HOW THE BIBLE CANON WAS SETTLED
1). INTRODUCTION
The theme of this post is to address the canonicity of the Bible, a topic that is too much neglected given the frequency of attacks on it from Muslims and others.
The question of canonicity addresses what documents belong in the Bible and why. The “canon” refers to the books that are contained within the Bible; those which are the word of God. Amongst the questions to be addressed are:
▪︎ How do we know which books belong in the Bible?
▪︎ How do we know that the 66 books we have are the correct ones?
▪︎ How do we know we’re not missing something?
▪︎ And who decided what would be included in the Bible and what would not?
Some have called the issue of canonicity the “Achilles heel” of Christianity. It’s often the point of attack from Muslims and other unbelievers. At some point, most Christians will be challenged here. Related, Roman Catholic proponents take issue with canonicity. They propose that holding to the canonicity of the 66 books of Scripture alone is “blind faith,” irrational, opposed to evidence, and arbitrary. But nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, an honest study of biblical canonicity will only build one’s necessary faith in the integrity of the God-breathed 66-books of the Bible. At the same time, it will prove that later books such as the Quran cannot be from God.
A popular myth needs correction from the outset. No men, church council, or spiritual leaders ever gathered to collectively determine what would and would not be included in the Bible. No council decided which books to keep and toss. No human being defined the list of biblical books. And that does not make the biblical canon less reliable, but more secure.
2). CANONICITY: A THEOLOGICAL ISSUE
The canon debate is primarily a theological issue, not a historical one. What should, and should not, be in the Bible is a matter of inspiration and revelation, not church councils and magisterium.
The question of the canon begins with understanding the nature of Scripture. We cannot understand what should be in the Bible until we understand what the Bible is. The canon of Scripture depends on the attributes of Scripture. A document must have certain attributes before it can be considered as canon. It’s the same way, for example, in professional baseball. Who gets to play major league baseball is determined by who possesses certain attributes and fulfils certain criteria necessary to the sport.
So it is with what is, and is not, in the Bible. That’s why our discussion of canon begins with a study of revelation and inspiration.
3). CANONCITY IS THE “CONSEQUENCE OF INSPIRATION”
Scripture is special revelation from God. It is otherwise undisclosed to, and unattainable by, man; that is, until God reveals. Humanity received God’s revelation through the act of verbal plenary inspiration, whereby God the Holy Spirit superintended the human authors to write exactly what He wished upon the original manuscripts. The result was the 66 books of God-breathed revelation. Since God is a God of truth, these 66 books are without error. They are truth. They are complete. This is what directs our understanding of what must be in the Bible; what constitutes the word of God.
Canonicity of the biblical text is the necessary consequence of the Holy Spirit’s work of verbal plenary inspiration. Whatever God inspired is consequently canonical. Because God gave revelation, it is thereby the word of God, or, canonical. Thus, the canonicity of a document depends entirely on the source and nature of the document, and not the outside opinion of man. Is the document the product of verbal plenary inspiration? If so, it is canonical.
The 66 books are God-breathed special revelation. So then, they are canonical by God’s doing, not man’s determination. The Bible is canonical whether or not anyone recognizes or acknowledges it. Inspiration establishes canonicity. The construction of the canon was the act of God, independent of man: God inspired the books of Scripture. In doing so, the canon was created.
4). A FLAWED APPROACH TO CANONICITY
So, how does imperfect man recognize what is and is not inspired and canonical?
The question has now changed from, “How was the canon formed, historically?” to “How can we, as Christians, know that these books are the right ones?”
One way to answer this question is to see how it should not be done. Enter the Vatican. The Roman Catholic religion takes a flawed approach to this question. Rome teaches that the canon exists because the church has infallibly decreed which books are Scripture. Thus, the magisterium determines the canon absolutely. The authority to do so lies, they teach, in who the pope is. For Rome, the pope is the successor of the apostle Peter, vicar of Christ, and head of the church. Thus, the authority to pronounce canonicity is vested uniquely by the pope and by the bishops who assume that they are in communion with the correct and true teachings of the faith. Add to that, when Rome speaks ex cathedra, she claims to speak infallibly. So, in her eyes, Rome does more than recognize canonicity; she determines it.
Though this is a flawed approach, Rome does get one thing right: the response of the church matters. We should care what the church has historically believed. However, by her numerous aberrant teachings, including denial of the true gospel and Christ as head of the church, Rome declares herself a false church (cf. Galatians 1:8-9). This has been the position of the true church, historically.
Rome undermines the authority of Scripture by teaching that canonicity is determined by the magisterium. In effect then, the authority of Scripture is beneath the authority of Rome. Though she teaches that God’s authority is vested in the magisterium, legitimizing her canonical determination, this must be rejected on the grounds that Rome has deviated from the true church. Thus, Rome’s say on the canon cannot be considered or recognised.
5). MAN RECOGNIZES THE CANON, BUT DOES NOT DETERMINE IT
God himself is the highest authority as to the nature of His word. Men and magisteria are not God. Therefore, they are not qualified nor instrumental in determining canonicity. Since God is the highest authority, He is the one who testifies to the authenticity of His word.
Since Scripture is the word of God, it is the highest authority, and thus alone qualified to declare its own canonicity. Scripture is self-authenticating in that sense.
