The Bible

Is it the Holy Word of God?

1. Who decided what to include in the Bible Canon?

2. What should be the standard in accepting a scripture as inspired by God?

3. Are all the current books in the Bible up to that standard?

4. Are there books that should also be in the Bible?

5. How should we view the Bible?

Who Compiled the Bible Books?

The Canons

Canons are the accepted collection of God inspired books. Accepted by a community using a set of standards, that is also agreed upon by that particular community.

For example, a Jewish Canon is composed of 24 books, accepted by the Jewish community, using the standards of acceptance agreed upon by the Jewish community.

Later on when other groups of people(which maybe bigger or smaller than the Jewish community) consider their Canon, they can accept what the Jews have already done or set another standard for themselves and decide which books to include in their canon.

This is basically what happened with the Bible.

That is why, there are different Bible Canons in existence today.

The question would be: what is the correct standard to use in determining which scriptures are really inspired by God?

God Himself should be the guide. His Words and His Son's Words are the best guidance.

If you have visited the Wikipedia link and the image link above about the Canons, you are now informed that many religions hold different numbers of books as canonical. What about God? What is His say about this?

First

20 But if any prophet dares to speak a message in my name when I did not command him to do so, he must die for it, and so must any prophet who speaks in the name of other gods.' 21 "You may wonder how you can tell when a prophet's message does not come from the Lord. 22 If a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord and what he says does not come true, then it is not the Lord's message. That prophet has spoken on his own authority, and you are not to fear him. - Deuteronomy 18:20-22

With the above words we see that one of the sign of being inspired by God is the fulfillment of a prophecy. When a book or a scripture is being considered as to whether it is inspired by God or not, the fulfilled prophecy contained in that document should be one of the standard that should be used.

What else?

Second

The inspired scripture should also contain information that cannot be from human source, something that is beyond human capacity to say. Too advanced for a mere human to know or value at a particular moment in time. Do the books of the Bible have that?

Let me give you a few example:

a. Job 26:7 - God stretched out the northern sky and hung the earth in empty space.

At the time of writing the book of Jobs, there is no one who knew that the earth is hanging on nothing. So much so that different cultures have many illustrations on how the earth is supported, like the Greek's giant Atlas who carries the world on his shoulder or India's animals, supporting the earth on their backs.

b. Genesis 6:15 - Make it 450 feet long, 75 feet wide, and 45 feet high.(dimensions of Noah's Ark)

The capacity, design and feasibility of the purpose of the Ark was studied closely by

Collins, D.H. 1977. Was Noah's Ark stable? Creation Research Society Quarterly 14:83-7. Giannone, R. 1975. A comparison of the Ark with modern ships.Creation Research Society Quarterly. 12:53. Morris, H.M. 1971. The Ark of Noah. Creation Research Society Quarterly. 8:142-4.

And they found that it is a sound design. This is a proof that the information used for the construction of the Ark did not originate from the desert dwelling people.

c. Genesis 1:24 - And God said , Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.

This passage is even more scientific than the scientific view accepted today, that all living things came from one kind and evolved into many different "kinds". We have been around many animals, have you witnessed a "kind" slowly turning into another "kind"? If the evolution theory is right, we should have seen some animal kinds in the process of doing so by now. But there is none to be found because it is not so.

Other outstanding scientifically-correct and advanced-in-its-time Biblical passages will be published later.

For now let us continue the other characteristics that will help us determine if a given scripture is inspired by God or not.

Third

The writer should be trustworthy, honest and humble.

-We can give the examples of Moses who wrote about how he killed an Egyptian, his confession of being weak in speaking and his failure to show faith just right before Israel enters the promised land.

-Same as with Apostle Peter, on how he denied being a disciple of Christ for three times.

-The fear of Jonas.

-Solomon's loss of favor of God

All of the above men, humbly wrote about their weaknesses and failures, even their sins. Their books are proven inspired by God because of the prophecies they contain have been fulfilled and the information within them are beyond human knowledge. This is in contrast to a lot of historians from many nations where they exaggerate their successes and downplay their failures.

