Who were the 40 penmen that wrote the Bible?
Moses, Joshua, Samuel, Gad, Nathan, Jeremiah, Ezra, Nehemiah, Mordecai, (David, Asaph, Heman + possibly others unnamed wrote the Psalms), Solomon, Agur, Lemuel, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, James, Peter and Jude.
60 people found this useful
A group of bishops in the council at Carthage in 397 A.D assembled the Bible. The actual books and chapters are credited to various prophets, apostles and disciples. But, the book as a whole was created by an assembly. They wanted to collect the most important Christian writings and histories into a… single book that would be enough for any person to have all that they needed to study and understand God's message. They put together the Bible. They did not write it but they made it. Like an editor putting together a book of short stories or essays. There is no one person that wrote the Bible. Although some people say God wrote it this is untrue. The Bible is supposed to contain God's message but most of it is in the words of the people who did the writing. If you accept the notion that Jesus was God in the flesh, then you could say that the words of Jesus were part of what God "wrote." The same would apply to the instances where someone heard the Lord speak to them. Generally speaking, Christians acknowledge that the exact phrasing was executed by human authors and transcribers, but that all the writing was inspired by God. Another answer The Old Testament came from stories handed down by word of mouth over thousands of years in the Middle East. Later, these stories were written down by scholars and scribes. The first four books of the New Testament were written by the people they are named after, the rest were written by collaborations of early Christians Another answer God used men to write down His thoughts much as a businessman uses a secretary. He allowed them to put these thoughts in their own words. But the men themselves said they were inspired. (2 Peter 1:20-21) 20 For YOU know this first, that no prophecy of Scripture springs from any private interpretation. 21 For prophecy was at no time brought by man's will, but men spoke from God as they were borne along by holy spirit. Again Paul's words: (2 Timothy 3:16-17) 16 All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be fully competent, completely equipped for every good work. Approximately 40 men, from Moses to the Apostle John were Bible writers from 1513 BC to 98 CE. Many may claim otherwise but an internal study of the Bible will show that it is of Divine origin. Albeit no physical proof is available to substantiate this claim. Another answer The bible was written over a 1600 year period. Its writers came from different times & came from many walks of life. Some were farmers, fishermen, and shepherds. Prophets, Judges, & Kings. The gospel writer Luke was a doctor. Another answer The Four Gospels, it is claimed, were written by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, two of them apostles, and two companions of the apostles of Christ. If this claim be true the other writings of the apostles, the writings of the Apostolic Fathers, and the writings of the early Christian Fathers, ought to contain some evidences of the fact. Twenty books -- nearly all of the remaining books of the New Testament -- are said to have been written by the three apostles, Peter, John, and Paul, a portion of them after the first three Gospels were written; but it is admitted that they contain no evidence whatever of the existence of these Gospels. Another answer The Apostles and disciples of Jesus Christ wrote the New Testament under inspiration from God. The Old Testament was written by Moses and the Prophets under inspiration from God. Another answer God is the one who wrote the Bible. There were many authors to the events that took place in scripture. All of these can be found in the contents page of the Bible. There have also been many translations of the bible but most consider that the KJV is the nearly the most accurate. The Bible was written by more then one man. in the first part the people wrote what they saw its happening and in the second they wrote under divine inspiration. they were many people. true and God's words that he spoke is in the Bible Writers of the books of the Bible . Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, & Job by Moses . Joshua by Joshua . Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel by Samuel/Nathan/Gad . 1 & 2 Kings by Jeremiah . 1 & 2 Chronicles by Ezra/ Nehemiah . Esther by Mordecai . Psalms - primarily David with several others . Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, & Song of Solomon by Solomon . Isaiah by Isaiah . Jeremiah & Lamentations by Jeremiah . Ezekiel by Ezekiel . Daniel by Daniel . Hosea by Hosea . Joel by Joel . Amos by Amos . Obadiah by Obadiah . Jonah by Jonah . Micah by Micah . Nahum by Nahum . Habakkuk by Habakkuk . Zephaniah by Zephaniah . Haggai by Haggai . Zechariah by Zechariah . Malachi by Malachi . New Testament: . Matthew by Matthew . Mark by John Mark . Luke & Acts by Luke . John & Revelation by John . Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 & 2 Thessalonians, 1 & 2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon by Paul . Hebrews by an unknown author, probably Paul . James by James . 1& 2 Peter by Peter . 1, 2, & 3 John by John . Jude by Jude Another answer The New Testament (modern Christian Bible) was written in the 4th century by Emperor Constantine and his council in his own words. This fact is confirmed in the Roman Catholic Encyclopedia, which also states that any original text was altered, apparently in order to create some form of consistency across all documents. Unfortunately, the copying of earlier texts, leaving some out, making some up, introduced many errors and inconsistencies in the modern Christian bible. For example in Genesis alone there are dozens. And example of these are as follows: GE 1:3-5 On the first day, God created light, then separated light and darkness. GE 1:14-19 The sun (which separates night and day) wasn't created until the fourth day. GE 1:3-5 On the first day, God created light, then separated light and darkness. GE 1:14-19 The sun (which separates night and day) wasn't created until the fourth day. GE 1:11-12, 26-27 Trees were created before man was created. GE 2:4-9 Man was created before trees were created. GE 1:20-21, 26-27 Birds were created before man was created. GE 2:7, 19 Man was created before birds were created. GE 1:24-27 Animals were created before man was created. GE 2:7, 19 Man was created before animals were created. GE 1:26-27 Man and woman were created at the same time. GE 2:7, 21-22 Man was created first, woman sometime later. There were originally 252 commandments in the Old Testament, in Judaism there are 613 commands found in the Pentateuch (the first five books of Moses, a.k.a. The Torah.), and in the modern day Christian Bible a mere 10 commandments, not including Psalms and Proverbs. So in summary man created the Bible. Many men writing earlier documents, and later copied, altered and modernized through the ages. The Bible was compiled by many authors throughout the centuries.However, it is claimed that Moses wrote the first five books of thebible called the Torah. Paul the Apostle is credited as writing thenew testament and almost two thirds of the bible. The bible that weknow it today was authorized by the Roman Catholic church. Just to clarify: Paul the apostle is credited as 'writing' the newtestament as an author writes. Moses 'wrote' the first five books of the Bible, called the Torah,as a scribe or stenographer writes. ( Full Answer )
