Re: THE BIBLE GOD'S WORD OR MAN'S WORD

Admin Sat 29 Jan 2011, 8:23 pm

Hi Joey.
I have not long returned from visiting a close member of family who is near to death, and did not have the time earlier to reply. You have brought a lot in the post so I will have to take bite size pieces to reply as best able.
But I would want to point out that there is much more evidence in the Old Testament,.. and the New Testament is confirmation of what is written of Jesus birth death, resurrection, and the Messiah (Redeemer) Yeshua Jesus the Christ.
I would prefer to bring these prophesies together to prove the accuracy of the bible of what you question, and I include the link below that you may examine for yourself how absurd it would be to try to reason the probability of these, could be coincidental when we are talking of a period of some 6,000 years.
http://www.messiahrevealed.org/book-index.html

You said:
During the first 20 years after Jesus' death, the early Christian Church relied heavily on stories passed on one to another, via word of mouth. They did not place any value on writing these down, possibly because most of them were fairly uneducated and illiterate. Eventually and quite slowly they started to compile collections of Jesus' sayings, however these were still fairly limited in their narrative, and in fact there was no mention of the virgin birth, miracles, crucifixion or the resurrection.
Your information you will find things deliberately left out which which makes this statement incorrect.
Nicodemus and Joseph both members of the Sanedrin and secret disciples would have been knowledgeable in both writing and dictate to scribes. On the humiliation of Jesus crucified came out boldly to share.
Furthermore, The Apostle Paul A Roman Jew studied under Gamaliel with a reputation for being one of the greatest teachers in all the annals of Judaism, a Pharisee doctor of Jewish Law, who was the teacher of Paul the Apostle.
The Book of Acts portrays Gamaliel as a man of great respect.
It is also noteworthy to make mention that James the brother of Jesus, their Father a mere capenter (I use that term loosley) to refute that these common people had little or no knowledge of literacy, would have had the same education as his brother Jesus who at the age of about 12 yrs old had opened the scriptures reading in the temple. You need not remind me that he was a younger brother, nevertheless they would all be brought up in the teaching and learning.
The Birth of Christ
The very enemies of Christianity claimed that he lived--and that he performed miracles! Early Jewish documents such as the Mishnah and even Josephus--as well as first-century Gentile historians--such as Thallus, Serapion, and Tacitus--all testify that the one called Christ lived in Palestine and died under Pontius Pilate. As the British scholar, F. F. Bruce put it, "The historicity of Christ is as [certain]. . . as the historicity of Julius Caesar" (NT Documents, 119). If they document his death, then he had to have been born.
Josephus, Jewish historian (AD 37-100) wrote of Jesus:
"About this time appeared Jesus, a wise man (if indeed it is right to call Him man; for He was a worker of astonishing deeds, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with joy), and He drew to Himself many Jews (many also of Greeks. This was the Christ.) And when Pilate, at the denunciation of those that are foremost among us, had condemned Him to the cross, those who had first loved Him did not abandon Him (for He appeared to them alive again on the third day, the holy prophets having foretold this and countless other marvels about Him.) The tribe of Christians named after Him did not cease to this day." (Jewish Antiquities, 18.3.3 §63 )
I intended writing a bit more and what I had began was on notepad in readiness, but had a lengthy phonecall. did say will have to take as bite size pieces.
I need to pace myself also as I am not in good health. As soon as able will get back to your other paragraphs.
I hope what I have brought can give food for thought.
Blessings Elaine.

Joey Fri 28 Jan 2011, 5:09 pm

The New Testament (NT), as we know it today, did not mystically fall to us from heaven but it was manually developed through a long, arduous and contentious process.

During the first 20 years after Jesus' death, the early Christian Church relied heavily on stories passed on one to another, via word of mouth. They did not place any value on writing these down, possibly because most of them were fairly uneducated and illiterate. Eventually and quite slowly they started to compile collections of Jesus' sayings, however these were still fairly limited in their narrative, and in fact there was no mention of the virgin birth, miracles, crucifixion or the resurrection.

