How do we know which scriptures are inspired by God?
- Thread starter Elia
- Start date
Bs'd
As you know, it is Jewish tradition to defame the authenticity of the NT.
I grew up with this.
I searched the Historical evidence of the 27 NT scriptures.
I searched for people's writings about the New Testament that could have skewed them or guarded them.
I studied the Historical transmission of the NT.
As you know the Dead Sea scrolls changed a lot of things. The genuine transmission of the NT is seen to date back to 200 - 325 A.D.
The transmission can be methodically traced from John the Beloved to Polycarp.
The transmission continues past the date of 325 A.D. Through a historical guard of men that trace from Jesus to John in oral tradition and then the written tradition is traceable to as early as 95 A.D. Through Polycarp.
I don't like being lied to, and when I traced this, I was rather angry that I had been lied to about the N.T.
Josephus is another reference. Not for anything other than his writings about matters and there tie to NT events.
Lastly, a scholarly write up of how to test authenticity of scripture is usually of this sort:
The Biblical Manuscript Evidence. The manuscript evidence for the New Testament is stunning by comparison. The most recent count (1980) shows 5,366 separate Greek manuscripts. These are represented by early fragments, uncial codices (manuscripts written in all uppercase Greek letters and bound together in book form), and minuscules (manuscripts written in lowercase Greek letters).4
Among the nearly 3,000 minuscule fragments are 34 complete New Testaments dating from the ninth to the fifteenth centuries AD.5 Uncial manuscripts providing virtually complete New Testaments date back to the fourth century and earlier. Codex Sinaiticus is dated c. AD 340.6 The nearly complete Codex Vaticanus is the oldest, dated c. AD 325–50.7 Codex Alexandrinus contains the whole Old Testament and a nearly complete New Testament and dates from the late fourth century to the early fifth century.
The most fascinating evidence comes from the fragments. The Chester Beatty Papyri (papyri are manuscripts written on paperlike material made from papyrus reeds) contain most of the New Testament and are dated mid-third century.8 The Bodmer Papyri II collection includes the first fourteen chapters of the Gospel of John and much of the last seven chapters. It dates from AD 200 or earlier.9
The most amazing find of all, however, is a small portion of John 18:31–33, discovered in Egypt. Known as the John Rylands Papyri and barely three inches square, it represents the earliest known copy of any part of the New Testament. The papyri is dated on paleographical grounds at AD 117–38 (though it may be even earlier).10
Keep in mind that most papyri are fragmentary and only about 50 manuscripts contain the entire New Testament. The manuscript evidence is nevertheless exceedingly rich, especially when compared to other works of antiquity.
...............................
Most books of antiquities don't even come close to this.
In fact, the NT is one of the most scrutinized documents of all times and it's evidence exceeds any other book older than 1700 years.
This doesn't stop propagation of lies by religions outside of Jesus was God believers, and even from within for that matter.
The entire purpose of defamation is to discredit the message of Jesus and the messianic followers.
I did not post this to irritate you, I posted it because your OP is intellectually stimulating. I decided to answer you, and am shocked that more haven't on the matter.
Excellent OP, and I promise to be silent to whatever you respond with out of respect to your OP.
Sent from my iPad using TOL Jesus is the Theology and the Counselor is the Commentary
Elia
Well-known member
Bs"d
Every Bible scholar will agree that the Tanach, though MUCH older than the NT, is much more accurately handed down the millennia than the NT.
The idea is not for people to be silent, but to discuss this fascinating matter.
This is about the very foundation of faith, it doesn't get more important that this.
"For all people will walk every one in the name of his god, and we will walk in the name of Y-H-W-H our God for ever and ever."
Micah 4:5
How do we know which scriptures are inspired by God?
Bs'd,
I ultimately rejected my family for faith. I can't even begin to tell you how much money I spent on genuinely scholarly books. I can't begin to tell you how I spent 1 full year of my life dedicated to that study.
I rejected the regurgitated spewing so of people defending religion. All religion, but especially Judaism, Christianity and Islam.
In the end, we must walk as we feel God has shown us and what we believe with our all that He desires.
This is why I cannot go further.
The TaNaKh is indeed equally reliable.
Egyptologist have falsely asserted the wrong time frame for the exodus.
There is much evidence that refutes their claims that that didn't happen.
I will see if I can find it, but there is now strong evidence that they have uncovered Joseph's estate in Egypt.
There is a grave site behind it. The largest is a walk in grave site shaped like a pyramid that has a sitting stature of a ruler with a coat of many colors.
There are 12 other graves here.
In the inner court are 12 pillars.
I'm adding to this post a link to the trailer of the movie that contains the best footage. It is by a skeptic and it is awesome! It seems at first that the evidence won't be found, but then things get awesome!!!
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2assFIyLInE
I assert that all 66 books are authentic from my studies.
I understand that the TaNaKh is assembled differently, but you understand what I mean.
Sent from my iPad using TOL ~Jesus is the Theology and the Counselor is the Commentary
Bs'd,
I ultimately rejected my family for faith. I can't even begin to tell you how much money I spent on genuinely scholarly books. I can't begin to tell you how I spent 1 full year of my life dedicated to that study.
I rejected the regurgitated spewing so of people defending religion. All religion, but especially Judaism, Christianity and Islam.
In the end, we must walk as we feel God has shown us and what we believe with our all that He desires.
This is why I cannot go further.
The TaNaKh is indeed equally reliable.
Egyptologist have falsely asserted the wrong time frame for the exodus.
There is much evidence that refutes their claims that that didn't happen.
I will see if I can find it, but there is now strong evidence that they have uncovered Joseph's estate in Egypt.
There is a grave site behind it. The largest is a walk in grave site shaped like a pyramid that has a sitting stature of a ruler with a coat of many colors.
There are 12 other graves here.
In the inner court are 12 pillars.
I'm adding to this post a link to the trailer of the movie that contains the best footage. It is by a skeptic and it is awesome! It seems at first that the evidence won't be found, but then things get awesome!!!
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2assFIyLInE
I assert that all 66 books are authentic from my studies.
I understand that the TaNaKh is assembled differently, but you understand what I mean.
Sent from my iPad using TOL ~Jesus is the Theology and the Counselor is the Commentary
WonderfulLordJesus
New member
I have always found this a matter of scripture and common sense. First, scripture:
2 Timothy 3
14 But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;
15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.
In Paul's day, all scripture was inspired and holy, all. So we know, with certainty, God had to have assembled scripture we know as the Old Testament. The mechanism of the Spirit is further stated:
2 Peter 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
Paul points out in Galatians and proves that the gospel was delivered to him directly from the Lord Jesus Christ. So, the Holy Spirit is the author of scripture.
As to the New Testament, one aspect of common sense comes in that unchanging God can also ensure the integrity of the New Testament as He did the Old, which He also must do of all scripture, to hold us accountable for truth. We must know where to find reliable truth from God, period, or you could rightly say God never gave us the truth, if your claim is the Bible is not reliable. But such a stance is just typical carnality and a very dark lack of faith that God can't even write a book?! It's actually a Satanic notion, of the seeds of slanderous doubt that God could even be so incompetent.
It is, thereore, glaring, obvious common sense that the perfect, omnipotent and omniscient Creator of the entire universe is also capable of writing a reliable book. You think? Just maybe He's up to it? Without even hiring a tech writer?
There need not be all this man's blabbering, "How can we know?", then going into tiring treatises on supposed evidence, as if it's a matter of archeology, that may or may not help them address what is, actually, again, common sense and a matter of faith: God made sure scripture is reliable, to perform all His pleasure and hold mortal man accountable for His Christian faith. God was active in the forming of what we call the Bible. If you stay away from the "Queen James," maybe wear latex gloves when using a NIV, but stick close to a KJV, NJKV or NASB, good examples of good Bibles, you should put the question to bed, for good. Then, get on to learning what God has to say in His reliable word, most importantly.
Also, in the worst of Bible translations or paraphrases, there is the gospel that saves, have not yet seen a Bible that refutes Christ crucified for our sins and risen, repentance and faith in the Lord Jesus for salvation. So, if you should wind up in hell, you should have paid better attention to even a Good News Bible or a lot of pamphlets. You don't need the best study Bible to receive the truth that saves, anyway, and results in the indwelling Holy Spirit that leads the believer into all truth. This alone makes the senseless disputing you see mute, at the bottom line this "is God reliable" thing a dumb subject to the man of faith. Of course He is reliable! This is abundantly clear to me, from a lifetime of Bible study, has been abundantly clear for longer than I can remember. I'd like to know what sort of Christian, at least who's not a newborn Christian, is even questioning the reliability of scripture? Again, Satan throws a lot of ideas just like this out there, he not the greatest fan of the word of truth and would like to impugn it, in man's eyes.
