WHITE LIFE
Sithly Elf
Preach Christ Crucified. Corinthians 1:23
Posts: 34
|
Post by WHITE LIFE on Nov 12, 2006 16:32:14 GMT -5
Where did the Bible come from? Who decided which books would be included in the canon as actually being the inspired Word of God - and what gave them the authority to make that decision?
|
|
|
Post by Tiana, eh? on Nov 12, 2006 16:48:01 GMT -5
Do you really want those questions answered? I'm not sure if you did this to start a potential flamewar or not... but if you actually seriously want to know about the Bible, realize that we're not going to give you 'uhhhh....' answers. You're talking to people who have made studies of this sort of thing for Awana...and a group of people with an admin whose church is currently doing a study on the believability of the Bible. ^^ I have a billion notes hanging around in my binder, and will have no shame in transcribing some if you really want to have a sane discussion about this. Pardon my cynicism, but we've had several horrid flame wars in the past over small spiritual issues.
Owing to your terminology, I assume you have a simliar foundation and are Christian, whether Prodestant or Catholic. ;D So.
The Bible came from God. The Bible is the word of God as put to paper through men who spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit. [/jist of a Bible verse that I don't know the reference for off top of head]
Who decided? In the old Testement times, there were strict tests to determine which prophecies... what are now our books of the Bible... were true. Generally, this led up to a simple fact--if the prophecy did not come true, it was not God-breathed. The Bible is one of the most accurate historical books in existance, with thousands of copies passed down through time, remaining very accurate to the very words. No one had any such authority, I should think, it was simply that the books were tested to be accurate. Note that all the prophecies in the Old Testement have/will come true, and all of the books of the New Testament were written by the apostles, or people very closely assosiated with them. (Paul--Titus?)
There were no books of the Bible written after this point.
Help? This was off the top of my head, so I hope it carries on the thread well enough.
|
|
|
Post by Ali Blue on Nov 12, 2006 16:54:04 GMT -5
You might not want to get yourself into this WL.. I'm dead serious. Tiana is right. If you want to get a buttload of facts and flaming.. then go right ahead.
|
|
WHITE LIFE
Sithly Elf
Preach Christ Crucified. Corinthians 1:23
Posts: 34
|
Post by WHITE LIFE on Nov 13, 2006 17:49:07 GMT -5
Hello again! I am a bible-believing Christian. I had no idea that talking about the origins of the Bible would cause such a reaction. I don't want people flaming or anything like that. The reason I bring this question out is because I see this is a Christian area on the site and most Christians believe in what is written in the Bible so I thought it would be a good starting point for getting an understanding of where some of my sisters and brothers on this forum are at with their understanding of Sacred Scriptures.
Just sticking to a agree or disagree (and why if disagree) on the subject is good enough.
Fact 1. It was at the Council of Hippo (393 A.D.) and Carthage (397 A.D.) that the books that would be included in the Bible were determined. Because of disputes, it needed to be determined what was actually inspired writing as opposed to non-inspired writings that were also floating around at that time. It was through the Holy Spirit that these people were able to make this determination. These people had that authority because they were the successors of the apostles who Jesus Christ gave his authority to. These books were used undisputed by all of Christianity for sixteen centuries until a seven books were removed by Martin Luther in 1529. This is why some Bibles have more books than others to this very day.
If you agree say "Amen!" if not please elaborate.
|
|
|
Post by Ali Blue on Nov 13, 2006 20:16:45 GMT -5
lol.... amen to Rev. 22:18-19. Also to you, White Life. Yes, the main reason that the books of the Bible are books of the Bible is because somewhere in it it says that it is inspired and essentially authorized by God. The books that did not claim devine inspiration were excluded.
|
|
WHITE LIFE
Sithly Elf
Preach Christ Crucified. Corinthians 1:23
Posts: 34
|
Post by WHITE LIFE on Nov 14, 2006 21:33:32 GMT -5
Thank you all for your kind responses. The scripture quote in Revelation is talking about not messing with the book of Revelation. Curiously enough, Luther originally wanted to remove it along with the other seven books he removed. Ali - I'm guessing you are talking about 2 Timothy 3:16-17? "All Scripture is inspired..." It is interesting that the scripture that Paul was talking about there is not our New Testament. His scripture was the Septuagint, which is included in the Old Testament of the Bibles that have all the books. The Bible doesn't tell us which books are to be included in the Bible. That had to be determined by the apostles successors. Thanks be to God for working through them!
Thanks again for all your input. Have a fantastic day!
|
|
|
Post by Tiana, eh? on Nov 14, 2006 23:17:00 GMT -5
Mmmm...
I will make this note RIGHT NOW.
Middle-earthians are famous for starting debates that get out of hand. Not all of the members are Christian, and I do not protest healthy debate. However, occasionally things have gotten out of hand. I do not permit my Christian members to "you're wrong!" anyone, backing up with Scripture is fine...
