Irenaeus: The Gnostic Heresy

Towards the end of the second century the Gnostic heresy had grown, with many groups claiming to have secret knowledge that was handed down to them by the apostles. And each group in turn claimed their own scriptures. Irenaeus, an early father, was one of the first to describe the old and new testament, as he utilized the authority of Scripture against his Gnostic opponents. He also spoke of the four gospels by name, and argued, that if the apostles had known "hidden mysteries, which they were in the habit of imparting," they would have committed them to the Churches which they themselves had founded. In addition to this he accused the heretic Marcion of mutilating the scriptures. Marcion, a Gnostic, who made the first assertion of a canon

In this work he makes mention of the fact that during his lifetime, James, Jude, 2 and 3 John, as well as 2 Peter were among the disputed writings. However, while there was some degree of confusion over the authorship, he is quick to mention that they were nevertheless recognized by many within the church. While some detractors might wish to discredit the canon over this issue of confusion, Köstenberger is quick to point out that what is more telling in this letter is that there was a discussion about which books were to be considered canonical in the first place. Athanasius, in his AD 367 Easter letter to the churches in Egypt, for the first time declared that the books of the Old and New Testament, as we have them today, were to be considered canonical. As he wrote, they are to be considered fountains of salvation. Notably, he also wrote that the apocryphal books, such as The Wisdom of Solomon and Tobit, serve as mere reading material, as they are only the inventions of heretics. His recommendations were then accepted at the Council of Hippo Regius in AD 393 when 27 books of the New Testament were affirmed. Of note is the fact that these lists were in no sense the result of debate. The church simply "recognized as scripture...those writings that had guided its

The first of these was apostolicity. As Augustine noted, there is a "distinct boundary" separating the authoritative writings of the Old and New Testaments, from those that were written subsequent to the apostolic times. He even goes as far as to say that if there is an apparent contradiction, then the manuscript is faulty, the translation is wrong, or you yourself are mistaken. However, to say that the author is mistaken is not allowable. This then leads to the second criteria, orthodoxy. For the writings in question could not be found to be inconsistent with the authentic gospel message, as was the case with the so called Gospel of Peter. Furthermore, these writing needed to reflect the quality of inspiration, giving evidence to the "high moral and spiritual values that would reflect the work of the Holy Spirit." And finally, there must have been evidence of ecclesiastical usage in worship, with the text never having been universally rejected as inauthentic by early churches. This then would eliminate the possibility of any new found text being added to the canon, even if one were to consider it to still be open. For if Paul himself were to have written another letter, there would be no evidence of its usage in over 2,000