What was the process used to canonized the Bible?

Question

Who were the people responsible for selecting the books included in the Bible and what was the criteria used in the process?

Answer 1

A Catholic Councel got together and decided the canon of the Bible in response to heretics who made false claims about truth. The Septuagint was used as the Old Testament and the New Testament was chosen by picking the books that most followed the teachings of the Apostles that had been handed down (Sacred Tradition) and also the books that had been most popular with Christians.

Answer 2

The term "canon" is used to describe the books that are divinely inspired and therefore belong in the Bible. The difficult aspect of determining the Biblical canon is that the Bible does not give us a list of the books that belong in the Bible. Determining the canon was a process, first by Jewish rabbis and scholars, and then later by early Christians. Ultimately, it was God who decided what books belonged in the Biblical canon. A book of Scripture belonged in the canon from the moment God inspired its writing. It was simply a matter of God convincing His human followers which books should be included in the Bible.

Compared to the New Testament, there was very little controversy over the canon of the Old Testament. Hebrew believers recognized God’s messengers, and accepted their writings as inspired of God. There was undeniably some debate in regards to the Old Testament canon. However, by 250 A.D. there was nearly universal agreement on the canon of Hebrew Scripture. The only issue that remained was the Apocrypha…with some debate and discussion continuing today. The vast majority of Hebrew scholars considered the Apocrypha to be good historical and religious documents, but not on the same level as the Hebrew Scriptures.

For the New Testament, the process of the recognition and collection began in the first centuries of the Christian church. Very early on, some of the New Testament books were being recognized. Paul considered Luke’s writings to be as authoritative as the Old Testament (1 Timothy 5:18; see also Deuteronomy 25:4 and Luke 10:7). Peter recognized Paul’s writings as Scripture (2 Peter 3:15-16). Some of the books of the New Testament were being circulated among the churches (Colossians 4:16; 1 Thessalonians 5:27). Clement of Rome mentioned at least eight New Testament books (A.D. 95). Ignatius of Antioch acknowledged about seven books (A.D. 115). Polycarp, a disciple of John the Apostle, acknowledged 15 books (A.D. 108). Later, Irenaeus mentioned 21 books (A.D. 185). Hippolytus recognized 22 books (A.D. 170-235). The New Testament books receiving the most controversy were Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, 2 John, and 3 John. The first “canon” was the Muratorian Canon, which was compiled in (A.D. 170). The Muratorian Canon included all of the New Testament books except Hebrews, James, and 3 John. In A.D. 363, the Council of Laodicea stated that only the Old Testament (along with the Apocrypha) and the 27 books of the New Testament were to be read in the churches. The Council of Hippo (A.D. 393) and the Council of Carthage (A.D. 397) also affirmed the same 27 books as authoritative.

The councils followed something similar to the following principles to determine whether a New Testament book was truly inspired by the Holy Spirit: 1) Was the author an apostle or have a close connection with an apostle? 2) Is the book being accepted by the Body of Christ at large? 3) Did the book contain consistency of doctrine and orthodox teaching? 4) Did the book bear evidence of high moral and spiritual values that would reflect a work of the Holy Spirit? Again, it is crucial to remember that the church did not determine the canon. No early church council decided on the canon. It was God, and God alone, who determined which books belonged in the Bible. It was simply a matter of God convincing His followers of what He had already decided upon. The human process of collecting the books of the Bible was flawed, but God, in His sovereignty, despite our ignorance and stubbornness, brought the early church to the recognition of the books He had inspired.

Answer 3

To learn how the books of the bible came to be assembled as such see: http://gbgm-umc.org/umw/bible/canons.stm

Catholic and Episcopal bibles have the same number of canonical books. The Catholic and Episcopal bible also includes some non-canonical books, grouped as the Apocrypha.

Many versions of the bible existed before the King James and the advent of mass printing.
See: http://www.greatsite.com/timeline-english-bible-history/

For an analysis of the various translations of the bible see:
http://faith.propadeutic.com/questions.html

For accurate translations of the bible at the literal level use the NASB or ESV translations.