If this debate stays light, it will stay.
I shall be watching closely.
-the admin
Now!
I quote, this is not to put people on the spot--this is to directly reply to something. If I quote a lot of your stuff, please... it's just to specify what I reply to.
Fact) The apocrytha, or the extra books in the Catholic Bible, never claim to be inspired by God. I say extra. Yes. I appologize to our Catholic-Christian members. These books were written between the time of the old and new testaments, a time which was known as the Silent Years, because God didn't really speak through prophets. Their messages occasionally contradict the rest of the Bible, which is why Prodestant Christians do not acknowlege them as part of our Bible.
Negative. Not about the Luther part, I won't touch that. But I will protest your opinion on the Revelations verse. (clasps hands)
The verse roughly says "do not add to this book or the punishments listed will be added onto you" for anyone who doesn't want to look it up. I did a study on Revelation last year. Pretty harsh punishment. There's a second verse somewhere, not in Revelation, that also has a threat for those altering His words.
Observe that it's in the last chapter of Revelation, at the very end of the Bible?
It doesn't say "Anyone adding to the Book of Revelation...". It says anyone adding to this book.
For that phrasing, I strongly believe that it refers to the entirety of the Bible. The Bible is a collection of smaller books, in the form of one book. Why wouldn't it refer to the entire thing? It's the Bible as a whole with those 66 books.
Right.
"All scripture is given by inspiration of God and is useful for teaching, rebuking..." argh. I'll look it up. I memorized it in the summer, I should still know it, but I mix it up.
Okay. NIV this time. "All scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteousness.
So that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work. 2 Tim. 3:16-17"
I fail to see what your point is, WHITE LIFE/WL? Any nickname we can give you? White?
Paul is talking about ALL SCRIPTURE. ALL SCRIPTURE is given by inspiration of God. He isn't referring to any specific verse, if that was the case, wouldn't the entire Bible be unbelievable? "Just this one verse is given by inspiration of God, we're not really sure about the rest..." Paul never quoted a verse of scripture there. He stated a fact. All scripture is God-breathed.
The books that were "floating around" at that time did not all claim inspiration of God. This is how they were decided. The Old Testament books were a different story. I do not disrepute that somewhere they were decided by humans under the influence of the Holy Spirit. It's quite likely, but a fact we cannot be entirely certain upon.
I repeat myself: the books included in the New Testament were written by apostles and close assosiates. Other books written at this time...
Well.
Let's take a look at the time period! *jazz hands* Christians were getting knocked off one by one! Or more than that! All out war! They were considered right out ready to be staked! Tell me how many other people do you think are going to be writing and claiming to be writing from Jesus unless they had a death wish. Just... a thought. Heh.
Now, by the effort in this post, you should be beginning to see how our debates burst into flame wars. I'm pretty straight out about stating what I know to be facts. It can be taken harshly. Some of us can be worse. I'm generally accepting of other people's beliefs and allow these discussions to take place, as long as no one states "No, you're wrong!" without some background proofing of it. I fully appreciate your posting, White. The origins of the Bible shouldn't cause flaming, it's the fact that we may have differing beliefs. I dislike denominational arguements, nonetheless, and I shall try keep this flame free as possible.
Welcome to the board!
|
|
|
Post by Ali Blue on Nov 15, 2006 0:11:56 GMT -5
I'm failing to see the point of this discussion...
|
|
WHITE LIFE
Sithly Elf
Preach Christ Crucified. Corinthians 1:23
Posts: 34
|
Post by WHITE LIFE on Nov 15, 2006 5:40:10 GMT -5
Thanks for the input Ali and Tiana. The main point, Ali, is that the scriptures didn't just fall down from the sky from God in a nice neat package. It was compiled by people. Both the Old and New Testament canon were compiled by people. That does not take away anything from God. He is still the author. He simply works His authority through man.
Tiana, interesting and impressive feedback. I need to briefly follow up on just a couple comments... The book of Revelation was not a part of the Bible when it was written. It was a book by itself. It is not like John wrote it and put it at the end of a bunch of the scriptures and bound it together at the back of the book. It did not become a part of the canon for many years after it was written. It was used, however, as were the many books of scripture, in the Sacred Liturgies - which is one of the determining factors as to its authenticity. The Deuteroconanical (Apocrypha) books is a whole other subject, yet none the less fascinating. As a matter of fact, you may have noticed that many Christians (protestants) are putting these books back in the Holy Bible. One reason they were set aside by the Jews was not due to the lack of inspiration, but to the fact that there was not any Hebrew copies of them. They have now found Hebrew copies of some of them in the Dead Sea scrolls. One of my personal thoughts on this is the fact that if Jesus and the Apostles used them as scripture (which they did because they used the Septuagint) then I want them. Going back to what Paul said when talking about scripture, it was the scripture that they had. Again - the Bible as we know it wasn't compiled yet but the Septuagint was. Praise the Lord for both of you (Tiana and Ali) and anyone else reading this! I am very glad you are alive!
