Who is noted historically for putting the bible together?

Question

If you know the answer, how are the dead sea scrolls and the anostic gospels not excepted as teachings of christ? Is it not possible that the biggest deception was the disregard of the rejected gospels. Are we turning a blind eye?

Answer 1

Never has archaelogy uncovered anything that goes aganist what is written in the Bible. In fact, the oposite is true. For those who would say the Bible is not the Word of God, or that the Bible contains numerous errors I would say this: Paul could say in 2nd Timothy 3:16, "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God." That's the Greek word, "theopneustos" meaning "God-Breathed." Every single word was given from God to 40 different men, and 2nd Peter 1:21 adds: "for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God." Now that was the Old Testament. The New Testament wasn't in existence when Paul used these verses. He was telling the churches in his letters what had happened in the past, but in John 16:12-13, Jesus talked about the coming of the New Testament. He says, "I have many more things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. But when He, the Spirit of Truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come."
That's the New Testamant. And we can say with John 17:17, "Your Word is Truth." Today, we have 66 books written by 40 different individuals on 3 continents covering a period of 1,500 years and there's not one mistake, regardless of what some of the critics say. They haven't studied God's Word enough to know the truth. Among the writers we had kings, poets, philosophers, prophets, scholars and fisherman. And I want you to know we have all of the Word of God today. Someone says, "Yes, but we don't have the original manuscripts" Who said so?
We have copies totalling 24,800. Now, how do we know that they're right? Well, if you take 20 items and you compare them and 19 state one thing and one doesn't, then the one is in error. We've got 24,800 manuscripts that exist today to compare one against another and we have another 80,000 quotations from the church fathers, enough to put the entire Bible together with the exception of 11 verses. Take the 80,000 quotations from the church fathers and the 24,800 manuscripts for a total of 104,800 and you have all of God's Word dozens and hundreds of times. This is so because God's Word is literally flawless. After computers have compared millions, or even billions, of letters in analyzing the 104,800 manuscripts the texts are basically flawless. So, don't listen to the critics.
The Dead Sea Scrolls prove--not disprove the Bible. These ancient manuscripts repeatedly confirm the accuracy of the Bible and have helped us gain new insights into the world of those who lived during Bible times.

As you may know, the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered almost 60 years ago in a series of caves near the Dead Sea. Scholars agree that these ancient manuscripts—written shortly before the life of Jesus—are one of the most significant archaeological finds in modern history. Many contain books of the Old Testament, and have repeatedly confirmed the accuracy of the texts of our Bibles. Other scrolls show that many people were eagerly looking for the coming of the Messiah.
What about you? Are you looking for the Messiah? If you are, you will find Him in the Person of God's Son, Jesus Christ.

Answer 2

The bible was put together by a bunch of religious leaders at a conferance (wich name escapes me at the moment) formed by the Roman Emperor Constantine. They debated for weeks over what should be in and out and some things had to be cut. Its very similar to the writing of the constitution, after such a long time they just got tierd and said we're done. (wich is why the 3rd article of the constiution is so short)

It isnt turning a blind eye, it was they had to set the foundation for a religion that was going to shape western civilization and set up its holy book, so some things that did not show the divinity of christ were cut or things that were not related to what was going on were cut. If it was a group of polititions or somthing in the roman time some of those gospels may have been included while others were not. It was all upto those 100 or so people at the conference.

