The formation of the Christian canon was not the result of arbitrary decisions or sudden inspiration, but a long and deliberate process guided by the Spirit and affirmed through the collective discernment of the early church. From the inspired writings of apostles to the exclusion of spurious gospels and heretical forgeries, the church emerged with a body of sacred Scripture that has remained the cornerstone of Christian theology, piety, and identity ever since.
The Scriptures as the Source of Christian Knowledge
The foundation of all Christian theology rests upon the source and rule of divine knowledge—the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Covenants. The recognition of this fact necessarily invites inquiry into the shape and scope of the canon, that is, which writings belong to the inspired corpus and which do not. This distinction grew ever more urgent amid a proliferation of apocryphal texts that emerged in the first centuries of the church’s life—many falsely attributed to apostles, and some written in the interests of Gnosticism, Ebionism, or simply as pious elaborations meant to fill historical gaps in the gospel narrative.
The Old Testament canon was received directly from the Jewish tradition and validated by the authority of Christ and the apostles. The Jewish Apocrypha, preserved in the Septuagint, also found their way into early Christian versions, though their status was often debated. The New Testament canon, in contrast, emerged gradually over several centuries, modeled in part on the Old, and formed under the guidance of the same divine Spirit that inspired its authors.
A hint of a New Testament canon appears already in 2 Peter 3:15–16, where Paul’s letters are placed alongside “the other Scriptures” as authoritative. Although the earliest church leaders and apologists primarily appealed to the Old Testament, apostolic preaching, martyrdom, and miracles, their writings also contain clear citations and allusions to apostolic documents. These early references testify to the growing recognition of certain texts as divinely authoritative.
The Homologumena and the Antilegomena
By the mid-second century, a core collection of writings—including the four Gospels, Acts, Paul’s thirteen epistles, 1 Peter, and 1 John—had achieved near-universal acceptance. These were termed “Homologumena” by Eusebius and recognized as apostolic, Spirit-inspired, and canonical. The widespread attestation of these texts by figures such as Justin Martyr, Tatian, Theophilus of Antioch, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and translations like the Peshitta and Old Latin versions, demonstrates their early and broad ecclesiastical use.
In contrast, a secondary group of seven texts, the “Antilegomena,” faced intermittent doubt: Hebrews, Revelation, 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, James, and Jude. Eusebius, writing in the early fourth century, noted ongoing hesitation regarding these books. Yet even by that time, major Greek manuscripts like Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus bore witness to their inclusion, suggesting widespread liturgical and theological acceptance.
A further tier of writings, sometimes called “spurious” (notha), included the Epistle of Barnabas, 1 Clement, the Shepherd of Hermas, the Apocalypse of Peter, and the Gospel of the Hebrews. Though read in some churches and even included in early codices, these texts eventually fell outside the canon due to post-apostolic origin.
The Canon Confirmed
The definitive recognition of the New Testament canon as we have it today came through the deliberations of regional synods. Two African councils—Hippo (393) and Carthage (397)—issued identical canonical lists matching the 27 books of the present New Testament. Augustin, present at both, exercised decisive influence in this process. In the East, the Council of Laodicea (ca. 363) also recognized nearly all of the same books, omitting only Revelation.
By the close of the fourth century, authoritative voices such as Athanasius, Cyril of Jerusalem, Gregory of Nazianzus, Epiphanius, and Chrysostom confirmed the canonical consensus. Though no ecumenical council defined the canon until the Council of Trent in 1546, the practical consensus of the church had already solidified.
Tertullian first used the juridical term “Novum Testamentum” (New Testament) to describe the Christian Scriptures, implying legal and covenantal weight. The books were organized into “the Gospel” and “the Apostle,” with the latter further divided into Pauline and Catholic epistles. This canonical structure remained stable until the Reformation, when renewed debate over the Apocrypha and Antilegomena led to the birth of modern biblical criticism. Nevertheless, the authority and inspiration of the New Testament survived the scrutiny of even the most rigorous modern scholars.
Views on Inspiration
The early Fathers attributed to the apostolic writings a supernatural origin, believing the Holy Spirit so overshadowed the authors that the resulting texts were free from error, even in matters of memory (according to Origen). Yet they did not deny the presence of individual style or human personality in the process. Irenaeus, for example, identified Paul’s fiery intellect as reflected in his passionate, complex prose.
Clement of Alexandria, more liberal in spirit, extended the idea of inspiration beyond the Bible, even calling Plato’s works “inspired” insofar as they contained truth. He viewed all beauty and wisdom as emanating from the divine Logos who tunes the soul like a lyre.
Exegesis and Allegory
Early biblical interpretation was practical and devotional. But as Gnosticism grew, more sophisticated methods became necessary. Both orthodox and heretics alike employed allegorical interpretation, borrowing heavily from rabbinic traditions and Alexandrian Platonism. Few Fathers attempted grammatical-historical exegesis; Chrysostom and Jerome were notable exceptions.
Origen systematized allegorical interpretation, modeling his theory on Philo. He saw Scripture as a living organism with body (literal sense), soul (moral sense), and spirit (mystical sense). This threefold hermeneutic led him to spiritualize difficult texts—especially morally challenging narratives such as David’s sins—and often imposed foreign meanings upon the text. Yet Origen’s influence was immense, and despite later suspicion of his orthodoxy, his exegetical legacy shaped the church for centuries.
He also pioneered textual criticism, compiling his “Hexapla” as the first polyglot edition of Scripture.
Despite the variety of interpretations and numerous fanciful readings, the church fathers shared a core hermeneutical commitment: extracting doctrines in harmony with the analogia fidei. This dogmatic filter, for better or worse, guided their exegesis and connected Scripture to the tradition of the faith.
Notes on the Canon
I. Eusebius on the Canon: Eusebius (d. 340) divided Christian writings into four categories:
- Homologumena (universally accepted): Four Gospels, Acts, fourteen epistles of Paul (including Hebrews), 1 Peter, 1 John, Revelation.
- Antilegomena (disputed): James, Jude, 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John.
- Spurious: Shepherd of Hermas, Apocalypse of Peter, Epistle of Barnabas, Gospel of the Hebrews.
- Heretical: Gospels of Peter, Thomas, and Matthias; Acts of Andrew and others.
II. Ecclesiastical Definitions:
– Council of Laodicea (ca. 363): Listed all New Testament books except Revelation.
– Council of Carthage (397): Adopted full list of 27 books; following Hippo (393).
– Augustin and Jerome cemented this list in the West.
– Council of Trent (1546): Dogmatized the canon and anathematized dissenters.
Protestants, following the liberty of the early church, continue to evaluate the canon through historical and critical methods. This freedom is essential for honest theology and faithful interpretation.
