The Bible -- What is it?

YusufNoor said:
well, in order to answer the question, the bible what is it?, it seems that some background info may help us decide just what the Bible really is.

so i ask the original poster the following questions:
Click to expand...
My intent in the opening post was to find out what some of the various views with regard to the Bible that are held by people here. I have no allusions that we will reach any agreement. Even if we did it wouldn't change the nature of what the Bible is or is not. And unless you can explain to me how my answers to your questions would make any difference with regard to your view as to what the Bible is, then I don't see how answering them helps in addressing the question that was originally asked.




Now leaving all of that aside, I'm happy to discuss my views of what the Bible is and isn't. So, in case that is what you are after here are how I would answer your questions:

1) has the bible as we know it now always existed since the time of Jesus[as]? NO



2) do we know what was considered the Bible in 170 CE? Yes, roughly.

3) do we know what was considered the Bible in 240 CE? Yes, roughly.

4) do we know what was considered the Bible in 350 CE? Yes, roughly.

5) do we know what was considered the Bible in 367 CE? Yes, roughly.

6) leaving the Tanakh (OT) aside, are there any "books" that were once considered part of the New Testament, such as 1 or II Clement, the Apocalypse of Peter or maybe the Shepard of Hermas, that were eventually removed? Not"removed", for that term would imply that there was an established set canon that was then changed. There were books such as those mentioned that were for a time disputed but accepted and then later not accepted.

7) how about "books" now considered "holy" or part of the New Testament that weren't considered part of it, such as II Peter, James, Timothy, Titus or the Apocalypse of John? All 27 if them, for there was a time when there was no New Testament.

8) when Constantine ordered 50 copies of the bible to be made, what books were included in THOSE copies? I honestly don't know. I haven't checked out Constantine's canon.

answering those questions just might get us started in figuring out "what is the bible?", In Sha'a Allah!

:w:
Click to expand...
I agree those questions might help us if we were in the process of trying to establish what was or was not the canon. But that wasn't the essence of my question. I was more interested in what you think of when you use the term "the Bible"?
 
Grace Seeker said:
My intent in the opening post was to find out what some of the various views with regard to the Bible that are held by people here. I have no allusions that we will reach any agreement. Even if we did it wouldn't change the nature of what the Bible is or is not. And unless you can explain to me how my answers to your questions would make any difference with regard to your view as to what the Bible is, then I don't see how answering them helps in addressing the question that was originally asked.

Now leaving all of that aside, I'm happy to discuss my views of what the Bible is and isn't. So, in case that is what you are after here are how I would answer your questions:

1) has the bible as we know it now always existed since the time of Jesus[as]? NO

2) do we know what was considered the Bible in 170 CE? Yes, roughly.

would you elaborate, and tell what was considered canonical then?

3) do we know what was considered the Bible in 240 CE? Yes, roughly.

would you elaborate, and tell what was considered canonical then?

4) do we know what was considered the Bible in 350 CE? Yes, roughly.

would you elaborate, and tell what was considered canonical then?

5) do we know what was considered the Bible in 367 CE? Yes, roughly.

would you elaborate, and tell what was considered canonical then?

6) leaving the Tanakh (OT) aside, are there any "books" that were once considered part of the New Testament, such as 1 or II Clement, the Apocalypse of Peter or maybe the Shepard of Hermas, that were eventually removed? Not"removed", for that term would imply that there was an established set canon that was then changed. There were books such as those mentioned that were for a time disputed but accepted and then later not accepted.

that is confusing! do you mean something was once considered "Holy" and then later it wasn't, while other things WEREN'T considered "Holy" and then later they were?

7) how about "books" now considered "holy" or part of the New Testament that weren't considered part of it, such as II Peter, James, Timothy, Titus or the Apocalypse of John? All 27 if them, for there was a time when there was no New Testament.

8) when Constantine ordered 50 copies of the bible to be made, what books were included in THOSE copies? I honestly don't know. I haven't checked out Constantine's canon.

I agree those questions might help us if we were in the process of trying to establish what was or was not the canon. But that wasn't the essence of my question. I was more interested in what you think of when you use the term "the Bible"?
Click to expand...

is not "the Bible" what is considered canon?

:w:
 
Grace Seeker said:
That might be one answer, but I've learned that it isn't everyone's. Is it yours?
Click to expand...

i did not start the thread. how can we possibly discuss "what is the bible" in YOUR thread if you do not know, or are unprepared to discuss or are unwilling to discuss what it is that constitutes "the bible"?

perhaps you would do better on a forum of mind readers, we cannot dialogue with you if you are incapable of answering the most simple of questions without the aid of a dentist.

