History of the canon of the Bible

Discussion in 'Bible Study' started by Ginger, Mar 19, 2011.

  1. Ever wonder how the Books of the Bible were chosen? How did they know which ones were inspired and which ones were mere men writing opinions or history and which ones were frogeries (pseudo works) intended to lead the faithful astray?

    I believe the Bible, which is a collection of several inspired books and letters, is self authenticating.
  2. I believe the Bible, being a collection of inspired works, bears witness to which books are truly inspired.

    The claim of inspiration by the author of a single book is not in itself "proof." The book's historic and geologic accuracy lends supporting witness. Being written in the time and language it claims to be written also lends credence.

    When prophets recognize the inspiration of other prophets they bear witness to each other, and when their prophecies come true.

    The New Testament books acknowledge the Old Testament Books. (Not all the Christian OT books) but what was recognized by the Jews as inspired.

    The Old Testament witnesses to the truth of the NT which fulfills the OT prophecy.

    And finally, that the testimonies of each book is consistant with the others.
  3. There are many reasons books were rejected, and not included in the collection we refer to as the Bible,

    A complete copy could not be found or put together from the partial copies found and too much information was missing to be certain of the clear meaning.

    The work was a forgery or what is referred to as a pseudo-work, meaning the person claiming to be the author couldn not have written it for one reason or another. Such as it was written in a different time period and the person named as author had been dead for hundreds of years and other such evidence.

    The writing clearly contradicts known inspired works and introduces heresy
  4. The canon of the Old Testament:

    The Jews were the chosen keepers of the Old Testament. Therefore, they knew what was inspired and what was not. Some claim unispired books are part of the Holy Scriptures because they were found among the Dead Sea Scrolls, but there are definitely pseudo works as well as non-inspired secular works mixed in with these Dead Sea Scroll writings, so just being found within this library of writings is not an indication of divine inspiration.

    It can be compared to your church library. You have the inspired Bible in the church library, but you also have uninspired writings as well. The same is true of ancient collections of writings. Just because a book is found among inspired writings doesn't automatically mean it is inspired, too!!

    Before I go on, I'll give someone else a chance to jump in. :)
  5. That is correct. I agree with you :)
  6. I couldnt find anything inspired by God in the book of Esther.I couldnt find where the Lord said anything in it.
    I wonder why it was included and yet the book of Enoch which is spoken of in the bible was left out.
    Anyone know?
  7. There are writings as well that were supposed to be included in the Canon but was lost:

    I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators:
    1 Cor 5:9

    1st Corinthian should have been 2nd Corintthians because Paul wrote a letter to them before 1st Corinthians.

    So 2nd Corinthians should have been 3rd Corinthians. But that's fine. The Bible is still complete :)
  8. The Jews believed it is part of the Canon. And it's actually more historical but there are moral lessons that we can learn from it...

    Spoken by whom?
  9. Yes, I was shocked to discover God is never mentioned in the book of Esther. I had to sit down and read it again when I was told, cause I was certain it did mention God. lol

    But like John said, it is part of the Jewish canon and has always been accepted as inspired.

    Enoch, I'm pretty sure is not mentioned in the New Testament as some claim. I'd have to find my notes on that, but most claims that deuteros or other writings are quoted by Jesus and the Apostles are false.

    However, even if a book has some accurate biblically correct, historical content, that doesn't make it inspired. In this forum we speak of things that are biblically true, but our words are not inspired. We are merely sharing information from inspired books and letters of the prophets and apostles.

    And just because a Bible character quotes something from elsewhere doesn't mean he believes the source is inspired.
  10. Jude 1;14
    And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,

    I read the book and enjoyed reading it.
    Though if Im not mistaken the book of Enoch said "ten thousand angels".
    I felt the book was inspired myself.Who would have ever thought the shepards would kill sheep?Im quite sure the Sanhedrin would never think such a thing.You know what I mean?

