• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

The Canonization of the New Testament a Deeper Look!

AbrahamSolomon

Member
Real Person
Male
  • Gospel According to Matthew Most scholars believe the gospel was composed between AD 80 and 90, with a range of possibility between AD 70 to 110; a pre-70 date remains a minority view.
  • Gospel According to Mark The consensus of scholarly opinion is that Mark's gospel was composed either in the mid-60s or shortly after 70 CE, in Rome or in Syria. The recognition that Mark's was the first gospel arose from the quests for the historical Jesus.
  • Gospel According to Luke The Gospel According to Luke, written in roughly 85 C.E. (± five to ten years), most likely during the reign of the Roman Emperor Domitian, is known in its earliest form from extensive papyri fragments dating to the early or middle of the third century.
  • Gospel According to John The Gospel of John, sometimes called "the spiritual gospel," was probably composed between 90 and 100 CE.
  • Acts of the Apostles Acts was apparently written in Rome, perhaps between 70 and 90 ce, though some think a slightly earlier date is also possible.
  • Letter of Paul to the Romans The longest and last written of Paul's authentic epistles (written around 57 or 58 CE), the letter to the Romans is an exceptional text. Unlike his other writings, Paul's letter to the Roman community lacks a particular occasion or causative problem.
  • Letters of Paul to the Corinthians The First Letter of Paul to the Corinthians, probably written about 53–54 ceat Ephesus, Asia Minor, deals with problems that arose in the early years after Paul's initial missionary visit (c. 50–51) to Corinth and his establishment there of a Christian community.
    • I Corinthians
    • II Corinthians
  • Letter of Paul to the Galatians When and where was it written? Paul likely wrote his Epistle to the Galatians while traveling through Macedonia during his third missionary journey in about A.D. 55–57 (see Bible Dictionary, “Pauline Epistles”).
  • Letter of Paul to the Ephesians
    AD 60–61 Paul wrote the letter to the Ephesians sometime in AD 60–61, around the same time he wrote Colossians and Philemon, as he sent all three letters by the hand of Tychicus, accompanied by Onesimus (Ephesians 6:21; Colossians 4:7–9; Philemon 1:10–12).
  • Letter of Paul to the Philippians aul the Apostle to the Philippians, abbreviation Philippians, eleventh book of the New Testament, written by St. Paul the Apostle to the Christian congregation he had established in Philippi. It was penned while he was in prison, probably at Rome or Ephesus, about 62 ce.
  • Letter of Paul to the Colossians Paul wrote this epistle during his first imprisonment in Rome, around A.D. 60–62 (see Guide to the Scriptures, “Pauline Epistles,” scriptures.lds.org). Paul probably wrote the Epistle to the Colossians around the same time he wrote Philippians, Ephesians, and Philemon.
  • Letters of Paul to the Thessalonians When and where was it written? “Paul wrote the epistles to the Thessalonians from Corinth during his second missionary journey,” around A.D. 50–51(Guide to the Scriptures, “Pauline Epistles,” scriptures.lds.org).
    • I Thessalonians
    • II Thessalonians
  • Letters of Paul to Timothy When and where was it written? Paul's First Epistle to Timothy was likely written sometime between A.D. 64 and 65, possibly while Paul was in Macedonia (see Guide to the Scriptures, “Pauline Epistles,” scriptures.lds.org; 1 Timothy 1:3).
    • I Timothy
    • II Timothy
  • Letter of Paul to Titus Paul wrote his letter to Titus from Nicopolis in AD 63, after the apostle's release from his first Roman imprisonment.
  • Letter of Paul to Philemon The epistle is the 18th book of the New Testament canon and was probably composed in Rome about 61 ce.
  • Letter to the Hebrews The letter was composed sometime during the latter half of the 1st century and is the 19th book of the New Testament canon. To judge from its contents, the letter was addressed to a Christian community whose faith was faltering because of strong Jewish influences.
  • Letter of James Dating. According to Josephus (Jewish Antiquities 20.197–203), James the brother of Jesus was killed in 62 CE, during the high priesthood of Ananus. Those who hold to traditional authorship date the epistle to sometime before 62 CE, in the forties or fifties, making it one of the earliest writings of the New Testament.
  • Letters of Peter Letters of Peter, also called Epistles of St. Peter the Apostle, abbreviation Peter, two New Testament writings attributed to St. Peter the Apostle but perhaps written during the early 2nd century.
    • I Peter
    • II Peter
  • Letters of John Letters of John, abbreviation John, three New Testament writings, all composed sometime around 100 ceand traditionally attributed to St. John the Apostle, son of Zebedee and disciple of Jesus.
    • I John
    • II John
    • III John
  • Letter of Jude Assuming Peter wrote his letter first (AD 64–66), Jude probably wrote his epistle sometime between AD 67 and 80.
  • Revelation to John The Book of Revelation was written sometime around 96 CE in Asia Minor. The author was probably a Christian from Ephesus known as "John the Elder." According to the Book, this John was on the island of Patmos, not far from the coast of Asia Minor, "because of the word of God and the testimony of Jesus" (Rev.
 

