What do you think?
Rate this book
Canon Revisited: Establishing The Origins And Authority Of The New Testament Books
Given the popular-level conversations on phenomena like the Gospel of Thomas and Bart Ehrman’s Misquoting Jesus, as well as the current gap in evangelical scholarship on the origins of the New Testament, Michael Kruger’s Canon Revisited meets a significant need for an up-to-date work on canon by addressing recent developments in the field. He presents an academically rigorous yet accessible study of the New Testament canon that looks deeper than the traditional surveys of councils and creeds, mining the text itself for direction in understanding what the original authors and audiences believed the canon to be.
Canon Revisited provides an evangelical introduction to the New Testament canon that can be used in seminary and college classrooms, and read by pastors and educated lay leaders alike. In contrast to the prior volumes on canon, this volume distinguishes itself by placing a substantial focus on the theology of canon as the context within which the historical evidence is evaluated and assessed. Rather than simply discussing the history of canon—rehashing the Patristic data yet again—Kruger develops a strong theological framework for affirming and authenticating the canon as authoritative. In effect, this work successfully unites both the theology and the historical development of the canon, ultimately serving as a practical defense for the authority of the New Testament books.
Canon Revisited provides an evangelical introduction to the New Testament canon that can be used in seminary and college classrooms, and read by pastors and educated lay leaders alike. In contrast to the prior volumes on canon, this volume distinguishes itself by placing a substantial focus on the theology of canon as the context within which the historical evidence is evaluated and assessed. Rather than simply discussing the history of canon—rehashing the Patristic data yet again—Kruger develops a strong theological framework for affirming and authenticating the canon as authoritative. In effect, this work successfully unites both the theology and the historical development of the canon, ultimately serving as a practical defense for the authority of the New Testament books.
368 pages, Kindle Edition
First published April 30, 2012
226 people are currently reading
2031 people want to read
About the author
Michael J. Kruger
33 books118 followersMichael J. Kruger (PhD, University of Edinburgh) is president and professor of New Testament at Reformed Theological Seminary, Charlotte, and the author of a number of articles and books on early Christianity.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 178 reviews
July 24, 2013
For many years I have felt that canon was my Achilles' Heel as a Protestant (wannabe) theologian. I felt the sting of the charge that I am a "fideist"—someone who chooses his authority arbitrarily, with no sound evidence to back it up. And I felt that sting because it's one thing to make the Bible your authority and another to prove to a skeptic, even a "Christian" one, that these 66 books and no others are divinely authoritative. Where does the Bible itself ever present the final list of canonical books?
Michael Kruger's Canon Revisited has shod my feet with armor; now my heel feels much safer! His work is truly a tour de force, and I don't toss out French appellations easily. What Kruger does is simple: he takes the theological and epistemological insights of presuppositionalism, an apologetic methodology which resolutely presses back to the Bible, and applies them to the question of canon.
You can hear the presuppositionalism in some of his opening words describing his work:
Kruger is eager to let the Bible speak in its own defense:
I won't go into great detail, but I'll note that Kruger helpfully describes three major Christian models for understanding canon:
The canon as community determined—this would include the Catholic model in which the church validates and therefore stands over Scripture, but it would also include the neo-orthodox model in which people experience God's authority individually and existentially through encounters with the Bible.
The canon as historically determined—this would be both the liberal Protestant model and the evidentialist model. We know what the books of the Bible are because they're the books that became the Bible, historically speaking (liberal Protestants) or because of all the objective evidence to which we can point for proving that they belong there (evidentialists).
The canon as self-authenticating—this is the model Kruger propounds. And what a great title for this chapter: "My sheep hear my voice." Kruger points out that the previous two models (and all those contained within those two broad categories) "share one core characteristic. They all ground the authority of the canon in something outside the canon itself." (88) Can you hear the presuppositional argument? "What is needed, then, is a canonical model that...seeks to ground the canon in the only place it could be grounded, its own authority. After all, if the canon bears the very authority of God, to what other standard could it appeal to justify itself? Even when God swore oaths, 'he swore by himself' (Heb. 6:13).
But Kruger isn't a fideist:
One more quote, striking at the essence of presuppositionalism:
Right: if God speaks, what are you going to do, run His claims through the NPOV community at Wikipedia? Are they neutral?
Kruger spends the rest of the book exploring three scripturally justified "attributes" of canonicity which allow the Bible to speak on its own behalf: 1) its divine qualities, 2) its apostolic origins, and 3) the corporate reception of the church.
This is an excellent book, a must-read. Kruger adeptly uses the Bible, stays up with current discussions, and brings in historical theology. My copy is absolutely filled with neon highlights. Kruger has performed a very important service for the church of Jesus Christ.
Michael Kruger's Canon Revisited has shod my feet with armor; now my heel feels much safer! His work is truly a tour de force, and I don't toss out French appellations easily. What Kruger does is simple: he takes the theological and epistemological insights of presuppositionalism, an apologetic methodology which resolutely presses back to the Bible, and applies them to the question of canon.
