The New Testament...Is it inspired Scripture ?

[Johnv]

Originally posted by pinoybaptist:
Is the New Testament part of inspired Scripture ? Paul says:

All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
(2 Tim 3:16)

Did Paul consider his letters to the churches to be part of Holy Writ already ? Did he not base his teachings, instructions, edifying, and doctrines on what was considered inspired writing which in his time was only the Old Testament ?

Paul was referring to the OT only. The NT writings had not yet been completed, and many of them had not even been penned yet. Those that had been penned had not been widely circulated.

However, it is right and proper to consider the NT divinely inspired in the same light as the OT.

 

[pinoybaptist]

Originally posted by MikeinGhana:
Pinoy, you did not relly answer my questions at all. If the NT is not inspired how do you know Peter and Paul,were even speaking the truth.

How do you know that the work of Christ on the cross is effectual to save you but for the MT information, which is God breathed.

I am assuming you believed on the Lord Jesus Christ and was saved, why did you do that? Maybe that portion of scripture was Paul's own idea and not God's. You believe because God said it!

I totally disagree with you about not having an authoritative plan for salvation, that was God's idea, not mine. He said, You must be born again. He said, whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved, He said all that the Father giveth me shall come to me, He said all these things, or did He? If your answer is yes, then the NT must be inspired, God breathed, and without error. If it is not maybe you have believed man's wisdom!

You asking proof that the NT is inspired as Peter and Paul say the OT was inspired. Do you see the irony of that statement? If the NT was not inspired who cares what Peter and Paul says. It is just their words and not God's.

The more you talk the more you make our arguments for us.

I answered your questions, MikeinGhana. You're the one who hasn't given me any Scripture at all to prove that the Epistles of Paul and Peter were dictated to them by the Holy Spirit.

Grrrrrrr!!!!!
There. Now let me take a few deep breaths, and this anger will be gone.

One thing I saw in this thread is that you folks are quick to jump in and call anyone who does not believe as you do to be heretical, or probably with some spiritual problem as Texas Sky infers, or somebody who is stupidly trapping himself in his own words, as you said.

Sad.

And all one had to do was go to a search engine, and sift through all those information, till one finds an honest and plausible exlanation.

Before I go on, I would like to state that (1) I never said I do not believe the Bible, (2) I never said I do not accept the 27 Books of the New Testament to be a part of the Bible, and that (3) I am looking for Scripture to support the teaching that all 66 books are God-breathed.

Now, I don't think even the Apostle Paul will be able to give us Scripture to that effect, but we still have to justify when we teach that only 66 books, or acceptable as inspired, and the only honest explanation I've found, so far, is that of Woodrow Kroll, quoted in part here:

The New Testament was written over a much shorter period, covering generally the years between A.D. 50 and A.D. 100. Many think that the Book of James was written first, at about A.D. 49. It was followed by the books to the Thessalonians and Paul's earlier epistles. Then the Gospels were written and finally the epistles of John and the Revelation of Jesus Christ.

Most of the books in the New Testament bear the names of their human authors (James, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Peter and Jude). But the Pauline epistles bear the name of the city or the person to whom Paul wrote.

There were many more books written during the Old and New Testament time periods than were included in the Scriptures. Have you ever heard of First and Second Maccabees, or Tobit or Baruch? How about the Acts of Peter or the Acts of Paul? You know about Esther, but do you know about Judith? You've heard of the Book of Ezra, but have you heard about the

How did some [books of the Bible] make it into the Bible while others did not?
First and Second Books of Esdras? You know about Ecclesiastes, but do you know about Ecclesiasticus? You've read the story of Jesus answering the scholars' questions in the temple at the age of 12, but have you read the story of Jesus making little birds out of mud, bringing them to life and watching them fly away?

These books, and many more, have been judged unworthy of being included in the Bible. Occasionally you'll hear someone advertise the "Lost Books of the Bible." Don't waste your money on them. None of the books of the Bible are lost.

How did some make it into the Bible while others did not?

What selection process was used? What were the criteria? Who made the decisions? These are important questions.

Criteria were set down by which writings could be judged, to determine which were strictly authoritative and divine and hence should become the standards of faith and practice for the Church. The selected writings were called the canon, a word that means "a measuring rod or stick," like a ruler to judge something by.

