CHAPTER VI

HOW THE BOOKS OF THE BIBLE WERE DETERMINED TO BE

SCRIPTURE

It seems necessary to address the question of, how do we know which

religious writings were actually breathed into the human writers by God, and
are, therefore, scripture?
Who decided which writings were truly scripture, and which were not?
Were they more qualified than anyone else to do that?
I have to believe that the God, who thought that it was important
enough for mankind to have His message that He breathed it into chosen
human writers, also guided the gathering together of the writings into a book
which we call the Holy Bible. The various writings that make up our Holy
Bible were written over a period of about sixteen hundred years, so it had to
be many different men throughout that period of time who determined which
writings were actually scripture. And, yes, the men, who determined which
writings were actually scripture, were also chosen and guided by God for that
task.
The first criterion, from the beginning, was that the writer must be a man
who was universally recognized by the people of his time to be specifically
chosen by God to be a spokesman to the people for God. That is, God had
specifically chosen that man to be a voice to communicate to the Jewish people
those things that God would reveal to him. He was usually a prophet, but in some
cases, was a priest or a king.
A problem developed with this simple criterion. Some obscure early
Jewish writers began to write religious works, but signed them with the name of an
accredited prophet, priest or king. When those, who were responsible for
determining which writings were scripture, became aware that spurious writings
were being circulated, they established other criteria for judging the genuineness
of the writings as scripture.
The second criterion was the question, did the writing contain any
provable error? Some writings contained prophecies that did not come to pass
when they were prophesied to happen, or the opposite of what was prophesied to
happen came to pass at the prophesied time. Another error that appeared in some
writings was identifying a wrong person as occupying a particular office at a
particular time, or a right person and right time, but a wrong office, or a right
person and right office, but a wrong time. Some writings would make the same
type of errors with certain events. True scripture does not contain errors.

39
 The third criterion was that there must be nothing in the writing that
contradicted anything in writings that were already recognized as being in the
canon of the scriptures, specifically, the writings of Moses, which are also
known as the Pentateuch, and are the first five books of our Old Testament.
The Jews completed determining the canonicity of the Old Testament
about four hundred years before the birth of Jesus. During the four hundred
years prior to Jesus’ birth there were no recognized prophets of God in all of Israel.
Citing the first criterion for judging the canonicity of the scriptures, no writings of
that period of time should be recognized as a part of the canon of scripture in the
Old Testament. The apostles of Jesus accepted the Old Testament just as the Jews
had canonized it, and passed it on to the church of New Testament times without
changing it in any way. It was a common practice in the early Christian church to
allow the reading of religious writings that were not officially recognized as a part
of the canon of scripture. Most of these writings were good devotional reading,
and were inspiring to read. Some of them were good histories and even shed some
light on certain aspects of some canonized writings. The early Christian church
sanctioned using these writings for inspiration in daily living, but would not
sanction using them to establish any new doctrinal teaching. Properly used, they
were profitable reading, but some who read them lacked discernment. Finally, in
the 1500’s the Roman Catholic Church canonized seven writings from the four
hundred year period of time just before Jesus’ birth, when there were no
recognized prophets of God in Israel, and they used one of these writings as the
authority for their doctrine of purgatory.
The fathers of the early Christian Church recognized one more
criterion for authenticating the canonicity of the books of the Old Testament:
Did Jesus quote from the book, identifying it as scripture?
While Jesus quoted from many of the books of the Old Testament,
identifying them as scripture, he did not quote from all of them.
If a writing met all of the previously established criteria for determining
if it were scripture, it was not necessary for Jesus to quote from it to prove
that it was scripture.
It is worthwhile to note that Jesus never quoted from any of the writings
produced in the four hundred years prior to his birth, thus, he didn’t identify
any of them as being scripture. None of those writings met all of the previously
established criteria for being scripture. There is no adequate evidence that any of
these writings should be included in the canon of the Old Testament.
The early church fathers finished determining the canon of the New
Testament some time in the fifth century.
One of the criterion for judging the canonicity of the books of the New
Testament was that the writers were required to be men who had had

