Skip to content
Back to the question

Evidence record

Who decided which books became the Bible?

Every sentence on the exploration belongs to at least one claim below. Each says what kind of statement it is, what it rests on, what the evidence does not establish, and how far it was checked. Nothing here is a score, and none of it is a verdict on a belief or a theory.

Last checked 23 September 2026.

  • Source checked: 29
  • Partly checked: 8
  • A judgement, not a fact: 7
  • Presented as open: 1

If something here is wrong, misquoted, out of date or unfair, write to support@unknownoceans.com and give the claim number, which does not change.

What the question takes for granted

A historical question with a popular answer, a council, that the evidence does not support, and a correction that can go too far the other way. Councils did adopt lists; what they did not do is invent one for every church.

  • Someone decided

    Contested

    The question expects a decider. The sources show regional councils adopting lists they said they had received, one council (Trent) defining a list for one church, and long use settling most books before any list did.

  • There is one Bible to decide on

    Contested

    Catholic, Orthodox, Protestant, Ethiopian Orthodox and Church of the East Bibles differ in the Old Testament, and in the last two, the New.

  • The books had authority only once listed

    Contested

    The Gospels were read at worship long before any list, and the churches read here hold that the lists recognised authority rather than conferring it. A historian can show the first; the second is a belief.

How the question is labelled

Claim: The making of the canon

Kind
Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

Claim: The canon

Kind
Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

The question

Claim: No council invented the list.

Kind
Historical claim. A statement about the past that historical evidence can test.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

What this does not establish

Councils did adopt lists, and Trent made one binding on Catholics; what the councils read here say is that they were receiving, not inventing.

Claim 1 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: It took about three centuries to settle, and it never fully did.

Kind
Historical claim. A statement about the past that historical evidence can test.
Review
Partly checked. Only part of the source could be read. What was not read is listed.

  • Supports

    The Formation of the New Testament Canon and Early Christian Apocrypha, in The Oxford Handbook of Early Christian Apocryphachapter abstract

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Abstract only, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: This essay discusses the relationship of those writings that originated in the same period as the emergence of the New Testament canon (second to fourth century CE), but which did not gain canonical status.

  • Supports

    The Bible: the canon of the Ethiopic BibleThe Bible

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: The Ethiopian Orthodox Church has 46 books of the Old Testament and 35 books of the New Testament that will bring the total of canonized books of the Bible to 81.

  • Supports

    Canon of the New Testamentthe Syrian churches

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: In Syria the Nestorians possess a Canon almost identical with the final one of the ancient East Syrians; they exclude the four smaller Catholic Epistles and Apocalypse.

What this does not establish

Schröter was read as an abstract. "Settle" means for most churches; the Ethiopian and Church of the East canons show it did not settle for all.

Claim 2 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: The New Testament was not selected at a single meeting.

Kind
Historical claim. A statement about the past that historical evidence can test.
Review
Partly checked. Only part of the source could be read. What was not read is listed.

What this does not establish

Both scholarly sources were read as abstracts; the primary texts in the passages below carry the detail.

Claim 3 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: The earliest surviving list of exactly the twenty-seven books most churches now read was written in 367

Kind
Historical claim. A statement about the past that historical evidence can test.
Review
Partly checked. Only part of the source could be read. What was not read is listed.

What this does not establish

Brakke’s abstract was read, not the article. "Earliest surviving" is Brakke’s judgement; the Muratorian fragment, which the Catholic Encyclopedia dates to the late second century and van Aarde to about 350 to 375 (Schutte reports the early date as challenged), does not list the twenty-seven on either dating.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “The earliest surviving list of exactly the twenty-seven books now in it was written in 367” "Now in it" treated the New Testament as the same in every church. The Ethiopian Orthodox New Testament has thirty-five books and the Church of the East’s has traditionally had twenty-two. Brakke’s own phrase is "the generally accepted canon".

Claim 4 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: and Christian traditions still disagree about the Old Testament and, at the edges, the New.

Kind
Historical claim. A statement about the past that historical evidence can test.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports

    The Westminster Confession of Faith, chapter 1chapter 1.3

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: The books commonly called Apocrypha, not being of divine inspiration, are no part of the canon of the Scripture

  • Supports

    Catechism of the Catholic Church, 120: the canon of ScriptureCatechism 120

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: It includes 46 books for the Old Testament (45 if we count Jeremiah and Lamentations as one) and 27 for the New.

