Why the first Christians did not read “New testament“?
the Question can seem strange or with a dirty trick to us, inhabitants of the 21st century. And the association of the words “first centuries“ and “illiteracy“ is not absolutely pertinent here. However and for inhabitants of the first centuries of Christianity such question also seemed strange. Why? The answer to banality is simple. Did not exist in the first centuries of our era of such finished Christian work under the name “New testament“.
The structure of “New testament“ consists of 27 works. Are its part:
four books called by the gospel that are translated from Greek as - “good news“. In them is narrated about Jesus Christ - about his birth, sermons and miracles created by it, about his death and revival.
the Acts of apostles, the fifth work which are a part of “New testament“ are represented by the story about self-sacrifice of adherents of Christ, popularizing Christian belief, and also about growth and strengthening of influence of church.
Twenty one messages of apostles, it the works of an epistolary genre addressed to various churches, and also to individuals. Pavel is considered the author of 13 messages and still one message, namely the anonymous message - “The message to Jews“ is attributed to him. Other seven so-called “cathedral“ messages as authors are considered; Ioann - three messages, Pyotr - two messages, and according to one message are attributed to Jacob and Judas. This is not that Judas Iscariot, and another.
the Last work being a part of “New testament“ it “Saint John the Evangelist`s revelation“ (Ioann`s Apocalypse).
the Modern historical science precisely established that works of which “New testament“ consists (and not only works of the New Testament) were separated, and in the first centuries of Christianity existed as separate independent works, but not as the finished work where all parts known to us under the general name “New testament“ would join. The main reasons that that works being a part of “New testament“ were written and read separately, were both the technical, and ideological plan.
Problems of the technical plan consisted that manuscripts of “New testament“ were created on rolls. Increase in the sizes of rolls above a certain reasonable side-altar interfered with association in one roll of several works.
The name “New testament“ as meeting of initial works, it began to be applied much later, than the works which are its part were written. The term “New testament“ of the beginnings becomes current at the end of IIV. our era it was also entered by the apostle Pavel in the first and second messages to Corinthians. At the heart of the term “New testament“ as historians consider, lies the phrase “Nova Soyuz“ as which it is necessary to understand “the union good luck“. And the concept of “the New Union“ proceeds from the Judaic sectarians living in IIV. BC - Iv. AD around Kumran, near the Dead Sea, called the sect “the New Union“. This sect was predecessors of Christians, and the main ideology of “the New Union“ was constructed on the union between “God and people“, unlike the union, concluded between “God and the people of Israel“ the representative who was Moisey on Mount Sinai.
Considers all works included in the New Testament, church initial. Considers other works of early Christian writings of the I-IV centuries written in the same genre church apocryphal or secret (Greek apokryphos - secret, intimate). The works which are not included in a church canon and not used at church service are considered as apocryphal stories.
The church canon did not appear just at the request of some authoritative church figures, and was dictated by realities of that time. Besides Christian works known to us, and a lot of other similar literature at that time was in use. Creation of such canon was need because there were many communities, sects, with the lists of the esteemed Christian works part of them who were far from “sanctity“ and “authenticity“, and also the treatment of the corresponding works did not correspond to Christian belief as the orthodox church of that time imagined. It was necessary to protect “sanctity“ of works and to accurately define borders of true “canon“.
Word canon (gr. kanon) is translated from Greek as - norm, the rule, and understood as the set of the provisions having dogmatic character today. It is necessary to understand as a church canon - “set of the books of the Bible recognized by church “vaticinal“ (unlike apocryphal stories), and (BSE) applied at church service as “Scripture““. Only from the middle of the 4th century. this word began to be applied to the sacred books of Christians which became a sample with which it is necessary to verify all statements, acts, sermons.
As for apocryphal stories, it should be noted that what is treated in one church as the apocryphal story, in another it can be in the initial list. This “reticence“ concerning apocryphal stories also generates distinction in the list of initial and apocryphal works between orthodox, Catholic and Protestant churches.
The term “apocryphal story“ was for the first time used in the papal decree at the end of the 4th century, then also the first list of apocryphal works appears. The majority of apocryphal stories never were secret, and were esteemed openly in the different Christian communities.
Difficulties with entering of certain works into a church canon are connected with the fact that already in those days, without speaking about ours (considering temporary distances), there were big problems in definition of “sanctity“, “sanctity“ of “bogovdokhnovennost“ of this or that Christian work. It is necessary to understand authenticity of Christian work, that is those works which authors were Jesus`s pupils, or pupils of pupils of Christ as the word “sanctity“ and “sanctity“. The choice of original works, their division on initial and apocryphal was rather long historical process, and likely dragged on and up to now, but this my opinion and to it is possible does not listen at all, and it is necessary to watch and consider only historic facts.
How the structure of “New testament“ why these works, but not others were included in it and when it was published as a part of one book was defined? - these questions remain to this day are open as founders of church do not give on them any concrete answers.
As for a canon of “New testament“ as we are told by historians, it was defined only in 367 our era by Afanasy Aleksandriysky. But also concerning a canon of “New testament“ disputes continued till the ninth century of our era, especially concerning inclusion in it “Saint John the Evangelist`s revelation“.
Canons of orthodox, Catholic and Protestant churches differ from each other in structure of the brought works.
Sadly, somehow with these canons., It seems, the,…., it seems, all Christian,…, it seems, and Jesus same,… and will agree, cannot …. ouch … ouch … ouch …. Ambitions. It turns out by the principle - I have the opinion, and only it correct! From here it is possible to make the whole list of banal conclusions. Banal only at first sight as, in fact, the reality shows that these conclusions not widly of the mark. And conclusions following - how many churches - there are so much truths! Each sect is truth! I sit down even more - how many religions are so much truth! And what we have as a result after these conclusions. And as a result - a huge number of the truths and a heap of truth. Pancake, how many - about - about truth that! … and what with them to do to me to the mere mortal?.... I do not need personally so much “truth“. The only thing what is wanted so it to live only up to one truth, but true TRUTH.
And still here - with full responsibility I declare that - in the following crusade you can not count on me! To be gun meat of strangers of an ambition, bothered! But this my opinion, it can not undertake in attention at all and as to you decide to arrive, or listen to “canons“ ….