I provided a very brief overview of key aspects of how we got the canon of the NT (these 27 books and only these 27) in my previous two posts.  Now I want to move into a deeper look found in my book Lost Christianities: The Battles for Scripture and the Faiths We Never Knew (Oxford University Press, 2003).  This was the second trade-book (for general audiences) I wrote, and it is the one that launched my career writing books for non-experts. The book is about the various forms of Christianity in the first several centuries (Ebionites, Marcionites, various kinds of Gnostics, various kinds of Proto-orthodoxy, etc.) and the books they used as their authoritative sacred texts.  Toward the end of the book I have a chapter on how the orthodox canon emerged out of that mess. I will be excerpting parts of the book here.  This will take a few posts. ****************************** So far as we can tell, all the Christian groups of the period came to ascribe authority to some written texts; and [...]

In my post yesterday I discussed the factors that motivated Christians to come up with a canon of the New Testament.  Now I can talk about how they decided which books should belong and how the process played itself out as leaders debated the issues over time. ****************************** The Criteria Used The “orthodox” church fathers who decided on the shape and content of the canon applied several criteria to determine whether a book should be included or not. Four criteria were especially important. A book had to go back to the very beginning of the Christian movement or it could not be accepted. If a really good and important book that was fully informed and “true” were written, say, last year, that would not be good enough for it to be part of Scripture. The canon of Scripture contained books from the beginning of the Christian movement. Only books that were written by apostles could be accepted as part of the canon; this included the disciples of Jesus and their followers of the [...]

In previous posts I discussed how we got the canon of the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament.  I now will discuss the formation of the New Testament canon.  Why these 27 books?  Who decided?  When?  On what grounds? This will be the focus of my next book, which I am beginning to read and think seriously about.  The following is the basic overview that I provide in my book The Bible: A Historical and Literary Introduction 2nd ed (Oxford University Press). This will take two posts. ****************************** We are much better informed about the formation of the canon of the New Testament (than for the OT), in no small part because we have the writings of later church fathers who explicitly discuss the matter. We do not have nearly as much information as we would like—as is true for almost every set of historical events from the ancient world—but we have enough to give us a good idea of what motivated Christians to come up with a list of canonical books, what criteria they followed in deciding [...]

When I started the "New Testament in a Nutshell" series I promised to provide one-sentence, fifty-word summaries of each book of the New Testament, and promised, when I was done, to put them all together in one post.  Here is the post!  (It includes a few other 50-worders on the Gospels and Paul). The idea behind this is that if someone asks you, "What is the letter to the Galatians about?" -- you should be able to give a brief statement that covers what it is in a way that is distinctive (so what you say for Galatians is not the same thing you would say for Romans or Ephesians, etc.). So here they are.  You may well be able to improve upon them!  But hopefully you will find them of some good use.   The Gospels as a Whole Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John are our oldest narrative accounts of Jesus, the Son of God who fulfilled Scripture in his life, death, and resurrection, who taught the way of salvation, performed miraculous deeds, was [...]

Now that I have spent two posts explaining the contents, structure, and organization of the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament, I can move on to explain how it is we got these books in particular.  Why not other books?  Who decided?  On what grounds?  And when? This will take two posts.  In this one, I give a brief overview of the understanding that was widely held for a very long time among scholars.  It was the one I was raised on! First I need to explain what we mean by "canon."  The term comes from the Greek word for “reed” or “rod.” A canon was a straight edge that was used, for example, by a carpenter to make sure that an alignment was correct; but it could also be used as a measuring stick. Eventually the word “canon” came to be applied in other contexts, by analogy, to refer to a rule or standard by which something could be judged, and in that sense it came to be applied to a collection or list of books. [...]

Here on the last day of 2025 it is time to write my annual Blog-Year-in-Review post.  This year I have been helped considerably in the task by our fantastically gifted and efficient CEO, Jen (Olmos), whom many of you have had contact with over the course of your (and her) time with us.  Jen has been the greatest gift to the blog since we started in 2012, and has eased my workload significantly.  Among a zillion other things, she dug out all the data for me and has summarized our most important accomplishments.  As you’ll see, well done us! As y’all know, over the course of its thirteen years the Blog has had two major objectives, to spread knowledge of biblical (and related scholarship) more broadly among non-scholars and to raise money for charity doing it.  I’m more or less responsible for the scholarship and all YOU, the paying members and donors, are responsible for the funds, and Jen and our generous team of volunteers makes it all happen and keeps it all running. [...]

I had an interview with Nicholas Kristof, columnist for the New York Times, which appeared electronically this past Saturday.  It was based on my book Love Thy Stranger (coming out in March) with a focus on Christmas. These kinds of interviews are very frustrating because it is impossible to back up a single thing you say and if you say anything that needs backing up, it is just sitting there for someone to take a potshot at.  Or at least when given as a bare statement seems really dubious.  But, it's the nature of the beast (kind of like being interviewed as a talking head for a documentary film/TV show; they interview you for three hours  and then take ten or fifteen ten- or fifteen-second soundbites!) So many of the comments the (NYT) interview has received show how many people in the world who have opinions about the Bible, Jesus, and early Christianity would really benefit from learning more.  There are so many commonplaces out there that simply seem true to people because they've heard [...]