Source - Wiki

found in the Septuagint accepted by other Orthodox Christians, the Ethiopian Old Testament Canon uses Enoch and Jubilees (ancient Jewish books that only survived in Ge'ez,
but are quoted in the New Testament), [citation needed] Greek Ezra and the Apocalypse of Ezra, 3 books of Meqabyan, and Psalm 151 at the end of the Psalter. The three books of
Meqabyan are not to be confused with the books of Maccabees. The order of the other books is somewhat different from other groups', as well. The Old Testament follows the
Septuagint order for the Minor Prophets rather than the Jewish order. [citation needed]

Biblical criticism
Main articles: Biblical studies, Biblical criticism, Historical criticism, and Textual criticism

See also: Biblical authority

Jean Astruc, often called the "Father of Biblical criticism", at Centre hospitalier universitaire de Toulouse [fr]

Biblical criticism refers to the analytical investigation of the Bible as a text, and addresses questions such as history, authorship, dates of composition, and authorial intention. It
is not the same as criticism of the Bible, which is an assertion against the Bible being a source of information or ethical guidance, nor is it criticism of possible translation errors.
[142]

In the 17th century, Thomas Hobbes collected textual evidence that he asserted as proving Moses could not have been the author of the first five books of the Bible known as
the Pentateuch.[143] Shortly afterwards, the philosopher Baruch Spinoza published a unified critical analysis, arguing that the problematic passages were not isolated cases that
could be explained away one by one, but pervasive throughout the five books, concluding that it was "clearer than the sun at noon that the Pentateuch was not written by
Moses ..."[144]

Jean Astruc (1684–1766), a French physician, believed these critics were wrong. He believed that Moses had assembled the first book of the Pentateuch, the book of Genesis,
using hereditary accounts passed down through the Hebrew people. [145] Biblical criticism began when Astruc borrowed methods of textual criticism which were already used to
investigate Greek and Roman texts and applied them to the Bible in search of those original accounts. [146]

Astruc believed this approach did identify the separate sources that were edited together into the book of Genesis, and modern scholars still, generally, accept his conclusions.
In Astruc's view, the existence of separate sources explained the inconsistent style and vocabulary of Genesis, discrepancies in the narrative, differing accounts and
chronological difficulties, while still allowing for Mosaic authorship. [69][147]

Biblical criticism made study of the Bible secularized, scholarly and more democratic, while it also permanently altered the way people understood the Bible. [148]: 22  It is no longer
thought of solely as a religious artifact, and its interpretation is no longer restricted to the community of believers. [149]: 129  Critical study divested the Bible of its scriptural character.
[150]: 9 
 Rationalism and the pursuit of history were its key elements. [151][152]: 8, 224 [153]: 214  Part of the legacy of biblical criticism is that, as it rose, it led to the decline of biblical authority. [154]: 
137 
 Jeffrey Burton Russell describes it thus: "Faith was transferred from the words of scripture itself to those of influential biblical critics ... liberal Christianity retreated hastily
before the advance of science and biblical criticism. By the end of the eighteenth century, advanced liberals had abandoned the core of Christian beliefs." [155]: 151, 153 

"There are those who regard the desacralization of the Bible as the fortunate condition for the rise of new sensibilities and modes of imagination" that went into developing the
modern world.[149]: 121  For many, biblical criticism "released a host of threats" to the Christian faith. For others biblical criticism "proved to be a failure, due principally to the
assumption that diachronic, linear research could master any and all of the questions and problems attendant on interpretation". [156] Still others believed that biblical criticism,
"shorn of its unwarranted arrogance," could be a reliable source of interpretation. [156] Michael Fishbane compares biblical criticism to Job, a prophet who destroyed "self-serving
visions for the sake of a more honest crossing from the divine textus to the human one".[149]: 129  Or as Rogerson says: biblical criticism has been liberating for those who want their
faith "intelligently grounded and intellectually honest". [157]: 298 

In the twenty-first century, attitudes towards the Bible differ among Christian groups. Roman Catholics, High Church Anglicans, Methodists and Eastern Orthodox Christians
stress the harmony and importance of both the Bible and sacred tradition,[158][159] while many Protestant churches focus on the idea of sola scriptura, or scripture alone. This
concept rose to prominence during the Reformation, and many denominations today support the use of the Bible as the only infallible source of Christian teaching. Others,
though, advance the concept of prima scriptura in contrast, meaning scripture primarily or scripture mainly.[158]

Divine inspiration
Main articles: Biblical inspiration, Biblical literalism, Biblical infallibility, and Biblical inerrancy

A Bible is placed centrally on a Lutheran altar, highlighting its importance

The Second Epistle to Timothy says that "all scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness". ( 2
Timothy 3:16)[160] Various related but distinguishable views on divine inspiration include:
 the view of the Bible as the inspired word of God: the belief that God, through the Holy Spirit, intervened and influenced the words, message, and collation of the Bible [161]
 the view that the Bible is also infallible, and incapable of error in matters of faith and practice, but not necessarily in historic or scientific matters
 the view that the Bible represents the inerrant word of God, without error in any aspect, spoken by God and written down in its perfect form by humans

Within these broad beliefs many schools of hermeneutics operate. "Bible scholars claim that discussions about the Bible must be put into its context within church history and
then into the context of contemporary culture." [120] Fundamentalist Christians are associated with the doctrine of biblical literalism, where the Bible is not only inerrant, but the
meaning of the text is clear to the average reader.[162]

Jewish antiquity attests to belief in sacred texts, [163][164] and a similar belief emerges in the earliest of Christian writings. Various texts of the Bible mention divine agency in relation
to its writings.[165] In their book A General Introduction to the Bible, Norman Geisler and William Nix write: "The process of inspiration is a mystery of the providence of God, but
the result of this process is a verbal, plenary, inerrant, and authoritative record." [166] Most evangelical biblical scholars[167][168][169] associate inspiration with only the original text; for
example some American Protestants adhere to the 1978 Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy which asserted that inspiration applied only to the autographic text of scripture.
[170]
 Among adherents of biblical literalism, a minority, such as followers of the King-James-Only Movement, extend the claim of inerrancy only to a particular version.[171]

Versions and translations

Further information: Bible translations and List of Bible translations by language

Title page from the first Welsh translation of the Bible, 1588. William Morgan (1545–1604)

An early German translation by Martin Luther. His translation of the text into the vernacular was highly influential.

The original texts of the Tanakh were almost entirely written in Hebrew; about one per cent is written in Aramaic. In addition to the authoritative Masoretic Text, Jews still refer to
the Septuagint, the translation of the Hebrew Bible into Greek, and the Targum Onkelos, an Aramaic version of the Bible. There are several different ancient versions of the
Tanakh in Hebrew, mostly differing by spelling, and the traditional Jewish version is based on the version known as Aleppo Codex. Even in this version there are words which
are traditionally read differently from written, because the oral tradition is considered more fundamental than the written one, and presumably mistakes had been made in
copying the text over the generations.[citation needed]

The primary biblical text for early Christians was the Septuagint. In addition, they translated the Hebrew Bible into several other languages. Translations were made into
Syriac, Coptic, Ethiopic, and Latin, among other languages. The Latin translations were historically the most important for the Church in the West, while the Greek-speaking East
continued to use the Septuagint translations of the Old Testament and had no need to translate the New Testament.

The earliest Latin translation was the Old Latin text, or Vetus Latina, which, from internal evidence, seems to have been made by several authors over a period of time. It was
based on the Septuagint, and thus included books not in the Hebrew Bible.

According to the Latin Decretum Gelasianum (also known as the Gelasian Decree), thought to be of a 6th-century document [172][173] of uncertain authorship and of pseudepigraphal
papal authority (variously ascribed to Pope Gelasius I, Pope Damasus I, or Pope Hormisdas)[174][175][176] but reflecting the views of the Roman Church by that period, [177] the Council of
Rome in 382 CE under Pope Damasus I (366–383) gives a complete list of the canonical books of both the Old Testament and the New Testament which is identical with the list
given at the Council of Trent.[178] Damasus commissioned Saint Jerome to produce a reliable and consistent text by translating the original Greek and Hebrew texts into Latin. This
translation became known as the Latin Vulgate Bible, in the 4th century CE (although Jerome expressed in his prologues to most deuterocanonical books that they were non-
canonical).[179][180] In 1546, at the Council of Trent, Jerome's Vulgate translation was declared by the Roman Catholic Church to be the only authentic and official Bible in the Latin
Church.

Since the Protestant Reformation, Bible translations for many languages have been made. The Bible continues to be translated to new languages, largely by Christian
organizations such as Wycliffe Bible Translators, New Tribes Mission and Bible societies. Lammin Sanneh writes that tracing the impact on the local cultures of translating the
Bible into local vernacular language shows it has produced "the movements of indigenization and cultural liberation". [181] "The translated scripture ... has become the benchmark
of awakening and renewal".[182]
 Bible translations, worldwide (as of September 2021)[183]

Number Statistic

7378 Approximate number of languages spoken in the world today

2217 Number of translations into new languages in progress

1196 Number of languages with some translated Bible portions

1582 Number of languages with a translation of the New Testament

717 Number of languages with a full translation of the Bible (Protestant Canon)

3495 Total number of languages with some Bible translation