If you run across what you think is a biblical contradiction, please study the two sites' content below for a comprehensive list of so-called biblical contradictions.

http://kingdavid8.com/Contradictions/Home.html
http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/bible.htm

Accuracy of bible:
http://www.carm.org/questions/trustbible.htm
http://www.carm.org/demo2/bible/reliable.htm

Answer 4

Comma Johanneum - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaIn 1502, Cardinal Cisneros sponsored a polyglot edition of the Bible, ... the delegates decided to canonize "the entire books with all their parts, ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comma_Johanneum - 58k - Cached - Similar pages

User:Mkmcconn/Creationist - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia... perspective and to canonize as the true and orthodox "Science", ... The myth that the Bible and Protestant theology produced western science is as ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mkmcconn/Creationist - 39k - Cached - Similar pages

User:TheLocalChurch - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia... it in Talk:Local churches, does not canonize or demonize the movement. ... Moody Press, Moody Bible Institute, and George Sweeting: As a result of a ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:TheLocalChurch - 59k - Cached - Similar pages

Blood libel against Jews - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaand mainstream Bible scholars interpret this as a reference to Jewish ... Simon was regarded as a saint, and was canonized by Pope Sixtus V in 1588. ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_libel_against_Jews - 76k - Cached - Similar pages

Talk:List of saints - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaMost of them are mentioned in the Bible, all of them are believed to have done ... The primary Christian denominations that recognize or canonize saints are ...
en.wikipedia.org/?title=Talk:List_of_saints -

Answer 5

It was all worked out during a meeting called The Council of Nicaea in 325AD, and it was the Pagan emperor Constantine (Eastern Roman Empire) who had final say. Funny that a pagan should dictate what christians put their faith in, isn't it?

Answer 6

Well, first, you get a cannon, and some gunpowder...

nah. too easy.

Answer 7

--Here is a breakdown that has scriptural references as to who was involved:

*** si pp. 300-301 pars. 10-12 Study Number 4—The Bible and Its Canon ***

10 Establishing the Hebrew Canon. Jewish tradition credits Ezra with beginning the compiling and cataloging of the canon of the Hebrew Scriptures, and it says that this was completed by Nehemiah. Ezra was certainly well equipped for such a work, being one of the inspired Bible writers himself as well as a priest, scholar, and official copyist of sacred writings. (Ezra 7:1-11) There is no reason to doubt the traditional view that the canon of the Hebrew Scriptures was fixed by the end of the fifth century B.C.E.

11 We today list 39 books of the Hebrew Scriptures; the traditional Jewish canon, while including these same books, counts them as 24. Some authorities, by putting Ruth with Judges and Lamentations with Jeremiah, counted the number of books as 22, though still holding to exactly the same canonical writings. This made the number of inspired books equal the number of letters in the Hebrew alphabet. The following is the list of the 24 books according to the traditional Jewish canon:

The Law (The Pentateuch)

1. Genesis
2. Exodus
3. Leviticus
4. Numbers
5. Deuteronomy
The Prophets
6. Joshua
7. Judges
8. Samuel (First and Second together as one book)
9. Kings (First and Second together as one Book)
10. Isaiah
11. Jeremiah
12. Ezekiel
13. The Twelve Prophets (Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, as one book)

The Writings (Hagiographa)
14. Psalms
15. Proverbs
16. Job
17. The Song of Solomon
18. Ruth
19. Lamentations
20. Ecclesiastes
21. Esther
22. Daniel
23. Ezra (Nehemiah was included with Ezra)
24. Chronicles (First and Second together as one book)

