About The Bible

Question:

Is there a difference between the Catholic Bible and the Christian Bible and if there is, what is it?

Answered on 07/21/06:

The answer is yes. Now, the differences are minor, but there are some differences. And the differences are that some books are added to the Catholic Bible. The Catholic Bible doesn’t take away from the authenticity of Scripture, but it does add a couple books that are not in the original canonized Scripture that we have in the main accepted, theologically approved translations.

The one book that I know of that’s in the Catholic Bible that’s not in the traditional Bible is the book of Maccabees. And although it’s harmless, it’s not in the original language. So what we need to do is to stick to what’s original.

Now, I could take a Catholic Bible and I could use a Catholic Bible to preach my sermons. I could use a Catholic Bible to lead somebody to the Lord because in the Catholic Bible, John 3:3 is the same as in my Bible. John 3:3 says, “Unless a man is born again he cannot enter the kingdom of God.” And so, for that purpose, I believe that it’s okay if someone’s reading a Catholic Bible. But just to be safe, you ought to read a Bible that is more accepted by the historians around the world. That is the Protestant Bible.

And again, I’m not coming against the Catholic Bible because it includes the entirety of the Protestant Bible, but it just adds some books that didn’t pass the criteria of the rest of the sixty-six books that are in the Bible. I hope that answers your question. And I hope I’m not offending my Catholic brothers and sisters because I certainly don’t mean to do that. And I’m not criticizing their Bible because it includes everything that my Bible includes.

Question:

Answered on 04/12/06:

First of all, there are 66 books in the Bible that are canonized in Scripture by the fathers of Christianity, by those who have studied and have researched and have actually compared to the original Hebrew manuscripts, the original Greek manuscripts. They’ve done an enormous amount of research, and study and every major translation of the Bible sticks to those 66 books.

Now, why do the Catholics add the books that they add? I don’t know, but here’s the most important thing: the books that they do add do not take away from the truth and the substance of the books that are scriptural and are considered by every other main source to be the tradition and history of Christianity. Those who agree that the 66 books are the books of the Bible are not contradicted by the Catholics having a few extra books.

I’m not saying that it’s good to have a couple extra books in the Bible, but I’m not criticizing the Catholics because that’s a part of their tradition. But it’s not a part of the canonization of Scriptures, the Scriptures that are considered to be Holy Scriptures by most of Christianity. The majority of Christianity sticks to the 66 books Why the Catholics add others, I can’t answer. But I can say that still you can find in the Catholic Bible John 3:3, “that unless a man is born again, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.”

Question:

Answered on 04/07/06:

People are going to ask why you believe what you believe. What I would say to them is two things. Number one, “you can not deny the change that took place in my life when Jesus came into my life. That is unmistakable, it is irrefutable, it is undeniable and wild horses could not drag me away from Jesus Christ and His love for me. When He showed me that He was real and that He was alive, it changed me and I am totally convinced.”

The second way that I would give an account for why I believe what I believe is because the Bible has been tested. People have tried to drown it, tried to burn it, tried to deny it, tried to argue it away and no one has been able to put it down.

You cannot keep the Bible down because it is filled with too much truth and too much life and too much love for mere humanity to try to subdue it or try to erase its truth and erase its indelible mark that it leaves upon the heart of every man or woman that comes genuinely to seek for the answers that come from it. And so, there is a book that I would recommend that everybody get by Josh McDowell called Evidence That Demands a Verdict. And it will go through the convincing, absolutely assuring list of reasons why the Bible is undeniably the Word of God. And if you get that book, Evidence That Demands a Verdict, it will give you ways to give an account for what you believe, not just emotionally because God has touched your life, but also intelligently with facts and evidences and demonstrations to prove that the Bible is true. Those are the two ways that I would give an account for why I believe what I believe.

Question:

I read the NIV Bible, but while searching the Internet, I found that the King James Bible is the only version to read. Do you agree?

Answered on 03/21/06:

There are many versions, but the main thing is that you are reading a Bible that is derived from the original version. The old King James Bible certainly fits that standard, but it was written several hundred years ago in the language of the day. Today, there are several choices that are derived from the original version, including the New King James, New American Standard, Amplified Version, and others. They are still anointed and authorized by God. The New International Version that you have is good, but the other choices are better

Question:

Who put the Bible together?

Answered on 03/21/06:

Let’s start with 2 Timothy 3:16, which says, “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.” All of the Scripture in both the Old Testament and New Testament is inspired by God. Jesus, in the Book of Revelation, said, “Do not add to it; do not take from it.”

What happened was there was a series of tests 2,000 years ago for letters to be canonized, to be considered authoritative and authentic, and to be classified as Old Testament and New Testament Scripture. That process was lengthy. There were dozens of men of various backgrounds who went into a time of seclusion and prayer . . . they went into different rooms and came out with the same interpretation of which letters were inspired by God and should be considered Holy Scripture.

Question:

As a Christian who has gone to church his entire life and considers himself an evangelical at this point, I still have yet to hear a good explanation why we believe without doubt that the Bible is the Word of God rather than a book written by men.

