Definition of Terms:
|
The canon of the Bible was not something universally agreed upon in the early Church. While the early Church Fathers had access to many of the writings that would later be recognized as part of the New Testament, the concept of a fixed “biblical canon”—a definitive list of divinely inspired books—was a development that unfolded gradually over several centuries. Contrary to popular assumption, there is no historical evidence that the Apostles themselves compiled an authoritative list of New Testament writings. Instead, the early Christian communities each received, preserved, and circulated different apostolic letters and Gospels, often written to address specific needs within local congregations.
The transmission of these texts was neither immediate nor uniform. The high cost of writing materials such as papyrus, parchment, and ink—as well as the labor involved in manual copying—slowed their dissemination. Moreover, literacy rates in antiquity were low, and local churches depended primarily on the public reading of Scripture by ordained leaders, typically bishops. Consequently, the accessibility and use of apostolic writings varied widely across regions. Some communities had only a few letters or Gospels, while others possessed more. The importance attached to a particular writing often depended on its perceived apostolic origin, doctrinal content, and relevance to the community’s specific situation.
Because of this diversity, different Christian groups held varying collections of authoritative texts in the first few centuries. As heretical groups began to compose writings under the names of apostles—often promoting distorted teachings—a growing need emerged among orthodox Christians to clarify which writings were genuinely apostolic and authoritative. By the late second century, multiple competing canon lists had begun to appear, each reflecting different theological, liturgical, and geographical perspectives (see Early Biblical Canons for specific examples).
The Antilegomena and Other Disputed Texts
Not all of the books that are now part of the modern New Testament were originally accepted by all early Christians. Several books—Hebrews, James, Jude, 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, and Revelation—were subject to dispute and came to be known collectively as the Antilegomena, meaning “disputed” or “spoken against.” These texts were viewed with suspicion in certain quarters due to questions about authorship, doctrinal clarity, or limited geographical use.
At the same time, a number of other writings were widely read and even treated as Scripture by many early Christians, though they were ultimately excluded from the canon. These include The Shepherd of Hermas, The Didache, The Epistle of Barnabas, The Acts of Paul, The Epistle to the Laodiceans, The Gospel of the Hebrews, The Apocalypse of Peter, and 1 Clement. Several of these were cited approvingly by early Church Fathers and were even included in important early Christian manuscripts, such as the Codex Sinaiticus.
Criteria for Canonization
As the Church moved toward defining the New Testament canon more formally, it relied on three primary criteria to determine which books were truly inspired:
Apostolic Origin – Was the text written by an apostle or by someone with direct access to apostolic teaching?
Orthodoxy – Did the text faithfully reflect the teachings passed down from Jesus through the apostles?
Universal Recognition – Was the text accepted and read publicly in the liturgical life of churches across the Christian world?
These criteria were ultimately grounded in Sacred Tradition. Apostolic authorship presupposed a chain of oral tradition originating from Christ and passed on to His apostles. Orthodoxy required that a text be measured against the doctrinal standard already received by the Church. Universal recognition assumed that authoritative texts were those already in use across a broad spectrum of local churches and traditions, particularly in public worship.
The Role of Tradition and Authorship Concerns
Despite the clarity of these criteria, their application often depended on a deeper reliance on Tradition. For instance, the four Gospels were all composed anonymously. It is only through the testimony of early Church Fathers—such as Papias, Irenaeus, and Origen—that the authorship of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John could be affirmed. Similarly, the authorship of Hebrews was uncertain even in antiquity. Though some early Christians attributed it to Paul or Barnabas, the text itself is anonymous, and its inclusion in the canon relied heavily on theological content and liturgical use, rather than on firm apostolic attribution.
Moreover, questions of authenticity extended beyond whole books to individual passages. Certain sections of the Gospels, such as Mark 16:9–20 and John 7:53–8:11, are absent from the earliest surviving manuscripts, such as Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus. Many scholars believe these passages were later additions, raising further questions about how the text of Scripture was preserved and transmitted in the early Church.