By the mid 1st century. numerous gospels, epistles and other texts started circulating amongst the Christian Churches. First came the Epistles by Paul such as 1 and 2 Thessalonians which are our earliest books from the NT. Gospels such the Gospel of Thomas and the Q were amongst our earliest gospels developed (however, it is important to note that the latter has never been found). Mark was the first to produce a gospel using a specific narrative structure. This structure was later copied by the authors of both Matthew and Luke. Some scholars believe this structure was "borrowed" from Homer's epic which contains a near exact narrative structure. The Gospel of John seems to have been written around 90 AD.

In addition to this we had the Acts of Peter, the Apocalypses of Peter and John, the Book of Barnabas, Hermas, the Gospel of Mary, the Gospels of the Hebrews, Ebionites and the list goes on an on. Below is the listing of the main events in the process which led to the formation of the NT:

- 95 CE: 1Clement is written by the church father Clement. He quotes sayings by Jesus that are not in any of the gospels found since. He makes references to Paul's letters but never mentions any actual written gospels, which indicates that these were not well known or distributed at this stage. Clement also only refers to Paul's letters as wise council and reserves the use of the word "scriptures" for the Old Testament only.

- 110 CE: The Didache is written by the Orthodox Church fathers, quoting the Gospel of Matthew (it refers to it as "The Gospel of Jesus"), and direct extracts from the Old Testament. The church fathers Origen, Clement of Alexandria and the churches in Egypt considered the Didache to be inspired scripture.

- 110 - 140 CE: Papias writes down his collection of sayings. He did not trust any of the gospels nor the epistles but decided to rely on oral tradition (stories told in the marketplace). Some of his quotations do indeed seem to come from some form of Matthew and Mark, but he never attributes these to the gospels themselves. Some of his claims have a sense of Baron Munchausen about them such as when he explains how Judas' head swells to become “wider than the width of a wagon trail so that his eyes were lost in the flesh,” and that the place where he died “maintained a stench so bad that no one, even to his own day, would go near it.” At the very least, this serves as an indication of the nature of the stories being circulated at this time. Papias also noted that the author of Mark was a young secretary of Peter, who had never met or seen Jesus himself. Once again we don't know how reliable this is, however Eusebius used this source to repeat the claim about Markan authorship.

- 100 - 154 CE: The book of Hermas is written by a man who, supposedly, had known Paul (Romans 16:14). The early church so revered this work that they included it in what they considered to be inspired scripture. The book of Hermas was considered inspired scripture even as late as the 4th century.

- 100 - 200 CE: The Christian Church begins to grow into various segments such as the Orthodox (later split into Catholic and Coptic), Ebionites, Nazarenes and Marcionites amongst others. Various gospels and epistles were written and copiers were changing texts to fit in with their own agendas and preferred doctrines. Due to pressure from Roman authorities, who saw Christianity as a social problem, the various Christian groups began to compete for Roman favour. The Gnostics would blame the Orthodox Church for all problems with the Roman authorities and vice versa. At this time, any anti-Roman sentiments within religious literature would be frowned upon and any anti-Semitic texts were applauded by the Roman authorities, which had a significant influence on the gospels and epistles being produced and copied. For example the verse "Give unto Caesar what is due unto Caesar" and the reduced responsibility of the Roman authorities during the crucifixion of Jesus could be viewed as possible examples of this.

- 140 CE: The first Canon is recorded by Marcion who was a Gnostic church father. Marcion strongly supported Paul but he believed that Jesus' God was different from the God that the Hebrews worshipped. He included a heavily edited version of Luke and Paul's epistles but excluded all others, even excluding the entire Old Testament. Marcion, in general, rejected anything Jewish-related, including the Gospel of Matthew and the Book of Hebrews. The Orthodox Church responded to this and wrote various anti-Marcionite literature, calling him a heretic. Some scholars believe that 2 Peter was produced as part of the Orthodox Church’s response against Marcion. What is important to note is that this was the first Canon and all of Marcion's books made it into the final Orthodox Canon centuries later. Some of Marcion's own editing as well as his prefaces to Paul's epistles were even included in the Latin Vulgate itself.