12 This was the catalog, or canon, that was accepted as inspired Scripture by Christ Jesus and the early Christian congregation. It was only from these writings that the inspired writers of the Christian Greek Scriptures quoted, and by introducing such quotations with expressions like “as it is written,” they confirmed these as being the Word of God. (Rom. 15:9) Jesus, in speaking of the complete inspired Scriptures written up till the time of his ministry, referred to the things recorded in “the law of Moses and in the Prophets and Psalms.” (Luke 24:44) Here “Psalms,” as the first book of the Hagiographa, is used to refer to this whole section. The last historical book to be included in the Hebrew canon was that of Nehemiah. That this was under the direction of God’s spirit is seen in that this book alone provides the starting point for reckoning Daniel’s outstanding prophecy that “from the going forth of the word to restore and to rebuild Jerusalem” until the coming of the Messiah there would be a period of 69 prophetic weeks. (Dan. 9:25; Neh. 2:1-8; 6:15) The book of Nehemiah also provides the historical background for the last of the prophetic books, Malachi. That Malachi belongs in the canon of the inspired Scriptures cannot be doubted, since even Jesus, the Son of God, quoted it a number of times. (Matt. 11:10, 14) While similar quotations are made from the majority of the books of the Hebrew canon, all of which were written prior to Nehemiah and Malachi, the writers of the Christian Greek Scriptures make no quotations from any so-called inspired writings written after the time of Nehemiah and Malachi down to the time of Christ. This confirms the traditional view of the Jews, and also the belief of the Christian congregation of the first century C.E., that the Hebrew Scripture canon ended with the writings of Nehemiah and Malachi."

THE CHRISTIAN GREEK SCRIPTURES

17 The Roman Catholic Church CLAIMS(my caps) responsibility for the decision as to which books should be included in the Bible canon, and reference is made to the Council of Carthage (397 C.E.), where a catalog of books was formulated. THE OPPOSITE IS TRUE however, because the canon, including the list of books making up the Christian Greek Scriptures, WAS ALREADY SETTLED (my caps) by then, that is, not by the decree of any council, but by the direction of God’s holy spirit—the same spirit that inspired the writing of those books in the first place. The testimony of later noninspired catalogers is valuable only as an acknowledgment of the Bible canon, which God’s spirit had authorized.

18 The Evidence of Early Catalogs. A glance at the accompanying chart reveals that a number of fourth-century catalogs of the Christian Scriptures, dated prior to the above-mentioned council, agree exactly with our present canon, and some others omit only Revelation. Before the end of the second century, there is universal acceptance of the four Gospels, Acts, and 12 of the apostle Paul’s letters. Only a few of the smaller writings were doubted in certain areas. Likely this was so because such writings were limited in their initial circulation for one reason or another and thus took longer to become accepted as canonical.

19 One of the most interesting early catalogs is the fragment discovered by L. A. Muratori in the Ambrosian Library, Milan, Italy, and published by him in 1740. Though the beginning is missing, its reference to Luke as the third Gospel indicates that it first mentioned Matthew and Mark. The Muratorian Fragment, which is in Latin, dates to the latter part of the second century C.E. It is a most interesting document, as the following partial translation shows: “The third book of the Gospel is that according to Luke. Luke, the well-known physician, wrote it in his own name . . . The fourth book of the Gospel is that of John, one of the disciples. . . . And so to the faith of believers there is no discord, even although different selections are given from the facts in the individual books of the Gospels, because in all [of them] under the one guiding Spirit all the things relative to his nativity, passion, resurrection, conversation with his disciples, and his twofold advent, the first in the humiliation arising from contempt, which took place, and the second in the glory of kingly power, which is yet to come, have been declared. What marvel is it, then, if John adduces so consistently in his epistles these several things, saying in person: ‘what we have seen with our eyes, and heard with our ears, and our hands have handled, those things we have written.’ For thus he professes to be not only an eyewitness but also a hearer and narrator of all the wonderful things of the Lord, in their order. Moreover, the acts of all the apostles are written in one book. Luke [so] comprised them for the most excellent Theophilus . . . Now the epistles of Paul, what they are, whence or for what reason they were sent, they themselves make clear to him who will understand. First of all he wrote at length to the Corinthians to prohibit the schism of heresy, then to the Galatians [against] circumcision, and to the Romans on the order of the Scriptures, intimating also that Christ is the chief matter in them—each of which it is necessary for us to discuss, seeing that the blessed Apostle Paul himself, following the example of his predecessor John, writes to no more than seven churches by name in the following order: to the Corinthians (first), to the Ephesians (second), to the Philippians (third), to the Colossians (fourth), to the Galatians (fifth), to the Thessalonians (sixth), to the Romans (seventh). But though he writes twice for the sake of correction to the Corinthians and the Thessalonians, that there is one church diffused throughout the whole earth is shown [?i.e., by this sevenfold writing]; and John also in the Apocalypse, though he writes to seven churches, yet speaks to all. But [he wrote] out of affection and love one to Philemon, and one to Titus, and two to Timothy; [and these] are held sacred in the honorable esteem of the Church. . . . Further, an epistle of Jude and two bearing the name of John are counted . . . We receive the apocalypses of John and Peter only, which [latter] some of us do not wish to be read in church.”—The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, 1956, Vol. VIII, page 56.

