How Available Was The New Testament Just After Jesus and The Apostles Died?

[AJB4]

Jhn 20:30 And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book:
Jhn 20:31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.

1) When it said 'book', I believe it was referring exclusively to the Gospel of John, not the entire Bible (as the Bible back then wasn't collective anyway).

2) I believe that verse 30 was indeed referring to miracles that Jesus did that weren't recorded in the book of John.

3) I believe that verse 31 was referring to the miracles that Jesus performed in the presence of his disciples that were written in the Gospel of John, not the miracles that weren't.

To say that there were miracles that Jesus did that weren't written in the Book of John, and then to say in the very next verse that those miracles were indeed written in the Book of John is a direct self-contradiction.

So, in order to prove that everything Jesus did was written in the Bible using that verse, is to take that verse out of context.

 

[ScottBot]

These words,



would certainly imply that the Catholic Church should not be implicated in the execution of acquitted heretics.



And no offense to you, but the multitude of resources you've read are (deliberately?) misleading It's not just your denomination that gets slandered, you know.



Here are a couple of accounts from a couple of Reformed authors?

Calvin vs. Servetus and Calvin and Servetus.

Both pieces (and particularly the second) contain some (relatively mild, I think) Reformed polemics against the Roman Catholic Church, though. If you're too thin-skinned to be able to read through a few jabs against your church, then I'm giving you fair warning not to read it. You don't strike me as that type, though, so I'll take my chances.

Thanks for giving me some credit. You seem like a pretty reasonable and well-thought out lady. Let's treat each other with the mutual respect as brothers/sisters in Christ, and despite our theological differences, and I think we'll get along just fine.

Now, you have to consider that the Church operated cooperatively with the governments of the time. That did not prevent the government from executing "State Justice" on people exhonorated by the Tribunals. It happened. Were there people within the Inquisition that were overzealous and power-hungry and recommended execution to rid themselves of rivals or "witnesses"? I'd bet my life on it. I'll be the first person to raise my hand and say that people within my church, going all the way up to the office of the Pope who did terrible things in the name of Christ. Such is the nature of the Church. Christ said that the wheat will grow with the tares, and that the goats will be raised with the sheep. God knows what He is doing. For what its worth, I admire Calvin's evangelical zeal, even though I cannot bring myself to concur with his theological conclussions.

 

[pilgrimgal]

The first known writing was I Thessalonians ca 53 a.d. by Paul. The gospels were not written until later in the first century...Mark being the oldest account. Before any writings...oral stories spread the Good News.

There was something called the "Q" document (later name) which some scholars have said Matthew and Luke used to get accounts of the sayings of Jesus.

See more information on the "Q" Document here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q_document which gives arguments for and against this.

 

[A. believer]

Thanks for giving me some credit. You seem like a pretty reasonable and well-thought out lady. Let's treat each other with the mutual respect as brothers/sisters in Christ, and despite our theological differences, and I think we'll get along just fine.

Sorry, but you didn't edit fast enough. I did catch your error. No problem, though. I think we can carry on respectful discussions.

Now, you have to consider that the Church operated cooperatively with the governments of the time. That did not prevent the government from executing "State Justice" on people exhonorated by the Tribunals. It happened. Were there people within the Inquisition that were overzealous and power-hungry and recommended execution to rid themselves of rivals or "witnesses"? I'd bet my life on it. I'll be the first person to raise my hand and say that people within my church, going all the way up to the office of the Pope who did terrible things in the name of Christ. Such is the nature of the Church. Christ said that the wheat will grow with the tares, and that the goats will be raised with the sheep. God knows what He is doing. For what its worth, I admire Calvin's evangelical zeal, even though I cannot bring myself to concur with his theological conclussions.

I agree that Christians (both Catholic and Protestant) did things that we'd consider pretty terrible during those times, but I'm certainly not convinced that it was necessarily only "tares" (which I interpret to mean unregenerate people) who were responsible for executing heretics. Things that seem obviously bad to those of us living centuries later wouldn't necessarily seem obviously bad, even to Christians of good conscience, living in a time when Christian civilization was being threatened by heresy and dissension. I think Christians can be godly people and still be gravely mistaken.

 

[Tonks]

The four Gospels were decided upon at Nicea, however, the rest of the epistles and the canon of the OT wasn't uniformly agreed upon unti Hippo and Carthage in 395 and 397

Yes, but Irenaeus was the first person to mention in writing that the four canonical Gospels were inspired. Start from there and work forward methinks....

 

[ArnautDaniel]

I'd like some more insight on this. It seems to be considered by most a historical fact that the New Testament in an easy, mass-produced book form didn't exist until at least the late 4th century, so, how would Christianity had survived in between the times when people had direct, inspired, word of mouth from the Apostles and Jesus, until the times when mass-production of the Bible was available?

This actually is where Apostolic Succession (whether you believe in it or not) makes a ton of sense. Certain men (the early church fathers), hand-chosen and taught by the Apostles, and guided by the spirit much the same way the Apostles were, to carry on the teachings and traditions of the early church from just after the Apostles died, up until they were no longer needed (when the Bible was readily available for all because of mass-production).

It seems highly unlikely to me that the New Testament was very available to people just out of the 1st century, because:

A) There was no mass-production. Everything would have to have been written by hand (which would take an extremely long time. Have you ever tried writing the Bible by hand?!)

B) Back then, if you weren't stinking rich, you were illiterate. There were no readily avaiable public schools back then either. If you weren't rich, you weren't educated.

What do other people think?

Given the actual textual evidence of NT texts it looks like the early copying was an amateur operation leading to wide variance in texts.

Basically imagine some very enthusiastic but unqualified people from your local church going about copying texts.