“All scripture is inspired by God” (2 Timothy 3:16 NAB). Increasingly claims are made that books were omitted from the Old Testament of the Bible. The Hebrew Scripture canon of inspired books was closed by circa 400 BCE, with the completion of the books of Nehemiah and Malachi. This means that any more books produced after that time were considered not inspired by God, according to the Jews. What evidence do we have that our current 39 book Old Testament doesn’t omit any inspired books?read more
“The Prayer of Nabonidus is a legendary account preserved in Aramaic that describes the punishment and healing of the Babylonian king Nabonidus. In the Prayer of Nabonidus, the recovery from the imposed illness is attributed to the recognition of the God of the Jews as the highest and only God. The text has only been preserved in fragments of a single manuscript, which was found together with numerous other scrolls by Bedouins in 1952 in Cave 4 near Qumran on the Dead Sea. It is now in the possession of the Israel Museum.”—Wikipediaread more
Critical scholars say the book of Jonah is fiction. “Now the word of Yahweh came to Jonah the son of Amittai” (Jonah 1:1 LSB). However, the book itself presents the account as historical, authentic non-fiction.
CRITICAL SCHOLARS VIEW OF JONAH
Many Protestant and Catholic scholars and commentaries regard the book of Jonah as fiction.
“A light satire, with no prentions to being historical . . . This fictional form is unique in the prophetic tradition”—Catholic commentary on Jonahread more
The Book of Revelation is without doubt the most complicated, controversial, and esoteric of the entire Bible! Some even doubt that it should even be in the Bible at all, and assert that its place in the Bible Canon was controversial from the start. This is false. Why? The early acceptance of Revelation by the Christian Church is proof that the book is divinely inspired.
EVIDENCE OF THE EARLY ACCEPTANCE OF REVELATION
We have early, widespread and consistent reception of Revelation. Papias (c 125), Justin Martyr, Irenaus, the Muratorian Fragment, Hippolytus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, and Origen all accepted Revelation as authentic. That’s impressive! Every one of these accepted Revelation as inspired, on the basis that John, the apostle was the recorder. B W Bacon was so impressed with the initial widespread acceptance of Revelation, that he wrote: “There is no other book in the entire NT whose external attestation can compare with that of Revelation, in nearness, clearness, defintiteness, and positiveness of statement” (The Making of the New Testament, 190).
Objections to Revelation were later and limited. Gaius in the early 3rd century rejected Revelation, thinking it was a forgery of the apostate Cerinthus. This is the first real objection.
Objections to Revelation were not on any historical basis. Gaius rejected the literal millennnial reign of Christ, so he thought the reference in chapter 20 of such had to be a product of the apostate Cerinthus.
Any such objections were resolved early. It was accepted by the synods of Hippo (393) and Carthage (397), by Philastrius of Brescia (c 385), Rufinus of Aquilia (c 404), Jerome (c 414), and Augustine (c 426). They accepted Revelation as authentic because it was accepted by the early Christians as authentic.
There are many quotations from Revelation by early writers, who quoted it as being authentic.
“I shall bring my work to an end here too. If it is well composed and to the point, that is just what I wanted. If it is worthless and mediocre, that is all I could manage”—2 Maccabees 15:37-38 NJB. The writer of the Apocryphal book 2 Maccabees, in effect, admits that he is not inspired by God.
The Apocrypha is accepted as being genuine by some people and some large religious organizations, such as the Roman Catholic Church, today, but rejected by many others. Some of it is included in various versions of the Bible, but is absent in most. The Apocryphal books accepted as canonical and part of the Old Testament (OT), by the Roman Catholic Church are: Tobit, Judith, 1 Maccabees, 2 =&0=&
Is it inspired by God, or invented by humans? Let’s examine some evidence to see if we can find the answer.
Is the Apocrypha inspired by God or invented by humans?
The Jews knew of the Apocrypha, but NEVER ACCEPTED any of it as canonical. For the Jews, any books written after Ezra, Nehemiah and Malachi’s time (such as the Apocrypha) were not considered inspired. They considered the canon closed after this time (by circa 400 BCE or before).
Jesus said “Whoever serves me must follow me.” (John 12:26 NIV) He spoke against those who “nullify the word of God by your tradition.” (Mark 7:13 NIV) What did Jesus consider the Old Testament (OT) to be?
