Who decided which books became the Bible?
No council invented the list. It took about three centuries to settle, and it never fully did.
The question
The popular version has a single council voting on which books to include and which to suppress. It is a good story and it is not what happened.
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.
Sources for the question:Source 9: The Formation of the New Testament Canon and Early Christian Apocrypha, in The Oxford Handbook of Early Christian Apocrypha, Jens Schröter, Oxford University PressSource 6: Canon Formation and Social Conflict in Fourth-Century Egypt: Athanasius of Alexandria’s Thirty-Ninth Festal Letter, David Brakke, Harvard Theological Review 87(4)Source 18: The Bible: the canon of the Ethiopic Bible, Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
Read this question as
Everything below, in the order it was written.
Showing every passage.
What actually happened
Known. Strongly supported by evidence and broadly established.
Strongly supported by evidence and broadly established.
The first surviving list of the twenty-seven is from 367
Evidence. Established by measurement, documents, manuscripts, archaeology or other method that can be checked, and not seriously disputed.
Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria, sent an annual letter announcing the date of Easter. 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.
He also did something more revealing. 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, which tells you that the line he was drawing was one people needed telling about. And he rejected a third group outright, the books he called apocryphal, as "an invention of heretics".
3 sources for this passage. Show them.
- Letter 39, for 367: the Festal Letter listing the canonical booksAthanasius of Alexandria, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, New Advent · 367
- Canon Formation and Social Conflict in Fourth-Century Egypt: Athanasius of Alexandria’s Thirty-Ninth Festal LetterDavid Brakke, Harvard Theological Review 87(4) · 1994
- The use and origin of the (Old and) New Testament as Christianity’s canonAndries G. van Aarde, HTS Teologiese Studies 68(1), open access · 2012
Councils ratified a consensus rather than creating one
Evidence. Established by measurement, documents, manuscripts, archaeology or other method that can be checked, and not seriously disputed.
Regional councils in North Africa confirmed the same twenty-seven books, at Hippo in 393 and Carthage four years later. 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.” 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.
The books that took longest to settle were the ones at the margins. 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”. The long argument was about those. Gospels under other names were set aside with less of one: Eusebius dismisses those of Peter, Thomas and Matthias as the fictions of heretics, and a bishop of Antioch who had let one church read the Gospel of Peter withdrew the permission once he had read it himself.
7 sources for this passage. Show them.
- The Code of Canons of the African Church, canon 24: the canonical ScripturesNicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, New Advent · 419
- Church History, Book III: the accepted, disputed and rejected writingsEusebius of Caesarea, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, New Advent · 325
- Church History, Book VI, chapter 12: Serapion and the Gospel of PeterEusebius of Caesarea, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, New Advent
- First Apology, chapters 66 and 67: the Sunday readingJustin Martyr, Ante-Nicene Fathers volume 1, New Advent
- Prolegomena to the Church History of Eusebius: Date of its CompositionArthur Cushman McGiffert, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers series II volume 1, Christian Classics Ethereal Library · 1890
- The use and origin of the (Old and) New Testament as Christianity’s canonAndries G. van Aarde, HTS Teologiese Studies 68(1), open access · 2012
- Canon of the New TestamentGeorge Reid, The Catholic Encyclopedia vol. 3 (1908), New Advent · 1908
Christian Bibles still do not contain the same books
Traditions differ. A point on which Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant traditions teach differently, described without picking between them.
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. All three sides say so, in their own words and in opposite directions. The Council of Trent listed Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, Baruch and two books of Maccabees among the sacred books in 1546. The Westminster Confession says the books “commonly called Apocrypha, not being of divine inspiration, are no part of the canon of the Scripture”. 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”. 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. It was sharpened at the Reformation, and has never been resolved.
The New Testament differs at the edges too. The Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church counts thirty-five books in its New Testament and eighty-one in its Bible, and the Church of the East has traditionally read a New Testament without 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, Jude and Revelation.
A Bible is therefore always a Bible according to some tradition. That is a fact about the book on the shelf, not a criticism of it.
9 sources for this passage. Show them.
- The Code of Canons of the African Church, canon 24: the canonical ScripturesNicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, New Advent · 419
- The Westminster Confession of Faith, chapter 1Orthodox Presbyterian Church · 1647
- The Confession of Dositheus, Synod of Jerusalem, question 3Christian Resource Institute · 1672
- Council of Trent, fourth session: decree concerning the canonical ScripturesPapal Encyclicals Online · 1546
- The Thirty-nine Articles of Religion, Article VIChurch of England
- Letter 39, for 367: the Festal Letter listing the canonical booksAthanasius of Alexandria, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, New Advent · 367
- The Bible: the canon of the Ethiopic BibleEthiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
- Canon of the New TestamentGeorge Reid, The Catholic Encyclopedia vol. 3 (1908), New Advent · 1908
- The use and origin of the (Old and) New Testament as Christianity’s canonAndries G. van Aarde, HTS Teologiese Studies 68(1), open access · 2012
Why these books
Uncertain. Meaningful scientific, historical or philosophical disagreement remains.
Meaningful scientific, historical or philosophical disagreement remains.
What made a book acceptable
Scholarship. A reading or reconstruction argued among the people who work on it, where the evidence allows more than one conclusion.
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. 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.
Some of it ran the other way round. 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.
5 sources for this passage. Show them.
- Canon Formation and Social Conflict in Fourth-Century Egypt: Athanasius of Alexandria’s Thirty-Ninth Festal LetterDavid Brakke, Harvard Theological Review 87(4) · 1994
- The ongoing Canon debate (review of McDonald and Sanders, The Canon Debate)Flip Schutte, HTS Teologiese Studies 60(4), open access · 2004
- Church History, Book III: the accepted, disputed and rejected writingsEusebius of Caesarea, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, New Advent · 325
- Letter 39, for 367: the Festal Letter listing the canonical booksAthanasius of Alexandria, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, New Advent · 367
- The Code of Canons of the African Church, canon 24: the canonical ScripturesNicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, New Advent · 419
What did not survive the sorting
Unknown. Humanity does not currently have a satisfactory answer.
Humanity does not currently have a satisfactory answer.
What was lost in the sorting
Open. A question no research, historical or scientific or theological, has resolved to general agreement.
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. What was circulating in the second century that we have no copy of, and no mention of, cannot be counted.
3 sources for this passage. Show them.
- Texts about Jesus, in The Oxford Handbook of Early Christian ApocryphaJörg Frey, Oxford University Press · 2016
- Gnosticism, in the Internet Encyclopedia of PhilosophyEdward Moore, Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
- The Formation of the New Testament Canon and Early Christian Apocrypha, in The Oxford Handbook of Early Christian ApocryphaJens Schröter, Oxford University Press · 2016
How the process is understood
Possible. A hypothesis or interpretation worth examining, but not an established fact.
A hypothesis or interpretation worth examining, but not an established fact.
What Christians understand the process to have been
Belief. A claim of faith about God, salvation, revelation or the resurrection. Held by Christians as true; not the kind of claim historical method is able to settle either way.
Three churches describe it in their own documents. 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." The Synod of Jerusalem of 1672 says the Church "has delivered to us as genuine the Sacred Gospels and the other Books of Scripture". The Westminster Confession says the authority of Scripture "dependeth not upon the testimony of any man, or church; but wholly upon God". Each is a claim about what was happening through the history rather than an alternative account of it.
4 sources for this passage. Show them.
- Catechism of the Catholic Church, 120: the canon of ScriptureHoly See
- Council of Trent, fourth session: decree concerning the canonical ScripturesPapal Encyclicals Online · 1546
- The Westminster Confession of Faith, chapter 1Orthodox Presbyterian Church · 1647
- The Confession of Dositheus, Synod of Jerusalem, question 3Christian Resource Institute · 1672
The evidence
Primary research, scientific institutions and archives. Links open at the publisher.
- Letter 39, for 367: the Festal Letter listing the canonical booksAthanasius of Alexandria, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, New Advent · 367
- The Code of Canons of the African Church, canon 24: the canonical ScripturesNicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, New Advent · 419
- Church History, Book III: the accepted, disputed and rejected writingsEusebius of Caesarea, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, New Advent · 325
- The Westminster Confession of Faith, chapter 1Orthodox Presbyterian Church · 1647
- The Confession of Dositheus, Synod of Jerusalem, question 3Christian Resource Institute · 1672
- Canon Formation and Social Conflict in Fourth-Century Egypt: Athanasius of Alexandria’s Thirty-Ninth Festal LetterDavid Brakke, Harvard Theological Review 87(4) · 1994
- The use and origin of the (Old and) New Testament as Christianity’s canonAndries G. van Aarde, HTS Teologiese Studies 68(1), open access · 2012
- The ongoing Canon debate (review of McDonald and Sanders, The Canon Debate)Flip Schutte, HTS Teologiese Studies 60(4), open access · 2004
- The Formation of the New Testament Canon and Early Christian Apocrypha, in The Oxford Handbook of Early Christian ApocryphaJens Schröter, Oxford University Press · 2016
- Texts about Jesus, in The Oxford Handbook of Early Christian ApocryphaJörg Frey, Oxford University Press · 2016
- Gnosticism, in the Internet Encyclopedia of PhilosophyEdward Moore, Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
- Church History, Book VI, chapter 12: Serapion and the Gospel of PeterEusebius of Caesarea, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, New Advent
- First Apology, chapters 66 and 67: the Sunday readingJustin Martyr, Ante-Nicene Fathers volume 1, New Advent
- Prolegomena to the Church History of Eusebius: Date of its CompositionArthur Cushman McGiffert, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers series II volume 1, Christian Classics Ethereal Library · 1890
- Council of Trent, fourth session: decree concerning the canonical ScripturesPapal Encyclicals Online · 1546
- The Thirty-nine Articles of Religion, Article VIChurch of England
- Catechism of the Catholic Church, 120: the canon of ScriptureHoly See
- The Bible: the canon of the Ethiopic BibleEthiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church
- Canon of the New TestamentGeorge Reid, The Catholic Encyclopedia vol. 3 (1908), New Advent · 1908
Where the book came from
Four Gospels that never name their writers, a canon no single council chose, and a text you can check against a fourth-century page.
03 of 08This question is stop 3 of 8 on Where the book came from, a route through the Ocean of Faith.Where this question leads
- Ocean of FaithHow close is today’s Bible to its earliest copies?Shared ground: bible, christianity and manuscripts.Shallowsdepth, meaning: Interesting questions with substantial evidence and real uncertainty remaining.Read
- Ocean of FaithWho wrote the Gospels?Shared ground: christianity.Deepdepth, meaning: Major unanswered questions.Read
- Ocean of FaithWhat did the ancient world write about Jesus?Shared ground: christianity.Deepdepth, meaning: Major unanswered questions.Read
- Ocean of TimeHow much of human history has been lost?Shared ground: manuscripts.Deepdepth, meaning: Major unanswered questions.Read