This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »
In Christianity who wrote the Bible?
Recently i attended an inter-religious dialogue, and a pastor was asked about previous books where he confidently stated to which apostle of God it was sent to like, Moses, David, and Jesus. he was further asked, "if the bible is the book of God to whom was it send to?" meaning which apostle. He said it was sent to all and when further asked who wrote it down, he said i don't know, so i thought i could get a convenient answer from TED members. so I ask again who wrote the bible?
James Zediana
First prophits would die if their prophcies proved wrong in any way (false prophet). The prophets of the bible spoke of several things that happened soon after they said it and things that happened 500-900 years later in Christ and some that have not happened yet. Their prophices being by chance would be like predicting the lottery every day of your life correctly.
Second we look at the apostles. They were uneducated fishermen. They lacked understanding as seen throughout the gospels. Yet when the Holy Spirit (Acts) came upon them they spoke in tounges and performed miracles and thousands agreed with them about Christ even though they knew they would be arrested, beaten or killed.
Third we look at the fact that historicly outside the bible there is truth of the things spoken of happening and the places still exsist.
Fourth as for the text itself it was a holy duty to copy exactly by the Jewish nation. Torah was destroied and burnt if a blemish was found. Latter text proved acurate with discovery of the dead sea scrolls being an almost exact copy.
As for which writtings we run into the church deciding which were inspired and acurate as mentioned in several replies above. Some lost gospels and other writtings did not make the cut. Don't be fooled by people saying these are real. Even the early church could recognize these were not true. There were many who wanted the early church to fail and it is written in several books of the bible that this was so.
2 Timothy 3:16 New American Standard Bible (NASB) All Scripture is [a]inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for [b]training in righteousness;
Read Mathew 13 the parable of the sower for more understanding
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%2013&version=NASB
Obey No1kinobe 50+
How hard would it be having the OT and writing things down to make it sound like Jesus was the Messiah. Even so many Jews an point out where the early Christians got it wrong, even with the benefit of hindsight.
If something is a known prophecy and humans work to make it happen, this is not evidence of supernatural.
2) Believing in something and acting on these beliefs knowing there may be harmful consequences is not proof of supernatural claims. E.g. Suicide bomber and 911 terrorists. The Jonestown people who commited suicide. Ask the persecuted Falun Gung devotees in china. People believe and die for all sorts.
Do you have any proof of any of the miracles in the bible. Can you demonstrate any biblical miracles.
You know there are living followers of Indian gurus who claim they perform miracles similar to the new testament ones.
Any recent healings of amputated limbs or down syndrome? Just one arm grown back say of an Iraq vet?
Speaking in tongues is not a miracle. I still can and I'm an atheist now.
3) So the bible mention Jerusalum etc. Is it really a miracle that the authors documented actual places in their scriptures?
4) So quality control of the Old testament is proof that bible is inspired by god. I could say the same about the Qur'an.
"Almost" exact copy???? so not exact??
I find it odd that the supposed messiah had nothing written about him while alive. Surely Yahweh could have done better. And why not create a book made of indestructable material with the verse and commentary. Why just paper and pen. How mundane. Why not a miraculous speaking crystal that speaks the scriptures and answers questions.
What you suggest is not proof unless you have faith without requiring compelling evidence. Unless you want to believe.
Robert Winner 50+
Be aware also that the "bible" has been translated from various languages and meanings have been changed or lost.
Additionally each church and each minister adds their slant.
Answer: Do your own research. Religion is personal and this question is personal and serious.
In my opinion
I wish you well. Bob.
Abdirizack Abdirahman Bare
I will do more research and will surely share any surprises i may tumble upon.
wish you well too Bob
Feyisayo Anjorin 50+
It was compiled after thorough examination of 2 categories of sacred writings: 1. Books accepted by some believers, but not others.
2. Writings once accepted but later questioned
The basic criteria for determining whether writings should be part of the Bible are:
1. Authouritative: Does it claim to be of God? Is it authoritative?
2. Prophetic: Is it prophetic? Was it written by a servant of God?
3. Authentic: Is it authentic? does it tell the truth about God, man, etc.?
4. Dynamic: Is the book dynamic? does it possess life-transforming power?
5. Accepted: Was it recieved by the people for who it was originally written? Is it recognised as being from God?
This five basic criteria would have to be explained in detail.
The writers of the Bible were inspired by the Holy Spirit; and the scripture shows its truth by the power of God that goes forth to confirm His word.
As Mr Edward Long has brilliantly stated it, this is an issue of faith. Certain truths about christainity may be known by those who are not christains; but there are certain truths and experiences that will not be known by someone who has come in contact with the life-transforming power of God. To those people, the Bible would be foolishness and that is understandable.
Theodore A. Hoppe 200+
The Bible is made up of what is commonly referred as the Old and New Testaments.
"The Old Testament is a Christian term for a collection of religious writings of ancient Israel." The number of books can vary depending on the version of the Bible we are referring to.
