Artikel ini merupakan summary dari presentation Greg Groom (dari Probe Center Austin) yang datang ke ICF Austin Februari 27, 1998.  Di presentasi ini Greg menjelaskan bagaimana proses kanonisasi atau pemilihan buku-buku yang dimasukkan ke Alkitab dan mengapa kita percaya kepada Alkitab ini.  Ini penting kita ketahui karena Firman Tuhan merupakan suatu sumber yang authoritative dalam kehidupan iman kita.

WHY BELIEVE IN THE BIBLE
(the process of bible cannonization) I. Introduction

1. The Problem Illustrated: Three Blind Men and an Elephant. Often it seems that what something is depends upon how you look at it.
2. In the same way, people often see the Bible in very different ways
   1. a southern view: the Bible as relic
   2. a political view: the Bible as symbol
   3. a liberal theological view: the Bible as myth
3. The Problem Stated: In light of so many different opinions, How should we see the Bible?
4. Our purpose this evening: Not so much to defend the Bible -- as C.H. Spurgeon said, "When a lion is attacked, you don\'t defend him. You let him out." -- as to better define what Christians have historically believed about the Bible.

II. The Cannon of Scripture: the Old Testament

1. "Canon" defined: "the list of writings acknowledged by the church as documents of divine revelation". The word was first used in this sense by Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria, in a letter in the late 4th century AD. The word itself derives from the Greek kanon, or "measuring rod".
2. The Old Testament canon: written over a period of 1,000 years in three divisions:
   1. The Law: Recognized by early 6th century BC
   2. The Prophets: Recognized by late 3rd century BC
   3. The Writings: Recognized by the 1st century AD
   Thus, by the time of Christ, the content of the Old Testament was roughly the same as we have it today. (Note: the order of the books was different and some books were combined with others: eg. the Pentateuch, Genesis through Deuteronomy, is one book in the Jewish canon, but the content was the same.) The most important criterion for OT writings was authorship, ie., do the writings contain the word of God given through a recognized prophet? See F.F. Bruce, The Canon of Scripture, chapter two, "The Law and the Prophets".
3. The most common challenge of the Old Testament canon has been to question the accuracy of its transmission, ie. Has its content remained unchanged over the years? The Dead Sea scrolls, discovered in a cave in 1948, provide valuable evidence that indeed the Old Testament has not been changed over the years. The scrolls contained parts of every book in the Old Testament, including a complete copy of the book Isaiah nearly 1,000 years older than the oldest copies previously known (from the Massoretic tradition, 10th century AD). Such differences as were noted were primarily differences in spelling (eg., the American "honor" vs. the English "honour") and stylistic changes (eg., the addition of "and"). Bottom line: no significant differences at all.
4. The New Testament church has also taken as definitive Jesus\' witness to the validity of the Old Testament: "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets: I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law, until everything is accomplished." -- Matthew 5:17-18 This is echoed at other places in the New Testament, eg. "For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit" -- II Peter 1:21
5. What about the Apocrypha?
   1. "Apocrypha" commonly refers to a group of writings from the period between the Old and New Testaments.
   2. The include I and II Esdras, Tobit, Judith, The Remainder of Esther, The Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, The Song of the Three Children, The History of Susanna, Bel and the Dragon, The Prayer of Manasses, I and II Maccabees.
   3. Why were these not included in the OT canon?
      1. They contain many errors: historical, geographical, and chronological: eg. Judith 1:1 speaks of "Nebuchadnezzar [reigning] over the Assyrians at Ninevah". The rest of the OT and history affirm him as king of Babylon.
      2. They teach false doctrines, eg. II Maccabees 14:41-46 justifies suicide.
      3. They are of a literary style at odds with the rest of Scripture, eg. Judith and Tobit admit that they are pure fiction.
      4. The OT Jews did not include them.
      5. Nor did the NT writers quote them.