Here are five of the criteria used in deciding what books should be included in the Bible:

Authorship. Who wrote the book or epistle? Was it an apostle, a well-known church member or an unknown person?

Local church acceptance. What opinion of the book or epistle was held by the first-century Church? Did they read it? Did they accept it as accurate? Did it square with their experience?

Recognition by church fathers. Did the fathers of the Church in the second century regard the book as authentic? (These were the disciples of the disciples. For example, Polycarp was a pupil of John the Apostle. The question would be asked: What did Polycarp think about this book?)
Subject matter. What was the book or epistle about? Was it doctrinally sound? Did it contradict other books? Were the stories in the book wild and fanciful?

Personal edification. Did the book have the potential to inspire, convict or edify the local congregation and individual believers?
One of these criteria alone was insufficient to make the book acceptable; books were judged by a combination of criteria.

It was not necessarily the age of the book that determined its authenticity. Many old books are mentioned in the Bible. For example, Numbers 21:14 mentions the Book of the Wars of the Lord. Joshua 10:13 mentions the Book of Jashar. Neither of these was judged worthy of being included in the Bible.

So, there you are. No Scriptures. Man decided which books were to be excluded and included based on their research and wisdom.

The above article was written by
WOODROW KROLL, THIS LINK

 

[Michaelt]

Originally posted by pinoybaptist:

So, there you are. No Scriptures. Man decided which books were to be excluded and included based on their research and wisdom.

The above article was written by
WOODROW KROLL

And is Mr. Woodrow Kroll the overall authority on this subject? I would suggest possibly not because I have read differing opinions on a few other sites that I scan through from time to time.

 

[Michaelt]

Originally posted by pinoybaptist:
Is the New Testament part of inspired Scripture If yes, where is the Scriptural proof ?
If no, then who taught us that the entire Bible is the inspired Word ?
Your thoughts, please.

Question: "Is there proof for the inspiration of the Bible?"

Answer: Here are some evidences that the Bible is from God:
1) Fulfilled prophecy. God spoke to men telling them of things that He would bring about in the future. Some of them have already occurred. Others have not. For example, there were more than 300 prophecies concerning Jesus Christ's first coming 2,000 years ago. There is no doubt that these are prophecies from God because of manuscripts and scrolls dated before the birth of Christ. These were not written after the fact. They were written beforehand. Scientific dating proves this.

2) The unity of Scripture. The Bible was written by approximately 40 human authors over a period of approximately 1,600 years. These men were quite diverse. Moses, a political leader; Joshua, a military leader; David, a shepherd; Solomon, a king; Amos, a herdsman and fruit pincher; Daniel, a prime minister; Matthew, a tax collector; Luke, a medical doctor; Paul, a rabbi; and Peter, a fisherman. The Bible was also written under a variety of circumstances. It was written on 3 different continents, Europe, Asia, and Africa. Yet, the great themes of Scripture are maintained in all the writings. The Bible does not contradict itself. There is no way apart from God the Holy Spirit supervising the writing of the Bible that this could have been accomplished.

Contrast this with the Islamic Koran. It was compiled by one individual, Zaid bin Thabit, under the guidance of Mohammed's father-in-law, Abu-Bekr. Then in A.D. 650, a group of Arab scholars produced a unified version and destroyed all variant copies to preserve the unity of the Koran. The Bible was unified from the time of its writing. The Koran had to be unified through the editing of men.

3) The Bible presents its heroes truthfully with all of their faults and weaknesses. It does not glorify men as other religions do about their heroes. When you read the Bible, you realize that the people it speaks of have problems and do wrong just as we do. What made them great was that they trusted in God. One example is David. David is described as a man after God's own heart (1 Samuel 13:14). Yet, David committed adultery (2 Samuel 11:1-5) and murder (2 Samuel 11:14-26). This could have been left out of Scripture to hide these details of David's life. But, God included these things.

4) Archaeological findings support the history recorded in Scripture. Though many unbelieving people throughout history have tried to find archaeological evidence to disprove what is recorded in Scripture, they have failed. It is easy to say that Scripture is untrue. Proving it to be untrue is a different story. It has not been done.