Canonical Diversity and Ongoing Disagreement
Even with the guiding hand of Tradition, the process of forming a fixed biblical canon was complex and marked by ongoing disagreement. Over the centuries, multiple Christian traditions developed their own versions of the canon, influenced by linguistic, liturgical, and theological factors (see Early Versions and Translations of the Bible). To this day, Christian denominations differ over the number of books considered canonical. Most Protestant Bibles include 66 books, while the Catholic canon contains 73. The Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, and Assyrian Churches each have canons ranging from 73 to 80 books, depending on the tradition.
This raises pressing theological questions for modern Christians. If differing religious authorities claim different canonical lists, then which authority is correct? Could some Bibles be missing inspired texts—or include writings that are not divinely inspired? Such uncertainties highlight the foundational role that ecclesial authority plays in recognizing the canon.
Authority and Apostolic Succession
For the early Church, the answer to these questions lay in the concept of authority. Scripture did not create the Church; rather, the Church, guided by the Holy Spirit, recognized and preserved Scripture. Christ established a visible Church and entrusted it to the apostles, who in turn appointed successors—bishops—to carry on their mission. Through apostolic succession, the Church maintained continuity with the teachings of Christ and the authority to discern which writings were genuinely inspired.
In the first century, inspired men within the Church composed authoritative texts. It was then through the guidance of the Holy Spirit, operating within the Church’s living Tradition, that the canon of Scripture was eventually discerned and codified (see Early Church Councils). This Tradition preceded Scripture itself, as Christ never wrote a book nor commanded the apostles to do so. It was only through this divinely inspired Tradition—and the authoritative discernment of the Church—that the New Testament canon was established with confidence and without error.
Bible Verses:
*There are no relevant Bible verses that list the books that should be included in the New Testament. (The Table of Contents is a modern invention added centuries later).
Church Father Quotes:
Papias of Hierapolis (60-163 A.D.)
“Mark having become the interpreter of Peter, wrote down accurately whatsoever he remembered. It was not, however, in exact order that he related the sayings or deeds of Christ. For he neither heard the Lord nor accompanied Him. But afterwards, as I said, he accompanied Peter, who accommodated his instructions to the necessities [of his hearers], but with no intention of giving a regular narrative of the Lord’s sayings. Wherefore Mark made no mistake in thus writing some things as he remembered them. For of one thing he took especial care, not to omit anything he had heard, and not to put anything fictitious into the statements. Matthew put together the oracles [of the Lord] in the Hebrew language, and each one interpreted them as best he could.” -Papias of Hierapolis, Exposition on the Sayings of the Lord as quoted by Eusebius in Church History 3:39:15.
Dionysius of Corinth (ca 171 A.D.)
“We passed this holy Lord’s day, in which we read your letter, from the constant reading of which we shall be able to draw admonition, even as from the reading of the former one you sent us written through Clement.” -Dionysius of Corinth, Letter to Pope Soter 2.
Irenaeus of Lyons (130-202 A.D.)
Matthew also issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect, while Peter and Paul were preaching in Rome and laying the foundation of the Church. After their departure, Mark, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, did also hand down to us in writing what had been preached by Peter. Luke also, the companion of Paul, recorded in a book the Gospel preached by him. Afterwards John, the disciple of the Lord, who also had leaned upon his breast, did himself publish a Gospel during his residence at Ephesus in Asia. (Against Heresies 3:1:1)
“It is not possible that the Gospels be either more or fewer than they are. For since there are four zones of the world in which we live, and four principal winds, while the Church is scattered throughout the world, and the pillar and ground of the Church is the Gospel and the Spirit of life; it is fitting that we should have four pillars, breathing out immortality on every side and vivifying our flesh… The living creatures are quadriform, and the Gospel is quadriform, as is also the course followed by the Lord” (Adv. Hr., III, xi, 8).
“Truly, then, the Scripture declared, which says, ‘First of all believe that there is one God, who has established all things, and completed them, and having caused that from what had no being, all things should come into existence:’ [Shepherd of Hermas 26:2] He who contains all things, and is Himself contained by no one.” -Irenaeus of Lyons Adversus Haereses Book IV, Chapter 20:2.
Clement of Alexandria (150-216 A.D.)
“The circumstances which occasioned . . . [the writing] of Mark were these: When Peter preached the Word publicly at Rome and declared the gospel by the Spirit, many who were present requested that Mark, who had been a long time his follower and who remembered his sayings, should write down what had been proclaimed” -Clement of Alexandria, Sketches [A.D. 200], in a fragment from Eusebius, History of the Church, 6, 14:1).
“By Divine Inspiration, therefore, the power which spoke to Hermas [ref. The Shepherd of Hermas] by revelation said, ‘The visions and revelations are for those who are of double mind, who doubt in their hearts if these things are or are not.’” -Clement of Alexandria, Stromateis 1:29:181:1
“And such a ray of godliness shone forth on the minds of Peter’s hearers, that they were not satisfied with the once hearing or with the unwritten teaching of the divine proclamation, but with all manner of entreaties importuned Mark, to whom the Gospel is ascribed, he being the companion of Peter, that he would leave in writing a record of the teaching which had been delivered to them verbally; and did not let the man alone till they prevailed upon him; and so to them we owe the Scripture called the Gospel by Mark. On learning what had been done, through the revelation of the Spirit, it is said that the apostle was delighted with the enthusiasm of the men, and sanctioned the composition for reading in the Churches. Clemens gives the narrative in the sixth book of the Hypotyposes.” -Clement of Alexandria, Hypotyposes Book 6 as quoted by Eusebius in Ecclesiastical History 2:15
“And in the Hypotyposes, in a word, he has made abbreviated narratives of the whole testamentary Scripture; and has not passed over the disputed books — I mean Jude and the rest of the Catholic Epistles and Barnabas, and what is called the Revelation of Peter. And he says that the Epistle to the Hebrews is Paul’s, and was written to the Hebrews in the Hebrew language; but that Luke, having carefully translated it, gave it to the Greeks, and hence the same coloring in the expression is discoverable in this Epistle and the Acts;. . .” -Clement of Alexandria, Hypotyposes as recorded by Eusebius in Ecclesiastical History 6:14.
Tertullian of Carthage (155-240 A.D.)
“I would admit your argument, if the writing of The Shepherd had deserved to be included in the Divine Instrument, and if it were not judged by every council of the Churches, even of your own Churches, among the apocryphal. . . the Epistle of Barnabas, (Tertullian’s name for the New Testament Epistle to the Hebrews) “is more received among the Churches than the apocryphal epistle of the Shepherd.” Tertullian, De pudicitia 10
Origen of Alexandria (184-253 A.D.)
“Among the four Gospels, which are the only indisputable ones in the Church of God under heaven, I have learned by tradition that the first was written by Matthew, who was once a publican, but afterwards an apostle of Jesus Christ, and it was prepared for the converts from Judaism and published in the Hebrew language” (Commentaries on Matthew [cited by Eusebius in History of the Church 6:25]).
Now in the catholic Epistle of Barnabas, from which perhaps Celsus took the statement that the apostles were notoriously wicked men, it is recorded that ‘Jesus selected His own apostles, as persons who were more guilty of sin than all other evildoers.’ And in the Gospel according to Luke, Peter says to Jesus, ‘Depart from me, O Lord, for I am a sinful man.’ Moreover, Paul, who himself also at a later time became an apostle of Jesus, says in his Epistle to Timothy, ‘This is a faithful saying, that Jesus Christ came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am the chief’ . . . What absurdity, therefore, is there, if Jesus, desiring to manifest to the human race the power which He possesses to heal souls, should have selected notorious and wicked men, and should have raised them to such a degree of moral excellence, that they became a pattern of the purest virtue to all who were converted by their instrumentality to the Gospel of Christ?” -Origen of Alexandria, Contra Celsum 1.63.9.
“And if one should dare, using a Scripture which is in circulation in the church, but not acknowledged by all to be divine, to soften down a precept of this kind, the passage might be taken from The Shepherd, concerning some who as soon as they believe are put in subjection to Michael. . .” – Origen of Alexandria, Commentary on Matthew 14:21.
Eusebius of Caesarea (260-340 A.D.)
“Matthew had begun by preaching to the Hebrews, and when he made up his mind to go to others too, he committed his own Gospel to writing in his native tongue [Aramaic], so that for those with whom he was no longer present the gap left by his departure was filled by what he wrote” (History of the Church 3:24 [inter 300-325]).
“And the fourteen letters of Paul are obvious and plain, yet it is not right to ignore that some dispute the Epistle to the Hebrews, saying that it was rejected by the church of Rome as not being by Paul and I will expound at the proper time what was said about it by our predecessors. Nor have I received his so-called Acts (of Paul) among undisputed books.” (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 3:3:5)
“Let there be placed among the spurious works the Acts of Paul, the so-called Shepherd and the Apocalypse of Peter, and besides these the Epistle of Barnabas, and what are called the Teachings of the Apostles, and also the Apocalypse of John (Revelation), if this be thought proper; for as I wrote before, some reject it, and others place it in the canon.” -Eusebius, Historia Ecclesiastica III, 25.
“Of the writings of John, in addition to the gospel, the first of the epistles has ben accepted without controversy by ancients and moderns alike but the other two are disputed and as to the Apocalypse there have been many advocates of either opinion up to the present.” (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 3:24:17-18).
“But since the same Apostle (Paul) in the salutations at the end of Romans has mentioned among others Hermas [Romans 16:14], whose, they say, is the Book of the Shepherd, it should be known that this also is rejected by some and for their sake should not be placed among accepted books but by others it has been judged most valuable, especially those who need elementary instruction. For this reason we know that it has been used in public in churches, and I have found it quoted by some of the most ancient writers.” (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 3:3:6).
Council of Rome (382 A.D.)
“It is likewise decreed: Now, indeed, we must treat of the divine Scriptures: What the universal Catholic (15) Church accepts and what she must shun. The list of the Old Testament begins: Genesis, one book; Exodus, one book; Leviticus, one book; Numbers, one book; Deuteronomy, one book; Jesus Nave, one book; of Judges, one book; Ruth, one book; of Kings, four books; Paralipomenon, two books; One Hundred and Fifty Psalms, one book; of Solomon, three books: Proverbs, one book; Ecclesiastes, one book; Canticle of Canticles, one book; likewise, Wisdom, one book; Ecclesiasticus, one book. Likewise, the list of the Prophets: Isaias, one book; Jeremias, one book, along with Cinoth, that is, his Lamentations; Ezechiel, one book; Daniel, one book; Osee, one book; Amos, one book; Micheas, one book; Joel, one book; Abdias, one book; Jonas, one book; Nahum, one book; Habacuc, one book; Sophonias, one book; Aggeus, one book; Zacharias, one book; Malachias, one book. Likewise, the list of histories: Job, one book; Tobias, one book; Esdras, two books; Esther, one book; Judith, one book; of Maccabees, two books. Likewise, the list of the Scriptures of the New and Eternal Testament, which the holy and Catholic Church receives: of the Gospels, one book according to Matthew, one book according to Mark, one book according to Luke, one book according to John. The Epistles of the Apostle Paul, fourteen in number: one to the Romans, two to the Corinthians, one to the Ephesians, two to the Thessalonians, one to the Galatians, one to the Philippians, one to the Colossians, two to Timothy, one to Titus, one to Philemon, one to the Hebrews. Likewise, one book of the Apocalypse of John. And the Acts of the Apostles, one book. Likewise, the canonical Epistles, seven in number: of the Apostle Peter, two Epistles; of the Apostle James, one Epistle; of the Apostle John, one Epistle; of the other John, a Presbyter, two Epistles; of the Apostle Jude the Zealot, one Epistle. Thus concludes the canon of the New Testament.” Pope Damascus I, The Decree of Damasus 2; Council of Rome
Athanasius of Alexandria (295-373 A.D.)
