47

First Enoch (or the Ethiopic Enoch) stands alone among the Jewish apocalypses for length, diversity, and richness.1 No other ancient non-canonical work influenced the Jewish world of the first century as much as Enoch.2 With its interest in suffering, evil, demons, and the Last Judgment, Enoch helps bridge the gap in life and thought between Malachi and ...


27

No Certain Answer to Give Disclaimer and Explanation of Citations and Notations: The evidence here is largely gleaned from Protestant source material (my tradition), and is presented in a way that argues toward Job being an ancient composition (my view); but the evidence also mentions there are numerous other views on this. A bibliography of all referenced ...


11

As a prior answer has examined where Enoch failed in canonicity, this one shall turn to the Book of Revelation to determine what factors led the church to recognize its canonicity. Though a popular genre, few apocalyptic works found their way into the New Testament canon. The most obvious exception comes to the modern world as The Revelation to John or The ...


9

The Muratorian fragment isn't simply a list of books included in the canon, but also a description of them. It's description of the Gospel of Luke makes it very clear that they believed it was written by Luke: The third book of the Gospel [is that] according to Luke. Luke, "the" physician, after the ascension of Christ, when Paul had taken him with him as ...


8

From the book The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration by Metzger and Ehrman, chapter 1, The making of ancient books, page 11-12: In the Greco-Roman world, literary works were customarily published in the format of a scroll, made of papyrus or parchment. The papyrus scroll was made by gluing together, side by side, ...


8

The Book of Revelation had a mixed reception among the early Church Fathers. This is exemplified by Eusebius, who (Ecclesiastical History, VII, xxv) quotes Bishop Dionysius the Great of Alexandria: Some indeed of those before our time rejected and altogether impugned the book, examining it chapter by chapter and declaring it to be unintelligible and ...


7

This was not, perhaps, Leon Morris's finest moment (quote is on p. 17, originally published 1974), although he certainly wasn't alone in assuming this datum. Neither Howard Marshall, nor John Nolland make mention of Marcion in their circumspect discussions of the attribution of authorship of the third (canonical) gospel -- simply to cite two subsequent "...


4

The Book of Revelations is one of the most controversial books of the Bible, given the Apocalyptic nature of the messages it carries. However, in regards to it's authenticity it has always been seen as being written by the Apostle John on the Isle of Patmos-a barren 30 sq. mi. island in the Aegean Sea where both common and political prisoners were held. Rick ...


4

Revelations is certainly the last book of the bible; however, canonicity wasn't resolved concerning the New Testament until the Council of Trent in 1546; in which it was established that 27 books which we refer to as New Testament were confirmed as "Articles of Faith", and "anathema" was ascribed to those that rejected them.(Reference: Canon of Trent) What ...


4

the book of Revelation (...) got accepted into the canonical New Testament of all the major branches of Christianity This is not true, Book of Revelation isn't accepted in Church of the East and its descendandts (Assyrian Church of the East). Can hermeneutics cast light on how this book overcame these barriers to admission to the canon? "Barriers" you ...


3

This is fairly uncomplicated. Prophetic utterances (= messages from God via a prophet) come in two types: Messages that are appropriate for inclusion in the Canon of Scripture and have content appropriate (as God see fit) for all the people that have and will read the Bible. Messages that only have relevance for the situation or person at the time and are ...


3

The word 'Gospel' is never applied to the records of Jesus' life by the Bible its self, rather it seems that the word is used of the message proclaimed, see for example: Matt. 4:23, Matt. 9:35, Matt. 11:5, Matt. 24:14, Matt. 26:13, Mk. 1:1, 14-15, Mk. 13:10, Mk. 14:9, Mk. 16:15, Lk. 4:18, Lk. 7:22, Lk. 9:6, Lk. 20:1, Acts 8:25, Acts 14:7, 21, Acts 15:7, Acts ...


3

The order of Jude (or texts of the NT in general) in Scripture is often seen as chronological, but there is nothing contained within that requires it. The only chronological stamp would be that it must be after 2 Peter (and Peter's death), as it references 2 Peter 2. The debate for many is whether Revelation was written before AD 70 pertaining to some or all ...


2

Revelation (no 's') is an example of apocalyptic literature, a genre of religious writings common to the intertestamental period, though appearing in Scripture prior to this time in places like Ezekiel. Though this genre is different than, say, discourse or historical narrative, it was common and well recognized by the original audience. The genre is ...


2

It is so so easy to presume in our hindsight history that prophets only knew of what they spoke, but Malachi's perception of his prophetic place is fascinating to consider. Thank you for this question. Since so many prophetic authors (Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Hosea, Malachi, etc.) preface their words with something similar to "the word/vision of the Lord ...


2

Some the congregations in the NT had withing them legitimate prophets of God giving revelations from God. We see this several times such as Acts 15:32, 11:27, 13:1, 21:10, etc. Thus, when someone stood up and claimed to be a prophet with a message/revelation from God, the NT instruction was (as usual) practical: 1 Cor 14:22 - Tongues, then, are a sign, not ...


2

The versification of the Bible is not inspired, and there are occasionally different ways of breaking up the text into chapters and verses. You can compare many translations here. The CEV is taking one option, and making the sentence "The dragon stood on the beach beside the sea." as a distinct verse. This is also the option taken by the NLT, CSB, GNT, ISV, ...


2

As stated in the other question, the main arguments against the authenticity of 2 Peter are: The argument against the authenticity of 2 Peter essentially rests on three observations: A few (admittedly significant) antenicaean father express doubts such as Origen; Eusebius (Ecclesiastical History vi 25, iii 3); Jerome, etc. This exacerbated by the fact until ...


2

Why might Jude vs. 3 tell us that "faith" had been fully delivered to the saints? Answer: Far more than "faith" is meant here. The statement in Jude vs. 3 applies to all that is contained in the Word of God. While it is true that faith applies to our common salvation in Christ, there is a much more profound meaning than the superficiality ...


2

If scripture was synonymous with faith, that would mean that nobody could have the faith Jude spoke of without having "all scripture". If he had written, "...the faith which was once for all written down by the saints", your idea would have had a basis. But faith can be "handed down" verbally, without reading anything. Just ...


1

Let us be very clear what Jude 3 actually states and what he does not state. He says: the faith which was once for all handed down to the saints Thus, Jude is saying that it is the "faith" that was delivered to the saints. This says nothing about whether the NT canon was complete or not. Indeed, at the probable time of writing Jude, several ...


1

Your question can not easily be answered biblically. It could ‘pull out’ supported scriptures, but the answer needs to be started out of scripture. It’s very clear that the apostles and believers had manuscript sources outside of Torah that built up their worldview, including their understanding of the ‘Old Testament’. And as we study these it’s becoming ...


1

It’s simple. John doesn’t mention a single ‘thing’ that hasn’t a firm foundation in the Old Testament. Everything can be referenced back. And, when you do, it matches, without contradicting. So if you accept that the Old Testament authors were inspired, then at the very least John was via them. Notwithstanding that John adds clarity. The book of Revelation ...


1

I would add that the question of canon is effectively answered by any individual individually and or by any given group corporately. We've no history of any universally recognized individual or group within either Judaism or Christianity that has been or is positioned to do so. In a word, the word is what you are willing to hear. A fragment of whichever ...


1

The question was asked: Why was 2 Peter included in the New Testament in the 4th century when its authorship was disputed for so long? Most likely the early church hesitated to accept 2 Peter as authentic because so many other writings were floating around with Peter’s name on them there were clearly heretical. Just like Peter was slow to accept converted ...


1

Tau's answer ends with this note: So while it is highly speculative that John imagined he wrote the last book, it is no stretch to say that John saw the final day, in which those who were redeemed by God from all humanity would dwell with Him for all eternity. Theologically this is surely the most salient point that can be made—whether or not John self ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible