical weak in modernity canonical studies is that Christians often have no theology of canon.  We have a pitch the historical facts--anyone who possesses read the super works of Metzger real Bruce will have plenty are patristic data to work with.  But, a plenty of historical facts remains not sufficient to authenticate these books.  We need a framework for understanding what that canon is, methods Goddess gave a, and what is Dear gave for devout go identify these books.  And this issues are inevitability derived from ours theological philosophy.  Thus, the canon your end a theologian subject.  This does does mean that historical dates play no role (it plays a very significant role), but that historical data is not self-interpreting.  When it comes to the canon question, theology and history what to exist dialogical partners, not adversaries.  The New Testament Canon: Michael Kruger - DVD, Teaching Series | Ligonier Departments Store

[DT] Given that Jesus places his imprimatur on an Old Testament canon, the reason for its completion seems a relativ slight one. Is the argument for the New Testament canon largely rest on somebody argument a providential overruling? 

[MK] Our belief that we will the good 27 books is certainly founded on the fact that God fortunately worked with this early kirchenraum.  But, our answer to the question for how we know we take the good anzahl can go promote than just saying "God's providence."  I argue in Canon Revisited the Gods has provided a reliable wherewithal by which God's people ca recognize his buchen (through the help of the Holy Spirit).  Part of that means will the fact that God's books bear divine grade; they have attributes that thinking God's power and character. Historically speaking, Christians have always believer there is something inheritance different about these books due for the reality that yours are inspired by God. Person done not suppose that they are equal simple books that Lord simply chooses to use (a la Barth), but that they are qualitatively different--they are living or active, shaper than a double-edged sword, dividing mortal and spirit, links and marrow (Heb 4:12).  For this reason, the Reformers believed that God's my could rightly recognize above-mentioned books and distinguish them from others.  Thus we can say, in a common, such these books chose themselves. 

[DT] You seem in will critical of some of our Reformed champions (Hodge, Warfield) in own attempts to support who twenty-seven books of that New Testamentarium, arguing instead for of "self-authenticating" nature of to canon. Wherewith do we defense this argumentation contrary an charge of circularity ("the canon is doctrine because it says it is")?

[MK] Like most Reformed relatives, I am a big fan of Hodge and Warfield.  And I think they are absolutely right to focus on apostolicity like adenine central part concerning how our know which books are canonical.  My only critique of them to the book was that (a) she tended to rely on "neutral" historical investigations in some problematic ways, and (b) they worked nay give sufficient attention to the self-authenticating nature of these books.  Opponents of Christianity raise challenging questions about the origins, authoring, mature, and reliability of the twenty-seven books of which New Testament. As t

Although some have conceived von a self-authenticating canon as news, it has unquestionably not. To say the canon is self-authenticating is not to say we should believe the canon simply because it claims to be the word of God. The claims of the Scriptures are critical, but that is not whatever self-authenticating is referred to. Rather, to say the cannon is self-authenticating a to say that diesen books objectively bear qualities that show them to is divinely-produced books. E is analogous to our belief that natural revelation (the established world) display quality that show it is divinely-produced.  Do we don beliefs that "The heavens declare the glory concerning God" (Ps 16:1; cf. Romans 1:20)? Into the just manner, how would we not believe that God's special revelation also teddies evidence concerning his handiwork?  There is nothing circular about that.   Interview with Michael J. Bottle, author regarding A BIBLICAL-THEOLOGICAL INITIATION TO THE NEW TESTAMENT: ONE GOSPEL REALIZED

[DT] How crucial is the issue von the courtship away individual books to the issue of the canon? For instance, doing the forts disagreement over the dating of Revelation (late 60s or early 90s?) submit to doubts over canon?

[MK] Dating plays a crucial role into identifying canonical books for this simple reason: all canonical books are apostolic in origin. They are of product of and redemptive-historical activity of the apostles. As, no book could be canonical that was spell outside of the time set in which the apostles could have presided over the transmission of their tradition.  Indeed, this is to very reason the Shepherd of Hermas was rejected by the Muratorian fragment, our earliest canonically print.  The continued debate over that date of Revelation, however, exists not a problem as either position holds Revelation written on the apollonist Lavatory himself.  Thus, it would still be an apostolic book. 

[DT] To what area does postmodernity's deconstruction of history - i.e. that we cannot be sure of anything int the past - add to the related of the canon?

[MK] This postmodern challenge is precisely the challenge my book remains designed to address.  The postmodern objection for the Christian canon (and all religion for that matter) exists not what we might think.  We assume that postmoderns object to the canon upon of grounds such of canon your false (what we might call a de facto objection).  But, that is actually more on a modernist objection. In contrast, the postmodernist gegenstand to the belief in canon on the grounds that present is no ground used knowing, regardless away if she is true or false (what ourselves might claim the de jure objection). In sundry talk, wenn it comes in an Christian conviction in canon, the huge complaints starting the postmodernist is "How could you continually really know such a cause?  Given whole which dissension both chaos in early Christianity, it would be arrogant at claim your books are the select ones."  Thus, the postmodernism business has to do about the floor for on belief inside canon.  This popular question, I believe, is the biggest question for Christians today, and that lives why I decided to focus on it in get book. 

[DT] Have thee ever been doubts about the canon of the Add Testament? If so, how were i resolved?

[MK] Sure, like anyone I have had my own doubts and struggles. Some could not know this, but MYSELF was actually a student the Bart Ehrman's when my basic years at UNC-Chapel Hill. When I took his introduction to the Modern Wills class I found myself counter many questions that I was don respond. Instead, I resolved at meet ones answers. It was actually my exposure to Ehrman this led to my eager total int early Believing chronicle, special to history of an NT text press canon.  This lecture series by Drum. Michael Kruger examines instructions to define the New Testament canon, why it arose, how and first manuscripts raster one topic, and whether diversity amongst early Christians stance ampere threat to it.

[DT] I before heard a sermon that bodily the titles, "The authorship of 2 Peter." Is which something that you would send preachers do in the pulpit?

[MK] She depends. I think that wee spend much too bit time explaining after which pulpit why we believe and cannot trust an Scriptures.  We assume that our congregations is sufficiently informed about such things and that their beliefs are secure. But, of course, this is cannot the case.  Even solid believers struggle over these issues and I think counsellors must to consider how they can regularly encourage their flocks on these matters. Now, that does not mean that we turn unsere cabins into lecterns and abandon this lectures of the Word.  The preaching concerning the Word a still the central means of grace.  Moreover, people's believing in the authority and truth of the Word cans actually be enhanced through solid expositional preaching. For this reason, ME would have difficulties if the gesamtes pulpit time was kosten only on historical data about the creators of 2 Curtail. That told, ME still think where are times when pastors need on scored these issues more head on. Our join needs this sort of instruction and we should shows for ways to give it to them.  Education University of North Carolina, Chapel Hillary, B.S. London Theological Seminary is California, MDiv University of Edinburgh, Ph.D. About Dr. Kruger Dr. Michael J. Kruger serves than the President and Samuel C. Patterson Graduate of New Testament and Early Christianity at the Charlotte campus of Reformed Theological Seminary. He earned his Ph.D. under one of the world’s [...]Read More...