“But for greater exactness I add this also, writing of necessity; that there are other books besides these not indeed included in the canon, but appointed by the Fathers to be read by those who newly join us, and who wish for instruction in the word of godliness. The Wisdom of Solomon, and the Wisdom of Sirach, and Esther, and Judith, and Tobit, and that which is called the Teaching of the Apostles, and the Shepherd. But the former, my brethren, are included in the canon, the latter being read; nor is there in any place a mention of apocryphal writings. But they are an invention of heretics, who write them when they choose, bestowing upon them their approbation, and assigning to them a date, that so, using them as ancient writings, they may find occasion to lead astray the simple.”
-Thirty-Ninth Festal Letter from Johannes Kirchhofer, Quellensammlung zur Geschichte des Neutestamentlichen Kanons bis auf Hieronymus (Zürich: Meyer and Zeller, 1844), 7-9.
Council of Hippo (393 A.D.)
“That beyond the canonical Scriptures nothing should be read in church under the name of the Divine Scriptures. The canonical Scriptures are; Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua the son of Nun, The Judges, Ruth, Reigns four books, The Paralipomenon two books, Job, the Psalter, five books of Solomon, the Twelve Books of the Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezechiel, Daniel, Tobit, Judith, Esther, Ezra two books, Maccabees two books.
Of the New Testament:
The Gospels four books, Acts of the Apostles one book, Epistles of Paul fourteen, Epistles of Peter, the Apostle two, Epistles of John the Apostle three, Epistles of James the Apostle one, one of Epistle of Jude the Apostle, Revelation of John.” (Brevarium Hipponense 36).
Augustine of Hippo (354-430 A.D.)
“How do we know the authorship of the works of Plato, Aristotle, Cicero, Varro, and other similar writers but by the unbroken chain of evidence? So also with the numerous commentaries on the ecclesiastical books, which have no canonical authority and yet show a desire of usefulness and a spirit of inquiry. . . . How can we be sure of the authorship of any book, if we doubt the apostolic origin of those books which are attributed to the apostles by the Church which the apostles themselves founded.” -Augustine on the anonymity of the Gospel authors. Contra Faustum, Book XXXIII.6.