Your question however seems to be asking about the origin of the New Testament.
"The New Testament is an anthology, a collection of Christian works written in the common Greek language of the first century, at different times by various writers, and canonically named for the early Jewish disciples of Jesus of Nazareth. In almost all Christian traditions today, the New Testament consists of 27 books. The original texts were written in the first and second centuries of the Christian Era, most likely in Koine Greek, which was the common language of the Eastern Mediterranean from the Conquests of Alexander the Great (335–323 BC) till the evolution of Byzantine Greek (c. 600). All of the works which would eventually be incorporated into the New Testament would seem to have been written no later than around AD 150."
There is actually a very fine outline of the early manuscripts, Codex as they were called, at Wikipedia.
see Development of New Testament canon: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Testaments
Additionally, I will recommend that you consult two excellent books on the subject, though there are many others.
"The Unauthorized Version," by noted Oxford scholar Robin Fox Lane
"The Gnostic Gospel" by the renown expert on the Nag Hammadi texts, Elaine Pagels
It is also worth noting that the Bible has been translated many times. What was originally written has not doubt been altered to reflect the teachings of the more orthodox of the early Christians where there was areas of disagreement.
jack bdaniels
Ed Schulte 50+
You are going to receive all kinds of answers hear and none are going to be able to reply with any Truth because they where not around. Some are going to beat the "Faith" drum and the talk like they Know the origin. Very few of those around the source of the NT could write therfore all was passed on orally till 60 -100 year after. And then all Hell ( pardon the pun) broke loose!!!
If you are further interested you could source the Essense ...their activities will atleast give some idea of what the NT is based on .......and from where the source of 256 evolving "Bibles" came from. And from just one of those 256 ONE was chosen ..traslated back and forth from Americ to Greek before it became conveniently called "offical"
Theodore A. Hoppe 200+
Its certain that there are historical scholars that have done extensive, I dare say exhaustive, research on this question. One example of this is that we find reference about Jesus in the writings of early historian Josephus. This is also an example of just how much scholars can and cannot agree on, but clearly there is some TRUTH to be found here.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus
Ed Schulte 50+
" but clearly there is some TRUTH to be found here."
I trust I wasn't one that sounded as though there was "no truth" because there clearly is. But the characteristic of growing Consciousness on the "earthly" level is that it has to go through a process ...one such as Schopenhauer's 1) Ridicule 2) Violence and finally 3) self evident.
The bast__edizing done of an attained ones simplicity.. by the "authorities" ..is 1) and 2) in multiple forms from religious wars to revenge to taunting by Book burning and Cartooning. That is obvious proof that truth lies behind......because it is what Ego fears will disclose Ego and will dis-energize it.
Mark Kurtz 20+
What seems much more important is recognition of truth in one's inner self upon thinking and reflecting on what one hears or reads. What is meaningful to a person may very well be according to one's enlightenment from many different life experiences. What is meaningful is what persons hold dear in their heart and it is this that drives one's behavior.
Let's add a challenge question for everyone here on TED. Would you be able to recognize what is truth (according to your enlightenment) if all references to author identity were removed from all material---books, magazine articles, thesis for university degrees, opinion editorials, letters,------anything included printed and electronic versions, including any religious authority books?
What is important is planetary progress in comprehending life, the Cosmos, law, behavioral ideals, so that we all live better, which would include freedom from all threats.
So called human religious authorities will never replace the original plan for planetary progress.
A lot more could be said here to address this conversation question.
Gail . 50+
Did you know that before the KJV, the "son of the father" (as Jesus was called) was released unharmed. King James changed the term "son of the father" to a name that was unheard of until the 2nd century AD. (The actual term is bar abba or beloved son of a loving "Daddy" who gives his son anything the son asks for. In short, it could properly be translated as Son of the Sugar Daddy - which is basically how Jesus described his abba in heaven.)
Did you know that Jesus said that heaven is within you now? You shouldn't believe anyone who says otherwise. (such as it's up there somewhere or where you go when you die)
Did you know that Jesus never used the word sin? In the koine-greek (the original texts were written in koine greek) the term used was Hamartia (Ancient Greek: ἁμαρτία). It is an injury committed in ignorance (when the person affected or the results are not what the agent supposed they were)
Did you know that Jesus never said "repent". He used two words instead: Metanoeo and Metamellamai. These mean respectively - change your way of thinking and change your way of emoting.
Did you know that when Jesus spoke of hell, he spoke of Gehenna - the garbage dump outside of Jerusalem's city gates, where those with wretched lives eeked out an existence.
Thus, if you live a wretched life, change your way of thinking and emoting so that you no longer commit hamartia. You do this by finding the heaven within you and letting it guide you - not by being sheeple who follow wolves in sheep's clothing.
Random Chance 30+
Write, but also edit. Some things were changed because they weren't as lyrical as the editor thought they should be, or because the editor thought something else was meant, or because the editor wanted to change it to what they thought it should be.