40
substantial personal contact with Jesus during His earthly ministry. That was
true of Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, James, Peter, and Jude. Saul, who
became known as Paul (Acts 13:9), was a special case. The change in Saul
after Jesus Christ met him in the road to Damascus was such that it was
recognized that he was also an apostle chosen by Christ.
The religious writings of New Testament times were also judged by the
established criteria for determining the canonicity of the books of the Old
Testament.
The book of Hebrews’ human writer is unknown. The book of Hebrews was
judged by its contents alone, according to the established criteria for determining
the canonicity of the scriptures.
As in Old Testament times, there were spurious writers in New Testament
times too, so discernment had to be exercised in determining which writings
actually belonged in the canon of the New Testament.
In spite of having certain criteria to guide them in determining the canonicity
of the many religious writings being circulated, the men who assembled and
canonized the writings that constitute our Holy Bible still needed God’s guidance
in which to accept and which to reject.
I believe that the same God, who breathed the scriptures into the men
who recorded them, also guided the men, who gathered the writings together,
as to which writings to accept, and which writings to reject, for the canon of
the scriptures.

TRANSLATIONS OF THE HOLY BIBLE

I believe that the Holy Spirit guided the men, who wrote the books of
the Bible, in their selection of words, and in the way that they wrote, so that it
communicated exactly what God wanted to communicate to mankind in that
language.
The problem is that we do not speak the languages in which the books of
the Bible were written. We have to have a translation of them.
There are always problems with translating from one language to
another. In any language a word may have several different meanings and several
different shadings of meanings, depending upon how it is used in the sentence.
When translating, there may not be a word in the language that is being translated
into that has the same mix of meanings and shadings of meaning as the word that is
to be translated. Sometimes there is no word at all with a meaning even close to
the meaning of the word to be translated. The translator has to decide whether to
choose a word that is closest in meaning to the word that he is translating, thereby
losing a part of the meaning of the original language in the translation, or to use a

41
sentence, or even a paragraph, to translate just one word. Sometimes the only
choice is to rewrite the parable, using things that the people are familiar with, and
for which there are words in the language being translated into. To illustrate this, I
have a missionary friend who is supervising a translating team of people in the
country of Mali, West Africa, in their efforts to translate the Bible into the Songhai
language of the African Songhai tribe of people, many of whom are former slaves
of the Taureg tribe of people in the southern Sahara Desert. Many of Jesus’
parables refer to things that these desert-dwelling people have never had or even
seen. Their language has no words for those things which they have never seen.
In this case it is not possible for the translators to simply translate some of the
parables from one language to another. There are no words to translate into. It is a
real challenge. This missionary friend and his translation team are finding it
necessary to rewrite some of the parables, using things and words that will make
the parable understandable to these desert-dwelling people. These translators are
honestly trying in their translation to communicate the meaning of the parable that
the original teller of it intended to be communicated. They rewrite only those
parables which could not be made understandable to the Songhai people any other
way.
These translators must first have a thorough understanding of the
parable, that they are translating, in the light of the culture, customs and
language usage of the people to whom it was first told. Then they must have a
thorough understanding of the culture, customs and language usage of the
people whose language they are trying to translate into. Only then is it possible
for them to retell a parable, using objects that the Songhai speaking people know,
in such a way that it expresses the same meaning as the original parable.
The best translators honestly try to be unbiased in translating the true
meaning intended to be conveyed by the original teller of the parable. That is
to say, that the best translators diligently try to understand, as accurately as
possible, what the original teller of the parable was trying to communicate to his
hearers. A translator with this kind of attitude is an others-centered person, humble
and open to the guidance of the Holy Spirit in his selection of the words that will
most accurately communicate the thoughts expressed in the original text.
A good translator must have a great deal more knowledge than just the
knowledge of the languages involved.
Every language is always slowly, but steadily changing with everyday
usage. The English language that was spoken five hundred years ago is almost like
a foreign language to English speaking people today. This slow change in
language usage makes it desirable, even necessary, for someone to edit the Bible
from time to time, and change some words, and sometimes, the way thoughts are
expressed, so that modern people can understand them.

