Which books were selected to make up the Bible?

JoeSinclair

I have stolen some text, quoted below, from the National Geographic website, http://www.nationalgeographic.com/lostgospel/timeline.html

I read their article about the supposed Gospel of Judas and found it interesting. I offer no comment on the validity of their article, nor seek one. Rather I have a simple request which is this:

It seems to me that if the books of the New Testament were selected by Athanasius then strict adherance to the bible in its present state wouldn't necessarily represent the true intentions of God? However, I suppose, if man's hand in selecting the books was guided by a divine influence then I suppose trust could be restored in the Bible..

I don't know much about the whole Jehovah's Witness thing, I must confess, but I think I am right in saying that a specific translation of the word of the Bible is used to proscribe the correct practises to carry out in being a Jehovah's Witness (New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures?) It occurs to me that if the selection process for the Bible itself is flawed, then this would be a stumbling block? If the source from which this translation was made is arbitrary then we've been barking up the wrong tree haven't we?

Can you point me in the direction of some discussion* of the selection process of the books of the bible that I can have a look at? Some kind of analysis of how one is supposed to be sure that the books selected are the right ones? What if some books got left out, or indeed if some wrong books were included? Again, can one rely on the assumption (or, I suppose, the knowledge, or faith, if you believe in God) that God's divine influence made sure it was done properly?

*Or, indeed, carry out a discussion right here :-)

Here's the quote:

"St. Athanasius of Alexandria, Egypt, lived from about 293 to 373. He spent much of his life waging a theological battle with Arianism, the belief that Jesus, though the son of God, was inferior to God the Father.

As a young theologian Athanasius took part in the Council of Nicea in 325. This meeting established an orthodoxy that proclaimed the equality of Jesus and God the Father as divine beings of the same substance.

. . .

In 367 he decreed to all Egyptian Christians that the only texts they should regard as sacred were 27 Jewish and Christian books specifically listed by him. The works on that list comprise the New Testament as we know it today."

[ I think this question will probably end up being a precursor to further questions I have about this subject. I look forward to discussing this kind of thing with you guys in the future ]

Narkissos

Welcome JoeSinclair,

Here's a quite decent article for a start:

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/NTcanon.html

As far as Jehovah's Witnesses are concerned, you are right in pointing out the inconsistencies: the NT Canon they rely on was determined by the very same "Church" (including Athanasius) which they reject as "apostate").

james_woods

Wonderful way to open a first post!

A few points on it from my perspective:

* JW's got their own organization started on the basis of other "worldly" translations of the bible. The NWT did not come along until late in the 1950's - by that time almost every core doctrine had been made up and confirmed by the Rutherford-Knorr hegemony. This all took place from 1880 or so up to the late 1930's. The blood thing came along in I believe the 1950's.

* AFTER the NWT came along many "glaring errors" in these other translations were found by JW translators. After all, they were done by false religion, no?

* And, yet, (and amazing in the face of the above two facts) - the selected list of books from the apostate council of 325 (sponsored by a half-pagan worldly government leader) are still considered to be Jehovah's true choice by the WT society. This is just the way it is - even if there were perhaps hundreds of other writings for Athanasius to pick from.

* And, finally - it is even more incredulous to notice that the Witnesses actually champion Arius (the gnostic view?) and put down Athanasius as an evil "trinitarian". Still, his list is the true one.

So, I guess they are not in the market for a copy of the book of Judas!

Welcome to the site, James

greendawn

I don't think we know on what exact criteria they decided but for sure any books containing errors of geography and history would be rejected.

XJW4EVR

The Muratorian Manuscript contains 23 of the current 27 NT books that are considered canonical.

The manuscript also lists two of the four gospels, Luke & John. The gospels that are mising are missing due to a lost piece of the manuscript.

The importance of this is that the manuscript is dated c. 175 AD, it appears to be the earliest canonical list extant.

jschwehm

Hi:

One of the best books I have read on the development of the New Testament Canon was written by Bruce Metzger. You can get it at amazon.com. Here is the link:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0198269544/sr=8-3/qid=1149005478/ref=pd_bbs_3/002-7406928-2908035?%5Fencoding=UTF8

Jeff S.

www.catholicxjw.com

XJW4EVR

Bruce Metzger is the best conservative scholar I have run across on the matter of canonictity.

katiekitten

Which books were selected to make up the bible?

Well, all the ones currently in the bible I guess. Did I answer the question?

JoeSinclair

katiekitten: You certainly have. Fortunately I didn't specify the prize did I? ;-)

Seriously though guys, I appreciate your replies. I will look into this - I have a lot of learning to do!

My musings on this subject have led me onto a similar subject. Can you point me towards a site or sites that explain the routes to the current bible translations. For example, some of the history of the current JW bible, and perhaps something similar for, say, the King James?

I would love to know at what point the JW took their text etc. and, I suppose, why they think theirs is superior, or why perhaps the other versions should be considered... I really don't know much about this subject.

Thanks for your help so far. I will spend this weekend Googling a lot and reading the links you have pointed me towards..

Joe

nelly136

as you'll need to avoid mention of exjw sites....the shutters will come down

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_World_Translation

 http://www.letusreason.org/JW39.htm i think the transcpripts of the court case are available to buy

the name of the case is Douglas Walsh vs. The Right Honourable James Latham i think if you fancy googling it

http://www.freeminds.org/doctrine/nwt.htm

Which books were selected to make up the Bible?

Share this