The Canon.....

[sagz4Christ]

There are some very wonderful replies going on here.

Jake...I am glad that I am not the only one who found it difficult to consider 1 Corinthians 7!!

And I tend to take the same appraoch God-man did...his opinion still carried the backing of God...so it might as well have come from Him.

I have got ALOT of reading to do on the subject, but ehre is what I have found so far....and it is interesting....

We all know that Hebrews was written by someone. That someone though, unfortunately is not recorded in Scripture. It is also a popular thought to attribute this letter to Paul. Whether or not this is true we will probably never know...but the reason it is attributed to Paul is because when his writtings were being circulated around to different churches, That letter was bundled with all the other Pauline letters as early as circa 100 a.d.

Interesting to think about anyway. Not that it has much to do with the subject at hand.

I do think that if we can answer this question though...here on this board, we can have a common ground to stand on as believers when debating heavy subjects such as are going on now.

Anyway...I appreciate all your comments and look forward to seeing more!

~your servant in Christ

[endure4salvation]

Hey Sagz, good to see you back...I was missing reading your posts!

Anyway, I have to point out that most of the book of Job is also not inspired by God, because Job's friends came and claimed to speak for God (in a round-a-bout way), and when God spoke, He blasted them for speaking what is not true about Him!

Just because there are words in the Bible, that doesn't make them inspired by God, IMO. Like in 1 Cor. 7 for example. But maybe someone will shed additional light here.

Now on to Hebrews....I read something on a messageboard somewhere (or it could have been an article, I don't know), that stated that Hebrews was indeed written by Paul, but he purposly hid this from his receipents because of some reason--it was either he didn't want it to be discovered enroute and from him, thus making it even harder on himself, or the people he wrote to didn't like him or consider him an apostle (Galatians indicates this point).

But like you said, Sagz, we will probably never know!

[Ovedya]

It is commonly believed that Paul wrote Hebrews due to the grammatical structure. The writings are very close to Paul's way of writing. I did not know about it's being budled together with other Pauline letters, though.

I don't really agree that any part of the Bible was not inspired by God, though - to a point. Even in Job when we read the words of Job's friends, we can reasonably say that God intended for those words to be recorded in the Bible. Certainly their words were not inspired by God, but God permitted them to be recorded in the Bible so that we know how wrong they were. So whether certain things were written under direct guidance from the Holy Spirit or not we can still believe that they were placed in the Bible to learn from. Who would follow the advice of Job's wife to "curse God and die" anyhow?

[sagz4Christ]

I agree with you God-man....

I was trying to find the words to express my thoughts on that subject and found that you summed up my feelings/thoughts just about right.

I will have more to post later tonight.

Right now though, it is time for me to get ready for Bible Study!

[endure4salvation]

I don't really agree that any part of the Bible was not inspired by God, though - to a point. Even in Job when we read the words of Job's friends, we can reasonably say that God intended for those words to be recorded in the Bible. Certainly their words were not inspired by God, but God permitted them to be recorded in the Bible so that we know how wrong they were. So whether certain things were written under direct guidance from the Holy Spirit or not we can still believe that they were placed in the Bible to learn from. Who would follow the advice of Job's wife to "curse God and die" anyhow?

I see your point and would probably tend to agree with you, God-man.

We have a long way to go in order to reach spiritual maturity (widsom). I am positive that none of us will ever reach it--but that doesn't mean that we don't try!

Bless you all.

PS: I got a kick out of your last sentence!

[Guest Butero]

ok saints...brothers and sisters....I have thought of a question.

We all know Scripture is inspired...and not only that....to make it more correct, it is "God-breathed". I personally take this to mean that every word is as if God Himself had wrote the Book.

I know that in the New Testament, when it refers to "Scripture," it is speaking of the Old Testament writtings. And I know...at least I think I know....that the New Testament writtings to profess to be this..."it doesn't refer to be 'Scripture.'" With the exception of Revelation 22:18-19:

18 I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book. 19 And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.

And maybe perhaps 1 Corinthians 7 in various places where Paul is "giving commands", I don't think the writtings of the New Testament claim the kind of authority that the Books in the Old Testament do.

Now, I am not saying that it is not as authoritative as the OT, or that is is any less "God-breathed" than the OT, I am just wondering...out of the WHOLE ENTIRE amount of letters that HAD to be floating around at the time of the forming of the early church, how was it..that (how many years later?) the Canon came to be what it is?

I say this because the Catholic Bible has the Macabees, and Jake has made reference (I think I remember reading) to some letters a fellow minister of Paul wrote. Why did these not make it in?

I think the answer would have to be that even the *group* of men that got together to put these letters in the form we have today were as *inspired* as the writters of the letters themselves. Otherwise, in my mind, the New Testament (and maybe even the Old) would be less authoritative as they actually are. Does this make sense? I am having a hard time finding the correct way of phrasing the question.

Maybe I will wait for someone to post a response and go from there.

I hope someone can help me with this.....

XXXX-XXXXXXXX.

Sorry to say and I hope the censors here have enough tolerance to allow my statement.

(Not at all, friend. Cursing is not allowed here. Not even an allusion to cursing. God-man)

Although Timothy says:

"2 Timothy 3

16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:"

What Paul has written to Timothy is not especially that all that is WRITTEN is 'god-breathed'......BUT RATHER, all that God BREATHES is INSPIRED.

There is a HUGE difference in how this relates to the Bible.

Because ALL that is WRITTEN in the BIBLE is NOT INSPIRED of God as hertical as that may first seem.

The POINT Paul was making to Timothy was that only that which was "god--breathed" was profitable regardless of whether it was considered "scripture", "canon", "Bible", or otherwise.

When I read your post defending abortion and homosexual marriage, and your claim that there are a lot of Christians that disagree over these things, I mentioned that those so-called Christians reject the Bible as the Word of God. Having looked at some of your past posts, I see you are one of those who rejects the innerancy of scripture. One has to in order to defend these positions. This does cause me to have to ask another question. The Bible is the book that witnesses of Jesus, and even tells us who he is, and what his mission was in this world. If you reject the Bible as the Word of God, why do you believe in Jesus? Most "Christians" that reject scripture as authoritative seem to like to use it when convenient, and reject it when it is not convenient. Is that you, or do you have other reasons for believing in Jesus? Also, who is Jesus to you? Do you believe he is God?

[xero]

Butero this thread is almost nine years old brother. I havent seen any of these handles on recent posts since Ive come to the forum. Check the dates because some of these threads are old enough for middle school.

[Guest Butero]

Butero this thread is almost nine years old brother. I havent seen any of these handles on recent posts since Ive come to the forum. Check the dates because some of these threads are old enough for middle school.

I know it is an old thread. I brought it back up because the person I was responding to just posted something defending legalized abortion and homosexual marriage. He said that many Christians disagree over these things, so I went back to see if he had posted anything in the past that would give us an idea how he looked at scripture? He rejects it as being the innerant Word of God. That is where you find Christians defending things like abortion and gay marriage. They can't defend it from scripture, so they either twist Romans chapter one and limit it to temple prostitutes, while rejecting the OT law entirely, or they reject the Bible? With regard to abortion, they either try to create a false moral equivilancy with other sins, or they reject the Bible? He has rejected the authority of scripture.

[xero]

Yeah I dont get that either. I know between translations there are differences but nothing which would support any of those claims. Linking verbs and punctiation is added to make the text readable and some versions use different connotations of the same term but thats not grounds for error within the Bible.

I cant see how anyone would think they could find support from the Bible for homosexuality or aborticide. Carnal minds. The secular world provides them with support I dont know why that wouldnt be an indicator that alls not well with their notions.