Do all Christian young people have questions about the canon of the New Testament? I know I did, especially, “How do we know that the books that we have in our New Testament are the ones that should be there?”
The answer I got used what Michael Kruger (Canon Revisited: Establishing the Origins and Authority of the New Testament Books
The argument was, I think, some variation of this one, as explained by Michael Kruger,
(1) the New Testament can be proved to be generally reliable history … ; (2) the New Testament testifies to the miracle of the resurrection; (3) the resurrection authenticates Jesus as the Son of God; (4) Jesus appointed twelve apostles to be his authoritative witnesses; (5) therefore, books by apostles should be received as authoritative.
I wasn’t satisfied. I never really doubted that the New Testament was as it ought to be, but I wanted solid justification for my belief, and this argument didn’t give me that. I’m not sure I could have explained why, except to say that it wasn’t enough.
Michael Kruger explains the biggest problem with this argument like this:
The … fundamental challenge for this kind of argument is whether it provides a sufficiently sturdy foundation upon which to place our convictions about the validity of the canon. This is a multilayered argument that is open to challenge at numerous stages, [and] presupposes numerous antecedent beliefs (existence of God, miracles, etc.) … . Thus, at best, it provides an argument for canon based only on probability. If the Christian is left with only this probabilistic argument as a reason to believe these books are from God, then some may legitimately question whether it can provide the necessary basis for the conviction of true religious faith. After all, Christians are asked to totally commit their lives to God on the basis of these books.
Thankfully, we have other warrant to believe that the canon of the New Testament is as it should be—the self-authentication of scripture. (That statement begs for an explanation, doesn’t it? Maybe you should buy the book.)
I want to quote more of Canon Revisited as I read, although the argument is complicated, and much of the text isn’t suitable for short quotes. We’ll see what other quotable bits I find.