Subject: Bible was Not Originally Confirmed As God's Word
Author: mwarbinek
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted:16:09:44 02/12/09 Thu
The title of this post is on purpose. To show that the Bible was not confirmed as God's word by the early historians or the Catholic church. The confirmation never occurred in accordance to Paul's words and teachings.
1 Corinthians. 2:14
But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
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:
Galatians 1:12
For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.
Then the words of John
1 John 5:6
This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth.
Then the words of Peter the Apostle,
2 Peter 1:20
Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
and the words of Christ as written by John
John 6:63
It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
Are these passages from the real servants of God and from Jesus himself important in how to determine the truth of the Bible?
Most certainly. Paul the Apostle clearly said that the word of God is given always by inspiration! Those spiritual words must be "spiritually discerned".
To learn and even recognize that a word is from God must be "spiritually taught". This is confirmed by the words of Peter the Apostle when he said that scripture is never by personal "private' interpretation. This means never by our own mortal power or deduction and logic, but to be spiritually edified (Acts 9:31).
These important elements or components must be present in order for any man or woman to have the ability to discern if the words given or written are from God.
We know, and many Christians agree in their own way, that revelation to the Church of Christ ended with the leaving of the last apostle. This means that all interpretations thereafter, not performed by any of the Apostles, are not of God. This means they are "private interpretations". This is not to say that all are not good, as some are, BUT and this is a big BUT, those interpretations, no matter how good they seem to be, they are clearly NOT from God, not ordained of God and therefore NOT canon and NOT Scripture.
Have I now denied the Bible as the word of God? - Nay I have not. Please read on.
Doing some research we find a consistency in information pertaining to the History of the Bible. On Wikipedia, the information is clear enough, the scriptures in the Bible never came from original texts written by the original Apostles. They are from a copulation of texts written by others and some of those documents are poorly written and worst of all, none or few agreed as to the authority of these books now found in the Bible.
The bible exists in multiple manuscripts, none of them original, and multiple canons, none of which completely agree on which books have authority.
To determine the textual accuracy of a copied manuscript, textual critics scrutinize the way the transcripts have passed through history to their later forms. There are no original documents. The higher the volume of the earliest texts (and their parallels to each other), the greater the textual reliability and the less chance that the transcript's content has been changed over the years. Still there are families of texts, see New Testament text types. There are more than minor (copyist errors, spelling, etc.) differences. These problems also arise in the earliest surviving texts of the Old Testament books, as shown by the Dead Sea Scrolls.
It is interesting to see that debates arose over the validity of the many manuscripts and also entries in the Bible (as we now have it). Debates??? Why were there debates about the word of God?
Within the academic community, the main discussion revolves around how much weight to give the text of the Bible against counter-evidence or lack of evidence. Generally those giving more weight to the text of the Bible, assuming its correctness unless proven otherwise, and tending to interpret it literally, are called Biblical maximalists, while the opposing view is Biblical minimalism. The debate between the two sides is inextricably tied to how one views historiography: they disagree over how much weight documentary and indirect evidence should be given. Biblical maximalists view the Biblical narrative as a starting point for constructing the history, and correct or reinterpret it where it is contradicted by archaeological evidence. Biblical minimalists start purely from the archaeological evidence, and only consider Biblical accounts of value if they are corroborated by the archaeological evidence.
Where is it in the Bible, that God's words is validated by debate or argument?
2 Corinthians 12:20
For I fear, lest, when I come, I shall not find you such as I would, and that I shall be found unto you such as ye would not: lest there be debates, envyings, wraths, strifes, backbitings, whisperings, swellings, tumults:
Is it not a serious concern that in all these centuries that few Christians ever questioned the manner in which the Bible came into existence, where it never existed during the time of the early Christian Church with the Apostles, but only after the fall of God's true Church and apostate doctrines and revelings took over?
The Bible is not the word of God until it is confirmed by God himself. Nothing in the Bible is valid until God says it is valid and good for our reproof and learning. This says that all the interpretations by other Christians are unacceptable until God confirms that they are of him.
This is an important thing to remember when seeking the real truth. To see that even many Christians advocate something ever so blindly as to not see that the very Scriptures they tote as God's word speaks loudly against them and "their doctrines".
If God says that the Bible is not sufficent for our salvation, but sayd it is his word under certain conditions, then why would God accept it? Well, at the least because of true goodness -
Matthew 13:45 45 Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a merchant man, seeking goodly pearls: 46 Who, when he had found one pearl of great price, went and sold ball that he had, and bought it. 47 Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a net, that was cast into the sea, and gathered of every kind: 48 Which, when it was full, they drew to shore, and sat down, and gathered the good into vessels, but cast the bad away.
In the New Testament times, Jesus organized his one true Church where it is hailed as "one faith and one baptism". He and his apostles built it up in many terriotroies. He never made different denominations - NEVER. It was all one, as "organized" by him through proper authority. Yet, we have today many denominations and many different Christian churches, with many separate agendas that are clearly in contradiction to one another. That is NOT God's true Church, not even in the smallest way. So why would God today make the Bible as acceptable?
Answer, to establish peace, but remember this there are conditions he set down as to what is and is not his word. Since all true goodness can allow us to move away from bad, then why not at least confirm that the Bible is sufficently good, if the words therein are truly good?
Still, without a confirmation from God, he teaches us to seek things that are truly good. This means this church or that denomination that holds some truth or some goodness, then that truth or goodness is commended. When someone or people follow true goodness, then they are commended. From that alone, the Bible is confirmed as a good book and God approves, automatically, to all true good things.
What of faith then? Is goodness part of faith? - Yea, it is. It feeds faith unto all things that are good and helps sustain a person's faith.
What of salvation now? Is the Bible sufficient for our salvation?
To be sufficient, even in part, requires God's confirmation that the Bible holds his words, for goodness does not save our souls, but only helps prepare us for salvation.
2 Timothy 2:21
If a man therefore purge himself from these, he shall be a vessel unto honour, sanctified, and meet for the master’s use, and prepared unto every good work.
Where then can we find God's confirmation?
Well, that is a good question then. Since interpretations by others, when not confirmed by God, are not of God, then where can we seek this confirmation?
Simple, if you believe that the Bible is God's word, but want to confirm it or confirm what is and is not, then abide in his word as found here,
James 1:5
If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.
Ah yes, God will give wisdom to those who sincerely seek it and are honest of heart. By way of this, God's words are confirmed or witnessed unto you as true;
1 John 5:6,8
This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth.
I say to you, that the Spirit did bear witness to me of where the word of God is found. This witness also confirmed that so long as the Bible is correctly translated and interpreted (as per Paul, Peter and Jesus), then it is the word of God.
When it is incorrectly translated and interpreted, it is NOT the word of God. Therefore, beware of the many Bible translations, for they sorely lack in righteousness and proper translation.
Seek God to help you find the proper translation. BY the witness I possess from the Spirit, the King James is overall the best for all of us, but it is up to you to seek that witness of truth yourself. A witness of truth is NOT by your belief, and clearly not by someone else's claim, it is by a true witness by the Spirit of Truth, which is the Holy Ghost.
The Bible was not properly confirmed and not properly complied in the early days after Christ and the fall of the early Christian Church. Due to persecution and destruction wrought by the Roman Government, all the original manuscripts were lost or destroyed. The "Bible" would be clearly different if the Apostles and the government of God's true Church remained. If that had happened, there would of been no need to "restore" the gospel of Jesus Christ.
