The Biblical Canon Was Never Agreed Upon — Early Church Fathers, Denominations, and the Long History of Canon Disputes
Most Christians today assume the Bible was always one book, agreed on by all — but the early Church was anything but united on that question. The canonicity of the biblical books was not decided in a single moment. It was a long and gradual process during which different churches held varying opinions about which books were authoritative, and that lack of consensus persisted for centuries. What follows is a compiled presentation of the evidence — drawn from Church Fathers, denominational canons, and scholarly sources — demonstrating the depth and persistence of that disagreement.
The following image opens the discussion with source material establishing the historical context of canon formation.
Father Fahim Aziz explains that the canonicity of the biblical books was not decided in a single moment. Instead, it was a long and gradual process during which different churches held varying opinions about which books were authoritative. This lack of consensus persisted for quite some time.
The following image presents source material on the divergent canon positions of the Western and Eastern churches.
For example, the Western Church did not recognize the canonicity of Hebrews and only accepted three Catholic Epistles — 1 and 2 John, and 1 Peter. Meanwhile, the Eastern Church rejected the Book of Revelation as canonical.
The Syrian Church Canon
The following image presents source material on the Syrian Church’s unique canon, which differed significantly from both the Eastern and Western traditions.
The Syrian Church accepted the Diatessaron instead of the four Gospels and rejected all the universal letters. Revelation was not even considered a revealed book. They also added a now-lost Third Epistle to the Corinthians — a letter that appears nowhere in modern canons.
The Epistle of Jeremiah — Early Fathers vs. Contemporary Fathers
The following image presents source material on the conflicting positions of early and contemporary fathers regarding the Epistle of Jeremiah.
The early fathers believed in the legitimacy of the Epistle of Jeremiah, while the contemporary fathers do not believe in its legitimacy. The same text held as canonical by one generation of Church authorities was rejected by the next.
The Book of Baruch — Rejected Then Accepted
The following image presents the relevant passage from the Christian Encyclopedia on the early church’s rejection of the Book of Baruch.
The Christian Encyclopedia states that the early church rejected the Book of Baruch and considered it non-canonical. The church today, however, believes in the canonical nature of the Book of Baruch. A book rejected by the early church is now scripture.
The Books of Maccabees — Three Then Two
The following image presents the relevant passage from Ibn Al-Assal’s Safawi Collection on early church acceptance of three books of Maccabees.
According to Ibn Al-Assal’s Safawi Collection, early church believers accepted three books of Maccabees. Today’s church, however, only recognizes two. One entire book of scripture was silently dropped.
The Shepherd of Hermas — Once Canonical, Now Discarded
The following image presents source material on the early church’s canonical acceptance of the Shepherd of Hermas.
The early church regarded the Shepherd of Hermas as canonical — placing it on par with the Books of Wisdom and Sirach — and considered its author to be an apostolic figure. Today the church no longer accepts it as part of the canon.
The Ethiopian Church Canon
The following image presents source material on the Ethiopian Church’s distinct canon, which diverges sharply from all Western and Eastern traditions.
The Ethiopian Church rejects the canonical Maccabees books, yet includes several apocryphal texts: the Chronicles of Baruch, the Ascension of Isaiah, the Book of Enoch, Jubilees, and the Shepherd of Hermas. The Ethiopian Church’s total canon contains 81 books — many rejected by other traditions, and it rejects some that others accept.
The Protestant Rejection of the Deuterocanonical Books
The following image presents source material on the Protestant Church’s rejection of the entire Deuterocanonical corpus.
The Protestant Church rejects all the Deuterocanonical books — Tobit, Judith, Baruch, Sirach, and the Maccabees — and labels them all as Apocrypha. These same books are considered divinely inspired scripture by the Catholic and Orthodox churches.
2 Peter — Rejected by the Early Church, Accepted Today
The following image presents the relevant passage from Eusebius of Caesarea on the early church’s rejection of the Second Epistle of Peter.
The church historian Eusebius of Caesarea conveys that the early church rejected the Second Epistle of Peter and did not consider it canonical. The church now believes in the canonicity of 2 Peter.
Origen’s Canon
Origen rejected 2 and 3 John, 2 Peter, Hebrews, and 1 Maccabees — but accepted Barnabas, the Shepherd of Hermas, and the Acts of Paul as scripture. None of the texts Origen accepted that are not in the modern canon appear in any church’s Bible today.
The following four images present the source material on Origen’s canon.
The following image continues the source material on Origen’s canon.
The following image presents the third entry in the Origen canon sequence.
The following image presents the fourth entry in the Origen canon sequence.
The following image presents the fifth entry in the Origen canon sequence.
Clement of Alexandria’s Canon
Saint Clement of Alexandria accepted the Didache, the Epistle of Barnabas, the Shepherd of Hermas, and the Revelation of Peter as scripture — books no longer in any canon today. Yet he rejected 2 Peter, which the Church now accepts.
The following four images present source material on Clement of Alexandria’s canon.
The following image continues the source material on Clement of Alexandria’s canon.
The following image presents the third entry in the Clement of Alexandria canon sequence.
The following image presents the fourth entry in the Clement of Alexandria canon sequence.
Saint Dionysius, Patriarch of Alexandria
Saint Dionysius, Patriarch of Alexandria followed Eusebius of Caesarea in denying the legitimacy of the Second Epistle of Peter and the Revelation of John the Theologian, describing them as works of the heretic Cerinthus. Christians today consider both books divinely inspired scripture.
The following three images present source material on Dionysius of Alexandria’s canon position.
The following image continues the source material on Dionysius of Alexandria.
The following image presents the third entry in the Dionysius of Alexandria sequence.