The Bible’s claims of being from God should not be understood as arguing in a circle or by circular reasoning. The testimony of reliable witnesses - particularly of Jesus, but also of others such as Moses, Joshua, David, Daniel, and Nehemiah in the Old Testament, and John and Paul in the New Testament - affirmed the authority and verbal inspiration of the Holy Scriptures. Consider the following passages: Exodus 14:1; 20:1; Leviticus 4:1; Numbers 4:1; Deuteronomy 4:2; 32:48; Isaiah 1:10, 24; Jeremiah 1:11; Jeremiah 11:1–3; Ezekiel 1:3; 1 Corinthians 14:37; 1 Thessalonians 2:13; 2 Peter 1:16–21; 1 John 4:6.

You also might be interested in the writings of Josephus. He was an historian who recorded much of the history of Israel during the first century. In this he records some events which coincide with Scripture. Beware though - his writings are rather lengthy.

Considering the evidence given, I have no choice but to accept the Bible as being from God (2 Timothy 3:16). I pray this information helps you and adequately answers you question. Keep Studying the Word! 2 Timothy 2:15
-------------------------------------------------
http://www.gotquestions.org/proof-inspiration-Bible.html

 

[TexasSky]

If you do not believe that Peter, Paul, etc. were writing what was given to them by God, then you lie when you say that you believe the entire bible.

 

[pinoybaptist]

Originally posted by TexasSky:
If you do not believe that Peter, Paul, etc. were writing what was given to them by God, then you lie when you say that you believe the entire bible.

Texas Sky:

I have tried to be as amiable as I am to you despite your insinuations about my spiritual conditions.
Now, you've done and called me a liar, which would have caused me, if we were face to face, to pull off my gloves and slap you, and from then on we could go for our six-shooters.

I lie not when I say I believe the Bible, including what Paul, Peter, and company, wrote down BUT to say that what they taught were given to them by God, as in direct revelation like that to Isaiah and Ezekiel and Daniel and Jeremiah and Nahum and Micah and Moses and the rest of the Old Testament prophets is, in my opinion, putting words into Peter and Paul and company's mouth.

They built on knowledge they had of the Scriptures, knowledge which they through the Holy Spirit possessed. They drew from the Old Testament the doctrines which they taught, the Christian precepts and Christian conduct that they taught to the churches they led, and these teachings they based on the Old Testament prophets.

They gave substance in their teachings to shadows of the Old Testament.

So, I believe what they teach, and follow those teachings, and pass on those teachings, to the best of my ability in accordance with the power granted by the Holy Spirit.

 

[TexasSky]

Piony,

You CANNOT "believe" Paul and Peter and "not believe" that their writing is inspired by God.

Either they are honestly stating what God gave them or they are not.

And if hearing that upsets you - I'm sorry, but I won't back down to anyone on whether or not the New Testament is the inspired work of God, especially not to make someone else feel better about saying it isn't.

 

[Michaelt]

Originally posted by pinoybaptist:

I have tried to be as amiable as I am to you despite your insinuations about my spiritual conditions.
Now, you've done and called me a liar, which would have caused me, if we were face to face, to pull off my gloves and slap you, and from then on we could go for our six-shooters.

you would slap a woman, and then shoot her? wow....

 

[TexasSky]

Not to mention ignoring 1 Timothy 1:11

According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust. 12 And I thank Christ Jesus our Lord, who hath enabled me, for that he counted me faithful, putting me into the ministry;

There is the statement you claim does not exist.

 

[TexasSky]

And here it is again in 11 Timothy 1

11 Whereunto I am appointed a preacher, and an apostle, and a teacher of the Gentiles. 12 For the which cause I also suffer these things: nevertheless I am not ashamed: for I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day

 

[James_Newman]

1 Corinthians 14:37
37 If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.

 

[TexasSky]

And here is John's testimony regarding it:

1 John 1:5
This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.

Revelation 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John: 2 Who bare record of the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw. 3 Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.

 

[pinoybaptist]

Originally posted by TexasSky:
Piony,

You CANNOT "believe" Paul and Peter and "not believe" that their writing is inspired by God.

Either they are honestly stating what God gave them or they are not.

And if hearing that upsets you - I'm sorry, but I won't back down to anyone on whether or not the New Testament is the inspired work of God, especially not to make someone else feel better about saying it isn't.

Texas Ski:

1. Try to stay in perspective. I did not say I did not believe the Bible as we have it now. You are the one insisting I don't. Suit yourself.