You can hear the presuppositionalism in some of his opening words describing his work:
This volume is not attempting somehow to "prove" the truth of the canon to the skeptic in a manner that would be persuasive to him. Our goal here is not to find some neutral common ground from which we can demonstrate to the biblical critic that these books are divinely given.... The issue that concerns us here is not about our having knowledge of the canon (or proving the truth of canon) but accounting for our knowledge of canon. (21)
Kruger is eager to let the Bible speak in its own defense:
Most prior studies of the canon have provided precious little by way of the theology of canon and have focused almost exclusively on historical questions.... The theology of canon is viewed not as an "epilogue" to be addressed only after the formal investigation of the historical evidence is complete, but instead as the paradigm through which the historical evidene is to be investigated in the first place. (24)
I won't go into great detail, but I'll note that Kruger helpfully describes three major Christian models for understanding canon:
The canon as community determined—this would include the Catholic model in which the church validates and therefore stands over Scripture, but it would also include the neo-orthodox model in which people experience God's authority individually and existentially through encounters with the Bible.
The canon as historically determined—this would be both the liberal Protestant model and the evidentialist model. We know what the books of the Bible are because they're the books that became the Bible, historically speaking (liberal Protestants) or because of all the objective evidence to which we can point for proving that they belong there (evidentialists).
The canon as self-authenticating—this is the model Kruger propounds. And what a great title for this chapter: "My sheep hear my voice." Kruger points out that the previous two models (and all those contained within those two broad categories) "share one core characteristic. They all ground the authority of the canon in something outside the canon itself." (88) Can you hear the presuppositional argument? "What is needed, then, is a canonical model that...seeks to ground the canon in the only place it could be grounded, its own authority. After all, if the canon bears the very authority of God, to what other standard could it appeal to justify itself? Even when God swore oaths, 'he swore by himself' (Heb. 6:13).
But Kruger isn't a fideist:
We shall argue that when it comes to the question of canon, the Scriptures themselves provide grounds for considering external data: the apostolicity of books, the testimony of the church, and so forth. Of course, this external evidence is not to be used as an independent and neutral 'test' to determine what counts as canonical; rather it should always be seen as something warranted by Scripture and interpreted by Scripture. (90)
One more quote, striking at the essence of presuppositionalism:
How do we offer an account of how we know that an ultimate authority is, in fact, the ultimate authority? If we try to validate an ultimate authority by appealing to some other authority, then we have just shown that it is not really the ultimate authority. Thus, for ultimate authorities to be ultimate authorities, they have to be the standard for their own authentication. You cannot account for them without using them. (91)
Right: if God speaks, what are you going to do, run His claims through the NPOV community at Wikipedia? Are they neutral?
Kruger spends the rest of the book exploring three scripturally justified "attributes" of canonicity which allow the Bible to speak on its own behalf: 1) its divine qualities, 2) its apostolic origins, and 3) the corporate reception of the church.
This is an excellent book, a must-read. Kruger adeptly uses the Bible, stays up with current discussions, and brings in historical theology. My copy is absolutely filled with neon highlights. Kruger has performed a very important service for the church of Jesus Christ.
September 17, 2012
The canon is an inherently difficult topic because it reaches down to the foundations of Christian authority. To ask the Christian to justify his belief that the 27 books and only the 27 books of his New Testament are God's new covenant revelation is akin to asking the rationalist to justify his rationalism or the empiricist to justify his empiricism. Canonicity has become even more complicated today with claims that a New Testament canon was not conceived until centuries after Christ and with assertions that various Gnostic or otherwise unorthodox texts have just as much a claim to represent authentic Christianity as the books of the New Testament.
Michael Kruger enters this discussion with a specific aim. This book is not an apologetic designed to win over the skeptic. He is instead seeking to provide the Christian with a model that can show his embrace of the New Testament canon is epistemically justified.
Kruger begins by surveying and evaluating three broad approaches to determining the canon: (1) "community determined," (2) "historically determined," and (3) "self-authenticating."
Within these broad categories are found several diverse models. For instance, the Roman Catholic model, the historical-critical model, and Childs's canon-criticism are all "community determined" despite the great differences between them. Historically, orthodox Protestants from the Reformation onward have eschewed the "community determined" approach, though Craig Allert has recently attempted to popularize it among evangelicals. Many of the current challenges to the traditional cannon come from models in this category. In this chapter Kruger evaluates each model individually, but his basic overall critique is that "these models are left with a canon that is derived from and established by the church, and thus is unable to rule over the church" (66).
The second broad approach, "historically determined," is more familiar to evangelicals. Contained under this category is the "criteria-of-canonicity" model advocated by the Princetonians and many modern evangelicals. In this model religiously neutral historical investigation seeks to establish that the books of the canon match such criteria as apostolicity, antiquity, and orthodoxy. Kruger doubts, however, that Christians should approach theological questions with studied historical neutrality. He notes, "to authenticate the canon on the basis of a supposedly independent, neutral standard ultimately subjects the canon to an authority outside itself. It allows autonomous human assessment of historical evidence to become an external authority over God's Word" (79-80). Kruger also notes three problems with the criteria themselves. First, there is no evidence that the early Christians did any choosing of which books were and were not canonical based on the proposed criteria. They received, rather than chose, the canonical books. Second, even if the early church did use the various proposed criteria, one must establish that they used the correct criteria. Third, it is not clear that criteria such as apostolicity can be established by neutral historical work.