You can just call me White Life - Thanks!
|
|
|
Post by Ali Blue on Nov 15, 2006 18:05:45 GMT -5
I'm very glad I'm alive too. XD when exactly did Jesus use the Septuagint? the name doesn't sound familiar. I don't think that most or even some protestants are putting those books into the Bible. I haven't heard of anyone who has, but I'll ask around.
|
|
WHITE LIFE
Sithly Elf
Preach Christ Crucified. Corinthians 1:23
Posts: 34
|
Post by WHITE LIFE on Nov 15, 2006 20:10:35 GMT -5
Yes, ask around. One example is the Third Millenium Bible at www.tmbible.com/. They point out the fact that the original King James had the books. Many people don't realize that. Also, in regard to the Septuagint, you can find out much more from Googling it than what I can give you. A couple of examples are en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Septuagint and/or www.newadvent.org/cathen/13722a.htmDepending on the source you might get varying facts but in short it was what was being used at the time of our Lord and the Apostles and what is refered to many times in the New Testament when it refers to scripture. Pax Christi
|
|
|
Post by Tiana, eh? on Nov 15, 2006 23:28:59 GMT -5
Our pastor will be covering the origins of the Bible, but not for a while yet.
I'd like to know where you're getting your facts, White. (sorry, we all shorten names here...) Understand that if it's from one pastor, or whatnot... please be open to second perspectives, not one person can always be right. Even a school group or whatever.
I'm arguing one thing. None of the books of the Bible were part of the Bible when they were written. Buuut. The point of this arguement is that God inspired all the Scriptures to be written, yes? In which case the Revelation is no less inspired, and even though John didn't know about all of the other books--it was not John that was the author. It was God writing through John through a vision. Same with Paul's "all scripture is given". Paul may not have known all of the scriptures... he did know a lot, as he was a Pharisee... but as what he wrote was through inspiration of the Holy Spirit, I must argue that no. That verse refers to all scripture--if you can't believe it was all given by inspiration of God, there's a slight flaw in your arguement. ;-) GOD knew that there would be all of these books bound together into a book, and even if the writers didn't...
They were just writing for a much bigger author.
The Apocyrtha (I can never spell that right) teaches things that contradict what we as Prodestants generally accept as our Bible's canon. Such as salvation through works. That's just the one I can remember without going back to searching through my notes. And I'm already rambling more than I said I would, lol. XD
Your arguements are valid as well.
And, Ali, the point of this discussion is the Bible. Which didn't just fall down in a nice bound book, yes. But God used men to get it there. ;D
Nothing wrong with this dicussion in the least, it's simply...hmmm... we're all human and prone to error. I don't really want to take one person's word for it, when I don't know you at all, White. I refuse to believe in something that could alter my faith without research, prayer, and study. I refuse to take point blank anything that's told to me. I mean, yeah--I took that Jesus was my savior and believed it wholeheartedly, but if someone informs me that, contrary to what I've been believing, THE BIBLE'S ALL FLAWED!!!! I'm not going to believe it right off the bat.
To summarize.
When the scripture is referred to, God knew what the entirety of the scripture was and wouldn't have limited those he was using to just what they had then. He was writing through them--they weren't the ones writing.
And...
There are no varying facts. Varying facts cannot exist, because then it is no longer a fact. It is a theory. Thank you. I'll be back later with further hopefully inflamitory posting.
|
|
WHITE LIFE
Sithly Elf
Preach Christ Crucified. Corinthians 1:23
Posts: 34
|
Post by WHITE LIFE on Nov 16, 2006 14:11:08 GMT -5
LOL - UR Funny Zombie! Ummm...what can I say. I think there is alot of misunderstanding in alot of this, but to save time I'll just have to say I agree that you should not take my word for it - check out the facts. You'll have to make educated choices as to what you will accept in your canon - but be careful what you use as your source of information. I figure if it is good enough for the Apostles - its definitely good enough for little old me. I have all the books and they don't contradict anything. One could interpret them to do so, but they don't. Why? Because they are the Word of God. Praise the Lord!
Peace of Christ!
|
|
|
Post by Ali Blue on Nov 16, 2006 18:07:14 GMT -5
I've been thinking about it and here's what I say... If those books were essential to the Bible than I'm pretty sure God would make sure they were in the Bible. God's plan for our lives is pretty well mapped out in the Bible I have on my shelf and I am happy with that. The whole gospel and a basic history of the ancient Hebrew nation is contained within the Bible. My point of view, as long as it gets the point across, nothing extra is needed.
