Posted on 06/02/2010 12:05:35 PM PDT by i88schwartz
Seriously, I don't get it. I see so many anti-Israel and anti-Semitic posts on the internet. Why not love our only real ally in the middle east?
So are you saying what Jesus said to Mary was determined un-important by the Creator? or do you think what Jesus said to Mary, would not be understood by most people and rejected because it was to Mystical for most people to understand through-out the ages?
Or can we even know why it was rejected?
I only ask because those writings were found with the Dead Sea Scrolls when many hidden things seem to be -un-covered
and when Prophecy became apparent for our Generation with Israel once becoming a nation again...
Thanks for your replies ST! :)
See here in this Gospel to Mary, I can imagine how strange and wierd it would sound to the World through-out the ages, yet what he says to her for our Generation does not sound far-out at all..
Do you agree?
Will matter then be destroyed or not?
22) The Savior said, All nature, all formations, all creatures exist in and with one another, and they will be resolved again into their own roots.
23) For the nature of matter is resolved into the roots of its own nature alone.
24) He who has ears to hear, let him hear.
25) Peter said to him, Since you have explained everything to us, tell us this also: What is the sin of the world?
26) The Savior said There is no sin, but it is you who make sin when you do the things that are like the nature of adultery, which is called sin.
27) That is why the Good came into your midst, to the essence of every nature in order to restore it to its root.
28) Then He continued and said, That is why you become sick and die, for you are deprived of the one who can heal you.
29) He who has a mind to understand, let him understand.
30) Matter gave birth to a passion that has no equal, which proceeded from something contrary to nature. Then there arises a disturbance in its whole body.
31) That is why I said to you, Be of good courage, and if you are discouraged be encouraged in the presence of the different forms of nature.
32) He who has ears to hear, let him hear.
BobJ was saying dump Israel....My response was to that.
Not all..... But most conservatives who are sick and tired of the “burden” of Israel are atheists. All they see are people and rocks and their own ass out there
Islam is in a centuries long big fight with the Western world which is the Christian world. The Muslims look at the West as being Christian even some Europeans don’t. Dumping the Jews of Israel will not placate the Muslims. Will not end their battle with the Christians and their taking over of Europe (via demographics) same as they took over Lebanon and Kosovo and massacred Christian Armenians and Greeks during Ottoman times and took their land. Muslims would love to do the same to Israel they did to the Armenians and Lebanese Christians
The Muslim war with Christianity never ends. BobJ can try and ignore this.
You are right dennisw....
On a couple other sites I visit and post on, every person that hates Israel and wants to dump them are Atheists....
The Atheists in the USA are hell bent on destroying all religious life here, we see it daily. If they can destroy Judaism, Christianity and our sacred values that come from G-D and Judeo/Christian Principles, then I believe in their opinion it will be a no-brainer by the *elites* to destroy the naomad race and culture which is Islam...
On a couple other sites I visit and post on, every person that hates Israel and wants to dump them are Atheists>>>>>>
Atheist have a poor understanding of religious wars. They prefer to laugh at them and say “Let them all die killing each other. Let the Jews and Muslims fight I don’t care” “All this fighting over imaginary gods”
Richard Dwakins will have his books burned when the Muslims take over the UK. So much for the “deep thinking” and high IQ of these atheist geniuses. Dawkins is also anti Israel though he doesn’t speak out much about Israel vs Muslims
So are you saying what Jesus said to Mary was determined un-important by the Creator? or do you think what Jesus said to Mary, would not be understood by most people and rejected because it was to Mystical for most people to understand through-out the ages?
Whatever Jesus said at the time served the purpose for which Jesus intended it. It wasn't unimportant for the purpose that Jesus had, at that time.
I mean, you know (should be obvious) that every word that Jesus ever said in His life is not in Scripture. Were there words that Jesus said (anywhere at any time) which were unimportant? No, I doubt that Jesus was saying things that were unimportant. The question is... for what purpose were the words spoken?
Was that purpose (for which Jesus spoke "other words) -- for the people of God, in that it was something intended to be for (1) doctrine, (2) reproof, (3) correction, (4) instruction in righteousness -- so "that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work."
The answer would have to be no ...
Why would the answer have to be no? ... well..., because God tells us that what we have in Scripture is so "that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work."
If God left out something (for that purpose) then what He says couldn't be accomplished.
We do have the complete Word of God for the purpose of -- (1) doctrine, (2) reproof, (3) correction, (4) instruction in righteousness -- so "that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work."
I think what you and some others may be "dealing with here" -- is a curiosity to find out much more about what Jesus said and did and how He acted and what His interactions were with other people, more so than what we have.
However, when one "seeks to go beyond" what God has already determined that He wants you to know now (in His authoritative Word that He has given us) ... we are starting encroach very subtlely on the territory of Satan, when He fell.
I think Satan "wanted more" than what was determined for Him. Satan thought he was more than what God said he was. We are very subtlely encroaching upon that territory when we think we should "have more" than what God has already predertimined we should have.
This is the exact sort of thing that leads to cults and "special knowledge" and "in-groups" (those "in the know") -- which eventually lead down a pathway that removes one from the proper knowledge that God wants us all to have -- "for His purposes" -- that He intends for us in this world, right now.
I think at a later time, and in a manner that God has determined and willed for us -- we will know more. But, when we seek out sources that God doesn't intend and when we want to "go beyond" what God has determined -- this usually ends up "in a fall" for that person.
For example, at the time of the coming Kingdom of the Messiah on this earth, we will certainly know more than we do now, about all aspects of that Kingdom, in which we have only been given certain limited things to know about it -- at the present time. That's done by "God's specific timing" to do so -- and not by "our timing" or "desires" to know more than God has determined for us, right at the moment.
AND... one more thing ... about the "mystical" here... Note that God has "anchored His Word" -- in "reality". His Word has been tied very tightly to "actual circumstances" and "happenings" in this world, where things can be seen and proven and verified (and they have been). The very interesting thing about "God's Word" and His "plan of Salvation" for the world -- is that it's so anchored in "reality" of circumstances that actually happened to people -- that it's not subject to hoaxes and twisting out of shape (in the understanding of it). God has "woven His message" very tightly into the "reality in which we live" so that His message can't be twisted out of shape, if we understand that reality in which we live.
God has made "His message" to come from an "actually happening" that gives a "teaching" and part of "his plan" to us.
For example, the serpent in the wilderness which was "hung up" for the Israelites to see, so that when they were bitten by the serpents (and would die) -- all they had to do was glance up and look at the serpent that Moses had put up (at God's command) -- and when they looked at it -- they would not die from having been bitten.
That actually happened. It was a "reality" ... an actual circumstance in the lives of those people living then. And that became a "lesson" for understanding about Jesus hanging on the cross and the salvation that He provides for us.
