If the first bible was written 160 years after the death of Jesus?

Question

If the first bible was written 160 years after the death of Jesus,with many Gospels left out,how can it be God's words

Answer 1

the bible is a compelation of letters and books written from 1400BC to around 100AD. men came together to put the book together and left out a bunch of other letters that they didn't feel were god breathed or supportive.

Answer 2

        You've made many erroneous assumptions, so it is difficult to know from which direction to address this mess.

        Firstly, you've assumed a definition for the "Bible" as something equivalent to our Bible. Do you realize that Jesus was taught, studied for Himself, and taught others from most of the same Bible we have now? Do you realize that the New Testament is largely nothing more than quotations and restatements from the Old Testament -- which was all completely written by about 600 years before Christ's time?

        Secondly, you seem to have assumed a definition for God as equal to Jesus. While it is true that Jesus is (the Son of) God, it is not true that God is simply equal to Jesus. There are Three which bear Witness in Heaven (1John 5:7,8 KJV).

        Thirdly, you seem to have assumed a definition of "God's Word" as the literally-spoken words of Jesus Christ when He was here on earth. The Bible is not just the literally-spoken words of Jesus Christ but is also the Holy Spirit inspired Word of God (2Peter 1:21).

        Fourthly, you've also assumed the Bible wasn't written until 160 years after the death of Jesus. In actuality, it was completed being written within about 60 years of Christ's death. John the Revelator was the last of the Apostles to die and he died around 90 A.D. Thus, the first Bible, as we know it, was merely a matter of bringing together those writings which had already existed for many years.

        Lastly, you assume, by implication, that Christ didn't Resurrect from the grave. The fact that He did Resurrect from the grave means that He could still be speaking directly to people even 160 years after His death. If you recognized that fact, then there would have been no need for your question.

God bless.

Answer 3

It wasn't written 160 years after Jesus' time.

Earliest fragments of the book (these are copies) date from between about 30 A.D. and 60 A.D. Scholars agree that the gospels were written beginning at about 60 A.D., though there is evidence to suggest an earlier date.

There are more early copies of New Testament books than any other historical document. By far. The gospels, regardless of what you may think of their content, are absolutely accurate copies of what was written -- this is an archaeological certainty.

Other books -- say, Plato's Republic as one example -- are considered to be accurate too. Yet the earliest known copies date hundreds of years after the original writings, and there are very few (less than 10) earliest copies that are known, compared to the New Testament's 5,000+ copies. It's no contest.

At the time the gospels were written, there were still many eyewitnesses around, or people who heard the stores first-hand from eyewitnesses. Yet the archaeological record strangely contains no writings that say "these stories about this Jesus fellow are made up." Why would that be, if the books weren't accurate?

The only reasonable conclusion is that they are indeed accurate.

EDIT: Additional information added:

Though some say that the New Testament was written 100-300 years after Christ died, the truth is that it was written before the close of the first century by those who either knew Christ personally, had encountered him, or were under the direction of those who were His disciples.
In the article When were the gospels written and by whom?, I demonstrated that Matthew, Mark, and Luke were all written before 70 A.D. Basically, the book of Acts was written by Luke. But Luke fails to mention the destruction of Jerusalem in 79. A.D., nor does he mention the deaths of James (A.D. 62), Paul (A.D. 64), and Peter (A.D. 65). Since Acts is a historical document dealing with the church, we would naturally expect such important events to be recorded if Acts was written after the fact. Since Acts 1:1-2 mentions that it is the second writing of Luke, the gospel of Luke was written even earlier. Also, Jesus prophesied the destruction of the temple in the gospels: "As for these things which you are looking at, the days will come in which there will not be left one stone upon another which will not be torn down," (Luke 21:5, see also Matt. 24:1; Mark 13:1). Undoubtedly, if Matthew, Mark, and Luke were written after the destruction of the Temple, they would have included the fulfillment of Christ's prophecy in them. Since they don't, it is very strong indication that they were written before 70 A.D.

Taken from http://www.carm.org/questions/written_after.htm

Answer 4

You realize this is as ridiculous as saying, 'prove the germ theory without using a microscope or any scientific journals', right? You ask us to prove something and then take away the primary source to do so and if that limitation was not enough you take away secondary sources as well. Either you broaden the pool of resources available to you, or you show that you are not really looking for an honest answer but just want to give Christians an impossible question and then feel good about yourself. No, first of all it is a good analogy because I did not ask you to prove disease, I asked you to prove that germs cause disease, there is a distinct difference. Second, my faith is not blind faith, it is based on scripture and is used in the same sense as trust, the same as if you were to say I have faith in the government or faith in the school system. It is a trust backed by consistent action. If you think faith means blind guess, you have misunderstood the word. This consistency in which we can trust has been provided to us by the scriptures. It lies on the Bible, not in. My faith lies in Christ and the revelation of him is based on Scripture, there is a difference. No, that is also incorrect. Sorry you feel that way but the Flying Spaghetti Monster has nothing to show for itself while the evidence of scripture is there.

Answer 5

St. Jerome compiled the bible as we know it today in what I believe to have read the 3rd century. And no all the Gospels that where inspired are there. there are some Coptic gospels by Thomas and Mary Magdalene and a few others, but these were not inspired and believed written in 2nd century to uphold some beliefs of some Church heresy's, Rest assured the Bible is inspired words of God for his children

Answer 6

2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:


and 2 peter 1:20, 21 says
20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

Answer 7

You got it a little wrong... the first written book of the new testament was written 80 years after the death of Jesus.

Answer 8

Different parts were written at different times, some before Jesus, some after, by different authors, some unknown.

I don't know all of when it was written or put together, but I know that God inspired people to write what he wanted them to. and He inspired the people who put it together as well. I believe that God is definitely powerful enough to make sure that his word is written and put together rightly.

Answer 9

its is stated as being the word and teaching of god. In "fact" it was the word of the lord, brought to the people from the disciples. Which at the time was a large group of people and they all sat around disusing whats what and whats important to be put in "the book" It does leave many Gospels out but because it would be a larger, harder for people to grasp and understand, but as you can tell more and more gospels are being brought back into the light of day for people to read.
Its a common misunderstanding, its not the word of the lord as most are to believe but a description of the life and teachings as seen through the eyes of his followers.

Answer 10

What you need to do is to find an original gospel, as such, not tampered by Christianity.
Such a text is the Talmud Jmmanuel text - which tells a different story about 'Jesus'.
www.tjresearch.info/overview.htm
www.tombofjesus.com
See the British documentary "Did Jesus Die?"
Ed T Martin's book "King of Travelers - Jesus Lost Years in India"
This contains the original teachings of Jesus - which is different to what Christianity teaches...