2 Timothy 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
With all due respect, I disagree the thread is such a great thread, when it involves subject matter seeding a premise much too similar to, "Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?"
2 Timothy 3
14 But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;
15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.
In Paul's day, all scripture was inspired and holy, all. So we know, with certainty, God had to have assembled scripture we know as the Old Testament. The mechanism of the Spirit is further stated:
2 Peter 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
Paul points out in Galatians and proves that the gospel was delivered to him directly from the Lord Jesus Christ. So, the Holy Spirit is the author of scripture.
As to the New Testament, one aspect of common sense comes in that unchanging God can also ensure the integrity of the New Testament as He did the Old, which He also must do of all scripture, to hold us accountable for truth. We must know where to find reliable truth from God, period, or you could rightly say God never gave us the truth, if your claim is the Bible is not reliable. But such a stance is just typical carnality and a very dark lack of faith that God can't even write a book?! It's actually a Satanic notion, of the seeds of slanderous doubt that God could even be so incompetent.
It is, thereore, glaring, obvious common sense that the perfect, omnipotent and omniscient Creator of the entire universe is also capable of writing a reliable book. You think? Just maybe He's up to it? Without even hiring a tech writer?
There need not be all this man's blabbering, "How can we know?", then going into tiring treatises on supposed evidence, as if it's a matter of archeology, that may or may not help them address what is, actually, again, common sense and a matter of faith: God made sure scripture is reliable, to perform all His pleasure and hold mortal man accountable for His Christian faith. God was active in the forming of what we call the Bible. If you stay away from the "Queen James," maybe wear latex gloves when using a NIV, but stick close to a KJV, NJKV or NASB, good examples of good Bibles, you should put the question to bed, for good. Then, get on to learning what God has to say in His reliable word, most importantly.
Also, in the worst of Bible translations or paraphrases, there is the gospel that saves, have not yet seen a Bible that refutes Christ crucified for our sins and risen, repentance and faith in the Lord Jesus for salvation. So, if you should wind up in hell, you should have paid better attention to even a Good News Bible or a lot of pamphlets. You don't need the best study Bible to receive the truth that saves, anyway, and results in the indwelling Holy Spirit that leads the believer into all truth. This alone makes the senseless disputing you see mute, at the bottom line this "is God reliable" thing a dumb subject to the man of faith. Of course He is reliable! This is abundantly clear to me, from a lifetime of Bible study, has been abundantly clear for longer than I can remember. I'd like to know what sort of Christian, at least who's not a newborn Christian, is even questioning the reliability of scripture? Again, Satan throws a lot of ideas just like this out there, he not the greatest fan of the word of truth and would like to impugn it, in man's eyes.
2 Timothy 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
With all due respect, I disagree the thread is such a great thread, when it involves subject matter seeding a premise much too similar to, "Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?"
Ben Masada
New member
My criteria is to go by those that promote the Law and the Prophets as Jesus did in Matthew 5:17-19.
Elia
Well-known member
Bs"d
You're back to the old argument: "The Bible is true, because the Bible says so!"
That is of course a circular argument which doesn't prove anything.
"For all people will walk every one in the name of his god, and we will walk in the name of Y-H-W-H our God for ever and ever."
Micah 4:5
Elia
Well-known member
Elia
Well-known member
I ask him.
Spoken like a person of my blood heritage. Smiling at the glory of Jewish stubbornness.
Above all traits, that is the trait of strength.
And about Velikovsky, I am glad.
I am amazed that houses of intellect are so afraid of admitting their past errors that they actually try to shut out factual findings!
Sent from my iPad using TOL ~Jesus is the Theology and the Counselor is the Commentary
Ben Masada
New member
First and foremost,because I am Jewish. Then, we don't even have to be Jewish. It is perfectly obvious that if we break the Law, somehow we will have to pay for the consequences thereof.
Ben Masada
New member
How could the gospel of Paul be delivered by Jesus when they had never seen each other? When Paul started preaching his gospel, Jesus had about 15 or 20 years passed away. Besides, also in Galatians Paul was proud to acclaim himself that he had not even gone to Jerusalem to those who were Apostles before him. (Gal. 1:18) Now, if Paul did not learn his gospel from the Apostles of Jesus, it is only obvious that his gospel was Hellenist.
