Private Revelation and Theology Jul 18, 2011 9:58:49 GMT -8
Post by Josh on Jul 18, 2011 9:58:49 GMT -8
Why did the church leave out the writings of Clement of Rome, or Ignatius?
The criteria I mentioned above weren't the only ones, just the most significant. There were also practical and theological considerations, as in:
Clement, I believe, was left out simply because he pretty much quotes the rest of the New Testament and adds little of his own innovations.
Ignatius? Well, by the time it was written all the original disciples had passed away, so, yeah, the era of those who were alive when Jesus was was gone. And it was probably a good call due to some theological considerations.
Not all the writers of the New Testament were given a direct commission by Jesus in the flesh. As far as we know, several of them were not necessary "commissioned" by Jesus to write Scripture.
I don't recall Jesus telling anyone to write scripture, but set me straight here is I missed something. I can only come up with three authors that were not either part of the twelve disciples or Paul. Those would be Luke, James and Jude. Luke only writes as one recording history, and doesn't give instruction to the church, while James and Jude were brothers of Jesus.
John (in Revelation) and arguably, Paul in several instances seem to claim direct commissioning in what they are writing. The point was that they rarely seem to have seen themselves as writing something that was in a separate category than other writings (that doesn't mean I don't think their writings did ultimately end up being in a unique category).
As to the second part of your question, Mark wasn't one of the 12 either. So we have at least 4 "second hand" witnesses. I say at least, because, of course, there are many that deny the traditional authorship of a few of Paul's books, Matthew, Hebrews, and some of the Johns. (I don't).
I'm not sure what you mean by saying that Luke wasn't writing to the church. Does that make him less authoritative to you?