Moses wrote the book of Numbers mainly. He did not write the whole book however there were a few other authors. A: . The Book of Numbers is traditionally attributed to Moses, although it both repeats and contradicts other books also attributed to him. . The Book of Numbers obviously was writt…en by more than one author, all of whom lived long after the time attributed to Moses. Scholars have identified a number of anonymous sources that contributed to the Book of Numbers. Because of their anonymity, they have been given the names, Yahwist ('J Source'), Elohist ('E Source'), Priestly Source ('P Source') and the Redactor ('R Source'). The Yahwist and the Elohist wrote quite early in the first millennium BCE, from Judah and Israel respectively, while the Priestly Source wrote shortly after the Babylonian Exile. The Redactor finalised the book, clarifying passages and adding unimportant material, to create the Book of Numbers more or less as we know it today. ( Full Answer )
A: Thirteen letters, or epistles, are attributed to St Paul, while seven epistles have traditionally been attributed to four of the twelve disciples of Jesus. However, the consensus of scholars is that of the epistles attributed to Paul, only Romans, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, Philemon, Galati…ans, Philippians and 1 Thessalonians are genuine, with the remainder written in Paul's name after his death. A.Q. Morton goes further, having carried out a computer analysis of the epistles attributed to Paul and found that only Romans, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians and Philemon contain exactly the same writing style as Galatians. Moreover, not one of the epistles attributed to James, John, Jude and Peter can safely be attributed to the named apostles. Whether Paul really wrote 7 or only 5 letters in the Bible, his contribution is considerable. ( Full Answer )
King David wrote the majority of Psalms. Answer Most of the psalms are traditionally attributed to King David. However, scholars say they are a genre that did not exist at the time of David. In the form we now see, most of the psalms are believed to have been written anonymously over a period of m…ore than two hundred years during and after the Babylonian Exile, although some contain pre-Exilic material. King David wrote many of the Psalms found in the Bible. ( Full Answer )
Fifty-four scholars were appointed for the King James translation in 1604, however, it is believed that only forty-seven actually worked on the translation.
The Writers of the Biblical Books A variety of people are credited for taking pen to paper and, allegedly under inspiration from the Holy Spirit, writing the 66 books of the Bible. (That number omits the Apocrypha and Deuterocanonical books found in many Catholic Bibles.) The Old Testament books in…cluded a variety of authors, most of them considered prophets, especially the Prophetic books that are named after the prophet usually considered to be the author. For example, the book of Isaiah was probably written by Isaiah himself. The first five books, often referred to as the Pentateuch or the Mosaic books, are believed to be written by Moses. The book of Psalms, on the other hand, contain a variety of songs written by a variety of people, including Moses and King David. The New Testament is composed largely of letters written by the apostle Paul to various churches; the books are named for the cities in which these churches were found, often with a number indicating the first or second letter that was written and included in Biblical canon. Paul also wrote a few letters to individuals, such as Timothy and Philemon. Other epistles are named for their apostolic authors, such as 1 Peter and 2 Peter (again, two different letters written by Peter) and Jude (or Judas, not Iscariot). The book of Revelation was written by the apostle John — probably the son of Zebedee. The four Gospels — Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John — were written by the four followers of Jesus for whom these books are named. (what this guy means is that the people that wrote this book of fairy tales was probably on shrooms or really crazy at the time.) ( Full Answer )
Answer: The Bible was never 'written' in English as such - only translated from the original Hebrew (Old Testament) and Greek (New Testament).John Wycliff translated the first Bible into English in the 1380s from the Latin version (the Latin Vulgate). This was a hand-written Bible as printing would… not be invented by Gutenberg until the 1450s. Wycliff died of natural causes but the Roman Catholic Church was so incensed with his work that 44 years after his burial they dug up his bones, crushed them and threw them in a river.Later William Tyndale also translated the Bible into English and, coupled with Gutenberg's invention of the printing press, the first printed version appeared in 1525 with the New Testament. The Catholic Church was so incensed by his 'treachery' that they caught him, imprisoned him for 500 days before he was strangled and burned at the stake in 1536.Although there were earlier 'translations' of parts of the Bible such as those of Caedmon and the Venerable Bede, these, of course, were not translated into English as we know it - as at that time (8th-9th Century) English as a language did not even exist. Those who have read Chaucer in its original form are well aquainted with the difficulty of reading the 'English' of even the 1300s let alone that which came before. By the time of Wycliffe English as we know it had developed into the language of Marlowe and Shakespeare, and, although a little alien to our modern ears it is fully intelligible. As it was then, of course, it was the common tongue of the English people - meaning that they, at last, could hear the Bible in their own tongue, as, in those days, only the most learned could read - and even the most intelligent could understand any latin at all. Another Answer CHAPTER XI. Abundance of Vernacular Scriptures before WycliffI HAVE said that people who could read at all in the Middle Ages could read Latin: hence there was little need for the Church to issue the Scriptures in any other language. But as a matter of fact she did in many countries put the Scriptures in the hands of her children in their own tongue. (I) We know from history that there were popular translations of the Bible and Gospels in Spanish, Italian, Danish, French, Norwegian, Polish, Bohemian and Hungarian for the Catholics of those lands before the days of printing, but we shall confine ourselves to England, so as to refute once more the common fallacy that John Wycliff was the first to place an English translation of the Scriptures in the hands of the English people in 1382.To anyone that has investigated the real facts of the case, this fondly-cherished notion must seem truly ridiculous; it is not only absolutely false, but stupidly so, inasmuch as it admits of such easy disproof; one wonders that nowadays any lecturer or writer should have the temerity to advance it. Now, observe I am speaking of the days before the printingÂpress was invented; I am speaking of England; and concerning a Church which did not, and does not, admit the necessity of Bible-reading for salvation; and concerning an age when the production of the Scriptures was a most costly business, and far beyond the means of nearly everybody. Yet we may safely assert, and we can prove, that there were actually in existence among the people many copies of the Scriptures in the English tongue of that day. To begin far back, we have a copy of the work of Caedmon, a monk of Whitby, in the end of the seventh century, consisting of great portions of the Bible in the common tongue. In the next century