VIDEO: What Books Were Excluded from the Bible–and Why?

 

GET THE BOOK!

Author: Jimmy Akin

Jimmy was born in Texas, grew up nominally Protestant, but at age 20 experienced a profound conversion to Christ. Planning on becoming a Protestant seminary professor, he started an intensive study of the Bible. But the more he immersed himself in Scripture the more he found to support the Catholic faith, and in 1992 he entered the Catholic Church. His conversion story, "A Triumph and a Tragedy," is published in Surprised by Truth. Besides being an author, Jimmy is the Senior Apologist at Catholic Answers, a contributing editor to Catholic Answers Magazine, and a weekly guest on "Catholic Answers Live."

6 thoughts on “VIDEO: What Books Were Excluded from the Bible–and Why?”

  1. What about books such as the Didache and Shepherd of Hermas and other books that I believe are in the canon of some Orthodox churces (I think there’s a 3rd and 4th Maccabees?). Were there problematic teachings in these books? Or were they just considered good books but not inspired?

  2. JohnE,
    I am of the opinion of the latter. The Didache, though first century and possibly apostolic, was perhaps not considered scripture in all cases because it was considered more of an instruction manual for converts. An easier way of putting it would be that Catholics have both the Bible and the Catechism.

  3. Jimmy gives here the two main criteria of canonicity. Continuous acceptance/usage since the earliest times and congruence with the teaching of the Apostles and their successors ie the official (catholic) church.
    The reasons for the Church’s acceptance/usage of an individual book were not always simple, straightforward or consistent. Not all the Gospels were written by the Apostles eg Luke. Not all the early texts with sound doctrine were eventually included eg Shepherd of Hermas, Didache, Epistle of Clement.
    More on the Development of the New Testament Canon: Wikipedia, Catholic Encyclopaedia 1911, interesting tabular summary
    The short history is that Jesus was crucified and rose in about 30AD. The New Testament books were written between about 50-100AD. The four gospels and most of Paul’s letters were accepted as special quite early on and the other books came to be accepted and used over time.
    By about 300 there was consensus in the Catholic (as opposed to Gnostic) church regarding about 20 of the 27 books we now call the NT. But the status of the following books were disputed within the Catholic Church: Hebrews, Jude, James, Second Letter of Peter, Third Letter of John, Revelation, Acts of Paul, Shepherd of Hermas, Apocalypse of Peter, Epistle of Barnabas, Epistle of Clement, Didache.
    The first list of the NT exactly as we now have it was in 367AD when Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, listed our 27 books. His list was binding only within his jurisdiction of the church. Later local councils repeated his list. Martin Luther, and others, had doubts about the authority of Jude, James, Hebrews and Revelation. The Council of Trent in 1546 was the first Council to claim authority to pronounce definitively on this matter for the whole Church.
    Who decided the “contents page” or canon of the Bible? The Church which Jesus founded. No one else has the authority.

  4. A problem for Jehovah’s Witnesses, who can understand this issue, is the role of Athanasius in accepting the controversial book of Revelation which is their most important book of the bible.
    Athanasius was the champion of Catholic Orthodoxy at the Council of Nicaea in 325 when he was a deacon. He defended the Catholic view of the Incarnation and Trinity against the Arian view. Jehovah’s Witnesses are modern day Arians, although generally not as intellectually sophisticated.
    According to the JWs Satan took over the Catholic Church at Nicaea in 325 with the doctrine of the Trinity. But surely JW’s should reject Athanasius and all his evil works including his list (including Revelation) in 367 (including Revelation) which JW’s hold so dear.
    Their only historical and rational grounds for accepting the Book of Revelation as inspired by God is the authority of St Athanasius and the Catholic Church.

  5. The Orthodox include a number of books (including 3 and 4 Maccabees) in their Bibles, mostly because those books were found in copies of the Septuagint, and some were used as liturgical songs. (These books are, I believe, included in the latest editions of the Vulgate, “so as to prevent them from being entirely lost.”) But as far as I know, the Orthodox have never formally defined the canon of Scripture.
    The Didache was lost to us until a few manuscripts were found toward the end of the 19th century. The Jewish Encyclopedia has an article which maintains that much of Didache was a Jewish text dating from before the time of Christ.

Comments are closed.