Kruger argues that the canon is self-authenticating. He is not arguing for a subjective, fideistic approach to the canon. He will, in fact, incorporate the strengths of both the community and historically-determined models into his own. Rather Kruger is advocating an approach that is already found in Calvin, Turretin, and the Westminster Confession of Faith. The Reformers and their heirs argued for canonicity on the basis of divine qualities found in the canonical books themselves. Kruger makes this one plank of his model. However, he also says that that the canon itself gives other criteria. Because the testimony of the Spirit to the voice of the Lord is corporate and not merely individual, the reception of books by the church is another plank in Kruger's model. Also, since the New Testament gives a foundational role to the apostles and their teaching, apostolicity forms the third plank. In Kruger's model the Holy Spirit testifies to the authenticity of the canon by enabling the church to see its divine qualities, its apostolic origins, and the confirming reception by the church throughout history.
In the remainder of the book, Kruger explains and defends these three planks. For instance, he includes a chapter in which he defines and defends the internal divine qualities of the Scriptural books. He has a chapter on apostolicity in which, among other things, he demonstrates from Scripture that the apostolic writers knew they were writing Scripture. He spends most of his time (three chapters) on the third plank, community reception, since this is where most of the current debate takes place. Kruger effectively challenges the late canon views of men such as Lee Martin McDonald. He also helpfully discusses what may be termed "problem books"—books whose canonicity was not immediately and universally recognized.
Kruger has done an excellent job updating and extending the classic Protestant approach to canonicity in light of present day challenges. This is now the best book on the canon available.
Michael Kruger enters this discussion with a specific aim. This book is not an apologetic designed to win over the skeptic. He is instead seeking to provide the Christian with a model that can show his embrace of the New Testament canon is epistemically justified.
Kruger begins by surveying and evaluating three broad approaches to determining the canon: (1) "community determined," (2) "historically determined," and (3) "self-authenticating."
Within these broad categories are found several diverse models. For instance, the Roman Catholic model, the historical-critical model, and Childs's canon-criticism are all "community determined" despite the great differences between them. Historically, orthodox Protestants from the Reformation onward have eschewed the "community determined" approach, though Craig Allert has recently attempted to popularize it among evangelicals. Many of the current challenges to the traditional cannon come from models in this category. In this chapter Kruger evaluates each model individually, but his basic overall critique is that "these models are left with a canon that is derived from and established by the church, and thus is unable to rule over the church" (66).
The second broad approach, "historically determined," is more familiar to evangelicals. Contained under this category is the "criteria-of-canonicity" model advocated by the Princetonians and many modern evangelicals. In this model religiously neutral historical investigation seeks to establish that the books of the canon match such criteria as apostolicity, antiquity, and orthodoxy. Kruger doubts, however, that Christians should approach theological questions with studied historical neutrality. He notes, "to authenticate the canon on the basis of a supposedly independent, neutral standard ultimately subjects the canon to an authority outside itself. It allows autonomous human assessment of historical evidence to become an external authority over God's Word" (79-80). Kruger also notes three problems with the criteria themselves. First, there is no evidence that the early Christians did any choosing of which books were and were not canonical based on the proposed criteria. They received, rather than chose, the canonical books. Second, even if the early church did use the various proposed criteria, one must establish that they used the correct criteria. Third, it is not clear that criteria such as apostolicity can be established by neutral historical work.
Kruger argues that the canon is self-authenticating. He is not arguing for a subjective, fideistic approach to the canon. He will, in fact, incorporate the strengths of both the community and historically-determined models into his own. Rather Kruger is advocating an approach that is already found in Calvin, Turretin, and the Westminster Confession of Faith. The Reformers and their heirs argued for canonicity on the basis of divine qualities found in the canonical books themselves. Kruger makes this one plank of his model. However, he also says that that the canon itself gives other criteria. Because the testimony of the Spirit to the voice of the Lord is corporate and not merely individual, the reception of books by the church is another plank in Kruger's model. Also, since the New Testament gives a foundational role to the apostles and their teaching, apostolicity forms the third plank. In Kruger's model the Holy Spirit testifies to the authenticity of the canon by enabling the church to see its divine qualities, its apostolic origins, and the confirming reception by the church throughout history.
In the remainder of the book, Kruger explains and defends these three planks. For instance, he includes a chapter in which he defines and defends the internal divine qualities of the Scriptural books. He has a chapter on apostolicity in which, among other things, he demonstrates from Scripture that the apostolic writers knew they were writing Scripture. He spends most of his time (three chapters) on the third plank, community reception, since this is where most of the current debate takes place. Kruger effectively challenges the late canon views of men such as Lee Martin McDonald. He also helpfully discusses what may be termed "problem books"—books whose canonicity was not immediately and universally recognized.
Kruger has done an excellent job updating and extending the classic Protestant approach to canonicity in light of present day challenges. This is now the best book on the canon available.
December 3, 2022
Really outstanding. Encouraging to show that the Christian belief they have the right 27 books of the New Testament is intellecutally justifiable. Kruger unpacks the self-authenticating model of canonicity, while answering common "defeaters" posed by critics.