we have the well-known translations of Venerable Bede, a monk of Jarrow, who died whilst busy with the Gospel of St. John. In the same (eighth) century we have the copies of Eadhelm, Bishop of Sherborne; of Guthlac, a hermit near Peterborough; and of Egbert, Bishop of Holy Island; these were all in Saxon, the language understood and spoken by the Christians of that time. Coming down a little later, we have the free translations of King Alfred the Great who was working at the Psalms when he died, and of Aelfric, Archbishop of Canterbury; as well as popular renderings of Holy Scripture like the Book of Durham, and the Rushworth Gloss and others that have survived the wreck of ages. After the Norman conquest in 1066, Anglo-Norman or Middle-English became the language of England, and consequently the next translations of the Bible we meet with are in that tongue. There are several specimens still known, such as the paraphrase of Orm (about 1150) and the Salus Animae (1050), the translations of William Shoreham and Richard Rolle, hermit of Hampole (died 1349). I say advisedly 'specimens' for those that have come down to us are merely indications of a much greater number that once existed, but afterwards perished. We have proof of this in the words of Blessed Thomas More, Lord Chancellor of England under Henry VIII who says: 'The whole Bible long before Wycliff's day was by virtuous and well-learned men translated into the English tongue, and by good and godly people with devotion and soberness well and reverently read' (Dialogues III). Again, 'The clergy keep no Bibles from the laity but such translations as be either not yet approved for good, or such as be already reproved for naught (i.e., bad, naughty) as Wycliff's was. For, as for old ones that were before Wycliff's days, they remain lawful and be in some folks' hand. I myself have seen, and can show you, Bibles, fair and old which have been known and seen by the Bishop of the Diocese, and left in laymen's hands and women's too, such as he knew for good and Catholic folk, that used them with soberness and devotion.' (2) But you will say, that is the witness of a Roman Catholic. Well, I shall advance Protestant testimony also.The translators of the Authorised Version, in their 'Preface', referring to previous translations of the Scriptures into the language of the people, make the following important statements. After speaking of the Greek and Latin Versions, they proceed:. 'The godly-learned were not content to have the Scriptures in the language which themselves understood, Greek and Latin ... but also for the behoof and edifying of the unlearned which hungered and thirsted after righteousness, and had souls to be saved as well as they, they provided translations into the Vulgar for their countrymen, insomuch that most nations under Heaven did shortly after their conversion hear Christ speaking unto them in their Mother tongue, not by the voice of their minister only but also by the written word translated.'. Now, as all these nations were certainly converted by the Roman Catholic Church, for there was then no other to send missionaries to convert anybody, this is really a valuable admission. The Translators of 1611, then, after enumerating many converted nations that had the Vernacular Scriptures, come to the case of England, and include it among the others. 'Much about that time,' they say (1360), even in our King Richard the Second's days, John Trevisa translated them into English, and many English Bibles in written hand are yet to be seen that divers translated, as it is very probable, in that age . ... So that, to have the Scriptures in the mother tongue is not a quaint conceit lately taken up, either by the Lord Cromwell in England [or others] ... but hath been thought upon, and put in practice of old, even from the first times of the conversion of any nation.'This testimony, from the Preface, (too little known) of their own Authorised Bible, ought surely to carry some weight with well disposed Protestants.Moreover, the 'Reformed' Archbishop of Canterbury, Cranmer, says, in his preface to the Bible of 1540: 'The Holy Bible was translated and read in the Saxon tongue, which at that time was our mother tongue, whereof there remaineth yet divers copies found in old Abbeys, of such antique manner of writing and speaking that few men now be able to read and understand them. And when this language waxed old and out of common use, because folks should not lack the fruit of reading, it was again translated into the newer language, whereof yet also many copies remain and be daily found.' Again, Foxe, a man that Protestants trust, says: 'If histories be well examined, we shall find, both before the Conquest and after, as well before John Wycliff was born as since, the whole body of Scripture by sundry men translated into our country tongue.' 'But as of the earlier period, so of this, there are none but fragmentary remains, the "many copies" which remained when Cranmer wrote in 1540 having doubtless disappeared in the vast and ruthless destruction of libraries which took place within a few years after that date.' These last words are from the pen of Rev. J. H. Blunt, a Protestant author, in his History of the English Bible; and another Anglican dignitary, Dean Hook, tells us that 'long before Wycliff's time there had been translators of Holy Writ.' One more authority on the Protestant side, and I have done: it is Mr. Karl Pearson (Academy, August, 1885), who says: 'The Catholic Church has quite enough to answer for, but in the 15th century it certainly did not hold back the Bible from the folk: and it gave them in the vernacular (i.e. their own tongue) a long series of devotional works which for language and religious sentiment have never been surpassed. Indeed, we are inclined to think it made a mistake in allowing the masses such ready access to the Bible. It ought to have recognised the Bible once for all as a work absolutely unintelligible without a long course of historical study, and, so far as it was supposed to be inspired, very dangerous in the hands of the ignorant.' We do not know what Mr. Pearson's religious standpoint may have been, but he goes too far in blaming the Church for throwing the Bible open to the people in the 15th century, or indeed in any previous age. No evil results whatsoever followed the reading of that precious volume in any century preceding the 16th, because the people had the Catholic Church to lead them and guide them and teach them the meaning of it. It was only when the principle of 'Private judgment' was proclaimed that the Book became 'dangerous' and 'unintelligible', as it is still to the multitudes who will not receive the true interpretation of it at the hands of the Catholic Church, and who are about as competent to understand and explain it by themselves as they are to explain or prophesy the movements of the heavenly bodies.(3) There is no need, it seems to me, to waste further time and space in accumulating proofs that the Bible was known, read and distributed by the Catholic Church in the common language of the people in all countries from the 7th down to the 14th century. I have paid more attention to the case of England because of the popularity of the myth about Wycliff having been the first to translate it, and to enable the poor blinded Papists, for the first time in their experience, to behold the Figure of the Christ of the Gospels in 1382. Such a grotesque notion can only be due either to ignorance or concealment of the now well-known facts of history. One would fain hope that, in this age of enlightenment and study, no one valuing his scholarship will so far imperil it as to attempt to revive the silly fable. But supposing it were as true as it is false, that John Wycliff was the first to publish the Bible in English, how in the name of reason can it be true at the same time that Luther, more than 100 years afterwards, discovered it? Really, people must decide which story they are going to tell, for the one is the direct contradictory of the other. Wycliff or Luther, let it be; but Wycliff and Luther together-that is impossible.