ORIGIN OF THE BIBLE

[FightingFat]

How do we proove the authenticity of the Bible of today?

Who’s to say what is considered apocrypha now wasn’t an important part of the (Pre Council of Nicea) early Church? Besides, the little changes in texts due to translation can have huge ideological consequences.
Experts still disagree on the precise and apropriate translation of these ancient texts, and even if the texts were handed in modern English, there would still be bickering over exact meaning.

For example if you look at what Scholars say on this subject who are University Professors versus versus what the Catholic church’s scholars might say, do you get a different perspective? Could one say that one group might see more plasticity on the issue and the other might see a clearer more steady picture out of the literature?

Where do our translations come from today? What is the best one and what are the differences? Does the church still hold the original texts?

 

[Servant1]

FightingFat:

How do we proove the authenticity of the Bible of today?

PROVE? The only proof is in the history. You follow the history and you have the proof. There is not a scientific experiment or any other test to PROVE the authenticity. Its existence and history are all there is to prove it. Plus there are some secular histories that are parellel enough to provide some independent corroboration.

Who’s to say what is considered apocrypha now wasn’t an important part of the (Pre Council of Nicea) early Church?

NOBODY I know of (that knows what they’re talking about) says it wasn’t an important part of the early Church. It assuredly was. What the early Church had as scripture was the Septuagint (also noted as the LXX), and it included the deuterocanonical books. They were not removed and set apart as a separate “section” until the Reformation.

Besides, the little changes in texts due to translation can have huge ideological consequences.

Yes they can. But it’s amazing how much agreement there can be, and is, when scholars get their heads together, use what they know, and couple that with the Church’s guidance. It was the Church’s guidance, finalized at Carthage in 397, that produced the canon of scripture. It wasn’t scholars alone. It wasn’t the Church alone. It was the combination of the two, with the Church making the final decision. So what do you trust? You trust the Church. It’s at once complex and simple.

Experts still disagree on the precise and apropriate translation of these ancient texts, and even if the texts were handed in modern English, there would still be bickering over exact meaning.

Some will always bicker. So what? Trust the Church. The Church produced the canon of scripture. Scripture itself says the Church is the pillar of truth; scripture does not claim that for itself. So be not dismayed. Some of this is no more than a red herring, cast before you by doubters, the ignorant, or those who wish to support their own private interpretations of scripture.

For example if you look at what Scholars say on this subject who are University Professors versus versus what the Catholic church’s scholars might say, do you get a different perspective? Where do our translations come from today? What is the best one and what are the differences? Does the church still hold the original texts?

For scholars versus the Church (which is not altogether an accurate perception - there is not necessarily a disagreement or antagonism there), see by answer above. As to what is the best? I can’t say. Nor can you. Several are excellent. Some of the likes and dislikes are driven by fact; some are driven by preference. It’s taht simple.

Many old and ancient texts survive. I don’t believe the ORIGINALS of any of them survive. All in existence today are, I believe, the product of copyists.

Charis kai eirene!

 

[Tom]

As far as the Apocrypha, let Jesus show you. Some claim that Jesus and the Apostles did not teach from those books. Anyone who has read them and studied them knows differently. Read Wisdom & Sirach; compare the teachings to the Sermon on the Mount, the Lord’s Prayer. Jesus teaches us marriage is forever, quite different from most of the OT, but not different from the book of Tobit, research when Tobits son was to be married; it teaches a covenant which is forever, the two shall be one. If you find that anywhere else in Scripture please let me know, I’d truly love to study it.
A great way to start is with Sirach, get a note pad and pen, start reading and jot down every time something, some idea sounds strangely familiar, as being a teaching of Jesus. You’ll get tired pretty quickly because it’s chock full of His teachings. Teachings you won’t find anywhere else in Scripture.

 

[jaralenio]

This site may help: geocities.com/militantis/biblecontents.html

 

[Todd_Easton]

FightingFat:

Where do our translations come from today? What is the best one and what are the differences? Does the church still hold the original texts?

The earliest Christian Bibles in Greek still in existance are the Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus which date to the mid A.D. 300s and Codex Alexandrinus which dates to early A.D. 400s. They each contain most, if not all, of the deuterocanonical books (Tobit, Judith, 1 & 2 Maccabees, Wisdom, Sirach, and Baruch):

Codex Sinaiticus has Tobit, Judith, 1 & 4 Maccabees, Wisdom and Sirach.

Codex Vaticanus has Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, and Baruch.

Codex Alexandrinus has Tobit, Judith, 1, 2, 3 & 4 Maccabees, Wisdom, Sirach, and Baruch.

 

[FightingFat]

Thanks for that Todd, what about the NT? do you know what the earliest texts we have of the Gospel are?

 

[Todd_Easton]

The three Bibles I mentioned, Codex Sinaiticus, Codex Vaticanus, and Codex Alexandrinus, are fairly complete Christian Bibles, with both Old and New Testaments bound together.

It is my understanding that The Dead Sea Scrolls, which date from 100 B.C. to 100 A.D., contain individual copies of Old Testament books, including the deuterocanonicals.

It is my understanding that there are individual copies of New Testament books that pre-date the three Bibles mentioned above, including a fragment of the Gospel of John that dates from the first century A.D.