Similarities and Differences Between John and the Synoptics​


Differences Between the Gospel of John and the Synoptic Gospels and Acts

Miracle Tradition, Rhetoric, and the Synoptic Problem​

 
Who authorized Luke to write The Book of Luke?

KJV
1 Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,

2 Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word;

3 It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,

NKJV
1 Inasmuch as many have taken in hand to set in order a narrative of those things which [a]have been fulfilled among us, 2 just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word delivered them to us, 3 it seemed good to me also, having [b]had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write to you an orderly account, most excellent Theophilus,

So is Luke saying that because others have written theirs and he feel like he knows it as good he might as well write one as well?
Could this be why The 4 Gospels don't completely agree?

The Good News is that most of the dates above are most likely closer to The Death and Resurrection of Yahshua, The Book of Mark is from everything I have seen is the oldest written in what is called The Eyewitness Period. The Book of Mark was most likely written more like 30 years after and Matthew was around 50 years later, there is also proof that Verses have been added to The New Testament as well.

Why does the book of Mark have two endings?

Most scholars agree that this happy ending was a later addition, since it was not present in the earliest manuscripts. It seems that later scribes were uncomfortable with Mark's inconclusive ending, so they provided an appropriate conclusion with what they knew had happened.

If you look at The 4 Gospels one must ask why 4 and why don't they fully agree? Most likely they are oral Teachings and from Memory luckily they in most areas. But are they Divine? Could a Divine set of books have any differences? So could they be from an unknown book or writings? We might never know, but Nothing New can contradict The Old Testament or it is either a wrong understanding or it is a Lie!

  1. Not to add to the commandments of the Torah, whether in the Written Law or in its interpretation received by tradition (Deut. 13:1) (CCN159). See Torah.
  2. Not to take away from the commandments of the Torah (Deut. 13:1) (CCN160). See Torah.
 
Mark's and John's Gospels
The opening chapter of Mark says that Jesus is from “Nazareth of Galilee.” This is repeated throughout the Gospel on several occasions, and Bethlehem is never mentioned.Dec 15, 2020

vs

Bethlehem

According to the Gospel of Matthew, the first Gospel in the canon of the New Testament, Joseph and Mary were in Bethlehem when Jesus was born.Dec 15, 2020

Mark mainly spoke about how Jesus was the suffering son of God, like Matthew does, but Matthew also introduces how Jesus is like the new Moses, coming to set his people free from their bondage, giving them new teachings and laws.Apr 13, 2015

What does the book of Matthew say about the birth of Jesus?



Image result for the story of the birth of jesus according to matthew


Matt 1:22-23 - All this took place to fulfill what had been spoken by the Lord through the prophet: "Look, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and they shall name him Emmanuel," which means, "God is with us."Dec 18, 2020

vs

This text is repeated in Matthew's version. Luke mentions that Jesus is not only genealogically connected to King David, but also born in Bethlehem, “the city of David.”

What does Luke say about the birth of Jesus?


Thus, Luke tells us, “And she gave birth to her firstborn son and wrapped him in swaddling clothes and laid him in a manger, because there was no place for them in the inn” (v. 7). Thus, Jesus was born in Bethlehem.Apr 23, 2022
 

The First 4 Books, I am bring this here so you can look deeper into them for better understanding.​

We can all learn more!

Overview: Mark


Mark

#1. Overview: Matthew 1-13

#2. Overview: Matthew 1-13

#1. Overview: Luke 1-9

#2. Overview: Luke 10-24

#1. Overview: John 1-12

#2. Overview: John 13-21
 
I watched the overview of John:1-12. Having taught systematically through this gospel account I appreciated the overview. Thank you. Shalom
 
Last edited:
It sure feels like you want to cast doubt on the New Testament.
No, but we must ask everything to make sure everything is a fact.
How many of us know of The Gnostic Gospels? How many of you have read them?
I have and what if they had been added? We would have a totally different view.
If you care about facts then we must make sure we have facts, to me it seems that all 4 Gospels are retelling of what they learned from eyewitnesses. I believe The Main Message of it is Truth but we must understand that they do not match up, Divine Word would be exact with all 4.
This is meant to Question Everything in Everything we do, Also I have been trying to locate The Original Hebrew New Testament.
Later I will dig deep into The Gnostic Gospels after I am done with The New Testament, I care very deeply about The Truth of G-d so I believe we must come together to Seek Truth in Everything.

Also I will dig deep in Books Removed from The Old Testament and why I believe even Historic Books for be left in.
 
I find the apocryphal gospels interesting because the unique things the Quran claims about Jesus actually appear previously in these earlier gospels - such as the miracle of making a clay bird and getting it to come to life. Regardless of whether or not this claimed miracle is true, it shows that the Quran was compiled from stories that were already floating around, undermining the Muslim claim that these details came from new divine revelation. This is useful to know when discussing Jesus with Muslims.

Having said that, I think that the early Christians were in a far better place than us to determine which books were reliable and not, so we're better off sticking with their lists of which books were canonical than trying to re-open this question and come up with new lists ourselves. This means both rejecting those New Testament books that were rejected by the early church - and accepting the Old Testament apocryphal books that were deliberately preserved by the church as having at least some value for study.
 
I find the apocryphal gospels interesting because the unique things the Quran claims about Jesus actually appear previously in these earlier gospels - such as the miracle of making a clay bird and getting it to come to life. Regardless of whether or not this claimed miracle is true, it shows that the Quran was compiled from stories that were already floating around, undermining the Muslim claim that these details came from new divine revelation. This is useful to know when discussing Jesus with Muslims.

Having said that, I think that the early Christians were in a far better place than us to determine which books were reliable and not, so we're better off sticking with their lists of which books were canonical than trying to re-open this question and come up with new lists ourselves. This means both rejecting those New Testament books that were rejected by the early church - and accepting the Old Testament apocryphal books that were deliberately preserved by the church as having at least some value for study.

I study other religions but I do it to show how wrong they are not by telling them they have some Truths.
I have Muslim friends and I respect their obedience and the irony that Muhammad took them out of beings pagans and expect Yahshua and His Virgin Birth and not He is Our Savior I wish more True Believers had their dedication to as some Muslims. But even though I am Jewish The Truth must include Yahshua as He has Power of Salvation.

I see the future of evil and that is where people pick their favorite parts of each and they are already here.
I have seen Churches that have part of different religions all-in-one and they are far more welcoming and have no Laws.

I am not sure if we are able to know what books should and should not be in The Bible but I believe that if Everything Must Agree with The Old Testament we will have Truth even if a few books are wrong.

My Hope is that this will serve as a Learning Place where people can find information.
 
Last edited:
We are learning for sure!
 
We are learning for sure!
NickF, I am not sure what you are getting at but make sure its about learning The Bible and not being condescending!
If my post do not help you them please find another post to reply too.
 
No, but we must ask everything to make sure everything is a fact.
How many of us know of The Gnostic Gospels? How many of you have read them?
I have and what if they had been added? We would have a totally different view.
If you care about facts then we must make sure we have facts, to me it seems that all 4 Gospels are retelling of what they learned from eyewitnesses. I believe The Main Message of it is Truth but we must understand that they do not match up, Divine Word would be exact with all 4.
This is meant to Question Everything in Everything we do, Also I have been trying to locate The Original Hebrew New Testament.
Later I will dig deep into The Gnostic Gospels after I am done with The New Testament, I care very deeply about The Truth of G-d so I believe we must come together to Seek Truth in Everything.

