# Who decided which books to include in the New Testament? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [November 7, 2002, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-decided-which-books-to-include-in-the-new-testament/135759 "2002-11-07T19:11:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 5\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![FriendRob](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ecc23a/32.png) [@FriendRob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FriendRob)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2002, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-decided-which-books-to-include-in-the-new-testament/135759/1 "2002-11-07T19:11:40Z")
In [another thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=142482) , **Freyr** asked > [@](#): > > Why were the various books that became the Christian canon picked? For example, why was Peter or the Letters of Paul chosen yet Thomas was left out? Are there any records of the decisions made to accept some books as canon and others to be left out? One poster pointed to [this page](http://petragrail.tripod.com/nicea.html) in answer. However, the cited page has serious misinformation, so I thought we should start another thread to straighten it out. From the web page: > [@](#): > > In other words, EVERYONE AGREED ON THE WORDING OF THE > NEW TESTAMENT (and Greek version of the Old Testament), > right down to the intimate details of every single word > used in its vocabulary. All the bishops of the church > were using the same Bible in 325 AD. This is patently false. The _first time_ that the NT books were listed as they currently are accepted was in the Easter letter of bishop Athanasius of Alexandria in 367 AD. He wrote every year to inform the churches of the official Easter date and to address other church concerns. Around the 325 time mentioned, we have the witness of Eusebius, however he lists some of our NT as “disputed” (specifically James, Jude, and 2 and 3 John, IIRC). It is unclear whether he accepts Revelation, a book that continued to be controversial. In fact, the Armenian national church (the oldest national Christian church of all) still doesn’t accept Revelation. So, in a sense, the controversy continues even today. The claim that “everyone agreed on … every single word” is absurd. Of the ancient documents of the NT that are still extant, _no two agree completely on any book_. (Reference, Bart D. Ehrman, \* Introduction to the NT\*. When modern translations are made, scholars debate which of the sometimes 5 or more ancient texts represent the best/most original version. For earlier periods (2nd and 3rd centuries), quotations of NT books are even more variable. Earler writers also quote from non-NT books, sometimes even describing them as “Scripture”. Even after the current list became the “official” NT of the Roman Catholic church (several decades after Athanasius), controversy continued. The [Codex Sinaiticus](http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04085a.htm) , an important early Bible of the 4th or early 5th century, includes the Letter of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas. In Syria for some time, our 4 gospels weren’t used at all, instead, a harmonization called the Diatesseron was considered “the Gospel”. (reference: H. Koester, _Ancient Christian Gospels_) Clearly, some people are so invested in the idea of an early unquestioned NT canon that they are willing to lie to support it. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc348/32.png) [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Flying_Dutchman)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2002, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-decided-which-books-to-include-in-the-new-testament/135759/2 "2002-11-07T20:27:47Z")
There is an excellent history of the canonization of the New Testament at the [Catholic Encyclopaedia](http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03274a.htm) ---
**Author:** ![Khadaji](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Khadaji](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Khadaji)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2002, 8:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-decided-which-books-to-include-in-the-new-testament/135759/3 "2002-11-07T20:41:00Z")
Most people don’t know it, and I’m not really supposed to say, but it was me. And actually, I’m the one they consult on a good many things. When people ask “Who’s to say …” usually its me. For instance: Who’s to say what’s right or wrong? Its me. Of course, I would appreciate if you don’t tell others. ---
**Author:** ![lieu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/c2a13f/32.png) [@lieu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lieu)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2002, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-decided-which-books-to-include-in-the-new-testament/135759/4 "2002-11-07T20:47:37Z")
I’d just always assumed it was Kay Graham. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2002, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/who-decided-which-books-to-include-in-the-new-testament/135759/5 "2002-11-07T21:54:36Z")
The staff report on [Who Wrote the Bible? (Part 5)](http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mbible5.html) concludes with a description of the collation of the NT (although it may not be as detailed as you’d like). If no one comes up with a clearer answer before I get home, tonight, I’ll try to synthesize the comments in Kümmel’s Introduction to the New Testament (although the summary runs to about eight pages).