“The Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms.” (Luke 24:44 NIV) What books were included in the Law, the Prophets and the Psalms (the Writings)? There were 24 by their count; 39 by our count today.
The Law contained five books: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy.
The Prophets was composed of eight books: Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Kings, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the Twelve Minor Prophets (as one book).
The Writings included eleven books: Psalms, Proverbs, Job, Song of Solomon, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, Esther, Daniel, Ezra-Nehemiah (one book) and Chronicles.
Notice that no Apocryphal books are included in these three OT sections! Jesus and the New Testament (NT) writers quoted from all three of these OT sections, but THEY NEVER QUOTED FROM THE APOCRYPHA! Since most of the NT quotes of the OT are from the Greek Septuagint Version (LXX), the absence of even a single quote by Jesus or NT writers from any of the numerous Apocryphal books speaks volumes!
The above Scriptures were kept at the Temple according to Deuteronomy 31:24-26 and 1 Kings 22:8-13 and Josephus, down to the time of its destruction in 70 CE. But the APOCRYPHAL BOOKS WERE NEVER KEPT AT THE TEMPLE.
Following Jesus means accepting the same OT books that he accepted as inspired, which are the 39 books of the OT from Genesis to Malachi, but not including “cleverly devised stories” such as the Apocrypha. (2 Peter 1:16 NIV)
In fact, early Christians (and we today) were commanded not “to devote themselves to myths,” which would certainly include the Apocrypha, since it’s full of myths! (1 Timothy 6:3-4 NIV)
The Septuagint is the first translation of the Hebrew Scriptures and was in Greek. There is no evidence that the Septuagint originally included the Apocrypha. There is no evidence that the apostles made use of the Apocrypha. The NT does not quote it. There is solid evidence against it. Inspired scriptures told Christians “not to concern themselves with myths,” which would rule out the Apocrypha for Christians. (1 Timothy 1:4 NAB) Also, the Apostles preached: “Admonish them sharply, so that they may be sound in faith, instead of paying attention to Jewish myths,” which precludes Apocryphal writings from Christians. (Titus 1:13-14 NAB)
The Apocryphal books were never “taken out” of the Septuagint, as some claim, because they were never there to start with. When the Apostle Paul was “trying to convince [the Jewish leaders in Rome] about Jesus from the law of Moses and the prophets,” he was using the 24 (our 39 today) OT books. (Acts 28:23 NAB)
Luke 24:44 proves that Jesus and the early Christians did not accept the Apocrypha, since these books were not included in “the Law, the Prophets and the Writings.”
The Jewish Council of Jamnia (90 CE) explicitly excluded all Apocrypha. The canon they accepted were the 22 books that both Josephus and Jerome said were inspired (our 39 today), and none of the Apocrypha! The Jews were aware of the Apocrypha, but did not accept any of it as inspired.
The expressions below include the 39 OT books, but none of the Apocrypha:
“The Law or the Prophets.” (Matthew 5:17 NJB) The entire OT – but no Apocrypha.
“From the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah.” (Matthew 23:35 NJB) From the beginning to the end of the OT, as arranged in Jewish Bible – but no Apocrypha.
“Beginning with Moses and all the Prophets.” (Luke 24:27 NIV) The entire OT – but no Apocrypha.
“Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms.” (Luke 24:44 NIV) The entire OT – but no Apocrypha.
Although it is popular to do so, we should not measure the existence of the New Testament (NT) canon (authoritative, or inspired, books) just by the existence of lists, which came into being somewhat later than the New Testament canon itself coming into existence. When we examine the way the NT books were viewed and used in the very early days of Christianity, we can determine the de facto existence of a functioning New Testament canon by about 100 CE.
Did it take until the fifth century to finalize the New Testament canon?
The views expressed here are admittedly a little different than the traditional, or orthodox, view of how the New Testament canon, in particular, and the Bible as a whole, came into acceptance. The views presented here actually stand in stark contrast to modern-day populist scholars, like the agnostic Bart Ehrman.
“Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven.” (Matthew 16:17). The New Testament canon was not revealed by humans, but by God.
The books of the Bible did not become the Word of God because people decided it to be so. A book became canonical if it was inspired by God (2 Timothy 3:16,17; 2 Peter 1:20,21). Inspiration by God, and not humanly contrived lists, determines canonization.