:w:
 
YusufNoor said:
i did not start the thread. how can we possibly discuss "what is the bible" in YOUR thread if you do not know, or are unprepared to discuss or are unwilling to discuss what it is that constitutes "the bible"?

:w:
Click to expand...

Why do you imply that I am unwlling to discuss?

I began by posting a comment that I said I really liked. I've also carried on perfectly pleasant conversations with 'Abd-al Latif, GreyKode, TKTony, Podarok and Woodrow, among others. I even answered 8 specific questions that you asked. But now when I ask if something you have written reflects your opinion you seem to accuse me of being unwilling to discuss. Unless you share your views it is going to be hard to do discuss anything with you. For this is not a thread about attacking others having a right or wrong view of the Bible, it is about disclosing how one personally views it. I've already done that by sharing a comment that I liked in the opening post. You've said that to answer it you needed some questions answered; I've done that as well.
 
so i ask the original poster the following questions:

1) has the bible as we know it now always existed since the time of Jesus[as]?

2) do we know what was considered the Bible in 170 CE?

3) do we know what was considered the Bible in 240 CE?

4) do we know what was considered the Bible in 350 CE?

5) do we know what was considered the Bible in 367 CE?


The Torah always was considered scripture- by Jesus and your quran.

The original 4 GOSPELS were always considered scripture, by the early church fathers and your quran.
 
Follower said:
so i ask the original poster the following questions:

1) has the bible as we know it now always existed since the time of Jesus[as]?

2) do we know what was considered the Bible in 170 CE?

3) do we know what was considered the Bible in 240 CE?

4) do we know what was considered the Bible in 350 CE?

5) do we know what was considered the Bible in 367 CE?


The Torah always was considered scripture- by Jesus and your quran.

The original 4 GOSPELS were always considered scripture, by the early church fathers and your quran.
Click to expand...

@Follower
When professionals talk, amateurs should keep quiet.


And to Grace, who told you Greatest I am is a muslim, his profile says nothing, so please stop attacking the character of muslims with your strawmen.
 
GreyKode said:
And to Grace, who told you Greatest I am is a muslim, his profile says nothing, so please stop attacking the character of muslims with your strawmen.
Click to expand...


My mistake. I got that idea from some of his prior comments, especially post #73 earlier in this thread. But you're correct he is "undisclosed" and I surely shouldn't use him as an example of Islamic thinking. I know you have much better scholars in Islam than he.
 
here are some of the disputed books-

Disputed books -Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, 2-3 John, Jude, Ps-Barnabas, Hermas, Didache, Gospel of Hebrews

Considered heretical—Gospels of Peter, Thomas, Matthaias, Acts of Andrew, John, etc.

These were disputed because they were either written at a later date, not referenced by early church fathers, or made weird claims, etc.
 
Grace Seeker said:
Why do you imply that I am unwlling to discuss?

I began by posting a comment that I said I really liked. I've also carried on perfectly pleasant conversations with 'Abd-al Latif, GreyKode, TKTony, Podarok and Woodrow, among others.

do you no longer find answering questions about "the Bible" pleasant?

I even answered 8 specific questions that you asked.

thank you for answering those questions, but i wasn't aware of any limitations on the number of questions we might ask. just for the record, what is the limit?

But now when I ask if something you have written reflects your opinion you seem to accuse me of being unwilling to discuss.

i would prefer to make informed comments, here i am seen as an ignorant Muslim who can't possibly no anything about "The Bible" or Christianity. therefore, BEFORE i form these "opinions" i thought i might be better to ask questions of an informed "Christian." AFTER i have gained some knowledge, we might be able to discuss these items.


Unless you share your views it is going to be hard to do discuss anything with you.

i am not yet at the "discussion" phase. my ignorance on 'the Bible" is immense. i only ask you to answer my questions, is that understandable?

For this is not a thread about attacking others having a right or wrong view of the Bible, it is about disclosing how one personally views it.

please forgive me if you think i have attacked "the Bible" in this thread. please point out the offending comment and i will remove it!