If we assume to use anything outside of the canon (e.g. church council, magisterium, men) as determinative of what is and is not the canon, then we have wrongfully put that thing in authority over God. But God and His word are the highest authority. The thing of highest authority must adjudicate what is and is not the canon. This means that God determines what is God’s word and is not. The canon itself must be self-authenticating. Certain Bible passages give us clues to this fact:
“I assure you: Anyone who doesn’t enter the sheep pen by the door but climbs in some other way, is a thief and a robber. [2] The one who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep. [3] The doorkeeper opens it for him, and the sheep hear his voice. He calls his own sheep by name and leads them out. [4] When he has brought all his own outside, he goes ahead of them. The sheep follow him because they recognize his voice. [5] They will never follow a stranger; instead they will run away from him, because they don’t recognize the voice of strangers.” (John 10:1-5 HCSB)
The true sheep know the voice of the shepherd.
“Then the Jews surrounded Him and asked, “How long are You going to keep us in suspense? If You are the Messiah, tell us plainly.” [25] “I did tell you and you don’t believe,” Jesus answered them. “The works that I do in My Father’s name testify about Me. [26] But you don’t believe because you are not My sheep. [27] My sheep hear My voice, I know them, and they follow Me. [28] I give them eternal life, and they will never perish — ever! No one will snatch them out of My hand.” (John 10:24-28 HCSB)
The voice of the Shepherd is authoritative, powerful, and effective. His voice is recognized by those who know Him. The sheep do not need external authentication to discern the Shepherd’s voice. They only need His voice to discern His voice. We might think of it this way: what is the best way to recognize your spouse’s voice in a sea of people? To have someone you don’t know tell you, “This is your spouse’s voice”? To read a document that explains what your spouse’s voice sounds like? The best way to discern your spouse’s voice amongst other voices is to listen out for until you hear your spouse’s voice. Likewise, the best way to discern God’s word is to listen until you hear God’s word. By nature of being the Chief Shepherd’s sheep, He assures that they are able, and will, hear His voice. His voice is Scripture (cf. 2 Timothy 3:16-17, Hebrews 1:1-2). Again, Scripture is self-authenticating. Thus the canon declares itself canonical.
6). MISSING PIECES TO THE CANON?
Is it possible, however, that the canon is incomplete? What if we found another letter by an Apostle and we could verify that it was genuine? After all, 2 Kings 22 demonstrates that the Bible has been lost before, so, parts of it could be lost now, right? Should we expect to find new books which belong in the canon?
Presupposing God’s care for His Church, it’s reasonable to affirm that He would not likely inspire a book/letter, then forget or neglect to bring it into the possession of His Church. Anything that has been lost for 2000 years was not intended by God to be foundational for the edification of The Church. We would simply recognize that God did not intend for it to be a permanent foundation for the Church, so we could not add it to the canon. #FACT: Canonical books cannot be lost. In the case of 2 Kings 22, the book of the law wasn’t really “lost”, it was neglected.
The Bible was in the Temple, yet sinfully abandoned due to Israel’s apostasy. Certain letters during the first century have been lost, but we have no record of them ever being considered part of Scripture. In such cases, they were lost in God’s providence because they were not canonical. God is that good to outfit His church with His word. These truths more than prove there is no such thing as the ludicrous Muslim claim of a “lost gospel of Jesus”.
7). CANONICITY & THE DIVINE QUALITY OF SCRIPTURE
Though there is no higher authority for determining the canon than the canon itself, we can observe criteria inherent to biblical canonicity.
The divine qualities present in Scripture testify to its canonicity. John Calvin wrote:
“It is easy to see that the sacred Scriptures, which so far surpass all gifts and graces of human endeavor, breathe something divine” (Institutes, 1.8.1. p. 82).
Again, “Scripture exhibits fully as clear evidence of its own truth as white and black things do of their color, or sweet and bitter things do of their taste” (Institutes, 1.8.1. p. 76).
8). WHICH DIVINE QUALITIES OF SCRIPTURE TESTIFY TO ITS CANONICITY?
First, Scripture has an unmatched excellency to it.
“The law of the Lord is perfect” (Psalms 19:7).
“How sweet are your words to my taste! Yes, sweeter than honey to my mouth” (Psalms 119:103).
“Your testimonies are wonderful; therefore my soul observes them” (Psalms 119:129).
Second, Scripture possesses unique power.
“The word of God is living and active; sharper than any two-edged sword…able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart” (Hebrews 4:12).
Scripture has the power to expose sin and guilt (2 Kings 22:11-13, Acts 2:34-37, Hebrews 4:12-13), give joy to the heart (Nehemiah 8:8-12, Psalms 119:111), bring wisdom (Psalms 119:98, 2 Timothy 3:16), give understanding (Psalms 119:144), comfort (Psalms 119:50), convert the unconverted (Psalms19:7, James 1:18, 1 Peter 1:23), and sanctify the converted (John 17:17, 1 Peter 2:2).
Third, Scripture possesses extraordinary unity. God cannot lie (Psalms 89:35, Titus 1:2) or change (Hebrews 13:8), so His word must confirm itself (consistent and never contradicting). Despite 66 separate books, inspired through 40 different authors from varying demographics, over a time span of at least 1500 years, the Bible tells one cohesive story of God’s redemptive plan. These divine qualities speak to the divine origin of Scripture, and its canonicity.
9). CANONICITY & THE APOSTOLIC ROLE
Canonicity is also observed in the role that the apostles played as human instruments in inspiration. Apostles were commissioned by the authority of Christ and entrusted with both composing and delivering the gospel to the world. The Holy Spirit guided them into truth, empowering them to testify inerrantly in Scripture (John 14:26, 15:26-27, 16:13).
10). CANOCITY & THE CHURCH’S EMBRACING OF THE CANON
Since the Shepherd’s voice is unmistakably discernable by His sheep, it follows that there will be a visible embracing of the canon in church history. This is exactly what is observed. That the true church—regenerate people through faith in the biblical Christ—recognize and affirm the canon testifies to the self-authenticating nature of Scripture. The church is not authoritatively determining which books belong in the canon. Jesus said that the church consists of sheep who hear, not Shepherds who determine. The church is more like a thermometer than a thermostat. They both tell you something about the temperature of the room. But one determines the temperature while the other responds to it. In the same way, the church does not determine the canon, it responds to it. As the canon developed, the church heard her Shepherd’s voice, and has unanimously recognized the canon. It also provided a chain of custody for it.
But what about all those disagreements over what should and should not be in the Bible? Why would God allow specious books to confuse the church? First, there are relatively few disagreements historically. Even more, the disagreements are a commentary on sinful man and the deception of Satan. But also, in the providence of.God, the counterfeit books were a blessing to the early church. They forced the church to hear the Shepherd’s voice. God’s people had to clarify what God has already done, namely, canonize his verbal plenary inspired word.
11). REGENERATION ESSENTIAL TO RECOGNITION
Only Holy-Spirit-indwelt people are able to recognize the canon. In regeneration, sinners are awakened to discern the things of the Spirit (cf. 1 Corinthians 2:14-16); what would otherwise be “foolishness” to unregenerate man. Thus, the internal testimony of the Holy Spirit is the means by which we perceive canonicity. This becomes the test of canonicity: the Holy Spirit’s testimony to the canonical nature of His own word. The Spirit overcomes the effects of sin and produces belief within us consequent of regeneration/the new birth. The Holy Spirit opens eyes to perceive objective qualities that are present in the text. Consequently, the true Church recognizes the canon.
12). GOD’S SOVEREIGNTY & THE CANON
God is the living God; active and sovereignly involved in life. He wishes for His people to discern what He has made canonical. God intends for His word to be known by His people (Romans 15:4, 2 Timothy 3:16-17). More than intention, God is sovereign in accomplishing His purposes (Psalms 135:6, Daniel 4:35, Acts 17:25-28, Ephesians 1:11, Hebrews 1:3). He will not fail to accomplish what He wishes (Psalms 115:3). Therefore, He will certainly both produce the canon and ensure that His people correctly recognize it. God is our Shepherd and we do not lack. How did, and does, God do that? God providentially guided the true Church to recognize what He had inspired. The recognition of the canon was the act of God, through regenerate man: God illumined regenerate individuals by the Holy Spirit to recognize what He had inspired. In doing so, the canon was recognized.
13). A BRIEF HISTORY OF CANON RECOGNITION
▪︎ Old Testament
Jesus affirmed the first-century Jewish canon, which is identical to our Old Testament canon. The New Testament contains no hint that the Jews had an incorrect canon. The subject of canon is never under dispute as far as the Old Testament is concerned. Jesus, Paul, Peter, Apollos, and Stephen, for example, appeal to the Old Testament as canonical. Further, Jesus endorses the three-fold structure of the Old Testament that the Jews observed (the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms; Luke 24:44).
▪︎ New Testament
By the close of the first century, God had completed the canon. The church immediately recognized the canonical character of New Testament letters (2 Peter 3:16). As time passed, the greater church heard her Shepherd’s voice. Between 70-170 AD, the authority of the apostles was considered equal to the Old Testament. The gospels and Paul’s letters were accepted as part of the canon. It seems that every New Testament book except for 2 Peter was recognized. Due to geographical separation, difficulty communicating in the ancient world, persecution, and Satanic opposition, we would expect recognition of the 27 books to take time. Over the next few centuries, there was little debate over the New Testament canon. All 27 books were recognized as the word of God.
During the fourth century, Athanasius completed the task started by Eusebius with recognizing the canon. Codex Sinaiticus existed, which contained all 27 books of the NT, indicating widespread recognition of the canon. That we know of, the Council of Laodicea (363 AD) became the earliest council to recognize the canon.
□ Summary
The divine qualities of Scripture, the apostolic involvement in inspiration, and the church’s embracing of the canon speak volumes as to the canonical nature of the Bible. Each of the attributes implies the other two attributes. If a book bears divine qualities, it follows that it contains apostolic teaching, which implies that the church should properly recognize it by the power of the Spirit. And, if the church receives it, then that implies that the book contains divine qualities and that it contains apostolic teaching. In other words, the 66 books of Scripture declare objectively their own canonicity.
So, what council determined what would be in the bible? Because of God’s act of inspiration, the only council which determined what would be in the canon and what would not, was the counsel of God. God inspired the canon by His Holy Spirit. In God’s providence, regenerate man recognizes the canon by the illumination of the Holy Spirit.
14). WAS THE CANON CLOSED?
We can discern the answer to this question by observing characteristics about the Old and New Testaments. The OT concludes, leaves us wondering what is next. The NT concludes, leaves us at praising God. Where is the Seed (Genesis 3:15) who will crush the serpent? Who’s the one to reign forever on the throne of David? Is mankind doomed to repeat an endless cycle of animal sacrifices for all eternity? It leaves mankind looking forward to more, to expect the arrival of the Messiah at some point.
But the NT leaves us only looking forward to the triumphant return of Christ. The New Testament is God’s final word. Jesus is the final messenger and complete revelation of God. Only the Apostles were commissioned to authoritatively testify about Christ.
“Long ago God spoke to the fathers by the prophets at different times and in different ways. [2] In these last days, He has spoken to us by His Son. God has appointed Him heir of all things and made the universe through Him.” (Hebrews 1:1-2 HCSB)
God’s redemptive story is complete. Revelation is the perfect ending. In it, God ties up the “loose ends” from Genesis on.
The early church believed the canon was closed. The Muratorian fragment rejected the popular work “Shepherd of Hermas” because it was written “very recently, in our own times.” So as early as the second century, the church did not consider the canon to be open. The early church recognized the close of the canon with the death of the Apostles.
When was it closed? God closed the canon with the conclusion of inspiration. The cessation of inspiration closes the canon.
15). BONUS QUESTION: WHAT ABOUT THE APOCRYPHA?
The Apocrypha is a collection of books and writings that were written during the intertestamental period. Rome considers them canonical. However, as Wayne Grudem wrote, “It was not until 1546, at the Council of Trent, that the Roman Catholic Church officially declared the Apocrypha to be part of the canon (with the exception of 1 and 2 Esdras and the Prayer of Manasseh)” (Systematic Theology, 59).
Even so, the church does not consider them to be Scripture. Why? The first-century Jews did not consider them inspired. The New Testament never affirms or cites the Apocrypha as Scripture. The dominant position of the early church was that these writings were not authoritative. The testimony of the Holy Spirit from within the regenerate/church, has universally concluded that the Apocrypha is not inspired/God-breathed.
16). CONCLUSIONS
Because we know how the Canon of Scripture was chosen, (by inspiration of God) and how it concluded (when Apostolic inspiration ended), we have complete assurance that nothing that was intended to be included is missing and that nothing that is included is not rightfully there.
The last chapter of the last book of Scripture contains a sombre warning:
“I testify to everyone who hears the prophetic words of this book: If anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book. [19] And if anyone takes away from the words of this prophetic book, God will take away his share of the tree of life and the holy city, written in this book.” (Revelation 22:18-19 HCSB)
By all this we know, there is no further revelation from God that supercedes or follows the completed canon. The New Testament is God’s final word to humanity, and Jesus Christ His final revelation. There is no more. And we should not expect anything else. For God in closing the Canon left nothing unfinished, left no loose ends and gave no hint that He had left anything unsaid, or that there would be anything to follow it. The only matters left to follow are the fulfilment of remaining End Times prophecies including the Second Coming of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ in power and glory. Amen.
Anything that claims to follow it, claims to alter, correct or supercede it is heresy. By this fact alone, we know that only Satan could have inspired the Quran or the Book of Mormon.
Category Archives: Bible
Bible inerrancy
WHY NO CLAIMED CONTRADICTION OR SCRIBAL ERROR IN THE BIBLE MATTERS
I challenge Muslims who daily trot out their unsupported claims of Bible corruption to bring just one that puts any core doctrine of the Christian faith in doubt.
Here are three reasons Christians should not be troubled by textual variants.
1). No theologies or denominations claim a particular text.
Yes, there are differences between Bible manuscripts, and from a certain perspective, they can look alarmingly serious. For example, those manuscripts (and resultant Bible translations) which “omit” 1 John 5:7 seem to some readers to undermine the doctrine of the Trinity.
But there’s a simple way to demonstrate how trivial the differences between ancient manuscripts really are in terms of their effect on the body of truth that the Bible reveals. We have lots of doctrinal differences within Christianity, right? But there are no Calvinist manuscripts/versions, Armenian manuscripts/versions, Pentecostal, Reformed, Presbyterian, Episcopal, Congregationalist, Egalitarian, Complementarian, Integrationist, Cessationist, or Continuationist manuscripts/versions.
Take any systematic theology textbook you want, and the set of proof texts offered for particular points is for all practical purposes version-independent – the authors don’t care which translation you use, so they just give references. The difference in doctrinal character among the various manuscripts and translations is very close to zero. The “omission” of 1 John 5:7 (in the judgment of almost all textual scholars, those words were actually added very late in the manuscript tradition, not appearing in Erasmus’ Greek New Testament until its third edition) has not caused a single Christian denomination to descend into Unitarianism – because the New Testament elsewhere still clearly teaches the doctrine of the Trinity. In fact, none of the Greek writings of the early church ever mentions this passage – even in their discussions of the Trinity! If the church fathers recognized and formulated that vital doctrine without referring to this verse, then its presence in the New Testament of their day is highly unlikely, and certainly its absence from a Bible text or translation today constitutes no defect in doctrinal character.
If the differences between Greek texts were doctrinally significant, you would expect theologies and tribal groups to grow out of distinctive readings of those texts—you would expect certain sects to adopt Greek texts as theological banners. But compare the positions of majority text advocates, Textus Receptus devotees, and eclectic text users on the core doctrines of the historic creeds and you’d be hard pressed to find a doctrinal difference for which they claim support in their favoured New Testament text as opposed to others.
In short different Christian groups bring somewhat different lenses to the Bible, but it’s the lenses that differ, not the Bible.
2). Even if we had absolutely perfect copies, the work of interpretation would still be required.
If we had the originals themselves – the very pieces of papyrus Paul used to compose Romans and Ephesians, for example – or if no copies contained any textual variants at all, unlocking the Bible’s power would still require us to do exactly what we do now: search for Scripture’s wisdom as for hidden treasure, interpreting carefully, with honest exegesis comparing Scripture with Scripture, and making relevant personal application. Nothing would change except that we would be able to dismiss from our minds the possibility that the text we’re working with may not preserve God’s exact inspired words with complete perfection. But my own weaknesses as a reader expose me to far more significant misunderstanding than the manuscript differences do, so by far the greatest problems that God must overcome in order to talk to me are within me, not within the transmission process.
3). Pristine perfection is a property of the next world, not (generally) of this one
It’s true that the Greek and Hebrew manuscripts we have can’t all preserve the exact wording of the originals (and by definition, a translation cannot do so). The fact that no two manuscripts are identical down to the jots and tittles means that at most only one manuscript of any given Bible book can be “perfect.” All manuscripts of any size (some are less than a page) contain some obvious scribal slips, so it seems clear that God hasn’t given us access to the one “perfect” manuscript of any book of the Bible.
The very strong pattern God has ordained is that pristine perfection is a property of the next world, not this one, so we just need to conform our expectations to that reality. The textual imperfections that generate so much angst and controversy are well within an easily tolerable range, and, while of course we must make the wisest choices we can, we can be completely at ease that, with the exception of extreme paraphrases or Bibles translated by cult groups, any Bible we may use is fully trustworthy as God’s Word. We need not fear that some of these Bibles are the devil’s. Where does Scripture warn us to ferret out and avoid the devil’s Bibles? It seems that, in his sovereignty, God has arranged that the very few Bibles possibly worthy of that categorization are obviously so, not subtly so.
At the end of the day we can safely conclude that the Bible IS the Inerrant Word of God (in the original writings). This statement is supported by the following:
• There is more manuscript evidence for the Bible than ANY other ancient document in history – more than 24,000 New Testament manuscript copies (fragments and full manuscripts combined), with the closest fragment copy being within 30 years of the original and a near complete copy between 100 -150 years after the original. Compare that to the next closest ancient document in history – The Iliad by Homer. There are approximately 643 manuscript copies with the closest copy to the original being 500 years old.
• With the exception of approximately 11 verses, the entire New Testament could be reconstructed from early church writers.
• No charge of a contradiction in the Bible has ever been sustained (this refers to EVERY apparent or alleged contradiction having a plausible answer.)
• More than 25,000 pieces of archaeological evidence support the Bible; NONE REFUTE IT.
• There are more than three dozen sources outside the Bible that support the Bible, to include hostile testimony which is among the best possible evidence that can be put forth.
• Scientific FACTS that are completely accurate in the Bible, LONG before man confirmed them.
• Several hundred Old Testament Prophecies fulfilled by Christ, combined with the principles of probability that any one person could accidentally or coincidentally fulfill all of these probabilities is astounding (See Professor Peter Stoner, George Heron and others).
• Several New Testament writers affirmed the truthfulness, reliability and divine inspiration of BOTH the Old and New Testament and NONE of their writings are in question in this category in any way whatsoever.
• Last, BUT NOT LEAST, Jesus Christ Himself put His seal upon the entire Canon of Scripture. He affirmed the reliability, truthfulness and divine inspiration of the Old Testament, AS WELL AS that the New Testament would in fact be reliable, truthful and divinely inspired and NONE of His words in this category are in any way whatsoever disputed. When He said “Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will never pass away.” (Matthew 24:35 HCSB) we had better believe it. For that to remain true the New Testament has to have accurately captured His words and they had to remain unaltered. And not only Jesus words in red ink but the ENTIRE canon because He inspired all it through the Holy Spirit who reminded the disciples of all He had told them. (John 14.26)
If an amateur such as myself can study the Jehovah’s Witnesses New World Translation with all its omissions and changes trying to prove Jesus is not God and STILL irrefutable demonstrate that He is the divine Son of God in spite of their best efforts to corrupt the message to support their self serving agenda, it isn’t a difficult thing for the anyone to do. The key is one’s mind and heart MUST BE OPEN, laying aside preconceived notions and seeking TRUTH.
CONCLUSIONS
If the Bible manuscripts were hopelessly confused across their whole bodies of text about whether Paul’s gospel was justification by faith plus works of the law or justification by faith without works of the law; or if some manuscripts said that the baptism of the Spirit includes speaking with tongues and some said the opposite; or if some promised that Jesus would rapture his church before the Tribulation while others took what we now call a postmillennial view—then identifying the correct text would obviously be a matter of theological importance. Jesus called some matters of the law “weightier” than others (Matthew 23:23) – if serious differences existed among those, we’d have a serious difficulty.
But the variations we have among manuscripts raise far different questions: does the inspired text say we have redemption through Christ’s blood twice or only once? Does it testify to Jesus’ atoning blood 44 times or only 43? Does John say “his anointing” or “the same anointing” (one letter different in Greek) in 1 John 2:27?
Even the two major passages that are textually questionable – Mark 16:9 – 20 and John 7:53 – 8:11 – do not affect the doctrinal character of the New Testament. The former largely duplicates material found in the other gospels; the latter illustrates truths we know well from other passages: the scribes and Pharisees are self-righteous and Jesus is forgiving and yet demanding. If such textual variants represent Satan’s best attempt to corrupt the doctrinal character of Scripture, then God is clearly keeping him on a very short leash, indeed. Which explains why all that Muslims can do is keep on straining a gnat and become masters of pedantry, they have never disturbed a single foundation of the faith and they never will.
The bottom line is that God has arranged things so that I can take any good English Bible translation, based on any textual or translation philosophy, treat it as if its every English word were straight from him, and get everything I need from that Bible to know, love, and live for him in a way that will bring Christ’s “Well done!” when I stand before him. And what more is there to life? Wherever a problem in transmission or in my own reading may tend to lead me astray, there’s a corrective somewhere else in Scripture that, when I interpret the parts in light of the whole, will keep me within bounds.
It bears repeating, if I can take the JW New World Translation with its claimed correction of 50,000 Bible errors and still prove that salvation is by faith alone in Christ alone and He is the Second person of the Trinity from eternity, then it really doesn’t matter which version you read.
And finally, appealing to sceptical scholars such as Ehrman and his like will not help Muslims. He is scornful of the Quran as a credible source, affirms the crucifixion as a “rock bottom certainty” and declares that textual variants affect NO core doctrines of Scripture, which is the main point of this Post.
#MAKE_NO_MISTAKE: Muslims will have no excuses on judgement day that they didn’t know which Bible to read in order to believe.
Anyone claiming the original writings of the Bible are errant bear the burden of proof; good luck with that …
The Bible was written over a period of roughly 2000
The Bible was written over a period of roughly 2,000 years by 40 different authors from three continents, who wrote in three different languages. These facts alone make the Bible one of a kind, but there are many more amazing details that defy natural explanation.
Shepherds, kings, scholars, fishermen, prophets, a military general, a cup-bearer, and a priest all penned portions of Scripture. They had different immediate purposes for writing, whether recording history, giving spiritual and moral instruction, or pronouncing judgement. They composed their works from palaces, prisons, the wilderness, and places of exile while writing history, laws, poetry, prophecy, and proverbs. In the process they laid bare their personal emotions, expressing anger, frustration, joy, and love.
Yet despite this marvellous array of topics and goals, the Bible displays a flawless internal consistency. It never contradicts itself or its common theme.
Is The Bible Accurate
Because there are over 14,000 manuscript copies of the New Testament we can absolutely be confident of its accuracy. With this large number of manuscripts, comparing manuscripts easily reveals any place where a scribe has made an error or where there is a variation. There are approximately 150,000 variations in the manuscripts we have today. However, these variations represent only 10,000 places in the New Testament (if the same word was misspelled in 3,000 manuscripts, that is counted as 3,000 variations.) Of these 10,000 places, all but 400 are questions of spelling in accord with accepted usage, grammatical construction, or order of words. Of the remaining variations, only 50 are of significance (such as two manuscripts leaving out Acts 2:37). But of these 50, not one alters even one article of faith which cannot be abundantly sustained by other undoubted passages.
There are some manuscripts that date as early as 130 AD, very close to the completion of the New Testament. These manuscripts are nearly identical to those dating 900 years later, thus verifying the accuracy of the scribes.
God also promised to preserve His words.
The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever. (Psalms 12:6-7)
You shall not add or take away, says God.
Now therefore hearken, O Israel, unto the statutes and unto the judgments, which I teach you, for to do them, that ye may live, and go in and possess the land which the LORD God of your fathers giveth you. Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.(Deuteronomy 4:1-2)
God cares about every one of His words.
Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar. (Proverbs 30:5-6)
God’s words will never pass away.
Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away. (Jesus Christ, Son of God) (Mark 13:31)
God will curse those who change His Word.
For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book. (Revelation 22:18-19)
Jehovah replaced with Lord
In the Hebrew Scriptures, the name of God is recorded as YHWH. So, where did the name “Jehovah” come from? Ancient Hebrew did not use vowels in its written form. The vowels were pronounced in spoken Hebrew but were not recorded in written Hebrew. The appropriate vowel sounds of words were passed down orally. As a result, when ancient Hebrew is studied, scholars and linguists often do not know with absolute confidence how certain Hebrew words were pronounced.
This particularly becomes an issue when studying the Hebrew name of God, written in the Hebrew Scriptures as YHWH, also known as the tetragrammaton. Despite much study and debate, it is still not universally agreed upon how the Hebrew name for God YHWH was pronounced. Some prefer “Yahweh” (YAH-way); others prefer “Yehowah” or “Yahuweh”; still others argue for “Jehovah.”
As you can see, virtually everything is up for debate. Should YHWH be pronounced with three syllables or two? Should the vowels be borrowed from Elohim or Adonai? Should the W be pronounced with more of a W sound or more of a V sound? It is not the purpose of this article to settle the debate. Rather, it is the purpose of this article to discuss the use of “Jehovah.”
The vast majority of Jewish and Christian biblical scholars and linguists do not believe “Jehovah” to be the proper pronunciation of YHWH. There was no true J sound in ancient Hebrew. Even the Hebrew letter vav, which is transliterated as the W in YHWH is said to have originally had a pronunciation closer to W than the V of Jehovah. Jehovah is essentially a Germanic pronunciation of the Latinized transliteration of the Hebrew YHWH. It is the letters of the tetragrammaton, Latinized into JHVH, with vowels inserted. “Yahweh” or “Yehowah” is far more likely to be the correct pronunciation.
The form Jehovah, though, is very commonly used. It is used in the King James Version of the Bible (Genesis 22:14; Exodus 6:3; 17:15; Judges 6:24; Psalm 83:18; Isaiah 12:2; 26:4). It is also used, and strenuously promoted by, the Jehovah’s Witnesses. The Jehovah’s Witnesses emphasize the use of Jehovah to the extent that any other name or title for God is viewed as borderline idolatry or outright heresy.
With all of that said, it is not crucial to the Christian faith for the proper pronunciation of YHWH to be known. Both the Old and New Testaments, inspired by God, use generic terms for “God” and “Lord,” including El, Elohim, and Adonai (Hebrew); and Theos and Kurios (Greek). If the authors of Scripture, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, were allowed to use these terms, it is not wrong for us to refer to Him as “God” or “Lord,” either.
In conclusion, it is highly unlikely that “Jehovah” is the correct pronunciation of YHWH. Further, it is far more important to know God through faith in Jesus Christ, than it is to know the correct pronunciation of His name in Hebrew.
Matt 16:28 They will not taste of death
The return of Jesus with the kingdom Jesus is talking about is the new birth and the church that occurred and started at Pentecost.
Matt 16:28 Truly I say to you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.
Jesus did indeed come in his Kingdom during the lifetime of most of those who heard him on that day. The Kingdom of God is in one sense the kingship of God in any one individual’s life. It will also be revealed at the end of time when the final Kingdom of God will be the eternal city”heaven. All this is true, but in the context of Matthew 16:28, Jesus is talking about the kingdom in the sense he most commonly uses it in the gospels. One aspect of the kingdom of God is the church of Christ. The church is the kingdom. In fact, Jesus had just finished making that point in Matthew 16:17-19 where Jesus clearly equates the church with the Kingdom of Heaven and the church began at Pentecost 50 days after the
resurrection.
This fulfillment is found in Acts chapter two. Many prophecies, both in the Old Testament and the New Testament point to the coming of the Kingdom in a new and unique way on the Day of Pentecost. For example, one could look at Isaiah 2:2-4. Daniel 2:44,45, Matthew 3:2,
Luke 24:45-47, Matthew 16:18-20 and Matt 16:28 all point to the events of the pouring out of the Spirit, the first public gospel sermon and the first conversions to Christ which all occurred on the Day of Pentecost, as recorded in Acts chapter 2
Hebrews 13
The last reference is the most important of all: “Now the God of peace, that brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great shepherd of the sheep, through the blood of the everlasting covenant, Make you perfect in every good work to do His will, working in you that which is well-pleasing in His sight, through Jesus Christ; to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen” (Hebrews 13:20-21)
Hell is another word for Hades
24 God raised him up, loosing the pangs of death, because it was not possible for him to be held by it. 25 For David says concerning him,
“‘I saw the Lord always before me,
for he is at my right hand that I may not be shaken;
26 therefore my heart was glad, and my tongue rejoiced;
my flesh also will dwell in hope.
27 For you will not abandon my soul to Hades,
or let your Holy One see corruption.
IN ITS original languages, the Bible uses the Hebrew word she’ohl’ and its Greek equivalent hai’des more than 70 times. Both words are related to death. Some Bible translations render them as “grave,” “hell,” or “pit.” However, in most languages there are no words that convey the precise sense of these Hebrew and Greek words. The New World Translation therefore uses the words “Sheol” and “Hades” in footnotes. What do these words really mean? Let us note how they are used in different Bible passages.
Ecclesiastes 9:10 states: “There is no work nor planning nor knowledge nor wisdom in the Grave [“Sheol,” footnote], where you are going.” Does this mean that Sheol refers to a specific, or individual, grave site where we may have buried a loved one? No. When the Bible refers to a specific burial place, or grave, it uses other Hebrew and Greek words, not she’ohl’ and hai’des. (Genesis 23:7-9; Matthew 28:1) Also, the Bible does not use the word “Sheol” for a grave where several individuals are buried together, such as a family grave or a mass grave.Genesis 49:30, 31.
To what kind of place, then, does “Sheol” refer? God’s Word indicates that “Sheol,” or “Hades,” refers to something much more than even a large mass grave. For instance, Isaiah 5:14 notes that the Grave, or Sheol, “has enlarged itself and has opened its mouth wide without limit.” Although Sheol has already swallowed, so to speak, countless dead people, it always seems to hunger for more. (Proverbs 30:15, 16) Unlike any literal burial site, which can hold only a limited number of the dead, ‘the Grave is never satisfied.’ (Proverbs 27:20) That is, Sheol never becomes full. It has no limits. Sheol, or Hades, is thus not a literal place in a specific location. Rather, it is the common grave of dead mankind, the figurative location where most of mankind sleep in death.
