What Is Your Opinion?

[Guest p3ngu!n]

i have been studying the epistles ( such as corinthians) and came to raise the question why they were ordained to be words of scripture and were God-breated while other letters that were written weren't. now i have formed my opinion and have a new understanding of the new testament, but i was wondering what were others viewpoint on this matter?

[Guest April63]

So... what is your opinion?

As for me, I don't know. I guess some were picked and some were not. Maybe the early church liked some over others, or didn't have access to all of them. I can't really say for sure, because I've never really looked into this before. Interesting question though.

[Guest p3ngu!n]

well, my opinion is that all the books of the new testament were written by the apostles (or people who were close to christ), and disciples of apostles. also, actually looking at some of the books that were not included, they seem to not line up with the old testament and jesus' life. not that they weren't valid, but they don't seem to embelish (sp?) upon the old testament and line up with biblical teachings to the point where it is perceived as written by God through man.

[Guest nayomi2438]

p3ngu!n;

As I understand it, the assembly of the Old and New Testaments are reflective of the men who published the texts. The Old Testament imposes God's rules and regulations in a way through stories the people of the time could understand. The New Testament, the basis of Christianity, takes a more forgiving and nurturing position. Some religions do not embrace Jesus as the Son of God but rather another profit. The books excluded from the final "Bible" did not reflect a belief of the men putting it together, may have contained texts that would have raised more questions than answers, and/or the writings were not known to them.

[Guest April63]

I also believe that the New Testament was written by the Apostles, but we don't have the original copies anymore. Because of that, some portions may have been changed or slightly edited, thus changing the meaning of some sections.

[Guest nymphblossom]

The early Church fathers reviewed all of the writings that had survived from the time of Christ and excluded those that were inconsistent. The others are collectively refrered to as the apocryphal gospel

Blossom

[Guest Talia J.]

There was also a lot of politics involved in the composition of what has now become the canonical Bible. One example is that the Roman Catholic church uses all the books including the Apocrypha whereas most protestant churches don't include the Apocrypha.

Like anything on earth it has gone through the hands of humans, not only in the original writings, but also the translations. It is critical when we study scriptures that we do so prayerfully and with an open heart and mind to hear what the spirit tells us.

Talia.

[Guest Sarinah]

The books of the New Testament were all validated to be written by people of authority in the early Christian church, Apostles and high ranking disciples of Christ were among the writers. They serve to inform us of Christ and give us examples of life and the struggles that come with that and how as followers of Christ we should handle them.

[Sally]

There are two problems with taking the Bible as the literal word of God and they both stem from the same source - the era of the events.

Very few people could write in those days and the ones that did other than the Romans used a form of written language that had no articles like a and the so when you read, "I am THE way..." it could just as easily be, "I am A way..." and now the meaning is totally different - now the Kingdom of God moves from the country club like exclusionary place of most Christian Churches and becomes and all inclusive kingdom for everyone - not very good for getting the people to fall into line and fill the collection plates.

I am a Christian but not in name only, I try to live my faith and be the best possible person that I can be, Jesus taught love and that is all that we need, it is hard to be mean to someone you love.

Love ya,

Sally

[Guest Tomgirl]

There was also a lot of politics involved in the composition of what has now become the canonical Bible. One example is that the Roman Catholic church uses all the books including the Apocrypha whereas most protestant churches don't include the Apocrypha.

Like anything on earth it has gone through the hands of humans, not only in the original writings, but also the translations. It is critical when we study scriptures that we do so prayerfully and with an open heart and mind to hear what the spirit tells us.

Talia.

I do not blame you dear Talia, but I must say that "Apocrypha" is only used in some protestant churches and is not by far oecumenical, if you see what I mean.

Tomgirl