Rating: 
Summary: Great start for further study.
Review: The breadth and depth of Metzger's scholarship is little short of amazing. In this book he has gathered together nearly all the early patristic references which relate to the formation of the NT canon. If you have any questions about how the Church's canon came to be formed, this book will answer it for you. He covers the apostolic fathers, traces separately the growth of the canon in the eastern and western churches, and provides a detailed analysis of the earliest lists (such as the Muratorian canon, Athanasius' Festal Letter of 367, and so forth). Some of the details he provided about the "flexibility" of the canon with respect to certain "antilegoumena" well into the post-Reformation period were entirely new to me. (Prior to Luther, every German edition of the Bible had included the spurious "Epistle to the Laodiceans", for instance.)My only critique is that the first two chapters of the book, while providing an excellent bibliography, are rather poorly written. In these chapters, Metzger tries to survey the post-Reformation and 20th century theological literature relating to the canon. Some of the information is valuable, but by the time he gets to 20th century authors, it degenerates into, "So-and-so said this; and then so-and-so said this." Unless you've read these authors, the description is so short as to be meaningless; and if you *have* read them, why do you need Metzger's one sentence summary? Scholars tend to do things like this, and I've never understood why: my theory is that they're showing off, but you may have your own.
Rating:
Summary: Clarification
Review: This book is not a Christian apology. It is a discussion of the process in the early Church that resulted in the definition of the New Testament canon as the 27 books that are commonly known to comprise it. Metzger does not diverge much at all from the standard scholarly views on this issue. He mainly approaches it as a matter of Church history, as do most inquiries into the topic, placing great weight on the words of Church fathers and documents that have bearing on early beliefs about the books belonging to the New Testament. As do most scholars, Metzger contends that the New Testament canon developed via a lengthy process, finally becoming relatively settled after about four-hundred years. This faulty conclusion is a natural result of limtting the scope of evidence used to explicit statements about the canon extant from the early church. See the works of David Trobisch for a powerful challenge to this outdated paradigm.
Two previous reviewers mentioned Metzger's view on the long ending of Mark as an example proving this work to be a believer's apology. The only place in this book that discusses the long ending of Mark is on pp. 267-70. In that section, Metzger asserts quite clearly that the long ending is not genuine. He does not say anything at all about Mark's original intention for the end of his book (nothing about a death or a fire--strange that two "independant" reviewers both brought up the same false charge). Metzger's point in even bringing up the ending of Mark is to ask which ending should be considered "canonical," the short and genuine one, or the long one that has the support of the early church in its favor deeming it canonical (though not genuine). While it's true that believers are the ones who would be most interested in this question, Metzger's view can hardly be thought of as a buttress to the faith (contra the opinion of the previously mentioned reviewers).
For a lay person, this book is a relatively easy-to-read introduction. For something more thorough, that tows the same basic line, but with more erudition, try to get your hands on Westcott's work on the Canon of the NT (now out of print).
Rating: 
Summary: Great analysis on a difficult issue
Review: This book was written by Bruce Metzger; one of the most respected Greek scholars of our modern day. While coming from a conservative viewpoint, Metzger is respected by scholars from all theological backgrounds. After reading "The Canon of the New Testament" I can understand why this man is so admired for his work. He devotes a very small portion of the book giving his opinion. Instead, he lays all of the facts on the table in such a compelling way as to almost force the reader to his conclusion before he even gives it. The first section contains a brief overview of other literature that has been written on the topic of the New Testament (NT) canon. The second section is where we are given all of the information regarding the development of the NT canon. Metzger examines the authority given by the apostolic fathers to the various NT books. He then proceeds to what I consider to be the most interesting part of the book - the influence of "heretics" on the development of the NT. Metzger demonstrates the fact that some NT books were already recognized as authoritative early in the second century because the orthodox and heretical writers of this time tried using passages of certain books to support their arguments. This book goes a long way toward refuting those who think the NT canon was arbitrarily selected by church councils of the fourth century. Metzger clearly shows how nearly all of the NT books were recognized as authoritative from as early as can be historically detected.
Rating: 
Summary: Apology, not scholarship
Review: This is an excellent book. The book demonstrates that the majority of the current canon of the New Testament has been standard from the start while at the same time telling about books which were strongly considered and rejected by the early church (as well as why) along with books in the current canon which were questioned by the early church. Great read for anyone who has an interest in early Christianity or any interest at all in the Bible.
Rating:
Summary: Very informative, gives clear view of the early canon
Review: This is an excellent book. The book demonstrates that the majority of the current canon of the New Testament has been standard from the start while at the same time telling about books which were strongly considered and rejected by the early church (as well as why) along with books in the current canon which were questioned by the early church. Great read for anyone who has an interest in early Christianity or any interest at all in the Bible.
| 