Fourth

The scripture in question should not nullify the proven inspired scriptures before it. It must not go against God's revealed will, His existing written words.

Fifth

Christ's guiding words.

These are actually simplified canonical standards that everyone can use. You don't have to have PhD in Theology, or to be a graduate of any religious school. The only requirement is that your desire to find and learn the truth. You love God enough to want to learn the true Words He wanted us to learn. We would intentionally not include "being chosen by God" as a test here since anyone can easily write this claim, instead by proving to pass these five, we can safely determine that indeed the writer of a particular Bible book is "chosen" and his scripture is inspired.

Do All the Books of The Bible Pass These Tests?

It is easy to fall into the trap of assumptions.

While growing up, we are introduced to the Bible as it is accepted by our community. That can mean from 24 books to 100+. And unless you have particular courage to ask pertinent questions, you will accept the books that your Bible has, as the "inspired scriptures". Avoiding any hardship of further research will entail.

But look, now you have made it up to this point! It means that you do seek the truth. So let us have an open mind and heart about this issue. Let us ask one of the most controversial questions that we may ask in our lives; Are all the books in the Bible inspired?

For example, if we apply the five simplified standards above to every Bible book, will they all pass? This is an unsettling question. This is a question most people would rather set aside than prove beyond doubt. A question that a dogmatic person will quickly kill with a thoughtless reply: OF COURSE THEY ARE!

Well, let's see.

Why The Hebrew Books Pass

Our Bibles are now divided into "Old Testament" and a "New Testament"...roughly they represent to many "Christians" as scriptures relating to period before the birth of Christ and the period after it.

Christ can actually shorten our research, He mentioned about the books that He, himself consider as inspired. For me, what Christ approves as inspired by God is surely inspired!

• Matthew 5:17 GNT "Do not think that I have come to do away with the Law of Moses and the teachings of the prophets. I have not come to do away with them, but to make their teachings come true.

• Matthew 7:12 GNT "Do for others what you want them to do for you: this is the meaning of the Law of Moses and of the teachings of the prophets.

• Matthew 11:13 GNT Until the time of John all the prophets and the Law of Moses spoke about the Kingdom;

• Matthew 22:40 GNT The whole Law of Moses and the teachings of the prophets depend on these two commandments."

• Luke 16:16 GNT "The Law of Moses and the writings of the prophets were in effect up to the time of John the Baptist; since then the Good News about the Kingdom of God is being told, and everyone forces their way in.

• Luke 24:44 GNT Then he said to them, "These are the very things I told you about while I was still with you: everything written about me in the Law of Moses, the writings of the prophets, and the Psalms had to come true."

• John 1:45 GNT Philip found Nathanael and told him, "We have found the one whom Moses wrote about in the book of the Law and whom the prophets also wrote about. He is Jesus son of Joseph, from Nazareth."

Above are the seven instances where our Christ is teaching us, the future believers to His words, what collection of books and scriptures, He Himself approve as being inspired by His Father, YHWH.

What are these books?