January 15, 2025
So, the thesis of this book is that Christians DO an have intellectual basis for believing that the 27 books of the New Testament are canonical. All in all, sound thesis. Kruger proves point on every chapter, with accurate defeat of the “defeater” arguments and scholars who raise questions against the canon. This book feels like a seminary class in a binding. Not quite the page turner, but definitely worth a read. Trying to not ascribe my seminary weariness to this read, because apart from that, this book is a helpful resource to combat postmodern objections to having rational defenses for religious belief. Love the ending scripture: “My sheep know my voice, and I know them, and they follow me.” John 10:27. And we do, that’s why the canon is the canon and Shepherd of Hermas and the Gospel of Thomas are not in it, but Luke Revelation and 3 John are in it.
December 28, 2021
Quite academic, but a good treatise on why we can trust the canon of Scripture. I appreciate that multiple strands come together in his framework to support and reassure the people of God.
June 12, 2023
Kruger makes a strong case against the assertion that Christians don't have sufficient warrant for believing they have the right 27 books in the New Testament. He argues for the Reformed self-authenticating model -- we know these are right books because they tell us they are. He demonstrates the weakness of other proposals for determining canonicity, such as ecclesial reception (Roman Catholicism), historical reliability (represented by some evangelicals), and subjective experience of the NT as the vehicle for the word of God (neo-orthodoxy). Instead he proposes that the Scriptures evidence themselves to be such by their being providentially preserved, bearing marks of canonicity (apostolicity, church reception, harmony, efficacy, etc.), and by the testimony of the Holy Spirit. His arguments are thorough, and he consistently anticipates objections.
The arguments used do fall along all points of a spectrum between indisputable fact (e.g., the remarkable unity among second- and third-century sources on the question of which books were canonical) and intriguing speculation (e.g., the scrolls and parchments mentioned in 2 Tim 4:13 may refer to Old Testament texts and collections of Paul's own writings). While not every argument on its own will be convincing, I do think the cumulative case is something to be reckoned with. If nothing else, this study is worth reading for developing firmer confidence in the New Testament scriptures.
---
Update: Three years later, this is still one of the top 5 books I've read at RTS.
The arguments used do fall along all points of a spectrum between indisputable fact (e.g., the remarkable unity among second- and third-century sources on the question of which books were canonical) and intriguing speculation (e.g., the scrolls and parchments mentioned in 2 Tim 4:13 may refer to Old Testament texts and collections of Paul's own writings). While not every argument on its own will be convincing, I do think the cumulative case is something to be reckoned with. If nothing else, this study is worth reading for developing firmer confidence in the New Testament scriptures.
---
Update: Three years later, this is still one of the top 5 books I've read at RTS.
April 21, 2019
Very helpful. Same doctrine as Rollock, Whitaker, Turretin, and other Reformed Scholastics, but with the addition of his critical engagement with modern scholarship. One criticism, however, would be that Kruger does not consistently apply his canonical model to the text and content of the canon (e.g. with respect to passages like Mark 16:9-20), this inconsistency seeps through several times throughout the book. Overall a very helpful book!
January 24, 2024
After four years at Baylor, I’ve lost most of my patience for the silly nonsense that gets peddled as canon scholarship. Kruger’s a breath of fresh air. Sober, level-headed introduction. Very accessible.
I’m fond of the ‘self-authenticating model’, though there’s no need to call it a model. Everything in academics has to have a ‘model’. I don’t get it. Just say “the canon is self-authenticating” and be done with it. Anyway, the self-authenticating model is really just what Christians have been doing for the last 2,000ish years so it works well.
I’m fond of the ‘self-authenticating model’, though there’s no need to call it a model. Everything in academics has to have a ‘model’. I don’t get it. Just say “the canon is self-authenticating” and be done with it. Anyway, the self-authenticating model is really just what Christians have been doing for the last 2,000ish years so it works well.
November 10, 2025
Tremendous resource.
March 2, 2025
Really stellar.
April 9, 2024
I am so grateful for both Kruger's phenomenal scholarship and the biblical and theological shepherding he does here. It deepened my trust and confidence in these 27 books of the New Testament in ways that I don't think I can put into words. This book is a gift to any Christian who is anxious over the validity of the New Testament canon.
February 11, 2019
This book is not apologetics but rather epistemology. Kruger's goal is not to convince the skeptic that they should accept the 27 books of the New Testament as divinely inspired canon but rather to show the believer that they have solid intellectual grounds for such a belief.
Before getting into his self-authenticating model for accepting the canon, Kruger briefly examines and rejects other models both conservative and liberal used to examine the canon. He then claims to take the "best parts" of these models and combine them into what he calls the self authenticating model. His model basically has three points. In order for a writing to be considered part of scripture it must have 1) apostolic origins 2)divine qualities and 3) corporate reception.
The apostolic origins is the easiest point to and Kruger spends the least time on it since there are many other books already out there to prove that each of our 27 books were either written by an apostle or come from the direct testimony of such.
Divine qualities seems to me to be a highly subjective claim and unworthy of this type of book. While I do not in the least doubt that our New Testament is divinely inspired, it is much more of a devotional subject than an intellectual one. I don't see how this can be proven to any skeptic through an appeal to the mind.
Corporate Reception is the biggest challenge that Kruger faces. It is the commonly held belief that this is exactly not the case among most historical critical scholars and their prime reason (outside their materialist worldview) in denying the canonicity of the New Testament. Here Kruger does an excellent job in showing that a) claims of disagreement on this issue among the early church are highly exaggerated and b) some disagreement is exactly what would be expected when we understand how God works through people.
In all, this is an excellent work on the subject of the New Testament canon. Kruger is incredibly well researched and I would strongly recommend reading through his many footnotes as well as the material itself. I think I ended up adding at least 4-5 other books to my TBR based on this books bibliography.
Before getting into his self-authenticating model for accepting the canon, Kruger briefly examines and rejects other models both conservative and liberal used to examine the canon. He then claims to take the "best parts" of these models and combine them into what he calls the self authenticating model. His model basically has three points. In order for a writing to be considered part of scripture it must have 1) apostolic origins 2)divine qualities and 3) corporate reception.
The apostolic origins is the easiest point to and Kruger spends the least time on it since there are many other books already out there to prove that each of our 27 books were either written by an apostle or come from the direct testimony of such.
Divine qualities seems to me to be a highly subjective claim and unworthy of this type of book. While I do not in the least doubt that our New Testament is divinely inspired, it is much more of a devotional subject than an intellectual one. I don't see how this can be proven to any skeptic through an appeal to the mind.
Corporate Reception is the biggest challenge that Kruger faces. It is the commonly held belief that this is exactly not the case among most historical critical scholars and their prime reason (outside their materialist worldview) in denying the canonicity of the New Testament. Here Kruger does an excellent job in showing that a) claims of disagreement on this issue among the early church are highly exaggerated and b) some disagreement is exactly what would be expected when we understand how God works through people.
In all, this is an excellent work on the subject of the New Testament canon. Kruger is incredibly well researched and I would strongly recommend reading through his many footnotes as well as the material itself. I think I ended up adding at least 4-5 other books to my TBR based on this books bibliography.
February 10, 2016
"How can we know what books belong in the N. T. canon?" This is the question Kruger answers. He starts by showing how the main models can be classified as either community determined or historically determined. In these models, either the community (the church) or the historical data (the dates of the books and their authorship) determine which books should or should not be part of the canon, thus showing that “they all ground the authority of the canon in something outside the canon itself.”
Kruger's argument is very much a Van-Tillian approach. As he says, the Word of God cannot be judged by external criteria but is to be assessed on its own self-authenticating claims.
Kroger explains the three components of his "self-authenticating" approach: Providential exposure - The books must have been available to the church. Attributes of Canonization - the New Testament books have a 'divine quality', are affirmed by the church at large, and have apostolic origins. The Internal Testimony of the Holy Spirit - confirms the authority of a book and its place in the canon for believers.
Dr. Kruger has a charitable tone, and even though this is a scholarly book with abundant footnotes, he has an easy-to-read writing style, and does a great job of explaining the philosophical and theological problems with any other approach.
“The canon, as God’s Word, is not just true, but the criterion of truth. It is an ultimate authority. So, how do we offer an account of how we know that an ultimate authority is, in fact, the ultimate authority? If we try to validate an ultimate authority by appealing to some other authority, then we have just shown that it is not really the ultimate authority. Thus, for ultimate authorities to be ultimate authorities, they have to be the standard for their own authentication. You cannot account for them without using them.” -pg. 91, Canon Revisited
December 9, 2018
This is one of the best books I've read anywhere on any topic, period. But this is a must read for anyone into apologetics. I've been into presuppositional apologetics for years and have often wondered, "I know my final authority is God, and that all other perspectives are lost in absurdity, but how in the world do I defend what God has revealed to us in Scripture without appealing to an outside authority such as history or church tradition?" Well, this book has answered my question. Using the "Self-Authenticating Model" Kruger gives assurance and apologetic fire-power to every believer. Here are some chosen quotes from the book as well as a diagram of Kruger's "Self-Authenticating Model."
"The fundamental problem with the canon-within-the-canon approach is that it subjects the Scripture to a standard outside itself, namely, whatever criteria scholars set up to evaluate its truthfulness."
"J. I. Packer sums it up well: 'The Church no more gave us the New Testament canon than Sir Isaac Newton gave us the force of gravity. God gave us gravity . . . Newton did not create gravity but recognized it.'”
“History alone cannot answer the question of what the canon finally is; theology alone can do that.”
"The fact that proximate, human decisions played a role in the development of the canon does not rule out the possibility that ultimate, divine activity also played a role."
"What is needed, then, is a canonical model that does not ground the New Testament canon in an external authority, but seeks to ground the canon in the only place it could be grounded, its own authority."
"The fundamental problem with the canon-within-the-canon approach is that it subjects the Scripture to a standard outside itself, namely, whatever criteria scholars set up to evaluate its truthfulness."
"J. I. Packer sums it up well: 'The Church no more gave us the New Testament canon than Sir Isaac Newton gave us the force of gravity. God gave us gravity . . . Newton did not create gravity but recognized it.'”