2. I am asking for Scriptures that prove that God directly revealed to Paul, Peter and others of the New Testament what they are to write down either as prophecy or teaching. Exception: The Book of Revelation, and perhaps, the Gospels.

3. You and some learned and cultured contributors started insinuating about my spiritual condition.

4. I proved to you that there are NO SCRIPTURES to show that our claim that the entire New Testament books are God-breathed, and that MAN, not God, decided on which are to be considered God-breathed or divinely inspired, and which not.

5. This is not about anybody backing down. This is about substantiating what we believe on the inspiration of only 66 books, and not the other books contained in the Douay-Rheims version.

Now, I turn to the claim that we live and teach according to what the Bible teaches.

There is not one in this Board who will not say that their church is patterned after the New Testament pattern.

If so, where is the command to have meeting houses ? The New Testament churches were by and large house churches.
Do you meet in a house church, Texas Ski ?

Where is the New Testament command to hold Sunday Schools ?

Where is the New Testament example to use and play musical instruments in church, or to train and have church choirs, or that special numbers like soloes or duets are part of the New Testament pattern of worship ?

Yeah, you believe the entire Bible, alright.

 

[pinoybaptist]

Originally posted by James_Newman:
1 Corinthians 14:37
37 If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.

And Peter reinforced that in 2 Peter 3:15. Paul had what we would call today as Bible training, so he knew the commandments of the Lord, from the Old Testament, the books that Peter said were written by Spirit inspired writers.

Second, Paul has already established himself an apostle, that is to say, someone personally chosen and recruited by the Lord Jesus Christ, on the road to Damascus, and by virtue of his sufferings on behalf of the gospel.

 

[TexasSky]

Actually,

I do believe in the entire bible.

You have expressed doubts that the bible is the inspired word of God. If it is not, it is a work of fiction or a lie. In either case, if you do not believe God inspired it, you cannot really believe it. It is a simple equation. Either it is inspired of God, or it is blaspheme because it teaches things as if they are of God.

I never claimed that things like Sunday School are commanded by God. That has nothing to do with my belief in God's word.

The bible says to make a joyful noise before the Lord, to enter His presence with joy and thanksgiving. There is indication in the old testament that included some musical instrumentation. Therefore, if people want to sing, shout or play music to praise God, I support them 100%.

The bible has always encouraged people to study God's word. It has always encouraged fellowship. Whether you do that in a private home or in a church building is, to me, irrelevant, as long as you do both.

Is my church based on the New Testament example? Let's see. We gather together in Christian love and fellowship. We study and teach the gospel of Christ. We lift one another up in prayer. We praise and worship God. Sounds pretty biblical to me.

The debate about whether or not churces are following God's pattern is NOT the same as the debate over whether or not the New Testament is the inspired word of God.

So I'll ask you plainly. If you do NOT believe the New Testament is the inspired word of God - why do you believe any of it?

 

[TexasSky]

P.S. - You have proven absolutely nothing to me. The New Testament IS the inspired word of God.

Christ Himself told the disciples to go and preach the Gospel. Peter, Paul, and John all refer to their writing as teaching that same Gospel. Revelation literally states that God told John to record what he writes. Paul, Peter and John reference the events in Matthew,Mark and Like and CALL them the gospel.

You are talking in circles.

Either you believe the bible or you do not.
Either you believe the New Testament is the inspired word of God, or you don't.
If it is. It is a wonderful, beautiful message from God that has lasted through the centuries, it accurately records the events of Christ's life, it accurately teaches the followers of Christ how to live since He returned to His father's throne.
If it is not - It is a lie.
Its all that simple.

You can't have "gray" areas in that regards.
Either it IS inspired by God or it is not.

 

[Michaelt]

Originally posted by pinoybaptist:

4. I proved to you that there are NO SCRIPTURES to show that our claim that the entire New Testament books are God-breathed, and that MAN, not God, decided on which are to be considered God-breathed or divinely inspired, and which not.

Actually you didn't. You offered an editorial written by another man, whose opinion you obviously share. You were given after that another opinion by another man who differed a little from your mans opinion. So there was nothing definitive about your claim.

 

[TexasSky]

If the bible is NOT the inspired word of God - why do you claim Romans as your scripture?

