Am I missing an article link in the OP? I've read members responding to, 'the article', but I do not see a link.
I copied the sentence from that OP as pertains to Constantine ("Therefore, one can easily argue that the first Christian Bible was commissioned, paid for, inspected and approved by a pagan emperor for church use." ) and found this site: Bible Origins
I think if Constanting did want to coalesce the Roman empire into one faith, he'd be a wise dictator to create a heavenly authority in the image and likeness of the earthly one that those he sought to conquer could relate to. A monotheistic celestial leader.
Therefore, adding the scripture that proclaims all scripture is God breathed would cement that unquestionable vehicle for proof and conversion.
I've always been fascinated by the origins of today's Bible. What I think stumps many seekers in that pursuit is that scholars always say there are no autographs to be found so as to know the first writings that predated the first Bible. While scrolls, and epistles, which are letters, remain either in whole or in fragments. And yet some find it odd that while the apostle Paul was executed somehow all his letters would not only be preserved, but deemed worthy of occupying most of the new testament.
That which is suppose to be Jesus' message to the world. And his words delivered by Christ himself occupy only a small portion of the new testament. That primacy, Paul's letters outnumbering Christ's own words, is very confusing as to what Christians, Christ followers, are to believe when a Pharisee who never knew Christ in the flesh wrote most of the new testament, more than what is attributed to Jesus himself, far more in fact, that is to lead people to Christ.
This is a great thread. I hope to learn those things that will help clear the confusion I have in seeking the honest truth about the true word of God.