Why do you believe this? If you discovered that Christ quoted from the pseudepigrapha, would you think the book He quoted from should have been included in the cannon?

I used the words "most likely."

Is there any way of knowing the criteria that was actually used in determining what books would or wouldn't have been in the canon?

In Jude verse 14, there is what appears to be a direct quote from the book of Enoch. Also googling on these words "christ quote book enoch" produce some interesting results.

There was already an Old Testament canon before Christ (or Jude) quoted from it (or other sources). I'm curious as to why you think Christ's quoting from something would "most likely" cause the canon to be changed.

If you're interested in knowing the criteria that was used, I'd suggest goolgeing something like "criteria Jewish Old Testament canon" and you'd probably find something.

I think it would be fruitful to this topic to take a look at the criteria used that resulted in the formation of today's Bible.

The following link shows how the books of the Old Testament were determined:

http://www.tektonics.org/lp/otcanon.html

So, Daryl is here establishing at least one criterion for the canon. Anything that is quoted by Jesus Christ should be in the canon. That is an interesting position because we know that the story of Lazarus and the rich man was not original with Jesus. It was part of the established Palestinian folklore. Does that mean that all of Palestinian folklore should be in the canon, since Jesus quoted from it? Under what authority did we keep that rich body of knowledge from the canon?

I found the following quote from the link Daryl provided to be very interesting:


Let us note the first step. "The deity speaks." If we believe that only YHWH could speak that calls into question the model on which the Israelites based their ideas for a canon. But once the people believe, or are made to believe, that the deity speaks to some people they are bound to accept whatever those people claim the deity told them, regardless of the source of that information.

The following is directly related to the question of the authorship of the Bible.

An e-friend of mine posted this on another forum. I find it to be interesting.


Most people think of the 10 Commandments as the lists in Exodus 20:1-17, or in Deuteronomy 5:6-2, and they're quite similar. But it's interesting to note that the only time in the Pentateuch that the actual words "The Ten Commandments" are used is in Exodus 34, and that chapter lists an entirely different set of commands (Ex. 34:11-26). The next two verses then go on to state:

Quote:
Ex. 34:27. "And the Lord said unto Moses, Write thou these words: for after the tenor of these words I have made a covenant with thee and with Israel.
28. And he was there with the Lord forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And He wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments.

That's it. The only time, within the Pentateuch, that the phrase "Ten Commandments" is used. Neither Exodus 20 nor Deuteronomy 5 refers to the rules they list as "the Ten Commandments."

You ought to read these alternate commandments. They can be condensed as follows:

Thou shalt worship no other god (For the Lord is a jealous god).
Thou shalt make thee no molten gods.
All the first-born are mine.
Six days shalt thou work, but on the seventh thou shalt rest.
The feast of unleavened bread shalt thou keep in the month when the ear is on the corn.
Thou shalt observe the feast of weeks, even of the first fruits of the wheat harvest, and the feast of ingathering at the year's end.
Thou shalt not offer the blood of my sacrifice with leavened bread.
The fat of my feast shall not remain all night until the morning.
The first of the first fruits of thy ground thou shalt bring unto the house of the Lord thy God.
Thou shalt not seethe a kid in its mother's milk

So my earnest question would be, why, when the Bible very explicitly calls these the Ten Commandments, does everybody else thinks that the Decalogue refers to the others lists, that don't call themselves that?

Ex. 34: 28 says, "And He wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments."
Therefore, the ten commandments were those which were written on the tables of stone.
After mentioning the ten commandments, in Deut. 5, Moses says, "These words the LORD spoke to all your assembly at the mountain out of the midst of the fire, the cloud, and the thick darkness, with a loud voice; and he added no more. And he wrote them upon two tables of stone, and gave them to me" (v.22).
Thus you can see that the commandments written on the tables of stone are in fact those mentioned in Ex. 20 and Deut. 5.