How holy is the New Testament?

Ken Rank

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jan 12, 2014
7,218
5,563
Winchester, KENtucky
✟308,985.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Ok I don't want this question to cause any discourse between us all but it's a question many non believers ask.
How can we prove that the New Testament is to be relied upon for guidance, how can we be so sure in this day and age that we are receiving the correct message.
The truth is, without some faith you really can't. Most Christians are not schooled in first century Judean culture and therefore are unable to align what we see in the NT to various aspects of Judean culture. That leaves two aspects to work from, Yeshua himself and his works, and the prophesies that come to pass or receive clearer direction (for us, it was always clear for God) that are scattered about the NT. But in the end it comes down to belief because we are 2000 years and many cultures removed, we are have translations of copies not the originals, and that is just the cold hard facts about it. Thankfully, ones salvation is not going to be based on whether or not we can prove anything... because, it is God who draws a man unto Himself (John 6:44). Which means, it's in His hands and always has been. :)
 
Upvote 0

Andrewofthetribe

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2016
815
256
Oxford
✟24,758.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
The truth is, without some faith you really can't. Most Christians are not schooled in first century Judean culture and therefore are unable to align what we see in the NT to various aspects of Judean culture. That leaves two aspects to work from, Yeshua himself and his works, and the prophesies that come to pass or receive clearer direction (for us, it was always clear for God) that are scattered about the NT. But in the end it comes down to belief because we are 2000 years and many cultures removed, we are have translations of copies not the originals, and that is just the cold hard facts about it. Thankfully, ones salvation is not going to be based on whether or not we can prove anything... because, it is God who draws a man unto Himself (John 6:44). Which means, it's in His hands and always has been. :)
So if it is God that draws a man, then why do we bother spreading the message? How can we tell a non believer that the New Testament is the truth?
 
Upvote 0

Ken Rank

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jan 12, 2014
7,218
5,563
Winchester, KENtucky
✟308,985.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
So if it is God that draws a man, then why do we bother spreading the message? How can we tell a non believer that the New Testament is the truth?
The Great Commission is not a call to convert the world, it says, "Go and make disciples." A disciple is a student not a proselyte and and so the idea is that God draws them and once He does and they are seeking, they will find. Meaning, once that spark is lit and they become hungry for me, we then have a willing student that we can teach.
 
Upvote 0

timewerx

the village i--o--t--
Aug 31, 2012
15,266
5,898
✟299,059.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Single
Ok I don't want this question to cause any discourse between us all but it's a question many non believers ask.
How can we prove that the New Testament is to be relied upon for guidance, how can we be so sure in this day and age that we are receiving the correct message.

You need consistent results and concrete proof. If not with authenticity of the letters, signs and wonders.
 
Upvote 0

Andrewofthetribe

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2016
815
256
Oxford
✟24,758.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
The Great Commission is not a call to convert the world, it says, "Go and make disciples." A disciple is a student not a proselyte and and so the idea is that God draws them and once He does and they are seeking, they will find. Meaning, once that spark is lit and they become hungry for me, we then have a willing student that we can teach.
What is it that draws them to be taught ? What is it we then teach? Shall we stand as an authority of Christ when we can't prove to even ourselves that the New Testament is the words of Jesus? If we didn't have the New Testament would we still have Jesus?
 
Upvote 0

Ken Rank

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jan 12, 2014
7,218
5,563
Winchester, KENtucky
✟308,985.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
What is it that draws them to be taught?
God... what drew you to seek God, you... or was there something else pulling you?

What is it we then teach?

2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, (17) that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

Shall we stand as an authority of Christ when we can't prove to even ourselves that the New Testament is the words of Jesus?

I was honest with my opening answer... if you want somebody that has to see 100% scientifically proven evidence, we won't convince that person. But when God draws us to Him, and we begin to walk in His ways we grow. Andrew... faith and belief are not the same... belief can be passive, faith is NEVER passive. Faith comes by hearing the Word of God and so when we search the Scripture and see God revealed in the pages, our faith grows but that isn't belief... faith demands action as faith without works is dead. So, as we hear the word of God and grow, and we begin to act on what we heard... the world will SEE Yeshua in our deeds and hear him in our words. That is how He has always worked.