- 150 CE: Justin Martyr refers to the Gospels as the "Memoirs of the Apostles", He refers to Mark as the "Memoirs of Peter". An idea he probably got from Papias or from the same oral tradition that Papias received it from. Justin goes on to describe church services where these "memoirs" were being read alongside the Old Testament. This gave rise to an interest in these texts and helped established the idea that the Gospels should be seen as being equal to the Old Testament scripture.

- 156 CE: A new movement within the early church started to develop called Montanism. They prayed in tongues and primarily preached apocalyptic teachings such as the famous adage "the end is nigh". They shunned educated clerics and admitted women to their clergy. In fact, you could say that they were very similar to our modern day Evangelical Churches. They were considered as demonic by the Orthodox Church due to their reliance on personal revelation as opposed to the scriptures themselves. This marked the beginning of the drive by the Orthodox Church to form an official version of the New Testament. It's at this time that the term "New Testament" is first mentioned. Interestingly, the Church did not want to include the book of Revelation in this Canon as it was very similar to the Montanists' apocalyptical ideas.

- 161 - 180 CE: Dionysius complains that other people had changed his own letters written to the various churches and goes on to complain that even his version of Mark contained too many errors and additions to be reliable. Eusebius, thus, became one of the main sponsors for formalising the books which would be considered “inspired”, and decide which were the preferred versions of those books.

- 170 CE: The first Orthodox Canon is produced by Tatian, a convert of Justin Martyr, from the Syrian Church. This Canon was actually a Syrian translation and not in the original Greek. He decided upon the four gospels which we have today - possibly because his mentor supported these four gospels. He included Paul's epistles and Acts and then proceeded to forbid the reading of any other books in the church.

- 170 CE: The first attack against any questionable texts is launched by the Orthodox Church when a well meaning priest is exiled after he writes the Acts of Paul in honour of Paul. The Acts of Paul is still included in the Armenian Church's Bible today. Interestingly enough, Tertullian attacked the book, but not because it was falsified, but because it depicted a woman teaching on the baptism, as according to the Orthodox Church only men were allowed to teach. It shows that even at this stage, texts were not necessarily accepted or rejected on their historical validity but rather on the subjective ideologies of the church fathers.

- 325 CE: The Council of Nicea meet to discuss Jesus' divinity. Arianism, lead of Arius, opposed the idea of Jesus as Divine, as they believed that Jesus was not equal to God himself. The Orthodox Church however were in favour of the doctrine that Jesus was equal to and, in fact, part of God Himself. The council's decision, after much discussion, was that Jesus was indeed equal to God. Subsequently, the only two bishops who voted against the notion, were exiled and lost all their material possessions and property. The canonization of scripture was also discussed but they could not agree on a single canon at this stage.

- 327 CE: Eusebius writes the fifth and final revision of the "History of the Church". This had previously been revised following his conversion from Arianism. At this stage, there is still no agreement regarding the official Biblical Canon. In this book he states the different considerations for books that are nominated for inclusion into the Bible. He lists three types of texts categories:

* Texts that are recognized as inspired by every orthodox author he knows.

* Texts that are considered inspired by some orthodox authors but disputed by other authors.

* Texts that are considered to be heretical by all orthodox authors.

Basically, Eusebius used his own subjective criteria (orthodox) to select his own Canon. He identified the four gospels, no more and no less because of mythical and numerological reasons (Irenaeus and Cyprian had used these criteria previously as well). He also includes Acts, Paul's epistles, Hebrews, 1 Peter and 1 John. He mentions that the Book of Revelation is disputed but confusingly still includes it into the first category.

He then goes on to list the disputed texts but not heretical texts, which included James, Jude, 2 Peter, 2 John, 3 John, the Acts of Paul, Hermas, the Apocalypse of Peter, Barnabas, Gospel of the Hebrews and book called the "Teachings of the Apostles". To confuse matters further, he again includes the book of Revelation into this category.