 

[pinoybaptist]

Originally posted by TexasSky:
Actually,

I do believe in the entire bible.

You have expressed doubts that the bible is the inspired word of God. If it is not, it is a work of fiction or a lie. In either case, if you do not believe God inspired it, you cannot really believe it. It is a simple equation. Either it is inspired of God, or it is blaspheme because it teaches things as if they are of God.

I never claimed that things like Sunday School are commanded by God. That has nothing to do with my belief in God's word.

The bible says to make a joyful noise before the Lord, to enter His presence with joy and thanksgiving. There is indication in the old testament that included some musical instrumentation. Therefore, if people want to sing, shout or play music to praise God, I support them 100%.

The bible has always encouraged people to study God's word. It has always encouraged fellowship. Whether you do that in a private home or in a church building is, to me, irrelevant, as long as you do both.

Is my church based on the New Testament example? Let's see. We gather together in Christian love and fellowship. We study and teach the gospel of Christ. We lift one another up in prayer. We praise and worship God. Sounds pretty biblical to me.

You are very Christian, Texas Ski.
You have constantly misrepresented me. I did not say the entire Bible is NOT God-breathed.
I asked: The New Testament...Is it inspired Scripture ?

I expected Scriptural answers from supposedly spiritual people that without a doubt proves that the New Testament is God-breathed, God-inspired.

I played the cynic in order to elicit deeper and more spiritual responses. Bible-based. Undoubtedly showing by scripture that, yes, the Epistles of Paul are God-inspired, and so of Peter, and the others.

No, I get answers that infringe on the integrity of my spiritual condition. And you outright call me a liar. Such Christian love leaves me speechless !

I showed that by research I can only come up with somebody, Woodrow Kroll, who, by the way, is Arminian as Arminian can ever be, but whom I respect saying that man and not God chose which were to be regarded as God-breathed.

You claim that Sunday School has nothing to do with your belief in God's word, but you want me to blindly accept the teaching that all Scripture was given by inspiration of God includes the entire New Testament ?

Where in the New Testament does it change God's word in the Old Testament that the responsibility of bringing up children in the fear and admonition of the Lord belongs to the parents and not the Sunday School ?

Perhaps the Bereans were not saved, right ? They examined the Scriptures before accepting what was taught to them, by [b[ Paul,[/b] of all people, and perhaps Luke was wrong in referring to them as more noble than some ?

You tell me of musical instruments and of making a joyful noise, yet you quote from the Old Testament, but no doubt claim that your pattern of worship is that of the New Testament church.

As for the church building, I merely wanted to point out that the claim 'I believe the Bible 100%' is simply exagerrated. Nobody does that. Paul could not even obey Agabus' warning, when the indication was clearly from the Holy Spirit.
Believe includes assent, obedience, and submission.

And it proved my point. When it is convenient, we will change the pattern, even if Jesus Himself started it.

As for your church following New Testament example, why, even JW's say that, you know.

 

[TexasSky]

Piony,

WHAT does Sunday School have to do with ANY of this discussion? You did NOT post, "Show me the support for Sunday School," in your post. You posted a post asking if the New Testament was really inspired scripture and then you argued against it being so.

I gave you scriptures regarding the New Testament.

Now you are changing your statements.

No, my claim that I believe the bible is NOT exaggerated. Once again, I never said that church buildings or Sunday Schools are in there. Ergo, your arguement in that regards has absolutely NOTHING to do with whether or not the New Testament is the inspired word of God or not.

As to you playing the cynic - I think that was a horribly foolish thing to do. OBVIOUSLY several of us assumed that you SERIOUSLY are saying that the New Testament is NOT the inspired word of God. The truth is, given your endorsement of words against it, and your failure to post anythign supporting it, I still think you do not believe the New Testament.

You were given numerous opportunities to say, plainly, "I agree it is inspired, but please give me scriptures to support this." You did NOT. Instead you posted things to the contrary by a man that you now say you respect.

How many unbelievers or new christians stumbled onto this site during this discussion and went away going, "Yeah, Piony is right. The New Testament is NOT the inspired word of God. It was NOT given to those men as scripture?" Who will never come back?

I will tell you, that anyone who does not believe the New Testament is of God, and does not believe a personal committment to God matters to a Christian is NOT the person who should be telling new Christians how to follow Christ.