If we didn't have the New Testament would we still have Jesus?

If nobody wrote down anything, that wouldn't have eliminated Yeshua nor his achievements. It just means we wouldn't have the stories to read and grow from. But we do have it and God is in control, He always has been and always will be.
 
Upvote 0

Andrewofthetribe

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2016
815
256
Oxford
✟24,758.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
God... what drew you to seek God, you... or was there something else pulling you?



2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, (17) that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.



I was honest with my opening answer... if you want somebody that has to see 100% scientifically proven evidence, we won't convince that person. But when God draws us to Him, and we begin to walk in His ways we grow. Andrew... faith and belief are not the same... belief can be passive, faith is NEVER passive. Faith comes by hearing the Word of God and so when we search the Scripture and see God revealed in the pages, our faith grows but that isn't belief... faith demands action as faith without works is dead. So, as we hear the word of God and grow, and we begin to act on what we heard... the world will SEE Yeshua in our deeds and hear him in our words. That is how He has always worked.



If nobody wrote down anything, that wouldn't have eliminated Yeshua nor his achievements. It just means we wouldn't have the stories to read and grow from. But we do have it and God is in control, He always has been and always will be.
Thanks ken great reply. As always I have a couple of questions lol
Firstly was Timothy saying that even his own words are scripture, is there a mention of which scriptures he is talking about?
 
Upvote 0

Ken Rank

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jan 12, 2014
7,218
5,563
Winchester, KENtucky
✟308,985.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Thanks ken great reply. As always I have a couple of questions lol
Firstly was Timothy saying that even his own words are scripture, is there a mention of which scriptures he is talking about?
I don't personally think so. The word for "Scripture" is graphe and that word simply means, "Something written." When the word "Scripture" was used in our English bibles long ago... it too simply meant, "something written" (see Webster's 1828) but over time the word has evolved into a meaning that aligns to "bible." So we hear "Scripture" and we think "bible" but that doesn't HAVE TO BE the case when that word was used in times past.

I wanted to say that as a disclaimer because in this case I think it does mean "bible" as the have the added "God inspired," which means "these things that are written" (in 2 Tim 3:16)... these graphe or Scripture is what we call the bible. But there are other times in the bible where we might find the word graphe and it is not speaking of the bible.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: RDKirk
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

RDKirk

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner
Site Supporter
Mar 3, 2013
39,253
20,260
US
✟1,450,592.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Thanks ken great reply. As always I have a couple of questions lol
Firstly was Timothy saying that even his own words are scripture, is there a mention of which scriptures he is talking about?

That wasn't Timothy writing the "Timothy" letters, that was Paul (it is traditionally accepted) speaking to Timothy. As Paul was writing, he probably did not consider his own words "holy scripture" like the OT, but he did consider his teaching inspired by the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 7:40).

2 Peter references Paul's writings in terms of "scripture." The very earliest extra-biblical reference we find to any NT writing was in 95AD by Polycarp, and that was of Paul. But for a couple of hundred years after that, Christians tended to speak of the OT as scripture and then of "the memoirs of the Apostles."

The first concept of compiling a broadly authoritative "canon of scripture" was Bishop Marcion in 140AD...and Marcion wanted to throw out the entire OT in favor of mostly Paul's writings. Marcion got enough traction that the Church had to come together for the first time and declare a heresy, but the fact that he did get such traction with a proposal to eliminate the OT in favor of the "memoirs of the Apostles" suggests to me that the Church must have been relying primarily on the "memoirs of the Apostles" in day-to-day discipleship. I suggest that they may have quoted the OT proportionately less then than we hear today.
 
Upvote 0

Ken Rank

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jan 12, 2014
7,218
5,563
Winchester, KENtucky
✟308,985.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
is there a mention of which scriptures he is talking about?

