How did we get the Bible?

"How did we get the Bible?"
Dr. Robert Plummer answers in Honest Answers | Episode 77

Watch more episodes of Honest Answers here:

To find out the answer to next episode's question, don't forget to SUBSCRIBE:

Ask any questions about theology, ministry, or life; and have them answered honestly by Southern Seminary professors.

Submit your questions by posting them in the comments below.

To learn more about studying with a Southern Seminary or Boyce College Professor, go to:

[sarchrisa]

Thank you. This is the best explanation I’ve found. Going to share with my 13 y/o daughter : already having her faith scorned and undermined by grade 8 social studies teacher. Prayers appreciated. God Bless ❤

[jackjones]

It's truly min boggling to think God descended from heaven to suffer, die and resurrect all while ensuring these events are recorded from their very beginnings so that we too after rebelling from nearly the very start can also reside in heaven and experience eternal peace. That is love.

[truthseeker]

At 09:40, he pauses to point out that the early Christian community was extremely careful and extremely interested in ensuring that they only gave reverence and final authority to writings that were apostolic and inspired. He specifically mentions the councils of Hippo and Carthage, discerning the canon. He fails to mention that these two councils discerned both the Old and New Testament canons for Christians. Interestingly, he accepts the New Testament canon from these councils but rejects their Old Testament canon. If their decision about the Old Testament is wrong, how could he trust their New Testament canon? Instead, he accepts the rabbinic Old Testament canon. Why on earth would he accept a canon derived from people that rejected Jesus over a canon derived from people that accepted Jesus?

[rickintexas]

Great explanation. The more I learn about the Bible the more I love the Bible.

[angramp]

This one of the most thorough explanations I've ever come across. Thank you.

[kellyedington]

From the Catholic church, its actually a really easy and straight forward history lesson... ✌️❤️‍🔥✝️

[aaronwood]

@10:30 - I believe he is referring to “evidence that demands a verdict”
Also- it’s interesting to note that the Ethiopian church developed independently of the Roman church and the Protestant and Eastern Orthodox influence and they have a slightly different cannon

[paulmualdeave]

These same councils also picked which Old Testament books are to be canon. They are the same books that are in the Catholic Bible. The Catholic Bible was affirmed multiple times in other councils between the 397 Council of Carthage to 1546 Trent, which made the list the church had been using for over a thousand years dogma. This was in response to Martin Luther removing four New Testament books and the Apocrypha from his German tradition. The original KJV had the Apocrypha in 1611 and then removed it in its second version in 1885. You left all this out.

[cml]

Awesome explanation. Thank God and thank you. Some students were debating about the origin of the Bible in class. Then I just came across this a few days after. God is good.

[elenagranda]

Thank you for sharing with us this explanation about the biblical canon, the recognized books that form our Bible today, by Dr. Robert Plummer. We have the blessing our younger son is an student of SBTS. God is very good and merciful. On 1994 we live in Cuba our natal country, my husband came to USA on 1995 and I could arrive on 2001 with our older son. He blessed us with another son who is studying with you because wants to be a Pastor. God is good. He let us to serve Him because His mercy in our life.

[justinchamberlain]

Thank you for the clarity!
3:55 NT Explained
4:19 That promise not being the context of only being for the apostles; Jn14:28 is not just for the apostles-that’s nonsensical. That would mean txt like Jn17 would only be for the apostles; it’s the same conversation which means that can’t be the proper context

[Athagn]

It’s funny how he mentions council of Carthage and the 27 books of the NT. Failed to mention the books that the Protestants threw out were also there at Carthage. Tobit, maccabees, etc.

[billmartin]

There were a lot of things in this video that were either inaccurate or misleading.

First, go back in time to the year 150 AD, and you will find the orthodox church is extremely Catholic. What does that mean? First and foremost, the church followed apostolic succession, that is how you knew you were not in danger of heresy. You had to belong to a church that was led by a bishop that could trace his lineage back to an apostle. The Catholic Church has that same apostolic succession to this day.

Second, as the video points out, there were books of the Bible that were clearly authoritative, but there were many books that were in debate until the 4th century. While Peter‘s letter does lend credibility to Paul’s letters, Peter’s letter never mentions other books such as Jude or John or James, so how can those be considered scripture? Revelation, which we all regard as inspired scripture, very nearly did not make the final Bible canon. It’s inspiration was clearly in question. So who made the call that it was inspired? Of course the answer is the Catholic Church, by which I mean the bishops of the only orthodox church in existence at that time.

It’s also a bit misleading that you quote these early church fathers such as Ignatius or Irenaeus or Justin Martyr, but you neglect to talk about their other subjects including apostolic succession as the legitimate form of Church polity, or the Eucharist being the true body and blood of Jesus Christ and not just a symbol, or the baptism of infants, or baptismal regeneration. You need to accept all of their writings, not just a few. That’s the problem with protestant churches, you all have your own theology‘s which you then interpret the Bible through, rather than reading the Bible at face value and building your theology off of it.

You are right about the importance of the early church fathers, they are the ones we should trust for interpretations of scripture, not modern day opinions or even our own opinions. The men who knew the apostles know the theology of Christianity the best.

[pkab]

But somebody or group of scholars had to decide what went in the Protestant canon. Some books that were left out were highly debated and either Peter or James almost didn’t make it in our canon because of the works righteous connotation. So to say there wasn’t a body of people deciding what went in, in my opinion, would be erroneous.

[malvokaquila]

Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away. Thus sayeth the Lord and Savior, Son of God, Jesus.

[JesseABN]

Another GREAT video, Dr. Plummer! We are so thankful for your devotion to extending knowledge of the Scriptures and our Lord. Godspeed, Sir.

[blaziustheblaze]

Thank you for explaining how the canon of Scripture came together. The more I learn about the Bible's history, the more I see God's hand in its preservation.

[rjltrevisan]

It's amazing the acrobatics that protestants do not to mention the Catholic church and its role since the beginning.

[BigRichardNRG]

Conveniently skated over the consistencies of some of the non chosen texts

[srich]

Hippo and Carthage “formally recognized” the 27 book NT canon 👍🏻 Sort of!

Hmmmm! Isnt this a Catholic thing??? Didnt these councils also “formally recognize” a 46 OT book canon at the same time? 🤔