(4) Now, it may seem somewhat irrelevant to our present subject, which is simply 'where we got the Bible', to wander off to foreign lands and see how matters stood there at the date at which we have now arrived; but I should not like to pass from this part of the enquiry without setting down a few facts which are generally unknown to our separated brethren, as to the existence of plenty of Bibles in those very countries which they think were, and of course still are, plunged in the depths of superstition, illiteracy and degradation. They flatter themselves with the idea that it was the knowledge of the Scriptures which produced the blessed Reformation the world over; and will tell you that it was all because the Holy Book was scaled and locked and hidden away from the benighted Papists in Continental countries that the glorious light of the Reformation never broke, and has not yet broken, upon them. There are, however, unfortunately for them, facts at hand, facts unquestioned, which explode this pious notion. The facts are these:-(i) As was shown long ago in the Dublin Review (October, 1837), 'it was almost solely in those countries which have remained constant to the Catholic Faith that popular versions of the Bible had been published; while it was precisely in those kingdoms, England, Scotland, Sweden, Denmark and Norway, where Protestantism acquired an early and has maintained a permanent ascendancy, that no printed Bible existed when they embraced Protestantism. Holland alone and a few cities in Germany were in possession of the Bible when they adopted the Reformed Creed.' Is it really the case then, you ask with open eyes, that these Latin countries allowed the Bible to be read and translated and printed before Luther? Listen and judge for yourself what rubbish is crammed into people's heads. (ii) Luther's first Bible (or what pretended to be the Bible, for he had amputated some of its members) came out in 1520. Now, will you believe it, there were exactly 104 editions of the Bible in Latin before that date; there were 9 before the birth of Luther in the German language, and there were 27 in German before ever his own saw the light of day. Many of these were to be seen at the Caxton Exhibition in London, 1877: and seeing is believing. In Italy there were more than 40 editions of the Bible before the first Protestant version appeared, beginning at Venice in 1471; and 25 of these were in the Italian language before 1500, with the express permission of Rome. In France there were 18 editions before 1547, the first appearing in 1478. Spain began to publish editions in the same year, and issued Bibles with the full approval of the Spanish Inquisition (of course one can hardly expect ProÂtestants to believe this). In Hungary by the year 1456, in Bohemia by the year 1478, in Flanders before 1500, and in other lands groaning under the yoke of Rome, we know that editions of the Sacred Scriptures had been given to the people. 'In all (to quote from "M.C.L's" useful pamphlet on the subject) 626 editions of the Bible, in which 198 were in the language of the laity, had issued from the press, with the sanction and at the instance of the Church, in the countries where she reigned supreme, before the first Protestant version of the Scriptures was sent forth into the world.' England was perhaps worse off than any country at the time of the Reformation in the matter of vernacular versions of the Bible: many Catholic kingdoms abroad had far surpassed her in making known the Sacred Word. Yet these lands remained Catholic; England turned Protestant; what, then, becomes of the pathetic delusion of 'Evangelical' Christians that an acquaintance with the open Bible in our own tongue must necessarily prove fatal to Catholicism? The simple truth of course is just this, that if knowledge of the Scriptures should of itself make people Protestants, then the Italian and French and Spanish and Hungarian and Belgian and Portuguese nations should all have embraced Protestantism, which up to the moment of writing they have declined to do. I am afraid there is something wrong with the theory, for it is in woeful contradiction to plain facts, which may be learned by all who care to take the trouble to read and study for themselves.(5) Now, before passing on to another part of the subject, I should like you to pause for a moment with the brief historical review fresh in your memory; and I would simply ask this: How can anyone living in the light of modern education and history cling any longer to the fantastic idea that Rome hates the Bible-that she has done her worst to destroy it-that she conceals it from her people lest it should enlighten their blindness, and that the Holy Book, after lying for many long dark ages in the dungeons and lumber rooms of Popery, was at last exhumed and dragged into the light of day by the great and glorious discoverer, Martin Luther? O foolish Scotchmen, who hath bewitched you? Do you not see that Rome could have easily destroyed it if she had been so disposed during all those centuries that elapsed between its formation into one volume in 397 A.D., and the sixteenth century? It was absolutely, exclusively in her power to do with it as she pleased, for Rome reigned supreme. What more simple than to order her priests and monks and Inquisitors to search out every copy and reduce it to ashes? But did she do this? We have seen that she preserved it and multiplied it. She saved it from utter destruction at the hands of infidels and barbarians and pagan tribes that burned everything Christian they could come across; she saved it and guarded it from total extinction by her care and loving watchfulness; she, and she alone. There was no one else to do it; she only was sent by God to defend His Blessed Word. It might have perished, and would have perished, were it not that she employed her clergy to reproduce it and adorn it and multiply it, and to furnish churches and monasteries with copies of it, which all might read and learn and commit to memory, and meditate upon. Nay, she not only multiplied it in its original languages (Greek and Hebrew), which would have been intelligible and useful only to the learned few, but she put it into the hands of all her people who could read, by translating it into Latin, the universal tongue; and even for those less scholarly she rendered it into the common languages spoken in different countries. Truly she took a curious way of showing her hatred of God's Holy Word and of destroying it. Many senseless charges are laid at the door of the Catholic Church; but surely the accusation that, during the centuries preceding the sixteenth, she was the enemy of the Bible and of Bible reading must, to any one who does not wilfully shut his eyes to facts, appear of all accusations the most ludicrous; and to tell the truth, it is ridiculed and laughed out of court by all serious and impartial students of the question. With far more justice, it humbly seems to me, may the charge of degrading and profaning the Sacred Scriptures be brought against those highly-financed Bible Societies which, with a recklessness that passes comprehension, scatter among savages and pagans utterly uninstructed, tons of Testaments, only to be used for making ball cartridges or wadding, for wrapping up snuff, bacon, tobacco, fruit and other goods; for papering the walls of houses; for converting into tapestry or pretty kites for children; and for other and fouler uses which it makes one ashamed to think of. True, the versions thus degraded are false and heretical, which may mitigate the horror in the eyes of Catholics; but those who thus expose them to dishonour believe them to be the real Words of Life. On their heads, then, falls the guilt of 'giving that which is holy to the dogs'. ( Full Answer )
