I'd like to open a thread about scripture in the light of 2 Timothy 3:16 "All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness".
I was taught that the Bible is the word of God, that it is complete and without error. All my Christian life I've adhered to this and I'm not in a place to disregard that principle. However, just because I have been told this, it doesn't necessarily make it correct.
So, how do we know what is scripture and what isn't?
What about other scriptures which are not in the Bible?
What about those more bohemian scriptures which are in the Bible but don't really make sense or are frankly a bit odd?
Thoughts...
Originally posted by divegeesterWhat they would have called scripture in those days must have been the Septuagint and the Hebrew Tanakh . These contain about a dozen or so additional books which were removed from the KJV of 1824. The original KJV 1611 contained all the books.
I'd like to open a thread about scripture in the light of 2 Timothy 3:16 "All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness".
I was taught that the Bible is the word of God, that it is complete and without error. All my Christian life I've adhered to this and I'm not in a place to disregard t ...[text shortened]... res which are in the Bible but don't really make sense or are frankly a bit odd?
Thoughts...
Some will claim that its God that removed the books.
Originally posted by divegeesterThese are excellent questions...to me anyway. I have been told by more than one pastor that they 'must' believe every word of the bible or none of it, no matter how puzzling the scripture.
I'd like to open a thread about scripture in the light of 2 Timothy 3:16 "All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness".
I was taught that the Bible is the word of God, that it is complete and without error. All my Christian life I've adhered to this and I'm not in a place to disregard t ...[text shortened]... res which are in the Bible but don't really make sense or are frankly a bit odd?
Thoughts...
Do you have a personal example of some scripture that warrants discussion of whether God could have been involved in its inclusion into the bible?
I suggest you read any competent history of how the Bible came to be, written by a historian without an agenda. By that I mean, a historian who examines the evidence as he would examine the evidence for any other ancient book, rather than starting from the assumption that everything in the Bible must be the inerrant word of God. Robin Lane Fox’s “The Unauthorized Version” is one such. Don’t be put off by the title; Fox is not anti-christian, and he has a solid reputation for scholarly work.
- Joined
- 08 Dec 04
- Moves
- 100919
Originally posted by moonbusYou should try reading "The New Testament Documents, are they reliable?", by F.F.Bruce.
I suggest you read any competent history of how the Bible came to be, written by a historian without an agenda. By that I mean, a historian who examines the evidence as he would examine the evidence for any other ancient book, rather than starting from the assumption that everything in the Bible must be the inerrant word of God. Robin Lane Fox’s “The Unautho ...[text shortened]... t off by the title; Fox is not anti-christian, and he has a solid reputation for scholarly work.
Originally posted by checkbaiterEvangelical propaganda.
What agenda would that be? ...
BTW, the book you mentioned does not appear to be a polished scholarly work. I append two reviews from amazon:
“This edition reads like an unedited manuscript with many grammatical errors. It also lacks the information page with name of publisher, date, and ISBN.”
“I have only managed to read the first two chapters because it is hard going trying to make sense of the narrative. This edition does not appear to have been proof read at all. OK, many of the errors are basic typo's but some are major flaws in important data of which I am unable to ascertain the correction. Firstly, one has to read through a paragraph making corrections as best as possible before making a second reading to get the gist of the information. It takes a third reading of the whole chapter to fully appreciate the details. It's a bit of a joke seeing that the book is arguing the case for the reliability of another set of writings. I don't know whether to bin this edition and pay out for an alternative one, hoping for a proof read copy, or to keep going as best as I can. It certainly makes me wary of purchasing anything else written by Mr Bruce. I can't be the only purchaser to have met with this problem.”
Further note to dive:
Here is a review of Lane Fox's book:
"If you are expecting a populist best seller challenging the basis of Christian faith, this is the wrong book. What you will be getting instead is a very serious and considered account of the current results of historical and linguistic research into one of most important works of mankind. As a Christian or Jew you can of course expect to be challenged, but not by the ravings of an atheist with an agenda to disprove the existence of God, but instead by a new and sober perspective on the process of the creation of the bible. Divine inspiration or not, Lane Fox allows you to keep to your own council. You will however learn that many readily accepted religious truths about authorship or time of composition of certain texts are indeed the invention of later generations. You might be also surprised as to how some facts, taken commonly as gospel today, have no foundation in the bible, let alone history, but are inventions of the medieval period. Take for example the 'Three Magi' from the Adoration: Casper, Melcher and Balthasar, allegedly three kings now buried in Cologne. Nowhere in the Bible are either their number or their names specified, and nobody in the bible mentions their royalty either. Their names appeared for the first time a remarkable 1100 years later.
There are no world changing theories put forward in this book, but it is a very insightful account into the culture and history of the early tribes of Israel and the forces and events that shaped the creation of two major religions. This subject matter is fairly complex and often in need of very thorough explanations. This makes the book somewhat strenuous to read, but to do the subject proper justice it is in my opinion a necessity. The author writes however for the layman and for the interested reader the book is not too hard to follow.
Lane Fox has in my opinion approached a very controversial subject with admirable consideration and academic skill. A book that speaks academic truths without trying to offend religious faith or push a specific agenda. Sine ira et studio, one could say."