“Perhaps you will read the gospel to me, and will attempt to find there a testimony to Manichæus. But should you meet with a person not yet believing the gospel, how would you reply to him were he to say, I do not believe? For my part, I should not believe the gospel except as moved by the authority of the Catholic Church. So when those on whose authority I have consented to believe in the gospel tell me not to believe in Manichæus, how can I but consent? Take your choice. If you say, Believe the Catholics: their advice to me is to put no faith in you; so that, believing them, I am precluded from believing you—If you say, Do not believe the Catholics: you cannot fairly use the gospel in bringing me to faith in Manichæus; for it was at the command of the Catholics that I believed the gospel;— Again, if you say, You were right in believing the Catholics when they praised the gospel, but wrong in believing their vituperation of Manichæus: do you think me such a fool as to believe or not to believe as you like or dislike, without any reason?” -Augustine of Hippo, Against the Fundamental Epistle of Manichaeus, Chapter 5
“Now, in regard to the canonical Scriptures, he must follow the judgment of the greater number of Catholic churches; and among these, of course, a high place must be given to such as have been thought worthy to be the seat of an apostle and to receive epistles.” –On Christian Doctrine Book II: 8:12
“Now the whole canon of Scripture on which we say this judgment is to be exercised, is contained in the following books:— Five books of Moses, that is, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy; one book of Joshua the Son of Nun; one of Judges; one short book called Ruth, which seems rather to belong to the beginning of Kings; next, four books of Kings, and two of Chronicles — these last not following one another, but running parallel, so to speak, and going over the same ground. The books now mentioned are history, which contains a connected narrative of the times, and follows the order of the events. There are other books which seem to follow no regular order, and are connected neither with the order of the preceding books nor with one another, such as Job, and Tobias, and Esther, and Judith, and the two books of Maccabees, and the two of Ezra, which last look more like a sequel to the continuous regular history which terminates with the books of Kings and Chronicles. Next are the Prophets, in which there is one book of the Psalms of David; and three books of Solomon, viz., Proverbs, Song of Songs, and Ecclesiastes. For two books, one called Wisdom and the other Ecclesiasticus, are ascribed to Solomon from a certain resemblance of style, but the most likely opinion is that they were written by Jesus the son of Sirach. Still they are to be reckoned among the prophetical books, since they have attained recognition as being authoritative. The remainder are the books which are strictly called the Prophets: twelve separate books of the prophets which are connected with one another, and having never been disjoined, are reckoned as one book; the names of these prophets are as follows:— Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi; then there are the four greater prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Ezekiel. The authority of the Old Testament is contained within the limits of these forty-four books. That of the New Testament, again, is contained within the following:— Four books of the Gospel, according to Matthew, according to Mark, according to Luke, according to John; fourteen epistles of the Apostle Paul— one to the Romans, two to the Corinthians, one to the Galatians, to the Ephesians, to the Philippians, two to the Thessalonians, one to the Colossians, two to Timothy, one to Titus, to Philemon, to the Hebrews: two of Peter; three of John; one of Jude; and one of James; one book of the Acts of the Apostles; and one of the Revelation of John.” –On Christian Doctrine Book II: 8:13
“Now among translations themselves the Italian (Itala) is to be preferred to the others, for it keeps closer to the words without prejudice to clearness of expression. And to correct the Latin we must use the Greek versions, among which the authority of the Septuagint is pre-eminent as far as the Old Testament is concerned” –On Christian Doctrine Book II: 15:22
Isidore of Seville (560-636 A.D.)
“For many of the Latins it is uncertain that the Epistle to the Hebrews is Paul’s, because of the lack of harmony in its vocabulary. Some suspect that it was written by Barnabas, others that it was written by Clement.” –Etymologies [6, 2, 45]
Non-Catholic Quotes:
J. N. D. Kelly (1909-1997), a Protestant & Early Church historian:
“It should be observed that the Old Testament thus admitted as authoritative in the Church was somewhat bulkier and more comprehensive [than the Protestant Bible]. . . . It always included, though with varying degrees of recognition, the so-called apocrypha or deuterocanonical books” –Early Christian Doctrines (5th Rev. Ed.), pg. 53
“the deuterocanonical writings ranked as Scripture in the fullest sense.” –Early Christian Doctrines (5th Rev. Ed.)
Bruce M. Metzger (1914-2007), biblical scholar & translator, professor at Princeton Theological Seminary and Bible editor on the board of the American Bible Society
“Nowhere in the New Testament is there a direct quotation from the canonical books of Joshua, Judges, Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Ecclesiastes, the Song of Solomon, Obadiah, Zephaniah, and Nahum; and the New Testament allusions to them are few in number.” –An Introduction to the Apocrypha, Revised ed. (1977).
Martin Luther (1483-1546), Father of the Protestant Reformation & Founder of Lutheranism
“We are obliged to yield many things to the papists (i.e. Catholics)—that they possess the Word of God which we received from them, otherwise we should have known nothing at all about it.” -Commentary on St. John (Chapter 16).
