What is your position regarding the "Apostles' Creed"?

We do not consider the “Apostles’ Creed” as inspired–neither in the form used by the Roman Catholic Church, nor in its numerous variations used by Protestant churches. Some claim that the “Apostles’ Creed” is the oldest of all the Christian creeds. It is considered the basis of all other creeds in non-Catholic churches. As fairy tales would have it, some allege that each of the apostles supplied one article to the Creed. This claim is totally without merit. The apostles had nothing to do with formulating this Creed.

In “The Lost Books of the Bible,” the following is explained:

“Mr. Justice Bailey says [in Mr. Justice Bailey’s Common Prayers, 1813]: ‘It is not to be understood that this Creed was framed by the Apostles, or indeed that it existed as a Creed in their time,’ and after giving the Creed as it existed in the year 600… he says, ‘how long this form had existed before the year 600 is not exactly known…’ The most important ‘addition,’ since the year of Christ 600, is that which affirms, that Christ ‘descended into hell.’ This has been proved… to have been an invention… after the time of Eusebius.”

The Cambridge Encyclopedia, Volume 6, explains that the Apostles’ Creed is “a statement of Christian faith widely used in Roman Catholic and Protestant Churches, and recognized by the Orthodox Churches. It stresses the trinitarian nature of God (as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit)… In its present form, it dates from the 8th [century] but its origins go back to the 3rd [century].”

The encyclopedia continues:

Continue reading "What is your position regarding the "Apostles' Creed"?"

Is the "Epistle of Barnabas" inspired? Shouldn't it be part of the Holy Scriptures?

The “Epistle of Barnabas” is not inspired. It was clearly not written by the Apostle Barnabas. Mosheim states in his “Ecclesiastical History” that the author “must have been a very different person from the true Barnabas, who was St. Paul’s companion.”

The epistle contains numerous Scriptural errors and should therefore not be considered as inspired. It was never referred to by Jesus or any of the New Testament writers as Scripture, and it was not included in the New Testament by the apostles. As we explained in a prior Q&A, the apostles Paul, Peter and John canonized the New Testament Scriptures, but the Epistle of Barnabas was not one of those books.

The Catholic Encyclopedia explains that a reference in the Epistle of Barnabas (in chapter 4, verse 4) pertains to a command given by Adrian in A.D. 130 for the reconstruction, in honor of Jupiter, of the Temple at Jerusalem, which had been destroyed by Titus. Adrian had also forbidden the Jews to practice circumcision. The epistle must, consequently, have been written in A.D. 130-131–long after the canonization process of the New Testament writings was completed.

It is further explained that “the extremely allegorical character of the exegesis leads to the supposition that the author of the letter was an Alexandrian. His way of constantly placing himself and his readers in opposition to the Jews makes it impossible to believe that either he or the larger part of his readers were of Jewish origin. Besides, he is not always familiar with the Mosaic rites… The history of the epistle confirms its Alexandrine origin. Up to the fourth century only the Alexandrians were acquainted with it…”

Some Interesting Concepts

Even though the Epistle of Barnabas is clearly not inspired, it does contain some interesting concepts. For instance, the author speaks out against abortion. It says in chapter 19, verse 5 (We should note that some divide the epistle in different chapters than the ones given in this Q&A): “thou shalt not kill a child by abortion, neither shalt thou destroy it after it is born…”

Abortion is indeed wrong. For more information, please read our free booklet, “Are You Already Born Again?,” pages 13-15.

In addition, the author seems to refer to the belief of a 7,000 year plan–the concept that God assigned six “days” of 1,000 years each to man to rule himself, followed by the Millennium or the seventh “day” of one-thousand years, which is referred to in the book of Hebrews as a “Sabbath” rest (compare Hebrews 4:1-10):

We read in chapter 15 in the Epistle of Barnabas:

“(15:3) He speaketh, too, of the sabbath in the beginning of the creation: And God made in six days the works of his hands, and finished them on the seventh day, and rested in it and sanctified it. (15:4) Consider, my children, what signify the words, He finished them in six days. They mean this: that in six thousand years the Lord will make an end of all things, for a day is with him as a thousand years. And he himself beareth witness unto me, saying: Behold this day a day shall be as a thousand years. Therefore, my children, in six days, that is in six thousand years, shall all things be brought to an end. (15:5) And the words, He rested on the seventh day, signify this: After that his Son hath come, and hath caused to cease the time of the wicked one, and hath judged the ungodly, and changed the sun and the moon and the stars, then shall he rest well on the seventh day.”

For further information on the existence of a seven-thousand-year plan, see our Q&A.

Doctrinal Errors

However, the doctrinal errors contained in the Epistle of Barnabas are quite striking, showing that this book could not possibly be “inspired” by God. We are setting forth below some of its major errors:

Error #1:

Continue reading "Is the "Epistle of Barnabas" inspired? Shouldn't it be part of the Holy Scriptures?"

Do you think that the Book of Enoch is inspired? Didn't Jude quote from it and gave it therefore canonical status?

The book of Enoch belongs to the so-called Pseudepigrapha books and was apparently written during the first century B.C.–even though some claim that it was written before then.

The term Pseudepigrapha was given to Jewish writings, which were attributed to authors who did not actually write them, but who misappropriated the names of famous people by pretending that they were the authors of those writings. Known “Pseudepigrapha books” include “the Apocalypse of Abraham,” which was probably written in the second century A.D.; “the Apocalypse of Adam,” which was perhaps written in the first or second century A.D.; the “Fourth Book of Ezra (2 Esdras),” which was probably written between 95 and 100 A.D.; and “the Testament of Moses” (or, “Assumption of Moses”), which was written in the first century A.D.

Continue reading "Do you think that the Book of Enoch is inspired? Didn't Jude quote from it and gave it therefore canonical status?"

Why don't many editions of the Bible contain the Apocrypha?

The Apocrypha are a collection of books, which were written in Greek by various individuals from about 400 to 200 B.C. The Catholic Church considers some of these books as inspired Scripture.

At the Council of Trent (1546 A.D.), the Catholic Church declared that some apocryphal books, together with unwritten Catholic tradition, are of God. It was stated that those who disagreed with this decision were to be considered “anathema.”

The Roman Catholic Church (as well as the Greek Orthodox Church) consider the following Apocrypha (which are also referred to as Deuterocanonical books) as inspired:

Tobit or Tobias
Judith
Wisdom of Solomon
Jesus Sirach (Ecclesiasticus)
Baruch (including the letter of Jeremiah, Baruch 6)
First and Second Maccabees
Additions to Esther and Daniel [i.e., added chapters at the end of the book of Esther; and added chapters to the book of Daniel, including Prayer of Azariah (Daniel 3:24-50); the Song of the Three Young Men (Daniel 3:51-90); Susanna (Daniel 13); and Bel and the Dragon (Daniel 14)].

Continue reading "Why don't many editions of the Bible contain the Apocrypha?"

What is the historical background of the book of Zechariah? Why was the book written? Were there two different authors of the book?

The book of Zechariah is an extraordinary inspired book which contains unique insights into the workings and the mind of God.

Zechariah’s Hebrew name, “Zekar-yah,” means “Yahweh Remembers,” or “Yahweh Has Remembered.” This name is related to the message of the prophet: God remembers His people and will not forget their work for Him, if they follow Him faithfully.

Zechariah was a prophet and a priest–the son of Berechia, the grandson of Iddo the prophet (Zechariah 1:1; compare Nehemiah 12:16, which only mentions Zechariah as a descendant of Iddo, since his father Berechia had apparently died at a young age). Iddo was also a priest who returned from Babylon with Zechariah, Zerubbabel the governor and Joshua the High Priest. Iddo was, according to tradition, a member of the Great Synagogue (the governing body of the Jews before the Sanhedrin).

Continue reading "What is the historical background of the book of Zechariah? Why was the book written? Were there two different authors of the book?"

Would you please explain the meaning of the coronation of the High Priest Joshua, as reported in Zechariah 6:9-15.

We mentioned in a prior Update, when discussing the vision of the High Priest Joshua in Zechariah 3:1-10, that Joshua is a type of Jesus Christ. This fact becomes even more obvious in the passage, which describes the coronation of Joshua.

Zechariah 6:9-15 reads:

“(9) Then the word of the LORD came to me, saying: (10) ‘Receive the gift from the captives–from Heldai, Tobijah, and Jedaiah, who have come from Babylon–and go the same day and enter the house of Josiah the son of Zephaniah. (11) Take the silver and gold, make elaborate crowns [according to the literal text, see margin of the New King James Bible], and set [them] on the head of Joshua the son of Jehozadak, the high priest. (12) Then speak to him, saying, “Thus says the LORD of hosts, saying: ‘Behold, the Man whose name is the BRANCH! From His place He shall branch out, and He shall build the temple of the LORD; (13) Yes, He shall build the temple of the LORD. He shall bear the glory, And shall sit and rule on His throne; So He shall be a priest on His throne, And the counsel of peace shall be between them both.'” (14) Now the elaborate crowns [not “crown,” see comment above] shall be for a memorial in the temple of the LORD for Helem, Tobijah, Jedaiah, and Hen the son of Zephaniah. (15) Even those from afar shall come and build IN [as it should say, compare the Authorized Version] the temple of the LORD. Then you shall know that the LORD of hosts has sent Me to you. And this shall come to pass if you diligently obey the voice of the LORD your God.”‘”

Continue reading "Would you please explain the meaning of the coronation of the High Priest Joshua, as reported in Zechariah 6:9-15."