I've already done that by sharing a comment that I liked in the opening post. You've said that to answer it you needed some questions answered; I've done that as well.

in order to be well informed and to make comments that aren't ignorant, i am still in need of some answers. if you find this too difficult, perhaps you can tell me which of the areas of questions that i have it is that you lack knowledge in.
Click to expand...

you opened the thread by making comments about "The Bible" and asked us our opinion AND if we had any questions. we are Muslims, how are we comment on a book that most of the Christians here claim we are ignorant about? AND we are told we are ignorant JUST because we are Muslims! therefore, i would REALLY like to know more about "The Bible" in order to give you my own opinion as well as evaluate yours. we try to obtain useful information and and the answers become evasive and they even become questions. the more evasive that the answer become, the more questions that i have!

let me quote the original post:

Comments? Questions? Reflections?
Click to expand...

to which i respond, WHY YES, I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS! answer them and THEN, In Sha'a Allah, i will post some comments and give you some of my reflections. is this understandable?

Originally Posted by Grace Seeker View Post
My intent in the opening post was to find out what some of the various views with regard to the Bible that are held by people here. I have no allusions that we will reach any agreement. Even if we did it wouldn't change the nature of what the Bible is or is not. And unless you can explain to me how my answers to your questions would make any difference with regard to your view as to what the Bible is, then I don't see how answering them helps in addressing the question that was originally asked.

Now leaving all of that aside, I'm happy to discuss my views of what the Bible is and isn't. So, in case that is what you are after here are how I would answer your questions:

1) has the bible as we know it now always existed since the time of Jesus[as]? NO

then when was "the Bible" written?

2) do we know what was considered the Bible in 170 CE? Yes, roughly.

would you elaborate, and tell what was considered canonical then?

3) do we know what was considered the Bible in 240 CE? Yes, roughly.

would you elaborate, and tell what was considered canonical then?

4) do we know what was considered the Bible in 350 CE? Yes, roughly.

would you elaborate, and tell what was considered canonical then?

5) do we know what was considered the Bible in 367 CE? Yes, roughly.

would you elaborate, and tell what was considered canonical then?

6) leaving the Tanakh (OT) aside, are there any "books" that were once considered part of the New Testament, such as 1 or II Clement, the Apocalypse of Peter or maybe the Shepard of Hermas, that were eventually removed? Not"removed", for that term would imply that there was an established set canon that was then changed. There were books such as those mentioned that were for a time disputed but accepted and then later not accepted.

that is confusing! do you mean something was once considered "Holy" and then later it wasn't, while other things WEREN'T considered "Holy" and then later they were?

please explain the term "established set canon" and can you provide a date on when there WAS and established set canon?

7) how about "books" now considered "holy" or part of the New Testament that weren't considered part of it, such as II Peter, James, Timothy, Titus or the Apocalypse of John? All 27 if them, for there was a time when there was no New Testament.

perhaps you misunderstood my question, let me rephrase it: are ther any books in what YOU call the "Bible" CURRENTLY, that were once considered NOT to be inspired books?

and is it true that Martin Luther consider the book of James NOT to be "inspired?" do you have any comments on that?

8) when Constantine ordered 50 copies of the bible to be made, what books were included in THOSE copies? I honestly don't know. I haven't checked out Constantine's canon.

really, as a professional Preacher you do not know what was in those books? and i didn't know that it was Constantine's canon! can anyone establish canon? i just assumed that when Constantine ordered those books, that he was in fact "ordering 50 copies of the Bible" and NOT making canon! as Muslims, we make the accusation that Constantine decided what was to be put in "the Bible," WHICH i was read somewhere was untrue! I DID NOT KNOW UNTIL NOW THAT HE DID! why did the church leaders let him do that? why didn't they just give him copies of what THEY considered to be "the Bible?" so, in 325 CE, what did the Church consider the bible to be?

I agree those questions might help us if we were in the process of trying to establish what was or was not the canon. But that wasn't the essence of my question. I was more interested in what you think of when you use the term "the Bible"?
Click to expand...

what is the 1st date that there was a book that was considered the Bible, and can we establish how this differed from "Constantine's Bible?"

:w:
 
YusufNoor said:
you opened the thread by making comments about "The Bible" and asked us our opinion AND if we had any questions. we are Muslims, how are we comment on a book that most of the Christians here claim we are ignorant about? AND we are told we are ignorant JUST because we are Muslims! therefore, i would REALLY like to know more about "The Bible" in order to give you my own opinion as well as evaluate yours. we try to obtain useful information and and the answers become evasive and they even become questions. the more evasive that the answer become, the more questions that i have!

let me quote the original post:



to which i respond, WHY YES, I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS! answer them and THEN, In Sha'a Allah, i will post some comments and give you some of my reflections. is this understandable?



what is the 1st date that there was a book that was considered the Bible, and can we establish how this differed from "Constantine's Bible?"