“That by revelation there was made known to me the mystery, as I wrote before in brief. By referring to this, when you read you can understand my insight into the mystery of Christ, which in other generations was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been revealed to His holy apostles and prophets in the Spirit” (Ephesians 3:3-5). Canonical books (inspired books of the Bible), prophecy, and revelation were revealed by the holy Spirt, not man-made councils.
The Roman Catholic Church (RCC) claims responsibility for the decision as to which books should be included in the Bible canon. However, the NT canon was settled long before then – not by any council’s decision, but by the same holy Spirit that inspired the Bible in the first place (2 Timothy 3:16; 2 Peter 1:20,21).
“And we also thank God continually because, when you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as a human word, but as it actually is, the word of God, which is indeed at work in you who believe.” (1 Thessalonians 2:13) The NT canon was accepted as the word of God by the early church, shortly after each book was written, which was long before the RCC came into existence in the 4th century.
There is no evidence that any book in our canon today gradually gained acceptance over time. There were no stages of acceptance for each individual canonical book.
“Dear friends, although I was very eager to write to you about the salvation we share, I felt compelled to write and urge you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to God’s holy people ” (Jude 3). This body of truth, or faith, contained in the New Testament canon, was delivered “once for all” time, being completed prior to 100 CE, according to the evidence.
“Just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which is ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction (2 Peter 3:15,16). This gives scriptural status to all 14 of Paul’s letters, by placing them as having equal status with the Hebrew Scriptures. Why can we say this?
Since Peter wrote to the “exiles scattered throughout [5] provinces” or regions (1 Peter 1:1), it is reasonable that Peter was referring to the entire collection of Paul’s letters available at the time. Peter probably knew all but possibly one or two of Paul’s letters that were available at the time. Not only would this mean that Peter was well aware of Paul’s writings, but as a leading apostle, he affirmed them. It’s obvious that Paul’s letters had a widespread reputation. From this we can infer that they were circulating possibly as a corpus, or body, in the 60’s. Ignatius of Antioch in the early 100’s, and Polycarp in the mid 100’s show familiarity with Romans, 1 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 and 2 Thessalonians, 1 and 2 Timothy, and Hebrews – eleven of Paul’s letters! The Chester Beatty papyrus 46, dated to around 200 CE, is a collection of most of Paul’s letters, including Hebrews. The facts solidly prove that the Pauline corpus was circulating early, long before the Roman Catholic Church (RCC) councils of the latter part of the 4th century.
From this platform of Paul’s 14 letters circulating as scripture from the 60’s on, we can verify the rest of 13 NT books.
“For the Scripture says… ‘The worker deserves his wages.'” (1 Timothy 5:18) Paul apparently quotes from Luke 10:7, which says “…for the worker deserves his wages”, and also quotesDeuteronomy 25:4, calling both “Scripture”. This quote of 1 Timothy 5:18gives scriptural status, or acknowledges the scriptural status, of Luke’s writings, namely volume 1 – Luke, and volume 2 – Acts.
Since Luke and Acts comprise Volumes 1 and 2 of Luke’s history (“my former book” – Acts 1:1), we can conclude that they both were circulating as scripture in the 60’s. Polycarp cites some verses in Luke, in the mid-100’s.
“Remember what the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ foretold.” (Jude 17) The word of the apostles was authoritative. The New Testament was written by four apostles directly chosen by Jesus, namely, Matthew, John, Peter and Paul. Four other close associates of the apostles, namely, Mark, Luke, James, and Jude, wrote the rest of the New Testament.
In the 60’s, when Jude wrote his letter, the apostles and their very close associates’ writings were considered authoritative. Papias and Justin Martyr referred to Matthew and Mark’s books, with Mark named as Peter’s secretary.
“The church in Babylon, also chosen, sends you greetings, as does Mark, my son” (1 Peter 5:13). Mark was a very close associate of Peter, apparently his secretary, writing the book of Mark. So Mark’s book had apostolic authority.
Polycarp and Justin Martyr in the mid-100’s referred to 1 John and John, respectively. Ignatius of Antioch, who was martyred c. 110 CE, makes clear references to John’s writings.
The Muratorian fragment of c. 170 CE named 23 of the 27 NT books as authentic. Only Hebrews, James and Peter’s 2 letters were omitted. This proves widespread circulation and approval of, and for, the 23 books some time prior to this. Since the Muratorian document is fragmentary – omission from it does not imply non-acceptance.