LAWS

• Bereshit (בְּרֵאשִׁית, literally "In the beginning") - Genesis

• Shemot (שִׁמוֹת, literally "Names") - Exodus

• Vayikra (ויקרא, literally "And He called") - Leviticus

• Bəmidbar (במדבר, literally "In the desert [of]") - Numbers

• Devarim (דברים, literally "Things" or "Words") - Deuteronomy

PROPHETS

• (יְהוֹשֻעַ / Yĕhôshúa‘) - Joshua

• (שופטים / Shophtim) - Judges

• (שְׁמוּאֵל / Shmû’ēl) - Samuel

• (מלכים / M'lakhim) - Kings

• (יְשַׁעְיָהוּ / Yĕsha‘ăyāhû) - Isaiah

• (יִרְמְיָהוּ / Yirmyāhû) - Jeremiah

• (יְחֶזְקֵיאל / Yĕkhezqiēl) - Ezekiel

• (הוֹשֵׁעַ / Hôshēa‘) - Hosea

• (יוֹאֵל / Yô’ēl) - Joel

• (עָמוֹס / ‘Āmôs) - Amos

• (עֹבַדְיָה / ‘Ōvadhyāh) - Obadiah

• (יוֹנָה / Yônāh) - Jonah

• (מִיכָה / Mîkhāh) - Micah

• (נַחוּם / Nakḥûm) - Nahum

• (חֲבַקּוּק /Khăvhakûk) - Habakkuk

• (צְפַנְיָה / Tsĕphanyāh) - Zephaniah

• (חַגַּי / Khaggai) - Haggai

• (זְכַרְיָה / Zkharyāh) - Zechariah

• (מַלְאָכִי / Mal’ākhî) - Malachi

PSALMS

• Psalms

• Proverbs

• Job

• Song of Songs

• Book of Ruth

• Book of Lamentations

• Ecclesiastes

• Book of Esther

If you would count the above list, which are categorized by the Jews as the Law, the Prophets and the Psalms, you will find they are composed of 32 books. Those books correspond to the books that are commonly called "old testament" today. These are the books the Christ Himself used, read and mentioned 7 times in His ministry.

The above reference of Christ is enough recommendation for us to believe that those books, accepted by the Jews up to the time of Christ are really inspired by God. Even if we test them one by one according to the simplified tests for canonicity, they will still pass because Christ is the Word of God and He vouched for those scriptures.

Do All "New Testament" Books Pass Too?

What about the books of the "New Testament"? How can we test those that are inspired from the non-inspired? It is by using the same method. Specially for those that are written by those person who are not Apostles of Christ.

Here are the list of the New Testament books:

• Matthew - Written by an Apostle

• Mark - Written by a disciple (We have to test)

• Luke - Written by a disciple (We have to test)

• John - Written by an Apostle

• Acts - Written by a disciple (We have to test)

• Romans - Written by Paul (All epistles of Paul will be tested)

• 1 Corinthians - "

• 2 Corinthians - "

• Galatians - "

• Ephesians - "

• Philippians _ "

• Colossians - "

• 1 Thessalonians - "

• 2 Thessalonians - "

• 1 Timothy - "

• 2 Timothy - "

• Titus - "

• Philemon - "

• Hebrews - "

• James - Written by an Apostle

• 1 Peter - Written by an Apostle

• 2 Peter - Written by an Apostle

• 1 John - Written by an Apostle

• 2 John - Written by an Apostle

• 3 John - Written by an Apostle

• Jude - Written by an Apostle

• Revelation- Written by an Apostle

The scriptures written by the handpicked and personally taught Apostles of Christ are automatically passing the "inspiration" test, because they have already passed Christ criteria of being trustworthy "witnesses" for Him. Having seen Christ and experienced first hand the things that concern Christ and His messages, these people are trusted by Christ Himself to carry on His teachings. But you as a reader can put them to question too if you please. Just send me anything that you think is questionable from the scriptures written by these apostles and i will try my best to resolve them.

This will leave us only 3 "new Testament" writers to test on the "inspiration", those three are: Mark, Luke and Paul. Do the scriptures written by these 3 men will also pass?

The test for the book of the Gospel According to Mark

Who is Mark?

There are many characters in the new testament that are named Mark, the accepted writer of the Gospel of Mark is the one who is a former companion of Paul (Acts 13:13) and the writer/interpreter of Peter (1 Peter 5:13).

Is there any problem with the content of the Gospel according to Mark?

Yes, one of the concern about this book is that it is written by a non-witness to the life and works of Christ, which he wrote about, so that the information he wrote has come from someone else. And there are some insertions to this book, most notable of which is the "longer ending" Mark 16:9-19 and two other ending versions appearing in different translations:

"A) But they reported briefly to Peter and those with him all that they had been told. And after these things Jesus himself sent out through them, from east to west, the sacred and imperishable proclamation of eternal salvation."

"B)This age of lawlessness and unbelief is under Satan, who does not allow the truth and power of God to prevail over the unclean things of the spirits [or, does not allow what lies under the unclean spirits to understand the truth and power of God]. Therefore reveal your righteousness now’ – thus they spoke to Christ. And Christ replied to them, ‘The term of years of Satan’s power has been fulfilled, but other terrible things draw near. And for those who have sinned I was handed over to death, that they may return to the truth and sin no more, in order that they may inherit the spiritual and incorruptible glory of righteousness that is in heaven."