The authorship of the book of Esther is a subject of debate.According to Rashi on Chapter 9, verse 20 of the book, Mordecai wasthe author. However, the Talmud in Baba Batra 15a ascribes the bookto the Anshei Knesset HaGedola (the men of the great assembly). Answer The Book of Esther purports to ex…plain how Esther became queen ofPersia during the fifth century BCE, and how the Jews were savedfrom a massacre, but it is not viewed by scholars as historicallytrue. Views as to when the book was written vary from the latefourth century, down to the second century BCE. We do not know whothe anonymous author was. Answer While the book does not specify an author, the two leadingcandidates for authorship are Ezra and Mordecai. Answer: Rashi commentary (on Esther 9:20) ascribes the Scroll of Esther toMordecai. Rashi, who is invariably loyal to the words of theTalmud-sages, is not debating the Talmud which ascribes Esther tothe Men of the Great Assembly. Rather, he is clarifying that theAssembly didn't create this Scroll from scratch; they merely editedand canonized what Mordecai had already written. ( Full Answer )
It is entirely unknown who wrote the Book of Job. Some scholars suggest that it is in fact the oldest book in Old Testament (and thus in the Bible itself). It is probably based on a poem Ludlul bel nemeqi from Akkadia about 1000 years earlier. A: R. N. Whybray ( The World of Ancient Israel: S…ociological, Anthropological and Political Perspectives , The social world of the wisdom writers) says that there is uncertainty about even the nationality of the author of the Book of Job, as well as about the date it was written. A date in the Persian period (fifth or fourth century BCE) is at present the most favoured one, chiefly because of the speculative nature of the book's theology, especially compared with the older parts of the Book of Proverbs, and the acquaintance of the author with other Old Testament writings such as Isaiah 40-55 and the presence of the Satan as a member of God's heavenly court. The author had a wide knowledge of the literary world of the ancient Near East outside Palestine. This fact, together with the unexplained peculiarities of the language of the poetical part of the book, has led some scholars to suppose that the author was either a Jew living outside Palestine, or even a non-Jew. However, it is not possible to identify the actual author. ( Full Answer )
The Bible is a collection of books added together. There were around forty men who wrote the books that make up the sixty-six books of the Bible. What is interesting is that the men didn't make up what they wrote for the Bible. They simply wrote what God told them to write (see the 1st book of Timot…hy, chapter 3 for more information from the Bible on that issue). Authors of the Bible Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, & Job by Moses Joshua by Joshua Judges, Ruth, 1 & 2 Samuel by Samuel/Nathan/Gad 1 & 2 Kings by Jeremiah 1 & 2 Chronicles by Ezra/ Nehemiah Esther by Mordecai Psalms - primarily David with several others Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, & Song of Solomon by Solomon Isaiah by Isaiah Jeremiah & Lamentations by Jeremiah Ezekiel by Ezekiel Daniel by Daniel Hosea by Hosea Joel by Joel Amos by Amos Obadiah by Obadiah Jonah by Jonah Micah by Micah Nahum by Nahum Habakkuk by Habakkuk Zephaniah by Zephaniah Haggai by Haggai Zechariah by Zechariah Malachi by Malachi NEW TESTAMENT Matthew by Matthew Mark by John Mark Luke & Acts by Luke John & Revelation by John Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 & 2 Thessalonians, 1 & 2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon by Paul Hebrews by an unknown author, probably Paul James by James 1& 2 Peter by Peter 1, 2, & 3 John by John Jude by Jude ( Full Answer )
Modern scholars credit the anonymous author now known as the Deuteronomist with writing a total of seven books: Deuteronomy , Joshua , Judges , 1 Samuel , 2 Samuel , 1 Kings and 2 Kings . The apostle Paul is traditionally credited with writing thirteen books, but there is a near-consens…us among scholars that he only wrote seven epistles: 1 Thessalonians , Galatians , 1 & 2 Corinthians , Philippians , Philemon and Romans . The Apostle Paul wrote more books of the standard Christian Biblethan anyone else--thirteen. He is the author of Romans, 1 and 2Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Phiippans, Colossians, 1 and 2Thessalonians, 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus, and Philemon. Paul may also have written Hebrews, but no one knows that for sure. Apostle Paul's work can be found in the New Testament. Moses wrote the most books in the Old Testament. He is creditedwith writing six books: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers,Deuteronomy, and Job. ( Full Answer )
Timothy didn't write the books of Timothy. It was a letter from Paul to Timothy. I don't know how old he was. Someone said he was in his 30's, but I don't know
Answer 1 Nobody wrote the Bible. The Bible is based on accounts from many different people like Luke, Mark, Matthew, John. Answer 2 The Bible was written by 40+ different authors from various backgrounds over a 4000+ year period. Some scholars disagree, but among the authors are figures lik…e Moses, Samuel, Paul, John, Matthew, Luke, Mark--even an unknown author. There are also some female contributors to the Book: Some of their songs are recorded and one taught a proverb set to her son, King Lemuel. ( Full Answer )
Women though they were able to stand for God's purpose on earth were not able to come as a head over their Husbands due to the events in Genesis at the fall of mankind. This is not realy a man woman ability thing, it's more obidience to the possition. Many women though not with pen and ink but wit…h circumcition of their natural self have indeed writen God's word. Some would say more than men.you will see that women didn't have jobs or even any choices in their lives.\n. \nThis is not a Man or woman thing, so don't take it as one, and use your mind to try to answer this question when if you are regenerated in Christ you have the human spirit to touch God who is Spirit. That said let me say this there is in spiritual terms only one Man in the universe, who is that Christ, He is the husband and any believer in the Church is His corperate bride(Read Revelation).\n. \nThe writers of the bible though phisically were men, spiritually like you(if your a Christian) and me are female(corporately) and subject to our Husband Christ. This is hard to understand if you've never read the bible before and haven't acepted Christ as Lord. May the Lord offer much grace. ( Full Answer )
It's not certain that exactly 40 people wrote the Bible. They would have lived in the Middle East, around what is now Turkey, Lebanon, Syria, Israel, Egypt, Iraq. Don't forget that that whole area has been under many different rulers; borders and names of areas have changed many times over the hundr…eds of years of writing the Bible, and have changed many times in more recent years. ( Full Answer )
Did the 40 men who wrote the Bible have access to each other's writing so that they could have copied from each other?
