How the Books of the New Testament Were Chosen

Home > Magazines > Bible Review > April 1993

How did the Church decide which books to include in the New Testament? When was the decision made? By whom? The surviving evidence unfortunately does not provide answers in the detail we would like, but it does document a number of the developments that eventually produced the New Testament as we know it.

Please join the BAS Library or become an All Access member of BAS to gain full access to this article and so much more.

Join the BAS Library!

Already a library member? Log in here.

Institution user? Log in with your IP address or Username

Footnotes

First Clement, despite its concern with quelling Church disputes and its teaching on the divine origin of Church order and the apostolic succession, is not part of the New Testament, although it was widely cited and often regarded as authoritative in the second century.

See George Howard, “Canon—Choosing the Books of the New Testament,” BR 05:05.

See Helmut Koester and Stephen J. Patterson, “The Gospel of Thomas—Does It Contain Authentic Sayings of Jesus?” BR 06:02.

Some scholars date the Muratorian Canon to the fourth century, at about the same time as Eusebius’ list of canonical books. See below.

The opening lines have not been preserved. The extant Latin text begins in mid-sentence and refers to Luke as the third gospel. Many scholars infer from this that the missing opening lines referred to Matthew and Mark.

Endnotes

Compiled from references in Irenaeus’ writings. See Bruce M. Metzger, The Canon of the New Testament (New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 1987), pp. 153–156.

Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 6.25, 3–14.

Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses [Against Heresies], 3.11.8.

Eusebius, Vita Constantini [Life of Constantine] 4.2. Cited by William R. Farmer, Jesus and the Gospels (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1982), p. 186.