These 3 endings of the Gospel of Mark are inserted by some unknown overly-pious copyist/s to "complete" the "deficient" gospel of Mark.

[ If you need a reference regarding this, you can start with Bruce Metzger’s statement “Clement of Alexandria and Origen show no knowledge of the existence of these verses; furthermore Eusebius and Jerome attest that the passage was absent from almost all Greek copies of Mark known to them” (Metzger, 2005, p.123) ]

The point is that, revisions and insertions do happen in the scriptures. And it did happen in the book of Mark. It goes to show that, believers should be very careful in accepting any written message from the time of the "New Testament" onwards as the inspired Word of God, unless they are direct quotations of God, Christ and the Apostles. Messages should be attested by other inspired writers, and in line with the revealed will of God. You can notice insertions and revisions like the above if you would read the side notes and footnotes of your own Bible version.

So is the Gospel according to Mark trustworthy? I will leave it up to you to decide, so far I have not found any doctrinal deviation within Mark. There are things that Mark have not mentioned, like the virgin birth and the appearances of Christ after resurrection, but the book does not deny them either.

We have just to be cautious because this book is not coming directly from the 12 Apostles chosen and taught by Christ in his three and a half years of ministry. So in priority we can put it after Matthew and John's Gospels although Mark is the first gospel written according to many scholars, but considering the writer as a third party and not a direct witness, makes the book of Mark lesser than Matthew's or John's. This is much like hearing first the story from a "hear-say" teller and then later you met the eyewitness and tells you the same story with more details. Would you say that the witness copied the story from the "hear-say" teller? Or is it wise to give more weight to the story told by the eyewitness?

Luke's Books Test

Another Gospel writer that is not an Apostle is Luke, who also wrote the Book of Acts of the Apostles(Acts). Who is he? According to the Epistle written by Paul to the Colossians, Luke is a Physician(Medical Doctor), see Colossians 4:14. So, some scholars have concluded that Luke is Paul's friend and Doctor.

"Luke, was born in Antioch, by profession, was a physician.[6] He had become a disciple of the apostle Paul and later followed Paul until his [Paul's] martyrdom. Having served the Lord continuously, unmarried and without children, filled with the Holy Spirit he died at the age of 84 years. .....While he does exclude himself from those who were eyewitnesses to Jesus' ministry, he repeatedly uses the word "we" in describing the Pauline missions in Acts of the Apostles, indicating that he was personally there at those times." - from Wikipedia

3 And so, Your Excellency, because I have carefully studied all these matters from their beginning, I thought it would be good to write an orderly account for you. - Luke 1:3

Confessing that he is not an eyewitness to the things he wrote about Christ we have more reasons to examine what he wrote.

What can we find if we put these books to the test?

Let us first examine the Gospel according to Luke.

What does the Gospel of Luke have that is different with the other Gospels?

Among others, many scholars claim that Luke have many historical errors, other researchers even ascribing the books of Luke and Acts to a woman(Randel Helms 1997, pp61-96)

But I would like to concentrate on passages that are in conflict with Christ's teachings to His Apostles as revealed by Apostles Matthew and John in their respective Gospels. Here are some of them:

"A light to reveal your will to the Gentiles and bring glory to your people Israel." - Luke 2:32

Though the phrase that implies that Christ will "reveal the will of God to the Gentiles" is immediately downplayed by "and bring glory to your people Israel", we can glimpse a common thread here later like the thought expressed in his Acts15:10.

Here is another one.

11 And it came to pass as He went to Jerusalem that He passed through the midst of Samaria and Galilee. 12 And as He entered into a certain village, there met Him ten men who were lepers, who stood afar off. 13 And they lifted up their voices and said, "Jesus, Master, have mercy on us!" 14 And when He saw them, He said unto them, "Go, show yourselves unto the priests." And it came to pass that as they went, they were cleansed. 15 And one of them when he saw that he was healed, turned back and with a loud voice glorified God, 16 and fell down on his face at His feet, giving Him thanks; and he was a Samaritan.-Luke 17:11-16

The above passage is a convoluted attempt to insert the idea that Christ attended to the "Gentiles" by including a "Samaritan" into the story. Why can we be sure that this is a deliberate attempt? Here is the proof: According to Jewish Laws(from God's Law) lepers should not mingle or touch other non infected Jews.

