dyslexia wrote:or they were left out when Constantine demanded a complete set of the bibles transcribed and the Church had to put something together with much editing. When Constantine I became the ruler of Rome in 313, the Donatist controversy was raging in North Africa and Numidia. A soldier and a statesman who liked order and agreement, Constantine tried to quell it but not very successfully. Constantine was not a theologian, but he took steps during his rule to try to make Christianity less conflictual by calling the Council of Nicea to settle the Arian controversy. One result of the the council was the drafting of a version of what we now call the Nicene Creed. Ultimately creeds such as the Nicene Creed and the Apostles' Creed were affirmed as "orthodox" -- right teaching. Those teachings not considered orthodox, such as Gnosticism, were defined as heretical.
Actually the Council of Nicea didn't create the Bible as we know it today. It would go through more changes. It did settle the Arian controversy though. 316 of the 318 bishops present accepted the Nicean Creed. The other 2 were excommunicated.
The Council of Laodicea in 363 had a different list of books. The first mention of the New Testament as we know it today is from Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria in 367. The formal recognition came at the Council of Carthage in 397. St. Augustine who was present at the Council believed that it was necessary to accept the authority of the Catholic Church to believe in the Bible.
While Catholics and Eastern Orthodox believe that the Councils had God-given apostolic authority, Protestants believe that the Councils only rubber stamped what the entire Christian community had already determined. In other words, the Bible was created by public appeal.
Both theories have problems as I have already stated in my original post.