Answered on 03/21/06:

Why is the Bible the Word of God? Why do we believe whole-heartedly that the Bible is the Word of God? How can we take the Bible literally and truly rely on and put our faith in its authenticity? I’ve got two primary comments that I’d like to make about that. Let me go through some things that are reasons for why I believe the Bible is the Word of God. Number one, because the truth of it and the Scriptures in it have changed my life dramatically. That’s the number one reason for me.

Number two, because the Scriptures that I read work. I see the Bible as a bag of seeds that when you plant a seed, you get a harvest. And so the seeds of the Bible produce the harvest that they say they will. For example, when it says, “give and it shall be given to you,” I have found that to be proven time and time again. Whether I’m giving something good or whether I’m giving something bad, it is always given back to me good measure, pressed down, shake together and running over just as the Bible says. This is overwhelming evidence for me.

But let’s take that one step further. Historians throughout history used to criticize the Bible as a book of myths and as a book of just letters as you described some people believe, written by man. And yet, historians after years of study and years of research have found overwhelming archaeological evidence of facts and figures that were at one time questioned in the Bible but have now been proven accurate in the Bible, artifacts that were written about in the Bible. Ur of the Chaldees, the city that was once thought a myth where Abraham came from that has been found and unveiled through archaeological research. The Meads, the Persians, these kingdoms that were at one time thought to be mythological kingdoms, there has been evidence to verify and validate the things that the Bible says about those things. So there’s another reason.

Question:

Answered on 03/21/06:

First of all, let’s establish that the Bible is the basis of authority within the church. And what did Christians do before there was a Bible? They operated on what is commonly known as oral tradition. The societies and the cultures that the Old Testament believers and the New Testament believers lived in was a culture of oral tradition. So they would literally memorize the letters, memorize the laws, memorize the things that Jesus said. And they were able to pass on what was said, through oral tradition.

Nowadays, if you tell somebody a story and they tell somebody else, it’s going to change quite a number of times between the first person and the third or fourth person. But there was such a strong commitment to oral tradition and oral learning, that when somebody said something, and they would memorize it, they would meditate on, they would go over it and over it and over it and over it, and that’s how they followed the things that Jesus said was through oral tradition. So Jesus said it to Peter and James and John, and then they said it to others. And they really knew it.

And that’s why, for example, the book of Mark was written by a disciple of Peter. Mark wasn’t even a disciple of Jesus. He was converted through the life of Peter, and followed Peter around and learned what Jesus said through what Peter said, as these things were indelibly marked on Peter’s life. This was the Son of God that was walking in the midst of men, and He was the pen writing on the table of their heart. And that’s why it was so ingrained in them, and then they could turn it into written tradition as well, and that’s why we have the Scripture.

Question:

Is it a sin to read certain translations of the Bible? I’m a little concerned and disturbed because Matthew 17:21 is completely eliminated from one translation. And there’s been, I think, a couple other areas. I just know there’s somewhere in the Bible where it talks about, “Woe be to the person who alters or changes anything.”

Answered on 03/21/06:

It’s not a sin, although it depends on what translation you’re talking about. The Jehovah’s Witnesses’ translation of the Bible I wouldn’t encourage you to read out of. The Mormon’s version of the Bible I wouldn’t encourage you to read out of. But if you’re talking about the King James or the NIV or New American Standard or the Amplified or the Jerusalem Bible or The Message translation or the New Living Translation, those are all great translations to read out of, and it’s not a sin at all. The New Revised Standard Version, from what I know, is perfectly legitimate.

I understand which translation you’re talking about. And, in fact, there are some Bibles that even though they include verse 21, there’ll be at the bottom of the page, “Some earlier manuscripts do not include this verse.” Mark 16:20 says that “These signs will follow those that believe in my name, they’ll cast out devils and speak with new tongues, and if they drink any deadly poison it won’t hurt them,” I think there are some translations that take that out as well. And if there is a translation that takes those verses out, then, yes, I would stay away from that, simply because they’re not including the entire text that God ordained through the various tests that the Scriptures went through to where we got the King James Version and the original Greek and the original Latin and the original Hebrew language.

So, is it a sin to read out of that translation? No, it’s not a sin at all. But if a translation excludes a couple verses because they think they’re not necessarily canonized Scripture, I think you should make sure that you read the translations that include all those. And the majority of translations do include Matthew 17:21. But it’s not a sin to read out of that Bible. But you’re not altering it; you’re not the one taking Scriptures out or adding to them.

And I think there are some Scriptures that that historians would argue or would debate about, and they would say, “Well, this verse really doesn’t belong here,” or “This verse doesn’t really belong here.” But we need to stick to the most accurate, historical evidence that comes from the Dead Sea Scrolls and comes from the time when the men who put the Scriptures together. Seventy men went in different rooms to pray about which Scriptures belonged, which letters belonged in the Scripture, and they all came out with the same books and the same letters, which is a miracle from God.

And by the way, I strongly urge you to get the book by Josh McDowell called Evidence That Demands a Verdict. And it’s a great book that validates the authority of Scripture. You can still receive encouragement from that version of the Bible, but I would stick to the ones that include all of the Scriptures that are approved by the fathers of the faith from years gone by.