45 If you have a dreaded skin disease, you must wear torn clothes, leave your hair uncombed, cover the lower part of your face, and call out, "Unclean, unclean!" 46 You remain unclean as long as you have the disease, and you must live outside the camp, away from others.- Leviticus 13:45,46

Since the lepers spoken by Luke 17:12 is either Jews or not, we have to determine really which. There are three clues given by Luke: They stand far-off, they call Jesus "Master"(teacher) and when Christ talked to them, they knew about "the priests" and they actually went their way to go and show themselves to those "priests" (See Leviticus 13 for the reason why). Therefore we can safely conclude that the lepers are JEWS! Or else Christ will tell them what He told to a woman from Tyre.

26 The woman was a Gentile, born in the region of Phoenicia in Syria. She begged Jesus to drive the demon out of her daughter. 27 But Jesus answered, "Let us first feed the children. It isn't right to take the children's food and throw it to the dogs." - Mark 7:26-27

And if the lepers are not Jews, Christ do know that they don't need to go to the priests that they don't acknowledge, being a Samaritan or a Gentile. So which is which. Clearly Luke is pushing for something here that makes his story convoluted.

Here are some Gospel-of-Luke verses to think about:

16 So they hurried off and found Mary and Joseph and saw the baby lying in the manger. 17 When the shepherds saw him, they told them what the angel had said about the child. 18 All who heard it were amazed at what the shepherds said. 19 Mary remembered all these things and thought deeply about them. 20 The shepherds went back, singing praises to God for all they had heard and seen; it had been just as the angel had told them.- Luke 2:16-20

So why did all those people not offered lodging to Joseph, Mary and a new born baby? Wouldn't you?

41 Every year the parents of Jesus went to Jerusalem for the Passover Festival. - Luke 2:41

So did this happen while they were in Egypt too?

13 After they had left, an angel of the Lord appeared in a dream to Joseph and said, "Herod will be looking for the child in order to kill him. So get up, take the child and his mother and escape to Egypt, and stay there until I tell you to leave." 14 Joseph got up, took the child and his mother, and left during the night for Egypt, 15 where he stayed until Herod died.- Matthew 2:13-15

Who is telling the truth here?

Again some verse inserting the idea of ministry to the Gentiles:

23 He said to them, "I am sure that you will quote this proverb to me, "Doctor, heal yourself.' You will also tell me to do here in my hometown the same things you heard were done in Capernaum. 24 I tell you this," Jesus added, "prophets are never welcomed in their hometown. 25 Listen to me: it is true that there were many widows in Israel during the time of Elijah, when there was no rain for three and a half years and a severe famine spread throughout the whole land. 26 Yet Elijah was not sent to anyone in Israel, but only to a widow living in Zarephath in the territory of Sidon. 27 And there were many people suffering from a dreaded skin disease who lived in Israel during the time of the prophet Elisha; yet not one of them was healed, but only Naaman the Syrian."- Luke 4:23-27

Notice that the parallel accounts in Matthew and Mark does not have these outside-the-Israel idea. (See Matthew 13:53-58 and Mark 6:1-6)

Now notice this verse from Luke Chapter 8

11 "This is what the parable means: the seed is the word of God. - Luke 8:11

What is unusual with this? This verse makes the Word of God a failure and taken by the Evil One. Why? Compare this to Matthew 13:18,19

18 "Listen, then, and learn what the parable of the sower means. 19 Those who hear the message about the Kingdom but do not understand it are like the seeds that fell along the path. The Evil One comes and snatches away what was sown in them.

So while Matthew says that those who hear are the seeds, Luke is saying that the Word of God is the seed. What does this mean? It means that Luke is saying that the Word of God FAILS, while in fact the ones who fail when God's Word is being proclaimed are those that "hear" them(the people) but fail to act accordingly to grow and bear fruit.