Also I will dig deep in Books Removed from The Old Testament and why I believe even Historic Books for be left in.
You have delved into things beyond your understanding. The Gospels do match up. You’ve been deceived and are now passing that deception along, hopefully unwittingly. But whatever is going on you need to stop being so confident in your assumptions. Vast swath of what you’ve been saying are patently ridiculous.

For instance; you think it’s a contradiction that Jesus was born in Bethlehem but described and being from Nazareth. However it’s a common thing to this day for someone to be described as from a place they weren’t born in. I tell people I’m from a small town in the Appalachians. I am. I’ve lived here for 40 plus years. But I wasn’t born here.

Christ lived in Bethlehem for two years. He grew up in Nazareth. Of course He was “from Nazareth”. You’re being silly or deceitful or possibly both but either way you need to stop it.
 
No, but we must ask everything to make sure everything is a fact.
How many of us know of The Gnostic Gospels? How many of you have read them?
I have and what if they had been added? We would have a totally different view.
If you care about facts then we must make sure we have facts, to me it seems that all 4 Gospels are retelling of what they learned from eyewitnesses. I believe The Main Message of it is Truth but we must understand that they do not match up, Divine Word would be exact with all 4.
This is meant to Question Everything in Everything we do, Also I have been trying to locate The Original Hebrew New Testament.
Later I will dig deep into The Gnostic Gospels after I am done with The New Testament, I care very deeply about The Truth of G-d so I believe we must come together to Seek Truth in Everything.

Also I will dig deep in Books Removed from The Old Testament and why I believe even Historic Books for be left in.
And clearly you have not read the Gnostic gospels. They are over a 1,000 pages long.

And if you had you would know that they explicitly contradict the Bible. The Bible literally labels gnostics heretics. And they are. They believe creation was performed by the devil (not their word but an accurate one) and all corporeal matter is evil.

They’re morons and you’re a moron if you think they hold any truth or validity outside of rejecting straight up polytheism, although they stray very close to polytheism from a practical standpoint.

Again, you speak very confidently for a man who appears to know very little.
 
You have delved into things beyond your understanding. The Gospels do match up. You’ve been deceived and are now passing that deception along, hopefully unwittingly. But whatever is going on you need to stop being so confident in your assumptions. Vast swath of what you’ve been saying are patently ridiculous.

For instance; you think it’s a contradiction that Jesus was born in Bethlehem but described and being from Nazareth. However it’s a common thing to this day for someone to be described as from a place they weren’t born in. I tell people I’m from a small town in the Appalachians. I am. I’ve lived here for 40 plus years. But I wasn’t born here.

Christ lived in Bethlehem for two years. He grew up in Nazareth. Of course He was “from Nazareth”. You’re being silly or deceitful or possibly both but either way you need to stop it.

You clearly don't comprehend what I am saying and instead accusing me of stuff you yourself is unable to comprehend.
 
And clearly you have not read the Gnostic gospels. They are over a 1,000 pages long.

And if you had you would know that they explicitly contradict the Bible. The Bible literally labels gnostics heretics. And they are. They believe creation was performed by the devil (not their word but an accurate one) and all corporeal matter is evil.

They’re morons and you’re a moron if you think they hold any truth or validity outside of rejecting straight up polytheism, although they stray very close to polytheism from a practical standpoint.

Again, you speak very confidently for a man who appears to know very little.

You are the one who is clueless, try a little hard before accusing people of stuff.
 
You are the one who is clueless, try a little hard before accusing people of stuff.
I may be clueless but it took exactly two minutes to find out the gnostic gospels were buried for 1,700 years and only exist in one copy for a reason. They’re stupid. They’re not scripture. They don’t belong in the Bible.

You’re trying to sound smart and aren’t. You’re regurgitating scraps of nonsense you heard in random places and cutting and pasting largely unrelated content from across the internet that mostly doesn’t even relate to what you’re saying.

I don’t know what caliber of intellects you’re used to dealing with but you’re out of your depth here. I don’t know one man or woman who’s been here longer than a year who would ever take any statement at face value or on someone’s say-so.

