Replies

"...there are atheists I know whose actions were "good" by most ethical standards or norms. ..." PFC

I don't think you comprehended a thing I wrote. UNREAL!

"I could follow the theologists who say what I read is not what it really says." PFC

I can completely understand why they might say that, after my experience with you so far.

"Of course what they say it actually and clearly says varies depending on their sect. ....Or I can say, the book has errors, therefore it is not written by God." PFC

You can "say" that, but who would believe you were comprehending what you were reading? Not me, that's for sure (for the reasons stated above).

And, of course things are a bit more complicated than I suspect you even begin to realize.

For starters, which one of these Bibles did you read?:

How to Choose a Study Bible - By: John R. Kohlenberger III

Read the introduction.

Introductions usually inform one as to the author, readers, date, origin, and the content of the book or section of the Bible; outlines display the contents of a book.

Introductions and outlines differ in thoroughness and length, but introductions can also differ in perspective.

Those written by conservative scholars take the Bible's self-witness at face value. They agree that Moses wrote all or most of the Pentateuch (the first five books of the Bible), that Paul wrote 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus, and that Peter wrote 2 Peter because the books themselves say so.

Most non-conservative or liberal scholars, however, use criteria other than the text of the Bible to evaluate its statements and claims. Thus, most liberal scholars believe that a series of editors wrote the Pentateuch, that a disciple or disciples of Paul wrote the Pastoral Epistles, and that 2 Peter was written a good half-century after Peter's death.

As a result, the introductions might be the first place to check to discern whether a study Bible takes a conservative or liberal interpretative perspective.

If the Bible has notes, they often betray an alignment with a particular theological or critical approach to the text.

For instance, the notes in the New Jerusalem and New American Bibles are noticeably Roman Catholic in certain texts.

The notes in the Scofield and Ryrie Bibles are conservative, but they are also dispensational.

The notes in the New Oxford Annotated Bible and the Harper Collins Study Bible take a liberal/critical approach.

The notes in the Dake Bible are pentecostal.

The Catholic study Bibles tend to emphasize the historical dogmas of the church at key texts such as Matt. 16:17-19.

Schofield and Ryrie emphasize distinctions between Isreal and the church and literal fulfillment of prophecy (e.g., Acts 15:15-17).

The New Geneva Bible takes a nondispensational approach at these texts.

Notes in liberal study Bibles often counter the literal understanding of the text (e.g., Josh.10-11) and point out stories and events they feel are contradictory or fabricated (e.g., Judg.1; 1 Chron.21).

Pentecostal and charismatic writers give extra attention to texts dealing with healing or spiritual gifts (e.g., Matt.8:17; Acts2).

Study Bibles reviewed (not an exhaustive list) ( *Not recommended ):

I Subjectively oriented:

A. Conservative Dispensational

1. Companion Bible (Kregel) KJV
2. Ryrie Study Bible (Moody, Expanded Editions) KJV, NASB, NIV
3. Scofield Reference Bible (Oxford) KJV
4. New Scofield Reference Bible (Oxford) KJV, NIV, (World) NASB (Nelson) NKLV

B. Conservative Evangelical

1. Disciple's Study Bible (Broadman & Holman) NIV
2. Harper Study Bible (Zondervan) NASB, NRSV
3. Hebrew-Greek Key Study Bible (AMG) KJV, NASB
4. Life Application Bible (Tyndale) KJV, LB, NIV, NKJV, NRSV
5. New Student Bible (Zondervan) KJV, NIV, NRSV
6. NIV Study Bible (Zondervan) NIV
7. The Quest Study Bible (Zondervan) NIV
8. Word In LifeStudy Bible ([NT] Nelson) NKJV, NRSV

C. Conservative: Pentecostal / Charismatic

1. * Dake's Annotated Reference Bible (Dake) KJV
2. Full Life Study Bible (Zondervan) KJV, NKJV
3. Spirit-Filled Life Bible (Nelson) KJV, NKJV
4. * The Word Study Bible (Harrison House) KJV

D. Conservative Reformed:

1. New Geneva Study Bible (Nelson) NKJV --- (My choice)

E. Conservative: Wesleyan / Holiness

1. The Wesley Bible (Nelson) NKJV

F. Nonconservative: Mainline Protestant

1. * Cambridge Annotated Study Bible (Cambridge) NRSV
2. * HarperCollins Study Bible (HarperCollins) NRSV
3. * New Oxford Annotated Bible (Oxford) NRSV
4. * Oxford Study Bible (Oxford) REB

G. Nonconservative: Roman Catholic

1. * The Catholic Bible: Personal Study edition (Oxford) NAB
2. * The Catholic Study Bible (Oxford) NAB
3. * New Jerusalem Bible (Doubleday)

II Objectively Oriented (ALL GREAT)

A. Dickenson New Analytical Study Bible (World) KJV

B. New Open Bible (Nelson, Expanded Edition) KJV, NASB, NKJV

C. Thompson Chain-Reference Bible (Kirkbride) KJV, NIV, NASB, NKJV

*
Note: As far as "versions" go, the KJV, NIV, NKJV, NRSV, and the NASB are all dependable and useful for serious study and personal devotions.

===

The preservation and correct assembling of the canon of Scripture was an integral part of the history of redemption itself. Just as God was at work in creation, calling his people Isreal, in the life, death, and resurrection of Christ, and in the early work and writings of the apostles, so God was at work in the preservation and assembling together of the books of Scripture for the benefit of his people for the entire church age.

God's greatest revelation to mankind was written down by the apostles.

We have everything we need to know about the life, death and resurrection of Christ, and its meaning for the lives of believers for all time.

No more writings can be added to the Bible after the time of the New Testament.[Heb 1:1-2 Rev.22:18-19]

Only those who don't believe that God is sovereign would doubt his faithfulness to his people and think that he would allow something to be missing from Scripture for almost 2,000 years that he thinks we need to know for obeying him and trusting him fully. The canon of Scripture today is exactly what God wanted it to be, and it will stay that way until Christ returns.

New Testament Canon:

In A.D. 367 the Thirty-ninth Paschal Letter of Athanasius contained an
exact list of the twenty-seven New Testament books we have today. This was
the list of books accepted by the churches in the eastern part of the
Mediterranean world.

Thirty years later, in A.D. 397, the Council of Carthage, representing the
churches in the western part of the Mediterranean world, agreed with the
eastern churches on the same list. These are the earliest final lists of
our canon of Scripture.

"In many and various ways God spoke of old to our fathers by the prophets;
but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son...". [Heb. 1:1-2]

God's speaking to us by his Son is the culmination of his speaking to
mankind and is his greatest and final revelation to mankind.

(The exceptional greatness of the revelation that comes through the Son,
far exceeds any revelation in the Old Covenant as noted over and over again
in the first and second chapters of Hebrews.)

Once the writings of the New Testament apostles and their authorized
companions were completed, we have everything that God wants us to know
about the life, death, & resurrection of Christ, and its meaning for the
lives of believers for all time. In this way Hebrews 1 & 2 shows us why no
more writings can be added to the Bible after the time of the New
Testament. The canon is now closed.

Old Testament Canon:

“Beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he [Jesus] expounded unto them in
all the Scripture the things concerning himself.” (Luke 24:24; cf. Rom. 1:2)

The entire OT canonical Scriptures are deemed in the following way:

1) the prophets; 2) Moses and the prophets; 3) Moses, the prophets, and the
psalms.

Augustine so shows this in his writings against Cresconius the grammarian:
“Not without cause was the canon of the church framed with so salutary a
vigilance, that certain books of the prophets and apostles should belong to
it.” (Lib. 2. cap. 31);

also “Let them shew us their church, not in the rumors of the Africans, but
in the injunction of the Law, in the predictions of the prophets, in the
songs of the Psalms; that is, in all the canonical authorities of the
sacred books.” (De Unit. Eccles. C. 16.)

That the apocryphal books were not written by the prophets are clear and
certain.

All confess that Malachi was the last Jewish prophet. Between Malachi and
John the Baptist, no other Jewish prophet arose, but the writers of the
apocryphal books lived after Malachi.

The Major premise rests on Scripture: Peter says the OT is the “prophetic
word.” (2 Peter 1:19);

Paul calls it the “scriptures of the prophets” (Romans 16:26);

Zacharias the priest says “As he spake by the mouths of his holy prophets,
which have been since the world began.” (Luke 1:70);

“They have Moses and the Prophets” as Abraham said (Luke 18:39);

Heb. 1:1, “God spake in divers manners by the prophets.”;

the church is built upon the “apostles and prophets” (Eph. 2:20);

“All things must be fulfilled which are written in the law of Moses, and in
the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me:” and it follows
immediately, “And he opened their understanding, that they might understand
the Scriptures.” (Luke 24:44-45);

Paul asks Agrippa, “Believest thou the prophets?” that is the Scriptures.
(Acts 26:27);

When Paul dealt with the Jews at Rome he tried to convince them “out of the
law of Moses and the prophets.” (Acts 28:23).

From these we see that the major assertion is true, that the whole OT was
given to us by God’s prophets.

There is no part of the OT which was not given by the prophets.