4 Wherever you are welcomed, stay in the same house until you leave that town; 5 wherever people don't welcome you, leave that town and shake the dust off your feet as a warning to them." -Luke 9:5

Luke is a bit confused about this issue and may have contracted Christ's command, confusing the readers, because the parallel account found in Matthew 10:5-15, Christ explicitly commanded that they have to seek a house that will welcome them, only after finding NO ONE to welcome them in a town do they have to shake the dust off their feet as a warning for the whole town.

And it seems Luke is really not into the Jewish Law with the following passage that cannot be found anywhere else in the other 3 Gospels:

6 Then Jesus told them this parable: "There was once a man who had a fig tree growing in his vineyard. He went looking for figs on it but found none. 7 So he said to his gardener, "Look, for three years I have been coming here looking for figs on this fig tree, and I haven't found any. Cut it down! Why should it go on using up the soil?' 8 But the gardener answered, "Leave it alone, sir, just one more year; I will dig around it and put in some fertilizer. 9 Then if the tree bears figs next year, so much the better; if not, then you can have it cut down.' "

-Luke 13:6-9

Why, what's wrong with the above verses? Christ know full well the LAW, thus, he knows that a Jew will never "look" for fruits from a tree until the fourth year! They are forbidden to eat fruits from a tree up to the third year.

"'When you enter the land and plant any kind of fruit tree, regard its fruit as forbidden. For three years you are to consider it forbidden; it must not be eaten. _ Leviticus 19:23

Why would a Jew decide to cut a fruit tree like a Fig tree on its third year? Evidently, this is not "told" by Christ but an insertion of the writer of Luke, putting those words as though quoted from Christ.

1 Jesus said to his disciples, "There was once a rich man who had a servant who managed his property. The rich man was told that the manager was wasting his master's money, 2 so he called him in and said, "What is this I hear about you? Turn in a complete account of your handling of my property, because you cannot be my manager any longer.' 3 The servant said to himself, "My master is going to dismiss me from my job. What shall I do? I am not strong enough to dig ditches, and I am ashamed to beg. 4 Now I know what I will do! Then when my job is gone, I shall have friends who will welcome me in their homes.' 5 So he called in all the people who were in debt to his master. He asked the first one, "How much do you owe my master?' - Luke 16:1-5

This passage is questionable in several levels. It claims that Christ "said" this, while the whole scene is an indirect stealing. The deed was called shrewdness and then commended. Which is a far cry from the teachings of Christ who kept the Law of God perfectly, the Law that forbids stealing and lying.

How about this?

18 "Any man who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery; and the man who marries a divorced woman commits adultery."- Luke 16:18

Is this true?? A divorced man who marries another woman is committing adultery? And a man marrying a divorced woman too? Are these included in God's Law as is being claimed by Luke by making it inside quotations?

What Law of God is Luke basing this "pseudo-quotation"? Let us quote the laws of God concerning divorce and marriage.

Here are some of God's law that has anything to do with divorce and remarriage.

1 "Suppose a man marries a woman and later decides that he doesn't want her, because he finds something about her that he doesn't like. So he writes out divorce papers, gives them to her, and sends her away from his home. 2 Then suppose she marries another man, 3 and he also decides that he doesn't want her, so he also writes out divorce papers, gives them to her, and sends her away from his home. Or suppose her second husband dies. 4 In either case, her first husband is not to marry her again; he is to consider her defiled. If he married her again, it would be offensive to the Lord. You are not to commit such a terrible sin in the land that the Lord your God is giving you. - Deutronomy 24:1-6

It appears that God's Law forbids "remarrying" the woman you once divorced and got married to another man! But it is not similar in any way to Luke's! How far can Luke astray from the perfect Law of God and then make them appear as though He is quoting God's Law??!

A man can even have more than one wife at the same time according to God!

"If a man takes a second wife, he must continue to give his first wife the same amount of food and clothing and the same rights that she had before." - Exodus 21:10

So how can Luke call a man marrying after divorce as "committing adultery"?