Sorry, I missed this.... my answer is yes and I warn you, it will likely upset somebody. :) Ezra canonized most of the OT... he canonized the Torah (law, first 5 books) and the Prophets although he rightly did not include his own writings of the writings of his friend, Nehemiah. In 90 AD, 20 years after the destruction of the Temple and probably "about" 25 years after Paul was martyred... the rest of the OT was canonized. So... I think Paul was referring to what was the "bible" in his day. He was referring to the Torah... the collection of dos and don't... what does God say is good and acceptable and what does He say we should avoid. The Acts 15 letter somewhat backs this up, believe it or not. We find this letter, sent to gentile believers, and it contains 4 things they are expected to do. However, by just looking at the 4 things what is not listed should jump out. Like, "Loving God and Him only." Or... "Not killing." Clearly they were not to kill or steal and they were to love God only BUT... those things were not included, why? The answer is, that letter was not intended to be a finish line, only a starting point. Give these ex-pagans a place to begin, a place to separate from their old ways and they will, like everyone else, learn as they go. And what comes after the letter to the gentiles? Acts 15:21 "For Moses has had throughout many generations those who preach him in every city, being read in the synagogues every Sabbath." The letter said, "abstain from things polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from things strangled, and from blood" and then it follows with, "the law is read on Sabbath." In other words, start here and then go learn. That really does line up to 2 Tim 3:16 IMHO
 
Upvote 0

Andrewofthetribe

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2016
815
256
Oxford
✟24,758.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
That wasn't Timothy writing the "Timothy" letters, that was Paul (it is traditionally accepted) speaking to Timothy. As Paul was writing, he probably did not consider his own words "holy scripture" like the OT, but he did consider his teaching inspired by the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 7:40).

2 Peter references Paul's writings in terms of "scripture." The very earliest extra-biblical reference we find to any NT writing was in 95AD by Polycarp, and that was of Paul. But for a couple of hundred years after that, Christians tended to speak of the OT as scripture and then of "the memoirs of the Apostles."

The first concept of compiling a broadly authoritative "canon of scripture" was Bishop Marcion in 140AD...and Marcion wanted to throw out the entire OT in favor of mostly Paul's writings. Marcion got enough traction that the Church had to come together for the first time and declare a heresy, but the fact that he did get such traction with a proposal to eliminate the OT in favor of the "memoirs of the Apostles" suggests to me that the Church must have been relying primarily on the "memoirs of the Apostles" in day-to-day discipleship. I suggest that they may have quoted the OT proportionately less then than we hear today.
Are there any original documents that show the memoirs of the apostles ? How far back can we prove that it was not tampered with? He was a bishop of which church? When did Christians start ordaining bishops?
 
Upvote 0

Andrewofthetribe

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2016
815
256
Oxford
✟24,758.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Sorry, I missed this.... my answer is yes and I warn you, it will likely upset somebody. :) Ezra canonized most of the OT... he canonized the Torah (law, first 5 books) and the Prophets although he rightly did not include his own writings of the writings of his friend, Nehemiah. In 90 AD, 20 years after the destruction of the Temple and probably "about" 25 years after Paul was martyred... the rest of the OT was canonized. So... I think Paul was referring to what was the "bible" in his day. He was referring to the Torah... the collection of dos and don't... what does God say is good and acceptable and what does He say we should avoid. The Acts 15 letter somewhat backs this up, believe it or not. We find this letter, sent to gentile believers, and it contains 4 things they are expected to do. However, by just looking at the 4 things what is not listed should jump out. Like, "Loving God and Him only." Or... "Not killing." Clearly they were not to kill or steal and they were to love God only BUT... those things were not included, why? The answer is, that letter was not intended to be a finish line, only a starting point. Give these ex-pagans a place to begin, a place to separate from their old ways and they will, like everyone else, learn as they go. And what comes after the letter to the gentiles? Acts 15:21 "For Moses has had throughout many generations those who preach him in every city, being read in the synagogues every Sabbath." The letter said, "abstain from things polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from things strangled, and from blood" and then it follows with, "the law is read on Sabbath." In other words, start here and then go learn. That really does line up to 2 Tim 3:16 IMHO
In what context do we mean canonised ?
 
