The concept of sin is one of the leading themes in the Bible, and this doctrine is central in the Christian faith. Although the meaning of this term might differ among biblical texts, in a broader sense, it can be understood as an offense against God and his purpose for humanity and the world (Balentine et al. 311). Throughout the Scriptures, sin is portrayed as the main tool that the devil employs to oppose God and, ultimately, to destroy humanity. It can also be broadly defined as any action that is wrong, “all unrighteousness is sin” (The Bible. Authorized King James Version, 1 John 5:17). The main goal of this paper is to study the development of the idea of sin throughout the Bible and to discuss the differences between the interpretations of this concept in various biblical texts.
There are at least ten different Hebrew words used in the Old Testament that translate into the English language as “sin.” The meanings of these words vary and might depend on the context in which they are used, but all of these terms mainly carry the idea of offense, transgression, or committing wrongs. The broad definition of the word might also include acts committed against God himself, harming other people, and disobedience to the laws and boundaries that God set for humankind (Balentine et al. 312).
In Genesis, sinful behavior is presented as something that separates a person from God himself and from the way of life he originally intended for people, “your iniquities have separated you from your God; your sins have hidden his face from you” (The Bible. Authorized King James Version, Gen. 20:3). This conflict is especially apparent in the story of Adam and Eve and the rebellion in Eden. In this text, the idealistic life in the fruitful garden that God created for his children (The Bible. Authorized King James Version, Gen 2:15) is contrasted with the consequences of the disobedience to God and eventual expulsion of the first people from Eden (The Bible. Authorized King James Version, Gen 3:23-24).
Similar to the Old Testament, the New Testament contains many different terms and metaphors for sin. The researchers have put together a list of 30 words that refer to this idea (Balentine et al. 318). One of the most general definitions of the concept of sin that can be found in the New Testament goes as following, “whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law” (The Bible. Authorized King James Version, 1 John 3:4).
Jesus Christ is the central figure in The New Testament, and the theme of his crucifixion and the sacrifice he made to save people from evil and to bring them back to God is leading in the Gospels. Jesus teaches his followers to bear against sin and to repent in order to be forgiven. Jesus is shown as both the advocate of sinful humankind and the sacrifice that had to be paid to return people to righteousness and to bring about justice.
Disbelieving Jesus and rejecting his teaching is the most severe offense in the New Testament, it is mentioned multiple times throughout the text that to refuse to follow the word of Jesus Christ is the same as to reject God himself (Balentine et al. 320).
There are many similarities in the ways the Old and the New Testament portray sin; the texts often use the same metaphors and comparisons to illustrate the damage caused by morally wrong behavior and the contrast between the life of righteousness and sin. For example, the life that God intended for his children is often compared to light, whereas evil is shown as darkness. God’s forgiveness to people is one of the key themes in the Old Testament, and it is central to the New Testament (Balentine et al. 318).
The leading idea of many biblical texts is that no matter how lost and sinful humans become, God’s response is not just to judge them but to help people to rise against evil and turn back to the way of life that the Lord originally intended for the humankind (Balentine et al. 311). This idea culminates in the story of Jesus Christ, the son of God, whose mission was to save humanity from evil and who pays the ultimate price of sacrificing himself to redeem humanity.
The doctrine of sin sees further development in the New Testament and is different from the Old Testament in many aspects. Jesus Christ teaches that sin is not only present in human behavior, but it also includes thoughts. Jesus euphemizes that evil is in people’s minds and hearts (The Bible. Authorized King James Version, Matt 15:17–20). It extends the idea of sin from the Old Testament, where the term applies only to physical actions.
It is also significant to mention that God’s reaction to humans’ transgressions changes as well and shifts towards being much more merciful. In the Old Testament, God responses to human sins with furious retaliation. The Scripture provides numerous descriptions of the terrible consequences of disobedience to God’s will. Plagues of Egypt and the death of firstborn is a prime example of it (The Bible. Authorized King James Version, Ex. 11:1–12:36). The New Testament, on the other hand, emphasizes forgiveness, using the figure of Jesus Christ as an example of unconditional love and compassion. Sending his son to death as a sacrifice for sin, God shows love and desire to bring people back to his domain and away from evil.
Interpretation of the biblical events up to this day remains a subject of debate among different religious groups as well as among scholars and philosophers. The concept of sin manifests itself in multiple different ways throughout the Scriptures, and it plays a key role in the conflict of good in evil. The difference in the way it is described in the Old and New Testament shows how the idea evolved in time. Studying the development of this concept helps improve the understanding of the Bible as well as the Christian religion and culture in general.
Works Cited
Balentine, S. E., et al. The Oxford encyclopedia of the Bible and theology. Oxford University Press, 2015.
The Bible. Authorized King James Version, Oxford University Press, 1998.
In this chef-d’oeuvre work, Bridgeman explores the Biblical book of Jonah from an Africana setting. The article also highlights the converging point of the book of Jonah and the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) that occurred in South Africa immediately after the end of apartheid. The article starts with an introduction where Bridgeman gives a brief contextual overview of the book of Jonah as recorded in the Bible. After the introduction, the author classifies Jonah in an Africana context where he draws parallels between what happen to him on the way Tarshish and the approach to reconciliation in post-apartheid South Africa. Bridgman then compares Jonah’s situation to the postcolonial thought where the colonized were required to abandon their cultures, beliefs, and way of life. Bridgeman (2010) posits, “The primary reason why people are colonized is to advance one’s religious notions, to rape the land and people of their resources, and to gain personal glory for being a conqueror” (p. 184).
The author then moves on to explore the issue of missionary impulses, rapprochement, and the perils of granting people blanket pardon. In this section, Bridgeman explores the issue of victims of oppression being required to forgive their tormentors. Apparently, Jonah could not understand why God would be so merciful to forgive the people of Nineveh, yet they had caused great pain to Israelites. Similarly, after the apartheid, native South Africans were required to forgive their colonialists and accept them in society, which would amount to granting them blanket amnesty. Bridgman concludes by exploring the problems surrounding the preaching of the book of Jonah coupled with how Africans can approach the issues of colonial atrocities in the contemporary times.
Critique
Bridgeman raises a critical issue surrounding the story of Jonah, which is relevant to the story of reconciliation in post-apartheid South Africa. Jonah disobeyed God’s order because He was using mercy to abet injustices. Jonah was required to go and preach the gospel of repentance to the people of Nineveh. However, he knew that God was too merciful that if these people repented their sins, he would forgive them. However, in Jonah’s view, the Ninevites did not deserve a chance to repent because they were a cruel people. Their existence meant the endangerment of the Israelites, Jonah’s people. The Ninevites would receive a “blanket amnesty, since there is no evidence that repentance meant repair the damage or change their blood-thirsty, land-grabbing, and people-enslaving ways” (Bridgeman, 2010, p. 185). This aspect could not make sense to Jonah because his enemies would not be held accountable for their deeds. In other words, they could repent, go back to their atrocious ways, and repent again because God is such a merciful creator. This move eliminated the possibility of justice. The Ninevites would receive mercy packaged as blanket amnesty, but Jonah’s people would get injustice. Therefore, Jonah was required to understand that mercy is not earned, as those who receive it do not deserve it, but they get it anyway. For mercy to prevail over injustice would amount to an anomaly, and thus Jonah decided to flee. The underlying question in this case is whether Jonah had the right to be angry. Was he justified to do what he did or was he acting from ignorance. Apparently, the Bible suggests that Jonah had no right of being angry, but this aspect complicates the process of reconciliation.
This scenario played in the post-apartheid South Africa. After the end of apartheid in South Africa, a committee was formed in a bid to reconcile the country and propel it into the future as a unified state bound by the spirit of nationhood. The commission was dubbed the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. The script followed in Jonah’s case applies in this scenario. The work of this commission was to “bring to light atrocities done in the name of a brutal apartheid system and help the country move forward” (Bridgeman, 2010, p. 185). Interestingly, a key component lacked in this commission. The commission sought to unearth the atrocities committed against South Africans, but it was not interested in justice. The victims of this brutal system would only be reminded of what happened to them and then be coerced into forgiving the colonialists for the sake of moving the country forward. In essence, this move amounted to the blanket amnesty that the Ninevites received from God. Bridgeman (2010) errs by supporting the claim that the task “of TRC was to balance the requirements of justice, accountability, stability, peace, and reconciliation….but there is no such balancing act apparent in Jonah’s text” (p. 185). The case of Jonah and that of apartheid in South Africa is similar as none sought any form of balancing. The native South Africans were being coerced into letting bygones be bygones and focusing on nation building, which was the case with Jonah being forced to rescue the very people that had caused him untold pain.
