THE BIBLE

The Bible, a compilation of several books, manuscripts, and writings used by almost Christian religions. The Gospel of Salvation.

THE BIBLE IS GOD’S WORD

                The Bible used by almost all Christian religions has been compiled and translated from several books, manuscripts, and writings of different languages and dialects, including some that are not in use at present.

            Assuming that the above statement is correct, let us consider and examine the following questions:

WHO COMPILED AND TRANSLATED THE BIBLE?

            The 39 Old Testament books as they are known today had been collected or compiled by the Jewish leaders in the first century. They had the authority to form the canon of the Old Testament (cf. Rom. 3:2, New International Version). Many religious books were written, but they knew which ones rightfully belong to the Bible.

            The New Testament books – 27 of them – were put together by the early Christians. In his book entitled “Brief Introduction to the New Testament ,” Adam W. Miller said:

            “It is now quite well accepted that the first collection of books of the New Testament was that of some of the letters of Paul. Some of the Christians who traveled throughout the Empire were likely familiar with the fact that these letters were in the possession of the various churches. Some letters had no doubt been exchanged with other churches, for Paul himself had suggested that the Colossians share their letter with the church at Laodicea. These exchanging and sharing of letters resulted in some churches knowing of the existence of other letters besides what they themselves possessed.

            “There seems to be evidence that toward the end of the first century someone conceived the idea of collecting the letters of Paul, having copies made, and circulating them among the churches.

            “The next evidence of the collection of books of the New Testament is that of the four Gospels. Justin Martyr, who wrote in Rome about A.D. 150, refers to the Gospels as the Memoirs of the Apostles. His use of the four Gospels in his writings has led scholars to believe they were circulated together at that time. Since John’s Gospel was not written until near the close of the first century, obviously a collection of the four Gospels was not made until early in the second century.” (pp. 16-17).

            The first known accurate list of the 27 books of the New Testament can be found in the Easter letter of Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria, in A.D. 367. In his book, Miller stated : “It was customary for such leaders to send letters at Easter time to the churches under their supervision; and Athanasius wrote one of special significance at this time, for it included a clear pronouncement concerning the approved list of scriptures. These he speaks of as ‘inspired Scriptures’, as books which are ‘believed to be divine’. The List of New Testament books, as already stated, is identical with ours today.” (pp. 18-19).

            The early church fathers of the second century, such as Ignatius, Polycarp, and Justin Martyr were all acquainted with the 27 books. However, it should not be mistaken that they were given the divine authority to determine whether the 27 books were genuine or canonical.

            Neil R. Lightfoot, author of “How We Got the Bible,” wrote: “No church through its councils made canon of Scripture. No church – in particular the Roman Catholic Church – by its decrees gave to or pronounced upon the books of the Bible their infallibility. The Bible owes its authority to no individual or group. The church does not control the canon, but the canon controls the church. Although divine authority was attributed to the New Testament books by the later church, this authority was not derived from the church but was inherent in the books themselves” (pp. 86-87). Miller, similarly, wrote: “It sometimes been assumed that the fixing of the number of books in our canon was the work of the church councils. The fact is they did not select the books, for the contents of the New Testament were quite well defined before the various councils took any action with regard to it. A general church council to determine the exact limits of the New Testament has never been called; and no such council has ever acted for or against such a canon. Council representing certain areas, and district synods, did from time to time pronounce their approval on certain lists, and when they did it was simply giving official approval to what had already come to be accepted by the church under the guidance of the Spirit of God” (p. 19). Therefore, even when the early Church apostatized, the divine books were still held intact.

            “A significant phase of the Bible’s transmission is attributed to the history of translations. The beginning of the English Bible can be traced to the seventh century. A person by the name of Caedmon arranged the stories of the Bible, ranging from the creation to the writings of the apostles, in verse form. This was the first known attempt to translate the accounts of the Bible into Anglo-Saxon. Aldhelm (d. 709) translated only a portion of the books of Psalms. Bede (d. 735) translated the Gospel of John. King Alfred (d. 901) played significant role in translating Psalms and other scriptures. In the tenth century other portions of the Old Testament were translated by Abbot Aelfric” (Lightfoot, p. 96).

            “The first complete English translation of the Bible, based on the Latin Vulgate, was done by John Wycliffe, an Oxford scholar and teacher. The translation work, under his guidance, was completed in 1382. However, it was William Tyndale (known as the “father of the English Bible”) who was the first one to translate the original Greek and Hebrew languages of the Bible into English. As a result, the Tyndale’s New Testament was printed in 1525. He died before finishing his work on the Old Testament” (Ibid., pp. 97-99). Numerous translations were printed thereafter.

HOW SURE ARE WE THAT THE TRANSLATION WERE DONE CORRECTLY? WERE THE WRITINGS TRANSLATED WORD FOR WORD OR DID THEY DEPEND ON HOW THE TRANSLATORS INTERPRETED THEM?

HOW SURE ARE WE THAT THE MANUSCRIPTS WERE NOT ERRONEOUS OR NOT INTENTIONALLY LEFT OUT AS IMMATERIAL BY THE TRANSLATORS THEREBY RENDERING THE BIBLE INCOMPLETE?

            There are many translators today and many still in the making. Of course, all of them have their shortcomings or faults, which stem from the individual biases of the translators. No particular translation of the Bible can be regarded as the ultimate word on Bible translations. Lightfoot explained, thus: “But no translation is ever final. Because translators are human beings, there will always be room for improvements of translations. No translator can transcend his own time; he can only work in light of the knowledge of his day, with materials available to him, and put his translation in words spoken by his generation” (p. 105). Clayton Harrop, author of “History of the New Testament in Plain Language”, has a similar explanation: “It is probably true that there is no such thing as a poor translations of the Bible, and it is also true that there is no perfect translation. We would not suggest that translators have been inspired in the same manner as were the original writers.” (p. 148).  

HAS THE IGLESIA NI CRISTO TAKEN ANY EFFORT TO CHECK ON THE ACCURACY OF THE TRANSLATION AND COMPLETENESS OF THE BIBLE, OR HAS THE CHURCH BLINDLY ACCEPTED THE BIBLE AS CORRECT AND USED IT FOR TEACHING?

            Although the Iglesia ni Cristo does not have a translation of her own, she has welcomed and appreciated the surge of many new translations in the twentieth century. In light of them all, the Iglesia ni Cristo has made it a point of concern to determine how accurate a certain translation is in conveying the biblical message. This is extremely important.

            For such reason, there is a need for God’s messenger. Since the words of God are kept secret of hidden in mystery (cf. Rom. 16:25), the messenger has the gift to come to the full knowledge of the truth and fully understand the mystery of God’s kingdom (cf. Mk. 4:11-12). Thus, accuracy of a certain translation can only be determined by him. He uses the method of comparing to ensure that the right message is ascertained. In I Corinthians 2:13, the Bible declares, “which things also speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual” (King James Version). And since the messenger is of God, only he has the exclusive authority to preach the undeniable and unadulterated truth, for it is written in Romans 10:15, “And how can they preach unless they are sent?” (New International Version). Does he have the sole right to preach the truth? The Bible clearly explains in John 3:34: “For the one whom God has sent speaks the words of God; to him God gives the spirit without limit.” (Ibid.)

IS THE BIBLE REALLY FROM GOD?

            The Bible, the treasure-house of sacred books, is definitely from God. The Apostle Paul wrote: “All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work” (II Tim. 3:16-17, Revised English Version). In a similar passage Apostle Peter said: “And we have the word of the prophets made more certain, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation. For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.” (II Pt.1:19-21, New International Version).

 

Follow Links:

Who can Understand the Bible