Researched by the Ignaria Editorial Team · Published 2026-03-12
The early Church applied several overlapping criteria in evaluating which books to include in the New Testament, though these were rarely stated as a formal checklist. Apostolic origin — that a book was written by an apostle or their close associate — was paramount, as Eusebius shows in tracing each gospel and epistle to its apostolic source. Broad acceptance across churches ("universal use"), doctrinal consistency with the rule of faith, and the antiquity of a text over later corruptions all served as supporting tests. Eusebius synthesized these in his threefold distinction between acknowledged books (homologoumena), disputed books (antilegomena), and spurious or heretical writings (nothoi).
Your research brief
This page is a summary. Your research brief is a working document.
Run the same question in Ignaria and get blockquoted primary sources you can refine, export, write from, and share.
-
Refine with Research Builder
Ask follow-up questions and deepen your line of inquiry — one brief becomes a research session.
-
Export for your projects
Pull blockquoted, cited passages into sermons, articles, and study notes.
-
Write in Ignaria
Turn your research brief into a finished article without leaving your thread.
-
Share when you're ready
Publish publicly on your profile, or share privately with colleagues on Pro.
1 free search · No account needed to start
What the primary sources show
The Homologoumena and Antilegomena are both canonical and orthodox, the fabrications of heretical men are neither canonical nor orthodox, while the nothoi occupy a peculiar position, being orthodox but not canonical — the most systematic ancient account of how the canon debate stood in the early fourth century.
The rule of faith prescribes belief in one God, Creator of the world, who sent forth His Word — this doctrinal standard, taught by Christ and held by the apostolic churches, was the test by which heretical writings were excluded from the canon.