  • Supports

    The Bible: the canon of the Ethiopic BibleThe Bible

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: The Ethiopian Orthodox Church has 46 books of the Old Testament and 35 books of the New Testament that will bring the total of canonized books of the Bible to 81.

  • Supports

    Canon of the New Testamentthe Syrian churches

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: In Syria the Nestorians possess a Canon almost identical with the final one of the ancient East Syrians; they exclude the four smaller Catholic Epistles and Apocalypse.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “and Christian traditions still disagree about the Old Testament.” The New Testament is not uniform either: the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church counts thirty-five books, and the Church of the East has read a shorter one.

Claim 5 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: The popular version has a single council voting on which books to include and which to suppress.

Kind
Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “The popular version has a council voting” Councils did vote on lists, at Hippo and Carthage, and Trent defined the Catholic list. What the evidence rules out is one council deciding for everyone, which is also what the summary says.

Claim: It is a good story and it is not what happened.

Kind
Historical claim. A statement about the past that historical evidence can test.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

What this does not establish

Suppression is not wholly a myth: Athanasius condemns the apocryphal books and a bishop withdrew one gospel from reading, both below. What is not supported is a single council deciding for all.

Claim 7 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: What happened is slower and stranger: churches scattered across the Mediterranean gradually converged on which writings they would read aloud, argued about the edges from the second century into the fourth, and wrote down lists along the way that never became one list for every church.

Kind
Historical claim. A statement about the past that historical evidence can test.
Review
Partly checked. Only part of the source could be read. What was not read is listed.

  • Supports

    The Formation of the New Testament Canon and Early Christian Apocrypha, in The Oxford Handbook of Early Christian Apocryphachapter abstract

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Abstract only, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: the emergence of the New Testament canon (second to fourth century CE) ... Christian writings were first categorized as ‘accepted’, ‘disputed’, and ‘rejected’; the terms ‘canon’ and ‘canonical’ were not applied before the fourth century.

  • Supports

    The use and origin of the (Old and) New Testament as Christianity’s canonp. 3

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: During the process of canonisation of the New Testament, numerous canon lists – mostly controversial – emerged

  • Supports

    The Bible: the canon of the Ethiopic BibleThe Bible

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: The canon of the Ethiopic Bible differs both in the Old and New Testament from that of any other churches.

  • Supports

    Canon of the New Testamentthe formation of the collections

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: each of the leading Churches -- Antioch , Thessalonica , Alexandria, Corinth , Rome --sought by exchanging with other Christian communities to add to its special treasure, and have publicly read in its religious assemblies all Apostolic writings which came under its knowledge . It was doubtless in this way that the collections grew

What this does not establish

Schröter was read as an abstract.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “argued about the edges for two hundred years, and then found that someone had written the agreement down.” "Two hundred years" had no source, and "found that someone had written the agreement down" presents Athanasius’s list as a record of agreement. Brakke reads it as an attempt to close a canon amid conflict, and the churches’ lists still differ.

Claim 8 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

What actually happened

Claim: What actually happened

Kind
Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

The first surviving list of the twenty-seven is from 367

Claim: The first surviving list of the twenty-seven is from 367

Kind
Historical claim. A statement about the past that historical evidence can test.
Review
Partly checked. Only part of the source could be read. What was not read is listed.

What this does not establish

Brakke read as an abstract.

Claim 13 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria, sent an annual letter announcing the date of Easter.

Kind
Historical claim. A statement about the past that historical evidence can test.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

Claim 14 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: In the one written for 367 he listed the books "handed down, and accredited as Divine", and the New Testament section names exactly the twenty-seven books that most Christian New Testaments contain today.

Kind
Quotes a source. The words of a named text, checked against the source.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports · English (NPNF)

    Letter 39, for 367: the Festal Letter listing the canonical bookssections 3 and 5

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: to set before you the books included in the Canon, and handed down, and accredited as Divine; ... Again it is not tedious to speak of the [books] of the New Testament . These are, the four Gospels , according to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Afterwards, the Acts of the Apostles and Epistles (called Catholic ), seven, viz. of James, one; of Peter, two; of John, three; after these, one of Jude. In addition, there are fourteen Epistles of Paul ... And besides, the Revelation of John.