“History alone cannot answer the question of what the canon finally is; theology alone can do that.”
"The fact that proximate, human decisions played a role in the development of the canon does not rule out the possibility that ultimate, divine activity also played a role."
"What is needed, then, is a canonical model that does not ground the New Testament canon in an external authority, but seeks to ground the canon in the only place it could be grounded, its own authority."
November 19, 2019
It's a common argument by critical scholars today that the 27 books we have in the New Testament is the product of human decision alone. The idea is that the "church bullies" of the 4th century essentially beat out other groups with variant theological ideas present in non-canonical books (Gospel of Thomas, Gospel of Peter, etc.) and "decided" on our current New Testament Canon. In Kruger's work, he thoroughly debunks this myth. While no one can "prove" the New Testament books we have come from God, one can understand the process by which these books were incorporated in the final form of the New Testament. In other words, Christians do have an intellectually viable cause to trust these books are the witness of the apostles to Jesus and his resurrection. This is a scholarly work with ample footnotes. For anyone wrestling with the issue of canon, I highly recommend it.
July 11, 2017
Great book addressing some of the big questions that every intro level Christianity class raises against Christianity. Especially helpful for college ministers.
May 15, 2024
"My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me" (John 10:27 ESV)
I found this a really convincing and helpful summary of why we can have confidence in our current canon, more specifically focusing on the NT.
The book starts out by critiquing a couple difference models that attempt to answer the question of what books belong in the NT. 1) Community-determined models give full weight to the books that were accepted by the early church. 2) Historically-determined models appeal only to the origins of the books themselves, such as if they are deemed authentic and apostolic. Both of these categories bring positive things to the discussion (the early church's acceptance and the authenticity/apostolicity of the canon are important), but ultimately fail in that they authenticate the NT canon on the basis of something external to it. At first I was hesitant on this point ... don't we always need external validity of the truth of something? But, Kruger points out:
"If we try to validate an ultimate authority by appealing to some other authority, then we have just shown that it is not really the ultimate authority. Thus, for ultimate authorities to be ultimate authorities, they have to be the standard for their own authentication. You cannot account for them without using them." (Kruger 132)
He then uses the analogy of wanting to determine if our sense perception is accurate. Since our senses are our only ultimate authority to know things, how can we determine truth without appealing to our senses?
"If I see a cup on the table, how do I know my sense perception is accurate? How would I test such a thing? I could examine the cup and table more closely to make sure they are what they seem to be (hold them, touch them, etc.). I could also ask a friend to tell me whether he sees a cup on the table. But in all these instances I am still assuming the reliability of my sense perception ... even as I examine the reliability of my sense perception." (Kruger 134)
This line of thinking really has helped me, as this specific question been one I've occasionally considered.
Kruger then moves on to show what environment the Scriptures lay in which belief in the canon can be reliably formed.
Providential Exposure: "We trust the providence of God to expose the church to the books it is to receive as canonical" (Kruger 434). There are not 'lost' books of the Bible.
Attributes of Canonicity: "The Scriptures indicate that there are three attributes that all canonical books have (1) divine qualities (canonical books bear the 'marks' of divinity), (2) corporate reception (canonical books are recognized by the church as a whole), and (3) apostolic origins (canonical books are the result of the redemptive-historical activity of the apostles)" (Kruger 435)
Internal Testimony of the Holy Spirt: "The internal testimony is not private revelation that tells us which books belong in the canon, but it is the spirit opening our eyes to the truth of these attributes and producing belief that these books are from God." (Kruger 435)
These are the summarized points of the book, but I found each of the chapters on these points really helpful, clear, and convincing. For a laymen such as I, this was the perfect mix of diving into the weeds and answering " ... well what about ... ?" questions and objections while also being readable and concise. I'd recommend it!
Some quotes I appreciated:
"The Church no more gave us the New Testament canon than Sir Isaac Newton gave us the force of gravity. God have us gravity ... Newton did not create gravity but recognized it." (J. I. Packer)
"Roger Nicole contends that we can know which books belong in the canon by appealing to the 'witness of the Holy Spirit given corporately to God's people and made manifest by a nearly unanimous acceptance of the NT canon in the Christian churches.'" (Kruger 147)
"Jesus's statement that 'my sheep hear my voice ... and they follow me' (John 10:27) is not evidence for the authority of the sheep's decision to follow, but evidence for the authority and efficacy of the Shepherd's voice to call." (Kruger 148)
"The fact that the church was able to reach such unity in the midst of such diversity would indicate that more was in play than just the random flow of history. Indeed, such a scenario gives us good reason to think that the church reached unity on these books precisely because Christ himself was speaking in them" (Kruger 416)
June 21, 2017
In the first section of this book, Kruger argues that many of the common ways of understanding the creation of the canon - for example, it being either community-determined or historically determined - are inadequate due to their placing of some external source of authority over the canon, which is then believed to itself have ultimate authority. Instead, Kruger argues, we need to use a self-authenticating model, as all forms of ultimate authority are inherently self-authenticating. This is a view that requires a lot of nuance, as Kruger argues that, for example, community determination and historical determination are still important elements in determination of the canon, even if it is ultimately self-authenticating. The idea is conceptually challenging at times, though Kruger does make some compelling arguments.