WonderfulLordJesus
New member
It's sort of senseless to answer, since you clearly don't believe, but perhaps others may be interested in the scripture, where Paul states, outright, he got the gospel directly from the Lord, and, contrary to your false claim, Paul's gospel was accepted of the other apostles.
That you don't believe this, so what? Most of the world doesn't believe it, either, bottom line what's your point, to even be talking to a Christian about these things? You could also save a lot of typing in your posts to simply say, "I don't believe."
Galatians 1
11 But I make known to you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man.
12 For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came through the revelation of Jesus Christ.
13 For you have heard of my former conduct in Judaism, how I persecuted the church of God beyond measure and tried to destroy it.
14 And I advanced in Judaism beyond many of my contemporaries in my own nation, being more exceedingly zealous for the traditions of my fathers.
15 But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb and called me through His grace,
16 to reveal His Son in me, that I might preach Him among the Gentiles, I did not immediately confer with flesh and blood,
17 nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me; but I went to Arabia, and returned again to Damascus.
18 Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and remained with him fifteen days.
19 But I saw none of the other apostles except James, the Lord's brother.
20 (Now concerning the things which I write to you, indeed, before God, I do not lie.)
21 Afterward I went into the regions of Syria and Cilicia.
22 And I was unknown by face to the churches of Judea which were in Christ.
23 But they were hearing only, "He who formerly persecuted us now preaches the faith which he once tried to destroy."
24 And they glorified God in me.
The others approved Paul's gospel:
Galatians 2
1 Then after fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, and also took Titus with me.
2 And I went up by revelation, and communicated to them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but privately to those who were of reputation, lest by any means I might run, or had run, in vain.
3 Yet not even Titus who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised.
4 And this occurred because of false brethren secretly brought in (who came in by stealth to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage),
5 to whom we did not yield submission even for an hour, that the truth of the gospel might continue with you.
6 But from those who seemed to be something --- whatever they were, it makes no difference to me; God shows personal favoritism to no man --- for those who seemed to be something added nothing to me.
7 But on the contrary, when they saw that the gospel for the uncircumcised had been committed to me, as the gospel for the circumcised was to Peter
8 (for He who worked effectively in Peter for the apostleship to the circumcised also worked effectively in me toward the Gentiles),
9 and when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that had been given to me, they gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised.
10 They desired only that we should remember the poor, the very thing which I also was eager to do.
There is the truth of the word of God, versus your claims to the contrary, which are, therefore, not true.
Ben Masada
New member
Listen WLG, are you sure that Paul was accepted by the Apostles of Jesus? After three years in Damascus, he finally decided to go to Jerusalem to try to join the Sect of the Nazarenes and the Apostles rejected him by saying that he could not even be a disciple, let alone an apostle. (Acts 9:16) I wonder why he even tried because I expected him to understand that the Apostles were supposed to be 12; neither 11 nor 13. Judas had got lost and, Matthias had been elected as the one to fill up the empty place left by Judas. (Acts 1:26) What did Paul want, to be the 13th apostle? No, WLG, Paul could not be an apostle and he never became one. The Apostle assigned to be an apostle of the Gentiles was Peter. (Acts 15:5)
Elia
Well-known member
Bs'd
But then we're back again at religion being an accident of birth.
But then the question is: Who's law? The sharia? The Christian "law" who threw all laws overboard?
Self made up laws?
"For all people will walk every one in the name of his god, and we will walk in the name of Y-H-W-H our God for ever and ever."
Micah 4:5
beameup
New member
What "Law" would that be, not putting your milk in a "milk refrigerator"? :rotfl:
The evidence is found in the facts concerning the Abrahamic Covenant. Israel has outlived all of her enemies and will out live the rest of them (Russia next to die).
The God of Abraham, Isaac and Israel (Jacob) has to be the one true God because He who keeps Israel never slumbers nor sleeps.
The God of Abraham, Isaac and Israel (Jacob) has to be the one true God because He who keeps Israel never slumbers nor sleeps.
Elia
Well-known member
Bs"d
So you are saying Israel is the proof that God exists, and that Judaism is the right religion?
Elia
Well-known member
Bs"d
"One who turns away his ear from hearing the law, even his prayer is an abomination."
Prov 28:9