BUT, when you start dealing in the "mystical" and "private knowledge" -- you'll find that this becomes "divorced from real circumstances of life around us" and it has a tendency to get all twisted out of shape.
This is the kind of messages that the demons send to us (i.e., send to mankind) -- the "mystical" -- which is divorced from reality (because the demons can't really affect reality the way God can). And thus, the demons send mankind messages through "mystical means" so to twist and subvert God's message, and get people off track from it.
I would be very careful about the "mystical" in that regard. God's Word, on the other hand, is anchored in the reality and lives of Adam and Eve, the real lives of Noah and his family during the flood, the real life of Abraham, and then Isacc and Jacob, from which came the twelve tribes of Israel. All of this was not "mystical" or "secret knowledge" or "special knowledge" but open to all. It was anchored in the real circumstances that God caused to happen in the "space-time world" that we all live in -- in order to "authenticate" His message to us. Only God has absolute control over this "space-time world" that we live in -- and so He "attaches" His message to what only He can control to verify and authenticate it as "true".
Anyone can make "mystical" -- but only God can change "reality" and make it actually "happen" and thus "weave His inerrant and infallbile and authoritative" Word into it and through it and come out with exactly what His purpose is.
I hope you see that "connection" to "reality" that God has linked His Word to -- and not the "mystical" ... :-)
Or can we even know why it was rejected?
For some writings, you can know now. One way that a prophet is discredited, from what we see from the Bible -- is -- if that prophet says one thing that is wrong, does not happen, is not true -- he is stoned and killed as a false prophet.
So, one way that the people of God judged a particular writing -- is if in that writing (let's say some "book" or "scroll") it has one thing that is wrong in it -- some false statement (or assertion or fact that it represents). The whole thing is rejected and thrown out. For example, some writing has 100 statements/assertions that it makes. You find just one of the 100 items that is wrong -- you have to reject all 100 of what it said (not just the "one item"), in that writing. That's one way we can know.
If you go into the subject of the "canon of Scriptures" you'll find a list of things that were used to "recognize" whether some was "determined by God" to be Scripture. All we do is "recognize" -- God is the one who "determines" (and "makes it so").
I only ask because those writings were found with the Dead Sea Scrolls when many hidden things seem to be -un-covered and when Prophecy became apparent for our Generation with Israel once becoming a nation again...
Well, I did show you (up above) that they weren't found with the Dead Sea Scrolls. Those documents were found in Egypt. ... :-)
Another thing to keep in mind here ... is that as we come closer to the time when the Judgement of God comes down on this earth -- we also get closer to the time of rampant deception. More things are going to happen and be discovered, during these times. Whenever God steps up His actions -- Satan ramps up his own, too ... you see ...
Keep in mind what God says about this deception and what is going to happen, and how this deception is dealt with ...
Matthew Chapter 13 24 Another parable He put forth to them, saying: "The kingdom of heaven is like a man who sowed good seed in his field; 25 but while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat and went his way. 26 But when the grain had sprouted and produced a crop, then the tares also appeared. 27 So the servants of the owner came and said to him, 'Sir, did you not sow good seed in your field? How then does it have tares?' 28 He said to them, 'An enemy has done this.' The servants said to him, 'Do you want us then to go and gather them up?' 29 But he said, 'No, lest while you gather up the tares you also uproot the wheat with them. 30 Let both grow together until the harvest, and at the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, "First gather together the tares and bind them in bundles to burn them, but gather the wheat into my barn." ' " [ ... ] 36 Then Jesus sent the multitude away and went into the house. And His disciples came to Him, saying, "Explain to us the parable of the tares of the field." 37 He answered and said to them: "He who sows the good seed is the Son of Man. 38 The field is the world, the good seeds are the sons of the kingdom, but the tares are the sons of the wicked one. 39 The enemy who sowed them is the devil, the harvest is the end of the age, and the reapers are the angels. 40 Therefore as the tares are gathered and burned in the fire, so it will be at the end of this age. 41 The Son of Man will send out His angels, and they will gather out of His kingdom all things that offend, and those who practice lawlessness, 42 and will cast them into the furnace of fire. There will be wailing and gnashing of teeth. 43 Then the righteous will shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. He who has ears to hear, let him hear!
Thus, we see that Satan has sowed the "tares" (and it represents things like deception, doctrines of demons, things to take people away from the Word of God).
And how does God deal with it ... He leaves the tares in place until the time of the harvest when the angels will remove those tares, at the end of the age. We're not quite to the end of the age, yet -- but we will be soon. In the meantime, God says we will be living with the deception and the sowing of the tares, by Satan and his fallen angels.
Exactly right!
In addition it does not help when we have *Weasels* like Bill Maher, Glenn Greenwald and of course MSNBC condemning Israel like they are the *Spawn of Satan*
Aprreciate Eliot Spitzer confronting this Greenwald bozo!
http://www.truthdig.com/avbooth/item/flotilla_debate_glenn_greenwald_vs_eliot_spitzer_20100601/
Great Post ST..and makes much sense, biblically and logically....
I sure don’t want to be deceived and taken in some crazy direction by deceivers, I just like learning all I can about Jesus and the Creator of the Universe..I guess I was just trying to *Test* everything like G-D says to do when reading his sacred texts.....
But Thank you!
Your posts help me alot!
See here in this Gospel to Mary, I can imagine how strange and wierd it would sound to the World through-out the ages, yet what he says to her for our Generation does not sound far-out at all..
Do you agree?
There would be several ways to verify whether something is of Scripture or not. But, without going into all that right now ... I'll start with something that is true for the rest of the New Testament writings -- for a "clue" as to whether this was something that the "people of God" (at that time) did "recognize" as Scripture (or not).
Remember, no book/writing -- which has ever been rejected by the people of God, the ones it was given to (at that time and to "those people") -- has ever been included in Scripture -- at a later time, and thus determined (at that later time) "to be Scripture"...
Another thing to remember is that all of the New Testament Scriptures were in the hands of the people of God, almost immediately from the time they were written, and all of them were distributed to those intended -- well before 95 A.D. -- except for the book of Revelation, which was the last one ... and that was distributed at around 95 A.D.
So, one of the first things I want to find out -- is if the people of God at that time did recognize this as the "Word of God" (or not).
Let me tell you one little "factoid" about the New Testament writings. It has been shown that one can "reconstruct" the entire New Testament, almost down to the very last verse, by the many quotes where the church fathers and in their own writings, wrote about this book and/or that verse. Just by their own writings, you can reconstruct any New Testament book, even if you did not have that particular New Testament book.
So, the question I have -- is -- can you reconstruct this particular book, from the "church fathers" quoting this book (all the verses and the entire book) in all of their writings?
That's another way to ask (and/or say) "Did they recognize this book as Scripture?". If they used it in their sermons, if they quoted from it and taught the flock (their church) about it, if they did "commentaries' on this book -- then it would be shown that they -- indeed -- recognized this book as the Word of God.