    It reminded me somewhat of Mathew 26;53
    Think you that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels?
  11. The Authentic Biblical Scriptures are the one and only official Holy Scriptures for this planet.
  12. There are several works attributed to Enoch. Catholics do have one of them included in their version of the Bible, but I think there is some confusion as to which one..... Some books have had there numbers changed with other books.

    Also, the Catholics have combined some books such as Bell and the Dragon which was original two separate books.

    While these books can be inspiring, I would never consider them "Inspired" if they were never considered so by the pre-Christian Jews.
  13. Oops, I should add that these books attributed to Enoch were not written by Enoch and that is why they are NOT considered inspired of God.

    Jude credits the quote to Enoch. Yet the Book of Enoch from which the quote was supposedly taken is not included in the Catholic canon because it is pseudepigrapha.

    The fact that the Book of Enoch is a fraud, leads me to an obvious conclusion: The Book of Enoch includes some historical facts, one of which is the quote. AND while Jude is quoting Enoch, he is NOT quoting the forged Book of Enoch.

    In-other-words, the Book of Enoch author was a ware of this quote just like every other Jew, but the author was NOT the source of the quote. Therefore, Jude was not quoting the Book of Enoch.

    Does that make sense?
  14. What other planet would they be for?
  15. I would think it nealy impossible for you to know what books Jude had read in his lifetime.
    Can you be 100 % sure Jude didnt read the same book of Enoch that I read?
  16. I said nothing about which books Jude read in his lifetime. :confused:

    What I am saying is experts say the various writings claiming to be written by Enoch are in fact forgeries. (ie those books were not written by Enoch) However, since Jude states he is quoting Enoch, (the man, not the book), all that proves is the author of the Book of Enoch also knew about this quote from man called Enoch.

    You do realize Jude sais "Enoch prophesied", Jude didn't say the "Book of Enoch says".
  17. LOL
  18. I understand what you saying.I just cant see how Jude can know what Enoch said so many thousands of years after he said it without a record of it.Its like saying you know axactly what Jesus said 2000 years ago without the written gospel accounts.
    Like I said though.Ive read the book of Enoch and enjoyed it.
    I enjoyed reading Barnabus as well.
    I found other books to be frauds but not these.
    Who are the experts you spoeak of?I understand the pharisees were experts and well trained in the word being taught by experts themselves.
  19. Enoch was so near the time of Adam. Writing could not have been invented yet.
  20. Good point, John. I never thought about that before.

    If a book's claims about authorship, are known to be false, why would you find reason to trust it, as a whole?

    To answer your question, experts are those who have studied and know in depth the lauguage and writing styles of different time periods as well as diffiferent writers. They also are well versed in the colloquialisms of these different eras. This makes it easier for them to spot a forgery. Just like one of us can find a piece of paper on the floor and know which one of our children wrote without any obvious clues. We see the penmanship, the grammar, even the age level can be seen as well as slang used.

    So it is with these experts. They don't depend on a "title page" to know who wrote the piece or when it was written.

    Why these books are not inspired:
    1. Authorship is the first reason. The author lied about who he is.

    2. The quotes are not identical. Both authors, from Jude and Enoch, obviously knew about Enoch's prophecy.
    . a. who is going to most likely have the correct quote? a forgery? a divinely inspired work?
    . b. the book of Enoch is dated after the Book of Jude.
    . c. doesn't the dating suggest the author of Enoch might be the one who tried to quote Jude?

    3. 2 Timothy 3:8
    As Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so these men also oppose the truth, men of corrupt mind and counterfeit faith;

    Jannes and Jambres are not mentioned in the Old Testament. 2 Ti is the only place we are given the magicians' names. I suggest Jude knew Enoch's quote the same way Paul knew the magicians' names - Jews were the God-appointed keepers of the Old Testament. They were both Jews and had been taught these stories from childhood.

    May I ask what criteria you use to determine fraud from divinely inspired?

Share This Page