Corruption of the Bible

[ytLiJC]

6 hours ago, Sojourner414 said:

9 hours ago, ytLiJC said:

 

it is right that they write (me) a message with explanation for why they have deleted my posts

Offhand, I'd say that the tone of your last two posts here is a pretty good indicator as to why your other ones were deleted by the moderators.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, as to the topic at hand:

Since there has been a lot of accusations thrown around about "the text being corrupted" and such, I thought it might be a good idea to post exactly how Scripture was recognized and canonized in the first place-

(this is going to be a bit long; if folks hate that, well, I'm not going to break this up over 50 posts!)

The Old Testament:

With the OT, when God authorized the writing of a manuscript, the people of God recognized it as being such and preserved it. To draw an example, Moses wrote "all the words of the Lord" (Exodus 24:4), and these writings were laid in the Ark of the Covenant (Deuteronomy 31:26), as were Joshua's (Joshua 24:26), Samuel's (1 Samuel 10:25), Jeremiah's and Daniel (Daniel 9:2). As time went on, the number of books grew and people honored them as the Word of God. Example: Ezra possessed a copy of the law of Moses and and the prophets (Nehemiah 9:14, 26-30). This law was read and considered the Word of God.

Not all Jewish religious writings were considered Scripture though. Some examples are the Book of Jashar (Joshua 10:13), The Book of Enoch, Books of the Wars of the Lord (Numbers 21:14) and other books (1 Kings 11:41). Were these books inspired Scripture, the Lord would have insured that they were to be included in the Bible. Man can scheme all he likes, but when the Lord decrees something, He is more than capable of making it happen.

The canonicity (authenticity) of these books were not questioned largely by the Jewish scholars; the books were regarded as canonical as soon as they were written, and when properly interpreted are in complete harmony with the other books of the OT. The centuries have demonstrated that keeping these books in the biblical canon was a wise move.

As of 400 BC, the canon of the OT was considered closed by the Jewish with the prophecy of Malachi. We know this because 1) our OT is based on the Hebrew Old Testament canon accepted by the Jews, and 2) it's the same canon that Jesus Christ ratified by His continual references to the OT as the unbreakable Word of God. (Note: Jesus never quoted any of the books of the "Apocrypha" such as Maccabees).

Keep in mind: the OT books were selected without the benefit of any "council" such as Nicaea to debate the merits or detractors of any of the books. They leaders who were responsible for the spiritual life of the nation recognized the books and selected them. That said, it was never a "select committee" that did so. And while a council in Jamnia in 90 AD met on the canon of the OT, all it did was to ratify what was already selected.

 

 

The New Testament:

The authority given to those who penned the books of the OT on the Lord's command was ascribed to the writers of the New Testament. This authority is not found in human intellect, brilliance or any type of speculation, but is rooted in God's character. Paul cited to the congregation that he was writing per the Lord's command, and could legitimately tell them that he was doing so (1 Corinthians 14:37).

The books of the OT were written around the last half of the First century.  With the books, some of them were letters to individuals (such as the letter to Philemon), and others being letters to the local churches. Then there were the books that had been were written to larger audiences (such as Europe and East Asia). Because of this, we need to understand that not all the books were immediately available as copies to all the churches due to travel being as fast as one could walk, ride a horse or sail; communication was also limited as well during this time and depended on travel as opposed to today's technology. So, it took some time before the final number of NT books was ratified and the canon was set.

Selecting and verifying Scripture was important to the early believers, and as long as the Apostles were alive they could verify everything (Luke 1:2, Acts 1:21-22). Had Paul or Luke been fakes or unreliable, they would have quickly been decried by Peter, John, James and those who had been there for Jesus' miracles and heard His teaching during His ministry on Earth. For example, John said:

"What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we have looked at and touched with our hands, concerning the Word of Life— and the life was manifested, and we have seen and testify and proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and was manifested to us— what we have seen and heard we proclaim to you also, so that you too may have fellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father, and with His Son Jesus Christ. " (1 John 2-3 NASB, emphasis mine).

