I've always enjoyed reading anything by Kruger. This is my first book I've read of his but his articles on his blog and elsewhere have been fantastic. In this book, he carries on his style and subject even more so. It should be noted that his other book "Canon Revisted" deals with the questions of what is the canon and why the books of the Bible are the ones. In this book, the question he focuses on is the canon authoritative? The focus even more is really "Did the early church have a canon of Scripture? Did the writes think they were writing with authority? Did the early church even recognize written Scripture?" and other such questions in this vein.

The amazing thing in Kruger's writing is how often and fairly he gives time to the other side of the issue. He always presents the other side first and looks at both strengths and weaknesses of the claims. He then deals with the claims and when confronted with difficult points on his side he will always point them out. I would think some might even claim he wasn't being forceful enough. However, he recognizes the flaws in his own field of history and it's pretty refreshing to have a historian give probability for difficult or "fuzzy" information rather than just present it, unethically, as fact to promote an agenda.

This book was such a great read and I learned a lot from it. I can't wait to read the other side of the coin in "Canon Revisted". Although Kruger is a highly recognized academic in the field, he writes with clarity and presents the information so that anyone could understand what is being said. He builds his argumentation really well and doesn't make leaps to draw his conclusions. If I had to pick the one part I learned the most, almost unfairly, I would say the presentation on why the early church who were a majority illiterate would accept and trust written Scripture. But like I said, there's a ton that I did learn and I would highly recommend this book for those that struggle with the question of the formation of the canon of The Bible and/or those dealing with challenges from badly informed critics. Final Grade - A ( )

The Christian “canon” refers to that set of scriptures, complete and bounded, that we accept as scripture. Modern Bible scholars often examine the development of the canon from an extrinsic model, noting that the canon was formed over the course of several centuries as the church fathers selected their favorites. Many argue that Irenaeus, in the late second century, was the first to feel the need for an authoritative canon. But what if the selection of accepted writings was more intrinsic … that is, guided from within, rather than from without? What if the New Testament writers themselves understood that they were writing Scripture, and their work was quickly recognized and adopted as such, perhaps with God’s guidance?

Kruger doesn’t deny the extrinsic claims, that the canon was fluid and argued over for centuries. He simply highlights the evidence that our New Testament writers were knowingly writing Scripture, and our earliest Scripture readers knew it. This Kruger does by critically examining five tenets of the extrinsic model to see if they really do hold water. The five tenets he questions, in five chapters, are:

1. We must make a sharp distinction between Scripture and canon.

2. There was nothing in earliest Christianity that might have led to a canon.

3. Early Christians were averse to written documents.

4. The New Testament authors were unaware of their own authority.

5. The New Testament books were first regarded as Scripture at the end of the second century.

Kruger hits his stride at about chapter three, and it gets stronger from there. So if you find the book winding up a little slowly, I promise it’ll be slinging fast balls by the end. Kruger’s research is convincing and well-argued, with generous footnotes. At the very least, this book will make you a believer in the passion and conviction of the New Testament writers, even as they sought to remain anonymous, letting the gospel message speak for itself on its own authority. ( )