20 It is noted that toward the end of the Muratorian Fragment, mention is made of just two epistles of John. However, on this point the above-mentioned encyclopedia, page 55, notes that these two epistles of John “can only be the second and third, whose writer calls himself merely ‘the elder.’ Having already treated the first, though only incidentally, in connection with the Fourth Gospel, and there declared his unquestioning belief in its Johannine origin, the author felt able here to confine himself to the two smaller letters.” As to the apparent absence of any mention of Peter’s first epistle, this source continues: “The most probable hypothesis is that of the loss of a few words, perhaps a line, in which I Peter and the Apocalypse of John were named as received.” Therefore, from the standpoint of the Muratorian Fragment, this encyclopedia, on page 56, concludes: “The New Testament is regarded as definitely made up of the four Gospels, the Acts, thirteen epistles of Paul, the Apocalypse of John, probably three epistles of his, Jude, and probably I Peter, while the opposition to another of Peter’s writings was not yet silenced.”

21 Origen, about the year 230 C.E., accepted among the inspired Scriptures the books of Hebrews and James, both missing from the Muratorian Fragment. While he indicates that some doubted their canonical quality, this also shows that by this time, the canonicity of most of the Greek Scriptures was accepted, only a few doubting some of the less well-known epistles. Later, Athanasius, Jerome, and Augustine acknowledged the conclusions of earlier lists by defining as the canon the same 27 books that we now have.

22 The majority of the catalogs in the chart are specific lists showing which books were accepted as canonical. Those of Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, and Origen are completed from the quotations they made, which reveal how they regarded the writings referred to. These are further supplemented from the records of the early historian Eusebius. However, the fact that these writers do not mention certain canonical writings does not argue against their canonicity. It is just that they did not happen to refer to them in their writings either by choice or because of the subjects under discussion. But why do we not find exact lists earlier than the Muratorian Fragment?

23 It was not until critics like Marcion came along in the middle of the second century C.E. that an issue arose as to which books Christians should accept. Marcion constructed his own canon to suit his doctrines, taking only certain of the apostle Paul’s letters and an expurgated form of the Gospel of Luke. This, together with the mass of apocryphal literature by then spreading throughout the world, was what led to statements by catalogers as to which books they accepted as canonical.

24 APOCRYPHAL WRITINGS-- Internal evidence confirms the clear division that was made between the inspired Christian writings and works that were spurious or uninspired. The Apocryphal writings are much inferior and often fanciful and childish. They are frequently inaccurate. Note the following statements by scholars on these noncanonical books:

“There is no question of any one’s having excluded them from the New Testament: they have done that for themselves.”—M. R. James, The Apocryphal New Testament, pages xi, xii.

“We have only to compare our New Testament books as a whole with other literature of the kind to realize how wide is the gulf which separates them from it. The uncanonical gospels, it is often said, are in reality the best evidence for the canonical.”—G. Milligan, The New Testament Documents, page 228.

“It cannot be said of a single writing preserved to us from the early period of the Church outside the New Testament that it could properly be added to-day to the Canon.”—K. Aland, The Problem of the New Testament Canon, page 24.