Featured Is the Codex Sinaiticus FAKE?

". . . That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. . . ."

 

Textual critic Wilbur N. Pickering translation note, "I take it that Paul is claiming to be Christ’s apostle to them, so he is writing with specific apostolic authority. Less than 1% of the Greek manuscripts, of objectively inferior quality, omit ‘at Ephesus’ [such is the basis for the nasty footnotes in NIV, NASB, LB, etc.]."

 

The underlying issue is on what corroborating evidence is one accepting a said document or report. On what basis are we accepting the witness or witnesses we see, read or hear?

 

Constantine Simonides - Wikipedia

 

From the very beginning of the Church age, the Christians held to the Jewish canon already recognized at time of Christ as being inspired books, and started to circulate around the NT books by end of first century, so early on had already agreed that majority of what would be the "official" NT canon was agreed upon, only disputed books were James, due to some see Him and paul disagreeing, revelation and Hebrews and 2 peter, as not sure who author was!

 

A big test was if there was a recognized Apostle as author, or if the author was associated with an Apostle, such as mark with peter, and Luke with paul!

 

As of since the book of Revelation I am of the view those 27 books where and so are settled.

 

The canon of the inspired 66 books were settles way before any official church council "a[proved" of them. as Rome did NOT give to us the Bible!

 

The early Christians pretty much agreed on which writings were inspired. By the 3rd/4th century, there were many non-inspired writings going around that folks like Athanasia firmly stated (my wording, of course), "These 66 and no others,", merely expounding what was generally believed. Since then, though there's been some sniping at Esther, James, Hebrews and others, the canon has well settled.