  • Context

    Canon Formation and Social Conflict in Fourth-Century Egypt: Athanasius of Alexandria’s Thirty-Ninth Festal Letterabstract

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Abstract only, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: Not only is this letter the earliest extant Christian document to list precisely the twenty-seven books that eventually formed the generally accepted canon of the New Testament

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “In the one written for 367 he listed the books "handed down and accredited as divine", and the New Testament section names exactly the twenty-seven books that are in it today.” The quotation dropped the translation’s comma and capital. "In it today" was true only of most churches’ New Testaments.

Claim 15 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: He also did something more revealing.

Kind
Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

Claim: He named a second group of books that were "not indeed included in the Canon, but appointed by the Fathers to be read" by new converts

Kind
Quotes a source. The words of a named text, checked against the source.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports · English (NPNF)

    Letter 39, for 367: the Festal Letter listing the canonical bookssection 7

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: 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.

Claim 17 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: which tells you that the line he was drawing was one people needed telling about.

Kind
This page’s reading. A judgement the page makes from the evidence. Others read it differently.
Review
A judgement, not a fact. Reviewed for whether it is fairly put and follows from the checked claims. No source can confirm it.

Claim 18 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: And he rejected a third group outright, the books he called apocryphal, as "an invention of heretics".

Kind
Quotes a source. The words of a named text, checked against the source.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “” The passage gave the letter’s two accepted groups and left out its third, the books it condemns. A page arguing against a story of suppression should not omit the one place the source does reject books.

Claim 19 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Councils ratified a consensus rather than creating one

Claim: Councils ratified a consensus rather than creating one

Kind
Historical claim. A statement about the past that historical evidence can test.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

What this does not establish

Canon 24 was itself an enactment, and Trent later defined a list with an anathema; the councils claimed to receive, and they also decided for their own churches.

Claim 20 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: Regional councils in North Africa confirmed the same twenty-seven books, at Hippo in 393 and Carthage four years later.

Kind
Historical claim. A statement about the past that historical evidence can test.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports · English (NPNF)

    The Code of Canons of the African Church, canon 24: the canonical Scripturescanon 24

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: The New Testament . The Gospels , iv. books. The Acts of the Apostles, j. book. The Epistles of Paul , xiv. The Epistles of Peter, the Apostle, ij. The Epistles of John the Apostle, iij. The Epistles of James the Apostle, j. The Epistle of Jude the Apostle, j. The Revelation of John, j. book.

  • Supports

    The use and origin of the (Old and) New Testament as Christianity’s canonp. 5

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: the synods of the church in North Africa, the synod of Hippo (393 CE) and the synod of Carthage (397 CE)

  • Supports

    Canon of the New Testamentthe African councils

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: The catalogues of Hippo and Carthage are identical with the Catholic Canon of the present.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “Regional councils in North Africa confirmed the same list for the Latin West” The African list is the same as Athanasius’s only in the New Testament: it counts Tobit, Judith and Maccabees as canonical where he did not. And an African council bound Africa; canon 24 asks other bishops to confirm it rather than deciding for the West.

Claim 21 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: The African code that gathers their canons prints the list in full and then says what it thinks it is doing: “these are the things which we have received from our fathers to be read in church.”

Kind
Quotes a source. The words of a named text, checked against the source.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports · English (NPNF)

    The Code of Canons of the African Church, canon 24: the canonical Scripturesintroductory note and canon 24

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: In the year 418-19, all canons formerly made in sixteen councils held at Carthage , one at Milevis, one at Hippo, that were approved of, were read, and received a new sanction ... Let this be sent to our brother and fellow bishop , Boniface, and to the other bishops of those parts, that they may confirm this canon, for these are the things which we have received from our fathers to be read in church.

Claim 22 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: By then the Gospels had been read aloud at Sunday worship for more than two centuries, and Eusebius could call the letters of Paul undisputed.

