Posted on 03/27/2015 3:11:53 PM PDT by Laissez-faire capitalist
Moving back from the Theodosian Code, which stated the scriptures they believed to be heretical, back to the First Council of Nicaea in 325 A.D., which decreed that the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were to be in the fixed New Testament Canon of scripture, and back to earlier dates we find the following:
A.) The Clermont List - a codex which embraced the Canon as it existed in Egypt (i.e. Alexandria) c.300 A.D.
It lists the New Testament books which are the same as ours except that the Gospels are listed Matthew, Mark, Luke (the apostolic authors coming first); then the Letters of Paul, save that Philippians, I-II Thessalonians, and Hebrews; the Epistle of Barnabas, the Shepard of Hermas, the Acts of Paul, and the Revelation of Peter are included.
B.) The Muratorian Fragment, which reflects the church of Rome in 180 A.D.:
It is incomplete, and lists our New Testament, with the following exceptions: Hebrews, James, I-II Peter, and III John are lacking; but the Revelation of Peter and the Wisdom of Solomon are included; the Shepard of Hermas may be read but not at public worship.
Were each of those in the aforementioned inspired by God? did God inspire the compilation of each or neither of them?
How so, if A and B contains at least one book deemed by Catholics, Protestants, and Coptics as not being inspired by God (i.e. inspired scripture)? Which one carried the true inspiration from God for compilation?
Secondly, the three earliest Greek manuscripts (Codex Sinaiticus, Codex Alexandrinus and Codex Vaticanus) from the 4th and 5th centuries, contains at least one book that Catholics, Protestants, and Coptics do not believe to be inspired scripture. Which one was the one Codex of those three that carried true inspiration from God for compilation?
People today have the hindsight to say that God has preserved the Bible and preserves His own, but how could this modern perspective have helped them then? Who determined what was the fixed Canon from A.D. 95 (the death of the Apostle John) to 180 A.D.?
Once again, please no Ad Homs. But let’s’ still have a lively discussion.
Again, as before, I will refrain from commenting.
I personally have no idea how or why certain books, chapters, verses etc. were selected for the New Testament. I trust that those who did, knew what they were doing.
I also do not know which translation is best. My Grandfather attended Southern Baptist Seminary in Louisville back in the early 1900s. He was an absolute genius.
I remember his telling me one time that the King James Version of the Bible was an excellent translation.
Never liked Book of John—Makes Jesus all God—very unlike other Gospels. I also like much of the Book of Thomas—that was not included. The Hymm of the Shepard —also not included is good—as well as the Coptic Book of Enoch (used by Jude). The Bible has many elements—its a library of books—inspired by God but organized by man.
To ask that question makes one think that some books or verses were not inspired by God. In truth, they all were.
Well, let me give you the opinion of the ignorant and of course myself:
The New Testament was inspired by Jesus. So by God by proxy. Each book is a ‘Testament’ or witnessed accounting of the words and deeds of Jesus. Except the Book of Revelations. Which is prophetic and a piece of work unto itself imho.
Old Testament — The Israelite Covenant with God. Particularly the first 5 books from Moses. The age of the Bull.
New Testament — The New Covenant Jews and Gentiles alike, the age of the Fish.
Book of Revelations — The destruction, remaking and ascension of the world. — The age of Aquarius.
I only include the astrological notation as a curiosity, it’s interesting that pre-Christ, there were many bull gods and idols that competed with the Jewish faith, and that the Christian sign of the fish is a result of the coming of Jesus.
Who determined the canon is fixed? Where does it say revelation ceased?
The NT books commonly agreed on by all Christians in the first century were..
The Four Gospels
Acts
All the letters of Paul except Hebrews (uncertain authorship, I believe he did write it)
1 Peter
1 John
And that was all.
200 years later additional books added were...
James
2nd Peter
More private letters of John,
Jude
Revelation.
Even then there was enough doubt about them that they were placed together in the back of the Bible.
