The canon of Muratori is also called the Muratorian Fragment, after the name of the discoverer and first editor, L. A. Muratori (in the "Antiquitates italicae", III, Milan, 1740, 851 sq.), the oldest known canon or list of books of the New Testament. The manuscript containing the canon originally belonged to Bobbio and is now in the Bibliotheca Ambrosiana at Milan (Cod. J 101 sup.). Written in the eighth century, it plainly shows the uncultured Latin of that time. The fragment is of the highest importance for the history of the Biblical canon. It was written in Rome itself or in its environs about 200; A.D. and probably the original was in Greek, from which it was translated into Latin. This Latin text is preserved solely in the manuscript of the Ambrosiana. A few sentences of the Muratorian Canon are preserved in some other manuscripts, especially in codices of St. Paul's Epistles in Monte Cassino. The canon consists of no mere list of the Scriptures, but of a survey, which supplies at the same time historical and other information regarding each book. The beginning is missing; the preserved text begins with the last line concerning the second Gospel and the notices, preserved entire, concerning the third and fourth Gospels. Then there are mentioned: The Acts, St. Paul's Epistles (including those to Philemon, Titus and Timothy; the spurious ones to the Laodiceans and Alexandrians are rejected); furthermore, the Epistle of St. Jude and two Epistles of St. John; among the Scriptures which "in catholica habentur", are cited the "Sapientia ab amicis Salomonis in honorem ipsius scripta", as well as the Apocalypses of St. John and St. Peter, but with the remark that some will not allow the latter to be read in the church. Then mention is made of the Pastor of Hermas, which may be read anywhere but not in the divine service; and, finally, there are rejected false Scriptures, which were used by heretics. In consequence of the barbarous Latin there is no complete understanding of the correct meaning of some of the sentences.
As stated above, the date of this canon is entirely unknown, but orthodoxy places it at the time of Irenaeus (200 A.D.), again simply it recognized the Four Gospels, Acts, thirteen Epistles of Paul, First John, Second John, Jude, and Revelation. It mentions the Wisdom of Solomon which is no longer in the Bible, among the New Testament books; speak approvingly of the Shepherd of Hermas, and says that the Revelation of John and the Revelation of Peter were accepted by the writer, although many were unwilling at the Revelation of Peter should be read in the churches. It does not mention either First Peter, Second Peter, First John, or James (Westcott, On The Canon of the New Testament, p. 527), all of which are not in the Bible.
As to the author, many conjectures were made (Papias, Hegesippus, Caius of Rome, Hippolytus of Rome, Rhodon, Melito of Sardis were proposed); but no well founded hypothesis has been adduced up to the present. It speaks of the Epistle to the Laodiceans, calls the Epistle to the Hebrews the Epistle to the Alexandrians (Davidson, The Canon of the Bible, p. 225), and says both were forgeries, passing under the name of Paul-a fact of which modern theologians are discretely silent, when they cite, as they do with so much exultation, this manuscript as "early evidence of the canon." You can judge for yourself how desperately the church was is in need of support when, after a tremendous conflict, it is willing to accept as "early evidence" a manuscript whose date is at least one hundred an fifty to two hundred years after Jesus was crucified.
These facts are disconcerting if you ponder them. We are 170 years removed from the Great Commission issued by Jesus. We find that almost 200 years later we have not the finished book that one would think necessary for such a noble endeavor as the Great Commission. I challenge you to imagine for a moment Jesus commanding his Apostles to go into all the world with this "New Testament" message of salvation but ill equipped due to not having the manual yet ready. What of those that perished without accepting the necessary messages of these books which we deem divine today?
I can just hear Jesus saying:
Matt 28:18-20
18 …"All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.
19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world"…but look guys…I don't have the new Bible ready yet…. the Father and I will not be able to agree on what to give you guys as the new manual for salvation for well over 200 years yet."
Answer for yourself: Have you ever stopped to think that Jesus was incompetent for his role if he expected his followers to go without the proper message or the necessary books?
Answer for yourself: How were these disciples and Apostles to teach the nations, better yet what were they to teach if they could not agree on what to teach with so many conflicting Gospels and Epistles circulating in the first centuries of the Gentile Church?
Answer for yourself: Were the people deprived of these books "damned" without hope automatically because they did not have a New Testament with all is necessary beliefs contingent upon one's salvation?
Answer for yourself: Is this inability to decide upon what was "inspired" by the early church the work of the Holy Spirit, and if so, what does that do to our image and understanding of a perfect God who cannot make up His mind and speak to his people?
Hopefully your reason and intellect is such that you can see the folly of such inability to decide which books God had determined necessary for the salvation of the world. The investigation of the sequence of books being deemed "in" and "out" and "in" and "out" over the centuries does little to bolster the image of a God who leads a people let alone speaks to them.
John 16:13
13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.
Well the Holy Spirit is evidently not guiding very good for several centuries. If you take the above passage from the New Testament seriously then God is out of His mind because He is evidently speaking one thing to one group at one time and a completely different and contradicting thing to another group at another time; even at the same times. We call that schizophrenia today and prescribe mind-altering drugs to cure such conditions.
Preserving the honor of God hopefully the Holy Spirit had little to due with this confusion in the canonization of the New Testament. What should trouble you is the inclusion into this "New Testament" of the various sects conflicting and competing theologies which today, not knowing the origin or the identity of them, one is relegated to reading the New Testament under the false notion that all is "inspired" and accepting such "beliefs" if they came from God. Let me give you a parallel. You go to the store and buy four puzzles consisting of a thousand pieces. You quickly go home and empty the pieces together into one jumble and then begin to fit and force them into a frame that was meant to only handle one puzzle. You read the instructions on the box and they inform you that these pieces are "inspired" so with utter confidence you begin to force the pieces together and make them fit even when they won't. Needless to say the picture come out distorted and is not true to the original. This is what has happened by the continual jockeying for authority by sect after sect over hundreds of years as they got "their views and ideas" recognized as the Word of God through successive Church Councils. These "ideas" became literally Holy Scripture! You failure to understand the history of the Canonization of the New Testament and the selection of books by sect after sect has robbed you of the truth in understanding what validity and authority such a document might possess today. To stake your Eternal Life upon such a "power struggles" for supremacy by those fractions within the Gentile Church is not wise; especially in light of the knowledge you are now acquiring let alone a honest comparison of the teachings of the Jewish Bible vs. The New Testament. You might have never noticed by the New Testament contradicts the Eternal Word of God as found in the Jewish Tanakh in multiple places. Dear one, this means that the "jots" and "titles" that Jesus said were forever were nullified many places in the New Testament. You lack of awareness does not negate such; only study on your part will reveal this to you.