That's one place where I would "start" -- but it wouldn't be the end of the story (about whether the book was "Scripture"). There's much more to that. I just use this one little example as a convenient starting place.
Aprreciate Eliot Spitzer confronting this Greenwald bozo!>>>>>>>
Most Jews of that generation are pro-Israel. They may vote Democratic and say malign Bibi Netanyahu, but the they are pro Israel. They have to stop voting for Democrat dogs who are pro-Muslim. When Obama does not support Israel in the UN and stands by while the UN demands that Israel get a nuclear inspection.... This is the best proof that Obama is a Muslim even if only sub-consciously
The other big anti-Israel faction is comprised of various "ethnic" communities, many of whom support the Palestistineans out of vestigal Third Worldism (most Latin Americans being supportive of the non-aligned movement), the one-sided nature of the ethnic/international press, or merely old school anti-semitism. The most obvious examples are Arab Americans (Muslim or Christian), but you even have cases like the Greek Americans in my area who seem to have an odd belief that the Palestineans are their "brothers", which is residual to the old allegiance against the Turks as well as a common myth that a huge number of Palestineans are fellow Orthodox Christians. If anyone can tell me of an "ethnic" community in the United States that is generally pro-Israel, I would like to know.
You then have another faction comprised of old line WASPs and PaleoCatholics who are merely resentful of Jewish influence and reflexively support the Palestinians as victims of the "Jewish cabal." This is probably the smallest group amongst the anti-Israel contingent, but they often show up on both Right and Left wing forums.
I think (Obama is a Muslim) even if only sub-consciously
He has the nerve to apologize to the Muslim World for the USA Actions..
He says the USA is not a Christian Nation based on the Core Values that come from Judeo/Christian Principles.
He says Muslims have contributed to much of the USA’s accomplishments! HUH?
He does not give one ounce of credit to what the American Military has done to keep the USA safe from Communism, Tyranny and Socialism.
Nor does he hace a clue about the Holy Scriptures that say Israel has the right to exist, that it is the City of G-D not the Moon GOD but the 1 G-D creator of Heaven and Earth..
How could he...After all his mentor *Rev Wright* said the USA has gotten what it deserves....*Those Chickens have come home to roost*
No. He is not doubting that the Islamic Jihad is worldwide. He is saying that Israel has all she can handle with the surrounding Islamic states without venturing too much into other theaters.
Introduction
This study is an excerpt of the book by Don Stewart entitled What Everyone Needs To Know About The Bible, which is part of The Basic Bible Study Series published by Dart Press, Orange, California. Used by permission of the author.
Don Stewart has written over twenty books on the subject of evidences for the Christian faith. These include You Be the Judge, Ten Reasons to Trust the Bible, The Coming Temple, The Basic Bible Study Series. In the last fifteen years he has spoken in over thirty countries proclaiming the message that the Christian faith is both reasonable and intelligent.
Who Decided Which Books Should Be Placed in the Bible?
Many people wonder who decided which books should be placed in the Bible.
The simple answer is that God decided which books should be in the canon. He was the final determiner. J. I. Packer writes:
The church no more gave us the New Testament canon than Sir Isaac Newton gave us the force of gravity. God gave us gravity, by his work of creation, and similarly he gave us the New Testament canon, by inspiring the individual books that make it up (J. I. Packer, God Speaks To Man, p. 81).
Canonizing and Collecting
A distinction needs to be made between canonizing and collecting. No man or council can pronounce a work canonical or scriptural, yet man was responsible for collecting and preserving such works. F. F. Bruce writes:
One thing must be emphatically stated. The New Testament books did not become authoritative for the Church because they were formally included in a canonical list; on the contrary, the Church included them in her canon because she already regarded them as divinely inspired, recognizing their innate worth and generally apostolic authority, direct or indirect. The first ecclesiastical councils to classify the canonical books were both held in North Africa-at Hippo Regius in 393 and at Carthage in 397-but what these councils did was not to impose something new upon the Christian communities but to codify what was already the general practice of these communities (F. F. Bruce, The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable?, Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 1960, p. 27).
Hence the books we have as Scripture were inspired by God and recognized such by man.
What Criteria Were Used in Determining Which Books Belong in the Bible?
The books admitted to the canon of Scripture were inspired by God. There were, however, many false books that claimed inspiration. How did the people judge between the true and the false? The Bible does not give any set of criteria that were used to determine which books were to be considered Scripture. We are not told how the determination was made. Though we do not know the exact criteria which were used, they may include the following:
Prophetic Authorship
For a book to be considered canonical, it must have been written by a prophet or apostle or by one who had a special relationship to such (Mark to Peter, Luke to Paul).
Only those who had witnessed the events or had recorded eyewitness testimony could have their writings considered as Holy Scripture.
Witness of the Spirit
The appeal to the inner witness of the Holy Spirit was also made to aid the people in understanding which books belonged in the canon and which did not. Clark Pinnock writes:
The Spirit did not reveal a list of inspired books, but left their recognition to a historical process in which He was active, God's people learned to distinguish wheat from chaff, and gold from gravel, as He worked in their hearts (Clark Pinnock, Biblical Revelation, Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1973, p. 104).
Acceptance
The final test is the acceptance of the people of God. Jesus told His disciples:
But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things Which I said to you (John 14:26).
We have the promise of Jesus that His disciples would given total recall by the Holy Spirit of the things He said and did. These same disciples either wrote the New Testament books or had input into which works were accepted as Scripture. Any book that claimed canonical status, yet diverted from the truth of the life of Christ, would have been rejected by Jesus' own disciples who were, eyewitnesses to the New Testament events. Thus the acceptance of God's people is an important criterion for book to be considered canonical.
What Effect Did the Council of Nicea Have on Determining What Books Belonged in the Bible?
There have been accusations that the council of Nicea had a tremendous effect on both choosing what books should be in the Bible and changing some of the doctrines that the church held before that time.
The council of Nicea met in A.D. 323 to discuss how Jesus Christ was related to God. There were some in the church, led by Arius of Alexandria, who denied that Jesus Christ was God in human flesh, the Second Person of the Trinity. In order to answer these issues, the church had to make a pronouncement about which books authoritative doctrine could be based on.
The council of Nicea did not meet to discuss which books belonged in the New Testament canon. It only recognized the books that the church had from the beginning considered to be the Word of God.
Already Composed
The books that were recognized as Scripture had already been composed at the time. All the books contained in the New Testament were composed before the end of the first century. Some fifty existing papyrus manuscripts written before A.D. 325 contain parts of every book of the New Testament except 1 Timothy.
There is no truth to the argument, so often brought up, that some of these books were not in existence until the council of Nicea. The argument, therefore, that certain doctrines were invented at this time has no basis in fact.
