This is book primarily deals with the history of the development of the Canon. It was quite interesting to read the history of various books and letters of the Old and New Testament and to realize how most Christians take for granted their acceptance as Holy Scripture. It was fascinating to discover that books like Hebrews and the Apocalypse had difficulty in finding their place in today's Bible,and why others such as the Shepher of Hermas were rejected. Reasons for the acceptance of letters and oppositions to others varied upon authorship, content, usage, and most of all inspiration.

Not surprisingly was that the need for a canon arose from the ubiquitous nature of heresies abounding in this era. Specifically one of the earliest heresies mentioned is the movement started by Marcion. Marcion's belief that solely the teachings and writings of the Apostle Paul is what made up the true faith led to the first collection of the New Testament epistles being collected together to form a body of doctrine. Later on many of the Gnostic gospels and sects were another impetus which drove the Catholic Church to canonicity of its collected documents and to determine what was to be standard for what was Apostolic and inspired.

Prof. Bruce follows the topic of canonicity into the Renaissance and the Reformation and the Counter-Reformation. It was interesting to discover that with the revival of Classical Greek and Hebrew, that European theologians began to question the canonicity of the books contained in the Vulgate and the accuracy of that one-time prevalent translation. One example of how this controversy is carried over into current modern apologetics is how the Roman Catholic Church criticizes Martin Luther for questioning and suggesting that James and Hebrews be rejected from the Canon. However what Prof. Bruce points out is that for many in his day, Luther practiced what many in the church were doing in their re-examination and criticism of the canon.

Also from the Reformation is Luther's position of the Canon within Canon. Although I do not completely agree with Luther on this point, I do agree with the importance of studying Scripture with the view of placing the Gospel of Christ as the central theme of the Canon.

The closing chapters are very valuable regarding the criteria for canonicity in early church history and the criteria for the church today as well. I found especially intriguing the proposition of anyone finding one of St. Paul's lost letters to the Corinthian church and would they be added to the books of the New Testament? Please read the book to find the answer. I hope this unanswered question will entice you to read this work. However, in my review,I know that I am not doing justice in my appreciation for this book and what it has taught me.

Final Note: I would not recommend this book without some prior knowledge of the Ante-Nicene and the Nicene Church Fathers as their opinions about the canonicity are frequently presented. The reader should be familiar with the church fathers mentioned and their significance and contribution to the Christian faith in the early history of the church. Although one will benefit from the text without it, such knowledge would enhance the reader's understanding of the reasons and the importance of Prof. Bruce citing these individuals.

Bruce's Canon of Scripture is the most thorough, scholarly, and readable account of the canon that I've come across. This book was recommended to me as a great place for a layperson (like myself) to read the story of how our Bible came into existence.

Bruce provides a detailed account of how Christ, the apostles, and early Church fathers interpreted and used the canon. He also discusses heretics like Marcion and soundly dismisses their claims. For Christians who trust the Bible as an inspired document, this book will be encouraging, as Bruce shows how the orthodox canon and orthodox interpretation have persisted throughout church history.

Although Bruce's prose isn't overly scholarly, his sense of story -- the way he structures this book -- is less than arresting. I found myself reading this book in chunks, skimming some sections and skipping others altogether. I imagine few people would enjoy devouring this book straight through. That said, this work is superior to a simple reference book, as Bruce provides a great deal of detail and appeals to a number of primary and secondary sources. Until a better book comes along, this one's essential for Christian households.

I bought this book because it was recommended as the most authoritative history of the New Testament canon in English. The book is scholarly and thorough. The author is an academic. The book reflects that for better and worse. The information is excellent and well documented. The writing style is often dry. It is best read in small segments.

Bill Breer