Kind
Historical claim. A statement about the past that historical evidence can test.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports · English (Dods and Reith)

    First Apology, chapters 66 and 67: the Sunday readingchapters 66 and 67

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: For the apostles , in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels ... And on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits

  • Supports

    Canon of the New Testamentthe Gospels

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: Justin Martyr (130-63) in his Apology refers to certain "memoirs of the Apostles, which are called gospels"

  • Supports · English (McGiffert)

    Church History, Book III: the accepted, disputed and rejected writingsIII.3.5

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: Paul's fourteen epistles are well known and undisputed. It is not indeed right to overlook the fact that some have rejected the Epistle to the Hebrews

What this does not establish

Justin does not say which gospels, or how many, were read. Eusebius calls Paul’s letters undisputed and in the same breath notes that Hebrews was disputed.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “By then the four Gospels, Acts and the letters of Paul had been read as authoritative in churches for generations.” The sentence carried no source. Justin’s Apology, before 163, attests Gospels read at Sunday worship, and Eusebius calls Paul’s letters undisputed; nothing read attests the reading of Acts as early, so Acts is dropped.

Claim 23 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: The books that took longest to settle were the ones at the margins.

Kind
Historical claim. A statement about the past that historical evidence can test.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports · English (McGiffert)

    Church History, Book III: the accepted, disputed and rejected writingsIII.25.3

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: Among the disputed writings, which are nevertheless recognized by many, are extant the so-called epistle of James and that of Jude, also the second epistle of Peter

Claim 24 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: Eusebius, writing before any of those councils, files James, Jude, 2 Peter and 2 and 3 John among the disputed writings “which are nevertheless recognized by many”, notes that some reject Hebrews on the ground that Paul did not write it, and cannot place Revelation at all: he lists it among the accepted books “if it really seem proper” and again among the rejected, “which some, as I said, reject, but which others class with the accepted books”.

Kind
Quotes a source. The words of a named text, checked against the source.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports · English (McGiffert)

    Church History, Book III: the accepted, disputed and rejected writingsIII.25.2 to 4 and III.3.5

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: After them is to be placed, if it really seem proper, the Apocalypse of John ... Among the disputed writings, which are nevertheless recognized by many, are extant the so-called epistle of James and that of Jude, also the second epistle of Peter , and those that are called the second and third of John ... 4. Among the rejected writings ... the Apocalypse of John, if it seem proper, which some, as I said, reject, but which others class with the accepted books. ... some have rejected the Epistle to the Hebrews , saying that it is disputed by the church of Rome , on the ground that it was not written by Paul .

  • Supports

    Prolegomena to the Church History of Eusebius: Date of its CompositionProlegomena III §1

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: since the latter was put to death by his father in the summer of 326, the History must have been completed before that time.

Claim 25 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: The long argument was about those.

Kind
This page’s reading. A judgement the page makes from the evidence. Others read it differently.
Review
A judgement, not a fact. Reviewed for whether it is fairly put and follows from the checked claims. No source can confirm it.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “The argument was about those, not about whether to keep a Gospel out.” Contradicted by the sources the page already cites. Eusebius III.25.6-7 rejects the Gospels of Peter, Thomas and Matthias by name, and VI.12 records Serapion allowing and then refuting the Gospel of Peter at Rhossus: an argument about keeping a gospel out. The correction keeps the page’s point that the long dispute was over the margins, without overcorrecting the story of suppression.

Claim 26 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: Gospels under other names were set aside with less of one: Eusebius dismisses those of Peter, Thomas and Matthias as the fictions of heretics

Kind
Historical claim. A statement about the past that historical evidence can test.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports · English (McGiffert)

    Church History, Book III: the accepted, disputed and rejected writingsIII.25.6 to 7

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: those that are cited by the heretics under the name of the apostles , including, for instance, such books as the Gospels of Peter, of Thomas, of Matthias, or of any others besides them, and the Acts of Andrew and John and the other apostles , which no one belonging to the succession of ecclesiastical writers has deemed worthy of mention in his writings. 7. And further, the character of the style is at variance with apostolic usage, and both the thoughts and the purpose of the things that are related in them are so completely out of accord with true orthodoxy that they clearly show themselves to be the fictions of heretics .

Claim 27 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: and a bishop of Antioch who had let one church read the Gospel of Peter withdrew the permission once he had read it himself.