You’ve insulted respected women, you’ve cast aspersions at almost every one here, implying that we do not follow the true faith because we’re not Jews; meanwhile you seem blissfully unencumbered by the historical fact that Judaism isn’t the religion of Moses or any of the Judges, Patriarchs, Prophets, kings, Israel or even Judah itself. Judaism was never commanded. It arose after the Babylonian captivity as a way to cope with the new reality. It was further refined after the A.D 140 expulsion of the Jews from Jerusalem and the final destruction of the Temple.

Few of its tenets and traditions are actually commands. It was founded by Ezra on the rubble of Israel and Judah. You don’t know what you’re talking about yet you keep talking and you keep talking with a stunning amount of certitude. Your blind hubris borders on insanity and that’s if it’s not rooted in a malignant intention to deceive.

Just stop talking. If you want to engage around the topic of Biblical marriage then fine but if you’re just here to put forward assinine theological fantasy then spare us. Very few of us agree with each other on this sort of thing. No one is going to agree with you.
 
I may be clueless but it took exactly two minutes to find out the gnostic gospels were buried for 1,700 years and only exist in one copy for a reason. They’re stupid. They’re not scripture. They don’t belong in the Bible.

You’re trying to sound smart and aren’t. You’re regurgitating scraps of nonsense you heard in random places and cutting and pasting largely unrelated content from across the internet that mostly doesn’t even relate to what you’re saying.

I don’t know what caliber of intellects you’re used to dealing with but you’re out of your depth here. I don’t know one man or woman who’s been here longer than a year who would ever take any statement at face value or on someone’s say-so.

You’ve insulted respected women, you’ve cast aspersions at almost every one here, implying that we do not follow the true faith because we’re not Jews; meanwhile you seem blissfully unencumbered by the historical fact that Judaism isn’t the religion of Moses or any of the Judges, Patriarchs, Prophets, kings, Israel or even Judah itself. Judaism was never commanded. It arose after the Babylonian captivity as a way to cope with the new reality. It was further refined after the A.D 140 expulsion of the Jews from Jerusalem and the final destruction of the Temple.

Few of its tenets and traditions are actually commands. It was founded by Ezra on the rubble of Israel and Judah. You don’t know what you’re talking about yet you keep talking and you keep talking with a stunning amount of certitude. Your blind hubris borders on insanity and that’s if it’s not rooted in a malignant intention to deceive.

Just stop talking. If you want to engage around the topic of Biblical marriage then fine but if you’re just here to put forward assinine theological fantasy then spare us. Very few of us agree with each other on this sort of thing. No one is going to agree with you.

You can believe as you want and are free to find another post if this bothers you.
 
How important to our Salvation is All 4 Gospels?
Could someone read one of The 4 Gospels and be Saved?
Did it require all 4?

I myself have used The New Testament as Law and I wonder if it can be used that way.
If it was in fact done by people who believed themself worthy it might be "based" on The Truth and not exact.
They have The Basic Agreement but to me I have held them to a much Higher Standard.

I think we have 4 Gospels because if they are True then some seem to be missing key information and only by having all 4 do you get a fuller understanding. But it is a very human process and so misunderstanding can and will happen, I understand we can't go back in time to know for sure and I think that is why they just added all 4. I don't believe they can be used as The Tanakh/Old Testament and we need to understand this so we used it this way.

Now I will dig into why The Gnostic Gospels was not added and what if there was a Book or Books that was added that wasn't supposed to be. "Tomorrow!"
 
@AbrahamSolomon, at this point I must remind you that this is a discussion forum. It is not a blog site for one person to use to preach all their own personal views to the world. It is for discussions.

You are welcome to post thoughts and questions here, and engage in discussion on those thoughts and questions. It is through such debates that we learn through "iron sharpening iron".

You are not welcome to use this forum to publish screeds and screeds of information. If you want to publish this sort of volume of material, you need to get your own website, or write a book. The site rules clearly state:
  • Don't copy and paste large amounts of content from other websites or previous posts. Post a link instead.
  • Don't take over the discussion. Let other people share their views also.
  • Do not attempt to impose your views on others, or dominate conversation to the point that others' views cannot be clearly expressed also.
Answer people's questions and objections to your statements, or refrain from posting. You could begin by actually answering the question you had posed to you days ago - why do you write "g-d" instead of "god" - to which you have given no better answer than "it's a habit".
 
Back
Top