Lastly he listed the books which he considered to be heretical, which were the Gospels of Peter, Thomas, and Matthias, and the Acts of Andrew and John.

- 327 CE: Eusebius states that he was commissioned by Constantine to produce 50 pristine copies of the officially recognised imperial Bible. We are not sure exactly what these copies looked like, however scholars found the Codex Sinaiticus developed in the 4th century, which is a possible copy of Eusebius' Bible. It includes the four Gospels, Acts, Paul's epistles, Hebrews, seven Catholic epistles, the book of Revelation, Barnabas and the book of Hermas. The Vaticanus Codex was also discovered that dates from this same period. It contains similar material in the same order. Both of these texts are incomplete however and we don't know if any other books were included.

Finally, it is impossible to discuss Eusebius' work without addressing his character. The 19th century historian Jacob Burckhardt, describes Eusebius as "the first thoroughly dishonest historian of antiquity". Eusebius himself said that, "It will sometimes be necessary to use falsehood for the benefit of those who need such a mode of treatment." This is an alarming passage as he also stated that he believed that Moses used certain falsehoods in the book of Genesis in order to persuade the people to follow in the footsteps of God. How far did Eusebius go? Did he use “falsehoods” in order to persuade people of his own ideologies? Scholars believe that Eusebius forged certain documents including official letters by Antoninus Pius and possibly even the Testamonium Flavianum itself. Unfortunately, he is our main source for much of what know regarding the church fathers and it was his personal theology which formed the bedrock on which the NT Canon was based.

- 350 CE: Bishop Cyril develops a series of lectures for the churches in Jerusalem, which would cover all aspect of Orthodox Christianity. Included in this is the first official announcement from a senior ranking official of the church as to which books are recognized by the church as the NT Canon. Cyril declares that no other books are to be read, not even privately. His canon consists of all the books we have in our NT Canon today, however he excludes the book of Revelation.

- 363 CE: The Synod of Laodicea is held in Asia Minor to decide the official contents of the Bible. The result was the following announcement: "Let no private Psalms nor any uncanonical books be read in the church, but only canonical ones of the New and Old Testament". Once again they use the same list as the Cyril produced and exclude the book of Revelation. We have no indication as to how they came to this conclusion but it has been suggested that they simply relied on Syril's previous Canon.

- 367 CE: Athanasius, the Bishop of Alexandria, had previously published a book called the Festal Epistle. This book contained the dates for all Christian festivals and it was considered the authoritative statement on these events by the Catholic church. Like Eusebius, Athanasius was fiercely anti-Arian and a conservative. In 367 CE he extended the scope of this epistle and included his Canon into it as well. This was considered an authoritative statement by both the Syrian and Western churches. His Canon included Revelation and looked exactly like our modern Canon today. However, even at this stage, there was still some dispute in regards to the Canon for example, Gregory of Nazianzus continued to protest the inclusion of Revelation, Jude, 2 Peter, 2 John and 3 John.

- 692 CE: There was continued debate amongst the various bishops in regards to the NT canon. Finally in 692 the Trullan Synod was convened under Emperor Justinian. The synod declared that they considered both the Synod of Laodicea and Athanasius' Canons to be authoritative, even though these contradicted each other in regards to the book of Revelation. They also included 2 letters they attributed to Clement as well as 8 other books "which it is not appropriate to make public before all, because of the mysteries contained in them." These are now lost to us but one can only speculate what they may have contained. This contradictory decision gave rise to much confusion and there were at least 6 different Canons used by churches in the East even as late as the 10th century. The Syrian churches still exclude Revelation from their Bibles to this day.

- 7th - 16th century CE: Various Canons began to circulate in both the Eastern and Western churches. The Eastern Bibles still differ today from Western Canons.

- 1546 CE: The Council of Trent finally recognizes the Canon, and this is still the article of faith used today. During the course of the next century Protestant churches also agree on the same 27 books in the NT Canon.