:w:
Click to expand...

apparently, someone is none too keen on discussing his Holy Book.

i wonder why?

must be trying to hide something....
 
Grace Seeker said:
You see this is where you are screwed up in your thinking. What you project as my ways of thinking are in fact not my ways of thinking. We can't have a productive conversation when you are going to project on to me or on to the Christian faith views that we do not in fact actually believe. You don't get to tell me what I believe.

But I should have known you would, for all Muslims believe that they are the only ones who know anything truth whatsoever, and thuse they are free to make up things for regarding other's beliefs with impunity. And since Muslims can never be wrong, well, then they are never wrong. Case closed, we've solved everything just by knowing that you're a Muslim and therefore cannot make any mistakes.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------

(For those who actually take the time to think while reading, you probably already know I wrote that last paragraph with tongue firmly planted in my cheek. :X )
Click to expand...

Just so you know, I am not a Muslim. I was born R C but do not quite see things the wrong way that they do.

You say I am wrong about your views. Lets check your view of Genesis.

Most see Genesis as the fall of man and a failure of God to start us off properly.

Is this also your view? If not please show it.

Regards
DL
 
Follower said:
here are some of the disputed books-

Disputed books -Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, 2-3 John, Jude, Ps-Barnabas, Hermas, Didache, Gospel of Hebrews

Considered heretical—Gospels of Peter, Thomas, Matthaias, Acts of Andrew, John, etc.

These were disputed because they were either written at a later date, not referenced by early church fathers, or made weird claims, etc.
Click to expand...

Banned From the Bible
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EPOsTVjWlE&feature=related

Regards
DL
 
Greatest I am said:
Just so you know, I am not a Muslim. I was born R C but do not quite see things the wrong way that they do.

You say I am wrong about your views. Lets check your view of Genesis.

Most see Genesis as the fall of man and a failure of God to start us off properly.

Is this also your view? If not please show it.

Regards
DL
Click to expand...
No. It is not my view that God failed in any respect. And I disagree with your assumption that most see Genesis as a failure of God to start us off right. The fall of man is man's failure, not God's. In fact, God did start us off right, and then we took a left turn.
 
OT is for jews i know...but everything written in Torah and Zabur(psalm) are recite in Quran...and the Bani ishmael(ismail) and Ibrahim(Abraham)are the same religion of Muhammad SAW...peace be upon him...isLam...but the JewS and Christianity in NT...always verse by verse changing the book of Torah,Zabur,The Scrolls and injeel(bible)...Jesus told that there is a comforter name Ahmad...after him is the Closing prophethood after Jesus....The Quran is the Book oF God that forevER live and everlasting that never change till the End of the world.
 
Suffiyan007 said:
...but the JewS and Christianity in NT...always verse by verse changing the book of Torah,Zabur,The Scrolls and injeel(bible
Click to expand...

The Bible used by Christians contains more than the Torah, Zabur, the Scrolls and injeel. Why do you limit it to these alone?

Could you be specific as to what books you believe were included in the Scrolls?
 
The Scrolls- ibrahim A.S
Torah- Musa A.S
Zaboor- Dawud A.S
InJeel- Isa A.S. a.k.a Holy Bible.
Quran- Muhammad SAW.

We believe the 5 books of Allah Taala who he sent.
When Quran came down to Muhammad SAW. last 4 books of God is banished.
We live in last century that we must believe Allah the Creator, The Angels, The Prophets, The Books of allah(The scrolls,Torah,Zabur,Injeel and Quran), and The Qadar and Qadha of allah(The Good and Bad things whom God sent) to anyone that we face lotsa problems of the world...insyaallah.:thumbs_up
 
Grace Seeker said:
No. It is not my view that God failed in any respect. And I disagree with your assumption that most see Genesis as a failure of God to start us off right. The fall of man is man's failure, not God's. In fact, God did start us off right, and then we took a left turn.
Click to expand...

So you would prefer to see Eve as dumb as a cow without the moral sense that comes with the knowledge of good and evil?

Would you then give up your moral sense?
Would you chose to not be as God, knowing good and evil even as scripture urges us to.

Matthew 5:48
Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect

Regards
DL
 

Similar Threads

Back
Top