Kind
Historical claim. A statement about the past that historical evidence can test.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports · English (McGiffert)

    Church History, Book VI, chapter 12: Serapion and the Gospel of PeterVI.12.2 to 6 and VI.11

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: He wrote this last to refute the falsehoods which that Gospel contained, on account of some in the parish of Rhossus who had been led astray by it into heterodox notions. ... as I had not read the Gospel which they put forward under the name of Peter, I said, If this is the only thing which occasions dispute among you, let it be read. ... But, on the death of Serapion, Asclepiades ... succeeded to the episcopate of the church at Antioch

What this does not establish

Serapion’s letter survives only in Eusebius’s extracts, and "withdrew the permission" is the page’s reading of his promise to come again and his refutation.

Claim 28 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Christian Bibles still do not contain the same books

Claim: Christian Bibles still do not contain the same books

Kind
Historical claim. A statement about the past that historical evidence can test.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports

    Catechism of the Catholic Church, 120: the canon of ScriptureCatechism 120

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: It includes 46 books for the Old Testament (45 if we count Jeremiah and Lamentations as one) and 27 for the New.

  • Supports

    The Bible: the canon of the Ethiopic BibleThe Bible

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: The Ethiopian Orthodox Church has 46 books of the Old Testament and 35 books of the New Testament that will bring the total of canonized books of the Bible to 81.

Claim 29 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: Catholic and Orthodox Old Testaments include books that Protestant churches do not count as canonical, and either leave out of their Bibles or print apart as the Apocrypha.

Kind
A church’s teaching. What the named tradition teaches, from its own documents. Evidence of what is taught, not proof that it is true, and not what every Christian holds.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.
Held by
Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Reformed, Anglican

  • Supports

    The Westminster Confession of Faith, chapter 1chapter 1.3

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: The books commonly called Apocrypha, not being of divine inspiration, are no part of the canon of the Scripture, and therefore are of no authority in the church of God

  • Supports

    The Thirty-nine Articles of Religion, Article VIArticle VI

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: And the other Books (as Hierome saith) the Church doth read for example of life and instruction of manners; but yet doth it not apply them to establish any doctrine; such are these following: The Third Book of Esdras The Fourth Book of Esdras The Book of Tobias The Book of Judith

  • Supports

    The use and origin of the (Old and) New Testament as Christianity’s canonp. 5

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: the apocrypha were included in the form of an appendix to the New Testament, but the appendix was omitted from later editions.

What this does not establish

Checked for the Reformed and Anglican confessions; no Lutheran or other Protestant document was read. The Anglican article reads these books "for example of life", which is not the same as leaving them out.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “Catholic and Orthodox Old Testaments include books that Protestant Bibles either omit or print separately as the Apocrypha.” The difference is first a judgement about canonicity, which the confessions state, and only then a matter of printing.

Claim 30 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: All three sides say so, in their own words and in opposite directions.

Kind
This page’s reading. A judgement the page makes from the evidence. Others read it differently.
Review
A judgement, not a fact. Reviewed for whether it is fairly put and follows from the checked claims. No source can confirm it.

Claim 31 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: The Council of Trent listed Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, Baruch and two books of Maccabees among the sacred books in 1546.

Kind
A church’s teaching. What the named tradition teaches, from its own documents. Evidence of what is taught, not proof that it is true, and not what every Christian holds.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.
Held by
Catholic

Tobias and Ecclesiasticus are the older English names for Tobit and Sirach.

  • Supports · English (Waterworth)

    Council of Trent, fourth session: decree concerning the canonical Scripturesdecree concerning the canonical Scriptures

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: And it has thought it meet that a list of the sacred books be inserted in this decree, lest a doubt may arise in any one’s mind, which are the books that are received by this Synod. ... Tobias, Judith, Esther ... Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Isaias, Jeremias, with Baruch ... two books of the Machabees, the first and the second.

  • Supports

    The use and origin of the (Old and) New Testament as Christianity’s canonp. 5

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: In reaction to the Reformation, the Roman Catholic Church, during the Council of Trent in 1546, upheld the Old Testament apocrypha

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “The African canon reads Tobit, Judith and two books of Maccabees into the list of what may be read in church.” The sentence stood for the Catholic side, but the African canon is a fifth-century regional code received by Orthodox and Catholic alike. The Catholic Church’s own statement of the longer canon is Trent’s, and a page answering "who decided" should name the council that did decide for one church. The African canon moves to the sentence on how old the disagreement is.

