What criteria did the 200 or so books presented for inclusion in the Bible?

Question

have to meet to be deemed "Inspired by God"..?

DeebariT - If they were all the inspired word of God then why weren't they all included in the Bible. Have you read the Gospel of Thomas? It paints a very different picture of Jesus to that in the Bible. Were the people who put the Bible together only picking those books that fit their agendas or fell within their comfort zone?

Dark Angel - Was it only 80? My mistake. Question still stands though....

Answer 1

First and foremost they had to be true and represent traditions handed down from the fathers, what St. Paul calls, "το παραδωσισ του πατρου". They had to be well known and accepted by all the Church. For the Hebrew Bible (the version known by its Hebrew acronym as the Tanakh), the rabbis at the Council of Jamnia in 90 C.E. decided on those books which were extant in Hebrew (or in the case of Daniel and Ezekiel, Aramaic), and excluded those of the Septuagint popular among Christians. Most Councils acted against books held to be heretical, especially gnostic works which promised some "secret" knowledge contravening ethical practice and morality. Most of the Eastern Church does not accept the Revelation of John as canonical. Martin Luther held it and James and Jude suspect. The Apocrypha (All of which is in the King James authorized version of 1611, making a Bible with more than 66 books) predates Christianity (Except 3rd and 4th Esdras) and was part of the Septuagint (so-called for the 70 rabbis who did the translating) translated for Ptolemy's Library at Alexandria, it was the Bible used throughout the Hellenic world and by most of the Apostles. Jerome's Vulgate accorded these books a secondary status, saying they were to be read only for instruction in manners and morals not to establish doctrine. He based this dictum on the Hebrew Bible. The Vulgate and the Greek scriptures reintroduced to Western Europe in the Renaissance were what Erasmus used for the Textus Receptus the reformers used in their translations.
For Christians an historical cut off point was the last writings of the apostles, Peter, John, James, and Jude. Two Letters of Leo, Clement, The Shepherd of Hermas, and the Didache (although considered) were not included. The Gospel of Thomas, and others purporting to be by Peter and Mary Magdalene, were not even considered because they contained material that was suspect, being magical in nature. A longer version of the Gospel of Mark was known to have existed, and is in neither of the two extensions found in our Bibles today. Morton Smith published one found in the library of Mt. Athos as "The Secret Gospel of Mark".


I did some of my post graduate study with the Dead Sea Scrolls and can tell you why this material was not included. First it was unknown to most of the Church and anathema to orthodox Judaism. It was from a community whose very existence was heresy, exclusiveness. They consciously "cut themselves off", believing they were to be the only ones saved in the end times. The scrolls do contain material that otherwise might be considered canonical, but the nature of the community itself made even these writings suspect.

Answer 2

To the best of my understanding one of the criteria was whether the "authorship" could be authenticated or not -- either that or it was used as an excuse to exclude a book.

And, I understand that one of the other important criteria was that the "book" had to support the idea of ONE God.

Why? Because of the multi-god beliefs of the "pagans" who made up the majority of the worlds population and believers.

Now, if you go back and read through the books that were excluded such as The Apocrypha you will discover that the majority of these books were about Angels who spoke and interacted with humans -- versus any "God" -- as this alluded to the fact that there are more involved than just one single entity.

However, they were not able to erase all of the references and many are still there which point to the fact that there are MANY who are, while not God, represent God as intermediaries between God and Man through the Oneness Principle.

As far as whether "a thing" (regardless of whether it is a book, a man, or doctrine) is inspired of God or not -- there IS only ONE infallible criteria -- and that is the criteria and ultimate and infallible authority of your OWN soul!!!

Learn to recognize, listen to and follow this (your soul), and you will NEVER be deceived by anyone or anything again.

Regards,

Answer 3

The Catholic Church and later the early Protestant Churches made the selection after prayer for guidance from God. The Catholic version of the Bible has more books (the Apocripha) than the Protestant. Reading about the books rejected or placed in the Apocripha is a fascinating reflection on the growth and history of the church. Of course, you also get exposed to data on who actually wrote what parts of the Gospels and other books.

Answer 4

Most were considered to be " inspired by God".
I guess this is something akin to Superman comic books being inspired by Superman
Common sense should tell us that people who try to judge material, written more than a thousand years earlier, are kidding themselves about their own qualifications.
It's not like judging an oil painting, you can't judge the veracity of what's being said or the motivation for saying it, when all you have is mostly hearsay evidence.

Answer 5

The canonization was not that many books to look at. They only had 80. 66 of them are in the Bible today.

Answer 6

When selecting the books, I believe they chose the books that were already widely accepted by the people, as the books most often read and referred to.

Also, I don't think they wanted stories in the bible that were too far-fetched, or way off the standardized version, that people would not be able to believe it.

Answer 7

Revelation. I've always assumed it was written by a Gnostic and by the time the NT was sorted out (at the Council of Nicea) Gnosticism was pretty much despised by most of the Christian hierarchy.

Answer 8

They are not just books. They are inspired word of God. They chronlogical arrangement may not be okay, but the facts stand out in order. Look at the astounding ministries in these book. Only God can fathom the wisdom they contain.

Answer 9

The only criteria was for the books to be COMPLETELY unverifiable. No evidence to support the claims could ever be unerthed about a particular book's subject, otherwise the whole thing would fall apart.

Answer 10

That's an interesting question. I don't usually read the Bible. I read the TaNaKh most of the time, since there is too much confusion between it and the Bible.