The Development of the Canon of the New Testament

Eusebius of Caesarea (b. ~260 CE probably in Caesarea, d. ~340 CE)

Although Eusebius leaves much to be desired as an exegete or an apologist for Christianity, he had one quality that was lacking in all his predecessors and contemporaries -- the instinct for historical research. His Ecclesiastical History gives us access to a host of sources and traditions otherwise long since lost. The 'Father of Church History' had at his disposal the library at Caesarea which Origen had built up after he had been forced to leave Alexandria and take up residence in Palestine. Pamphilus, an enthusiastic adherent of Origen, had sought out and added many volumes to the library, and Eusebius, the pupil, coworker and friend of Pamphilus, became his successor when he died (~310) as a martyr in the Diocletian persecution.

In the congenial setting offered by a well-stocked library in Caesarea, as well as by visiting the Christian library at Jerusalem, founded in the previous century by Bishop Alexander (Hist. eccl. 6.20.1), Eusebius indulged his appetite for Christian antiquities, and began the task of collecting and organizing material covering the history of the Church, chiefly in the East, during the previous 3 centuries.

Regarding Eusebius and the New Testament canon, we will use the well-known passage in his Ecclesiastical History (3.25.1-7). We also use an earlier passage (3.3.5-7) in the same book regarding the Epistle to the Hebrews and Shepherd of Hermas, where both are classified as 'disputed'. In the absence of any official list of the canonical writings, Eusebius finds it simplest to count the votes of his witnesses, and by this means to classify all the writings into four categories:

Class	writings	symbol
homologoumena (recognized)	... the holy quaternion of the Gospels, which are followed by the book of the Acts of the Apostles. After this must be reckoned the Epistles of Paul; next in order the extant former Epistle of John, and likewise the Epistle of Peter must be recognized. After these must be put, if it really seems right, the Apocalypse of John, .....
antilegomena (disputed)	Of the disputed books, which are nevertheless familiar to the majority, there are extant the Epistle of James, as it is called; and that of Jude; and the second Epistle of Peter; and those that are called the Second and Third of John, ....
notha (spurious)	... the Acts of Paul, and the Shepherd, as it is called, and the Apocalypse of Peter; and, in addition to these, the extant Epistle of Barnabas, and the Teaching of the Apostles [Didache], as it is called. And, in addition, as I said, the Apocalypse of John, if it seem right. ... And among these some have counted also the Gospel of the Hebrews, ....
heretical	... such books as the Gospels of Peter, of Thomas, of Matthias, or even of some others besides these, and the Acts of Andrew and John and the other apostles.

Despite Eusebius' good intentions, he has been unable to present a tidy listing. For example, he lists the Revelation of John in both the recognized and spurious classes. For more discussion of these problems, see [Metzger] pp. 201-206. For a visual summary of Eusebius' classification see the Cross Reference Table.

The Divine Scriptures that are Accepted and Those That are Not (from Ecclesiastical History 3.25.1-7)

[recognized]
At this point it seems appropriate to summarize the writings of the New Testament which have already been mentioned. In the first place must be put the holy quaternion of the Gospels, which are followed by the book of the Acts of the Apostles.

After this must be reckoned the Epistles of Paul; next in order the extant former Epistle of John, and likewise the Epistle of Peter must be recognized. After these must be put, if it really seems right, the Apocalypse of John, concerning which we shall give the different opinions at the proper time. These, then, [are to placed] among the recognized books.

[disputed]
Of the disputed books, which are nevertheless familiar to the majority, there are extant the Epistle of James, as it is called; and that of Jude; and the second Epistle of Peter; and those that are called the Second and Third of John, whether they belong to the evangelist or to another of the same name.

[spurious]
Among the spurious books must be reckoned also the Acts of Paul, and the Shepherd, as it is called, and the Apocalypse of Peter; and, in addition to these, the extant Epistle of Barnabas, and the Teaching of the Apostles [Didache] , as it is called. And, in addition, as I said, the Apocalypse of John, if it seems right. (This last as I said, is rejected by some, but others count it among the recognized books.) And among these some have counted also the Gospel of the Hebrews, with which those of the Hebrews who have accepted Christ take a special pleasure.

[heretical]
Now all these would be among the disputed books; but nevertheless we have felt compelled to make this catalogue of them, distinguishing between those writings which, according to the tradition of the Church, are true and genuine and recognized, from the others which differ from them in that they are not canonical, but disputed, yet nevertheless are known to most churchmen. [And this we have done] in order that we might be able to know both these same writings and also those which the heretics put forward under the name of the apostles; including, for instance, such books as the Gospels of Peter, of Thomas, of Matthias, or even of some others besides these, and the Acts of Andrew and John and the other apostles. To none of these has any who belonged to the succession of ecclesiastical writers ever thought it right to refer in his writings.

Moreover, the character of the style also is far removed from apostolic usage, and the thought and purport of their contents are completely out of harmony with true orthodoxy and clearly show themselves that they are the forgeries of heretics. For this reason they ought not to be reckoned among the spurious books, but are to be cast aside as altogether absurd and impious.

The Epistles of the Apostles (from Ecclesiastical History 3.3.5-7)

... Paul's fourteen epistles are well known and undisputed. It is not indeed right to overlook the fact that some have rejected the Epistle to the Hebrews, saying that it is disputed by the church of Rome, on the ground that it was not written by Paul. But what has been said concerning this epistle by those who lived before our time I shall quote in the proper place. In regard to the so-called Acts of Paul, I have not found them among the undisputed writings.

But as the same apostle, in the salutations at the end of the Epistle to the Romans, has made mention among others of Hermas, to whom the book called The Shepherd is ascribed, it should be observed that this too has been disputed by some, and on their account cannot be placed among the acknowledged books; while by others it is considered quite indispensable, especially to those who need instruction in the elements of the faith. Hence, as we know, it has been publicly read in churches, and I have found that some of the most ancient writers used it. This will serve to show the divine writings that are undisputed as well as those that are not universally acknowledged.