Claim 32 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: The Westminster Confession says the books “commonly called Apocrypha, not being of divine inspiration, are no part of the canon of the Scripture”.

Kind
Quotes a source. The words of a named text, checked against the source.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.
Held by
Reformed

  • Supports

    The Westminster Confession of Faith, chapter 1chapter 1.3

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: The books commonly called Apocrypha, not being of divine inspiration, are no part of the canon of the Scripture, and therefore are of no authority in the church of God

Claim 33 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: And a Jerusalem synod of 1672 names much the same books, Wisdom, Judith, Tobit, Bel and the Dragon, Susanna, Maccabees and Sirach, and the act of calling them apocryphal, which it says was done “foolishly and ignorantly, or rather maliciously”.

Kind
Quotes a source. The words of a named text, checked against the source.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.
Held by
Eastern Orthodox

The "he" the synod accuses is Cyril Lucaris, a patriarch of Constantinople whose confession the synod was answering.

  • Supports

    The Confession of Dositheus, Synod of Jerusalem, question 3Question 3

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: adding to Scripture those which he foolishly and ignorantly, or rather maliciously, called Apocrypha; specifically, “The Wisdom of Solomon,” “Judith,” “Tobit,” “The History of the Dragon” [Bel and the Dragon], “The History of Susanna,” “The Maccabees,” and “The Wisdom of Sirach.”

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “names the same books” With Trent now the sentence before, "the same" would claim the two lists match exactly; the Orthodox list names Bel and Susanna and not Baruch.

Claim 34 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: The disagreement is old: the African canon counts Tobit, Judith and two books of Maccabees as scripture, where Athanasius had set Judith and Tobit among the books to be read but not the canon.

Kind
Historical claim. A statement about the past that historical evidence can test.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports · English (NPNF)

    The Code of Canons of the African Church, canon 24: the canonical Scripturescanon 24

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: Daniel. Tobit. Judith. Esther. Ezra, ij. books. Macchabees, ij. books.

  • Supports · English (NPNF)

    Letter 39, for 367: the Festal Letter listing the canonical bookssection 7

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: 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

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “The disagreement is old, was sharpened at the Reformation, and has never been resolved.” "Old" had no evidence on the page. The two fourth-century lists the page already cites disagree on exactly these books.

Claim 35 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: It was sharpened at the Reformation, and has never been resolved.

Kind
Historical claim. A statement about the past that historical evidence can test.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports

    The use and origin of the (Old and) New Testament as Christianity’s canonp. 5

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: In reaction to the Reformation, the Roman Catholic Church, during the Council of Trent in 1546, upheld the Old Testament apocrypha, even adding others to it. Even today, different canons exist within the church.

Claim 36 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: The New Testament differs at the edges too.

Kind
Historical claim. A statement about the past that historical evidence can test.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports

    The Bible: the canon of the Ethiopic BibleThe Bible

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: The canon of the Ethiopic Bible differs both in the Old and New Testament from that of any other churches.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “” The page described the canon as settled everywhere except the Old Testament. Two churches, one of them the Ethiopian Orthodox, have New Testaments of other lengths.

Claim 37 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: The Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church counts thirty-five books in its New Testament and eighty-one in its Bible

Kind
A church’s teaching. What the named tradition teaches, from its own documents. Evidence of what is taught, not proof that it is true, and not what every Christian holds.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.
Held by
Oriental Orthodox

  • Supports

    The Bible: the canon of the Ethiopic BibleThe Bible

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: The Ethiopian Orthodox Church has 46 books of the Old Testament and 35 books of the New Testament that will bring the total of canonized books of the Bible to 81.

What this does not establish

The church’s own list. How the eight books beyond the twenty-seven are used in its liturgy was not checked.

Claim 38 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: and the Church of the East has traditionally read a New Testament without 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, Jude and Revelation.

Kind
A church’s teaching. What the named tradition teaches, from its own documents. Evidence of what is taught, not proof that it is true, and not what every Christian holds.
Review
Partly checked. Only part of the source could be read. What was not read is listed.
Held by
Church of the East

  • Supports

    Canon of the New Testamentthe Syrian churches

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: In Syria the Nestorians possess a Canon almost identical with the final one of the ancient East Syrians; they exclude the four smaller Catholic Epistles and Apocalypse.

