Why these books and not those?

Last Tuesday at Hub we explored the way in which the New Testament formed, as churches shared documents, built their libraries, and decided which books they would read in church and trust for teaching.

But how did the churches know whether a certain books should be included in the New Testament? We often say that the books in the New Testament are “inspired” (“breathed out” by God), and that’s what sets them apart. This is true, but only in hindsight. We often imagine this to mean that God handed these books to us already written, as if Paul’s hand was moved for him as he wrote things he barely understood. As we saw at Hub, this definitely wasn’t the case. Paul wrote what he thought for people he knew.

The Catholic Church has a different take. It says that the books are in the New Testament because the church said they would be. That is, the early Christians decided which books they would trust, and that’s why we trust them now. This is even more problematic than the ‘handed down’ idea. If the books are only in the New Testament because the early Christians liked them, why should they be any better than other books?

The books in the New Testament weren’t handed down to us, nor were they chosen by the early Christians. The New Testament formed as of the early church recognised the authority of the apostles and their writings, and placed itself under their teaching. The books in the New Testament are there because the church recognised that these were the books with the most trustworthy teaching about Jesus, what he did, and what it means for us.

And we’re still doing it. We recognise that the books in the New Testament tell us the truth about the gospel. So we read them, study them, and work out what they’re saying, so we can know more about Jesus and live better lives in response to him.