Below I provide a table of reasons why a certain book of the NT is authentic. In WT speak this also means that it should be part of the canon which also means it is inspired scripture. This info is taken from Si-book.
ABLE FRAME=BOX CELLSPACING=0 COLS=4 RULES=GROUPS BORDER=1>
BookIdentificationExampleReason for canonicityMatthewOverwhelming evidence early churchPapias of Hierapolis (early second century C.E.) from the calm appeal as to a settled authorityfrom the absence of all hints of doubtMarktradition of Papias, Origen, and Tertullianancient manuscripts, such as the Sinaitic and the Vatican No. 1209fourth-century scholars Eusebius and Jerome are in agreement that the authentic record closes with the words Lukeancient authorities Muratorian Fragment (c. 170 C.E.) shows evidence of Paul’s influence (i.e. Lord's supper account)Pointing to actual fulfillment of prophecyHe quotes Jesus’ inspired testimony As a scholar (MD/GP) we can be sure he did not leave one stone unturned to assemble an accurate accountJohnChurch fatherClement of Alexandria (2nd Century )Papyrus Rylands 457 (P52) (ca 150 C.E.)Internal evidenceEusebius (c. 260-342 C.E.) quotes Irenaeus as sayingKenyon: circulation close to original proves traditionActsActs 1 and last chapter of luke equalMichigan No. 1571 (P38) Chester Beatty No. 1 (P45) Difference in style of speech = actual record no fictionThe way a ship is steeredTemple of artemis in EphesusRomansIntroductionPeter uses similar expressionsQuotes by Clement of Rome (<98 CE)Chester Beatty Papyrus No. 2 (P46) (3rd Cent)1 Cortint.Introductionit is said that First Corinthians is alluded to and quoted at least six times in a letter from Rome to Corinth dated about 95 C.E. and called First Clementdirectly quoted by Justin Martyr2 CorinthIntroductionSecond Corinthians has always been reckoned along with First Corinthians and the other Pauline epistles as an authentic part of the Bible canonGalatiansIntroductionIt is referred to by name in the writings of IrenaeusChester Beatty Papyrus No. 2 (P46)it is entirely in harmony with the other Greek Scripture writings and also with the Hebrew ScripturesEphesiansIntroductionIrenaeus attributes certain text to PaulEusebius, another authority on early Christian history (c. 260-342 C.E.), includes Ephesians in the Bible canonQuotes from early churchfathers makes it part of biblical canonPhilippiansIntroductionPolycarp (69?-155? C.E.) mentioned Paulcited in the Muratorian Fragment of the second century C.Equoted as from Paul by IgnatiusChester Beatty Papyrus No. 2 (P46)ColossiansIntroductionChester Beatty Papyrus No. 2 (P46)1.ThessaloniansIntroductionThe book is internally harmonious with the rest of the inspired WordMentioned in Muratorian FragmentChester Beatty Papyrus No. 2 (P46)2.ThessaloniansIntroductionquoted by Irenaeus Allusions made by Justin MartyrThough it is now missing from the Chester Beatty Papyrus No. 2 (P46), it was almost certainly contained in the first two of seven leaves that are missing after First Thessalonians1.TimothyIntroductionPolycarp (69?-155? C.E.) mentioned Paulstrong evidence from the early church2.TimothyIntroductionIt was recognized and used by PolycarpTitusIntroductionThe style of writing is similarIrenaeus and Origen both quote from TitusJohn Rylands Library P32 Codex Leaf (3rd Cent.)PhilemonIntroductionHe was acknowledged as such by Origen and TertullianMuratorian Fragment of the second century C.E.HebrewsInternal evidencePlace: Italy & associated with Timothy = PaulHe was acknowledged as such by Origen and Tertullianthe doctrine is typical of PaulChester Beatty Papyrus No. 2 (P46) There is no substantial evidence, external or internal, in favor of any claimant to the authorship of this epistle except Paulthe contents of Hebrews prove that it is “inspired of GodIt constantly magnifies Jehovah’s Word and his nameJamesIntroductionVatican No. 1209A deep inner harmony with the rest of the inspired Scriptures is very evident widely quoted by early ecclesiastical writers1.PeterIntroduction Irenaeus names Peter as writerIrenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and Tertullian all quote the letterIgnatius, Hermas, and Barnabas, of the early second century, all make references to itcompletely in harmony with the rest of the inspired Scriptures 2.PeterIntroductionIts canonicity has also been disputed on the grounds that it “is poorly attested in the Fathersregarded as part of the Bible catalog by a number of authorities prior to the Third Council of Carthage1.JohnIntroductionIrenaeus, Polycarp, and PapiasMuratorian Fragment 2.JohnOlder man = John.From their general similarity, we may conjecture... McClintock & strongquoted by Irenaeusaccepted by Clement of AlexandriaMuratorian Fragment3.JohnOlder man = John.See 2.JohnJudeIntroductionMuratorian FragmentClement of Alexandria (second century C.E.) accepted it as canonicalRevelationHe must be the apostle JohnPapias is said to have held the book to be of apostolic originThere is no doubt that it belongs with the other inspired ScripturesIrenaeus speaks explicitly of the apostle John as the writer
| Muratorian | Irenaeus, | Clement | Tertullian, |
| | Fragment, | Asia | Alexandria |
| | Italy | | |
| | | | |
| Approximate | | | | |
| Date C.E. | 170 | 180 | 190 | 207 |
| | | | |
| Matthew | A | A | A | A |
| Mark | A | A | A | A |
| Luke | A | A | A | A |
| John | A | A | A | A |
| Acts | A | A | A | A |
| Romans | A | A | A | A |
| 1 Corinthians | A | A | A | A |
| 2 Corinthians | A | A | A | A |
| Galatians | A | A | A | A |
| Ephesians | A | A | A | A |
| Philippians | A | A | A | A |
| Colossians | A | A | A | A |
| 1 Thessalonians | A | A | A | A |
| 2 Thessalonians | A | A | A | A |
| 1 Timothy | A | A | A | A |
| 2 Timothy | A | A | A | A |
| Titus | A | A | A | A |
| Philemon | A | A | | |
| Hebrews | D | DA | DA | |
| James | ? | | | |
| 1 Peter | A? | A | A | A |
| 2 Peter | D? | A | | |
| 1 John | A | A | DA | A |
| 2 John | A | A | DA | |
| 3 John | A? | | | |
| Jude | A | | | |
| Revelation | A | A | A | A |
| | | | |
| A - Accepted without query as Scriptural and canonical | | | | |
| | | | |
| D - Doubted in certain quarters | | | | |
| | | | |
| DA - Doubted in certain quarters, but cataloger accepted it as | | | | |
| Scriptural and canonical | | | | |
| | | | |
| ? - Scholars uncertain of the reading of the text or how a | | | | |
| book mentioned is viewed | | | | |
| | | | |
| - A blank space indicates that the book was not used or | | | | |
| mentioned by that authority | | | | |
So, what real answer can the WTS provide to support 1) authencity, 2) canonicity, 3) inspiration of God?
I could come up with a book...say.....the history of the brittisch kings written by Geoffrey of Monmouth and apply the same arguments as have been supplied for ....say....Acts. Does that make it a more truthfull account than homer's Ilias or Odyssee? Or the bible as a whole?
Si-book excells in exlpoiting the following line of reason: a snippet, a detail, a name, a location, a flower is truthfully depicted. Therefore the whole book is trustworthy thus inspired......
O....one more feature: all is larded with expressions like: overwhelming evidence, testimony, etc, were there is only secondary or tertiary allusions offered. interesting, no?
Cheers
Borgia