Another answer from our community: Many of them did haveaccess to the books of the Bible written prior to theirs. There aremany verses in the Bible that quote other Bible books, and theyusually say so. For instance, Luke 20:42 "And David himself saithin the book of Psalms, The LORD said unto my Lor…d, Sit thou on myright hand," ( Full Answer )
Muslims believe, as God said in Quran (Muslims Holy book), that the Bible (or Injil) is God revelation to Jesus. However, the current texts, with current languages, were written by the close companions to Jesus (peace be upon him) or to his followers. For more information on who wrote the Old Tes…tament and the New Testament, it could be referred to the related links below. ( Full Answer )
A: The book of Kings (now produced as two books, 1 Kings and 2Kings) is part of the Deuteronomic History, written by an anonymousauthor now known as the Deuteronomist or 'D' source, because he isseen as the principal source of the Book of Deuteronomy. A: Theauthor is unknown, but Jewish tradition ho…lds that Jeremiahcompiled the book and originally included it as part of the Booksof Prophecy. Some believe this, along with prophetic referenceswithin the books, could also indicate that the author or authorswere one or several of the prophets. A: The two books we now have, 1 Kings and 2 Kings, were originallya single book written by a single author towards the end of theJudahite monarchy. They form part of an integrated history, nowknown as the Deuteronomic History ( Joshua , Judges , 1 Samuel , 2 Samuel , 1Kings and 2 Kings ) and are attributed to the authorof Deuteronomy. This author was anonymous and is therefore knownsimply as the Deuteronomist. Jewish answer: Jewish tradition is that Jeremiah wrote the book of Kings (Talmud,Bava Bathra 14b). That includes 1 and 2 Kings, since in the HebrewBible they are a single book. Traditionally Jeremiah is credited the author of the books ofKings. There are some portions that are almost identical to the Book ofJeremiah, for example, 2 Kings 24:18-25 and Jeremiah 52; 39:1-10;40:7-41:10. There are also many undesigned coincidences betweenJeremiah and Kings (2 Kings 21-23 and Jer. 7:15; 15:4; 19:3, etc.),and events recorded in Kings of which Jeremiah had personalknowledge. ( Full Answer )
ThenBook of Galatians which is one of 66 books in the Bible was written by Paul
The book of Colossians 1:1-2 tells us that the writer wasPaul, who was accompanied by Timothy. He wrote the letter to theColossian congregation from Rome around 60-61CE. On the other hand, Fr. Raymond E. Brown, a member of the Vatican's Roman Pontifical Biblical Commission , says that, of thethir…teen epistles which say that they were written by Paul,critical scholars have reached a near consensus that only seven aredefinitely Paul's: 1 Thessalonians , Galatians , 1& 2 Corinthians , Philippians , Philemon and Romans . On this view, Colossians was written by ananonymous author late in the first century CE. ( Full Answer )
The Latin version of the Bible was translated by Jerome. It is called the Vulgate and was the official Catholic Bible up until very recently.
The same people who wrote the first Bible. The Last book of the Bible (which is a biblios or library of 66 books) is Revelations which was written by St, John the Apostle on the Island of Patmos around 100 A.D.
God is the author of the words in Scripture. It began orally in the Garden of Eden between God and Man. It may have been written on tablets as one theory surmises. It was codified by Moses during the Exodus period and continued onwards until the final chapter, the Book of Revelations was completed b…y the writer John. Sometime after this, men came together to decide the 'New Testament' just like they did for the Old Testament before it. In all, there were many different recorders/writers of Scripture but all had God as the inspired Word and author. The bible was written over many centuries by many different people who wrote recollections of religious events or experiences involving God. ( Full Answer )
It comes from the same source and most of it is the same. Genesis,Exodus, Psalms, Isaiah, and all of the other books that we have inthe Protestant Old Testament are in the Catholic bible. They are inthe same form and contain the same words, additionally The NewTestament is identical in both bibles. …The difference comes in thebooks that are called the Apocrypha (Which if I remember right,simply meaning "extra writings") these are a group of books foundin Catholic Bibles, but not in the Protestant bible. If you'reinterested in where these books came from, see below. These are books that are not contained in the Protestant bibles.Basically what happened is that about 250-200 BC the Israelitepeople had gotten to the point where they were speaking Greek &Aramaic and few of them spoke Hebrew anymore. So a group of Jewishscholars got together and translated the Old Testament into Greek.At this time, the books of the Old Testament had not been 100%fixed, so they translated several other writings that were ofimportance to them culturally and religiously, but were probablynot to be considered the Word of God, either because they werewritten to late in History or because they contained teachings thatcontradicted teachings in Moses, or both. This Greek version of theOld Testament became the bible that Jesus would have read and thatall of the Apostles would have read. It's interesting to note,however, that in all of the New Testament there are well over 300quotations from the Old Testament and only one possible allusion toone of these "extra" books, meaning that it Christian's from dayone seemed to understand that these books weren't actually InspiredScripture. The Dead Sea Scrolls also contain very little of theApocryphal books as well, again a sign that Jewish people as earlyas 150-200 understood that these weren't inspired by God. Anyway,by the time Jerome got around to translating the bible into Latin,most of the Church didn't really understand all of this AlthoughJerome and many other Church Fathers (Augustine, athansias &Ambrose and many others), although he understood that these werenot Scripture, he translated them into Latin b/c so many people inthe Church were used to having these books in their bibles. Overthe course of the next several hundred years the Catholic Churchgradually began to accept these books and when the Protestantsbroke away in the 1500s it became a way for them to try tode-legitimze the Protestant movement. They issued severalstatements saying that anyone who did not accept these books asScripture would go to Hell. ( Full Answer )