What this does not establish

An outside Catholic source of 1908, not a document of the Church of the East, and it does not say whether current editions follow it.

Claim 39 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: A Bible is therefore always a Bible according to some tradition.

Kind
This page’s reading. A judgement the page makes from the evidence. Others read it differently.
Review
A judgement, not a fact. Reviewed for whether it is fairly put and follows from the checked claims. No source can confirm it.

Claim 40 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: That is a fact about the book on the shelf, not a criticism of it.

Kind
This page’s reading. A judgement the page makes from the evidence. Others read it differently.
Review
A judgement, not a fact. Reviewed for whether it is fairly put and follows from the checked claims. No source can confirm it.

Claim 41 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Why these books

Claim: Why these books

Kind
Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

What made a book acceptable

Claim: What made a book acceptable

Kind
Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

Claim: Eusebius already applies three tests: whether a book came from an apostle, whether the church’s own writers had used it, and whether it agreed with what was already taught.

Kind
Historical claim. A statement about the past that historical evidence can test.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

  • Supports · English (McGiffert)

    Church History, Book III: the accepted, disputed and rejected writingsIII.25.6 to 7 and III.3.5

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: those that are cited by the heretics under the name of the apostles , including, for instance, such books as the Gospels of Peter, of Thomas, of Matthias, or of any others besides them, and the Acts of Andrew and John and the other apostles , which no one belonging to the succession of ecclesiastical writers has deemed worthy of mention in his writings. 7. And further, the character of the style is at variance with apostolic usage, and both the thoughts and the purpose of the things that are related in them are so completely out of accord with true orthodoxy that they clearly show themselves to be the fictions of heretics . ... on the ground that it was not written by Paul .

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “The criteria usually named are apostolic origin, use across many churches, and agreement with what was already taught.” "Usually named" is a claim about modern scholarship, and the only source cited, Brakke, could be read only as an abstract that does not discuss criteria. The same three tests are in Eusebius, whom the page already cites, so the sentence now attributes them to him.

Claim 43 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: How far tests like these decided anything, and how far they were reasons given for what congregations were reading anyway, is one of the questions still argued over.

Kind
What scholars argue. A report of what specialists argue, or where they disagree.
Review
Partly checked. Only part of the source could be read. What was not read is listed.

What this does not establish

Brakke was read as an abstract. Schutte reports the question as debated; the particular reading that the tests were reasons given afterwards is a position within that debate, not established here.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “Historians disagree about how much these functioned as tests and how much as justifications for what congregations were reading anyway.” Recast so the claim is what Schutte’s review supports: that the criteria question is one of the debated questions in canon scholarship.

Claim 44 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: Some of it ran the other way round.

Kind
This page’s reading. A judgement the page makes from the evidence. Others read it differently.
Review
A judgement, not a fact. Reviewed for whether it is fairly put and follows from the checked claims. No source can confirm it.

Claim 45 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: Eusebius did not count 2 Peter in the canon, but it had been read with the other scriptures because many found it useful, and both Athanasius’s list and the African one include it.

Kind
Historical claim. A statement about the past that historical evidence can test.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “Some of the argument runs the other way round: a book was judged apostolic partly because it was already being read, rather than being read because it had been judged apostolic.” A general claim about scholarly argument with no readable source behind it. The page now gives an instance the sources show: a letter in use before it was accepted, and accepted after.

Claim 46 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

What did not survive the sorting

Claim: What did not survive the sorting

Kind
Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

What was lost in the sorting

Claim: What was lost in the sorting

Kind
Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

Claim: Early Christian writing that did not enter the canon survives unevenly, some of it only in fragments or quotations, some only because a collection of codices turned up in Egypt in 1945.

Kind
Historical claim. A statement about the past that historical evidence can test.
Review
Partly checked. Only part of the source could be read. What was not read is listed.

  • Supports

    Texts about Jesus, in The Oxford Handbook of Early Christian Apocryphachapter abstract

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Abstract only, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: the more important papyrus fragments of unknown gospels, and the fragmentary quotations from lost Jewish-Christian gospels and from the Gospel of the Egyptians.

