Bibliology - Lesson 3

In this second part of the course, we’re asking, how did we get the Bible? How did the original writings turn into the Bibles we read today? This part includes three lessons. First, we’ll explore canonicity—why we have the 27 books in the New Testament and whether they are the right ones. Then we’ll look at transmission, the process of copying and preserving these writings. Finally, we’ll turn to translations, a personal favorite topic of mine. Underlying all three is the fundamental question: Can you trust it? Even though Bible translations vary, they are remarkably consistent. So, how can we trust Scripture if differences exist?

Why Was Canonicity an Issue?

Several historical developments prompted early Christians to consider which writings were truly authoritative. First, the apostles and eyewitnesses began to die. Previously, you could ask Peter or Paul directly. With their deaths, the question arose: Who now speaks authoritatively about Jesus’ life and teachings?

Second, persecution intensified. Believers risked their lives for their faith and needed certainty that their beliefs were grounded in truth. You don’t die for something you only think might be true.

Third, there was a rise in heresy and forged letters. Competing doctrines spread, sometimes falsely attributed to apostles. For example, Paul warns in 2 Thessalonians 2:2 against the false claim that the Day of the Lord had already come. In Galatians 1, he fiercely opposes distortions of the gospel, and in Galatians 6:11, he highlights his own handwriting to validate authorship.

The New Testament Apocrypha

Out of this confusion came writings now labeled as the New Testament Apocrypha—not to be confused with the Old Testament Apocrypha. These writings, mostly from the 2nd and 3rd centuries, include both helpful and bizarre content. Works like the Shepherd of Hermas, Didache, and writings from Ignatius offer early Christian insights but are not considered divinely authoritative.

Others are more dubious. Stories from the Infancy Gospels attempt to fill in gaps about Jesus’ childhood—like Jesus making clay birds come to life, resurrecting a dead playmate to avoid blame, or miraculously fixing a carpentry mistake. These imaginative tales lack theological weight and historical credibility, helping illustrate why certain texts were excluded.

What Is Canonicity?

Canonicity is the study of which books the church recognized as divinely inspired. It’s important to clarify that the church did not give these books authority; it recognized the authority inherent in them. Bruce Metzger defines the canon as the set of books accepted as inspired and therefore authoritative for faith and life.

Criteria for Canonicity

The early church used three basic criteria to recognize which books belonged in the New Testament:

1. Apostolic Authorship – Was the writer an apostle or closely connected to one? For instance, Paul’s letters were immediately authoritative, as were those of Matthew and Mark (who recorded Peter’s testimony).
2. Harmony of Doctrine and Tone – Did the content agree with established truth? Books like the Didache may have been useful but lacked the depth and consistency of inspired texts. Apocryphal stories about miracle carpentry and talking birds clearly fail this test.
3. Widespread Church Usage – Was the book used universally among churches? Contrary to popular media claims, no single person or council decided the canon. The early church broadly recognized and used these books, as shown by figures like Origen, who traveled to gather consensus.

What Got In, What Struggled

Most books (around 22 of 27) were accepted quickly. Paul’s letters, Matthew, Mark, and Luke-Acts gained wide recognition early. Luke, though not an apostle, was accepted based on his thorough research and association with Paul.

Some books faced hesitation:

• John’s Gospel: Its unique style led to early suspicion, especially when misused by heretical groups, but it was soon affirmed.
• Hebrews: Lack of known authorship delayed acceptance.
• James: Its emphasis on works troubled some, including Luther, but its connection to Jesus’ brother and internal consistency earned its place.
• 2 Peter: Significant stylistic difference from 1 Peter and overlap with Jude raised questions.
• 2 & 3 John: Their brevity and personal nature meant fewer churches had access, delaying widespread recognition.

The Gospel of Thomas

Perhaps the most famous excluded text is the Gospel of Thomas, often cited in popular skepticism. While some claim it contains more authentic sayings of Jesus than John’s Gospel, reading it reveals the issues. It dates to the late 2nd century (long after Thomas), is steeped in Gnostic heresy, and contradicts biblical teaching. For instance, its final verse declares that women must become male to enter the kingdom of God—blatantly contradicting the equality affirmed in Scripture.

The Gospel of Thomas fails all three criteria: apostolic authorship, doctrinal harmony, and church usage. It was never seriously considered for inclusion.

Is the Canon Closed?

Could more books be added? Some letters Paul mentions, like one to the Laodiceans, are lost. Revelation 22 warns against adding to "this scroll," referring specifically to Revelation—not the whole Bible.

Some argue the canon remains open, but even if a new letter were discovered, it would likely fail the usage criterion. The church has never recognized it, and 2,000 years of consensus is weighty.

Jude 3 speaks of “the faith once for all delivered to the saints,” implying finality. Ephesians 2:20 calls the apostles and prophets the church’s foundation—once laid, it isn’t expanded.

Did the Church Get It Right?

This is the ultimate question. I believe the answer is yes. After examining objections and studying arguments, I see no convincing case that any book was wrongly included or excluded. And beyond reasoned argument, I trust in God’s providence. Why would God inspire Scripture but fail to preserve it?

Faith doesn’t require abandoning reason. In this case, faith and logic both affirm that the church recognized the correct 27 books. What about you? Have you explored these questions? What books do you believe belong—or don’t belong—in the New Testament?

This is a great place to pause and reflect.