The Canon of the Bible

The Bible is composed of 66 books written by 40-plus authors over a period of 1,500 years. Those different books that were recognized as sacred Scripture did not drop from heaven as a complete, single revelation, but emerged through a complex historical and theological process that continues to invite scrutiny. Christians and skeptics alike raise recurring apologetic questions:

Who decided which books belong in the Bible, and by what criteria? Why are some ancient writings, such as the so‑called “Gnostic gospels,” excluded? Did church councils merely recognize an existing canon or create it? Can we trust that no inspired books were left out or that no merely human books were added? How do differences between Jewish, Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant canons affect claims about biblical authority?

This study will explore the historical development of the Bible's canon and address the central challenges to its reliability and legitimacy.

Outline

1.0 What Is the “Canon”?

2.0 The Old Testament Canon

3.0 The New Testament Canon

4.0 Criteria for Canonicity

5.0 Confessional and Denominational Divergences

6.0 The Closure of the Canon

1.0 What Is the “Canon”?

The word canon comes from the Greek kanŏn (κανών), which itself traces back to the Hebrew qāneh, meaning “reed” or “measuring rod.” Just as a reed was cut to a specific length and used as a physical standard of measurement, the word canon came to represent an abstract rule or standard. In its biblical sense, Origen (early third century A.D.) used the term to refer to Scripture as the “standard” or “rule” of faith, and Athanasius (a century later) employed it to denote the authoritative “list” of writings the Church acknowledged as divinely inspired. By the fourth century A.D., “canon” had expanded to describe the collection of writings regarded as the infallible standard for God’s people. (1)

The Canon of Scripture, then, is the list of writings accepted as the divinely inspired record of God’s self-revelation, with Jesus Christ at its center.

These writings are not authoritative because they are on the list; they are on the list because their authority has been acknowledged. (2) The authority of a text comes before and supports its canonical status; canonicity follows authority and depends on it. This distinction is crucial: the question of canonicity is not “Which books did the Church create as authoritative?” but “Which books did the Church recognize as already possessing divine authority?” (3)

[See Authority of the Bible]

The main question about the canon is ultimately theological rather than historical. Paul states in 2 Timothy 3:16 (ESV):

All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness.

The Greek word theopneustos (“God-breathed”) shows that Scripture’s authority comes not from church decisions but from its divine origin. Peter also confirms this in 2 Peter 1:21 (ESV):

For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

The inspiration of Scripture is the theological foundation for the entire canon. [See Inspiration of the Bible]

2.0 The Old Testament Canon

2.1 The Threefold Division of the Hebrew Scriptures

The Old Testament canon did not form all at once but developed gradually over centuries in connection with Israel's history. The Hebrew Bible is divided into three parts: the Torah (Law), the Nevi’im (Prophets), and the Ketuvim (Writings), collectively called the Tanakh. (4) This three-part structure is mentioned as early as the Prologue to Ecclesiasticus (Ben Sira, around 180 B.C.), which refers to “the Law and the Prophets and the others who followed after,” making it one of the earliest clear references to a three-part Hebrew canon. (5)

This same threefold division appears in Jesus' words in Luke 24:44 (ESV):

“These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.”

The term “Psalms” here acts as a shortcut for the entire Writings section (Ketuvim), of which Psalms was the most prominent book. (6) Jesus’ citation of all three sections confirms that by the first century, the Hebrew tripartite canon was well established and authoritative.

2.2 The Torah and Prophets

The process of canonization started with the Torah (the five books of Moses). According to 2 Kings 22 (ESV), when King Josiah was repairing the Temple in 621 B.C., the High Priest found “the book of the Law” and had it verified by the prophetess Huldah. Scholars widely identify this book with some form of Deuteronomy. During the Babylonian Exile (586–539 B.C.), Deuteronomy was combined with other writings to form the Pentateuch as we know it. (7) After the exile, as described in the book of Ezra, the Torah was returned to Jerusalem and publicly read by Ezra, probably around 458 B.C.