John and Peter’s status as prominent apostles gave them outstanding authority, and their writings would have been received as such.
1 Corinthians 15:7 – “Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles.” Jesus appeared to James, his half-brother.
Mark was a close associate of Peter, from whom he received his information. (1 Peter 5:13) Peter regards Mark with such warmth and affection that he calls him his son.
This information didn’t come to Mark as a finished, sequential account of the life of Jesus, but as the preaching of Peter – preaching directed to the needs of Christian communities. Mark accurately preserved this material and arranged and shaped it.
The title “According to Mark” appears in all the ancient canonical lists and many ancient manuscripts, and is thought to have been added very early in the history of the text.
Early church fathers all affirm Mark wrote the Gospel:
Papias (140)
Justin Martyr (150)
Iranaeus (185)
Origen
Tertullian
Clement of Alexandria (195)
Eusebius (326) – quotes Papias saying “elder” (John) attributed to Mark
Second and third century books falsely claimed apostles as authors rather than secondary figures such as Mark.
“A young man, wearing nothing but a linen garment, was following Jesus. When they seized him, he fled naked, leaving his garment behind.” (Mark 14:51-52) The “young man” here may be Mark. “Linen” clothes were a sign of wealth. He was from a wealthy family in Jerusalem. (Acts 12:12-13)
Possible evidence of Mark as Peter’s “interpreter” is the simplified chronological order of events in Mark that mirrors Peter’s rehearsal of those events in Acts. (Acts 3:13-14; Acts 10:36-43)
Peter’s eyewitness accounts include many descriptive scenes in Mark, which are lacking in other gospels. For example:
Is the Bible reliable? Does it contain myths, or are the stories true? Did the writers simply write down stories they had heard from other people, or did they experience the things firsthand that they wrote about?
The Bible is not made up of cleverly devised fables or myths. “We did not follow cleverly devised myths when we known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ” (2 Peter 1:16 NAB). Many of the Bible writers were actually eyewitnesses of their written accounts. “But we had been eyewitnesses of his majesty” (2 Peter 1:16 NAB; see also 1 Peter 5:1) Eyewitnesses also handed down their accounts to others who carefully researched these things. (Luke 1:1-3) Still others studied and pondered. (Ecclesiastes 12:9-10) But none came from human will. (2 Peter 1:21)
All scripture was inspired by God:
“All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work” (2 Timothy 3:16,17 NIV). read more
Paul–The Old Testament, Luke, and the Old Covenant
Skeptics and some modern Christians believe the Old Testament (OT) was simply the word of man and is fallible. However, the Apostle Paul viewed the Old Testament as the infallible word of God. How did Paul view the Old Testament, Luke and the Old Covenant? Below, we will use scriptural quotations followed, by comments to show why this is true:
“All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the servant of Godmay be thoroughly equipped for every good work.” (2 Timothy 3:16-17)
Paul affirms God’s active involvement in the writing of Scripture through his holy Spirit, including the Old Testament, an involvement so powerful and pervasive that what is written is the infallible and authoritative word of God.
Paul’s View of Luke’s Writings and the Old Testament
“For Scripture says, ‘Do not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain,’and ‘The worker deserves his wages.’[” (1 Timothy 5:18)read more
Where did the Old Testament canon of books come from? The term “canon” is used to describe the list of books approved for inclusion in the Bible. It stems from a Greek word meaning “rod,” as in a straight stick that serves as a standard for measuring. Hence, to speak of the biblical canon is to speak of authoritative books, given by God, the teachings of which define correct belief and practice. Obviously, only books inspired by God should be received as canonical. The Bible before you includes 39 books in the Old Testament (OT). Are these the right books? Who wrote them? What were their sources of information? These questions are asked by friends and foes of biblical faith. ThIs article touches on such issues with an aim to bolster confidence in the Old Testament Canon of books as the “inspired” “word of God” (1 Thessalonians 2:13 NLT; 2 Timothy 3:16 NLT).
Sources for the Earliest Histories of the Old Testament Canon of Booksread more
Critical scholars say the book of Jonah is fiction. “Now the word of Yahweh came to Jonah the son of Amittai” (
,_c._1657.jpg)
