How did church decide which books to put in the Bible? what about book of Judas, or Book of Mary etc?

Question

who decided which book to pick? are all these books from God ?

Answer 1

This link should give you all the information on "Who" decided what should be canonized, "What" was considered, and "Why" they believe it was chosen.
Many of the books of the Bible were available at the time the Bible was collected. Some of the newer things that have come to light since that time have been used to verify the things we already have. Many of the writings have been ruled out for conflicting opinions. The Dead Sea Scrolls did verify the entire book of Isaiah.
The book of Judas is considered the writings of the Gnostic's who were a sect of Jews who believed in the ability of humans to achieve salvation on their own. They didn't believe in the divinity of Jesus, they just thought He was a gifted prophet.
Some of the Council at Nicea did give this thought serous consideration.

Answer 2

This was NOT determined by a vote as some would have you believe.

Before the Council of Nicea there were many "centers" of Christianity and many people who spent their lives studying the parts of the writings about the Christ written in that first century. It was a matter of agreement during the next two centuries which created the canon of the New Testament.

The Council of Nicea only approved it and declared it to be so.

These writings you mention were all written at least a hundred years after the life of Jesus Christ and were never accepted as part of the Bible.

Answer 3

The books of the Hebrew Bible developed over time, starting with the Torah, then the Prophets and finally the other Writings. Rabbis met in council near the end of the 1st Century CE and drew up a final canon (list) of books, determining that anything written after the time of Ezra (c. 350 BCE) was to be rejected. A few books appeared to have faked their way into that time period, but others that appeared in the Septuagint (the first Greek translation) were removed from the Jewish list.

The Christians used the full Septuagint, quoting from it in their writings, but never intending to write new "scriptures" until it became apparent that Jesus wasn't coming back right away. Several of Paul's better letters were copied and shared among churches. As the original apostles were dying, the stories and teachings of Jesus were collected and the gospels were produced to preserve them. More letters were added to the collection, along with some more mystical writings such as the Shepherd of Hermas and Revelation (a Daniel-style symbolic work designed to cheer up persecuted Christians).

Theologians and Bishops started putting together lists of works they considered inspired. Some rejected Revelation as too disturbing and confusing, Hebrews, because the author was unknown, Jude, because it referred to a book that had never been in the Bible. Some wanted the letters of Clement and Barnabas included. The official list was not finalized until the 4th Century, after Christianity had been legalized.

There were many books that had never appeared on any orthodox lists. These were generally of two varieties. One type, such as the Protoevangelium, the Infancy Gospel of Thomas, the Acts of Peter and Paul, added needless pious details to existing stories or recounted meaningless adventures of Jesus and the apostles that added nothing to the message of salvation.

The other type, such as the Gospels of Thomas, Mary Magdalen and Judas, were products of "Gnostic" Christianity, which taught that the god of the Jews was a corrupt, inferior, material god to the true, spiritual God of Jesus and that salvation was not achieved through Jesus' death (which didn't really occur) but through knowledge of secret doctrines that showed the believer how to purify himself of the corrupting influence of "the flesh". The emphasis was on personal transcendence rather than love and service toward neighbor. Church leaders felt this was not the true message of the gospel and so rejected the books.

Once the list was finalized, there were undeniable attempts to purge the "bad" books and obliterate their history. It was a time in which the nature of God and Christ was still hotly debated and theological disputes led to street riots and the overthrow of bishops in large cities.

What about those old books that Christians accepted and Jews rejected? When St. Jerome was asked to write the definitive Latin translation, he discovered that some of the books in the Septuagint weren't available in Hebrew. He didn't want to discard them but he wanted it clear that there was a discrepancy, so he decided to put them in their own section, called "Apocrypha" ("hidden").

There they remained until Martin Luther wrote his German translation in the 16th Century. The books of the Apocrypha contained newer ideas than the older books (such as the efficacy of prayer for the dead) that Luther didn't like. So he rejected them. (He had considered rejecting the letter of James but felt he didn't have sufficient grounds to do so.) The Catholic church continued to regard the books as inspired scripture.

That's about how it lays now. The Greek Orthodox church accepted a few more books than the Catholics, the Coptic church even more. Every sect has substantial reasons for the canons they endorse. As to whether a book is from God, that's what faith determines.

Answer 4

The beliefs weren't "voted on". If you take the time to look, you would see that the beliefs have not deviated from the first. There has been development of doctrine over time, but the council did not elect certain doctrines. They put down as heresy certain doctrines that had crept in since the time of the apostles. The Church did not really "decide" which books to put in. She simply had the authority to recognize the canon.

Answer 5

Not all the books can be from God because they dont agree with eachother on important points. The books of the Bible were chosen by agreeing with the Majority Texts, which means if you have 20 books claiming Jesus died on the cross and 1 book says he didnt, then you exclude that book. Think about it, if you folks dislike the Bible so much because of the alleged contradictions it has now, that are tiny... how much would you like it if the books that spoke that much differently were kept in?

Answer 6

It was probably a lot like our forefathers and how they wrote the constitution of the U.S. There was a committee and those men didn’t always agree, but they compromised. They decided they wanted Jesus to be seen as pure and the son of god and not just a profit, so they picked texts that reflected that.

Answer 7

The early roman catholics picked scripture that supported their particular version of christianity.

This version eventualy won out and became the dominant version above all of the others.

Anything that did not support their version was excluded. In my opinion this includes a lot of scripture that is much truer to the teachings of Jesus than the things that were included in the bible.

Love and blessings Don

Answer 8

Leaders from most every church assembled. With the guidance of the Holy Spirit and the direction of the known scriptures they were able to assembled those that God wish to be preserved as His message to mankind..... Jim

Answer 9

It was the Council of Nicaea. It's a shame that Christians don't see the fact that their beliefs were voted on by some bishops 1700 years ago.

Answer 10

Council of Nicea. I think it was 336 or 338 A.D. How many times a day is his question going to be asked?