Should Other Early Writings Be Included in the Bible?
There are some very early works in the history of the church that add to our information about Jesus. These books written between A.D. 80 and A.D. 180, were composed by "apostolic fathers." Although they were not inspired, as the New Testament books are, they do provide us with some confirming information regarding the New Testament events. Some of the most notable examples include:
Letter of Clement
In A.D. 95 Clement of Rome wrote a letter to the Corinthian church. This is an extremely important work because Clement was the leading elder of the church of Rome. He wrote his letter to the Corinthians to end a dispute between the laity and the elders.
Ignatius of Antioch
Ignatius of Antioch wrote seven letters in A.D. 115 on his way to being thrown to the lions. He made the distinction between his writings and that of the apostles.
I do not enjoin you as Peter and Paul did. They were apostles, I am a convict; they were free, but I am a slave to this very hour (Ignatius, Letter to the Romans, 4.3).
Quadratus
Quadratus was one of the earliest defenders of the Christian faith. He wrote to the Emperor Hadrian about A.D. 125. The work has been lost except for a brief statement in the writing of the church historian Eusebius.
The deeds of our Saviour were always before you, for they were true miracles; those who were healed, those who were raised from the dead, who were seen, not only when healed and when raised, but were always present. They remained living a long time, not only whilst our Lord was on earth, but likewise when he left the earth. So that some of them have also lived to our own times.
Quadratus gives another account of the miracles of Jesus and testifies as the Apostle Paul does that many who participated in the miraculous events surrounding the life of Christ lived long after Jesus ascended into heaven.
The Epistle of Barnabas
The Epistle of Barnabas, not the Barnabas of the New Testament, was written between A.D. 130 and 138. It was written to show that Jesus is a fulfillment of the Old Testament law.
Though these books were written at an early date, they have never been seriously considered as Holy Scripture. They do not claim biblical authority, some actually disclaim it. In addition, none of them were written by apostles or members of the apostolic company. But they are helpful in shedding light on the New Testament.
What is the Apocrypha?
There are a group of writings which are considered part of Old Testament Scripture by the Roman Catholic church but are not accepted as inspired by the Protestant church and Judaism. These are known as the Apocrypha.
The word Apocrypha means "hidden." The Apocrypha refers to the fifteen books (fourteen if the Letter of Jeremiah is put with Baruch) written between the years 300 B.C. and 100 B.C. (except Esdras which was written about A.D. 100). Eleven of these fourteen books are considered Holy Scripture by the Roman Catholic church. When added to the Old Testament, they constitute only seven extra books because the others are attached to existing books. The Apocrypha is about the size of the New Testament.
Apocrypha and Apocryphal
Sometimes people confuse the terms Apocrypha and apocryphal. The term apocryphal is also applied to other books that are New Testament forgeries. An example of this would be the Gospel of Thomas, which claims to have been written by Jesus' disciple Thomas. The book, however is a forgery. The word Apocrypha is a specific term used to refer to the particular books that are considered Scripture by the Roman Catholic Church.
History
The Protestant reformers, particularly in the sixteenth century, pointed out many abuses in the Roman Catholic church at that time. From 1545 to 1563 a church council met at Trent to answer some of their charges. Among their decisions was the pronouncement of these books as Holy Scripture. Before that time they were not regarded by the Roman Catholic church as sacred Scripture. The Protestant church rejects them for the following reasons:
No Claim
The primary reason for rejecting the Apocrypha as Scripture is that there is no claim within the books that they are inspired by God. This is in contrast to the canonical Scriptures which claim to record the revelation of God.
Never Cited
Though the New Testament cites directly or alludes to almost every book of the Old Testament as Scripture, it never cites the Apocrypha as being God's Word. If the Apocrypha were considered Scripture by the people living in the first century, we would certainly expect them to refer to it in some way.
The New Testament does refer to the Apocrypha in Jude 14 and Hebrews 11:35. but does not cite it as holy Scripture. It cites the works the same way Paul cited heathen poets (Acts 17:28). This demonstrates that the New Testament writers were familiar with the Apocrypha but did not consider them to be upon the same level as Old Testament Scripture.
Rejected by the Jews
The Jews have never considered these works to be inspired. On the contrary, they denied their inspiration. At the time of Christ we have the testimony of the Jewish writer Flavius Josephus that they were only twenty-two books to be inspired by God. The books of the Apocrypha were not among these.
Not on Early Lists
In the early years of the church it drew up various lists of the books it considered to be Scripture. The books of the Apocrypha do not appear on any list until the fourth century.
Rejected by Many Catholic Scholars
Many Roman Catholic scholars, through the Protestant Reformation, rejected the Apocrypha as Scripture. There was no unanimity of opinion among them that these books should be considered Scripture.
Demonstrable Errors
The Apocrypha also contains demonstrable errors. For example, Tobit was supposedly alive when Jereboam staged his revolt in 931 B.C. and was still alive when the Assyrians captured the Northern kingdom of Israel in 721 B.C. This means that he lived over two hundred years! However, the Book of Tobit says he lived only 158 years (Tobit 1:3-5; 14:11). This is an obvious contradiction. Other examples could be cited. Those who believe in an inerrant Scripture cannot accept the Apocrypha as God's Word.
No Evidence of Inspiration
The books of the Apocrypha do not contain anything like predictive prophecy that would give evidence of their inspiration. If these books were inspired by God, then we should expect to see some internal evidence confirming it. But there is none.
Old Testament Complete
It is clear that in the first century the Old Testament was complete. The Hebrews accepted the same thirty-nine books, (although divided differently) that the Protestant church does today. Jesus put His stamp of approval on these books but said nothing concerning the Apocrypha. However, He did say that the Scriptures were the authoritative Word of God and could not be broken. Any adding to that which God has revealed is denounced in the strongest of terms. Therefore, we have the testimony of Jesus against the authenticity of the Apocrypha.
We conclude that the Apocrypha should not be considered canonical because the books do not demonstrate themselves to be upon the same level as Scripture. Jesus did not consider it part of His Old Testament and we are told not to add or subtract anything from God's Word.
What about Other Books that Claim Biblical Authority?
Throughout the history of the church many documents surfaced that claimed to have been written by the apostles or those intimately familiar with the life of Christ. However these works were written by someone other than the named author. These fraudulent works are known as the pseudepigrapha (forgeries). They are also known as apocryphal works, and were rejected by all. The early church father, Eusebius, called these books "totally absurd and impious." Over three hundred different works that fit into this category have been catalogued.
Other Gospels
Among the forgeries were a large number of apocryphal or false gospels. Origen, a third century writer, testified to the existence of other gospels when he wrote, "There are many who have tried to write gospels, but not all have been accepted."