Peter was able to assure us that he had personally seen the Lord at the Transfiguration, his testimony being an eyewitness account (2 Peter 1:16-18) Apostolic authority was a final "court of appeal"; as they were the Lord's representatives on Earth and were commissioned to pass on the truth Jesus had taught them:

"“These things I have spoken to you while abiding with you. 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 that I said to you."" (John 14:25-26, NASB, emphasis mine)

 

 

Apostolic Authority:

The fact that some books were accepted as Scripture is demonstrated in Peter's own words in Scripture: he possessed a collection of Paul's letters and regarded them as Scripture. Peter soundly confirms Paul's authority on writing Scripture:

"Therefore, beloved, since you look for these things, be diligent to be found by Him in peace, spotless and blameless, and regard the patience of our Lord as salvation; just as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you, as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction." (2 Peter 3:14-16, NASB, emphasis mine)

Other books in the Bible confirm the authority of each other: Paul confirms Luke's writing as Scripture (1 Timothy 5:18 quoting Luke 10:7) and Jude quoted Peter (Jude 1:17-18 quoting  2 Peter 3:3) are examples. By the end of the 1st Century, more than 2/3 of our present NT was deemed inspired, with the remaining books deemed as authoritative even though they had not been fully circulated yet. When a heretic named Marcion in 135 AD decided to "publish" his own version of Scripture that completely omitted the OT and only selected a few books from the NT (Marcion was fiercely anti-Semitic), the Church was forced to respond and declare which books were authoritative. A document called the Muratorian Fragment, dating back to 175 AD, evaluates the various canonical books alongside those that were not deemed canonical. Although the document is mutilated by age, scholars have been able to identify a list of book that contains 23 of the present 27 books of the NT. It also listed some spurious (fake) writings ascribed to Paul that the author noted could not be accepted into the church. These books that were considered fake were not "banned"; they were brushed aside because they were fakes.

 

 

What about the Councils?

There is contention that the canon of the NT was not finalized until 40 years after the Council of Nicaea (convened in 325 AD). While it's true that the full list of 27 NT books first appeared in the Easter letter of Athanasius in 367 AD, the 27 books of the NT (along with 39 books of the OT), had been functioning as the rule of the church for 250 years.

As for the Council of Nicaea, the topic of canon did not even come up at it; Constantine did not decide what canon was. What was discussed at the Council was whether Jesus Christ (The Son) was fully God or not (a man by the name of Arius was spreading the heresy that Jesus was not). This, along with other doctrinal disputes that were tearing apart society, forced Constantine to convene the council. Constantine had no agenda as to what creed or doctrine was selected; he let the delegates decide that.

Arius was given the opportunity to voice his views. But the council decided overwhelmingly that Jesus was fully God and fully man, and that Arius' views on Jesus not being so were heresy (John chapter 1 pretty much blows Arius' views out of the water). The delegates recognized that if Jesus was not fully God, then He could not be the redeemer of Mankind; to say Jesus was created was to violate Scripture in a number of areas (Colossians 1:16, Romans 9:5, Hebrews 1:8, etc.). Once the divinity of Jesus was addressed and confirmed, they then determined that Christ could be fully God only if He had the very same nature as God (This was expressed by Marcellus, a bishop from Asia Minor and representative of Athanasius, who was present but not invited to the proceedings).

That said, what Constantine did do was commission Eusebius to make 50 Bibles on good parchment by trained scribes to be given to the churches of Constantinople for use. But while we presently don't have any copies of these Bibles to see which books were in the NT, scholar F.F. Bruce (Rylands Professor of Biblical Criticism and Exegesis at the University of Manchester for 27 years), "the answer is not seriously in doubt. The copies contained all the books which Eusebius lists as universally acknowledged...in short, the same twenty-seven books as appear in our copies of the New Testament today". (F.F. Bruce, The Canon of Scripture, InterVarsity Press, 1988)

in short: all the early church could do was recognize which books were inspired and which were not. It did not have the power to imbue a non-canonical book with any sort of authority, nor remove authority from a book that was authentic and had authority. They could only determine which books were legitimate; only the Holy Spirit, inspiring the book from the beginning, could make it authoritative.  No council could do this either, and the process was not a "selective, deliberate committee with an agenda".

 

 

Selection:

Now, how were these books determined to have inspiration and authority? These were the criteria:

1) Apostolic Writing/ Sanction: The books were either written by an apostle or sanctioned by one. Mark was not an apostle, but his words reflect his association with Peter; meantime, Luke traveled with Paul.

2) Tying in to the Rule of Faith: the book had to be consistent with both the teachings of the Old Testament prophets and the writings of the New Testament Apostles.

3) Acceptance: The book had to have continuous acceptance to remain in the canon. While times may change, the truth does not. Any book can be "true" in it's time, but does that book remain true and in harmony with established Scripture?

On that specific note: the Church is headed by Christ, and made up of fallible humans. And while humans can and do make mistakes, it is an infallible God who inspired a fallible  Church to compile an infallible collection of books that comprise out New Testament.

 

there has been no need to tell me these things - they are well known, but just think what can or must i say as a contradiction to the true brothers and fathers in faith - the ones who wrote the holy scriptures without having conformed with world councils or been approved by world continuous acceptance or been taught by the world in their time, because they were about to do the will of the true God (they were even convinced that they had to); so must i say "look, Paul, you are an Apostle and Preacher of the true Lord God, but i think my opinion i have from the world is more important than what you say - i think your sermons are not interesting at all - including because you are not generally accepted - people hate you, and i am going to twist your writings making them fit with my self-interested opinion"?!

so we have to listen to the true Lord God and His Saints/Prophet, not to read and twist their writings for our own self-interested benefit

Romans 10:16-17 (ISV) "not everyone has obeyed the gospel, for Isaiah asks, “Lord, who has believed our message?” Consequently, faith results from listening, and listening results through the word of the Messiah.",

Luke 16:29-31 (ISV) "“Abraham said, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets. They should listen to them!’ “But the rich man replied, ‘No, father Abraham! But if someone from the dead went to them, they would repent.’ “Then Abraham told him, ‘If your brothers do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be persuaded, even if someone were to rise from the dead.’”"

so there is even no mention of reading, but rather there is speech about listening, because it is one thing to read something written by the true Saints and interpret it according to our opinion we have from the world, while quite another thing to listen to Them in order to understand the truth They explained in writing

no world council or general acceptance is more important than the testimony of the true Saints - so from this perspective either we listen to Them or we ourselves become and are true Saints and thus capable of understanding the truth of God, but, in fact, we should honor the true brothers in faith anyway, because do any hindu or yogi come to tell you the truth of the true Lord God?!, no, including because such people have been great traitors, but true brothers in faith - people who practice the faith righteously in the true Lord God - come to tell you the truth, even if some of them were once yogis or any other kind of heretics (after all, what is important now is that they are now true/faithful followers of the true Lord God, and we have to conform with this fact and His truth)

even billions of religious worshipers of this world cannot replace one of the true Saints and even their collective testimony is vain compared to the testimony of one true Saint of God which is perfectly true

so, truth or twist, the choice is ours

Blessings

[Guest shiloh357]

2 hours ago, GeorgeTwo said:

Jesus spoke Aramaic, Hebrew and Greek depending on the audience He was addressing.  The New Testament was written in Koine Greek because it could reach the most people.  Koine Greek was the language of commerce.

 

 

He would likely have spoken Greek to Pilate and the Centurion's whose servant He healed.

[Guest shiloh357]

1 minute ago, ytLiJC said:

so there is even no mention of reading, but rather there is speech about listening, because it is one thing to read something written by the true Saints and interpret it according to our opinion we have from the world, while quite another thing to listen to Them in order to understand the truth They explained in writing

The problem with that is that we don't have any of those original authors living with us today.   God inspired them to write the Scriptures for us to read.   So God expects us to read and as we read the Scriptures daily and to allow the Holy Spirit to enlighten the eyes of our understanding in the Scriptures.  