The Ninevites would receive blanket amnesty and so were the colonialists in South Africa. Perhaps, because the South African case involved human subjects, they were duped into thinking that a form of balancing was involved. However, these claims only existed on paper, because true justice was not achieved in South Africa. In Jonah’s case, justice would demand the Ninevites to pay their deeds by compensating the Israelites what had been stolen or taken away from them. In addition, for justice to prevail, the involved parties must be held accountable. Unfortunately, the aspect of accountability lacked in the two cases. In the South African case, the colonialists were powerful and they agreed to end the system under some conditions. Desmond Tutu was given a prewritten script to follow in his pursuit for the alleged justice and reconciliation. In Jonah’s case, the same script played because he was not permitted to question God’s order. The problem with blanket amnesty is that the oppressor is right, while the oppressed is wrong. In Jonah’s case, he was apparently wrong to defy his creator. Similarly, the segregated South Africans would be wrong to repulse reconciliation efforts for the sake of nationhood. The oppressed South Africans were not given back the land that was stolen from them. In addition, they did not get any form of compensation from the oppressors for the suffering that they had undergone during apartheid. Similarly, the Israelites did not get anything from the Ninevites, and this amounted to injustice. Therefore, Bridgeman is wrong to support Tutu’s claims that the TRC sought to strike a balance between justice and injustice. In conclusion, the story of Jonah fits well in the apartheid system of South Africa. The two cases meted injustice to the oppressed parties.
Reference
Bridgeman, V. (2010). Jonah. In H. Page (Ed.), The African Bible (pp. 183-188). Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press.
How would modern human civilization be like if the Bible did not exist? Vishal Mangalwadi opines how the Bible shaped and molded the western civilizations throughout the ages up to the modern state that the world is in his book ‘The Book that Made Your World.’ From the development of modern medicine and abolition of slavery to the originating of the United States of America and the formation of governments in which citizens participate, the Bible breathed life into the western world. In the absence of the Bible, the world as we know it today would simply never exist.
As a Christian and philosopher from India, Vishal Mangalwadi examines the role that the Bible played in the development of modern-day universities worldwide. Mangalwadi (2012) states that neither the imperialists nor the merchants advanced education, but the advancement of knowledge was carried out through the efforts of Christian missionaries. In chapter 12 of his book, Vishal Mangalwadi examines the development of the university system throughout the world, from the founding of Harvard, Yale, and Oxford to Korea, India, Turkey, and Medieval Europe.
Education as a Religious Enterprise
In the early years, education was available only to the most privileged few, just as it is in modern society. Although education has become available to all, it is still an expensive undertaking that not so many people can afford. Mangalwadi (2012) found that for all practical purposes, all education was typically church education. Mangalwadi (2012) also stated that the church furnished a strategy of popular instruction, institutions of higher learning, and an approach towards the academic conversation. The church-based education was not available to everyone who desired it, especially women; it was only available to the rich families and clergy in society.
The overhaul of medieval education brought about the development of modern education. Mangalwadi (2012) states that Martin Luther’s passionate appeal to the Christian nobility in 1520 led to the reformation of education. Luther argued that to reform the university, the Bible would have to be included as the center of its curriculum. Mangalwadi (2012) opined that the university he attended in Allahabad had a church but not a Hindu temple or a Muslim mosque because Christians built it. Education was a fruit of the Biblical missionaries, and it was integral to their Christian missions. Missionaries took the Bible to all corners of the globe and with it education.
Christians came up with the notion of bringing education to colonial subjects. According to Mangalwadi (2012), the Christian’s response to the lack of education in the colonies met with resistance. The colonial overlords at the time did not want to educate their subjects. They figured that it would lead to their struggle for independence, and they did not want to lose the vast amounts of land that they owned.
The early Christians wanted to educate the masses and bring them closer to God. Just as the western society was built through education, they opined that if the subjects were educated in their ways and beliefs, they could thus spread the word of God, as Jesus had wanted. Modern churches continue to spread education where it has not reached through the development of schools and universities the world over. Nearly all modern-day universities credit their founding to the early Christian missionaries and evangelicals.
On the other hand, the secular world positively responds to education. Most communities and nations now believe that education is the key to living a blessed life. Modern education systems are built upon the early teachings and ways that were developed by early missionaries. The school systems that we know of today were established by missionaries as most of the early schools were built and operated by Christian missions.
The main purpose of these schools was to teach a few of the natives in the culture and ways of the Christian faith, and the students, in turn, would go on and teach the same to others. With the Bible as the center of the curriculum, the Gospel spread, and this led to the development of societies. Educated locals were in a better position to get the best jobs, while their mindset and thought patterns were shaped by the Christian education they received.
In response to reading the chapter, I am not surprised much because I went to a school founded and funded by the Catholic Church. We had to attend mass twice a week in the school chapel, complete with an ordained catholic priest. This mass attendance was compulsory whether one was Christian or Muslim, Catholic or Protestant. This fact just goes to show that although time has gone by since the early development of education, the church still has a far wider reach within the school systems the world over and will continue to do so for a long time to come. As Mangalwadi (2012) states, everything good in his hometown is a result of the Holy Bible, even the secular universities that undermine it. To maintain modern society, we cannot ignore the scriptures and the teachings within.
After reading Mangalwadi’s book, my opinion on my culture and other culture has changed a little. Although I recognize the important role that the Bible has played in societies the world over, there are some facets of our forgotten cultures that were good. Mangalwadi (2012) states that missionaries believed that education had moral, political, and commercial overtones. Although some cultural beliefs are better off forgotten, not everything was horrible for these cultures, and incorporating them would have led to a more peaceful and sustainable development worldwide.
The challenges, that leaders are facing today, come in a contemporary form where more and more people are deviating from the biblical teachings. Modern societies are embracing homosexual relationships which are in direct contradiction to the Bible which advocates that relationships should be between a man and a woman. Nothing has changed about how I see myself, although I have come to appreciate and accept just how interconnected our world today is through linkages in the Bible. Without the scriptures, we would not have the modern trappings of life that we enjoy today, and we should not take anything for granted.
Truly, the kingdom of God has spread to the descendants of Abraham in all nations of the world. The biblical word is truly the foundation of modern society, and although there are different opinions, a study of the Holy Bible can result in one being a better leader. As Mangalwadi (2012) noted, the holy book turned meaningful knowledge into wisdom. Applying the knowledge in the Holy Scriptures can result in a very prosperous leadership for ages to come.
Reference
Mangalwadi, V. (2012). The book that made your world: How the Bible created the soul of western civilization. Thomas Nelson.
The “Worst Bible Story” blog is the writer’s reaction to Peter Enns’ text “The Bible Tells Me So: Why Defending Scripture Has Made Us Unable to Read It.” In a similar manner to the text, the blog critiques the conservative appreciation of scriptures by many evangelical Christians. According to Enns, most Christians approve of everything in the Bible as 100% clear, straightforward, and in all ways applicable to our lives (2014). Through a critical reading of the Bible, the writer points out various instances in the Bible that contradict the core teachings of the Christian faith. The dilemma that these contradictions cause among Christians is the subject of the “Worst Bible Story” blog post. The Bible stories that the blogger highlights depict God as able to cause suffering to innocent people and perpetuate unthinkable human rights abuses. The blogger relates these stories to the happenings in her life and makes an assessment of their applicability in the lives of modern Christians. As she puts it, these stories fail to answer the “WTF” question in modern society as they contradict what Christian values stand for.