Upvote 0

Ken Rank

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jan 12, 2014
7,218
5,563
Winchester, KENtucky
✟308,985.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Andrew... consistency through time between books is one way. Alignment to other works of the day is another. For example... in about 30BC a student of Hillel, the grandfather of Paul's teacher.... wrote a paraphrase/commentary on the Torah and soon after, the prophets. It is an AMAZING work because it gives us insights into the Jewish mind just before the time of Yeshua. Using a work like that we can take John 1 that speaks of "the Word" and look at the work of Hillel's student (it is called "Targum Jonathan") and see where "the Word" (memra in Aramaic, what the Targum was written in) is used and it really supports our understanding of Yeshua. So this is one example where we can have the NT and align it to other works that have survived that time period and they do indeed align in enough places to add more weight to the NT.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Ken Rank

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jan 12, 2014
7,218
5,563
Winchester, KENtucky
✟308,985.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
In what context do we mean canonised ?
Canonized... to officially recognize as inspired works. So the Torah (Law) and Prophets were officially labeled as inspired works by Ezra and then in 90AD the Writings and the other few Prophetic books were added. The NT was compiled and canonized officially a couple of hundred years after Christ's death but what is really neat is that when the Christians began to compile the OT they independently came up with an OT canon and they checked it with the Jews believe it or not to see what they had... and it was identical.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: RDKirk
Upvote 0

Norbert L

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Mar 1, 2009
2,856
1,064
✟560,360.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Single
Ok I don't want this question to cause any discourse between us all but it's a question many non believers ask.
How can we prove that the New Testament is to be relied upon for guidance, how can we be so sure in this day and age that we are receiving the correct message.
By taking responsibility for yourself and listen to the council of many others, be they a believer or not. Don't automatically adopt their opinions because they sound to your liking and pleasing, but use the mind that God gave to reach your own conclusions. After all it's your own life that's on the line.
 
Upvote 0

miamited

Ted
Site Supporter
Oct 4, 2010
13,243
6,313
Seneca SC
✟705,807.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
So if it is God that draws a man, then why do we bother spreading the message? How can we tell a non believer that the New Testament is the truth?

Hi andrew,

Well, as I understand what God is doing, it is through the Scriptures, His Spirit and His Son that He does the 'drawing'. It's how we see the body of those called to believe God throughout the book of the Acts of the Apostles. The first disciples went out and preached the Scriptures. Quite frankly, if it's how the first disciples understood Jesus' commission, then it's how I understand that same commission.

We can't 'tell' or 'make someone believe' that the new covenant that God has made with mankind is the truth...but the Holy Spirit can.

God bless you,
In Christ, Ted
 
  • Like
Reactions: singpraise
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Andrewofthetribe

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2016
815
256
Oxford
✟24,758.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Hi andrew,

Well, as I understand what God is doing, it is through the Scriptures, His Spirit and His Son that He does the 'drawing'. It's how we see the body of those called to believe God throughout the book of the Acts of the Apostles. The first disciples went out and preached the Scriptures. Quite frankly, if it's how the first disciples understood Jesus' commission, then it's how I understand that same commission.

We can't 'tell' or 'make someone believe' that the new covenant that God has made with mankind is the truth...but the Holy Spirit can.

God bless you,
In Christ, Ted
Thanks Ted, I honestly feel that I have felt the Holy Spirit come upon me and I wept for Christ. I never read the bible and I was not going to church, this is such an illogical faith for me, that I can't see the bible like others but I'm sure God touched me in some way.
I have been trying to make sense of it all but I can't. It's why I'm so curious about scripture.
To make matters worse I have an aversion to reading the bible as I think it's boring, it just doesn't make sense that I feel the way I do. Yet in spite of this I feel so sure God has spoken to me and revealed his son to me.
 
Upvote 0