What I mean by that is as pertains to study of early Christian history and the cobbling together of what we today consider the Biblical canon of scripture.
Long experience has let me to understand I cannot inform anyone not familiar with those particulars. It is something they should feel led to find and study for themselves. I think it helps a great deal to understand that if those involved in the canonization process over many centuries were inclined to follow the leading of the holy spirit there would not be such a history as what is delineated in that process.
Further, here's a test to perhaps consider what I've proposed. Perhaps personal experience has let one to find this out already. Say, in a Christian forum where doctrine is discussed.
Pose a question on any topic within the field of Apologetics, Soterilogy, etc... to a group of gathered Christians.
Do they all concur with the specifics under that topic? Let's say, the Trinity.
If the answer is no, imagine why that is. Imagine if you will all the denominational constructs and their doctrines. They're different in many respects. Each one.
Why?
It is an awesome power over generations into the eternal earthly future for those who believe they are charged with speaking for God. Which is what occurred when we are told God inspired the scripture. And do not be misled by my observations after years of study. I love the Bible. I feel it is a part of me and couldn't do without it. However, I think we err if we come to a place in our journey with God wherein we believe
in the bible.
That is not at all what God intended. There was no new testament when the apostles brought the good news. There was the old testament for those Jews to whom they spoke. There was no such reference for the gentiles. And yet, the great commission had the apostles go into the whole world and bring the good news. An oral practice, an oral teaching, an oral tradition for over a generation.
One would think the chronological order of the new testament aligns with the order of the books in the new testament. That's not true. This is why in many cases when we read a chapter in one book say in the synoptic gospels we find when that chapter ends the next one doesn't pick up where that prior one left off.
Did you know the first gospel , when all are anonymous, is that of James? Written in 50 A.D.
This is why I note mans involvement tends to reflect man's nature. For instance this list. Which includes OT books. In both links below pay attention to the order of NT books.
Chronological order of the books of the Bible.
Now, compare to what is here in the same type of list.
Chronological order new testament books
To be clear, it is not ever my intention to violate any rule there may be concerning my observations. I was , as we all were who read this board, asked a question.
Why is the bible so murky and confusing?
I will tell you the words of holy spirit that rang in my mind when reading this thread title was those found in the book of John.
"You study the Scriptures diligently because you think that in them you have eternal life. These are the very Scriptures that testify about me, yet you refuse to come to me to have life."
Remember that challenge? Ask a question in the study of Apologetics, Soterilogy? The unity of the church, the faithful in Christ not a structure called church, is not.
Why? Because for centuries we've come to believe in doctrines often named after those who invented them. And as such we've been led to believe in different ways what it means to be in Christ. And what it means to be saved. When in truth Jesus teachings informed us it is a very compelling and easy method which one may employ in order to believe and be saved.
Man, this is a long response. But, you asked. :) An example. A few years ago I met a Christian woman who lived by the belief that had it not been for the Jews refusing to accept Jesus was the prophesied messiah of the old testament Gentiles would not be saved.
I've spoken with Christians who believe God predestined whom he would save before he created anything at all. And knew those chosen ones by their name. And those and only those persons are saved. Not because they find Christ because they are not capable of understanding the gospel as sinners. Rather, they are only saved after God permits that per-deterimened saved one to believe and hold faith. Which is why those whom he does not bestow that ability upon are not his chosen.
I've spoken with Christians who insist baptism with water was to cease after Jesus resurrected and returned to the father. Not infant baptism, all baptism.
From whence do those persons and others who hold other beliefs get their information in order to arrive at such beliefs?
In closing this near novelette, consider this observation entitled, The Everlasting Gospel, by William Blake. My interpretation won't help you. Consider yours after reading it. What's the message?
That is my point. Thank you for your enduring patience in reading this wall of text. I wish to be clear and to also assure you I mean no disrespect to the scriptures in sharing my answer to the OP question.
The Vision of Christ that thou dost see
Is my Vision’s Greatest Enemy.
Thine has a great hook nose like thine;
Mine has a snub nose like to mine.
Thine is the friend of All Mankind;
Mine speaks in parables to the Blind.
Thine loves the same world that mine hates;
Thy Heaven doors are my Hell Gates.
Socrates taught what Melitus
Loathd as a Nation’s bitterest Curse;
And Caiphas was in his own Mind
A benefactor to Mankind.
Both read the Bible day & night,
But thou readst black where I read white.