The biblical scholar Edwin Yamauchi offers an appropriate comment:
The apocryphal gospels are non-canonical writings of a motley variety about the purported deeds and revelations of Jesus Christ. Though the Greek word apocrypha originally meant "hidden," the church fathers used it to describe spurious writings foisted as gospels. Irenaeus refers to 'an unspeakable number of apocryphal and spurious writings, which they themselves (i. e. the heretics) had forged to bewilder the minds of the foolish.' Although some of them were patterned after the canonical gospels, many bear little resemblance to them. As Origen noted, The Church possesses four Gospels, heresy a great many' (Edwin M. Yamauchi, "The Word From Nag Hammadi," Christianity Today, January 13, 1978, p. 19).
Gnostic Influence
Many of these works were influenced by gnosticism. The word gnostic means "one who has knowledge." The gnostics taught that salvation came by secret knowledge of God. The gnostic view of God is contrary to the Bible. In addition, the gnostics considered that all matter is evil.
An example of gnostic writing can be found in the Gospel of Philip. The original Gospel of Philip was probably written sometime during the second century A.D. The influence of gnosticism and its emphasis on secret knowledge can be clearly seen in this work. The Gospel of Philip reads,
The Logos said: If you know the truth the truth will make you free. Ignorance is a slave, knowledge is freedom. When we recognize the truth we shall find the fruits of truth in our hearts. If we unite with it, we will bring our fulfillment.
Different Level
Other statements show that they are on a different level than Scripture.
A Gentile man does not die, for he has never lived that he should die. Adam came into being from two virgins, from the Spirit and from the virgin earth. Because of this Christ was born of a virgin, in order that he might set in order the stumbling which came to pass at the beginning.
These fanciful statements betray their non-biblical source.
Second-Hand Sources
The pseudepigrapha, apart from being forgeries, were also written long after, in some cases hundreds of years after, the New Testament events. The writers were not eyewitnesses to the life of Christ or to the events of the early church. This is another reason to reject the testimony which they give.
Gospel of Thomas
One of the most prominent of all the forgeries is the Gospel of Thomas. The Gospel of Thomas was probably composed in Edessa in Syria about A.D. 140. Consisting of 114 sayings of Jesus, it is the most extensive collection of non-biblical sayings of Jesus that still exist. The Gospel of Thomas begins as follows:
These are the secret words which the living Jesus spoke and Didymus Judas Thomas wrote. And He said: Whosoever finds the explanation of these words shall not taste death.
We know that the Gospel of Thomas is a forgery for the following reasons:
Incorrect Name
The author is not Thomas. Whoever wrote the Gospel of Thomas used the incorrect name when referring to the Apostle Thomas as Didymus Judas Thomas. In the four Gospels, Thomas is referred to as either Didymus or Thomas, not both at once. Didymus is the word for "twin" in both Greek and Aramaic, so the author of the Gospel of Thomas must not have been aware of this linguistic connotation.
Secret Approach
The secret approach found in the Gospel of Thomas is typical of the writings of the gnostics. The four Gospels are open about the ways of salvation and the kingdom of God while the Gospel of Thomas views truth from a hidden vantage point.
There is no historical setting for the statements. The Gospel of Thomas is a compilation of sayings without the inclusion of important historical events as recorded in the Gospels. We are not told when or under what circumstances the statements were made.
Contradicts Four Gospels
Many of the sayings are contradictory to those we have in the Gospels. For example, saying 114 says:
Jesus said, 'See, I shall lead her, so that I will make her male, that she too may become a living spirit, resembling you males. For every woman who makes herself male will enter the Kingdom of Heaven.'
Different Jesus
The person of Jesus Christ is different than the one revealed in the Gospels. In the Gospels Jesus is God the Son, Second Person of the Trinity. In the Gospel of Thomas He is one who points the way by which an individual can attain the knowledge of God.
These reasons demonstrate that the Gospel of Thomas is a forgery rather than a legitimate work written by one of Jesus' apostles.
Aquarian Gospel of Jesus Christ
One alternative explanation of the life and ministry of Jesus that has caused considerable interest is the Aquarian Gospel of Jesus the Christ. This work was written by Levi Dowling (1844-1911). based upon communication he received from an alleged "universal mind." The Aquarian Gospel attempts to fill in some of the missing years of Jesus' youth as well as explain His wisdom by attributing it to contact with holy men of other religions. The result is a contradictory mixture of Christian science and occultic thought.
The name is derived from the astrological idea that a new Aquarian age has come upon us, bringing with it the need for a new spiritual gospel, the Aquarian gospel.
Content
The Aquarian Gospel of Jesus the Christ attempts to fill in some of the blanks in the life of Jesus. Some of the material in the Aquarian Gospel is borrowed from the ancient Gospel of James, a well-known forgery in the early years of the church. The most prominent part of the book deals with the education and travel of Jesus. According to the Aquarian Gospel, Jesus first studied under the Jewish teacher Hillel and then went to India to spend time with their holy men. His learning also supposedly took Him to Tibet, Persia. Assyria, Greece, and Egypt. It was in Egypt that Jesus was said to have joined the sacred brotherhood. He passed through seven degrees and emerged as the Logos. In Alexandria a council of seven sages was held where they formulated seven great religious postulates and ordained Jesus for the work of the ministry.
The Aquarian Gospel then rewrites the four gospels according to its own particular viewpoint. The end of the story has Jesus appearing in a materialized body to people in India, Persia, Greece, and other countries.
Evaluation
Like many previous attempts, the Aquarian Gospel attempts to give an explanation of the wisdom and character of Jesus apart from the biblical depiction. Dowling's reconstruction shows obvious borrowing from the Ancient Gospel of James, as well as familiarity with a nineteenth century works, Notovitch's Unknown Life of Jesus Christ.
The book begins with an historical inaccuracy: "Augustus Caesar reigned and Herod Antipas was ruler in Jerusalem." This is an error because Antipas ruled in Galilee, never in Jerusalem.
A crucial problem with the Aquarian Gospel concerns its scenario of the source of Jesus' teachings. If Jesus obtained His wisdom from the masters of India, Greece, and other countries, then why doesn't His teaching reflect it? The teachings of Jesus, as recorded in the Gospels, are in direct conflict with every central belief of Hinduism, Buddhism, and the other religions with which He supposedly came into contact!
The simple fact is that we have in the Gospels a firsthand account of the life and ministry of Jesus. The Aquarian Gospel is a false portrait of the life of Christ, not based upon historical records or eyewitness testimony but rather upon the recollections of an ancient forgery and the imagination of a twentieth-century writer. It has no value whatsoever in providing new or accurate information on the life of Christ.
The Archko Volume
One of the most famous written hoaxes is the Archko Volume. The work is also known as the "Report of Pilate" or "Archko Library." The content of this work is an alleged report of the trial and death of Jesus made by Pontius Pilate to the Emperor Tiberius. Its existence can be traced back to Rev. W. D. Mahan of Boonville, Missouri, who published a thirty-two page pamphlet in 1879 titled, "A Correct Transcript of Pilate's Court."