The road which led to the formation of the New Testament was thus not simple and certainly not inspired in any shape or form. We had extreme disagreements not just amongst the early church fathers but also between the Eastern and Western churches. The criteria used to decide which books were included and excluded were ever changing and often church councils would contradict each other. Some of the earliest disputed texts such as Revelation and 2 Peter were included, whilst some of the texts which were recognised by the 2nd century churches such as Hermas were finally excluded. Political, geographical, religious and cultural aspects all influenced the process. It reflects how we seek out truth, deny truth, have prejudices, agree and disagree, love and hate. It is the product of 1600 years worth of humanity.

Sources:
Offline:
B. Metzger -The Canon of the New Testament: Its Origin, Development, and Significance
B. Ehrman - Lost Scriptures - Books that did not make it into the New Testament

Online:
www.infidels.org
www.ntcanon.org
en.wikipedia.org
www.westarinstitute.org

Admin Fri 28 Jan 2011, 3:14 pm

Hi Joey,
Thank you for your reply to the thread The Bible God's Word or Man's Word.
In reply to your thoughts, bringing some notes of mine.
The translation of the King James version began in 1604 by 47 scholars and completed in 1611 The Old Testament was translated from Hebrew and from my understanding the New Testament from Greek. Thirteen epistles (New Testament) have been attributed to Paul. Hebrews was also at one stage attributed to him and maybe letters which had been dictated by him have not been counted.
There have been many findings such as the dead sea scrolls, El amarna Tablets about 400 tablets found dating about 1400 centuries BC They refer to the Hebrews, they give evidence of the trustworthiness of the book of Judges. They mention a lot about Canaan. There is much more that could be brought here but I feel sufficient.

Prophecy is one of the stronger proofs pointing to the fact that the Bible is from God. Begining at Genesis and throughout the Bible.
You question the translations.
The Apostle Paul (Saul) did more than question he was a zelous Jew who persecuted the early Christians and at the stoning of Stephen then on his way to Damascus to murder more, he had an encounter with Jesus which changed his life:-
Acts9: 3 And as he journeyed, he came near Damascus: and suddenly there shined round about him a light from heaven: 4 And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? 5 And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: ....
Paul says it was REVEALED to him from God concerning the mystery
of Christ. It was not by his own knowledge or ability that he wrote
these things.

For years I called myself Christian, I did not have the experience of being Born-again of the spirit of God, I believed in what I had heard of Jesus.
I also had a life changing experience 30 years ago.

God does speak to us through his Word the Bible, and maybe there is a word omitted or added, but I truly believe, God has used man to write what they have been inspired by God. Just as God came in the flesh, the Son, Yeshua, Jesus the Christ, but even then and now many do not believe in Him for forgiveness of our sins and promise of eternal life with Him.
1 Timothy 2:16 By common confession, great is the mystery of godliness: He who was revealed in the flesh, Was vindicated in the Spirit, Seen by angels, Proclaimed among the nations, Believed on in the world, Taken up in glory.

I speak from personal experience.
When Jesus left earth He sent the promise of His Holy spirit. I would respectfully ask you read John 16 which speak of the Helper the Holy spirit.
John 16:13 "But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come.
God reveals to us what is truth as we prayerfully seek Him as we read, it is a matter of intimacy with God. Many may say they have read the bible from cover to cover, but it is not knowing what is written by head knowledge but what is revealed by the Holy spirit as a Bornagain believer from a heart-changed by His Holy spirit.
Please ask if there is anything we may be able to help with. I don't know all the answers but will bring what I know of.
Blessings Elaine.

Joey Thu 27 Jan 2011, 11:33 pm

Is the Bible inspired by God?
If you were to take a hypothetical position and say that God exists and inspired the original copies of the Bible, then that would not mean that the Bible is inspired as we have no idea what the original copies looked like.

The copies we have today have been copied from other copies, which had been copied from other older copies. Mistakes, small changes and additional text found it's way into the books of the Bible as time went by. As such, if God existed and if he inspired the Bible, then that version which he inspired is lost to us today.

You could turn this around and ask if a supernatural being as powerful and intelligent as the Biblical god is described to be, would in fact use both Hebrew and Greek, papyrus and manual methods of copying to convey the most important message in the world to his creation. Even delivering message via DHL is more reliable than the transmission of Biblical texts and you can determine the value a message has to it's sender by the format and process in which he sends it. The value of the message found on a post card or a post-it note will by it's very nature be different from the value of a message delivered by registered mail or in person.

If a god existed and he wanted to transmit a life saving message to his believers, then he certainly would not have used the process used in the creation of the Bible.

Admin Fri 03 Sep 2010, 10:34 am

THE BIBLE *
*GOD'S WORD OR MAN'S WORD *
*Part 3 of 3*
*By Jack Trumm*
*
Because of Israel's unbelief, God has revealed a new program to Paul,
the apostle of the Gentiles (or nations). "For this cause I Paul, the
prisoner of Jesus Christ for you Gentiles, if you have heard of the
dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward. How that
BY REVELATION he made known unto me the mystery, (as I wrote afore in
few words, whereby, when you read, you may understand my knowledge in
the mystery of Christ) which in other ages was not made known unto the
sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets
by the Spirit, that the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same
body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel. Whereof I
was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of God given
unto me by the effectual working of his power. Unto me, who as less than
the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among
the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ, and to make all men see
what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the
world hath been hid in God who created all things by Jesus Christ".
(Ephesians 3: 1-9)
Notice Paul says it was REVEALED to him from God concerning the mystery
of Christ. It was not by his own knowledge or ability that he wrote
these things.
This brings up the question, What was revealed to Paul? "That the
Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of
his promise in Christ BY THE GOSPEL" (Verse 6). What gospel? The gospel
which was not made known in ages past, "which in other ages was not made
known unto the sons of men" (verse 5). What was the message of this
gospel? "Moreover, brethren I declare unto you the gospel which I
preached unto you, which also you have received, and wherein you stand,
by which also you are saved, if you keep in memory what I preached unto
you, unless you have believed in vain. For I delivered unto you first of
all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins
according to the scriptures, and that he was buried, and that he rose
again the third day according to the scriptures" (1 Corinthians 15: 1-4).
What is so beautiful about this revealed message is that we can be saved
by just believing it. "By which also ye are saved" (verse 2).
Paul speaks of himself in this way, "And I brethren, when I came to you,
came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring unto you the
testimony of God. For I determined not to know any thing among you, save
Jesus Christ, and him crucified (or what He accomplished in the cross).
And I was with you in weakness, and in fear, and in much trembling. And
my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man's wisdom,
but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power; that your faith should
not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God." (I Corinthians
2: 1-5) We are also told, "But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor
ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which
God hath prepared for them that love him. BUT GOD HATH REVEALED THEM
UNTO US BY HIS SPIRIT, for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea the deep
things of God. For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit
which is in him? Even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the
Spirit of God. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but
the Spirit which is of God, that WE MIGHT KNOW THE THINGS THAT ARE
FREELY GIVEN TO US OF GOD. Which things also we speak, not in the words
which man s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth,
comparing spiritual things with spiritual. " (I Corinthians 2:9-13)
So I would conclude by asking again, is the Bible man's word or is it
God's Word? Yes, the Bible was penned by man, but it was not man's word,
it is GOD'S WORD. "So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the
WORD OF GOD." (Romans 1 0: 17)

Eph 3:9 And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, *
*which from the beginning of the world *
*hath been hid in God,*
*who created all things by Jesus Christ*
*Truth can't be judged on the basis of popularity. *

