Re: The status of Bible
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Faisal: *
Ok, this thread is purely for informational purposes, so please feel free to correct any miconceptions, mine or others. These questions arose in my mind, after reading the other thread by Apple, and I don't want to deviate from the core of that thread, hence this new thread.
[/QUOTE]
I will try and respond as far as I can. Hope others with knowledge also pitch in.
0.1 The Bible consists of the Old (Jewish Tanakh or Law, Prophets and Writings) and New (written by persons that knew Jesus personally) Testament. The Jewish part was written over a period of more than a 1500 years and completed ±400 BC. Christian writers therefore are only responsible for the New Testament.
0.2 There exist a fragment of the Gospel of John in the John Rylands University Library, which is dated ca. 125 AD. There also exist a fragment of the Gospel of Matthew found in the Dead Sea Caves dated ±68 AD. Since all the writers died (mostly crucified) before 100 AD, it is clear that the New Testament Books were written between 50-100 AD.
0.3 What is true is that all the New Testament Books were only combined into a unit ±350 AD. All did exist before that date and was quoted from extensively by writers after 100 AD. In fact even if we lose all manuscripts, the New Testament could be reconstructed just from these later writers’ quotes during 100-200 AD.
0.3 There are various writers of the different books, yes. There are various translations by others, yes. Jesus read publicly, quoted freely from and accepted the Old Testament as used in his time.
- Many people wrote the different books now combined together as the Bible. The Jews still do not consider the Old Testament or their Tanakh as a closed compilation as new prophets can still be send from God. No new books were added in the last 2400 years though. Christian writers used basically the same list of inspired books from about 170AD although it was fully certified by the church as the full list at the end of 400AD.
2.1 The most widely accepted English Bible translations are the King James Version, the NIV, and the New American Version. According to me the NIV stand head and shoulders above the rest.
The NIV was compiled since 1965 and had the opportunity to check all available manuscripts with the Dead Sea Scrolls. Its translators were also chosen from a wide denominational base to prevent any “translation” errors. It point out any differences between old authentic manuscripts as a footnote. The King James did not have this luxury as it was translated in 1611. (There exist older English Bible translations).
It comprises of words of God, words of Jesus, stories about general history, and religious poetry.
See point 3 above for the English translation. Obviously one translation in each language would be considered to be the best for that language. I have my own one in Afrikaans, my “mother”/home language, although there are 4 available.
Yes.
6.1 Aramaic was the everyday speech of uneducated Jews and therefore Jesus’ mother tongue. As Jesus was educated, he should have been fluent in Greek and Latin as well. It does seem that he read from the Greek translation of the Old Testament (Septuagint compiled 200 BC) in the synagogue. In fact most of the quotations done by him seem to be from this compilation. This Greek Septuagint was also the standard Old Testament text used by the early Christian church.
6.2 Most of the Old Testament was written in Hebrew with several in Aramaic especially during the Jewish. All the New Testament books were written in koiné Greek (a dialect) which is different from Modern Greek. Some scholars feel that Matthew might have been written n Hebrew originally. The first translations into other languages were already done within the first years as books were written. Full versions of the New Testament was compiled in Coptic ±150AD, Latin and Syriac in 100-150AD, etc.
6.3 There exist “Red-line” Bibles today indicating in red print where God or Jesus is personally speaking.
In conclusion, Christians are supposed to be lead and taught by the Holy Spirit and generally should be able to teach and live without the Bible. For many hundreds of years that was the case. Now that Christians have a proliferation of Bibles in their mother tongue, most don’t read/use it as intended. Christianity does not stand and fall on the authority of the Bible. It is a way of life with God’s Holy Spirit there to teach and guide each one individually. As Jesus said: Unless I go away, the Councillor will not come to you; but if I go, **I will send him* to you…..when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth.* – John.16v7b-13a.
Continually Christian Scholars study manuscripts and any new insight that might help them to purify the Bible. Although there are detractors (also on this site) of the authenticity of the Bible manuscripts, not once has anyone come forward with proof that the Bible translations were changed. If such proof exists, scholars would include it in their work.
My pardon for the lengthy post.