The success of the "Report of Pilate" led Mahan to make some more "discoveries" including: an interview with the shepherds who were given the announcement of Christ's birth, Gamaliel's interview with Joseph and Mary, Eli's story of the Magi, and other previously unknown interviews surrounding the life and ministry of Jesus. Mahan claimed these "interviews" were translated from ancient manuscripts in Rome or Constantinople.
Edgar Goodspeed writes concerning the accuracy of the "interviews":
The picture of Jesus in his interview with Pilate is romantic and theatrical, and the Pilate reflected in the "Report" is historically improbable.
The whole work is a weak, crude fancy, a jumble of high-sounding but meaningless words, and hardly worth serious criticism. It is difficult to see how it could have deceived anyone.... Like the *Report of Pilate," these [the other interviews] bristle with childish blunders.... The supposed references to Josephus's Jewish Wars ... simply do not exist. The statement that Josephus in his Antiquities refers to Jesus in more than fifty places is false ... That Tacitus wrote his history of Agricola in A.D. 56 is of course an error; Tacitus was born in 55, and even if he had been able to write his father-in-law's biography at the age of one year, there was nothing yet to write, for Agricola himself was only nineteen (Edgar Goodspeed, Famous Biblical Hoaxes, pp. 33, 35).
As can be imagined, the "Report of Pilate" as well as the later interviews were immediately exposed as frauds. It was noticed, for instance, that entire pages of Eli's story of the Magi were copied verbatim from the novel Ben Hur.
Unhappily, people continue to read and believe these fraudulent works although they have no basis in fact.
The Lost Books of the Bible
One of the most often asked questions concerns the so-called "Lost Books of the Bible." A book with this title was produced in 1926. It was the reprint of William Hone's Apocryphal New Testament, first printed in 1820. Hone's book was copied from two earlier one's published in 1736 and 1737. Thus the materials found in the "Lost Books of the Bible" were written 250 years ago. Since the time of the original wilting of the lost books, the field of manuscript studies has made tremendous advances but none of this has been taken into account by those who publish these works.
The contents of the "lost books" include the following:
Four Infancy Gospels:
They include: "The Birth of Mary," a work written in the middle of the second century; "The Protoevangelium of James," written about the same time; the first "Gospel of Infancy." composed about A.D. 400; "The Second Infancy Gospel," which in reality is a fragment of the Gospel of Thomas.
These were so-called infancy gospels that were written to fill in the details of the early unrecorded years of the life of Christ. These works include stories of Jesus forming clay figures of animals and birds which He makes walk, fly, and eat. Another account has a child who runs into Jesus falling down dead. These examples are representative of the fanciful nature of the accounts.
The Letter of King Abgar
This was supposedly a letter written to Jesus by Abgar, King of Edessa. Jesus' reply to the letter is also contained. These works were written in the third century.
Gospel of Nicodemus
This is also known as "The Acts of Pilate." It was written in the fourth or fifth century.
Other works found among the lost books include the Apostles' Creed and the spurious letter from Paul to the Laodiceans. These books have been called "outlaw" Scriptures by some. But this is not the case, for none of these works were ever thought of as part of the New Testament. Anyone who claims these works were suppressed by the church is speaking out of ignorance or a desire to deceive.
It is obvious from the date of composition of these works that they cannot be considered on the same plane as Holy Scripture, which was written by eyewitnesses or people who recorded eyewitness testimony of the life and ministry of Jesus.
Contrast With Four Gospels
One hundred years ago F.W. Farrar wrote the following that is still true today:
The Four Gospels superseded all others and won their way into universal acceptance by their intrinsic value and authority. After so many salutary losses we still possess a rich collection of Apocryphal Gospels, and, if they serve no other good purpose, they have this value, that they prove for us undoubtedly the unique and transcendent superiority of the sacred records. These bear the stamp of absolute truthfulness, all the more decisively when placed in contrast with the writings which show signs of willful falsity. We escape their lying magic to find support and help from the genuine gospels. And here we take refuge with the greater confidence because the ruins which lie around the ancient archives of the Church look like a guarantee of the enduring strength and greatness of those archives themselves (F. W. Farrar, The Messages of the Books, p. 27).
A. Roberts and J. Donaldson, the editors of the AnteNicene Library, said the other gospels offer ...
curious glimpses of the state of the Christian conscience, and of modes of thought in the first centuries of our era, the predominant impression which they leave on our minds is the immeasurable superiority, the unapproachable simplicity and the majesty of the Canonical writings.
We conclude that any other book apart from the New Testament that attempts to fill in the gaps of the life of Christ only reveals the superiority of the four Gospels.
Has God Revealed Anything Further to Mankind Since the First Century?
There is evidence that the canon of Scripture was complete in the first century. Has God, since that time, revealed anything that is to be added to Holy Scripture?
Claims Do Not Make It True
The mere claim that God spoke to an individual does not make it true. There has to be evidence to back up the claim. The question Is, "Does the evidence support the claim that God spoke through them?" The Bible instructs us to test the spirits:
Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits whether they are of God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world (1 John 4:1).
When we test the claims of those who have brought forth a "new Scripture" we find them to be untrue.
The downfall of all the books that have had inspiration claimed for them is that they present a different revelation from what has previously been recorded. They contradict the Bible. For example, the Koran says that Jesus was not the Son of God and that He did not die upon the cross for the sins of the world.
The sacred books of Mormonism teach that there exist many gods rather than the one God the Bible speaks of. In addition, Mormonism teaches that each male can someday become a god himself, Mormonism also denies the doctrine of the Trinity. salvation by grace through faith, and the eternal punishment of the wicked.
No Book Qualifies
Every book written since the completion of the Bible that claims to be further revelation from God fails on the same ground. They all deny that Jesus Christ is God Himself, second Person of the Trinity. These works also deny salvation by grace through faith. They preached a different gospel. The Apostle Paul warned the church at Galatia about such people.
I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel ... But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed (Galatians 1:6,8).
No Evidence
Furthermore, there is no substantiating evidence such as fulfilled prophecy to demonstrate the books are of divine inspiration.
Thus, as we examine the various books that have been written since the completion of the New Testament that have claimed to be further revelation from God, we find them coming short of the mark. The Bible warns:
Every word of God is pure; He is a shield to those who put their trust in Him. Do not add to His words, lest He reprove you and you be found a liar (Proverbs 30:5,6).
Can Anything Be Added to the Bible Today?
We have seen that the canon was closed in the first century, and that since then God has not revealed anything on the level with Holy Scripture.