Assessment
The first story that the writer explores is found in 2 Samuel 21:1-14. It is quite unthinkable that God is purported to have permitted the murder of seven innocent members of Saul’s family to end the famine and affliction that had befallen the land of Israel. In analyzing the lesson drawn from this Scripture, the writer contemplates how God is capable of afflicting innocent people due to the sins of others. She relates the event to her personal life where she at a time considered her illness as a result of her having acquired a boyfriend. While it is common knowledge among Christians that God will judge people according to their deeds, this Bible story is in total contradiction of this fact, and yet Christians are expected to read and approve everything written in the Bible.
The blogger challenges the kind of reasoning that evangelical Christians have even when some scriptures raise questions in their minds. While Saul sinned as an individual by murdering the Gibeonites, it is quite unfortunate that God was appeased by the death of seven innocent people from Saul’s family and ended the famine that was in Israel. The only reason these innocent people had to suffer the brutality is that they were Saul’s blood relatives.
The story also suggests that God is capable of tormenting people with adverse afflictions until they get to realize the exact reason it is happening to them and they repent. This kind of communication that God is seen as capable of having with humans contradicts the notion that He is all-loving and all kind as taught in the Christian faith. Inflicting suffering to people to the point they realize their sins are depicted in numerous other Bible stories. As such, the blogger wants to challenge this image that God is accorded without necessarily appearing to be against Christianity. Since for a Christian, it is inappropriate to challenge the authority of God or to fault Him, the only alternative that the writer finds to challenge these stories is to suggest that the authors of the scriptures might have altered the stories by adding some creativity to emphasize on some lessons. To this end, the author gives an interpretation of the scripture in a manner that open-minded Christians, who may have had these concerns, might be able to relate with.
In the other worst Bible story found in Numbers 25, the blogger describes the suffering of the Israelites while in the desert under Moses’ leadership as a result of their sins. They had forsaken God by sleeping with Moabite women and by worshipping their gods. As a result, God punished them by unleashing a plague that indiscriminately claimed numerous lives. Phineas moved to action to restore the glory of God by throwing a spear into a tent killing a man and a woman who were making love. Through his action, God lifted their affliction and restored sanity among them. Again, this story raises a lot of concerns about the way God has been portrayed.
In many other Bible scriptures, killing is strongly condemned as ungodly and as a serious atrocity. Yet, judging other people and taking it upon oneself to be the advocate of goodness even to the point of using violence is considered acceptable in the scripture. God saved the children of Israel from slavery in Egypt and even before they could reach their destination, He was already punishing them heavily. God’s use of plagues to punish people in the Old Testament was also exhibited in Egypt. While these stories suggest that God can afflict innocent people, some Christians tend to embrace the message.
Phineas appeases God by killing the man and woman even before they get a chance to argue their case. The concept of an all-merciful and all-loving God is, therefore, contradicted by the scripture. Phineas is acclaimed as a heroic figure for his actions that cannot be accepted in modern society. To put this scripture into context, the writer of the blog relates the action of Phineas to that of her friend Hector, who voiced his concerns about Carl being unworthy to receive the Holy Communion. As per the scripture, Hector was acting to restore the honor of God and possibly to save humanity from the wrath that may come as a result of Carl’s mistake. Despite their heroic deeds, Phineas, as well as Hector, contradict the scripture whereby Christians are advised to desist from judging others lest they are judged. The only logical explanation of this Bible story is that the writer might have distorted the real events to achieve some end and thereby contradicted the nature of God.
The “Worst Bible Story” blog post provides a critical Bible reading platform on which the contradicting Bible scriptures are faulted by open-minded Christians. The correlations that the writer creates between the Biblical scriptures and real-life experiences draw valuable criticism of the applicability of the lessons in modern Christian life. For instance, while in modern society murderers are rebuked and punished severely, certain Bible verses applaud the vice citing that it was pleasing to the eyes of God. As such, the only way that Christians can discern the messages contained in the Bible is to read them critically. In this light, the numerous contradictions in the Bible that create confusion in the subject of the nature of God can be highlighted.
References
Enns, P. (2014). The Bible Tells Me So: Why Defending Scripture Has Made Us Unable to Read it. New York: HarperCollins Publishers.
Perfectnumber628. (2015). The Worst Bible Story. (Web Blog Post). Web.
The question on how the bible was formed has attracted immense scholarly research, which has lead to the emergence of an incredibly large scholarly body of knowledge attempting to explain both the Old Testament (OT) and New Testament (NT) canon.
Much of this literature also endeavors to explain the factors that were considered in the listing of various books in the bible considering that some writings believed to contain inspirational writings about Jesus Christ were omitted from inclusion in some versions of the New Testament canon.
For instance, Tenney Merrill, in his text, New Testament Survey, published in 1961, established the criterion used in the listing of books in the NT1. The first criterion is that the writing needed to have been authored by an apostle or a person considered as a close associate to an apostle2.
The writing should not have contradicted with other inspired writing with regard to its doctrinal teachings. Thirdly, writing should have similar ‘feel’ coupled with character while compared to other writings which are inspired3. Lastly, writings were supposed to have been cited by some early Christians and also receive acceptability among many churches4.
While this criterion may explain the inclusion of some books in the NT canon, as revealed by the historical considerations of the NT canon in this paper, this criterion fails to apply in some instances. The aim of this paper is to explore how the New Testament was formed through historical research, the influence of the church, and how Marcion’s edited canon impelled the early church Christians to move toward formally approving the books that were accepted as the official New Testament canon.
Historical perspective in formation of New Testament
Historical studies on the development of the NT claim that the inspired writings that forms books in the NT were first spread orally. However, Christian scholars disagree with this account. They argue such a theoretical perspective “would threaten the integrity of Jesus’ message, and thus threaten the validity of the gospel tradition”5. The implication of this on arguments of formation of the NT is that historical accounts of NT canon become problematic.
Nevertheless, it is crucial to note that presentation of historical accounts of NT canon entangles dealing with delicate information while still ensuring that history is presented objectively in the context of happenings that took place more than 2000 years ago. Evidence for the validity of such historical accounts also becomes hard to evidence especially by noting that the writing art was not well developed in this time due to limitation of writing materials.
Historians such as Metzger claim that oral traditions that carried the Jesus’ word were written first in the early 40’s AD6. The author further argues that this was done to ensure that an authoritative order of the sayings was kept intact so that integrity of the word could be kept live across generations to come. This historical perspective is developed further by Nag Hammadi text as documented in the Nag Hammadi Library.
This library is “a collection of thirteen ancient codices containing over fifty texts, discovered in the Egyptian desert in 1945, sealed in a large clay jar”7. Carried in this jar was the Thomas’ gospel. This gospel encompasses collections of various sayings that are not chronologically arranged or carrying any thematic order. Some of saying documented are parallels which are almost identical to the verses appearing in the gospels of Luke, mark and Mathew. Gospel of Thomas Saying 11 quotes Jesus saying:-
“This heaven will pass away, and the one above it will pass away. The dead are not alive, and the living will not die. In the days when you consumed what is dead, you made it what is alive. When you come to dwell in the light, what will you do? On the day when you were one you became two. But when you become two, what will you do?”8
Historians contend there is a high probability that leaders in early times found such saying valuable and found it necessary to record them down in the form of writing to retain their authoritative voice of command. Majority of religious historical scholars also contend that the first NT gospel to be written was the Gospel of Mark (in 60’s AD), followed by gospel Mathew and then gospel of Luke (80’s AD).
Dating of NT inspired writing is incredibly difficult because some of their believed authors did not quote from various writings. A good example of such writers is Paul, whose writings do not carry quotations from the four main gospel books of the NT. The main argument developed for this by historian is that during the early times in which some of the NT books are believed to have been written, there was slow copying speed coupled with low circulations speeds9.
This perhaps explains why clear quotations from the past inspired writings only appeared in the writings completed in the second century. It is in this century that Papyrus also become available for use in writing outside Egyptian region.
1st Clement and Barnabas are some of the non-NT Christian early documentations which in the second century made reference to NT as an allusion while quoting OT principally as a scripture. In this line of argument Harry reckon “Ignatius of Antioch (107 -120 AD) is full allusions to and paraphrases of the New Testament”10. Later, in the second century, writers begun to have quotations verifiable to have been obtained in what people refer to NT canon.
In the same time Marcion’s NT canon appeared. Marcion’s NT canon was done in 140’s AD. The NT canon only carried epistles of Paul coupled with the Gospel according to Luke. Marcion argued that other Gospels were not accurate and hence invalid for inclusion in the Canon since Jews had tampered with them. This suggests according to Marcion that oral tradition was not accurately recorded in the books. The work of Marcion pushed hard the early church to come up with a listing of the NT.
Between 170 AD and 175 AD, Tatian came up with the Diatessaron. This was collection that contained the four main orthodox gospels. The text received acceptance to the extents that it almost replaced the four gospels books in the modern NT. Unfortunately, this acceptance lived only shortly. Nevertheless, this makes it clear that at the time of Tatian, the church had already begun to embrace the four Gospels as opposed to rejection of three of them by Marcion.
Towards the end of the second century Clement of Alexandra, and Tertullian works carried quotation from many of the NT. However Clements included many inspired writings in his works which never made it in the NT. According to Shelley One can develop the entire NT by use of the Clement and Tertullian works with the exception of a few epistles11. The questions that arise here is- did these two authors have access to the NT canon to quote from?
The oldest orthodox canon is the Muratorian Canon. This manuscript is believed by many scholars to have been written between 170 AD and 200AD. Discovered in the Italian library, the manuscript has its first fragments missing. It mentions four main gospels: Luke, John, Mathew and Mark. However, these last two books are merely assumed to be mentioned in the missing fragment.
Other books mentioned as forming part of the NT canon includes Acts, the 13 Pastoral Epistles, revelations to John and Jude12. The canon also fails to mention books such as Hebrews 3rd John coupled with 1st and 2nd Peter. Some documents which are not included in the orthodox NT are also mentioned in the canon. By the end of the second century many of the 27 NT documents had gained incredible acceptance.
During the 3rd and 4th century the magnitude and the frequency of quotation from the inspirational writings that form NT increased while mention of the inspirational writings which are not incorporated in the modern NT decreased tremendously. Prolific religious writers in the third century included “Tertullian, Hippolytus of Rome, Origen of Alexandria and Cyprian of Carthage”13.
Christian literature citing acceptant of the 27 inspirational writing forming the modern NT exploded in the 4th century through the works of scholars like Cappadocian fathers, Lactantius and John Chrysostom among others. All these scholars marked the way for proclaiming on the NT cannon officially.
Some historians contend that NT was officially accepted during the Nicea council meeting, where 20 church rules were voted for. However, the first reference, which provides whole list of 27 NT writings, was a letter sent by Athanasius during Easter in 367 AD. Additionally, Shelley notes “the first time a church council ruled on the list of “inspired” writings allowed to be read in the church was at the Synod of Hippo in 393 AD and no document survived from this council”14.
This decision is only known to by historians is because it was referenced in 397 AD during the Carthage of the 3rd Synod. Nevertheless, this Carthage never mentioned all the writings individually. Rather, phrases like- ‘four gospel’ are common. The main purpose of the Carthage was to declare which writings were considered sacred. Hence, they needed to be read in church. The reason in support for inclusion of any particular or group of writings in the canon of NT was also not given.
Based on the above discussions, it is arguable that NT canon evolved and developed between 250 and 300 years marking the early Christian history. The decision to include certain writings and not others in the NT canon was neither arrived at by an individual nor made during any church council meeting. Specific wrings which formed the NT canon developed gradually through the power of being trusted as precise representations of the beliefs of early Christians.
Influence of the church in formation of New Testament
Church played central roles in the formation of the NT. However, it is crucial to note that the formation of NT never took place at a single consensus meeting. Indeed, there was no single time that all churches meet and universally agreed on the books that should be included in the canon. The whole process took more than one century in which proliferation of various writing was done before people begun to select which writing to include in the NT.
The whole process was “cumulative, individual and happenstance event, guided by chance and prejudice more than objective and scholarly research, until priests and academics began pronouncing what was authoritative and holy, and even they were not unanimous”15. All churches had established lists of the books which they favored.
This is because no orthodoxy that was clearly defined existed in the years preceding 4th century. Several literarily traditions that were simultaneous existed. Only the churches that came up at the top had its texts preserved while texts that were opposing to its got vanished. This implies that the modern orthodoxy is merely a compilation of texts of the church that emerged the winner.
In the processes of the formation of the NT canon, there were different doctrines having different canons such as the eastern churches. These doctrines were also divided internally for instance “Ethiopian and Coptic and Syrian and Byzantine and Armenian canons all riding side-by-side with each other and with the Western Catholic canon, which itself was never perfectly settled until the 15th century”16.
This means that a way of unifying churches to ensure that all churches accepted specific writings was necessary. Thus, church had to come up with acceptable list of inspirational readings. However, this was incredibly difficult since different churches had different roles in contribution to the final listing of the NT books.
In the events of high influences of heretics during mid century, church was in the process of producing a list of NT which presents the world of God in a unique way. Considering the roles of the church in the development of the NT, it is evident that the idea of heretics was not the only driving force for development of a new list of NT opposed to the Marcion’s canon.
Perhaps the most significant contribution of the church in the development of the NT canon is Jewish canonization during 90AD during Jammia council. In this context, Stephen notes, “This obvious example of canonizing scripture could only have been a decisive influence of the church”17. Church made substantive efforts to influence the formation of NT in 150 to 170AD.
In this time church played the roles of collection followed by subsequent standardization of inspired writings, which would later form the NT. Irenaeus of Lyons moved away quickly from the tradition of use of only OT to accommodation of the NT documents as part of scriptures in an attempt to defend the strategic effort of the church to disregard the Gnostics coupled with heresies.
Muratoran fragment formed one of the well known lists of acceptable inspirational writings. This fragment is considered by many religious historians’ scholars to have been authored in 170 AD18 by the western church. It was written as part of introduction of the list of texts that formed the scriptures.
In the words of … “The significance of the fragment with regard to the formation of the New Testament canon is found in its list of what was considered in the latter second-century to be the –scriptural books”19. While reading this fragment, there arises the feeling for common agreement and or rejection of views of the church on the acceptable listed books.
After the Muratorian Fragment, as the second century came to an end, Theophilus of Antioch also came up with various pieces of writing which defended the position of the church in influencing the official readings in the church. Based on this assertion, it is arguable that church believed that it has the final say in matters of the inspirational writing that were to be incorporated in the NT.
How Marcion’s edited canon impelled the early church Christians to move toward formally approving the books that were accepted as the official New Testament canon
Marcion believed in Jesus Christ as the savior sent by God while Paul was his immediate apostle. In the founding years of his school of religious belief, Marcion received several followers but later lost them due to several criticism related to his approach of NT listing. Mercion argued other gospels, apart from Luke, were interfered with by Jews20.
Hence, they did not represent the actual message of Jesus Christ. This explains why he omitted them in his NT canon. The early church was opposed to this position, making Marcion’s teaching irrelevant. Thus, his theology did not last for a long time.
The rejection of the Marcions NT canon was based on erroneous teachings that the early church considered as misleading. For instance, he claimed the God of NT was different from the God of the OT in that the OT God was essentially evil while the God of NT was loving, caring, and had no intentions for harming His creations21.
This made him reject in totality the OT and embraced some inspired writings of the NT that he claimed were dominated by overtones of Judaic teachings. According to him, some Jews interpolated some portions of the NT in the effort to ensure that the gospel of Jesus Christ was corrupted in the effort to serve their own interests and promote their own religious doctrines.
This prompted him to extract some of the portions of NT he claimed were Gnostic in nature. This move was not embraced by the early church which held that the inspiring writing incorporated and approved for reading in the church presented the actual revelations of apostles by God.
The changes made by Marcion were interpreted by the early church as intentional alteration of the true gospel. This compelled it to approve the gospel books to form part of the NT canon. Marcion’s list of NT was divided into two main groups: apostle and gospel canon. The gospel was only made of the book of Luke which was also incredibly altered to remove Judaic doctrinal elements.
Apostles such as Galatians, Romans, Colossians and Corinthians among other were also immensely altered to suit the Marcion’s doctrinal school of thought. However, it is important to note that Marcion canon was the first ever attempt to list various inspirational writings that form the current modern NT canon. It was also the first time in the development of the early church that a list of books for readings was declared as the final authority.
The discontents associated with the teachings of the Marcion doctrine compelled the church in Rome to seek efforts to define itself in a new way.
This included declaration of inspired writing that was authorized for reading in the church because “Marcion formed his bible and declared opposition to the Holy Scriptures of the church from which he had separated; it was in opposition to his criticism that the church in its turn first became rightly conscious of its heritage of apostolic writings.”22 Since the church opposed the Marcion doctrines, declaration of the accepted books for reading the church was almost inevitable.
The arguments raised above make several religious scholars to raise a lot of questions on the validity and acceptability of the declared lists of inspirational writing forming the NT canon used to day. For instance, Roger seeks to know “if the teachings of Marcion were unsound, what was the sound teaching, and how could it be defended?”23 .
The church responded by opposing the attempts of Marcion to disregard scriptures. The aim of the church was to include as many scriptures as possible. The church categorically said that it did not reject the OT as Marcion did, rather is accepted it just as Jesus and apostles accepted it. For the case of scriptures forming the new order, the church said it did not only accept one gospel, but instead four of them. In case of the epistles of Paul, the church said it never recognized ten but thirteen of them.
Opposed to the Marcion’s’ approach of only including apostolic letters of Paul in his canon, the church considered other letters in its declared official listing such as acts of apostles, which acts as the link between apostolic letters and gospels. This list was compiled in Rome. It was then called Muratorian canon. It is dated to the 2nd century.
It forms the “list of New Testament books recognized as authoritative in the Roman Church at the time”24. Hence, it is arguable church moved in to declare officially the acceptable scriptures of the new order in the effort to set the record straight about unacceptability of doctrines that it considered as misleading such as the Marcion’s doctrine.
Conclusion
The establishment and formation of the New Testament (NT) took the process of proliferations of various inspirational writings. In the process there was a valid disagreement among various people on what needs to constitute readings in the church.
One of such person was Marcion who came up with his own listing only considering one gospel book (Luke) while claiming that other gospels were characterized by immense modifications by the Jews who sort to reframe inspirational writings to fit their doctrinal beliefs. On the other hand, early church sought to include, as opposed to excluding, as many inspirational writing in the NT canon as possible.
The Marcion’s position that OT and some parts of the NT inspirational writings were not appropriate also attracted hefty criticism from the church making the Marcion doctrine to die. This and other arguments that the church considered as misplaced propelled it to officially declare the official list of readings during the church service. These readings came in hardy to form the NT canon.
Bibliography
Bruce, Shelley. Church History in Plain Language. Dallas: Word Publishing, 1995.
Carson, Aurthur, and Douglas Moo. An Introduction to the New Testament. Leicester: Apollos, inter-Varsity Press, 1999.
De Jonge, Johnson. The New Testament Canon. Belgium: Leuven University Press, 2003.
Gamble, Harry. Books and Readers in the Early Church: A History of Early Christian Texts. Michigan: Book Crafters, Inc., 1995.
Glenn, Davis, “The Development of the Canon of the New Testament.” Journal of Evangelistically Theological Society 23, no.11 (2008), 77-91.
Knox, John. Marcion and the New Testament: An Essay in the Early History of the Canon. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1980.
McGrath, Alister. An Introduction to Christianity. Malden: Blackwell Publishers, Inc., 1997.
Metzger, Bruce. The New Testament: Its Background, Growth, and Content. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2000.
Nicole, Roger. “The canon of the New Testament.” Journal of the Evangelistically Theological Society 40, no.2 (1997): 199-206.
Voorwinde, Stephen, “The Formation of the New Testament Canon.” Vox Reformata 60, no.4 (1995): 127-131.
Footnotes
1 John Knox, Marcion and the New Testament: An Essay in the Early History of the Canon, (Chicago: the University of Chicago Press, 1980), 107.
2 Ibid, 107.
3 Johnson, De Jonge, The New Testament Canon, (Belgium: Leuven University Press, 2003), 315.
4 Knox, Marcion and the New Testament, 108.
5 Davis, Glenn, “The Development of the Canon of the New Testament,” Journal of Evangelistically Theological Society 23, no.11 (2008): 77.
6 Bruce, Metzger, The New Testament: Its Background, Growth, and Content (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2000), 23.
7 Ibid, 24
8 Alister, McGrath. An Introduction To Christianity, (Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell Publishers, Inc., 1997), 123.
9 Metzger, The New Testament, 24.
10 Harry, Gamble. Books and Readers in the Early Church: A History of Early Christian Texts, (Chelsea, Michigan: Book Crafters, Inc., 1995), 19-81.
11 Shelley, Bruce. Church History in Plain Language, (Dallas, Texas: Word Publishing, 1995), 11.
12 Gamble, Books and Readers, 21.
13 Bruce, Church History, 15.
14 Bruce, Church History, 16.
15 Bruce, Church History, 29.
16 Stephen, Voorwinde, “The Formation of The New Testament Canon,” Vox Reformata, 60 no.4 (1995), 127
17 Ibid, 127
18 Gamble, Books and Readers, 26
19Arthur Carson and Douglas Moo, An Introduction to the New Testament, (Leicester: Apollos, inter-Varsity Press, 1999), 34
20 Ibid,52
21Glenn, The Development of the Canon, 88.
22 Roger, Nicole, “The canon of the New Testament,” Journal of the Evangelistically Theological Society 40, no.2 (1997), 199.
23Nicole, The canon of the New Testament, 204.
24Carson and Moo, An Introduction to the New Testament, 52.
Christianity is one of the major world religions with the greatest number of followers. Even though, there is no known exact number of Christians in the world it is, without doubt, the only religion that has spread to all parts of the world. Christians derive hope, faith, and guidance by reading the bible which guides their daily activities including praying, fasting, worshiping, and their relationships with others. This paper examines the King James Bible version and its role in the past and present society.
Background Information
Christians believe that the first bible was written by people inspired by the Holy Spirit. The first version was written in Hebrew and Greek languages (Campbell 33). However, since then there have been many translations and today there are as many translations as there are languages in the world. Despite this, it is believed that the King James Bible version was the first English translation.
Roles of King James Bible
The relevance of the King James Bible version is attributed to its format and translation from the original Hebrew version. The King James Bible outlines the relationship between God and various people including Moses, Abraham, Elijah, Samson, and Joseph among others (Moser 21). The version gives detailed coverage of how Abraham interacted with God and the aftermath of his trust and obedience. In addition, this version gives a step by step coverage of the journey and tribulations Abraham went through like living his home, people, and property and going to an unknown place. Christians’ hope and faith is built on the basis of what God did to Abraham and later blessed him with a son and many descendants.
Moreover, this version contains the story of Moses and the Israelites. Christians learn that despite the sufferings they go through God has great plans for them in the future. In fact, these sufferings should strengthen their faith in God and make them more prayerful (Campbell 34). This version documents the details of all events that took place prior to the release of the Israelites from slavery. For that reason, it does not matter how long Christians suffer as long as they trust God one day they will overcome their sufferings. According to this version, their journey through the wilderness symbolizes Christian’s life that is full of temptations and tribulations. The version gives an account of what happened in the wilderness and how desperation can lead to idolatry. The Israelites were not patient enough to wait for God to guide them through Moses and instead begun demanding to be taken back to Egypt (Moser 54). Therefore, they started worshiping idols and breaking other commandments and, as a result, God punished them.
There are other, many illustrations that show how people were rewarded according to their actions. For instance, Lot’s wife was transformed into a salt rock when she looked back at her city contrary to God’s rules. Sodom and Gomorrah were set on fire after their citizen committed unspeakable adultery, which was contrary to God’s commandments (Campbell 23). There are various footnotes that help Christians understand this bible version without struggling. In addition, the glossary explains some of the terminologies used in the bible including events, names of places and practices.
In addition, the Old Testament opens ways for the New Testament by including prophesies of Elijah regarding the birth of Jesus. Prophet Elijah was an eye opener to what was expected in the coming days. He was a voice in the desert calling for people to get ready to receive Jesus Christ. Even though, many people did not understand what Elijah meant they soon realized that, despite their sins and transgressions, God loved them and was willing to offer his son to deliver them from sin (Moser 76). The main emphasis in the Old Testament is in the Ten Commandments given to Moses during the journey across the wilderness. These were later commonly known as the Laws of Moses that guided Christians before the coming of Jesus Christ.
On the other hand, this version outlines the second generation of Christians guided by the birth, suffering, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. This version has a detailed coverage of the happenings starting from the ancestral lineage of Adam to Jesus Christ; therefore, it outlines the relationship between Adam and Jesus Christ. While most Old Testament characters based their teachings on the Laws of Moses, New Testament characters based their teachings and beliefs on Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit (Roncace and Gray 31). This identifies one salient feature that, in the past, God used to communicate with man directly as evident in Moses and Abraham’s encounters with God. However, in the New Testament the presence of the Holy Spirit as intercessor between God and man changes the whole scene. This confirms Jesus’ teachings that, after his death, the Holy Spirit will come to be their companions. Therefore, most happenings in the New Testament involve the Holy Spirit and not direct communication with God.
The teachings of Jesus Christ aim at promoting brotherhood among human beings. Christians believe that being responsible people means taking care of their neighbors. In addition, Jesus summarized the Ten Commandments in two great laws that advocate Christians to serve God wholeheartedly and love their neighbors without limits (Roncace and Gray 41). This is a vital element that should be promoted among human beings irrespective of their religions or cultures. Today, there are many insecurity cases including terrorism, robbery, murder and genocide instigated by political differences.
The New Testament according to the King James Version describes how Jesus used parables to teach his followers. For instance, the parable of the farmer sowing seeds plays key roles in determining Christians’ faith in God while the parable of the Good Samaritan is an example of how people should treat their neighbors (Campbell 45). Other parables advocate for love, peace, generosity and forgiveness among human beings. All these teachings aim at promoting peaceful coexistence among people from diverse social, political sand economic backgrounds.
Opinion
The Old Testament is synonymous to the constitution that governs individuals’ rights and freedoms while the New Testament is a compass that guides human relations. Therefore, these bible sections play crucial roles in ensuring people obey laws and at the same time respect, love and serve their neighbors. All in all, their teachings promote peaceful interactions among human beings.
Conclusion
The King James Bible version is relevant to Christians as it outlines the journeys they have to go through just as their predecessors did. The version is written in ordinary English language with translations and footnotes that help Christians understand everything covered in the chapters. For that reason, the bible is a vital Christian requirement since it guides and shapes their faith in God.
Works Cited
Campbell, Gordon. Bible: The Story of the King James Version, 1611-2011. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010. Print.
Moser, Barry. The Holy Bible: Containing all the Books of the Old and New Testaments: King James Version. New York: Viking Studio, 1999. Print.
Roncace, Mark and Patrick Gray. Teaching the Bible: Practical Strategies for Classroom Instruction. Leiden: Brill, 2005. Print.
The Book of Ruth is considered to be the biblical book named specially for women. It is the reflection of the love story between Boaz and Ruth showing God’s grace. This book was created in difficult times of violence, disobedience, and idolatry, in times of despair and crisis. The Book of Ruth discloses the life of people who followed God and did everything that was right in his eyes. The period of Judges covering Israel’s conquest is deeply reflected in the book highlighting all the peculiarities of that time and the way people were devoted to God.
Though the author of the story is unknown, the Book of Ruth has its roots in history and plays a significant role in the Holy Bible. The Biblical names of characters give an opportunity to dive into the depth of the book sense and its color. They are very symbolic and reflect the basic notions of the Bible and its meaning in the modern world. For example, Naomi reflects the meaning of Christ’s cross and shows God’s wisdom.
The Book of Ruth is a combination of the Bible traditions rooted in the Judaism epoch and which are popular nowadays. The believers’ tradition of three times before being accepted into the church is closely described in the text. One more mystical tradition disclosing clinging to God’s spirit and being popular in the Western churches shows its relation to the Holy Bible.
It is important to stress that its relation to the Bible is based on the illustration of human choice in life, which is as well presented in the Book of Ruth:
To depend on the society you live in;
To rely on your work for redemption;
To believe, depend and wait on God.
The theme of sexual relations between the main characters of the book is the demonstration of strong spiritual unity between the Church and Christ which is so mystical that cannot be expressed with words.
The Book of Ruth is considered to be an integral part of the Holy Bible. It performs the place of God in our life disclosing the most important holy traditions that should be followed by the believers at present times. The spiritual meaning of God’s word is completely reflected in the features and behavior of the book characters. It is an individual separate holy book, not the part of the Judge’s book, as it was considered to be earlier. It is a “Women Bible” reflecting all changes brought by God to our usual life. The grace of God presented in the book provides the reader with evidence of His majestic power and the level it influences people’s view on life and the general sense of it.
The embodiment of Ruth as a holy woman is considered to be a bright example of a biblical symbol changing the lives of many believers. The Book of Ruth is proved to play a significant role for the Holy Bible and reflect all spiritual symbols and holy traditions in the description of its characters. This book can influence every reader and show how God can change our life in case we follow His word and His thoughts. The Book of Ruth disclosed all the roots of Bible ancient traditions and showed that every person has a right to choose how to live and what principles of life to follow. This book reflects all the main positions of the Bible followed by people on the example of a woman with her blessings and blame whose only sense of life is God and His holy Word.
References
The Holy Bible: King James Version. 1611 Edition, Hendrickson Publishers, 2003.
The Bible is an indivisible entity, a document of spiritual and historical relevance. Depending upon interpretation and usage, it has been and can be an indispensable tool of liberation or a weapon of mass destruction and oppression.
Main body
It is the infallible word of God as depicted by His inspired prophets and the story of a people. Divided into two sections – The Old Testament and The New Testament – the fundamental theme of the Bible is an expose on God’s nature and the nature of the human family via key biblical figures and their relationship to Him and with each other. Written and inspired by Moses, the Old Testament is comprised of 39 books. It conveys the Law and the Prophecies. The relationship between brothers and its negative as well as positive impact is one of the many motifs explored in the Old Testament. Most importantly, thru these relationships we witness God’s love and mercy but His wrath and condemnation as well. Intense love/respect to abhorrent sibling rivalry epitomizes the relationship between key biblical figures who happen to be brothers.
Fratricide, the killing of one’s own kin, is first introduced in the Bible via the relationship/story of Cain and Abel (Genesis 4:1-16) – the off springs of Adam and Eve. Through them is our first glimpse into the struggle between the carnal and the spiritual.
A mere man of the earth, Cain embodied self-will/interest/hatred and materialism. His bloody sin offering reveals his unflinching noncompliance and disrespect to God. His action is considered the precursor to false religion for he sought to worship God in the manner in which he choose as opposed to how God’s desire. Revered as the first Biblical martyr, Abel was spiritual man as evidenced by his offering. His faith was unbound and pure. Cain’s murdered of Abel catapulted the human family into blood shed and perpetual violence as well eternally cursed the earth.
Like Cain and Abel, the parable Esau and Jacob (Genesis 25:24 – 33:20) symbolize how children despite similar parentage can be of diverse seed. The disparity between the carnal (Esau) and the spiritual (Jacob) is further explored. Paramount and inherent in their story is prophetic destiny. The essence of their character and destiny is solidified from conception. Most importantly, the impetus for their sibling rivalry is compounded by parental favoritism. The difference is that their personal flaws contribute to the strife in their relationship in contrast to Cain and Abel, in which Cain was the primary antagonist. Jacob’s idiosyncrasies lay the foundation for the dissension he would encounter in his family (Genesis 29-48). The sons he fathered with Rachel and Leah would predominately constitute the Twelve Tribes of Israel. His incessant love for Rachel over Leah and nepotism for their son, Joseph, served as the progenitor for the sibling rivalry between Joseph and his brothers birthed by Leah. The envy is so fervent and deep-rooted that it forces them to sell Joseph into slavery. Contrary to such consternation and strife, is in the relationship between Moses, one of the greatest of the biblical prophets, and Aaron, the founding father of the Levite Priesthood. Their difference in character did not impede their brotherly love for one anther. Aaron was older and more eloquent and persuasive of the two in terms of speaking. The relationship between him and Moses eludes strife because of their humility and reverence for God’s will.
God’s wrath and condemnation is prevalent, but his love, forgiveness and mercy are equally evidenced in these relationships. Hatred, sibling rivalry, jealousy, and contention succumb to love, compassion, and forgiveness only proving that God’s word is absolute. He puts it into the heart of man to fulfill that which he says and wants.
Bibliography
Scofield, C.I. Reverend, Editor. The Scofield Study Bible. Oxford University Press: New York, 1917.
Ryken, Leland, James C. Wilhoit and Tremper Longman III, Editors. Dictinary of Biblical Imagery. InterVarsity Press: Downers Grove, IL, 1998.
John N. Oswalt, the author of the book “The Bible among the Myths” and he introduces his book by a comparison of the Old Testament, beliefs, and acculturation. John as well explains a great theoretical division while judging the Old Testament against its equals.
Some of the differences that Oswalt notes include “essence” and “adversity”. When an individual speaks concerning the essence of a given entity, the individual is citing the things that compose its practical details.1
Adversities, on the other hand, refer to things that are purely accidental and do not essentially describe the entity. John Oswalt brings the reader into the perception of myth.
With the admission that intellectuals vary intensely on a particular description, John affirms that this aspect is not supposed to deter the person from searching for an excellent description of the word.
With the aim describing the word, John Oswalt lists four fundamental features of a myth. To start with, one of the features is that people possess slight or no intrinsic worth. Another feature is virtual lack of concern in historical researches.
Thirdly, is the carrying out of magical and association with occultism and lastly is the denial of accountability for individual activities. In the last section of the introduction, John maintains that theological assertions are indivisible from historical assertions.
Reliability of the theological concerns depends on the reliability of the historical assertions. Should the historical assertions be actually bogus, then no acceptance should be accorded to the theological assertions.
Nevertheless, if the historical assertions are in line with the known, then the person who reads the bible must take the theological assertions critically.
Chapter One
The initial chapter of this book handles the bible with respect to its setting and the role it plays in the community at large. John affirms that there exists numerous of its roles with regard to the manner in which the Western world perceives certainty, with the Bible acting as the greatest contributor.
The Greek people initiated a form of thinking that bore weighty influence on the community. Some of their most noteworthy roles include the conviction in the “universe” rather than a “polyverse”, plain cause and effect, and non-inconsistency.2
The Hebrew individuals were as well distinctive in their worldview and the impact was almost the same. Their belief was in the existence of just one God, the creator of the universe.
God is separately existent from the creation. He found it necessary for Him and His testament to be identified by human beings. Moreover, God awards and reprimands individuals after going against His will.
Both Hebrews and Greeks shared common thinking patterns concerning certainty in numerous approaches. The intellectual thinking of the Greeks coalesced with the monotheism, which was embraced by the Hebrews.
The conviction of the Greek people concerning the law of non-inconsistency merged with the conviction of the Hebrew people concerning the existence of God as detached and different from creation.
John raises the controversy that sense was not fully established until after individuals came to the realization that God was not just the creator, but as well totally different from the creation.
In spite of the presently supported convictions of the dominance of sense and science with the exception of religion, John affirms that sense and science brings about self-annihilation.3
Devoid of the inspiring creator of the universe to guide the ways of humanity, individuals just appear to serve themselves. John applies Hiroshima and Buchenwald campsite as instances of the accomplishments of people without the influence of God.
Chapter Two
In chapter two, John tries to come up with an applicable description for myth. Prior to the description of myth, John re-examines the idea that intellectuals have wandered from the perception that the Bible is distinctive from other publications, religions, and cultures of Ancient Near East.
From the 1960s, intellectuals have been affirming that the features of the Bible and its current conviction systems have universal resistance grounds although the information employed in backing these grounds has stayed unchanged. The author desires using the suitable categorization to the Bible.
Particularly, he deals with the concern of whether the Bible could be perceived as myth or not. In a bid to respond suitably to such issue, an individual must reflect on the numerous descriptions created currently by intellectuals. John names these descriptions and discusses his reasons for deeming them insufficient.4
A particular group of descriptions lies in the historical-philosophical class. The initial description of myth in this class is the etymological description. The weight here is placed on the fallacy of the deity or incident.
The second description is the sociological-theological description. As per this description, the reality is deemed virtual and something is regarded as truth when other people have first deemed it as truth.
The last description is the literary description. Under this description, the incidents are not viewed as correct or incorrect.5 Rather, the narrative utilizes intense application of symbolism to convey its implication.
The numerous descriptions of myth bear a common item at their central point, viz. they all support the idea of continuity. According to continuity, not all items are associated with each other, although they are each other in one way or another.
John employs the case of an individual as “with a tree”. In accordance with continuity, the person is not only symbolically the one having the tree, but the person is a section of the quintessence of the tree and the tree is similarly a section of the quintessence of the person.
Chapter Three
The third chapter mainly focuses on continuity. The main thing that myths bear in common at their central point is the existence of continuity. The manner of thinking with respect to continuity perceives all items as a section of each other in a number of ways.
Some three vital strengths (humankind, the natural world, and divinity) are present on a spherical scale where they all bear substantial and indefinite overlie. John affirms that the effects of a worldview like that are extensive.6 A major consequence is the highlight of searching for indications in nature.
Endeavors are carried out at presenting truth from climatic samples such as epidemics, fire, droughts, and heavenly bodies. A different consequence is the application of magic to sway and have an impact on the universe.
The final instance from the list of consequences of continuity encompasses the appeal of people on fertility. John applies the instance of the way sexuality is vital to the people’s lives presently based on the consequence of continuity.
In conclusion, John tackles his perception of the common characteristics of myth bluntly. Except for a few exclusions, all myths have in common that there exists several gods.7 Additionally, myths share the conviction of the application of representations and signs to interrelate with the godly and nature.
The gods are regarded lowly and are perceived to be imperfect things. The explanations on creation entail some kind of major argument with the intention of resulting into the cosmos. Lastly, myths share low natural worth set on humankind, which originates from the conviction that there exists no measure of ethics.
Chapter Four
In the fourth chapter, John opts to discuss features of the Bible. In this regard, he tackles the subject of transcendence where deity (existing separate from the universe) decisively interrelates with cosmos in an intense and supernatural manner. John offers the reader an all-inclusive list of a number of common features.
Among the most apparent features of the Bible is monotheism, which delineates Christianity from other religions.8 Aside from the religions that owe their origin to the Bible, roughly every other religion revered more than one god. A major different feature was the conviction of the pre-existence of God.
There is not a thing in the universe that was present before God. All things that exist are thus compliant to God who created them all.
Most of the creation explanations of myth entail divine being(s) controlling matter in a number of ways with the intention of shaping the universe, as it currently exists. According to the Bible, God created all things from nothing.9
The Bible ranks humankind highly, which is another feature that outlines biblical notion unlike in other religious convictions. This declaration adds up when a human being takes the words of the Bible from Genesis chapter 1 and verse 27, which affirms that God made humans in His likeness.
Human beings bear natural worth, they were the climax of the creation of God and were charged with authority over it.10
Different features that outline the biblical worldview unlike other world perceptions is the conviction of God as supra sexual, the forbiddance against magical performances, and the ethical regulations that God commands people to obey.
Transcendence could be regarded as the basic standard amid the major features of biblical conception.
Chapter Five
In this chapter, John carries on the suggestion that the Bible should not fall in the class of myths. John goes into details with the subject of ethics. Two outlines of ethics were supported by the non-biblical world perceptions in the Ancient Near East.
One of the outlines tackled the manner in which individuals interrelated with one another.11 The second outline of ethics tackled the way individuals acted upon the divine beings. According to the Bible, ethical conduct was set by God, and thus not subject to the urges of change by the society.
Other unique characteristics of the biblical ethics encompass a single lay down of ethics, universal relevance of the ethical systems, and criticism against others, which were deemed an evil doing towards God. John discusses a number of resemblances involving both Israelites and non-Israelites.
Even being alike, John reiterates his conviction that these sections are accidental and not necessary to the fundamental uniqueness of those individuals.
Chapter Six
Similar to the description of myth, history denotes another expression that has been described in a different way by numerous intellectuals. Even as the description of myth is somewhat controversial, the descriptions of history are not as diverse.
John employs Webster’s New World Dictionary of the American Language in a bid to acquire descriptions that he sees as a depiction of the accord. During the early times, there were numerous and different kinds of writings that provided intellectuals with the awareness into the existence of humanity.
While frequently helpful in the comprehension of cultures of ancient times, John affirms that the majority of their writings are not as per the description of the history. The numerous kinds of non-biblical writings entail omens, king lists, and date formulae just to mention a few.12 Omens try to apply representations from nature to establish the line of action that a leader must follow.
King lists encompass descendants of considerable individuals, but frequently highly overstate the information. The date formulae comprises of a list of major occasions in the progression of a community, but fails to connect the occasions in a manner that provides individuals a profound understanding of the culture.
Other kinds of non-biblical writings fail to satisfy accurately the state of history due to overstatements and highlights on a person over groups of individuals among other reasons.
The people who existed in the ancient times did not employ historic writings. John outlines a number of causes for this trend. The individuals of ancient times failed to see the significance of writing information for the gain of others because they were only caring of the present situation.
A different cause for their failure to make use of historic writing was due to their self-seeking perspective. They were not concerned with removing themselves from current conditions while writing concerning occasions due to the creation of intensely biased descriptions.
Additionally, they believed in numerous foundations when simple foundations were adequate, backed by the conviction that they would not have power over their destinies and cared more regarding sustaining order. Nevertheless, the Bible is distinctive in its dealing with historical occasions.
It tackles human beings as actual mortal persons.13 The authors incorporated imperfections in their descriptions while non-biblical authors could not reveal the same. For instance, the account of David and the way he sexually sinned prior to a killing to conceal the crime/sin.
The highlights of people affiliations and selections are as well instances of things that result into the distinctiveness of the Bible and its portrayal of history.
Chapter Seven and Chapter Eight
The author tackles a number of alarms that are raised in opposition to the Bible regarding its historical authenticity. A number of these issues regard its disclosure, supernatural occurrences, and if Israel was distinctive in these sections.14
The author exposes the manner in which the supernaturally exposure of God to the humankind by Himself resulted into the Israelites ascertaining that they were cautious in guaranteeing that they were perfect in their scripts.
Oswalt gives an explanation in the eighth chapter that is significant in the comprehension that the Bible is a historically perfect text. John arrived at the notion of the perfectness of the Bible to some extent earlier in the script, but develops it in the eighth chapter.
It is significant to understand the entire Bible is historical. Pertaining to the poetry books, the prophetic books and other books in the Old Testament, they disclose the historical standpoint of the Bible.
These sections depict individuals and stretch out their connections with each other, cautious not to marginalize flaws, imperfections, and indecencies. John brings the reader to a greatly shaded perspective of history and divides the description.
The wrapping up of this part verifies history in the Bible to be undividable from theology therein. It is from theological convictions that historical occurrences sprout. John employs a perfect instance in the resurrection of Jesus to back this ending.
In the book of Corinthians, Paul declares that the conviction of a person cannot survive devoid of historical conviction in Christ’s resurrection.15
Chapters Nine and Ten
Chapter 9 tackles a number of alternative perspectives regarding the biblical description as it currently exists. The primary condemnation is by John Seters and the manner in which he stated that Jewish priests changed the biblical writings probably to suit their needs following the expatriation of Babylon.16
A different condemnation is by Frank Cross in insisting that the Bible is utilized as heroic poetry, but was modified at a particular point to the condition of the Old Testament.
The third condemnation by William Dever involves his conviction that the faith structures of Israelites were equivalent to the faith structures of the Canaanites.
Additionally, he declares that Christian intellectuals have paid no attention to distinct realities all through history and have instead opted to smear an incorrect description of the traditional Israel.
Lastly, John Oswalt discusses Mark Smith and the way he portrays that the beliefs of Israelites originated from the polytheistic convictions of the Canaanites.17
In conclusion, John Oswalt sums up his book in the tenth chapter and essentially reaffirms his major points from the earlier chapters.
The main theme that Oswalt highlights is the one of the dissimilarity between biblical and non-biblical perspectives of truth. The biblical perspective is based on the transcendence whereas the non-biblical perspective is based on continuity.
Bibliography
Oswalt John. The Bible among the Myths. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2009.
Footnotes
1 John Oswalt, The Bible Among the Myths (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2009), 11-12.
The Bible portrays Jesus as both 100 percent human and 100 percent God, hence having dual natures that are both complete. This has been disputed ever since the times of Jesus to today.
One of the reasons identified as an explanation of His humanity is the fact that he suffered human weaknesses such as got tired and slept, got hungry and ate in Luke we are told that he even wept. These are all characteristics of human beings that God could not probably suffer. This made those who did not believe in Him to believe that he was more human than God.
In the Bible we also learn of Jesus being God. This is expressed in prophesies that were made way before he was even born by prophets such as Isaiah. The prophets who prophesied His birth indicated that he would be God and those who lived during His time such as john openly identified Him as God. He also identified Himself as God which then led to a lot of criticism from the Pharisees.
He forgave sins and knew people’s thoughts as well as healed people cast out demons and raised the dead. All these acts show that he had power over nature which can only be credited to God1. By virtue of Him being the son of God and proclaiming this Himself, it therefore means that he sure was God. Those who came after Jesus also proclaimed that he was God and in this case Paul emphasized His deity by proclaiming in His letter to the Colossians that Jesus has authority over all things and that he existed before all things were created.
Jesus was a manifestation of God in an earthly form and for God to be an earthly being he had to be human. This means that the human form of Jesus was actually God. It is identified in the holy trinity that God exists in three forms which are God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit. Two of these forms are identified as being God the father and Jesus hence making Jesus God Himself just in another form.
The fact that Jesus was both God and man means that God needed to show His love for humanity by living among human beings and going through the same experiences that humans go through. It also shows that He wanted to relate with humans on a personal note rather than be a supernatural being that humans should avoid due to fear.
He needed people to believe more of Him out of reality other than just belief. This means that people would relate more to Him instead of believing in a power that they could not understand or relate to. In His incarnate form He dined with sinners and the poor, which portrays His humbleness and hence more people end up believing that He is in apposition to care about them and understand their needs.
The dangers of overemphasizing or, either the deity or humanity of Christ, lies in the breakdown of the belief in Christianity. It also leads to intolerance to those who don’t believe in Christ which then contradicts the teachings of Christ2. Some of the heresies that object the traditional understanding of Christology are Ebionitism, Gnostism, Euychianism, Apollinarianism and Nestorianism. They object that God could not be portrayed as a human being due to the weakness of man, and therefore Jesus could not be God.
Christ’s humanity teaches me that my human nature should not limit my belief in God since He also went through the human experience. His human nature teaches us how to overcome sin by not being tempted by our human needs.
Bibliography
Everett, Ferguson. “Baptism in the early church: history, theology, and liturgy in the first five centuries”. Journal of Religious Studies Review. 36, no 1, (2010): 24-67. Web.
Kalin, Everett. “The New Testament Canon: Its Making and Meaning.” Currents in Theology and Mission 15, no.5. (2003): 113-146. Web.
Footnotes
1 Ferguson, Everett. “Baptism in the early church: history, theology, and liturgy in the first five centuries”. Journal of Religious Studies Review. 36, no 1, 42, (2010).
2 Everett, Kalin. “The New Testament Canon: Its Making and Meaning.” Currents in Theology and Mission 15, no. 5: 138. (2003).