7.2 How Was the New Testament Canon Formed?

Showing that the New Testament is close to its originals does not answer every question. Indeed, from the earliest centuries, other writings were circulating within Christian communities: gospels, letters, acts, and apocalypses. Some of these texts were not included in the Bible: they are called apocryphal writings.

What Is an Apocryphal Text? #

The word apocryphal comes from the Greek ἀπόκρυφος (apókruphos), meaning “hidden” or “secret.” By extension, the term refers to writings attributed to biblical figures but whose origin is doubtful, late, or not recognized by the Church.

• Some apocrypha are gospel-like (Gospel of Thomas, Gospel of Philip, Gospel of Peter).
• Others recount imagined episodes from Jesus’ childhood (Infancy Gospel of Thomas, Protoevangelium of James).
• Still others imitate the style of Revelation (Apocalypse of Peter, Apocalypse of Paul).

Most of them date from the 2nd to the 4th century and often reflect the influence of outside philosophical or religious currents, such as Gnosticism (cf. Bart Ehrman, Lost Scriptures, 2003).

The Criteria for Selecting the Canonical Writings #

The Church Fathers and Christian communities relied on several criteria to distinguish recognized writings (canonical) from apocryphal ones (cf. Bruce Metzger, The Canon of the New Testament, 1997).

1. Apostolic connection

   • The text had to come directly from an apostle or from a close witness.
   • Irenaeus of Lyons (around 180) states that Mark wrote under Peter’s authority and Luke under Paul’s (Against Heresies, III, 1).
   • Apocrypha such as the Gospel of Thomas, written in the 2nd century, could not meet this criterion.

2. Conformity to the rule of faith (regula fidei)

   • The content had to agree with the teaching handed down from the beginning.
   • Paul insists: “But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be accursed!” (Galatians 1:8).
   • The Gnostic gospels, with their emphasis on “secret knowledge,” did not fit this criterion (cf. Elaine Pagels, The Gnostic Gospels, 1979).

3. Liturgical and universal use

   • A recognized writing had to be read publicly in several churches, not just in an isolated community.
   • Paul already mentions the exchange of letters between communities (Colossians 4:16).
   • Eusebius of Caesarea (around 325) distinguishes books “universally recognized” from those that were “disputed” (Ecclesiastical History, III, 25).

4. Antiquity and authenticity

   • First-century texts carried greater authority because they were closer to the direct witnesses of Jesus.
   • The apocrypha, dated to the 2nd–3rd centuries, were considered too late (cf. Helmut Koester, Ancient Christian Gospels, 1990).

A Gradual Process #

The canon of the New Testament took shape gradually:

• 2nd century: the four Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) were already widely recognized. Irenaeus of Lyons insists that there can be “neither more nor fewer than four gospels” (Against Heresies, III, 11,8).
• 3rd century: Origen (around 230) distinguishes between texts “received by all” and those that are “disputed” (Homilies on Joshua, Preface).
• 4th century: Athanasius of Alexandria, in his Festal Letter (367), gives for the first time the exact list of the 27 books of the New Testament.

The Role of the Councils #

To bring debates to a close and unify practice, certain regional councils confirmed this list:

• Council of Hippo (AD 393): first official decision listing the 27 books of the New Testament.
• Council of Carthage (AD 397): confirms the same list and states: “that apart from these Scriptures, nothing be read in the Church under the name of divine Scripture” (Canon 24).
• Council of Carthage (AD 419): reaffirms this canon once again.

(cf. Henri de Lubac, History and Spirit, 1950).

These councils did not “invent” the canon, but officially ratified a reality already widely recognized in Christian communities.

In Summary #

The apocrypha were not retained because:

• they were too late and therefore too far removed from the direct witnesses (cf. Koester, 1990),
• they contained elements foreign to the Christian faith, often linked to Gnosticism (cf. Pagels, 1979),
• they were not read throughout the churches, but only in restricted circles (cf. Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, III, 25).

As the historian F. F. Bruce summarizes:

“The church did not create the canon; it recognized it.” (The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable?, 1981).

Thus, the distinction between canonical and apocryphal writings is not the result of an arbitrary selection, but of a gradual process of discernment aimed at preserving the oldest, most authentic, and most universal testimony concerning the life and teaching of Jesus.