Westminster Confession
"The Westminster Confession," a seventeenth-century statement of faith, says concerning the Bible,
The whole counsel of God, concerning all things necessary for His own glory, man's salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations of the Spirit, or traditions of men ("Westminster Confession," 1:6).
According to this statement, which sums up the Protestant view of Scripture, nothing is to be added or subtracted from the Bible. The revelation from God to man has been completed.
No Direct Word
However, there is no direct word in the Bible that says God has stopped revealing Himself. Some have appealed to the following verses in the Book of Revelation.
For I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the Book of Life (Revelation 22:18,19).
This is only speaking of the Book of Revelation. It is not a commandment against adding any other book to Scripture. If taken literally, then you could not have any other book in Scripture but the Book of Revelation!
Yet there is a principle here that is clearly taught. No one is to add or to take away from the revealed Word of God.
Jude makes a statement that Is pertinent to' our discussion.
I found it necessary to write to you exhorting you to contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints (Jude 3).
This verse teaches that a body of truth from God has been delivered to man and that this faith has been wholly delivered. This seems to indicate that no further revelation from God is necessary. God has told us in Scripture everything that we need to know about who He is, who we are, and what will happen to the earth in the future.
We know the nature of God does not change:
For I am the Lord, I do not change (Malachi 3:6).
The Bible says clearly that the faith has been completely revealed. Therefore, If any new revelation were to come from God, it would be consistent with past revelations.
Even if a work met all of the above criteria, it would not necessarily be the Word of God. While theoretically it is possible that God could add something to what He has previously revealed, it is highly unlikely that this would be the case. The faith has already been delivered to mankind. Any further word from God to man is not necessary. The canon of Scripture is complete.
Conclusion
After considering the subject of the canon of Scripture we can make the following conclusions.
Thank you for your interest in the Blue Letter Bible and we hope that God will grant you continual blessing in your studies.
When he gets back to the forum, here .... he can clarify ... :-)
He was? I think he clarified his position quite well in post #120 to F15Eagle (emphasis mine):
Thank you for admitting support for Israel has everything to do with Biblical apocalypse prophecy and nothing with realistic foreign policy or the security of this nation.
Bible is derived from the Greek, biblos, meaning book. As such it is applied by Christians, by way of eminence, to the collection of sacred writings of the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments. The word itself, biblos, is found in Matthew 1:1, "The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ...".
Apparently it originated from the Lebanese town of Biblos, which produces papyrus sheets for writing in ancient times.So the oracles of God, His inspired Word, is collectively known today as the Holy Bible, a book set apart from all the others as unique, one of its kind.
The Old Testament Canon
There are 39 books in the Old Testament, no more and no less, for the simple yet profound reason that only these books have the stamp of divine authority on them.
Only these - before the incarnation of the Son of God - subdivided into the Law (Torah), the Writings (Ketubim), and the Prophets (Nabiim), proceeded from the mouth of the living God, and as such were kept, preserved, read, held dear, believed and obeyed by the covenant people of God before the appearance of Jesus Christ, their long-awaited for Deliverer.
From all the literature of ancient times, only these 39 books carry with them the divine seal, originating from above and being given through the instrumentality of holy men who were moved by the Spirit of God and who spoke with the authority of God.
Only these 39, because these and no more have withstood the test of time, close scrutiny and scholarship. And more than that, they speak to the renewed heart as bearing the imprimatur of the Almighty. Other writings, whether it be by Seneca or Aristotle or Buddha, though ancient, do not enjoy this divine impress.
How were the 39 Old Testament books authorised? Though the Jewish nation had its scribes, scholars and men of authority among them, there is absolutely no evidence that they at some point in time declared these or those books as inspired and therefore canonical.
All the evidence we have is that as they books were written and delivered to the nation they were accepted for what they were: the rule by which the people were to live and abide. They were looked upon as the oracles of God, His authentic message for them which He wanted to be passed on from generation to generation.
These 39 books are canonical by virtue of what they are intrinsically and inherently, as coming from the mouth of God Himself. By virtue of their content, their authorship by God's prophets in general, and the stamp and seal of their sanctifying power, they were received by the Jews - being entrusted with such a task - as God's Word. Some contend that the canon of the Old Testament was not closed before the Council of Jamnia (90 A.D.). They say this because there were still some doubts about Ecclesiastes and the Song of Solomon.
But others, more numerous, such as David Kimchi (1160-1232) and Elias Levita (1465-1549), two Jewish scholars, maintained that the final collection of the Old Testament canon was completed by Ezra and the members of the Great Synagogue, in the fifth century before the coming of Christ.
We have the testimony of the Jewish historian Josephus to the effect that the Old Testament canon was closed in the reign of Artaxerxes Longimanus in the time of Ezra. Ezra was peculiarly concerned with the sacred oracles. He is described as the Scribe (Nehemiah 8:1,4,9,13; 12:26,36), and a specialist in the law of Moses (Ezra 7:6), being taught in the commandments of the Lord and teaching His statutes to Israel (Ezra 7:11).
Whatever Ezra and others of like mind did and contributed to the final compilation of the Old Testament canon, it is evident that God's supervising providence brought the final result about. Ezra and others only recognised what was inspired from its very inception.
The testimony of Josephus
Though unsympathetic with the infant Christian church, Joesephus gives this testimony about the inherited collection of books that the church enjoyed, namely, the Old Testament.
Writing about the year 100 A.D., he states: "For we have not an innumerable multitude of books among us, disagreeing from and contradicting one another (as the Greeks have), but only 22 books, which contain the record of all time; which are justly believed to be divine...It is true our history has been written since Artaxerxes very particularly, but has not been esteemed of like authority with the former by our forefathers, because there has not been an exact succession of prophets since that time.* And how firmly we have given credit to those books of our own nation, it is evident by what we do; for, during so many ages as have already passed, no one has been so bold as either to add anything to them, to take anything from them, or to make any change in them; but it becomes natural to all Jews, immediately and from their very birth, to esteem those books to contain divine doctrines, and to persist in them and, if occasion be, willingly to die for them" (Against Apion, I.8).
*In this sentence Josephus is referring to the intertestamental uninspired books known commonly as the Apocrypha. Accidentally, such an interesting testimony agrees perfectly with the Protestant position of excluding the Apocrypha from the biblical canon, as against the Romanist position.
Melito of Sardis
“Melito, bishop of Sardis, the capital of Lydia, was a shining light among the churches of Asia Minor in the third quarter of the second century...Melito was a man of brilliant mind and a most prolific author. Tertullian speaks of his elegant and eloquent genius...
“To Melito we owe the first Christian list of the Hebrew Scriptures. It agrees with the Jewish and the Protestant canon, and omits the Apocrypha. The books of Esther and Nehemiah are also omitted, but may be included in Esdras. The expressions “the Old Books,” “the Books of the Old Covenant,” imply that the church at that time had a canon of the New Covenant. Melito made a visit to Palestine to seek information on the Jewish canon” (Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church, Vol.2, page 736-738).
