How was the New Testament Canon Formed? (Part 2 of 2)
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 18 ต.ค. 2020
- How the New Testament canon was formed (Part 2 of 2). In this video, Lee McDonald and Mike Licona discuss the Muratorian Fragment, 1 Clement, the claim to divine inspiration and canon, the use of 1 Enoch by Jude 14, divine inspiration and biblical inerrancy, and the canon within the canon.
LEE’s BOOKS
Keep It Simple: amzn.to/36GsUPO
Intermediate: amzn.to/33Ci3El
Advanced: amzn.to/2GC42xP
Expert: amzn.to/3nu3BGm
On the literature that did not make the cut: amzn.to/3d98tfj
Mike Licona is associate professor of theology at Houston Baptist University. HBU offers a fully accredited Master of Arts degree in apologetics that may be completed entirely online or on the HBU campus in Houston. For more information, visit bit.ly/2Wlej6Z.
WEBSITE: www.risenjesus.com
FACEBOOK: / michael.r.licona
TWITTER: / drmikelicona
Buy "The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus": amzn.to/38vTfNU
Buy "The Resurrection of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach": amzn.to/2NOOZkT
Buy "Paul Meets Muhammad": amzn.to/2RdEFoB
Buy "Why Are There Differences in the Gospels?": amzn.to/36dzc5C
If you like Mike's work, become a patron by visiting his new Patreon page at / risenjesus
#canon
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 71 วันนี้!! คู่เอก "ทรงชัยน้อย vs รักษ์"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/_AGPnq2p6Js/mqdefault.jpg)
I truly appreciate Dr. McDonald's candor. "I don't know" is a great answer. This man is an authority on the subject. If he doesn't know, what chance do I have of figuring these things out. It may seem strange but, I find that encouraging, and a relief. The more I learn, the more I find out, I don't know, and I'm okay with that. Thanks for posting.
Eph 4-5 one Lord one faith and one hope .... But over 2000 sect .... This is a big problems
@@okhuibutala1640 didnt ur prophet say only one of ur 73 sects would be correct? big problem
@@majestyhype9605 Who's "ur prophet"?
I can remember a very Godly Pastor friend many years ago telling me something about Hebrews that he thought
was a mistake. (Hebrews 9:3-4) He looked at me and said "does it bother me" speaking of himself. Then he smiled and said "not at all". That was a dangerous thing for him to tell me as a young Christian, but recently as I learn more, my view of inspiration has been evolving basically on the lines you two are talking about though I have learned much from these videos. In some ways, it actually strengthens my faith, as it answers questions we all have and the overall evidence for God, scripture, the resurrection, and the inner witness and life of a Christian out weigh any troubling issues such as this.
I'm glad these videos are helpful to you. I'm with you. This should not undermine our confidence in Scripture. It should only undermine our confidence in OUR PARTICULAR VIEW of Scripture that is not consistent with what we observe in Scripture.
Don't you think that Jesus is protect the Bible
Only one book is telling us about the Salvation
Jesus is watching over the Bible
Flaming Sword - If I might ask, what sort of mistake did this person perceive in Heb 9:3-4?
_
For others, for reference:
And after the second veil, the tabernacle which is called the Holiest of all; which had the golden censer, and the ark of the covenant overlaid round about with gold, wherein was the golden pot that had manna, and Aaron's rod that budded, and the tables of the covenant; and over it the cherubims of glory shadowing the mercyseat; of which we cannot now speak particularly.
The talk about errors and inaccuracies in scripture was really helpful to hear. I’ve been struggling with errors in the Bible lately, so I appreciate this a lot.
brebeaa: I encourage you to check out my book "Why Are There Differences in the Gospels? What We Can Learn From Ancient Biography" (New York: Oxford University Press, 2017).
@@MikeLiconaOfficial Wow, thanks for responding! I actually started reading it recently, I’m enjoying it so far. I really appreciate your scholarship, and that of Dr. Habermas. Please keep up the great work!
I'm a non believer but I really this guys honesty. I think if you are at least honest with the text and you still hold a high view of it because you find power in the core message, then I still disagree but I can recognize you are being sincere and intellectual.
The last part was encouraging
Thanks for another interesting video!
Thank you very much for that interesting conversation!
Hey Mike Licona, it would be great if you could have a talk with Lee Martin Mcdonald about the gnostic literature like the gospel of thomas in the near future . How did our churchfurthers think about this literature?
Why is it 3 hours before the premiere starts and I'm sitting here waiting? My wife calls me a dork.
:-) I'm glad you're that interested in the topic, Travis!