Luke, the author of Luke and Acts is commonly considered to havebeen a Gentile. If you really mean non-Jew, then all of the New Testament booksexcept those written by Matthew, maybe 1 Peter, and Paul wouldqualify. The author of Hebrews is unknown, and some of the minorbooks of Paul have contested a…uthorship. -- The term "Jew" was coined in reference to the descendants of thetribe of Judah. Paul was from the tribe of Benjamin. ANSWER The above answer to this question is obscure, and it all comes downto definitions and modern mis-understanding. It is easy to say that a Gentile is someone who is not a jew, butthere are 5 usages of the word "jew". (1) The word "jew" or "Jew" is simply a phonetic contraction of theword "Judah". One of the first times the word "Jew" appears in the Bible is whenthe tribe of Judah is fighting some of the other 11 tribes. (2) A Gentile is not simply someone who is not in the tribe of Judah:it refers to someone who is not descended from any of the 12 tribesof Israel. (3) It can also be used: of an individual OR of a single tribe of Judah OR of all the 12 tribes of Israel [that is, the country as a whole] (for example, even today the modern nation of Israel still regardseveryone else as Gentiles.) Not everyone in the land of Judah was from the tribe of Judah. . Jesus knew He was from the tribe of Judah (as for example didJohn & James [Jesus' cousins], Jude and another James [bothJesus' brothers] ), . Matthew knew he was from the tribe of Levi . Paul knew he was from the tribe of Benjamin . Anna knew she was from the tribe of Aser Just as: . Every Californian is American, but not all Americans areCalifornian . [that is, they could be from one of the other 51 States ofAmerica]. So: . A Gentile is a non-jew, but not all non-Jews are Gentiles. That is: A Gentile is not from one of the 12 tribes of Israel, but noteveryone not in the tribe of Judah are Gentiles [that is, theycould be from one of the other 11 Tribes of Israel]. The question would be more accurate and understandable to non-jewsif it was re-worded as " What non-Israelite wrote a book in the Bible?" Using that definition, the non-Israelite authors of the books ofthe Bible are:- In the NewTestament: . Luke . Titus In the OldTestament: . Job (reason: The book of Job was written before the patriachIsrael himself was even born, let alone his 12 sons. This means Jobwas a Gentile, sor more accurately a non-Israelite, as was alsoAbraham) . Nahum (reason: he was from Elkosh in Iraq, definitely anon-Israelite) Summary There are 4 books in the entire Bible written byGentiles. ( Full Answer )
Moses wrote Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy(except maybe the final summary that could have been written by Joshua) according to tradition. Joshua was written by Joshua(except possibly the ending, that could be written by Phinehas the high priest). According to Jewish tradition J…udges was written by Samuel. Kings is has an uncertain author( some think Jeremiah or a group of prophets). Chronicles, Ezra, and possibly Nehemiah was written by Ezra according to Jewish tradition. Esther was written by Mordecai. Job's author is uncertain( maby Moses, or Job). Psalms had many writers incliding David, Asaph, Korah, Solomon, Herman, Ethan, and Moses. Proverbs was written by Solomon, Agur, and Lemuel. Ecclesiastes and song of songs was written by Solomon. Isaiah was written by Isaiah or his fallowers. That is all I hav time to write if anyone wants plaese fell free to edit or add to this. I got this info from a New Living Translation of the Bible. ( Full Answer )
Many of the books of the Bible are named after the author. It is true in this case as well. Jeremiah was the author of Jeremiah.
Habakkuk was the prophet's name who wrote the book of Habakkuk. He prophesied to Judah in the last quarter of the seventh century B.C.
Well we don't know when the actual Bible was written but what we do know is that the first Bible to be written in English was written in the 1380's. It was written by John Wycliffe who was an Oxford Professor, scholar and theologian.
Just who did write the Bible is a matter of dispute, and even of debate among biblical scholars. Nevertheless, no matter who wrote the Bible, it does not make the Bible true. We may never know if there is any divine truth in the Bible, but we do know there is much that, for whatever reason, is not h…istorically true. Another perspective: No, the lone fact that the Bible represents the work of some forty writers does not make it true. Nor do the facts that it is the single most polarizing work of literature the world has ever known, written over a span of forty generations (some 1,600 years), on three continents, in three languages, by men of wildly different backgrounds, educations, skills and occupations. The fact that these disparate works forms a cohesive whole is what's seen as powerful evidence which speaks to its truth, and is just part of what inspires believers to accept the Bible as what it claims to be; the work of only one mind, the Holy Spirit of God, writing by inspired men. (1 Corinthians 2:9-11; 2 Timothy 3:16, 17). ( Full Answer )
2Timothy 3:16 " All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness." 2Samuel 23:2 " The spirit of the Lord spake by me, and his word was in my tongue."
Old Testament Books of Law Genesis - Moses Exodus - Moses Leviticus - Moses Numbers - Moses Deuteronomy - Moses Books of History Joshua - Believed to be written by Joshua Judges - Samuel Ruth - Samuel 1 Samuel - Samuel and Isaiah 2 Samuel - Isaiah 1 Kings - Isaiah 2 Kin…gs - Isaiah 1 Chronicles - Ezra 2 Chronicles - Ezra Ezra - Ezra Nehemiah - Nehemiah Esther - Ezra Books of Poetry/Wisdom Psalm - King David, Moses, Hezekiah, Solomon, and others Proverbs - Solomon, son of David Ecclesiastes - Solomon, son of David Song of Songs (Song of Solomon) - Solomon, son of David Major Prophets Isaiah - Isaiah Jeremiah - Jeremiah Lamentations - Jeremiah Ezekiel - Ezekiel Daniel - Daniel Minor Prophets Hosea - Hosea Joel - Joel Amos - Amos Obediah - Obediah Jonah - Jonah Micah - Micah Nahum - Nahum Habakkuk - Habakkuk Zephaniah - Zephaniah Haggai - Haggai Zechariah - Zechariah Malachi - Malachi New Testament The Gospels Matthew - Matthew Mark - Mark Luke - Luke the doctor John - John the Baptist, cousin to Jesus Book of History Acts - Luke the doctor Letters of Paul Romans - Paul the Apostle 1 Corinthians - Paul the Apostle 2 Corinthians - Paul the Apostle Galatians - Paul the Apostle Ephesians - Paul the Apostle Philippians - Paul the Apostle Colossians - Paul the Apostle 1 Thessalonians - Paul the Apostle 2 Thessalonians - Paul the Apostle Titus - Paul the Apostle Philemon - Paul the Apostle General Letters Hebrews - Believed to be Paul. No evidence to prove true. James - James, brother to Jesus 1 Peter - Peter 2 Peter - Peter 1 John - John, disciple to Jesus 2 John - John, disciple to Jesus 3 John - John, disciple to Jesus Jude - Jude Book of Prophecy Revelation - John, disciple to Jesus ( Full Answer )
There are many authors who wrote the old and new testament through out the history of the world, ultimately the Christian God is the author of the Bible..
Different people wrote different ones. Exactly who wrote what depends on who you ask. In general, each book has a "traditional" author and at least one other candidate (whose name we may not know). One reason for this is that some scholars refuse to believe in, for example, prophecy. So a book that… contains a section foretelling the future "can't" have be written by the guy whose name is on it, it "must" have been written by someone after the events described in it had already happened. Wikipedia has a pretty good article on this; I'm going to refer you there (look in the Related Links) instead of retyping it all here. ( Full Answer )
During the reign of Queen Mary I of England (1553 - 1558), a number of Protestant scholars fled from England to Geneva in Switzerland, which was then ruled as a republic in which John Calvin andTheodore Beza provided the primary spiritual and theological leadership. Among these scholars was William …Whittingham, who supervised the translation now known as the Geneva Bible, in collaboration with Myles Coverdale, Christopher Goodman, Anthony Gilby, Thomas Sampson, and Willian Cole ; several of this group later became prominent figures in the Vestments controversy. Whittingham was directly responsible for the New Testament, which was complete and published in 1557 while Gilby oversaw the Old Testament. ( Full Answer )
The first book in the Bible was Genesis. That chapter tells us how the earth was formed. In the beginning......... The person who wrote Genesis was Moses.
Name of Book: Isaiah Writer(s): Isaiah Place Written: Jerusalem Writing Completed (B.C.E.): a. 732 Time Covered (B.C.E.): c. 778-a. 732
It appears the phrase 'biblia sacra' first appeared in the Middle Ages. It was put on the front of the King James Bible in 1611. The Greek word 'biblios/biblia' simply means book(s).
The Apostle John is understood to be the writer of this letter. His theme of love is prevalent in all of his writings.
Most likely David , since (according to the 'superscriptions') the surrounding Psalms are all by David.
The Gutenberg Bible was the first book in recorded history to be printed, but was written by the original writers of the individual books.
A: It is only tradition that says forty men wrote the Bible, since many of the books were either written anonymously or pseudepigraphically. In any case, there is no evidence that any of the authors was inspired by God or received the word of God. The evidence of the Bible itself is that the variou…s authors wrote for the political and theological needs of their times, just as any modern author would do. ( Full Answer )
The authors of the bible are not known; the date is probable 3 000 years ago.
The Old Testament comes from the writings of people of the Jewish faith. The New Testament comes from the writing of people of the Christian faith. The two are brought together because Christ is the fulfillment of the prophesies made by God to the Jews as documented in the Old Testament.
The books "The Acts of the Apostles" and "The Gospel According toSt. Luke" were both said to have been written by a physician namedLuke. Luke was likely a disciple of the Apostle Paul. It isprobable that the books of Luke and Acts were actually two parts ofthe same document, addressed to one Theophi…lus. While most scholars agree that Luke and Acts appear to be writtenby the same author, there are always discussions as to who thoseauthors truly were. The books of the New Testament were notactually authored until later in the first century, beginningaround 60 to 70 AD. Hence many of the authors were not themselvesacquainted with the Savior during his life, but were closeassociates with those who had known Him, such as the apostles Peterand Paul (Paul having been converted by the Savior after Hisresurrection). Paul himself was known to have used scribes forseveral of his own epistles, each employing a slightly differentwriting style. It is important to note, however, that none of these discussionsshould in any way diminish the power of the testimonies being borneby these authors. ( Full Answer )
The shortest book of the bible (including books of the New Testament) with fewest words 3 John --- 1 chapter, 14 verses with 299 words, and 2 John --- 1 chapter, 13 verses, 303 words with the fewest verses. The author of those 2 books is the apostle John. The smallest book of the Old Testament is O…badiah (1 chapter, 21 verses, 670 words) which presumable was written by the prophet Obadiah. ( Full Answer )
The book "Bad Girls of the Bible" was written by Liz Curtis Higgs. It was published in 1999 and relates the stories of the female characters found in the Bible who have less than perfect lives, and illustrates how the reader can understand and learn from their mistakes.
This book in the Hebrew Bibles is called "Sepher Amos", the Book ofAmos; and, in the Vulgate Latin and Syriac versions, the Prophecyof Amos. This person, Amos is not the father of Isaiah, as some say. Thereare no family details regarding, Amos except that this man was acountry farmer and herdsman.
Jehovah's Witnesses don't have their own bible. They prefer to use a translation from the Hebrew-aramic and greek scriptures that was originally writted by famous bible figures such as Moses, Paul, John and Joshua. So in reality, the bible that Jehovah's witnesses use is the same as the ones that w…as written long ago, just translated in English. But then there are different versions of the bible. New international Version does not have more complicated translation and some scripture is left out. King James Version has also removed a few things to fit the Catholic's needs. Jehovah's Witnesses DO NOT use a version. They use a translation. A translation is different, it is from one language to the next and no change. A version is a slight deviation from the original concept. Like playing a game. Pac-man version two, its not pac-man the original, its another game entirely, so too is the versions of the bible. But lets say pac-man was in Spanish only. Then it would be Translated into English. Same game, different language. So too is the "New world Translation of the Holy Scriptures" Which is the translation Jehovah's Witnesses used. When was the first copy? I did a little research. A old 1984 Translation was considered the most accurate of the time. What is the difference between this and the King James. Modern English. Now one uses 'Thou','art' and 'thine' any more. Even spell check does not recognize the words. New World translation uses 'You', 'are' and 'I'. It is easy to read. Now who translated it is a good question. I don't know them by name, but I know they are intelligent, using computers to translate everything to another language and even making sure its accurate. ( Full Answer )
There is no book with that name. You are probably thinking of oneof the main characters in the Book of Esther namedMordecai/Mordechai.