[ytLiJC]

2 minutes ago, shiloh357 said:

The problem with that is that we don't have any of those original authors living with us today.   God inspired them to write the Scriptures for us to read.   So God expects us to read and as we read the Scriptures daily and to allow the Holy Spirit to enlighten the eyes of our understanding in the Scriptures.  

 

Moses and the Prophets had also not been physically with the former scribes and pharisees at the time of Jesus in this world, but He was categorical when He told the parable of the excessively enriched pharisee and the poor man Lazarus that the scribes and pharisees had to listen to Moses and the Prophets, and it is called "faith" - here is how most of the modern religious worshipers haven't even known what faith is - in fact, Moses and the Prophets had already been physically taken to heaven before Jesus told that parable

Blessings

[ytLiJC]

9 hours ago, shiloh357 said:

You will have to go to them in private.  They are under no obligation to you.  If you want to know, you will have to go to them.

 

if they interfere with the works of God and the Holy Spirit in this forum, then they are obliged to answer to both God and me - after all, the Holy Spirit works and God does His works through me - you know whoever disputes with a man of God, dispute with God Himself

Blessings

[enoob57]

4 minutes ago, ytLiJC said:

 

if they interfere with the works of God and the Holy Spirit in this forum, then they are obliged to answer to both God and me - after all, the Holy Spirit works and God does His works through me - you know whoever disputes with a man of God, dispute with God Himself

Blessings

spouting such yet found lacking in the Scriptures
Jesus The Christ has pre-eminence in all things. 1 Cor 11:3; Eph 1:22; Col 1:18.

[Guest shiloh357]

56 minutes ago, ytLiJC said:

 

Moses and the Prophets had also not been physically with the former scribes and pharisees at the time of Jesus in this world, but He was categorical when He told the parable of the excessively enriched pharisee and the poor man Lazarus that the scribes and pharisees had to listen to Moses and the Prophets, and it is called "faith" - here is how most of the modern religious worshipers haven't even known what faith is - in fact, Moses and the Prophets had already been physically taken to heaven before Jesus told that parable

Blessings

Listening to Moses and the prophets is not limited to audible listening, but to reading the Bible and reading it on a daily basis.  That is how they speak to us today and we listen to the Holy Spirit who illuminates the Scriptures to us.   To tell people they should not read the Scriptures daily is antithetical to the authentic Christian faith.

39 minutes ago, ytLiJC said:

 

if they interfere with the works of God and the Holy Spirit in this forum, then they are obliged to answer to both God and me - after all, the Holy Spirit works and God does His works through me - you know whoever disputes with a man of God, dispute with God Himself

Blessings

They do not answer to you. You have no authority here.  You are a guest on this forum and you can be removed from this forum if you are not careful.   You need to lose your arrogance and pride.  Their dispute with you is not with God.

So again, if you want to know why your posts were deleted, then you need to go to the mods in private and they will explain why your behavior was such that the posts needed to be deleted. 

[GeorgeTwo]

2 hours ago, shiloh357 said:

He would likely have spoken Greek to Pilate and the Centurion's whose servant He healed.

Yes.

I think it noteworthy that the sign Pilate put on Jesus' cross did not include Aramaic -- It was Greek, Hebrew and Latin.

 

 

[ytLiJC]

5 hours ago, enoob57 said:

spouting such yet found lacking in the Scriptures
Jesus The Christ has pre-eminence in all things. 1 Cor 11:3; Eph 1:22; Col 1:18.

 

and which things lack in the scriptures?!, and why must we blindly believe that Scripture explains all the important details like the best-arranged textbooks?! - do we (have to) believe or just become scientists?! - after all, faith is to believe even if we have no knowledge, while science is to acquire knowledge even if we don't believe

Blessings

[enoob57]

27 minutes ago, ytLiJC said:

 

and which things lack in the scriptures?!, and why must we blindly believe that Scripture explains all the important details like the best-arranged textbooks?! - do we (have to) believe or just become scientists?! - after all, faith is to believe even if we have no knowledge, while science is to acquire knowledge even if we don't believe

Blessings

my comment was referring to your previous rhetoric and I'm not even commenting on this ...