III. The Canon of Scripture: the New Testament (about 100 years)

1. The first list of all twenty-seven books in our New Testament dates to 367 AD in a letter of Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria. The so-called Muratiorian fragment contains what may be an earlier list (its date is disputed) of 21 books from our current New Testament plus some other writings. It distinguishes between books that are suitable to be read in worship and those that should only be read in private devotion. Justin Martyr, 2nd century, argued that only the four gospels should be included. The point of of this: the formation of the New Testament canon was a process, involving the Holy Spirit working within the church over a period of time. It was not the decision of a church council: the first ecumenical council at Nicea in 325 didn\'t address the issue at all, and the edict of the council at Carthage in 397 AD that only the 27 canonical books of the New Testament should be read in worship seems to recognize books that were already considered canonical, rather than defining a new list.
2. What were the criteria for canonicity? Three things were emphasized:
   1. Authorship: was it written by the apostles or their close associates? eg. Mark or Luke?
   2. Ecclesiastical usage: was it accepted by the great majority of churches?
   3. Doctrinal: did it conform to teachings of recognized Scripture?
   In the end there was remarkably little dissent on what writings were Scriptural. Through it all the church sought to recognize authority rather than confer it.
3. What about "other gospels"? Hebrews, Ebionites, Philip, Matthias, Peter, Thomas, James, Arabic Gospel of the Infancy. eg. the gospel of Thomas found in Egypt in the 1940\'s.
   1. A Gnostic document. Central idea: we gain salvation through secret knowledge.
   2. Therefore Thomas contains many so-called \'secret\' sayings of Jesus.
   3. Little or no history in it: no references to the birth, trial, death, or ressurection of Jesus. Instead it contains about 114 parabraphs of Jesus\' "sayings" eg., "These are the secret words which the living Jesus spoke and which Didymus Judas Thomas wrote. And he said \'He who finds the explanation fo these words will not taste death\'". "Simon Peter said to them, \'Let Mary go away from us for women are not worthy of life. Jesus said, \'Lo, I shall lead her so that I may make her a male, that she, too, may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every woman who makes herself a male will enter the kingdom of heaven\'\'". The "other gospels" were rejected on two grounds:
      1. They have little historical value.
      2. They do not produce true religion.
4. Has the Bible been changed?
   1. Many cults: Jehovah\'s Witnesses, the Local Church, and tehh Way just to name a few, charge that key passages in Scripture have been changed to reflect a Christian bias. eg., John 8:58.
   2. Liberal Christian scholars argue that the New Testament books were written much later than the traditional datings and by people other than the apostles. See resurrection accounts.
   3. Responding to critics: Biblical scholarship well-supports the accuracy of our transcripts. See attachment.
   4. But does "the Bible hasn\'t changed" mean "the Bible is true"?
5. Why believe? The Bible claims to be the word of God.
   1. See Jeremiah 1:9, II Peter 1:21, II Timothy 3:16, I Corinthians 2:13. What does "Inspiration" means?
      1. mere encouragement? No!
      2. as in Jeremiah it is God putting his words in the mouths and on the pens of the Bible\'s writers.
   2. Is the Bible really God\'s word simply because it claims to be? No. But could it really be God\'s word, if it didn\'t claim to be so?
   3. What other writings claim to be God\'s word?
      1. nothing in pantheism: why not?
      2. historically there are three major possibilities, and all are related: the Koran (Islam), the Old Testament (Judaism) and the Bible (Christianity). All share certain parts in common. Is this a coincidence?
   4. How do we choose among them?

VI. Why believe? The evidence of historical accuracy.

1. Biblical scholarship has repeatedly demonstrated the Bible\'s historical accuracy. eg., Ur of the Chaldees (see Genesis 11) the \'67 Arab-Israeli War in the Sinai.
2. Is this enough? ie., the Koran were shown to be historically accurate, would that mean that what it says about God is true? No. Indeed, some would argue that the historical accuracy of the Bible can be entirely separated from the spiritual truth of its message. eg., the Ressurection accounts in the Synoptics vs. John: was Jesus crucified on Thursday or Friday?
3. Infallible vs. Inerrant. Infallibe="it won\'t deceive you". Inerrant="it doesn\'t contain any errors". Can the Bible be "infallible" if it is not "inerrant"?

VII. Why believe? The evidence of fulfilled prophecy.

1. See Isaiah 41:21-23 "Present your case... Bring forward your strong arguments... Declare the things that are going to come afterward, that we may know that you are gods..."
2. Pseudo-prophecy is infinitely flexible: Nostradamus "The senseless ire of the furious combat will cause steel to be flashed at the table by brothers: To part them death, wound, and curiously, the proud duel will come to arm France." Is a reference to the Camp David peace accords and the assasination of Anwar Sadat?
3. True prophecy is specific: see Daniel 9:25. From issuing of the decree to rebuild (in 444 BC, See Nehemiah 2:1-8) until the coming of the Messiah will be 7x7=49 years, plus 7x62=434 years, ie., 483 years. According to the Hebrew calendar (a lunar calendar of 360 days per year) this is 173,880 days. Conver this to our modern solar calendar: 173,880/365=476 solar years. So beginning in 444 BC going forward 476 years brings us to 33 AD and the crucifixion.
4. Is this enough reason to believe? The problem with miracles.

VIII. What do we mean when we say that the Bible is true?

1. U.T., February 1997: "The truth shall make you free", but which truth is it? Truth as what you believe vs. Truth as the way things really are?
   A true explanation is one that fits the way things really are.
2. "I have more reasons to believe in the Bible than I do believe in my wife" -- Francis Schaeffer.
3. Does what the Bible says about:
   1. What it means to be human: are we mere animals or machines, or are we persons, made in the image of God?
   2. The nature of meaning and morality: are right and wrong relative or absolute, rooted in God\'s character?
   3. Where everything came from: is there a God, or is everything the result of matter and energy plus chance over time?
   Fit the way things really are?

For Further Reading:

1. The Canon of Scripture, by F.F. Bruce (1988, InterVarsity Press, 349 pages plus notes and index) -- A classic on why what\'s in the Bible belongs there.
2. The New Testament Documents: Are they reliable? By F.F. Bruce (1995, InterVarsity Press, 120 pages plus index) -- Much of the attack on the Bible is focused on the New Testament. Bruce ably defends it against those who claim that it is not historically reliable.
3. God Has Spoken, by J.I. Packer (1979, InterVarsity Press, 137 pages plus appendix) -- An outstanding defense of revelation by a godly scholar.
4. Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties, by Gleason Archer (1982, Zondervan, 434 pages plus indices) -- Troubled by some confusing passages in Scripture? Archer points the way toward solutions.