However, for much of the book, I found myself wanting to see his approach in action. Early on, after outlining what the self-referential model looks like, Kruger gives a very brief summary of how the model could be applied to the book of 1 John. While this is mildly helpful, 1 John is a book that was never in doubt in terms of inclusion in the canon. I wanted to see how it applied to books that were on both sides of the fringes.
I was excited then to see that the final chapter of the book was to deal with the "problem books on the canonical boundaries." But unfortunately, this chapter seemed to somewhat pull the rug out from under the rest of the book. For each book discussed, the explanation of why that book was or was not included in the canon basically covered how many of the early church fathers accepted it as canonical, when it was presumed to have been written, and whether it had ties to apostolic authority. In other words, the criteria sounded an awful lot like the community-determined and historically determined models. At that point, the reader is left to wonder whether the self-referential model is really something new and tenable, or if deep down it’s just a bit of academic tomayto/tomahto.
Nevertheless, regardless of what one concludes about the self-referential model, there is plenty of food for thought and helpful historical information in this book.
However, for much of the book, I found myself wanting to see his approach in action. Early on, after outlining what the self-referential model looks like, Kruger gives a very brief summary of how the model could be applied to the book of 1 John. While this is mildly helpful, 1 John is a book that was never in doubt in terms of inclusion in the canon. I wanted to see how it applied to books that were on both sides of the fringes.
I was excited then to see that the final chapter of the book was to deal with the "problem books on the canonical boundaries." But unfortunately, this chapter seemed to somewhat pull the rug out from under the rest of the book. For each book discussed, the explanation of why that book was or was not included in the canon basically covered how many of the early church fathers accepted it as canonical, when it was presumed to have been written, and whether it had ties to apostolic authority. In other words, the criteria sounded an awful lot like the community-determined and historically determined models. At that point, the reader is left to wonder whether the self-referential model is really something new and tenable, or if deep down it’s just a bit of academic tomayto/tomahto.
Nevertheless, regardless of what one concludes about the self-referential model, there is plenty of food for thought and helpful historical information in this book.
September 5, 2024
In Canon Revisited, Michael Kruger's purpose is "to answer the question about whether the Christian belief in the canon [of the New Testament—its 27 books—] is intellectually acceptable." He argues "that Christians have more than adequate grounds for their belief in the truth of the canon." A summary of the book (and his argument) is on my blog.
This is a fantastic book. It has outstanding scholarship, clear presentation, and is fair to opposing viewpoints. Many of the arguments within are quite strong and persuasive. Others are hard to prove (or disprove), but reasonable based on the evidence as a whole. This is a must-read for those interested in the formation and defense of the New Testament.
This is a fantastic book. It has outstanding scholarship, clear presentation, and is fair to opposing viewpoints. Many of the arguments within are quite strong and persuasive. Others are hard to prove (or disprove), but reasonable based on the evidence as a whole. This is a must-read for those interested in the formation and defense of the New Testament.
November 10, 2023
Brilliant introduction. Gives great confidence that the books in our bible are what God intended us to have.
Also is very helpful intro for those engaged with catholics or Mormons where canonicity is a live issue.
Also is very helpful intro for those engaged with catholics or Mormons where canonicity is a live issue.
Read
July 19, 2025I had no idea how to address this topic until now! Thankful for Kruger’s work on this, it did blow my mind a bit.
I didn’t read every chapter, but I read most of them! It will give me the opportunity to officially “revisit” this topic one day.
I didn’t read every chapter, but I read most of them! It will give me the opportunity to officially “revisit” this topic one day.
September 26, 2019
Excellent book on the NT canon, perhaps the best book on the subject period, especially from a historically confessional view. Kruger deals very well with the scholarly material and covers the entire range of the field and different positions capably, while also showing the many pitfalls of those misunderstanding the conception of canon he lays out.
Defitniely a must read for every pastor and student of the Bible. At the very least, it will be a full introduction to the field and topic, and provided tons of resources for further study. Additionally, it will equip teachers and lay people in the Church, teaching them how to wrestle, and answer what appear to be some very troubling issues in studies raised on the canon of the NT.
Defitniely a must read for every pastor and student of the Bible. At the very least, it will be a full introduction to the field and topic, and provided tons of resources for further study. Additionally, it will equip teachers and lay people in the Church, teaching them how to wrestle, and answer what appear to be some very troubling issues in studies raised on the canon of the NT.
March 2, 2019
This is probably one of the most helpful books on the new testament canon... Especially after reading FF Bruce's 'The Canon of Scripture' - which is itself a classical must-read on the topic! - Kruger's book offers an excellent argument for the self-attesting model of the biblical canon.
His writing is clear with great resources in the footnotes, making it perfect for both casual readers and also those wanting to peruse the wealth of his bibliography.
Ultimately, I think Kruger makes a sound and compelling argument for the self-attesting nature of the scriptures (NT in particular) rooted in what they are ontologically - that is, the very words of God, divinely inspired and authoritative. If the scriptures are what they claim to be, then it would follow that what we see in terms of their recognition of canonicity would line up historically with regards to their Apostolicity, communal reception (catholicity) and authority (self-attestation). Kruger offers good critique of other models of establishing the biblical canon and makes it a point to show that the question is essentially (and must be) a theological one - no one is neutral in their approach to the question of canon. This in my opinion is one of the great strengths of Kruger's work here.
This book is well worth the read for anyone interested in the origins and confidence we have in the canon of the new testament!
His writing is clear with great resources in the footnotes, making it perfect for both casual readers and also those wanting to peruse the wealth of his bibliography.
Ultimately, I think Kruger makes a sound and compelling argument for the self-attesting nature of the scriptures (NT in particular) rooted in what they are ontologically - that is, the very words of God, divinely inspired and authoritative. If the scriptures are what they claim to be, then it would follow that what we see in terms of their recognition of canonicity would line up historically with regards to their Apostolicity, communal reception (catholicity) and authority (self-attestation). Kruger offers good critique of other models of establishing the biblical canon and makes it a point to show that the question is essentially (and must be) a theological one - no one is neutral in their approach to the question of canon. This in my opinion is one of the great strengths of Kruger's work here.
This book is well worth the read for anyone interested in the origins and confidence we have in the canon of the new testament!
March 8, 2025
If I had a nickel for every time I've heard the quip, "Well, don't you know that the Bible was invented by Constantine!", I'd be a rich man. The idea that the Bible is merely a human compilation of human writings that may or may not have accidentally left out books like the Gospel of Thomas is peddled and preached by so-called academic elites who walk in the footsteps of Enlightenment rationalism and theological liberalism. Just turn on the history channel, and you'll know what I'm talking about.
Michael Kruger buries such nonsense under an avalanche of careful, reasoned scholarship. His aim is not so much to convince the skeptic as it is to help Christians understand that the Bible itself gives the warrant for believing it is the complete word of God.
This is such a helpful, exciting book. I was so engrossed that I flew through it. The parts where he talks about scholarship surrounding the early Christian manuscripts themselves read like a detective novel. The introductory chapter talks about different paradigms for understanding canon. The discussion there about Roman Catholicism and even evangelical externally applied criteria is worth the price of admission on its own. What a great book and one that I will be recommending and referring to often.
Michael Kruger buries such nonsense under an avalanche of careful, reasoned scholarship. His aim is not so much to convince the skeptic as it is to help Christians understand that the Bible itself gives the warrant for believing it is the complete word of God.
This is such a helpful, exciting book. I was so engrossed that I flew through it. The parts where he talks about scholarship surrounding the early Christian manuscripts themselves read like a detective novel. The introductory chapter talks about different paradigms for understanding canon. The discussion there about Roman Catholicism and even evangelical externally applied criteria is worth the price of admission on its own. What a great book and one that I will be recommending and referring to often.
January 5, 2020
The last three chapters of this book are great; they go through the history of how the New Testament was formed and why some books are accepted and others rejected, and it’s fascinating. However, for the first three chapters he argues that the canonical model cannot be authenticated by external standards. Which of course, involves circular reasoning, and he proceeds to talk about all the external standards that make the New Testament trustworthy (we have to define what makes something ‘divine’ or ‘apostolic’). His ‘self-authenticating’ model really just combines the work of others to say that there are multiple factors in determining what is canon, which I agree with, but he really didn’t need to spend three chapters on it. Overall, there’s some really interesting stuff here, but it’s also a bit painful to read.
December 15, 2012
As I said a while back, this was one of my favorite books I've read so far this year. Part of this is the triperspectival approach, but even that is in the background throughout the book. Kruger's work helped to answer questions I have had brought to me over the past six months about the canon of the New Testament, and this is now my go-to book for that subject. I would hope that it gets the scholarly attention that it deserves and that it is widely read among evangelicals and non-evangelicals alike.
Read the full review on my blog
Read the full review on my blog
June 23, 2016
Very well done! This is a great resource demonstrating that Christians are intellectually justified when they claim that the NT canon is complete. I learned a great deal from it and feel more confident about my trust in the authority and validity of the canon. Overall, Kruger's approach-- starting with the presupposition that the NT is "self-authenticating"-- is worth the price of the book. Truly Christ's "sheep" throughout the centuries have heard His voice in the NT and have learned to follow Him as a result (John 10:27).
November 2, 2016
A well-documented, brilliantly argued explanation and defense of the self-authentication of the 27 books of the New Testament. Why this 27? Not by accident of history, the choice of the powerful, nor by church authority. Rather, Kruger argues that canon is rooted in Apostolic authority, Holy Spirit testimony, and orthodoxy. He presens his view well and simply, and defends it against the major "defeaters." An excellent read for believers and friendly questioners who wonder where the "table of contents" in our Bible came from, and why it is the right one. Highly recommend.
October 29, 2017
The book does not aim to prove the truth of the Canon in a Cartesian sense, but rather demonstrate that there is sufficient intellectual basis for the Christian belief in the 27 books of the New Testament. It need not be taken on blind faith.
This books has strengthened my faith.
This books has strengthened my faith.
Want to read
April 15, 2016I've read parts of chapters 2 and 3 (pp. 77-94). Really good stuff.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 178 reviews