Admin Fri 03 Sep 2010, 10:17 am

THE BIBLE *
*GOD'S WORD OR MAN'S WORD *
*Part 2 of 3*
*By Jack Trumm*

*
Luke tells us (concerning Israel, God's covenant people) what God's plan
was for them: "But those things, which God before had showed by the
mouth of all his prophets, that Christ should suffer, he hath so
fulfilled. Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your (Israel's)
sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from
the presence of the Lord, and he shall send Jesus Christ, which was
before preached unto you, whom the heaven must receive until the times
of restitution of all things, WHICH GOD HATH SPOKEN BY THE MOUTH OF ALL
HIS HOLY PROPHETS SINCE THE WORLD BEGAN. For Moses truly said unto the
fathers, a prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your
brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he
shall say unto you. And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which
will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people
(Israel). Yea, AND ALL THE PROPHETS FROM SAMUEL AND THOSE THAT FOLLOW
AFTER, AS MANY AS HAVE SPOKEN, have likewise foretold of these days. Ye
are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made
with our fathers, saying unto Abra-ham, And in thy seed shall all the
kindreds of the earth be blessed. Unto you (Israel) first God, having
raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every
one of you from his iniquities." (Acts 3:18-26)

What these verses tell us is that God inspired (or told man by
revelation) to write down things concerning Israel and concerning our
Lord Jesus Christ's coming to cleanse them and then reign over them,
making Israel the instrument of blessing to the rest of the nations.
This process of revelation began at the beginning of the world "since
the world began" (verse 21). What was prophesied concerning Israel?
Verses 19 and 20 tell us that if Israel as a nation would have been
obedient to God by repenting of the murder of Jesus Christ, God would
have at that time forgiven the nation and sent His son back to them.
Jesus Christ would have immediately returned to reign over them as their
King. God would have used the nation Israel as a blessing to all other
nations of the earth. " ... and in thy seed shall all the nations of the
earth be blessed" (verse 25) "unto you first ... " (verse 26).

This does not sound like something that man could come up with by his
own knowledge, and even if he could, how would he carry it out?

We also know that Israel as a nation failed to adhere to the word of God.

So what God has done is to set that program with Israel aside for the
time being. Since they (as a nation) would not believe the claims of
Jesus Christ, nor the witness of God the Father, nor the witness of the
Holy Spirit in His coming at Pentecost, they have been temporarily
broken off and set aside in unbelief.
" ... because of unbelief they were broken off'. (Romans 11:20)

Eph 3:9 And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, *
*which from the beginning of the world *
*hath been hid in God,*
*who created all things by Jesus Christ*

*Truth can't be judged on the basis of popularity.

Admin Wed 01 Sep 2010, 11:49 am

THE BIBLE *

*GOD'S WORD OR MAN'S WORD *
*By Jack Trumm*

*Part 1 of 3*
When reading the Bible, can we be sure that it is accurate? Can we read
it with the assurance that it is the truth? Or is there error in it? So,
therefore, do we need to interpret some things written in the Bible,
simply because there are those that would say the Bible was written by
man, therefore there could be error in the Bible?

What is amazing is that people will subscribe to a daily newspaper and
read it from one end to the other, and believe every word it says, and
not question it, yet it was written by man. People will subscribe to a
monthly magazine and read it cover to cover and believe what it says.
Yet, it was written by man.

There are those who will go to a library and get a book that is based on
a true story, not question it, yet it was written by man. If one
purchases a product that needs to be assembled, he is informed to read
the instructions thoroughly before beginning to assemble it. Yet the
instructions were written by man.

But, when it comes to the Bible (God's Word) some will say, it was
written by man therefore there could be error in it and therefore we
need to interpret or come to the conclusion that some of it might not
even be true. So then, was the Bible written by man? Yes, it was written
by man, but not by man's own knowledge or his own ability. Rather, it
was written by men through inspiration from God. As Paul the apostle to
the Gentiles tells us, "all scripture (the Bible, or God's Word) is
given by Inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for
reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness. " (II Timothy
3: 16)

The word inspiration is taken from the Greek word (theopneustos) which
translated means "divinely breathed in". What God has done was to
breathe into the hearts and minds of those men that He had chosen to
write down those things concerning Himself that He would have us to
know, and that word would be the Bible or God's Word, not man's word.
Look also at the first two words of this verse, "all scripture" and
especially the word "ALL". Notice it does not say "some scripture" but
rather ALL SCRIPTURE. This means that every word in the Bible was given
by inspiration of God.

Sponsored content

THE BIBLE GOD'S WORD OR MAN'S WORD