  • Supports

    Gnosticism, in the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy§ 3 and § 4

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · Read in full, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: Porphyry also mentions by name two Gnostic treatises that were discovered in Egypt in 1945 ... it was the discovery in 1945, in Egypt, of a large collection of Coptic Gnostic codices, now known as the Nag Hammadi Collection

What this does not establish

Frey was read as an abstract. The IEP describes the 1945 codices as Gnostic; which of their texts are Christian in origin is itself argued.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “some only because a copy was buried in a jar” The passage cited nothing. The jar, though often told, is in no source that could be read here; the 1945 discovery in Egypt is, and the fragments and quotations are in Frey.

Claim 48 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: What was circulating in the second century that we have no copy of, and no mention of, cannot be counted.

Kind
Historical claim. A statement about the past that historical evidence can test.
Review
Presented as open. The page says this is unresolved, and the review found that it is.

Claim 49 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

How the process is understood

Claim: How the process is understood

Kind
Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

What Christians understand the process to have been

Claim: What Christians understand the process to have been

Kind
Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

Claim: Three churches describe it in their own documents.

Kind
Framing. Signposting. It asserts nothing a source could check.

Claim: The Catholic catechism says "It was by the apostolic Tradition that the Church discerned which writings are to be included in the list of the sacred books."

Kind
A church’s teaching. What the named tradition teaches, from its own documents. Evidence of what is taught, not proof that it is true, and not what every Christian holds.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.
Held by
Catholic

  • Supports

    Catechism of the Catholic Church, 120: the canon of ScriptureCatechism 120

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: It was by the apostolic Tradition that the Church discerned which writings are to be included in the list of the sacred books.

Corrected

23 September 2026. Previously: “Christian traditions do not generally describe the canon as a committee decision. They describe the church as recognising books that were already authoritative, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, which is a claim about what was happening through the history rather than an alternative account of the history.” One sentence summarised Catholic, Orthodox and Reformed accounts that differ on the church’s role, and spoke for traditions not read; whether it was fair to all of them is a theological judgement no source read could settle (flagged for a qualified reviewer). Replaced with each church’s own words, attributed to it. The closing interpretation is kept, narrowed to the three documents (claim 57); the new sentences are claim 54 to claim 57.

Claim 51 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: The Synod of Jerusalem of 1672 says the Church "has delivered to us as genuine the Sacred Gospels and the other Books of Scripture".

Kind
A church’s teaching. What the named tradition teaches, from its own documents. Evidence of what is taught, not proof that it is true, and not what every Christian holds.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.
Held by
Eastern Orthodox

The Confession of Dositheus, adopted by the Synod of Jerusalem, answering whether the books Protestants call apocrypha are Scripture.

  • Supports

    The Confession of Dositheus, Synod of Jerusalem, question 3Question 3

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: For ancient custom, or rather the Catholic Church, which has delivered to us as genuine the Sacred Gospels and the other Books of Scripture, has undoubtedly delivered these also as parts of Scripture

What this does not establish

One Orthodox synod of the seventeenth century, read in an English translation.

Claim 55 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: The Westminster Confession says the authority of Scripture "dependeth not upon the testimony of any man, or church; but wholly upon God".

Kind
A church’s teaching. What the named tradition teaches, from its own documents. Evidence of what is taught, not proof that it is true, and not what every Christian holds.
Review
Source checked. The cited passage was read, and it says this.
Held by
Reformed

The next section of the Confession (1.5) places the believer’s assurance of that authority in "the inward work of the Holy Spirit".

  • Supports

    The Westminster Confession of Faith, chapter 1chapter 1.4

    Cited · Link answered, 19 October 2026 · The cited passage was read, 23 September 2026

    The source reads: The authority of the Holy Scripture, for which it ought to be believed, and obeyed, dependeth not upon the testimony of any man, or church; but wholly upon God (who is truth itself) the author thereof:

Claim 56 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

Claim: Each is a claim about what was happening through the history rather than an alternative account of it.

Kind
This page’s reading. A judgement the page makes from the evidence. Others read it differently.
Review
A judgement, not a fact. Reviewed for whether it is fairly put and follows from the checked claims. No source can confirm it.

Follows from the three documents quoted: none disputes the historical process the page describes, and each says where the books’ authority came from.

What this does not establish

The three documents disagree with one another on where that authority rests: in the church’s discernment by tradition, in what the church delivered, or wholly in God rather than in any church’s testimony.

Claim 57 · checked 23 September 2026 · AI-assisted audit

What was read