In my previous post, I ranted for a little while then listed some frequently mistaken ideas about the canon. In this post, I’m going to talk about the first thing on that list: The decision of what went into the Bible was a process, not one made at any one “councilâ€?. The idea put forth by many popular books and movies these days is that what we have in the Bible is a direct result of the Council of Nicea.

At that church council in about 325 A.D., the story goes, the newly converted emperor Constantine decided that the form of Christianity he had adopted should become the only form of Christianity. To cement the victory of this “orthodox” faith, which included the idea that Christ was both God and Man, the emperor summoned the council of church leaders to impose his ideas upon the bourgeoning Christian Church. Furthermore, Constantine commissioned the production of Bibles which furthered his Christology. Books which did not portray Christ in the light the emperor desired were left out of the canon, while books that favored the emperor’s interpretation were given weight and included. And that is the current story being told about how what we know as the “orthodox”, not to be confused necessarily with the “Orthodox” of the Eastern Orthodox Church, became the dominant form of Christianity.

While it makes an interesting story, the truth is that it totally misunderstands how the canon came into being. While it is true that what we have today as the “Bible” was validated at the council of Nicea, it’s origins are far older than at the council itself. As early as the mid second century (c. 170 A.D.), Christians were compiling lists as to what was considered “inspired”. One of these, the so-called Muratorian Canon (named after the person who discovered it), lists all of the current new testament books with the exception of: Hebrews, 1 and 2 Peter or, James. Even these omissions, however, may have been caused by the fact that the document is partially destroyed. It is plausible that these books were originally present, although it is not proven. In addition to the list of acceptable books, the canon list mentions other books written “in the name of Paul” and the other apostles, but are not accepted as inspired for the Christian church. Moreover, the list makes mention of books written around the time of Paul, such as the Sheperd of Hermas, which are good for learning, but not for inspiration.

Lists such as these, in combination with quotes from early church fathers shows that Christians were thinking about the canon long before the council of Nicea. The canon was not decided upon lightly. As the non-acceptance of the Sheperd of Hermas shows, just because something was written during the time of the Apostles doesn’t mean it was accepted blindly. Just because people lived hundreds of years ago doesn’t mean they were idiots.
The development of the Canon was a process, not a decision.