@@MikeLiconaOfficial Hello brother Mr Licona, I hope you are doing well. My name is Luke and I was hoping if it will be possible to email you to ask you a couple questions regarding one of your books. If you look at my channel, you'll be able to see I have been responding to the most infamous Dawah groups attack on the historicity of the NT. One of their apologist has one of your books and may possibly be misrepresenting position. Thus, I wanted to clarify your position and also ask for your recommendation on something else regarding the Crucifixion... I havent been able able to find your email sir. So, if you'd be willing to help, I'd be more than happy to email you with details if you provide contact info/email...Thank you & God bless you!
Greatly arrpicitied this viedoes I have learned a lot. Even though I am not a believing Christian I have great interest in New testament.
Thanks to the early church fathers, the One holy apostolic Church.
Thank you so much learned a lot.
Thank you for such an insightful teaching about God's Word. It seems that if Jude referred to the Book of Enoch as Scripture, it may well be because Scriptures say that all the books would not be able to contain all of God's Words. And I, also, like what the guest speaker says about the core teachings of Christianity being included in the Bible, which is sufficient. Cheers,
5:00 I almost screamed
Hi, Why you don't enable the subtitles in English. It is automatic and there is no reason to not enable it to help people like me that are not english native tongue. Thank you! Keep up the good work!
Thanks for the suggestion! I will look into it.
@@MikeLiconaOfficial I wish you would have asked him about whether or not the book of Revelation was included in the fourth century Council of Carthage in 397. You had mentioned this council did omit Revelation in your video presentation several years back (th-cam.com/video/s0BCm2cRx9w/w-d-xo.html), and you referred me to his book "The Biblical Canon" where Dr. McDonald cites this twice.
The reason I would have loved to have heard his answer is because when I brought this up in my debate against Gary Michuta on the OT canon, he stated he was in private correspondence with Dr. McDonald who Gary "claimed' Dr. McDonald had made a mistake in his book, and he wanted to correct it in an updated version of his book. But when Gary interviewed him, twice, and this question was asked of him, he never actually addressed it. This is why I'd like to have heard what he had to say on the subject.
It keeps being said throughout this series "Some things are biblical and some things are cultural".... But which things would be "cultural" or "biblical" considering, on the model proposed here, all the biblical books were open to acceptance or rejection based on the cultural milieu for centuries in memorial?
Furthermore, you can't say, "We need to believe in what the bible teaches about the CORE of who Jesus was and what He did".... if in fact THERE NEVER WAS A CORE as you are arguing! That is the whole point. Again, the proposed understanding here of the formation of canonization inherently is going to implode upon itself into perpetual indefinite uncertainty and ultimately therefore to hyper subjectivism and relativism. Again, this is a byproduct of the loosey goosey understandings of inerrancy that tends to calcify in the hearts and minds of many modern bible scholars today.
What if Jude wasn’t quoting from anything he’d ever read himself but was just simply being led by the Holy Spirit? If all scripture is God breathed Jude was not speaking from his own understanding rather by the Holy Spirit.
The book of Enoch (the first one), was well known at that time. The readers of Jude would have known that he was quoting from the book of Enoch. They would have seen Jude's quotation as him validating that book itself, otherwise the Holy Spirit would have clarified it and said that the quotation was from something other than the book of Enoch.
As far as I understand Jude also alludes to the book called the Assumption of Moses regarding the incident of the body of Moses. Could the solution be that when God reveals and inspires an author, this revelation is interpreted filtered through the worldview or lense of the author...in this case James thought the prophecy was from Enoch, even though he may have made a mistake in regards to this, it would not necessarily negate the truth or 'inspiration' of the message being conveyed. The case could be resolved arguing for infallibility instead of strict inerrancy (?)
I agree with your thinking here, Marc. And this seriously challenges the idea of verbal and plenary inspiration.
I respect your honesty, Mr. Lincona. The solution, IMO, is that the Evangelical doctrine of Scripture needs to be seriously revised pie jettisoned because it isn't historically defensible. And it leads to a theological cul-de-sac.Wm Abraham of SMU has written that this doctrine functioned as a counterpoint to Catholic teaching and authority but narrowed down the notion of authority from a robust to one grounded in Christology and elucidated by ecclesiology and sacramental theology. I don't see this revision taking place because Evangelical identity is so rooted in this teaching.
I guess I don’t see why the assumption of *error* has to follow. The books cited may not have been fully inspired, but if the Scripture really is Theopneoustos and the the author’s “carried along by the Holy Spirit, (and many many more that point towards God vs. man as the *ultimate* author) then all that *need* follow is that they were inspired (correct) in *that* regard.
Nowadays people don’t believe Enoch wrote Enoch ? What are you talking about mister man. What about me ?
