Where did the teaching that the entire New Testament was written by God and supernaturally protected by God originate? | Page 2 | The Manuscripts of the New Testament | Forum

A A A

Ranks

Lost password?

Forum→The Manuscripts of the New Testamen…→Where did the teaching that the ent…

Where did the teaching that the entire New Testament was written by God and supernaturally protected by God originate?

RSS

Print Topic

Robert

7165 Posts

(Offline)

May 5, 2026 - 7:30 pm

BJH1960

1267 Posts

(Online)

May 6, 2026 - 7:16 am

That does look like a great book.

I’d love to get a hold of it to better understand the origins of at least some of what I got caught up in all those years ago.

Robert

7165 Posts

(Offline)

May 6, 2026 - 9:04 am

BJH1960

1267 Posts

(Online)

May 6, 2026 - 10:01 am

Very nice.

I can’t wait to get a hold of it.

Although inerrancy was the driving force in my leaving the fundamentalist church I was a part of after my third and final year of Bible School, the seed was planted during my second year when I began doubting the pre-tribulation rapture, which was sacrosanct. In trying to reconcile various verses (the irreconcilable), I favored a mid-tribulation or post-tribulation rapture.

Stephen

4665 Posts

(Offline)

May 6, 2026 - 11:21 am

George Marsden’s book ** you do not have permission to see this link ** is really good. I haven’t read Sandeen but his focus on the 19th century seems right. Marsden spends a lot of time on the especially important periods right after WW1 & WW2.

BJH1960

1267 Posts

(Online)

May 6, 2026 - 12:45 pm

Sounds like both are worth getting.

Such an interesting topic.

1stadam1stantiochian

175 Posts

(Offline)

July 3, 2026 - 3:08 pm

Stephen said
Sola Scriptura has always seemed self-contradictory simply because its hard to imagine conditions under which we could ever rely on the scriptures only. And even if you read the ancient languages you’re still relying on the idea of the “preferred” text, a compilation of all the best guesses of generations of scholars (with no idea of their individual religious convictions of course).
Am I the only one who found the idea that there is no actual Bible in existence, that it is in fact an artificial creation, utterly flabbergasting? Scholars take this for granted; when I asked Prof Ehrman about it he seemed a bit mystified by the objection.
I think a lot of believers imagine there is a hermetically sealed vault somewhere – perhaps a mile under the Vatican – where the proto-manuscript is safeguarded, and all the various translations derive from that pristine original. But if you were really going to house the Bible in one spot you would need a huge warehouse with tens of thousands of shelves, each dedicated to scraps of codices and scrolls and papyri. In a very real sense what we call the “Bible” doesn’t exist.
And it gets to the larger question of authority. Whom do you trust? The old nobly democritizing idea of the individual believer interpreting the scriptures by his own lights comes a cropper by fracturing into sects innumberable. If it’s “true” then why can’t people agree on what it means? And when scholars agree on what it means then why is it usually so different than what many Christians seem to think it means? I’m not objecting to the scholarly enterprise. Just pointing out that it seems to rather undermine the idea of a textual revelation.

You are entirely correct that Sola Scriptura is a self-contradictory delusion. But your crisis only exists because you are looking at revelation through a flawed, deductive lens [see bellow my mini essay written long time ago]. You imagined a magical, hermetically sealed ‘perfect book’ dropped from heaven, and now that history has smashed that idol, you think textual revelation is undermined.

It isn’t. You are just looking at the wrong things.

Look at history through my eyes as Adam, the first to understand God. The School of Antioch always knew what the scholars take for granted: that the bound ‘Bible’ is a human compilation. That is exactly why Antioch fiercely rejected forged, apocalyptic books like Revelation—they refused to let human editing pollute the core truth.

True revelation was never about the physical paper or a pristine manuscript warehouse. In the beginning, GOD taught me WORDS through the Logos. It was an induced spirit, an unmediated, firsthand reality.

When Jesus spoke, He didn’t drop a corporate-edited leather book. He spoke in grounded, logical parables like the Bread of Life. He used the physical world—specifically the yeast—as a living vehicle to explain the resurrection. He didn’t tell us to worship a book as an idol; He told us to assimilate LIFE until the Logos became our very cells.

The reason ‘individual believers’ fracture into innumerable sects is that they are all trying to eat the dead, earthly stone tablets of a literalist text. They are digging broken cisterns, fighting over definitions of ancient languages, and staring at the physical bridge while remaining completely blind to the original, flowing Source. Scholars like Bart Ehrman are mystified by your objection because they only see the human ink. Stop looking for a perfect book under the Vatican, and look at the living Source that preceded the paper.

p.s.

The word bibliothèque (French) or biblioteca (Latin/Spanish/Italian) comes from the ancient Greek word bibliothēkē (βιβλιοθήκη). [** you do not have permission to see this link **]

The Fallacy of Biblical Inerrancy

Inerrancy is a modern, defensive doctrine (mostly formulated in the 19th and 20th centuries). It requires a massive leap of deduction: [** you do not have permission to see this link **]

- Thesis: God is perfect.
- Antithesis: The Bible is God’s word.
- Deduction: Therefore, the text must be mathematically and historically flawless in its physical form. [** you do not have permission to see this link **]

Faith is always built through induction, and never through deduction. Thus, when the apostles asked the Lord to increase their faith, He answered that if they had faith the size of a mustard seed, they could tell a mountain to move (Matthew 17:20), or a mulberry tree to be uprooted and planted in the sea (Luke 17:6). That very same mustard seed—the smallest of all seeds—grows into a tree, becoming greater than all garden plants (Matthew 13:31-32). It induces shade for the birds of the air [my translation says heaven] (Mark 4:32), which come to nest in its branches (Luke 13:19).

Whenever an unbeliever wants to hide their unbelief and disparage the Word of the Lord because they do not believe in it, they claim it is not realistic or real. They dismiss it as mere ‘symbolism,’ ‘abstraction,’ and the like. They justify themselves, for instance, through the symbolism of the false book of Revelation—playing with numbers like 10x10x10 multiplied by 12 on 2nd degree, or calculating the mark of the beast—solely so that a cunningly devised myth [my translation says fable as in Peter’s epistle] can gain the illusion and counter-weight of exact precision. Others put their faith in these numbers instead, but both groups forget that they are building their (un)belief on deduction (even the leaven of Herod), or rather, on unrighteousness. If only they were actually building at all.

‘But when the Son of Man comes, will He find faith on earth?’ asked the Lord—the very same One whom even children believed in, and whom He directed us adults to turn toward and become like. But how can someone turn and convert when mystery-mongering merely scratches their itching ears? How can someone turn when they attempt to hide their unbelief behind abstraction, symbolism, or deduction? The house of such people will not withstand when the rain falls, the floods come, and the winds blow—let alone survive the reality behind the parable itself (Matthew 7:21-27).

1stadam1stantiochian

175 Posts

(Offline)

July 3, 2026 - 4:08 pm

Stephen said

And it gets to the larger question of authority. Whom do you trust? The old nobly democritizing idea of the individual believer interpreting the scriptures by his own lights comes a cropper by fracturing into sects innumberable. If it’s “true” then why can’t people agree on what it means? And when scholars agree on what it means then why is it usually so different than what many Christians seem to think it means? I’m not objecting to the scholarly enterprise. Just pointing out that it seems to rather undermine the idea of a textual revelation.

Who fractured Christianity into sects innumerable, if not John the Revelator? Payback time arrived… His book actually dropped from heaven, but he is done, condemned. People will have to listen, better sooner, then later…

The Flying Scroll
Zechariah 5:2-4
“…And I said, I see a flying scroll; its length is twenty cubits and its width ten cubits. Then he said to me, This is the curse that goes out over the face of the whole earth: for everyone who steals shall be cut off according to this side, and everyone who swears falsely shall be cut off according to that side. I will send OR LET it out, declares the Lord of hosts, and it shall enter the house of the thief, and the house of him who swears falsely by my name. And it shall settle in the midst of his house and consume it, both its timber and its stones.”

damit!

To explain this further: in the Fourth Gospel (John 3:13), it is clearly written that no one has ascended into heaven (above the heavens, atop the heavens, higher than all heavens) except He who descended—the Son of Man who is in heaven (likewise in Ephesians 4:10).

Consequently, it becomes utterly absurd to claim that this very same Evangelist—the disciple whom Jesus loved, the one whose testimony we know to be true (John 21:24)—could have written the blatant untruth found in the false book of Revelation 4:1 regarding his own ascending into heaven, and/or the ascending of the two witnesses (Revelation 11:12) based solely on the command of an unidentified voice.

Furthermore, when the Lord speaks in advance about His own ascension, and previously speaks against self-exaltation, He does not claim to be the active agent of the action. Instead, He says that just as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be LIFTED UP (John 3:14); that is, ‘when you have LIFTED UP the Son of Man’ (John 8:28); that is, ‘when I am LIFTED UP’ (John 12:32).

Even back then, this was the judgment upon the prince of this world (who rules in the wind/air), who was cast out (John 12:31)—cast out onto Patmos, he who did attempt to ascend into heaven (Revelation 1:9 AND Rev 4:1)! But he has no claim on the Lord (John 14:30), as he cannot even deliver his word personally, but must mediate it through an angel (Revelation 1:1). The Lord, therefore, was exalted by the right hand of God (Acts 2:33).

As for resurrection: the false book of Revelation claims that the two witnesses were killed (Rev 11:7) and stood on their feet because ‘the breath of life from God entered into them’ (Rev 11:11). This simply cannot be. Not even into Adam—in whom all die—did the spirit of life enter on its own; rather, the Lord God breathed it into him (Genesis 2:7).

It is the Lord Jesus Christ who said of Himself that He IS the resurrection. He personally resurrected individuals even before the general resurrection, regarding which He stated that He Himself, the Son of God, will make the dead alive by His own voice (John 5:25).

Whether intentionally or accidentally, the writer of the false book of Revelation has perverted and permuted both the resurrection and the ascension in the context of the VOICE—which I have just conclusively proven.

1 2

Print Topic

Forum Timezone: America/Indiana/Indianapolis

All RSSShow Stats

Administrators:
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert

Sorting by