GRPL Ping.
“In many and various ways God spoke to His people of old by the prophets, but now in these last days He has spoken to us by His Son.”
Thanks for posting this.
Thanks for providing these helpful reminders about the bible and about biblical books whose authority and/or authenticity are disputed within Christian circles. There are some fine points that I am not sure are covered here, I mention them because I don’t have a lot of time to review this. The canonization process itself did not happen until well into the 3rd century which is why some claim that canonization has the right to embrace material that late. That’s a whole ‘nother wrangle. As an evangelical who has found the bible indeed quite adequate as a base document for all matters faith and practice, I make it clear where I stand. Later material is just not of the same spiritual caliber and shows it, not because of who wrote it, but because it tends to shift the center of attention from God to men. At best (short of Christ’s personal return), I humbly submit, we can elucidate the bible and trace how it applies to our personal affairs, which is often very helpful. (I believe in prophetic forthtelling still existing as a spiritual gift.)
If I remember correctly, the only books of the NT that were never in question were..
The four Gospels.
Acts.
All the letters of PAUL except HEBREWS.
1 PETER
1 JOHN
and that was IT.
The other books that were considered “doubtful” and not recognized for years...
That would be..
HEBREWS(one of my favorites, Uncertain authorship).
JAMES (too much difference from Paul’s letters)
2 PETER (Too different from 1 Peter in style of writing)
2&3 JOHN (Private correspondence, not inspired)
JUDE (Mentions verses from the book of Enoch)
REVELATION.(Too strange, too different in style from John’s other writings.)
It took several centuries before these were added to the bible.
Tautology
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach