Speaker Identification

Speaker 1 - Steve Dupuis - Host / Interviewer. The opening identifies the speaker as Steve Dupuis and the closing identifies the program presenter with a slightly different surname rendering, "Steve Dupuy." The exact surname spelling should be verified.

Speaker 2 - Dr. Bob Thiel - Guest / Commentator. The raw transcript renders the surname as "Teal," but the contextual reading strongly indicates "Thiel." This correction should be verified if publication requires source-level certainty.

Speaker 1 - Steve Dupuis: Friends, this is Steve Dupuis for the Bible News Prophecy program with Dr. Bob Thiel, bringing you news and analysis of world events in light of Bible prophecy. Dr. Thiel, who gave the world the Bible?

Speaker 2 - Dr. Bob Thiel: God did.

Speaker 1 - Steve Dupuis: What do the Roman Catholics claim?

Speaker 2 - Dr. Bob Thiel: Well, I bought a book by a guy named Jimmy Akin titled The Bible Is a Catholic Book. He claims the Bible cannot exist apart from the Church, and that its origins, its formation, and its careful preservation over the centuries are inseparable from Catholicism. He says Catholics can sometimes get intimidated by the Bible, especially by scriptural challenges from Protestants, and he says, "We are the original Bible Christians." Well, that is what he says.

I went to Catholic Bible 101 and asked where the Bible comes from. The answer given was that the Church gave the world the Bible, that the Bible does not exist apart from the Church, and that the New Testament was not finalized in its present form until Pope Damasus I and the Council of Rome in 382 proposed the current canon of Scripture of 73 books. So that was that response.

Then I went to the Roman Catholic EWTN website. They had a question from a guy named Bill that, in substance, asked: If the Roman Catholic Church gave the world the Bible and is infallible, then why did Rome reject or question the inspiration of James and Hebrews and later accept them? If the Catholic Church really is illuminated by the Holy Spirit so men can trust her as God's organization, why was she so wrong about something so simple?

The answer was from a priest by the name of John Eckert. He said the recognition of the canon of Scripture was not accomplished in an instant, and that the Church was not wrong in such a matter because she never infallibly declared a wrong canon.

Well, the fact is that the Church of Rome admits there was uncertainty about various books. The old Catholic Encyclopedia discussed questions about the Epistle to the Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, 2 John, Jude, and the Apocalypse - the Book of Revelation. They admit there was uncertainty. Why? Unlike the Church of God, they did not have the chain of custody.

Now, the New Catholic Encyclopedia specifically claims they did not infallibly declare the canon until the Council of Trent in the 16th century. Although most Protestants do not accept that particular canon, their scholars tend to agree that the canon of Scripture was not known for a long time.

But in Hebrews 13:5, God promises He will never leave or forsake us. Well, if we did not know what the New Testament was for two or three hundred years, or 1,500 years, it kind of sounds like God would have forsaken us.

Look, in 2 Timothy 3, the Apostle Paul wrote Timothy and said that you could become complete from the Scriptures. So if you did not know what they were, it does not make sense that true Christians did not know what they were.

There are some Protestant scholars who get parts of this right. Dr. Krueger wrote, in substance, "After all, aren't God's books still God's books apart from anybody using them or recognizing them?" Well, yes. It is correct to conclude that a council of men did not change the books inspired by God. Those that God inspired were always inspired, despite the fact that various Roman Catholics and Protestants, for that matter, were confused about them.

The instant one of the books of the Bible was written, someone had to have possession of it. Did any one person or group of people ever have possession of all of the books of the Bible? If so, when did they possess them?

Well, the writers had the books from the beginning, and the recipients had them when they received them. I will go over this more in a moment. The disciples and apostles collected them, and the last apostle to die and the last one to write books of the Bible, the Apostle John, had them. He lived in Asia Minor.

Of the 27 books of the New Testament, between 14 and 20 were written to people in Asia Minor or by people associated with Asia Minor. According to historical records, Polycarp was a disciple of John, and he learned from John and the apostles. According to a document known in the transcript as the "Paris Fragment," the Apostle John passed the canon to Polycarp, which we would have believed happened anyway because he knew him.

So we believe this is evidence that the canon of Scripture was known from the beginning in Asia Minor. A Protestant scholar by the name of James Moffatt wrote, in substance, "Was not the apostolic canon of Scripture first formed in Asia Minor?" We say yes. It was the Church of God that was prominent, even predominant, in Asia Minor until the early third century and had the chain of custody.

We have a free e-book available at ccog.org titled Who Gave the World the Bible? At ccog.org, you can find the literature and a chart of the chain of custody. On one side, you have the Church of God chain of custody; on the other side, the record of Roman Catholics and Protestants.

For most of the original points, we all agree. So let me go through many of those original points. God inspired various ones to write books of the Bible. Paul wrote Timothy to bring Mark and the parchments. Peter had Paul's writings, as referenced in 2 Peter. We believe John received Paul's writings from Peter. Peter and Paul were killed. After John was on the Isle of Patmos, he moved back to Ephesus.

One thing we teach that Greco-Roman Catholics and Protestants do not teach is Isaiah 8:16. We believe John fulfilled that passage about sealing the testimony among the disciples. John was the last of the original apostles and the last one to write a book of the Bible, so he had them all.

We believe he passed what he knew to Polycarp. Others accept that he passed at least some of this to Polycarp.

Now let us go to additional points that, in our view, show that we had the chain of custody. One of our people in Asia Minor, Papias of Hierapolis, accepted the Book of Revelation. He was writing around A.D. 120.

Polycarp wrote a letter to the Philippians around A.D. 135. I had this published, by the way, in a theological journal, where I argued that he quotes from or alludes to all 27 books of the New Testament. Greco-Roman Catholics and Protestants say he alludes to most of them. I say it was all of them.

Polycarp also wrote that the Philippians were well versed in the sacred Scriptures. Well, how could they be well versed in the sacred Scriptures if they did not know what they were?

Another Church of God leader in Asia Minor by the name of Melito of Sardis wanted to verify that we had the true Old Testament canon. So he went down and checked that out. That writing is accepted by the Greco-Roman Catholics. But they accept books that are not in our Bibles. Church of God Bibles and Protestant Bibles do not include what is called the Apocrypha in the Old Testament. Melito did not include that. They all call him a saint. He is one of our people.

Also in Asia Minor, we have Polycrates of Ephesus. He told Victor, the Bishop of Rome, that he had gone through every sacred Scripture. Well, how could he go through every sacred Scripture if he did not know what they were?

Also close to Asia Minor, you have a man by the name of Serapion of Antioch, who we consider one of our people. He said the Scriptures were handed down to him. That is what we say: they were handed from John to Polycarp, and Polycarp and others passed them on. That is how they were handed down to people such as Serapion.

Serapion also visited a church where they were using something called the Gospel of Peter, which the Church of God was not using, but some of the Greco-Roman Catholics were. That was around A.D. 209.

Furthermore, there was a church - actually, a school - in Alexandria. According to Origen, in the third century they regarded Hebrews, 2 Peter, 2 John, 3 John, James, and Jude as contested writings.

Around the year A.D. 250, the raw transcript appears to refer to North Africa and Cyprian of Carthage in connection with an early Latin Bible. The precise wording is unclear. Speaker 2's stated point is that this Bible did not include Hebrews, 2 Peter, James, or Jude.

While there was a school in Alexandria, there was also one in Antioch, associated with one of our people, Lucian. He used the Hebrew Masoretic Text and what we call the traditional text for the New Testament, the Textus Receptus. Again, those are the books and textual tradition we would use.

According to Eusebius, the Greco-Romans in the fourth century were still unsure about Hebrews, James, Jude, 2 Peter, 2 John, 3 John, and Revelation. In something the transcript identifies as Canon 85 of the Apostolic Constitutions, they included two epistles of Clement as sacred books. Those are not in the New Testament, by the way.

In the late fourth century, Jerome wrote that the Nazarene Christians used the Old and New Testaments. The Pope wanted him to put together the Bible, so he consulted with the Nazarene Christians - our people, as we understand them - to know what the books of the Bible were. He did not want these extra books in the Old Testament, but the Pope told him he had to put them in anyway. I have writings from Jerome where he objected, by the way. You can read them in our free e-book at ccog.org.

While our people continued with what we regard as the original canon, Augustine of Hippo said Hebrews was still disputed. In A.D. 405, Pope Innocent I left Hebrews out. In 405, Jerome finally completed his Bible and, after pressure, included the Apocrypha.

But our people kept working with the Bible, translating the New Testament into different languages, and we had the books. There were edicts against our people in the 12th and 15th centuries, and supporters of Rome took the books from us.

Now, what about the Protestants? In the 16th century, one of their reformers, a man by the name of Zwingli, did not accept the Book of Revelation as Scripture. In 1546, Martin Luther still doubted the inclusion of Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation in the Bible. For example, Martin Luther said you are saved by faith alone, while James says otherwise, and he did not want to use that book.

But what about the Roman Catholics? In 1546, they declared the fixed canon as a dogma of their church and said it could not be changed. That was 1546, approximately 1,450 years after the last book of the New Testament was written.

In 1611, the King James Version of the Bible was published with the Apocrypha included as an appendix.

In 1672, [the wording in the source transcript is too garbled to reconstruct confidently]. Protestants used the Masoretic Text for the Old Testament, whereas the Greco-Romans used the Septuagint. We used the Textus Receptus for the New Testament as the best source. Protestants sometimes use it and sometimes use something else.

The reality is that the view of agnostic scholars, Greco-Roman Catholics, and Protestants is that nobody knew what the books of the Bible were. But we do not agree. We think the Bible itself points to the fact that the true Church would know what the books of the Bible were, and that we have had the chain of custody throughout. We believe history supports our view.

You know, even though Jesus said His Church would be a "little flock" in Luke 12:32, most scholars ignore that. They assume the Greco-Roman Catholics represent Christianity as a whole, so they have taken the Greco-Roman view of the councils as fact.

Speaker 1 - Steve Dupuis: I want to circle back to my original question, Dr. Thiel. Who gave the world the Bible?

Speaker 2 - Dr. Bob Thiel: God gave the world the Bible. [The next short phrase involving Jerome and Roman Catholics is garbled in the source transcript and cannot be reconstructed confidently.] They basically got it from us, and we got it from the apostles, who were inspired by the Holy Spirit.

Hopefully, the facts of history will help people realize which church had the chain of custody, because they did not know what the books were, and we did.

Speaker 1 - Steve Dupuis: Thank you, Dr. Thiel. For more interviews with Dr. Thiel, in addition to written and audio articles, visit our website at biblenewsprophecy.net. This is Steve Dupuis for the Bible News Prophecy program.