Did the Roman Catholic Church Canonize the New Testament?

When we read certain historical books, we may find something like the following narrative, as adopted from sources published on the Internet:

The process of canonization was complex and lengthy. In the first three centuries of the Christian Church, there was no New Testament canon that was universally recognized. Nevertheless, by the 2nd century there was a common collection of letters and gospels that a majority of church leaders considered authoritative. These contained the four gospels and many of the letters of Paul. Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, and Tertullian (all 2nd century), held these to be on par with the Hebrew Scriptures as being divinely inspired. Other books were held in high esteem, but were gradually relegated to the status of New Testament apocrypha.

Continue reading "Did the Roman Catholic Church Canonize the New Testament?"

Would you please explain the Vision of the Horses, as described in Zechariah 1:8-11

We explained in an earlier Q&A on Zechariah’s vision of the four chariots (in Zechariah 6:1-8), as well as in our free booklet, “Angels, Demons and the Spirit World,” that the horses mentioned in this first vision, as well as other visions in the book of Zechariah, describe angels or spirit beings. Angels can appear or manifest themselves in the form and shape of animals, including horses, as well as men. In Zechariah’s first vision, which begins in Zechariah 1:8, angels manifest themselves both as men and as horses. Notice the exact wording:

“(8) I saw by night, and behold, a MAN riding on a red HORSE, and it stood among the myrtle trees in the hollow, and behind him were HORSES: red, sorrel and white. (9) Then I said, ‘My lord, what are these?’ So the ANGEL who talked with me said to me, ‘I will show you what they are.’ (10) And the MAN who stood among the myrtle trees answered and said, ‘These are the ones whom the LORD has sent to walk to and fro throughout the earth.’ (11) So they answered the ANGEL of the LORD, who stood among the myrtle trees, and said, ‘We have walked to and fro throughout the earth, and behold, all the earth is resting quietly.”

Continue reading "Would you please explain the Vision of the Horses, as described in Zechariah 1:8-11"

Who preserved the New Testament?

As a first step in answering this question, we need to consider what the New Testament is. Why is there even such a collection of books and letters that report on events from the first century A.D.? Are these merely the random writings of an influential religious movement that have found their way into the literature of the present time?

Or, as the New Testament claims for itself, is this part of the inspired Word of God? Understanding who preserved the New Testament adds even more proof about the unquestionable authority of this part of the Bible that we now possess!

What is the New Testament? Consider the following summary statement given in the “Illustrated Dictionary of the Bible,” Herbert Lockyer, Sr., Editor, 1986:

“…the second major division of the Bible. It tells of the life and ministry of Jesus and the growth of the early church. The word testament is best translated as ‘covenant.’ The New Testament embodies the new covenant of which Jesus was Mediator (Jer. 31:31-34; Heb. 9:15)…

“The 27 books of the New Testament were formally adopted as the New Testament canon by the Synod of Carthage in A.D. 397, thus confirming three centuries of usage by the church.”

Continue reading "Who preserved the New Testament?"

Was Rahab really a harlot?

The famous woman Rahab who helped the spies at the time of Joshua, is clearly identified in the Bible as a harlot or a prostitute. This is the obvious conclusion, when we just accept the relevant Scriptures on their face value.

However, many commentaries feel uncomfortable with that assessment and have been trying to re-interpret and re-write Scripture to bring it more in line with their humanly-devised perceptions. The following serves as a very good example to caution everyone NEVER to accept the opinions of commentaries as inspired doctrine, UNLESS they are clearly supported by the biblical evidence. Commentaries reflect, as a whole, the opinions of man which may or may not be inspired by God. We must also remember that God has revealed His truth to “babes,” while HIDING it from most of the learned and sophisticated intellectuals of this world (compare Matthew 11:25).

Continue reading "Was Rahab really a harlot?"
©2025 Church of the Eternal God
Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.