is the Bible fully inspired, and is it just 66 books as canon?

I believe the current 66 books were God breathed (2Ti 3:16). Given by the revelation of Jesus Christ (Gal 1:12), and holy men of God spake [as they were] moved by the Holy Ghost (2Pe 1:21).

What puzzles me are those who in a sense exclude the gospels as inspired, which I partially blame on the practice of synopsis and/or Harmony of the Gospels, which is rooted in the thought of “by the will of man

While this practice, which originally started by Tatian in the 2nd century may seem enlightening and helpful in the understanding of the gospels, when you scrutinize this layout even slightly closer it is anything but helpful. I think there are maybe 26 standard formats of the harmonies…. all of which present problems…. “The synoptic problem”
If I believe that the gospels were written (as some describe) by the recollection or common source of → Mat, Mark, Luke & Johnny ….then it is nothing more than a good story ….devoid of any authority. And when you start with a flawed premise your conclusions will generally be flawed….

The gospels are purposed for a reason by God, exactly the way they are written and do not contradict one another………….. similar is not identical.
 
I believe the current 66 books were God breathed (2Ti 3:16). Given by the revelation of Jesus Christ (Gal 1:12), and holy men of God spake [as they were] moved by the Holy Ghost (2Pe 1:21).

What puzzles me are those who in a sense exclude the gospels as inspired, which I partially blame on the practice of synopsis and/or Harmony of the Gospels, which is rooted in the thought of “by the will of man

While this practice, which originally started by Tatian in the 2nd century may seem enlightening and helpful in the understanding of the gospels, when you scrutinize this layout even slightly closer it is anything but helpful. I think there are maybe 26 standard formats of the harmonies…. all of which present problems…. “The synoptic problem”
If I believe that the gospels were written (as some describe) by the recollection or common source of → Mat, Mark, Luke & Johnny ….then it is nothing more than a good story ….devoid of any authority. And when you start with a flawed premise your conclusions will generally be flawed….

The gospels are purposed for a reason by God, exactly the way they are written and do not contradict one another………….. similar is not identical.
Some Hyper Dispy would place the Gospels and Acts back still in the OT era!
 
Some Hyper Dispy would place the Gospels and Acts back still in the OT era!
I guess I am partial Hyper Dispy…

The separation of the Old and New Testaments is no more God breathed than chapter headings, chapter and verse markings, and punctuation …Helpful absolutely….but not God breathed.

While I don’t put the gospels in the OT …I do consider them to be neither in the old or new …they stand alone as the cohesive bond between the old and new.

Acts records the rise and expansion of the Church of God the age of grace. And shows the transition between law and grace.

But that is getting off the subject of the 66 books being fully inspired.
 
As some have read support just limited inspiration, and have added to the canon additional books to the 66?

YES!

The question is actually rooted in fact that The Catholic bible has 73 books, the Protestant only 66. Why is that?

Were those 7 books removed by the Protestants, or added by the Catholics? Most importantly, do they belong in the Bible?

Those 7 books are called the Apocrypha and I say this with all due respect......when a born again believer actually reads those books it becomes very clear that they are "Occultic" and can never be included in the inspired Word of God.

I will be glad to give anyone who needs to know the examples of that comment if asked.
 
YES!

The question is actually rooted in fact that The Catholic bible has 73 books, the Protestant only 66. Why is that?

Were those 7 books removed by the Protestants, or added by the Catholics? Most importantly, do they belong in the Bible?

Those 7 books are called the Apocrypha and I say this with all due respect......when a born again believer actually reads those books it becomes very clear that they are "Occultic" and can never be included in the inspired Word of God.

I will be glad to give anyone who needs to know the examples of that comment if asked.
Think that Rome included them due to the fact that many of their sacred dogmas could not be found in the 66 canon books!
 
Just asking …what changed at the birth?

Wasn’t the law still applicable for 30 years following the birth…and throughout His ministry of 1.6 years (or 3 years)
 

bobinfaith

Senior Moderator
Staff member
Senior Moderator
I believe the current 66 books were God breathed (2Ti 3:16). Given by the revelation of Jesus Christ (Gal 1:12), and holy men of God spake [as they were] moved by the Holy Ghost (2Pe 1:21).
What puzzles me are those who in a sense exclude the gospels as inspired, which I partially blame on the practice of synopsis and/or Harmony of the Gospels, which is rooted in the thought of “by the will of man
While this practice, which originally started by Tatian in the 2nd century may seem enlightening and helpful in the understanding of the gospels, when you scrutinize this layout even slightly closer it is anything but helpful. I think there are maybe 26 standard formats of the harmonies…. all of which present problems…. “The synoptic problem”
If I believe that the gospels were written (as some describe) by the recollection or common source of → Mat, Mark, Luke & Johnny ….then it is nothing more than a good story ….devoid of any authority. And when you start with a flawed premise your conclusions will generally be flawed….
The gospels are purposed for a reason by God, exactly the way they are written and do not contradict one another………….. similar is not identical.

Hello Sandman;

I like how you aligned the 66 books in the order of God breathed, the revelation of Jesus and those who spoke, prompted by the Holy Spirit.

The inspiration of the canons "the rule of faith" by the early authors and scholars would have their challenges of scrutiny, the will of man, questionable authority, etc...that would shape and arrive at the ultimate purpose of God. That is,

To expect the inerrancy of the Bible as my tool and weapon today, sharing the gospel, those thirty nine in the Old Testament and twenty seven in the New Testament to those who don't know Christ.

God bless you and thank you for sharing, brother.
 

bobinfaith

Senior Moderator
Staff member
Senior Moderator
If the Bible is not fully inspired, when it says it is then we have a credibility problem.

Hey crossnote;

Good point. It reminded me of those I know who were uninspired by the Bible, how the Scriptures fell short with them during the most undesirable circumstances. This affected their witness to others.

Some came back to their senses, others didn't, which sadly can be a hard ministry.
 
Top