The main principle for Old Testament canonicity was prophetic authorship. A book qualifies as canonical if it was written by a recognized prophet of God. (8) Deuteronomy 18:15–22 (ESV) set the standard: a true prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, and his words come true. This explains why the Prophets section of the Hebrew canon included historical books (such as Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings) written by prophetic figures. The books of the Prophets were considered authoritative at the time they were written, not centuries later at a council. (9) The Writings (Ketuvim), which include Psalms, Proverbs, Job, the Song of Solomon, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, Esther, Daniel, Ezra–Nehemiah, and Chronicles, completed the three-part canon. The Babylonian Talmud (Baba Bathra 14b) lists the order of the Prophets and Writings, showing that these divisions have ancient roots in rabbinic tradition. (10)

2.3 Josephus and the Twenty-Two Books

The clearest first-century witness to a fixed Hebrew canon comes from the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus (A.D. 37–c. 100). In Against Apion (1.8, c. A.D. 94), Josephus writes that the Jews considered only twenty-two books as sacred, including five books of Moses, thirteen prophetic books, and four books of hymns. He also argues that no new authoritative writings had been created since the time of Artaxerxes (the era of Ezra and Malachi), suggesting that the canon was already closed by his time. (11) These twenty-two books match the content of the thirty-nine books in the Protestant Old Testament. The differences in counting come from attaching Ruth to Judges and Lamentations to Jeremiah, among others. (12)

Josephus’s testimony is important for two reasons. First, it shows that a fixed Hebrew canon existed in the first century, long before any supposed rabbinic council. Second, it ties the end of the Old Testament canon to the end of prophecy after Artaxerxes' reign. (13)

2.4 The Septuagint and the Deuterocanonical Books

Adding to the complexity of the Old Testament canon question is the existence of the Septuagint (LXX), a Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures that began in Alexandria around 250 B.C. According to The Letter of Aristeas, seventy-two scholars from Jerusalem translated the Torah under the patronage of Ptolemy II Philadelphus. (14)

Over the following generations, additional books were added to the Greek corpus, including Tobit, Judith, Baruch, 1–2 Maccabees, the Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach (Ecclesiasticus), and expansions to Esther and Daniel. These books, known as the deuterocanonical books by the Catholic Church and the Apocrypha by Protestants, are considered part of the canon by the Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Oriental Orthodox churches. The seven books universally accepted by these traditions are Tobit, Judith, Baruch (with the Letter of Jeremiah), Sirach, Wisdom, and 1–2 Maccabees, along with the Greek additions to Esther and Daniel. (15) Conversely, modern Rabbinic Judaism and Protestantism view these books as Apocrypha rather than inspired Scripture. (16)

The dispute has deep historical roots. Jerome (c. 340–420), who translated the Latin Vulgate, clearly distinguished between the Hebrew canon (protocanon) and the additional Greek books. Although he included the deuterocanonical books in the Vulgate, he noted that they were of secondary importance and should not be used to set doctrine. Augustine, on the other hand, preferred the broader Alexandrian list and disagreed with Jerome. (17) This early church disagreement foreshadowed the conflict that would emerge during the Protestant Reformation.

2.5 The Dead Sea Scrolls and Canonical Confirmation

The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls (1947–1956) in caves near Qumran shed important light on the pre-Christian state of the Hebrew scriptures. Fragments of every Old Testament book in the current Protestant evangelical canon have been found among the scrolls, all except Esther (whose absence likely reflects the accidents of preservation rather than canonical exclusion). The scrolls confirmed that the text of books like Isaiah had been transmitted with remarkable fidelity for over a millennium. (18) Additionally, Qumran scribes indicated a book’s sacred status by citing it authoritatively in community documents or composing commentaries on it, providing indirect evidence of canonical recognition within the Qumran community. (19)

3.0 The New Testament Canon

3.1 The Apostolic Foundation

The New Testament canon came from the unique and unrepeatable witness of the apostles and their close associates to Jesus Christ. Just as prophetic authorship founded the Old Testament canon, apostolic authorship or connection grounded the New Testament canon. (20) Paul’s letters, for example, were quickly distributed and recognized as authoritative even within the first generation of the Church. Peter confirms this when he places Paul’s letters alongside “the other Scriptures” (2 Peter 3:16, ESV).

The shape of the New Testament was not decided by a single council but by “widespread consensus rather than official proclamation.” (21) The books that form our New Testament were written, circulated, collected, and recognized over many decades and across different continents before any church body officially approved them. The question of canonicity is mainly theological: God providentially ensured that His inspired books would be accessible, that they would exhibit attributes of divine quality and apostolic origin, and that the Holy Spirit would testify to them in the hearts of God’s people. (22)

3.2 Marcion and the Crisis That Accelerated Canon-Consciousness

In the mid-second century A.D., the heretic Marcion (c. 85–160) forced the church to clarify its boundaries for the canon. Marcion completely rejected the Old Testament, viewing the God of Israel as a lesser, malevolent deity different from the Father of Jesus. (23) He assembled his own shortened canon, including an edited version of the Gospel of Luke and ten of Paul’s letters, removed of what he saw as Jewish “contamination.” (24) Marcion was the first known Christian to establish a fixed written canon of Scripture, and his heretical canon prompted the proto-orthodox Church to respond more precisely about which texts were authoritative. (25)

Marcion’s excommunication from the Roman church (c. 144 A.D.) and the ongoing theological debate about his teachings by figures like Tertullian and Irenaeus fast-tracked how the Church understood its scriptural limits. However, it is important to recognize that the scholarly consensus is that Marcion’s canon was based on a larger set of recognized writings that he then narrowed, rather than the Church creating a canon in response to nothing. (26)

3.3 The Muratorian Fragment

The earliest known list of New Testament books is the Muratorian Fragment (also called the Canon Muratori), discovered by Lodovico Antonio Muratori and published in 1740. The Fragment, made up of 85 lines of vulgar Latin, is almost certainly a translation from a Greek original, and most scholars date it to the late second century (around A.D. 170–200), though some argue for a fourth-century date. (27) The list includes the four Gospels (Matthew and Mark are implied or missing from a damaged opening), Acts, the thirteen letters attributed to Paul, the Letter of Jude, two letters of John, the Wisdom of Solomon, and the Apocalypse of John and Peter — notably excluding Hebrews, James, 1–2 Peter, and 3 John. (28) The Fragment also explicitly rejects the letters to the Laodiceans and Alexandrians as Marcionite forgeries and explains that the Shepherd of Hermas, while instructive, should not be read in church because it was written too recently and “cannot be placed among the prophets . . . nor among the apostles.” (29)

3.4 Eusebius and the Four Categories

The fourth-century church historian Eusebius of Caesarea (c. 260–339 A.D.) offers one of the most systematic early accounts of canonical debates in his Ecclesiastical History (c. 325 A.D.). (30) Instead of establishing a canon, Eusebius documents the prevailing church opinions, categorizing writings into four groups. (31)

Accepted (homologoumena): The four Gospels, Acts, Paul’s letters, 1 Peter, 1 John, and (with some dispute) Revelation.

Disputed (antilegomena): James, 2 Peter, 2–3 John, and Jude.

Rejected (but edifying): The Acts of Paul, the Shepherd of Hermas, the Apocalypse of Peter, the Epistle of Barnabas, and the Didache.

Heretical forgeries: The Gospel of Peter, the Gospel of Thomas, the Acts of Andrew, the Gospel of Matthias, and the Acts of John. (32)

Eusebius’s categories show that by the early fourth century, there was general agreement on twenty-two of the twenty-seven books of our New Testament. (33) The five contested books (James, Jude, 2 Peter, 2–3 John) were seen as clearly different from both heretical writings and purely edifying non-canonical ones — a sign that recognition of the canon was already well developed.

3.5 Athanasius’s Festal Letter (A.D. 367)

A landmark moment in canonical history occurred on January 7, A.D. 367, when Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, wrote his thirty-ninth annual Easter (Festal) letter to his churches. Concerned that his people were being misled by spurious writings claiming scriptural authority, Athanasius provided a clear list of the canonical books. His letter included exactly the same twenty-seven books of the New Testament that are in our Bibles today, and he used the Greek word "kanonizomena" (“canonized”) to refer to them. (34) Athanasius also listed the Old Testament books according to the Hebrew canon and categorized the deuterocanonical books as useful but non-canonical readings. (35) The importance of Athanasius’s letter cannot be overstated. It is the first surviving document to list exactly the twenty-seven-book New Testament canon that became universally accepted in the Church.

3.6 The Synods of Hippo and Carthage

Building on the growing consensus, regional synods formalized the canon in the late fourth century. The Synod of Hippo Regius in North Africa (A.D. 393) may have been the first council to officially accept the current New Testament canon. Its conclusions were confirmed by the Council of Carthage (A.D. 397) and later reaffirmed at another Council of Carthage (A.D. 419). These councils were influenced by Augustine of Hippo, who considered the canon already ratified. (36) It is important to note that these North African councils did not create the canon; they recognized and approved what had already been widely accepted by the church consensus. (37)

4.0 Criteria for Canonicity

Throughout the canonical process, both formal and informal tests were applied to writings under consideration. Scholars have identified several overlapping criteria.

For the Old Testament:

Prophetic authorship: Was the book written by a recognized prophet of God? (38) This was the primary criterion, grounded in Deuteronomy 18:18–22 (ESV).

18 I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers. And I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him. 19 And whoever will not listen to my words that he shall speak in my name, I myself will require it of him. 20 But the prophet who presumes to speak a word in my name that I have not commanded him to speak, or who speaks in the name of other gods, that same prophet shall die.’ 21 And if you say in your heart, ‘How may we know the word that the Lord has not spoken?’— 22 when a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word that the Lord has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously. You need not be afraid of him.

Consistency with the Torah: Did the message tell the truth about God and not contradict the Mosaic revelation? (39)

Confirmation by acts of God: Was the writer confirmed by miracles or other divine attestation? (40)

Acceptance by the covenant community: Was the book received by the people of Israel as authoritative? (41)

For the New Testament:

Apostolicity: Was the author an apostle, or did the author have a close and authenticated connection with an apostle? (42)

Orthodoxy: Did the book contain consistent and orthodox doctrine? (43)

Universality of reception: Was the book accepted by the body of Christ at large? (44) Writings acknowledged only by a small regional community carried less weight.

Antiquity: Was the work written in the apostolic era? (45) A book written too late, like the Shepherd of Hermas (composed in Rome in the early second century), could not be apostolic.

Divine quality: Did the book bear the internal marks of divine inspiration — the kind of spiritual power and theological coherence characteristic of God’s Word? (46)

As F. F. Bruce summarizes, the Church “did not create the canon” by conferring authority on these books; it “recognized the canon” by acknowledging the authority that these books already inherently possessed. (47) Michael Kruger similarly argues that the canon is “self-authenticating”: God has provided a proper epistemic environment — including providential exposure, attributes of canonicity, and the internal testimony of the Holy Spirit — through which believers recognize Scripture as His Word. (48)

5.0 Confessional and Denominational Divergences

5.1 The Protestant Reformation and the Sixty-Six-Book Canon

The Protestant Reformation brought the canon debate to a head. Martin Luther, insisting that Christian doctrine must rely solely on biblical authority (sola scriptura), rejected the deuterocanonical books of the Old Testament and moved four New Testament books (Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation) to an appendix, questioning their apostolic origins. His doubts about the deuterocanonical books reflected his alignment with the Hebrew canon of Josephus and Jerome’s earlier concerns, as well as his rejection of 2 Maccabees 12, which had been used to support the Catholic doctrine of purgatory. (49)

Although Luther’s doubts about the four New Testament books were not embraced by later Protestant groups, his stance on the Old Testament Apocrypha became standard in Protestantism. (50) By the end of the Reformation, Protestants had established a 66-book canon: the 39 books of the Hebrew Old Testament plus the 27 books of the New Testament. (51)

5.2 The Council of Trent (A.D. 1546)

In response to the Protestant challenge, the Roman Catholic Church firmly established the canon at the Council of Trent. On April 8, 1546, during its fourth session, the council officially declared the deuterocanonical books to be fully canonical — with a vote of 24 in favor, 15 against, and 16 abstentions. (52) This marked the first ecumenical declaration of the Catholic biblical canon, including all seven deuterocanonical books (Tobit, Judith, 1–2 Maccabees, Wisdom, Sirach, and Baruch) as well as the Greek additions to Esther and Daniel. (53) The council also reaffirmed the canonicity of Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation in response to Luther’s doubts. (54)

