Why weren't the Epistle of Barnabas and The Shepherd of Hermas considered Canon?

Discussions about the Bible, and any issues raised by Scripture.
Post Reply
Christian2
Advanced Senior Member
Posts: 929
Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2004 10:27 am
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 11 times

Why weren't the Epistle of Barnabas and The Shepherd of Hermas considered Canon?

#1

Post by Christian2 » Sat Nov 04, 2017 8:31 am

Why weren't the Epistle of Barnabas and The Shepherd of Hermas considered Canon?

It is my understanding that both books appear in the Sinaiticus manuscript in the fourth century.

Why were they dropped out of the Canon?

Thanks.

DBowling
Advanced Senior Member
Posts: 898
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2015 8:23 pm
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Day-Age
Has liked: 14 times
Been liked: 81 times

Re: Why weren't the Epistle of Barnabas and The Shepherd of Hermas considered Canon?

#2

Post by DBowling » Sat Nov 04, 2017 12:49 pm

Christian2 wrote:Why weren't the Epistle of Barnabas and The Shepherd of Hermas considered Canon?

It is my understanding that both books appear in the Sinaiticus manuscript in the fourth century.

Why were they dropped out of the Canon?

Thanks.
The Epistle of Barnabas and Shepherd of Hermas were never really a part of the NT Canon. There were some portions of the Church who highly regarded those books and considered them beneficial to read. But these books did not meet the criteria of apostolic authority and authenticity that were required to be universally recognized across the Church.

Barnabas and Hermas are grouped in with the 'Spurious' books, which means they are rejected but are still considered to be orthodox. Which is different from the 'Heretical' books like the Gospel of Thomas which are rejected and unorthodox.

So it's not that Barnabas and Hermas were dropped out of the Canon. A more accurate statement is Barnabas and Hermas never made it into the Canon in the first place.

Christian2
Advanced Senior Member
Posts: 929
Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2004 10:27 am
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 11 times

Re: Why weren't the Epistle of Barnabas and The Shepherd of Hermas considered Canon?

#3

Post by Christian2 » Sun Nov 05, 2017 5:29 am

DBowling wrote:
Christian2 wrote:Why weren't the Epistle of Barnabas and The Shepherd of Hermas considered Canon?

It is my understanding that both books appear in the Sinaiticus manuscript in the fourth century.

Why were they dropped out of the Canon?

Thanks.
The Epistle of Barnabas and Shepherd of Hermas were never really a part of the NT Canon. There were some portions of the Church who highly regarded those books and considered them beneficial to read. But these books did not meet the criteria of apostolic authority and authenticity that were required to be universally recognized across the Church.

Barnabas and Hermas are grouped in with the 'Spurious' books, which means they are rejected but are still considered to be orthodox. Which is different from the 'Heretical' books like the Gospel of Thomas which are rejected and unorthodox.

So it's not that Barnabas and Hermas were dropped out of the Canon. A more accurate statement is Barnabas and Hermas never made it into the Canon in the first place.
Thank you.

PaulSacramento
Board Moderator
Posts: 8273
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2011 12:29 pm
Christian: Yes
Sex: Male
Creation Position: Theistic Evolution
Location: Ontario, Canada
Has liked: 100 times
Been liked: 285 times

Re: Why weren't the Epistle of Barnabas and The Shepherd of Hermas considered Canon?

#4

Post by PaulSacramento » Mon Nov 06, 2017 5:43 am

The canonical process was a complicate done BUT what must be understood is that no one or no one group decided what was canon, they simply confirmed it.
The sheppard of Hermas was viewed as an important NT era document but it was never of the status of the Gospels or the Epistles or viewed as such.
The Epistle of Barnabas is an interesting document and, IMO, I think that the reason it was never viewed as canoical was because the authorship was in question AND it was a bit "inflammatory" at times. That said it was indeed included in the Codex Sinaiticus and, IMO, a very important read to understand the Christian though process of the time.

Post Reply