Whoever made this decision had to have a recognized and accepted authority to do so given to them by someone who had the power to do so. Otherwise, anyone could claim to have that authority and make any list that pleased them.
So the question to answer first is: Who had the authority to decide the canon? To go about the task, however long it took, to include some books and exclude others. Find out who that is, and what canon they used (or still use); and then-- viola-- you will find your canon.
***Secondly, the three earliest Greek manuscripts (Codex Sinaiticus, Codex Alexandrinus and Codex Vaticanus).... contains at least one book that Catholics, Protestants, and Coptics do not believe to be inspired scripture.***
That would be THE SHEPHERD OF HERMAS. Read it and you will see why it is rejected. It is a joke!
It is historically known that Constantine ordered the printing of fifty bibles. This was a massive undertaking as the pages were made of antelope skin, bound, handcoppied and distributed to the churches.
Some have suggested that when the three bibles mentioned here were found to contain errors they were stored away (too valuable to toss them) and that is why they survived the centuries. They simply were unused much so never got the wear and tear other “RED (read) bibles” got.
Another interesting way to look a the bible is, just which ones did the early preachers preach from?
Looking at all the sermons of the first 400 years, we can probably find every verse of the NT quoted (in Greek) as it is written in our modern bibles.
I wish The Didache and the letters of Clement of Rome had been included, and the Book of Revelation dropped.
I'm not quite sure what you by this.
The book of John is basically theology. He lived longer than the synoptic Gospel writers and was inspired in this way.
Dig down to the second and third levels to understand John. It’s been said by theologians that EVERY word in John is important.
My pastor's cousin is doing his PhD work on the authorship of Hebrews. He is arguing that LUKE wrote Hebrews down as a sort of dictation based on a sermon from Paul.
To me it makes sense ... Hebrews sounds Pauline ... but looks Lucian.
Just a theory ... but one that doesn't cost anything ... lol
Cant wait to read the thesis.
I can maybe understand wanting to include the first letter of Clement, but the second was not written by Clement and is pure propaganda.
Now I will comment, as the first and second threads on this have been commented on in full.
If there was no inspiration from God in compiling the scriptures (i.e. placing the 39 Old Testament and 27 New Testament books together and binding them in one book) and there is only inspired scripture - but, again, no inspiration in/for compilation - then did those councils and groups of men ascend to the level of the Absolute and Absolute Being and then become incapable of committing error when compiling them?
If so, A.) how then do we account for the earliest Greek manuscripts (Codex Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus, and Vaticanus) each being different from the other (even when barring pages that were lost) and being different from each other in the realm of books that are there? And how do we account for B.) the Clermont List and the Muratorian Fragment being different from each other?
I ask this because the scriptures didn’t place themselves into a bound Codex, List, etcetera, and God did not send down a compilation of 39 OT and 27 NT bound books and say “Here are your inspired scriptures to read.”
What is quite interesting about the Gospel of Thomas is that the same scientific methods of determining that Matthew, Mark, and Luke came from the first century A.D. have also determined that of the many so-called lost gospels, the Gospel of Thomas seems to be unique in that it also came from the first century - around 70 A.D. - the same time range given to Matthew, Mark and Luke.
I forgot to mention this...
Yes, the 27 NT and 39 OT books were inspired by God and organized (compiled) by men, but God has never sent down a list of books with a note attached to them saying “Here are your inspired scriptures to read.”
So if there is inspired scripture, but no inspiration in the act of compiling them, then short of men becoming Absolute Beings and absolutely incapable of error when organizing and binding together books they consider to be inspired scripture, then the question arises: were these men and councils ascending to God-level when compiling them?
Because, as we can see, by looking at the oldest Greek manuscripts available (Codex A, S, and B) each of them contains at least one book that is not considered scripture by Protestants, Catholics and Coptics and going back further the Clermont list and Muratorian fragment each contains books not considered to be inspired by catholic, Protestants and Coptics.
If there is inspiration in compilation is it equal in inspiration to inspired scripture? If not, then that would explain all of the errors in compilation from the second century until now.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.