How do we know which books belong in the Bible? How do we know that these 66 books are the correct ones? How do we know we’re not missing something? And who decided what would be included in the Bible and what would not?

It’s a question you hear often. And it’s one that I wrestled with for a time. “Who decided what books would be in the Bible and what would not? How did they decide? When?”

I surrendered to Christ later in life. It was a radical shift in everything I had ever studied and believed up through my university years. Up until that time, I never gave the Bible a serious thought. But God changed that. One big question I had pertained to the biblical canon. Why these 66 books? What about “all the other books”? The Apocrypha? Pseudepigrapha? The Gospels of Thomas, Peter, and Judas? Why didn’t they make it in? Says who? People told me things like, “Yeah, a bunch of guys in the fourth century got together and decided what to include and exclude from the Bible. You can’t really trust it.” I didn’t know what to think.

Recently we began a series addressing fundamental questions surrounding the Bible. These questions concern the topic of bibliology. First, we studied the topic of revelation, answering the question, “What is the Bible?” From there, we looked at inspiration, answering the question, “Where did the Bible come from?” Then, we observed the logical conclusion, namely, that the 66 books of the Bible are the inerrant and infallible words of God. Today’s post will address the canonicity of the Bible.

The question of canonicity addresses what documents belong in the Bible and why. The “canon” refers to the books that are contained within the Bible; those which are the word of God. How do we know which books belong in the Bible? How do we know that these 66 books are the correct ones? How do we know we’re not missing something? And who decided what would be included in the Bible and what would not?

Some have called the issue of canonicity the “Achilles heel” of Christianity. It’s often the point of attack from unbelievers. At some point, most Christians will be challenged here. Related, Roman Catholic proponents take issue with canonicity. They propose that holding to the canonicity of the 66 books of Scripture alone is “blind faith,” irrational, opposed to evidence, and arbitrary. But nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, an honest study of biblical canonicity will only build one’s necessary faith in the integrity of the God-breathed 66-books of the Bible.

A popular myth needs correction from the outset. No men, church council, or spiritual leaders ever gathered to collectively determine what would and would not be included in the Bible. No council decided which books to keep and toss. No human being defined the list of biblical books. And that does not make the biblical canon less reliable, but more.

Canonicity: A Theological Issue

The canon debate is primarily a theological issue, not a historical one. What should, and should not, be in the Bible is a matter of inspiration and revelation, not church councils and magisterium.

The question of the canon begins with understanding the nature of Scripture. We cannot understand what should be in the Bible until we understand what the Bible is. The canon of Scripture depends on the attributes of Scripture.

A document must have certain attributes before it can be considered as canon. It’s the same way, for example, in professional baseball. Who gets to play major league baseball is determined by who possesses certain attributes necessary to the sport. So it is with what is, and is not, in the Bible. That’s why our discussion of canon began with a study of revelation and inspiration.

Canonicity is the Consequence of Inspiration

Scripture is special revelation from God. It is otherwise undisclosed to, and unattainable by, man; that is, until God reveals. Humanity received God’s revelation through the act of verbal plenary inspiration, whereby God the Holy Spirit superintended the human authors to write exactly what he wished upon the original manuscripts. The result was the 66 books of God-breathed revelation. Since God is a God of truth, these 66 books are without error. They are truth. That directs our understanding of what must be in the Bible; what constitutes the word of God.

Canonicity of the biblical text is the necessary consequence of the Holy Spirit’s work of verbal plenary inspiration. Whatever God inspired is consequently canonical. Because God gave revelation, it is thereby the word of God, or, canonical. Thus, the canonicity of a document depends entirely on the source and nature of the document, and not the outside opinion of man. Is the document the product of verbal plenary inspiration? If so, it is canonical.

As observed in the previous few posts, the 66 books are God-breathed special revelation. So then, they are canonical by God’s doing, not man’s determination. The Bible is canonical whether or not anyone recognizes or acknowledges it. Inspiration establishes canonicity. The construction of the canon was the act of God, independent of man: God inspired the books of Scripture. In doing so, the canon was created.

A Flawed Approach to Canonicity

So, how does imperfect man recognize what is and is not inspired and canonical? The question has now changed from, “How was the canon formed, historically?”, to, “How can we, as Christians, know that these books are the right ones?”

The Roman Catholic religion takes a flawed approach to this question. Rome teaches that the canon exists because the church has infallibly decreed which books are Scripture. Thus, the magisterium determines the canon absolutely. The authority to do so lies, they teach, in who the pope is. For Rome, the pope is the successor of the apostle Peter, vicar of Christ, and head of the church. Thus, the authority to pronounce canonicity is vested uniquely by the pope and by the bishops who assume that they are in communion with the correct and true teachings of the faith. Add to that, when Rome speaks ex cathedra, she claims to speak infallibly. So, in her eyes, Rome does more than recognize canonicity; she determines it.

Though this is a flawed approach, Rome does get one thing right: the response of the church matters. We should care what the church has historically believed. However, by her numerous aberrant teachings, including denial of the true gospel and Christ as head of the church, Rome declares herself a false church (cf. Gal. 1:8-9). This has been the position of the true church, historically.

Rome undermines the authority of Scripture by teaching that canonicity is determined by the magisterium. In effect then, the authority of Scripture is beneath the authority of Rome. Though she teaches that God’s authority is vested in the magisterium, legitimizing her canonical determination, this must be rejected on the grounds that Rome has deviated from the true church. Thus, Rome’s say on the canon cannot be considered.

Man Recognizes the Canon, But Does Not Determine It

God himself is the highest authority as to the nature of his word. Men and magisteria are not God. Therefore, they are not instrumental in determining canonicity. Since God is the highest authority, he is the one who testifies to the authenticity of his word. Since Scripture is the word of God, it is the highest authority, and thus alone qualified to declare its own canonicity. Scripture is self-authenticating in that sense.

Read More