There is no canon without the AUTHORITY to EXCLUDE. Who had that authority?
the Church, which is the pillar of truth
@@str.77 Amen
This discussion just highlights something that is so self-evident: the Evangelical doctrine of Scripture is the weakest, almost heterodox aspect of its theology. It can't stand up to the historical development of the Canon and the of actual use of sacred texts in the early Church. And most of all it is not connected to Christology, which is the hermeneutical key to Scripture and it's root and goal.
Jesus is the Canon in the canon... I know childish of me ;)
Glory belongs to Allah. Mike said many [christians] will be disturbed by what the professor said. yes. they should and opt out to what is firm. dr. McDonald truly exposed what we have known over 1,400 years now. those that died believing what is proven wrong here that will disturb many, what is their condition with God Almighty that revealed the consistently true about Himself being the Only One God and there is no true Lord with Him, not any angel, not any son of man, not any prophet.
not every apostle was a disciple. even some disciple, at least 1, Judas Iscariot was wrong, guilty in the eyes of the Christians. imagine a later date apostle that never met the walking and talking and preaching Jesus? AlhamdulIllah i am a muslim and i was able to watch the 2 parts, affirming what i already know and my feet are firm in belief even as i have family members in christendom. i pray they become a worship of Who Abraham worshiped. aameen.
i appreciate your honesty dr. McDonald.
A "later date apostle that never met the walking and talking and preaching Jesus" ... sounds like Muhammad.
@@str.77 Apostle of Jesus was either true or not. If true he did preach what was true about Jesus. Either the apostolic group that opposed Paul when they preached opposite him and got him to perform ritual of repentance were the liars or they preached the truth. This means Paul was either lying or preacher the truth. I want you to address the above so that we know the party that was the liar and which side are you supporting; the liar nor name the truth speaker.
My beloved Muhammad SA was Apostle of Allah The Almighty Creator Whose Hands his blessed soul is. The noble Prophet SA preached about God Who is Supreme, Worthy of all worship as befitting Him which He of His Mercy outlined in the Qur'an, in the wisdom/Hadith and Sunnah.
Allah is 1 instead of something else like duality, trinity, idol, many Gods, etc.
The claimed apostle of Jesus AS never met Jesus AS. Jesus AS was already lifted up to heavens before he appeared to make contradictory claims of his enlightenment and what contradicted the core disciples and Jesus himself.
Prophet SA on the other hand went on Isra which is mentioned in the 1st verse of Surah Isra and Miraj mentioned extensively in Surah Najm. The specific details were in the tutorial which I called Hadith. In both the Isra part and the Miraj part, the noble soul SA led Jesus AS and others in Salaah ala Ibrahima in the pricinct of Masjid Al Aqsa and when he ascended to the heavens and the gates of each was opened and the journey ended beyond the worldly heavens to the Throne of The Almighty Creator Who His Prophet SA heard His Voice and the Vail between The Lord and His Slave was The Light. The order if daily prayers which is primary event of worship was given and the ending ayat of Chapter 2, too.
Reality, the noble soul SA is the chairman of all Prophets AS and all of the mankind/children of Adam. He was the Apostle of Allah. Your apostle Paul was not accepted as apostle of Jesus by the Jerusalem disciples/apostles
@@lionabbass The 12 Apostles did not oppose Paul. Peter welcomed him and do did James (not one of the Twelve). Later one, there was a squabble but that was sorted out at the council.
Paul met Jesus in a vision and that was accepted by the Twelve.
Muhammad had all his knowledge about Jesus from various Christian sources, sone of which were heretical. Hence the ideas he included in the Quran.
Given Muhammad's claim to supremacy over Jesus, he can only be a false prophet.
@@str.77 I hope you will explain why Paul was asked to perform the Nazarene vow of sin offering? Please do because I will not allow you to tuck it under the bed so easily. When Paul lambasted the disciples that resided in Jerusalem, how is that agreement between them? You agree with a person questioning your name? If a man calls you a fool, liar, are you both in agreement on the titles?
Vision that is in more than 1 version can't come from God. At best 1 version is true or worse which is more of the reality is each version is a lie. The liar is known which why 4 Gospels came out of his followers based on his epistles, etc. Liars following liar will pen no absolute truth.
According to the bible, if all that was spoke and did by Jesus is written down no papers and ink in the world can put it down. This means there are many truth of Jesus not penned in the new testament.
While we see obvious lies, the truth missing you will find in the Quran and Hadith while they correct the lies on the pages of previous religious documents
@@str.77 12 disciples? Name them that Jesus approved or went about the places with him and I will show you a denier, a liar, a cheat, a betrayer and lode of doubters and lacking in faith.