It seems that the writer of Luke has found power in putting words in Christ mouth, knowing that people will believe Christ and they will believe whatever it is that he will write as though it was spoken by Christ while it was not really so, just by claiming Christ said them. One of this is found in Luke 16:19-31.

• 19 "There was once a rich man who dressed in the most expensive clothes and lived in great luxury every day. 20 There was also a poor man named Lazarus, covered with sores, who used to be brought to the rich man's door, 21 hoping to eat the bits of food that fell from the rich man's table. Even the dogs would come and lick his sores. 22 The poor man died and was carried by the angels to sit beside Abraham at the feast in heaven. The rich man died and was buried, 23 and in Hades, where he was in great pain, he looked up and saw Abraham, far away, with Lazarus at his side. 24 So he called out, "Father Abraham! Take pity on me, and send Lazarus to dip his finger in some water and cool off my tongue, because I am in great pain in this fire!' 25 But Abraham said, "Remember, my son, that in your lifetime you were given all the good things, while Lazarus got all the bad things. But now he is enjoying himself here, while you are in pain. 26 Besides all that, there is a deep pit lying between us, so that those who want to cross over from here to you cannot do so, nor can anyone cross over to us from where you are.' 27 The rich man said, "Then I beg you, father Abraham, send Lazarus to my father's house, 28 where I have five brothers. Let him go and warn them so that they, at least, will not come to this place of pain.' 29 Abraham said, "Your brothers have Moses and the prophets to warn them; your brothers should listen to what they say.' 30 The rich man answered, "That is not enough, father Abraham! But if someone were to rise from death and go to them, then they would turn from their sins.' 31 But Abraham said, "If they will not listen to Moses and the prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone were to rise from death.' "- Luke 16:19-31

Again, Luke made it appear as though Christ said this. Would Christ say this? No. Why not? Because they are not true. How can we be sure they are not true? Let us examine the details closely.

• Why did the rich man get punished? What evil did he do? NONE

• Why did Lazarus the poor man, go to a feast in heaven beside Abraham? What goodness did he do to qualify for that? NONE

• Why did the rich man call Abraham Father? While Christ have clearly said that no person should call anyone Father ? Christ said it in Matthew 23:9 "And you must not call anyone here on earth "Father,' because you have only the one Father in heaven." Christ would not tell a parable in conflict with His own teaching.

• Why did the rich man call upon Abraham to save him from the supposedly fiery Hades, and not God?

• Why did Abraham answer the rich man as though he indeed have the authority to send someone from death back to life on earth?

All of these, are not true. They are but pigments of Luke's imagination and was inserted into this "Gospel" knowing that the gullible will believe whatever he claimed to be words from Christ.

42 And he said to Jesus, "Remember me, Jesus, when you come as King!" 43 Jesus said to him, "I promise you that today you will be in Paradise with me. -Luke 23:42,43

What is wrong with the above verse? Isn't it good? Yes, it is good if it is true, the trouble is, it is not. Why? You see, Christ is dying in this scene, and many disciples are around their teacher, they are paying so much attention to Christ's last words, they will record all that Christ can say on His dying breath for they may not hear Him ever again.

Did one of the bandit who was crucified at the same time as Christ really repented and gave praise to our Christ? What did the Apostles say about this?

In Matthew 27:43,44 here is what Matthew wrote:

43 He trusts in God and claims to be God's Son. Well, then, let us see if God wants to save him now!" 44 Even the bandits who had been crucified with him insulted him in the same way.

Luke's verses about the bandit going to paradise is a blatant attempt to insert the doctrine that a man can gain the favor of God by confession of sin and being converted at the time of one's death. So people may be as evil as they want, selfish, and as far away from God all his life, then with his last breath, express regret and he will be in "paradise". Thus, the beginning of indulgences, where many dying rich men donated their estates to the priests that administer their deathbed confessions.

Maybe the above can not compare to the damage that the next passage has done to humanity.

19 Then he took a piece of bread, gave thanks to God, broke it, and gave it to them, saying, "This is my body, which is given for you. Do this in memory of me." 20 In the same way, he gave them the cup after the supper, saying, "This cup is God's new covenant sealed with my blood, which is poured out for you.- Luke 22:19,20

Only in Luke can you find the doctrine of a "New Covenant" in all four "Gospels". Which is not necessary nor true.

This is very similar to 1 Cor 11:25, written by the liar Paul.

This text-type appears to have descended from an offshoot of the main manuscript tradition, departing from more familiar readings at many points. Verses 22:19–20 are omitted only in Codex Bezae and a handful of Old Latin manuscripts. Nearly all other manuscripts including Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus and Church Fathers contain the "longer" reading of Luke 22:19 and 20. Verse 22:20, which is very similar to 1 Cor 11:25, provides the only gospel support for the doctrine of the New Covenant. Verses 22:43–44 are found in Western text-type, are omitted by a diverse number of ancient witnesses, and are generally marked as such in modern translations. See Bruce M. Metzger's Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament for details. - Wikipedia

Let us read the parallel accounts from the other "Gospels"

26 While they were eating, Jesus took a piece of bread, gave a prayer of thanks, broke it, and gave it to his disciples. "Take and eat it," he said; "this is my body." 27 Then he took a cup, gave thanks to God, and gave it to them. "Drink it, all of you," he said; 28 "this is my blood, which seals God's covenant, my blood poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. 29 I tell you, I will never again drink this wine until the day I drink the new wine with you in my Father's Kingdom."- Matthew 26:26-29

22 While they were eating, Jesus took a piece of bread, gave a prayer of thanks, broke it, and gave it to his disciples. "Take it," he said, "this is my body." 23 Then he took a cup, gave thanks to God, and handed it to them; and they all drank from it. 24 Jesus said, "This is my blood which is poured out for many, my blood which seals God's covenant. - Mark 14:22-24

So why would Luke say NEW COVENANT while all the other "Gospels" say that it only SEALS God's Covenant? Evidently, Luke wanted to insert the doctrine that the "Old Covenant" is now done away with. The covenant that require Israel to keep God's Commandments! And Paul took advantage of that insertion in his own agenda of bashing the Law of God.

Next time, we will add here the findings on the book of Acts.

Now only Paul's epistles remain, and we have proven the Paul is indeed a liar so that there is no further need of testing here. All his letters and books are automatically categorized as non-inspired.

You may wonder, why all your life as a pious Christian these sort of things never crossed your mind? Why all of a sudden, you can see how twisted some of the Bible writers message are? Or maybe up until now you are confused, how all of these things can happen, why would an all powerful God allow changes to be made in His inspired Word, at times even whole lot of them to be included?

The explanation is simple, the decision of which scriptures will be included in the Bible canon has been done by mortal men, with their biases and self interests affecting their decision. Yet if all the people that will choose to compile the documents and scriptures to be included in a "Bible" version, be God fearing and respect the Law of God, a far different and more reliable collection will be compiled. Reflecting God's revealed will.

The better version of the Bible would be

• Hebrew Books(39 books) plus all the books authored by Christ real Apostles

• Matthew

• John

• Mark

• James

• 1Peter

• 2Peter

• 1John

• 2John

• 3John

• Jude

• Revelations

Then at the end, we can add the books of Luke(Luke and Acts) and Paul's as reference for what they erroneously wrote so that whenever someone ask; why they are not really inspired, you can easily open their document and show them.

How Should We View The Bible?

Having proven that;

• different religions have different sets of Canon for the Bible

• Canons are not decided by God

• although a book is included in the Bible, it does not necessarily mean they are inspired by God

• insertions, revisions and blatant lies are found within the pages of the books and letters written by persons that were not handpicked Apostle of Christ.

• some of them contain directly opposing teachings against God's will and Christ's messages

How should we view the Bible? Should we throw it away as unreliable? No, instead we should cherish the Word of God more dearly, that despite the forceful effort of the fallen angels to dilute and adulterate God's message, it still made it through and that now we clearly see which books belong to God and which are not. Indeed our God knows who are His people and that His chosen Shepherd knows who are His sheep.

My sheep listens to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. - John 10:27