42
 Unfortunately, there are some translators and editors who do not care
what the original authors tried to communicate. They work hard to make the
Bible say what they want it to say, so that it doesn’t offend them. They want a
Bible that doesn’t remind them of what they don’t believe, but they think of
themselves as being Christians, and they want to be known as Christians. Does
this sound like the devil at work?
I am a bit short of patience with those who say that it isn’t possible to
know exactly what those ancient writers were trying to communicate to their
readers, and ultimately, to us, so it’s useless to try to figure it out. It is only
proper courtesy to make every effort to understand as accurately as possible what
others are trying to communicate to us, whether they are ancient writers or current
companions. The difficulty of comprehending exactly what others are trying to
communicate to us does not excuse us from making the utmost effort to
comprehend what they are trying to communicate to us.
It is not possible for any translation to be absolutely true to the original
language. However, I believe that many of the translations of the Bible in use
today have succeeded in preserving, pretty much intact, the essential truths that
God intended to communicate to man, but we need to be aware that there are
translations of the Bible existing, whose translators and/or editors made no effort to
understand and preserve the original meaning of the original text.
I am not an authority on the different translations of the Holy Bible, but I
trust the following translations:
The Authorized Version of the King James Bible.
The New International Version of the Bible.
The American Standard Version of the Bible.
What about the New King James Bible, and the New American Standard
Bible? I fear that I cannot intelligently comment on them. I think that some words
have been changed in them, and some of the language changed to reflect modern
usage of them. As has already been noted, there is a need to do this because all
language slowly changes over time, and given enough time, the change is
significant enough to warrant an update.
My own preference is for the standard King James Bible, even though I
would like to see the “thees” and “thous” replaced with the modern English word,
“you”, and the “hasts” and “haths” replaced with the modern English words, “has”
and “ have”. In comparing the New King James Bible to the standard King James
Bible, I note that the structures of some sentences have been completely changed
along with some words other than thee, thou, hast, and hath. In some cases I feel
that the word chosen by the updaters, was not the best choice to convey the real
meaning of the original scriptures; in other cases, the change in the sentence

43
structure, and in words has improved the ease of understanding that particular
passage of scripture.
I think that the New King James Bible is adequate and dependable for the
average Christian, but I think that the real student of the Bible is better served by
staying with the standard King James Bible.
There may be other translations that are dependable, but since I am not a
student of all of the different translations, I cannot name them or give an evaluation
of their worth as faithful translations.
I believe that God, through the Holy Spirit, caused certain chosen men
to write those things that He wanted people on this earth to know about
Himself, what his standard of behavior was for us, when we were failing to
meet that standard, how to return to meeting His standard, and how to
remain true to His standard.
I believe that the standard that God has given to us is intended to
promote our highest happiness and best welfare.
I believe that God, through the Holy Spirit, guided certain chosen men,
of both, the Old Testament and New Testament times, as they selected the
writings that God wanted to constitute the canon of the scriptures.
I believe that God, through His Holy Spirit, guided certain chosen men,
as they translated the scriptures from one language to another, in such a way
as to preserve His essential message to mankind in the Holy Bible.
I believe that there has been some translators who have willfully tried to
translate the scriptures to support what they already believed, or wanted to
believe; they were not guided by the Holy Spirit, and their translations do not
present God’s message to mankind as God wanted it to be presented.

Herb’s note: I realize that my knowledge of this subject is too limited for
me to write as an authority on it. It has been fifty years since I studied these things
at Baptist Bible Seminary, and my memory is not as dependable as I would like it
to be. I will not be offended if there are those who can, and would endeavor, to fill
in the “holes” in my knowledge. What I have written is what I believe now, based
upon the knowledge that I now have. My beliefs are subject to “modification” as I
gain more knowledge, but it’s a slow process for me. Thanks for bearing with me.

In the next chapter I will write about my perception of the origin of

everything.

44