Answer 3

The dead sea scrolls are of the old test. NOt the new.
The term "canon" is used to describe the books that are divinely inspired and therefore belong in the Bible. The difficult aspect of determining the Biblical canon is that the Bible does not give us a list of the books that belong in the Bible. Determining the canon was a process, first by Jewish rabbis and scholars, and then later by early Christians. Ultimately, it was God who decided what books belonged in the Biblical canon. A book of Scripture belonged in the canon from the moment God inspired its writing. It was simply a matter of God convincing His human followers which books should be included in the Bible.
Compared to the New Testament, there was very little controversy over the canon of the Old Testament. Hebrew believers recognized God’s messengers, and accepted their writings as inspired of God. There was undeniably some debate in regards to the Old Testament canon. However, by 250 A.D. there was nearly universal agreement on the canon of Hebrew Scripture. The only issue that remained was the Apocrypha…with some debate and discussion continuing today. The vast majority of Hebrew scholars considered the Apocrypha to be good historical and religious documents, but not on the same level as the Hebrew Scriptures.For the New Testament, the process of the recognition and collection began in the first centuries of the Christian church. Very early on, some of the New Testament books were being recognized. Paul considered Luke’s writings to be as authoritative as the Old Testament (1 Timothy 5:18; see also Deuteronomy 25:4 and Luke 10:7). Peter recognized Paul’s writings as Scripture (2 Peter 3:15-16). Some of the books of the New Testament were being circulated among the churches (Colossians 4:16; 1 Thessalonians 5:27). Clement of Rome mentioned at least eight New Testament books (A.D. 95). Ignatius of Antioch acknowledged about seven books (A.D. 115). Polycarp, a disciple of John the Apostle, acknowledged 15 books (A.D. 108). Later, Irenaeus mentioned 21 books (A.D. 185). Hippolytus recognized 22 books (A.D. 170-235). The New Testament books receiving the most controversy were Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, 2 John, and 3 John. The first “canon” was the Muratorian Canon, which was compiled in (A.D. 170). The Muratorian Canon included all of the New Testament books except Hebrews, James, and 3 John. In A.D. 363, the Council of Laodicea stated that only the Old Testament (along with the Apocrypha) and the 27 books of the New Testament were to be read in the churches. The Council of Hippo (A.D. 393) and the Council of Carthage (A.D. 397) also affirmed the same 27 books as authoritative.

The councils followed something similar to the following principles to determine whether a New Testament book was truly inspired by the Holy Spirit: 1) Was the author an apostle or have a close connection with an apostle? 2) Is the book being accepted by the Body of Christ at large? 3) Did the book contain consistency of doctrine and orthodox teaching? 4) Did the book bear evidence of high moral and spiritual values that would reflect a work of the Holy Spirit? Again, it is crucial to remember that the church did not determine the canon. No early church council decided on the canon. It was God, and God alone, who determined which books belonged in the Bible. It was simply a matter of God convincing His followers of what He had already decided upon. The human process of collecting the books of the Bible was flawed, but God, in His sovereignty, despite our ignorance and stubbornness, brought the early church to the recognition of the books He had inspired.
God got into his bible what he wanted, left out what was false ie phillip, book of mary mag. book of judas-all fakes.
†

Answer 4

I know the answer Star...but it does not mean that I agree with the Nicene Council or the Constantinople Council for leaving out major works that should have been accepted as a part of the Bible. Thing is, I do not see it changing at this point. However, we are free to read many of the early church documents that have been left out.

The Skeptical Christian
Grace and Peace
Peg

Answer 5

To learn how the books of the bible came to be assembled as such see: http://gbgm-umc.org/umw/bible/canons.stm

Catholic and Episcopal bibles have the same number of canonical books. The Catholic and Episcopal bible also includes some non-canonical books, grouped as the Apocrypha.

Many versions of the bible existed before the King James and the advent of mass printing.
See: http://www.greatsite.com/timeline-english-bible-history/

For an analysis of the various translations of the bible see:
http://faith.propadeutic.com/questions.html

For accurate translations of the bible at the literal level use the NASB or ESV translations.

If you run across what you think is a biblical contradiction, please study the two sites' content below for a comprehensive list of so-called biblical contradictions.

http://kingdavid8.com/Contradictions/Home.html
http://www.bringyou.to/apologetics/bible.htm

Accuracy of bible:
http://www.carm.org/questions/trustbible.htm
http://www.carm.org/demo2/bible/reliable.htm

Answer 6

The church fathers wanted to tell a story and the discarded books contradicted many of the teachings take for example: The gospel of Thomas and the Gospel of Mary. Mary was branded a prostitute to discredit her teaching.

Answer 7

I believe it was Roman Emperor Constanstine and the Niccea Council. And they not only left things out but they also added many things to the bible.

Answer 8

Probably one of Dubya's ancestors.