Various thoughts come to mind - the Iraqi election; political turbulence at home; the ongoing Christmas season, etc. We shall, however, temporarily digress to comment on a relatively common question posed to us a couple days ago: "Were the New Testament authors aware they were writing Scripture?"
For the most part, probably not. First of all, a long extended Church age wherein need would exist for an authoritative written body of faith-related directives was little foreseen by the early Church. In terms of original intent, several of the epistles were essentially pastoral letters written to specific churches with specific needs. Some writings were addressed to individuals while yet others, although directed to a somewhat wider audience, were nonetheless penned in the interests of then present concerns.
The ascription of canonical status (i.e., accepted as inspired and universally applicable) to such texts developed only with time. As an expanding institution, the Church was increasingly beset by questions derivative practical experience, doctrinal uncertainties, cultural considerations, administrative concerns, spiritual and social relationships, disciplinary requirements, ad infinitum - but even more so, inroads of heresy. The need for a definitive guideline of meaning and intent eventually became inescapable.
Given the flood of writings with which the early Church was inundated, it was only logical that apostolic authorship constitute the initial criterion in granting canonical status (including, in some instances, works written under apostolic aegis - e.g., Mark under Peter's sponsorship; Luke under Paul's, etc.). It was further stipulated that such texts carry a recognizable sense of divine inspiration as well as proven history of usefulness. Hence our New Testament which was granted final approval at the Council of Carthage in 397 A.D.
Two points here: First of all, the outworking of divine purpose is not always instantaneous or fully recognizable at once. The compiling of an established written standard became an ongoing process as the Church's need for such became increasingly evident.
Second: Had the apostles perceived their writings in terms of "Scripture" (although II Peter 3:16 does ascribe such to some of Paul's writings), divine inspiration might well have suffered in that human instinct (of which the apostles were not always in total want) would have likely inclined toward self-conscious, self-initiated efforts at composing "Holy Writ for the ages" - as opposed to serving then present need. That the Spirit would ultimately use the latter to far greater ends would, of course, become apparent in time.
God has His times and His ways.
Burl Ratzsch
