English
Português
Español
Français
Answer
A comprehensive explanation of the process of determining the New Testament canon would necessitate a response of book length, and indeed, there have been books written about it. However, it is feasible to provide a fundamental overview in a brief article.
The canon comprises the authoritative books that constitute the New Testament. Numerous other early Christian documents existed, some potentially valuable while others were heretical. The canon represents the compilation of those that God imparted to the church through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Critics often assert that the early church exhibited diversity and that over time, a particular version of Christianity prevailed over others. The “winners” selected which books would hold authority, opting for those that aligned with their beliefs. Additionally, it is frequently alleged that the church arbitrarily determined the books to include in the New Testament centuries after Jesus and the apostles had passed. (This suggests that Jesus, guided by the Holy Spirit, played no role in the process at all!)
It is crucial to recognize that church leadership did not so much choose which books to incorporate in the canon as they endeavored to discern which books God had genuinely bestowed upon the church and thus should be included. When seeking to ascertain which books were inspired and authoritative (meriting inclusion in the canon), the early church had three primary criteria:
• Apostolic Authority: Christ entrusted His apostles with preserving His teachings and spreading them worldwide. For a book to be part of the canon, it needed to be associated with an apostle or someone who had witnessed the resurrected Jesus and heard His teachings firsthand. Some books were authored directly by apostles: Matthew, John, and Peter all penned books included in the canon. The Gospel According to Mark is believed to haveBased on the preaching of Peter, Luke wrote the books of Luke and Acts after conducting eyewitness interviews and consulting firsthand documents (Luke 1:1-4). He also traveled with the apostle Paul and directly experienced many of the events described in Acts. The books of James and Jude were authored by Jesus’ half-brothers, who were not followers of Jesus during his lifetime. However, James became a believer after Jesus appeared to him following the resurrection, as mentioned in 1 Corinthians 15:7. While there is no record of a similar appearance to Jude, it is reasonable to assume that he was influenced by Jesus’ teachings and likely had a transformative experience, possibly a post-resurrection encounter. Jesus personally appeared to Paul and appointed him as an apostle.
Although there were other books that could have been beneficial to Christians, those lacking an apostolic connection were excluded from the canon. Some writings were falsely attributed to apostles, and if their authorship was in doubt, they were not accepted.
– Orthodox Doctrine: Numerous early texts claimed to convey Christian doctrine but contained errors. Much of the New Testament was written to address and correct these misconceptions. Any document contradicting the established teachings of the apostles was disregarded. The apostles’ teachings were initially passed down orally before the formation of the New Testament. Oral transmission, a common practice in certain cultures, has proven to be highly accurate, unlike the game of “telephone” to which it is often compared.
– Broad-Based Acceptance: Several other books, while potentially beneficial and doctrinally sound, were utilized by specific segments of the church in different regions. However, for a book to be deemed canonical, it needed to have widespread acceptance among the early Christian communities.
Broad-based acceptance and recognition of its authoritative nature across the Christian world. Letters written by Paul to churches in Asia Minor were saved, copied, and circulated all over the civilized world, and Christians worldwide recognized their authoritative nature. This is what we would expect if God were actually involved in the process of deciding the canon.
As these tests of authenticity were applied, 27 books began to emerge. For a while, there were some doubts or disputes about a book here or there, but the 27 books of the New Testament accepted by Christians today were the ones that emerged as a result of the application of the above guidelines. As this view of the canon emerged, various church councils and synods gave formal acknowledgment of what the church had organically come to recognize. (This is somewhat similar to how the term classic is applied to literary works. No one person decides that a certain book should be a “classic” of English literature. The “classic” status just emerges based on the intrinsic qualities of the book and its broad-based acceptance.)
The Synod of Laodicea (363) forbade the use of several non-canonical books. A formal list of canonical books was not given, but the difference between the two kinds of books was obviously evident, and none of the forbidden books were later accepted as canonical.
The Council of Hippo (393) stated that the 27 books in the New Testament were canonical.
The Synod of Carthage (397) stated that only canonical books should be read in the churches, and it listed the 27 books of the New Testament.
The Council of Carthage (419) reaffirmed the existing canon.
Prior to these councils, many early church leaders also listed books considered authoritative in their times. There was the occasional inclusion of a book that was ultimately excluded or some question about a book that was ultimately included, but, for the most part, there is remarkable agreement about which books were recognized.
Here, we find inspiration and authority.
We believe with faith that the canon is accurate; nevertheless, it is not a blind belief. The early church had precise criteria for determining which books should be part of the canon, and present-day Christians can support their choices. They were more qualified than us to make this decision, so it would be arrogant to accuse them of being wrong.