In accordance with the orthodox Jewish and the primitive Christian view, Protestantism excluded the Apocrypha from the Old.
The New Testament canon
What was the primary factor in the completion of the New Testament canon? Was it the decision of the Roman Catholic church? No; for the obvious reason that the Roman Catholic church (at least as it showed its distinctive features later on) was non-existent at this early stage in history (4th to 5th century).
Romanist apologists, though, insist that it was through the initiative and intervention of the Roman church that we have the Bible as we know it today. Their reasoning is that the church caused the New Testament books to be written, so the church is above the books of the New Testament (she being their originator).
If I, as a jeweller, were to inspect and upon verifying, issue a certificate that a certain ruby is genuine, that does not automatically make me the owner of the precious stone. And yet, this is what the Roman church is saying: in insisting that she recognised the books of the New Testament, that makes her the sole possessor of those same books. As the most, she may be credited with insight and discernment, but not with the ownership (and sole right to interpret) the Scriptures.
The blatant falsity of Rome's claim needs no answer. The Holy Spirit was He who gave the New Testament writings, just as He moved the prophets to write the Old Testament: same Source (heaven), same Author (God), same method (by inspiration), same instrumentality (holy men).
The fact is, God gave the Bible to His church, and not the church gave the Bible to itself.
Was it the then an accidental drawing together of the various documents? This proposal is even more ludicrous, for in so saying we would be virtually denying the wise and all-powerful providence of God. Nothing happens by accident, not even as sparrow falling to the ground. How much less the collection of the inspired writings into one canon! No Christian would entertain such an absurd thought in his mind, especially as he reads what the Bible says about itself and its origination (2 Timothy 3:15-17).
Was it the decision of the Council of Carthage in 397 A.D.? Historically, the church was forced to pronounce what constitutes Scripture and what doesn't. This was because of false teachers, such as Marcion, who were either rejecting parts of the established canon or else adding uninspired writings to the Bible. The Council convened at Carthage was the first gathering of bishops that issued a list of the 27 canonical books of the New Testament, recognising that as inspired, and rejecting all other (sometimes competing) literature. This council was simply the culmination of a current within the church that was needed in order to have the canon of Scripture made known for what it was: fixed and unalterable.
Individual preachers, such as Chrysostom, had already compiled lists of the canonical books, no more and no less, before 397 A.D. But such actions, significant as they may be, are not determining or prime factors in the completion of the New Testament canon (see the final assignment for the real and crucial factor).
The documents that make up the New Testament were recognised as having Apostolic Authority. The church, which hears the voice of her Good Shepherd (John 10), has certainly been instrumental in the recognition of the canonical books. Being what she is - the assembly of the living God - she will not go after strange voice (pseudopigraphical books), but will rather find concord with the voice of her Master, who teaches her by His Word and Spirit.
Though the church of the early centuries had a unique role to play in the recognition of what constitutes the Holy Bible and what not, she was not the primary factor.
The books of the Bible
We have 66 books in the canon of Scripture, no more and no less
The formal conclusion of the New Testament is at least intimated at the end of Revelation (22:18). The difference of how the two Testament close is highly significant. The anticipatory and unfulfilled hope of the Old Covenant is articulated at the end of the last book, Malachi. It gives an assurance of the coming of another prophet. But on the other hand, no continuing revelation is mentioned at the end of the New Testament. Rather we find an announcement about the Lord's soon return and thus the consummation of all things at the Eschaton. The natural conclusion is that no other voice will be heard from heaven before the second Advent of Christ.
An important proof of all this is that, since the close of the biblical canon, no attempt was made by anyone to add some other book to the established and recognised sixty-six.
As God wrote His message though the instrumentality of holy men, so also He made known the canon of Scripture through men, particularly His people who know Him and hear His voice. The canon, comprising sixty-six books, no more and no less, was recognised by His own covenant people, to whom the Scripture was given to be believed and obeyed.
This is a great wonder. His infallible Word not only was received and written down in incomparable documents, but was also infallibly collected in one volume to be the sole rule of faith (cf. the Greek kanon, meaning measuring rod or rule).The same collection of books was preserved from corruption, destruction or any human and devilish attempt to change it.
The canon was not added to or deducted from; we may rest assured that it is not adulterated by non-inspired writings. God took special care to determine the formation of the canon, as it is also obvious that He ruled its transmission so that His truth may reach to all His elect.
This was His way of giving His Scriptures to His people, and nobody can accuse God that His purpose has somehow failed.So when it comes to determine the crucial and indispensable factor that determined the collecting together of the sixty-six books, it must be expressed as being the wise and all-powerful providence of God, who certainly operates through second causes (His church). But the determinative reason why Jude is in the canon, when it has so much in common with 2 Peter, and why four gospels narrating mostly the same events, instead of just one longer Gospel, the reason must be the inscrutable and ineffable wisdom of God, who thought it proper and fit to give just those sixty-six and no more, with all the repetitions and similarities between books (Kings and Chronicles, and so on).
He knows best, and He knows what issued from Him and what not. There must we rest.
If it were left to mere human agency, I am positively sure the canon would have been far different.
There were principles upon which the church has largely determined which were the inspired books and which not. I emphasise "largely," because the criterion of apostolicity does not strictly account for Mark, Luke-Acts, and possibly Hebrews.
The criterion of antiquity is really a variation on apostolicity and fails to explain why Paul's "previous" letter (mentioned in 1 Corinthians 5:9) was not included in the canon.No matter how strong the evidence for apostolicity (and therefore of canonicity) may be in many instances and no matter how forceful the arguments in favour of the apostolicity of certain other writings may be, historical judgements cannot be the final and sole ground for the church's accepting the New Testament as canonical.
Just these sixty-six books God has chosen to preserve, and He has not told us why. In the matter of the New Testament as canon, too, until Jesus comes "we walk by faith, not by sight" (2 Corinthians 5:7). But that faith, grounded in the apostolic tradition of the New Testament, is neither arbitrary nor blind. It has its reasons, its good reasons; it is in conflict only with the autonomy of reason.
I conclude by saying that the books which were to form the future completed canon forced themselves on the Church by their intrinsic prophetic and apostolic authority, as they still do, because the Lord Christ speaks in them.
You are completely misguided.
We are in a civilizational war with Islam
On one side is Islam
On the other side is the Christian world and Israel
Islam is trying to conquer Israel and right now is conquering Europe via immigration and demographic warfare
So which side are you on?
If you want to abandon Israel then you are on the Muslim side or you figure you can dodge this war.
I say no one can dodge this war and your children and grandchildren cannot dodge it either
Of course you can always submit to Islam now or somewhere down the road, I predict many atheists will
Who (or what) does her infant represent?
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.