5.3 Protestant Confessional Statements

The major Protestant confessions responded by clearly defining their canonical commitments. The Thirty-Nine Articles of the Church of England (finalized in 1571) distinguished the canonical Old Testament books from the Apocrypha, which “the Church doth read for example of life and instruction of manners; but yet doth not apply them to establish any doctrine.” (55) The Westminster Confession of Faith (1647) offered the most detailed Reformed statement on the canon. Chapter I lists all sixty-six books of the Old and New Testaments by name as “holy Scripture, or the Word of God written,” and explicitly states that the Apocrypha, “not being of divine inspiration, are no part of the canon of the Scripture, and therefore are of no authority in the Church of God, nor to be any otherwise approved, or made use of, than other human writings.” (56) The Belgic Confession (1561) similarly listed the sixty-six canonical books and distinguished them from the Apocrypha. (57)

The Westminster Confession also states the epistemological foundation for recognizing the canon, affirming that “the authority of the Holy Scripture, for which it ought to be believed, and obeyed, dependeth not upon the testimony of any man, or Church; but wholly upon God (who is truth itself) the author thereof: and therefore it is to be received, because it is the Word of God.” (58)

6.0 The Closure of the Canon

6.1 The Theological Basis for Closure

The canon is considered closed for theological reasons, given the nature of divine revelation. The New Testament asserts that it is the fulfillment and culmination of God’s saving plans through Jesus Christ. As Hebrews 1:1–2 (ESV) states:

Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son.

The finality of the Son’s revelation means that no more authoritative word from God is expected or possible in the same canonical sense.

Once the apostolic witnesses to Jesus’ resurrection passed away, no further writings could hold apostolic authority. (59) This idea was clear as early as the Muratorian Fragment, which rejected the Shepherd of Hermas from being canonical because “it cannot be placed among the prophets, for their number is complete, nor among the apostles, for it is after their time.” (60) The organic closure of the canon is thus connected to the unique historical moment of the apostolic generation.

6.2 Revelation 22:18–19

A commonly cited text for the closure of the canon is Revelation 22:18–19 (ESV):

“I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book, and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.”

Most scholars agree that the immediate reference of this warning is to the Book of Revelation itself rather than the entire biblical canon. John wrote those words before the full New Testament was compiled, and other Johannine letters seem to have been written after Revelation. (61) Nonetheless, this passage has wider canonical implications: if God prohibits adding to or subtracting from individual inspired books, the principle applies to the entire body of inspired Scripture. (62)

The formation of the biblical canon was not a single event but a process that took centuries of recognition, debate, and consensus. During this time, the people of God identified writings that showed signs of divine inspiration and apostolic authority. The Hebrew Old Testament canon was essentially established by the first century A.D., as shown by Josephus’s testimony in Against Apion and Jesus’ own reference to the threefold Law, Prophets, and Writings in Luke 24:44 (ESV). The New Testament canon, developed from the apostolic witness to Christ, was evaluated against criteria such as apostolicity, orthodoxy, antiquity, and universality, and achieved clear agreement by the late fourth century. It was formalized by Athanasius in A.D. 367 and confirmed by the North African councils of A.D. 393 and 397.

The fundamental divergence between Catholic/Orthodox and Protestant traditions centers on the deuterocanonical books, whose status was definitively settled, for Catholics at Trent (1546) and for Protestants in the Westminster Confession (1647). Supporting all canonical history is the theological belief that Scripture is what it is because God inspired it (2 Timothy 3:16, ESV), that men spoke from God as they were guided by the Holy Spirit (2 Peter 1:21, ESV), and that the self-authenticating Word of God will be recognized by those who belong to him — for, as Jesus declared in John 10:27 (ESV): “My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me.”

Notes

1. F. F. Bruce, The Canon of Scripture (Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 1988), 17-18.

2. Bruce, The Canon of Scripture, 95.

3. Bruce, The Canon of Scripture, 17.

4. Timothy H. Lim, The Formation of the Jewish Canon (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2013), 1–3.

5. Bruce, The Canon of Scripture, 41; Lee Martin McDonald, The Formation of the Biblical Canon, 2 vols. (London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark, 2017), 1:14.

6. Roger T. Beckwith, The Old Testament Canon of the New Testament Church and Its Background in Early Judaism (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985), 110–11.

7. McDonald, Formation, 1:62

8. Norman L. Geisler and William E. Nix, A General Introduction to the Bible, rev. and expanded ed. (Chicago: Moody Press, 1986), 92–95.

