Is it true that Catholic leaders assmbled all the writings and letters that we now call the Bible?

Question

Please cite a source if you want your answer to have any credibility.

Answer 1

short answer. YES
Source
There are historical record of the ecumenical councils where the bishops assembled in these councils agreed on what books to include as part of the new testament canon.

You can read the documents of these same councils, they are a matter of public domain and historical fact.

Council of Nicea, Constantinople I and II, Ephesus, etc. In sum the first seven ecumenical councils before the east west schism attest to that,

Now, in response to the reformation, the council of Trent in the 1500s defined the canon, closing it, because Luther on his version of the Bible removed some books. This is when the canon was officialized finally. God bless.
One correction: the council of Nicea didn't define cannon, Father K is right.
Now the scripture is God's inspired to all men. ALL MEN

Answer 2

Yes...........
Which books of the Old Testament did the Apostles accept as Scripture? Did they accept the 46 books as in the Catholic Douay-Rheims Bible or the 39 books as in the King James version? The Septuagint was accepted among the Hellenistic sect of Judaism (of which St. Paul was a member) and this canon did indeed include the same books as the present-day Catholic Bible.

During the Reformation, did the Protestants "re-evaluate" all the deutero-canonical and apocryphal Christian writings such as the Gospel of St. James, the Acts of St. Paul, the Apocalypse of St. Peter, the Gospel of St. Mary Magdalene, the Gospel of St. Thomas and the myriad of other writings from the first and second centuries of the Christianity? No. The Protestants accepted the New Testament as defined by the Catholic Church in the late 4th century. Why accept the Canon as defined and preserved by the Catholic Church yet not accept the other teachings of this same Church?

Answer 3

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.

Recommended Resource: The Canon of Scripture by F.F. Bruce.

Answer 4

The Holy Catholic Church defined the canon of the bible against the Protestants at the ecumenical council of Trent. She didn't have to do it earlier because it was not disputed.
A synod in the 3d century did come up with a list of the canonical books of the New Testament. And it was followed in the western Church until the Protestants disputed it.
The reason a lot of so called "gospels" were excluded from the canon was that they were not Christian but Gnostic writings.

Answer 5

Sort of. The councils of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church (there was only one - no "denominations" prior to the Great Schism of 1054 A.D.) did "canonize" (make official) the books of the New Testament. The list was culled-down from a great number of texts that were in wide circulation for the first 2-300 years of the Church.

Answer 6

While Protestants are in agreement with the Church as to the works of the New Testament (27 works), most Protestants do not accept seven works of the Old Testament which have been judged canonical by the Church. These works at issue are called the deutero-canonical works, or the Apocrypha, as Protestants refer to them.
Why the difference? The canon (list of biblical books) was settled in the 5th century AD, at the time when St. Jerome translated the works of the OT and NT into the common language of the time, Latin. His translation, the Vulgate, functioned as the official text of the Church for well over a thousand years. But at the time of the Reformation, Protestant leaders rejected or diminished the value of the seven works of the OT which had been debated about in the early centuries of the Church (see below for explanation of this debate). Their reason for rejecting these works, after so long a history of use by the Church, was principally related to a clash of theology, especially over the matter of prayers for the dead. In short, many Protestant leaders did not like the theology of some of these works of the OT, and so they dismissed them from the canon. Some Protestant Bibles will not include these works at all, while others will put them in a special section, for those who wish to reference them. It is a loss of the fullness of divine revelation and, among other things, has reduced the numbers of prayers offered for the dead.

In attempting to discern what works were inspired and should be included in the OT the Church looked to Judaism. Within Judaism, however, there were two canons subscribed to by different Jewish groups. One was a shorter canon which did not include the seven works at issue. This canon was settled upon late in the 1st century AD by the more conservative element of Judaism located in Palestine, in the Council of Jamnia. One criterion for this group was that only works appearing in the ancient language of Hebrew (with some Aramaic) could be considered as inspired. This effectively eliminated not only the deutero-canonical works which were later works and appeared in Greek manuscripts and also precluded any Christian writings from gaining recognition within conservative Judaism. On the other hand, many of the Jews in Diaspora (that is, away from Palestine) were quite comfortable with the Greek language, spoken and written. They were accustomed to the Scriptures written in Greek, as witnessed by the Septuagint and so this element of Judaism was accepting of the seven works at issue, which were in the Septuagint and in use in pre-Christian times. The Church debated as to what constituted the OT and some favored the short canon and others the long. The issue needed to be settled, since St. Jerome was about to translate the Scriptures in to the common language of the time, Latin. St. Jerome argued for the shorter canon, perhaps influenced by his studies of biblical languages under conservative Jewish rabbis and scholars. St. Augustine, on the other hand, argued for the longer canon based upon the fact that it was evident that God had inspired these works by the use the Church made of them. This position won out, demonstrating that the life of the Church –Tradition- is a manner in which God reveals. The irony is that whereas St. Jerome personally favored the short canon, the translation he rendered included the seven works, showing that the Church is larger than any single individual.

Answer 7

Yes, my source, well just google, or wikidepia the Nicean council.

To Father K, so are you trying to tell me that the questions of the divinity of Jesus, the holy trinity, and the virgin birth were not voted on at the Nicean council? And are you saying that this has nothing to do with existing dogma.

The First Council of Nicaea, held in Nicea in Bithynia (in present-day Turkey), convoked by the Roman Emperor Constantine I in 325, was the first ecumenical[1] conference of bishops of the Catholic Church, and most significantly resulted in the first uniform Christian doctrine, called the Nicene Creed. With the creation of the creed, a precedent was established for subsequent 'general (ecumenical) councils of Bishops' (Synods) to create statements of belief and canons of doctrinal orthodoxy— the intent being to define unity of beliefs for the whole of Christendom.

The purpose of the council was to resolve disagreements in the Church of Alexandria over the nature of Jesus in relationship to the Father; in particular, whether Jesus was of the same substance as God the Father or merely of similar substance. St. Alexander of Alexandria and Athanasius took the first position; the popular presbyter Arius, from whom the term Arian controversy comes, took the second. The council decided against the Arians overwhelmingly (of the estimated 250-318 attendees, all but 2 voted against Arius). Another result of the council was an agreement on the date of the Christian Passover (Pascha in Greek; Easter in modern English), the most important feast of the ecclesiastical calendar. The council decided in favour of celebrating the resurrection on the first Sunday after the first full moon following the vernal equinox, independently of the Bible's Hebrew Calendar (see also Quartodecimanism), and authorized the Bishop of Alexandria (presumably using the Alexandrian calendar) to announce annually the exact date to his fellow bishops.

The Council of Nicaea was historically significant because it was the first effort to attain consensus in the church through an assembly representing all of Christendom.[2] "It was the first occasion for the development of technical Christology."[2] Further, "Constantine in convoking and presiding over the council signaled a measure of imperial control over the church."[2] With the creation of the Nicene Creed, a precedent was established for subsequent general councils to create a statement of belief and canons which were intended to become guidelines for doctrinal orthodoxy and a source of unity for the whole of Christendom — a momentous event in the history of the Church and subsequent history of Europe.

Answer 8

No, it was Emperor Constantine in the council of Nicea in 325 ad. They read hundreds of books and gospels, narrowed it down to 80 and then voted on the few that were put in the bible. Then it was destroyed in 400 ad and then Emperor Justinian put it back together in 525 ad. Bishop Thomas translated it into Latin in 872 ad for the new religion he started, Roman Cathoicism, and then King James re-wote it for the english people.

Answer 9

Yes in 300 to 325 AD.

www.Catholic.com

Peace!