The Bible teaching of the resurrection helps us to gain further insight into the meaning of “Sheol” and “Hades.” God’s Word associates Sheol and Hades with the sort of death from which there will be a resurrection. * (Job 14:13; Acts 2:31; Revelation 20:13) God’s Word also shows that those in Sheol, or Hades, include not only those who have served Jehovah but also many who have not served him. (Genesis 37:35; Psalm 55:15) Therefore, the Bible teaches that there will be “a resurrection of both the righteous and the unrighteous.”Acts 24:15
Holy Communion
What Is the Significance of the Holy Communion?
The love of Christ
To partake of the Holy Communion is to taste the extent of Jesus’ sacrifice. It is to realize the full dimensions of His love:
The depth to which the king of heaven descended to suffer as a sinner for our sins
The width of His arms spread on the cross to bring all humankind into His embrace
The height He rose to transcend death and Hades and lead us in triumphant life and glory
As we eat the bread, we remember the body that was broken by nails, His splintered flesh. As we drink of the cup, we remember the blood that poured from His wounds. We not only remember His suffering. We proclaim the eternal life in heaven the Lord Jesus Christ prepared for us through His death and resurrection.
The life of Christ
The spiritual effect of the sacrament is based on the Lord’s own words:
Most assuredly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you. Whoever eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For My flesh is food indeed, and My blood is drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in Me, and I in him. (Jn 6:53-56)
Isn’t it a profound, wonderful mystery that Jesus Christ would give us His flesh and blood to eat and drink? It represents the completeness of His sacrificeHe gave us His all; His life. Through the Holy Communion, we connect with the Lord Jesus Christ not only in the memory of His death, but in the spiritual life He gives to us. By receiving the spiritual flesh and blood, Christ lives in us and we in Him. Only with the life of Christ in us can we have eternal life and resurrect on the last day. Therefore, all believers of Christ must partake of the Holy Communion.
How could Melchizedek have had no father or mother
Q. How can the book of Hebrews say that Melchizedek, the priest who blessed Abraham, was “without father or mother” and “without beginning of days or end of life”? Wasn’t he human?
Byzantine icon of Melchizedek
Here’s what I say about this in my study guide to Deuteronomy and Hebrews, where I note that the author of Hebrews talks about Melchizedek in the third of the four messages or sermons that make up the book:
This message is based primarily on Psalm 110, but in it the author characteristically draws on other Scriptures for support, in this case the story in Genesis that describes who Melchizedek was.
The author first translates the word Melchizedek, explaining that it means “King of Righteousness.” Melchizedek was most likely not a given name, but an honorary title of the Jebusite kings who formerly ruled in Jerusalem, including the one in the Genesis story who greeted Abraham. (A similar example of an honorary title is the name Pharaoh that was given to all the rulers of Egypt.)
After the Israelites conquered Jerusalem, their own kings took over the title Melchizedek. Since the Jebusite kings had been priests, the Israelite kings also assumed an honorary role as priests and interceded for the nation in prayer. But they were not allowed to offer sacrifices; this was reserved for the descendants of Aaron under the law of Moses.
The author next explains that King of Salem (that is, of Jerusalem) means “King of Peace.” By translating these two terms, the author identifies Jesus, who is a priest in the order of Melchizedek by virtue of being the Messianic king of Jerusalem, as someone who helps people become righteous before God and so find peace with God.
Now come some more significant details”or rather, a significant lack of them. The Hebrew Scriptures usually introduce a new figure into their narratives by describing the person’s parentage and ancestry. They usually also report when a figure dies. But the book of Genesis doesn’t do either of these things in the case of Melchizedek.
This allows the author of Hebrews to observe that, when considered only in light of what the Scriptures say about him, Melchizedek seems to have no origin or ending. He appears to “remain a priest forever.” In this way he “resembles the Son of God,” and this allows him to serve as an earthly representation of the Messiah. This is why the Lord chose to name him as the head of the order of priests to which the Messiah (represented in Psalm 110 by the Davidic king) would belong.
This is a classic example of the author’s typological method, which is based on the understanding that transcendent spiritual realities are reflected in earthly replicas. A little later in this message the author makes the basis of this method explicit, noting how the earthly tabernacle had to be modeled after the heavenly pattern Moses was shown. The Greek word is typos, the source of the English word type, and so this interpretive method is known as typology.
To summarize what I say in the guide, the author of Hebrews is able to establish a connection between Melchizedek and Jesus by considering Melchizedek in light of what the Scriptures say about him (that his title means “king of righteousness” and that he was king of Salem = “peace“), but only in light of what the Scriptures say about him, not what they don’t say. Since the details of his parentage, birth, and death aren’t reported, this allows an even stronger typological connection to Jesus, who has a permanent priesthood “on the basis of an indestructible life.”
In other words, the key to understanding how the Bible could say that Melchizedek was “without father and mother” and “without beginning of days or end of life” lies in appreciating the distinctive typological method of the book of Hebrews.