9. Norman L. Geisler and William E. Nix, A General Introduction to the Bible, 93.

10. Norman L. Geisler and William E. Nix, A General Introduction to the Bible, 94; Bruce, The Canon of Scripture, 35.

11. Flavius Josephus, Against Apion 1.8, in Josephus: The Complete Works, trans. William Whiston (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1960), 609.

12. Beckwith, Old Testament Canon, 235–40.

13. Beckwith, Old Testament Canon, 3–5.

14. McDonald, Formation, 1:89-91

15. McDonald, Formation, 1:96–98.

16. Metzger, The Canon of the New Testament: Its Origin, Development, and Significance (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1987), 7–8.

17. McDonald, Formation, 1:97–98.

18. James C. VanderKam, The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Bible, 17–22.

19. Eugene Ulrich, The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Developmental Composition of the Bible, VTSup 169 (Leiden: Brill, 2015), 83–86.

20. Geisler and Nix, General Introduction, 282.

21. Michael J. Kruger, Canon Revisited: Establishing the Origins and Authority of the New Testament Books (Wheaton: Crossway, 2012), 31.

22. Kruger, Canon Revisited, 92–95.

23. Adolf von Harnack, Marcion: The Gospel of the Alien God, trans. John E. Steely and Lyle D. Bierma (Durham, NC: Labyrinth Press, 1990), 17–20.

24. Adolf von Harnack, Marcion: The Gospel of the Alien God, trans. John E. Steely and Lyle D. Bierma (Durham, NC: Labyrinth Press, 1990), 17–20, 20–24; Metzger, Canon of the New Testament, 90–92.

25. Metzger, Canon of the New Testament, 90-92

26. Metzger, Canon of the New Testament, 92–93.

27. Metzger, Canon of the New Testament, 191–201.

28. Metzger, Canon of the New Testament, 305–7.

29. Muratorian Fragment, lines 73–80, in Metzger, Canon of the New Testament, 307.

30. Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History 3.25, in Philip Schaff, ed., Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, 2nd series, vol. 1 (repr., Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1994), 3.25.

31. Metzger, Canon of the New Testament, 201–6.

32. Schaff, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, 2nd series, 1:3.25.

33. Metzger, Canon of the New Testament, 203–4.

34. David Brakke, “A New Fragment of Athanasius’s Thirty-Ninth Festal Letter: Heresy, Apocrypha, and the Canon,” Harvard Theological Review 103, no. 1 (2010): 50.

35. Philip Schaff, ed., Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, 2nd series, vol. 4 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1989), 551–52.

36. Metzger, Canon of the New Testament, 238.

37. Kruger, Canon Revisited, 31.

38. Geisler and Nix, General Introduction, 92.

39. Geisler and Nix, General Introduction, 221.

40. Geisler and Nix, General Introduction, 222.

41. Geisler and Nix, General Introduction, 223.

42. Geisler and Nix, General Introduction, 282

43. Geisler and Nix, General Introduction, 283

44. Geisler and Nix, General Introduction, 284.

45. Metzger, Canon of the New Testament, 251–54.

46. Kruger, Canon Revisited, 127–30.

47. Bruce, The Canon of Scripture, 95.

48. Kruger, Canon Revisited, 92–95.

49. McDonald, Formation, 2:441–45.

50. Bruce, The Canon of Scripture, 101–3.

51. McDonald, Formation, 2:447.

52. Metzger, Canon of the New Testament, 246.

53. McDonald, Formation, 2:445–47.

54. Bruce, The Canon of Scripture, 103.

55. Church of England, The Thirty-Nine Articles (1571), Article VI, in Philip Schaff, The Creeds of Christendom, 3 vols. (repr., Grand Rapids: Baker, 1977), 3:489–90.

56. Westminster Assembly, The Westminster Confession of Faith (1647), Chapter I, §§2–3, in Schaff, Creeds of Christendom, 3:601–2.

57. Guido de Brès, The Belgic Confession (1561), Article 6, in Schaff, Creeds of Christendom, 3:385–86.

58. Westminster Assembly, Westminster Confession, Chapter I, §4, in Schaff, Creeds of Christendom, 3:603.

59. Metzger, Canon of the New Testament, 254–55.

60. Muratorian Fragment, lines 73–80, in Metzger, Canon of the New Testament, 307.

61. Metzger, Canon of the New Testament, 269–270.

62. Bruce, The Canon of Scripture, 282–83.