Saint Athanasius the Apostolic
The following image presents source material on Saint Athanasius’s limited Old Testament canon of 22 books.
Saint Athanasius the Apostolic believed that the number of books in the Old Testament was only 22 books and did not recognize the canonical nature of all the Deuterocanonical books of the Bible in either its Old or New Testament.
Saint Justin the Martyr
The following image presents source material on Justin Martyr’s relationship to the four Gospels.
Saint Justin the Martyr knew the four Gospels were linked together — but he did not reveal who collected them or when they were collected. He described them as “memories.” Early Church Fathers including Papias, Irenaeus, and Jerome believed in a Hebrew Gospel of Matthew. Where is that Gospel now? Jerome also doubted the Epistle of Jude for quoting apocryphal texts.
Saint Hippolytus of Rome
The following image presents source material on Hippolytus of Rome’s limited canon.
Saint Hippolytus of Rome, a prominent Church Father, recognized only 22 Old Testament books. He rejected Hebrews due to its unknown authorship, and also denied 2 and 3 John, 2 Peter, James, and Jude.
Saint Jerome and the Book of Tobit
The following image presents source material on Jerome’s rejection of the Book of Tobit.
Saint Jerome did not consider the Book of Tobit to be a canonical book. The Ethiopian Church and the Protestant Church also consider Tobit non-canonical. The Catholic and Orthodox Churches, however, believe in the canonical nature of the book. The same text is simultaneously scripture and non-scripture depending on which Christian tradition one follows.
Saint Didymus the Blind
The following two images present source material on Didymus the Blind’s canon, including his acceptance of the Letters of Clement of Rome and his rejection of 2 and 3 John.
The following image continues the source material on Didymus the Blind.
Saint Didymus the Blind and Clement of Alexandria accepted the Letters of Clement of Rome as legitimate — and these letters appear in key fifth-century manuscripts. Yet Didymus did not accept 2 and 3 John, recognizing only the First Epistle of John as canonical.
The 27-Book New Testament — A Late and Contested Decision
The following image presents source material refuting the claim that the early church had a fixed 27-book New Testament.
Some naively believe — as Father Adnan Traboulsi’s words suggest — that the early church had a fixed New Testament of 27 books. In reality, the second-century church had dozens of texts bearing the names of Christ’s apostles and disciples, widely circulated among Christian groups.
The following image presents source material on the final election of the 27-book canon and the subsequent Council of Trent.
The Bible consisting of 27 books was determined at the end of the third century. The conflict between sects regarding the canonical nature of individual books continued until the Council of Trent in the fifteenth century, where the number of canonical books was decided by voting.
The contents of the Bible were determined by a vote.
The following two images present the relevant passage from Bart Ehrman on how long it took to finalize the New Testament list.
The following image continues Ehrman’s account, noting that the Apocalypse of Peter was once more popular than Revelation and considered sacred until the fifth century.
Bart Ehrman notes it took centuries to finalize the list. The Apocalypse of Peter was once more popular than Revelation and seen as sacred until the fifth century — then suddenly it was not.
The Book of Esther
The following image presents source material on the Church Fathers’ rejection of the Book of Esther.
Many Church Fathers rejected the sanctity of the Book of Esther and did not consider it canonical. It later came to be regarded as holy scripture. Among its textual problems is the fact that the Hebrew text of Esther never once mentions the name of God.
The Gospel of James, Saint Cyril, and the Egyptian Church
The following four images present source material on the Gospel of James, Saint Cyril’s 26-book New Testament, and the Egyptian Church’s acceptance of lost texts.
The following image continues the source material on these canon variations.
The following image presents the third entry in this sequence.
The following image presents the fourth entry in this sequence.
The Gospel of James was once considered sacred in the East but was later dropped. Saint Cyril listed only 26 New Testament books, rejecting Revelation. The Egyptian Church accepted now-lost texts including the Gospel of the Hebrews and the Gospel of the Egyptians.
The Hebrew Gospel of Matthew and the Ethiopian 81-Book Canon
The following three images present source material on the Hebrew Gospel of Matthew believed in by Papias, Irenaeus, and Jerome, and on the Ethiopian Church’s 81-book canon.
The following image continues the source material on these canon divergences.
The following image presents the third entry in this sequence.
Early Church Fathers including Papias, Irenaeus, and Jerome believed in a Hebrew Gospel of Matthew — so where is it now? Jerome also doubted the Epistle of Jude for quoting apocryphal texts. The Ethiopian Church accepts 81 books — many rejected by others — and rejects some books that others accept.
The biblical canon was never a fixed, universally agreed-upon collection. It was assembled gradually, disputed continuously, and resolved differently by every major Christian tradition. The Western Church rejected Hebrews. The Eastern Church rejected Revelation. The Syrian Church replaced the four Gospels with the Diatessaron. The Ethiopian Church uses 81 books. The Protestant Church strips out the entire Deuterocanonical corpus. The early Church accepted the Shepherd of Hermas, the Acts of Paul, the Epistle of Barnabas, and the Revelation of Peter as scripture — and then quietly dropped them. Origen, Clement of Alexandria, Hippolytus, Jerome, Athanasius, Dionysius of Alexandria, and Justin Martyr each held a different set of canonical books, and in numerous cases what they accepted is now rejected, and what they rejected is now accepted. The 27-book New Testament was not finalized until the end of the third century at the earliest, and the full canon was not settled by vote until the Council of Trent in the fifteenth century. The question that every Christian must answer is simple: which canon, and decided by whom?
Early Church Fathers and the Trinity — A Pre-Constantinople Study
The Corruption of the Bible: A Study from Christian Sources
...rue author of the Gospel did exactly that. Therefore the true author was not Matthew the Apostle.