Can We Trust That Christian Orthodoxy Got It Right? – Part 3
How the Canon Was Formed and Why It Still Matters
Consider Paul’s contrast between Law and Gospel.
The Law, he says, brings wrath, works, flesh, sin, and death.
The Gospel brings grace, faith, Spirit, righteousness, and life.
It’s tempting to read this as a clean break—as if the Gospel were a theological revolution that severed itself from the Jewish Scriptures. That temptation became a full-blown doctrine in the second century, when a wealthy shipowner named Marcion made a bold and dangerous claim:
The God of the Old Testament and the God revealed in Jesus Christ are two entirely different—and opposing—deities.
Marcion argued that the theology of the Hebrew Scriptures was incompatible with the teachings of Jesus. So he compiled his own canon: ten edited letters of Paul and a stripped-down version of Luke’s Gospel, purged of any reference to the Old Testament. No Hebrew Bible. No continuity. No covenant.
It was sleek. It was spiritual.
And it was heresy.
The Church’s Response
The Church Fathers didn’t just disagree with Marcion—they exposed the distortion.
Not because he asked hard questions, but because he offered the wrong answers.
Marcionism forced the early church to confront a question it had long assumed:
Which writings truly reflect the apostolic faith?
And how do we know?
The formation of the canon wasn’t about suppressing dissent. It was about preserving the gospel.
The Canon Wasn’t Invented—It Was Recognized
Contrary to popular myth, the Bible wasn’t assembled by imperial decree or ecclesiastical fiat. The canon wasn’t imposed—it emerged.
From the earliest days, Christian communities read, copied, and circulated apostolic writings. The Gospels, Acts, Paul’s letters, and other texts were treated as authoritative—not because a council said so, but because the churches recognized their voice.
By the end of the first century, most of the New Testament was already in use. By the mid-second century, documents like the Muratorian Fragment reveal a growing consensus. The church didn’t choose the canon arbitrarily—it discerned it carefully.
The question wasn’t “What do we want to include?”
It was: What has been recognized and affirmed to be inspired by the Spirit?
Criteria for Recognition
The early church used three key criteria to discern the canon:
- Apostolic Origin – Was it written by an apostle or a close associate?
- Orthodox Content – Did it align with the rule of faith—the core gospel message?
- Widespread Use – Was it read and affirmed across diverse Christian communities?
The formation of the canon was necessary to preserve what had already been received as the authentic gospel.
It protected the church from theological drift and speculative rewrites.
It preserved the story of Jesus—not as myth, but as memory.
The canon gave the church a center of gravity.
It anchored orthodoxy in text, not just tradition.
It ensured that the gospel proclaimed was the gospel preserved.
If orthodoxy is rooted in truth, then the Bible isn’t just a book.
It’s the foundation of our belief.
The Scriptures we have weren’t chosen to serve empire or suppress dissent.
They were recognized because they carried the voice of Christ, echoed by His apostles, and affirmed by His church.
The canon is not a cage. It’s a compass.
It doesn’t limit exploration—it guides it.
It doesn’t silence questions—it anchors them.
What’s Next
In the next post, we’ll explore how heresies—far from being mere threats—actually helped the church clarify truth.
We’ll look at what false teachings taught us about the gospel, and why orthodoxy was worth defending.
Because sometimes, it’s the challenge that sharpens the confession.
Apologetics in the Lion City 