• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Christians: How do you know which books of the bible are "inspired?"

nPeace

Veteran Member
@Hubert Farnsworth
You said:
It seems to me that you can't answer the question. You're saying that the books "considered canonical" seem to harmonize perfectly. Considered canonical by whom? As I have emphasized, different Christian denominations consider different books to be canonical and you haven't identified which canon you use and why you believe that this canon is superior to the others.

It appears as though these three are the same...
Protestant
Lutheran
Anglican
according to this source Biblical canon
...except for some editions of Protestant, and Anglican, which contain Apocrypha.

Lutheran does not include Apocrypha.
Regarding inspiration
Lutherans affirm that the Bible does not merely contain the Word of God, but every word of it is, because of plenary, verbal inspiration, the direct, immediate word of God. The Apology of the Augsburg Confession identifies Holy Scripture with the Word of God and calls the Holy Spirit the author of the Bible. Because of this, Lutherans confess in the Formula of Concord, "we receive and embrace with our whole heart the prophetic and apostolic Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments as the pure, clear fountain of Israel." The apocryphal books were not written by the prophets nor by inspiration; they contain errors and were never included in the Judean Canon that Jesus used; therefore they are not a part of Holy Scripture. The prophetic and apostolic Scriptures are authentic as written by the prophets and apostles. A correct translation of their writings is God's Word because it has the same meaning as the original Hebrew and Greek. A mistranslation is not God's word, and no human authority can invest it with divine authority.

I too, believe that the scriptures are inspired of / by God, as the apostle Paul said.
2 Timothy 3:16, 17
16 All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness, 17 so that the man of God may be fully competent, completely equipped for every good work.

Not only did Paul say that they are God breathed, but he also highlighted the benefits. How right he was. Something those who appreciate and understand it in its correctness, can attest to.

Misinterpretation can indeed lead to a misrepresentation, as seen by the doctrines of the immortality of the soul, eternal damnation in Hell fire, Triune God (Trinity), etc.
Mistranslation can be a problem, also.

These, although dangerously misleading, may affect people negatively, but since God has always used people, not only to preserve his word, and prevent major corruption of his word, but to reveal his truths, people of the right heart condition are seeing the light, and identifying the true from the false.

God's uses his powerful holy spirit to accomplish this - the same powerful spirit he used to create the universe, and inspire prophecy, and the writing of the scriptures. 2 Peter 2:21

In an imperfect world, with imperfect people, I think it would be unreasonable to expect a perfect translation, and perfect worshipers.
It is clear from my point of view that they are true worshipers, and the Bible is true - though imperfect.

Jesus and his apostles used the Septuagint, which evidently indicates that a Canon of the Hebrew scriptures existed in the first century. So a lot of what they quoted and mentioned from there helps us appreciate the value of those texts.
For example, they mentioned the Flood, Lot's wife, and Sodom and Gomorrah, Moses, Abraham, etc.
I think this is a good piece of evidence regarding regarding the authenticity of the books we presently have - 39, and later the 27.


I personally believe continually debating which books belong, from which don't belong in the Holy writings, is a futile distraction from what we ought to focus on. Understandable people will debate the subject indefinitely.

So basically, because I believe God is in full control of his will, and purpose, and there is nothing more powerful than him, I believe he has intervened in determining that a canon would exist, for which his people would use, and I believe he guides his people to determine which books are useful for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness, so that the man of God may be fully competent, completely equipped for every good work.

Actually the fact that there is evidence that practically all the prophecies uttered in the Greek scriptures, have been fulfilled, convinces me that the canon of 66 books is complete.

I believe the time left is greatly reduced, and therefore the any action God is taking currently, involves his will - the preaching of the good news of God's Kingdom, being carried out by those who submit to his direction, through the faithful and discrete slave, appointed by the master, Jesus Christ. Matthew 24:14, 45.

I think I have been clear enough this time. I tried to be.
 

Hawkins

Well-Known Member
Protestants use a 66 book bible. Catholics use a 73 book bible. Other churches accept even more books as being inspired by God. For instance, the Ethiopian Christian Church uses a bible comprised of 84 books. Yet, the differences do not end here. Martin Luther succeeded in removing seven books from the original 73-book Catholic bible, and also wanted to remove the book of James and the book of Revelation, among others. So, how do you decide which Christians are correct, and which are not correct? And what makes you so certain that *you* are correct in identifying the word of God, if all of these church "fathers" disagreed with each other?

It represents how things are authenticated.

The Jews were given the authority to form the OT Canon.
The Catholics were given the authority to form the NT Canon. It represents a shift of earthly authentication from the Jews to the Catholics.
The Protestants were given the authority to hold both a correct OT Canon and a correct NT Canon. It represents the same shift of authentication.
 

Muffled

Jesus in me
I see what you're saying, but I'm interested in specifics. So, was Luther correct in removing the seven books from the original bible? Was he correct in wanting to remove James and Revelation? If you think he was wrong in wanting to remove James and Revelation, why would you trust him to be correct in removing the seven books that he succeeded in convincing the Protestant church to remove?

I believe Luther was inspired to see that salvation is by grace but how much inspiration he had I could not say.
 

Milton Platt

Well-Known Member
Protestants use a 66 book bible. Catholics use a 73 book bible. Other churches accept even more books as being inspired by God. For instance, the Ethiopian Christian Church uses a bible comprised of 84 books. Yet, the differences do not end here. Martin Luther succeeded in removing seven books from the original 73-book Catholic bible, and also wanted to remove the book of James and the book of Revelation, among others. So, how do you decide which Christians are correct, and which are not correct? And what makes you so certain that *you* are correct in identifying the word of God, if all of these church "fathers" disagreed with each other?

How does anyone know that ANY of the stories are inspired? What does the label "inspired" actually indicate?
 
Top