And right up to the present day, there are those who feel that the Apocrypha should be included in the canon of Scripture, and the Roman Catholic church regards them as such today.
Bruce takes the time to discuss individual theologians such as Jerome, Origen, Tertullian, Augustine, Clement of Alexandria, Irenaeus, Athanasius, and many others and whenever possible, he furnishes their choices for books whoch were deemed fit for the canon of Scripture. Apparently, Athansius' trip to Rome in 350 AD was decisive for helping the western church decide on the 27 books of the New Testament that we now have today. Before this, they were hedging on Hebrews, 1 Peter, 2 Peter, Revelation, James and 2 and 3 John.
The book concludes with a couple of the author's lectures on the subect of the secret gospel of Mark (which he rejects) and the difference between the plenary meaning of scripture and the meaning in context.
The last few chapters deal with the Criteria of the Canon; what it took to put the Canon together, how it actually occurred, why certain books were chosen and others not, etc. Bruce also examines the differences between the Roman Catholic view and the Protestant view of the Canon, he discusses criticism and interpretation within the Christian Church (as well as from those outside) in reference to the Canon.
Finally Bruce examines the "secret" gospel of Mark, what it is, what is the controversy surrounding it, its historical roots, etc. This is an interesting chapter and has a bit of apologetic value to it. Overall, this is a great basic text for anyone interested in the Canon of the Scriptures, how the Bible was put together, how it has been viewed over the centuries and how interpreting the Bible is possible and the need for good interpretation, criticism, Biblical inerrancy, etc.