Or, their writing embellished what was already on papyrus, as humans are wont to do.
I'm just relieved to know that incest is all right, as Eve and her boys had lots of kids, and Adam and his girls did too, and so too did Cain and Abel with their children. Apparently for decades.
Because we all come from Adam and Eve, according to the bible.
Believe it? Not on your life.
It is filled with too many contradictions, false information, misleading ideas, downright evil actions and simply isn't clear for something supposedly meant to be clear in order to guide the human race.
And it isn't a "source material" book in my opinion.
Abdirizack Abdirahman Bare
John Smith 30+
Abdirizack Abdirahman Bare
the Row in the Shiites and Sunni accounts doesn't have anything to do with the infiltration or alteration of the Hadiths of prophet Mohamed (p.b.u.h) and on that please read more on that via this link and thanks http://islam.about.com/cs/divisions/f/shia_sunni.htm
edward long 100+
Theodore A. Hoppe 200+
What is your resource for this comment, according to whom?
There are many other Codex from the period that were not included into the Bible such as the Gospel of Mary or the Gospel of Thomas. Can you tell us why they were not included?
edward long 100+
Theodore A. Hoppe 200+
The Bible is after all a book that has been shaped by men to portrait a certain perceptive of the events. There are many historically inaccurate details in the translations of the gospels. The codex of Nag Hammadi, (which I think you mention as "the Canon" in dispute by scholars) is no more inaccurate than other books in the Bible. There is no absolute "God's word" in any of this. It is all recollections of oral history that was written down by men years after the fact, and shaped into a narrative that lead to a certain understanding. Text like those found at Nag Hammadi represent ideas that differ about the details of the events thatdid take place. Those with the power to shape Christianity deemed those writings to be heresy, and the texts were burned and destroyed.
This is not to say that the lessons found in the Bible are not valuable lessons on which one can base their life around, but the lessons Jesus taught right not the lessons that religious dogma would have as believe. The lessons donot stop with the Bible they start there. You need to read more.
edward long 100+
Theodore A. Hoppe 200+
You stated, " The best (most faithful to the earliest manuscripts) English translation is the King James Version (KJV), also called The Authorized Version (AV)."
The best, really? How would you know this? This is what was being called into question.
You didn't write, 'In my opinion it is the best.' I would have no problem with this statement. But you are making a declaration here, 'It IS the best!' And that needs to be qualified in some manner.
We would do well to remember that the reason the Bible survived as the accepted truth some proclaim it to be is because for over a century those who questioned it faced a tortuous death at the hands of the so called righteous, much like Tyndale.
edward long 100+
Theodore A. Hoppe 200+
John Dunbar 10+
So God chooses you? Based on what criteria?
edward long 100+
John Dunbar 10+
-Brian
edward long 100+
Obey No1kinobe 50+
Abdirizack Abdirahman Bare
Obey No1kinobe 50+
The bible based religions just happen to be one of the popular ones.
Their is no evidence to support the supernatural claims. No reason to think the moral rules are enlightened or divinely inspired. Unless you think we should kill adulters, homosexuals, keep slaves, disrespectful children, and worship a god that is stated to support and committed genocide, and eternally punishes those who do not follow his vague contradictory book.
The bible says a donkey talked. You might find some insights into the good and bad aspects of human nature but there is so much myth and iron age morality and unsubstantiated claims.
I've read the bible cover to cover, and many parts many times. I'm not sure if it makes any difference if one person or many wrote it, because there is no evidence to support the core claims.
Abdirizack Abdirahman Bare
watch this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jIOUo0u8eaw
Obey No1kinobe 50+
Obviously writing sometime over decades by one or just a few people should come us with something more consistent than the schizophrenic bible, where the old testament god and creation myths and tribal histories do not fit well with the stories about Jesus and Christian doctrines that developed and were written in the decades after his death.
I used to have a Qur'an and have read a quite a bit. It looks entirely man made and a product of it's time. Quite poetic at times, even in English, like the Psalms in the bible. At times it may have been advanced compared to the alternatives at the time, but still endorses slavery and sexism.
It does not answer many questions. It certainly does not offer proof for claims.
I note Muslims pick and choose in regards to borrowing the god of the Jews.
I have heard the arguments for the Qur'an being divine and there is nothing compelling in these, at least for me.
I also not that there are some pagan parts that are at odds with monotheism.
The Qur'an is an important book, but still a book.
If there is just one interventionist god I expect it would not need 3 contradictory tries at getting the message straight. And instead of relying on paper and pen and human scribes should have just created a tome made from indestructible and exotic materials, and provide a commentary to the scriptures. Or how about a magic talking rock that repeats the verses and another that answers questions.
Paper and ink. How mundane. How very human.
And you still propose a specific invisible intangible god that created the universe and has given specific instruction with no proof, with no way to demonstrate any of the key claims are correct.
John Smith 30+
Abdirizack Abdirahman Bare
John Smith 30+