I'm not saying that those books are heretical or made up, but that they are merely extraneous.
|
|
WHITE LIFE
Sithly Elf
Preach Christ Crucified. Corinthians 1:23
Posts: 34
|
Post by WHITE LIFE on Nov 17, 2006 8:19:23 GMT -5
I agree Ali that God would make sure that they are in the Bible. God did make sure they were a part of the Bible. They are a part of the Bible. He put the people in place to make the decision on which books would be included and it was that way for all of Christendom for many , many years. What gives someone, me, you, Mr. Magoo, Luther, or any other person the authority to remove them? My answer is that we do not have that authority. The authority HAS to be Apostolic - we can't mess with the Word of God. It really comes down to recognizing or ignoring authority. We should trust that God got it right the first time. He couldn't be wrong when he put the Bible together and then come back and say - "Oops, I guess I was wrong, the Holy Spirit must have made a Boo Boo." We can't just think that we can say "Let's yank this book, this one, oh, and this one because that doesn't support my notion of Solo Scruptura (The Bible Alone) or for any other purpose. That would be like me saying "Oh, you know, I don't agree that divorce is wrong. I'm gonna yank the Gospels out because I find them not agreeing with my theology." Perhaps I've ranted or raved (hopefully didn't flame) but I really think we need to trust that God knew what he was doing when he compiled the Bible by the successors of the apostles.
May God Bless you most abundantly today!
|
|
|
Post by Ali Blue on Nov 17, 2006 20:10:15 GMT -5
No you didn't flame. But in those books does it say that they're inspired by God? Books not inspired by God=books God didn't put into the Bible. Again, I'm positive that if God thought it was necessary for his followers to read those books, he would make sure they were.
|
|
WHITE LIFE
Sithly Elf
Preach Christ Crucified. Corinthians 1:23
Posts: 34
|
Post by WHITE LIFE on Nov 18, 2006 0:12:44 GMT -5
Alistair, Please help me understand your question a little better. Are you saying that every book that belongs in the Bible specifically states that it is inspired by God?
|
|
|
Post by Master Warious on Nov 19, 2006 23:17:27 GMT -5
I'm gonna say yes that's what she is saying....bu I'll let Ali speak for herself. Nice rant and you get your point across well. In Revelations (for your future reference) Chapter 22: 18-19 would be a good reference for you to check on what I'm about to say. No one has the right to add or subtract from the Word of God. Ever. If there is going to be discussions on 'editing' the Bible please have reference scripture.
|
|
|
Post by Tiana, eh? on Nov 20, 2006 0:16:51 GMT -5
Call me Tiana, please. "the Zombie" is just my current description of state. , you know? Tired and rather, well, half-dead? Warious: a favor, PLEASE remove at least half of the exclamation points in your personal text! It's mega stretching every thread you post in! Not everyone of us keeps our windows maximized... I sure don't. I double task. Anyway, back to the topic at hand. 1) Regarding 2 Tim 3:16, I have prayed and considered answering my opinon on "Paul only meant the Scripture then" for a while. I cannot prove anything. I am human and prone to error. But the Holy Spirit knew that all scripture was inspired by God, and Paul was writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. That all scripture then, before, and to come would be inspired by the Holy Spirit. I can do nothing to sway your opinion. It is simply my strong belief that God is the same yesterday, today, and forever--infallable and inerrent. 2) I didn't say there was anything wrong with these other books, I haven't researched them yet. ;D 3) Yes, I believe we're saying that every single book in the Bible we consider our canon claims to be inspired by God. *deep breath* In the Old Testament, over 3000 times, the writers claim to be writing from God. In the New Testament... argh... around 300 times, the writers directly quote the OT, and refer to it around 1000 times. In the Old Testament, the writers were mostly simple men. This isn't to say they were stupid, just... normal people, farmers, shepherds... the lower, normal class. Mostly. Yet each one of them claims to be writing from God without being self-conscious about it. Never does any book go on to say "Yeah, I know I'm just a farmer, but God told me this, and... you'd better listen up because God told me it!" like most people starting on the intent to tell a story would. I agree with Ali, that if God thought these books necessary, He would've made sure they were there! God's all-powerful, He certainly could've made sure something happened to keep them there! But our Bible canon is all-inclusive, containing everything we need to know, and that is why we don't count the rest as Scriptures. This isn't to say they're not good books, morals and how to live... by all means, I respect most religious books as being very wise! No one's been flaming, don't worry... I've seen flaming.
|
|
|
Post by Ali Blue on Nov 20, 2006 13:20:05 GMT -5
^^^^^ Yes! That's exactly what I mean. ^^^^^ Kudos to Tiana for helping me get it out of my brain. The Bible is really (I think, anyway ) one of those things that we don't have any control over. God does give us free choice to do things for ourselves but I don't believe that we could change the Bible if we wanted to. I mean.. literally we could. But God would set us straight one way or another..
|
|