nice song from Maria Shandi and Jonathan(indonesian Idol)

Hey 14-9-2015, actually the post was directed to Pharmacist on the New Jerusalem, so I won't waste your time on New Jerusalem.

I am familiar with what "mainstream" teaches and that is the problem ... I can't reconciled it with the verses in Matthew 25. Definitely, they have to take the premise that those cast into outer darkness are non-believers .... otherwise the other alternative was they will lose their salvation. In which, we cannot accept that based on the Lord's word.

The problem with the interpretation that I find is ...

1) why would unbelievers wait for the Bridegroom?

2) Both the wise and the foolish have lamps ... what is the significance of it? The only one I can associated with was Proverbs [referring to our spirit]. Also Luke 12:35; Matt. 5:15-16; which definitely refers to believers

3) How about buying? Paying a price? How will you interpreted this? The church in Laodicea in Revelation speaks of paying the price ... definitely believers.

4) Also, the Lord charge to watch ... why will unbelievers need to watch??

There are many more ... if we take this interpretation. That is only the parable of the virgin. The next parable is on faithfulness in service. We now require the believers to be faithful in serving the Lord???

You have to really help with me with this if I can accept that? There is something inadequate with the "mainstream" teaching. It produces a false sense of security.

I know that the Scofield Study Bible do agrees with this. Maybe you can answer my questions before I can answer yours ... because of the premise.

This post has been edited by pehkay: Oct 4 2014, 11:11 AM

I understand what is Mainstream View of Christianity as well.

What if they're not unbelievers but the Israelite (& "Christians" Opponents of God's Grace) who rejected Jesus?
Israelite are referred to In another translation as Sons of the Kingdom.

God gave them chances after chances but if they reject him all the way, there is no more Salvation for them which also coincides with the meaning in Hebrews 10:26.

This post has been edited by unknown warrior: Oct 4 2014, 11:18 AM

Btw, my name is Steve Ngai

Thanks a lot for sharing your conviction

I never tried any of those. Just wish to know more only since I am studying on alternative medicine now. Okay, keep take note of it.

This post has been edited by ngaisteve1: Oct 4 2014, 12:02 PM

Hehe ..... now you see how hard a stance on God's salvation (Always saved, saved eternally) ... we will like to open a "small door" a little bit to Arminianism. Then, we will put God's will, God's covenant, God's predestination etc into question... that it is not effective after all. If that is the case, Paul will not call the Corinthians, saints! [The OSAS mobs will go against you XD]

“Predestinating us unto sonship...according to... His will” (Eph. 1:5).

“Who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works but according to His own purpose” (2 Tim. 1:9).

"This is the will of Him who sent Me, that of all which He has given Me I should lose nothing” (John 6:39).

“The unchangeableness of His counsel” (Heb. 6:17).

Hebrews 10 also, which you quoted:

15 And the Holy Spirit also testifies to us, for after having said,

16 "This is the covenant which I will covenant with them after those days, says the Lord: I will impart My laws upon their hearts, and upon their mind I will inscribe them,''

17 He then says, "And their sins and their lawlessnesses I shall by no means remember anymore.''


I think the key word in Hebrew is maturity
Hebrews 6:1

1 Therefore leaving the word of the beginning of Christ, let us be brought on to maturity, not laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith in God,

Paul is always charging the Hebrew believers to enter to Holy of Holies (where God is) to experience Him that they mature.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

This post has been edited by pehkay: Oct 4 2014, 12:01 PM

Actually I'm quite convinced that the Bible speaks very much on Eternal Salvation as secured for the Believers.

As you have said above, God is the one who secure our Salvation as in 2 Tim. 1:9, (John 6:39, Heb. 6:17 & Hebrews 10 ver 17.

So with regards to Jesus mentioning about weeping and gnashing of teeth, He's referring to those who reject God's Grace (who else but the Jews & gang) and insist on going back to obedience to the Law which is explained in Hebrews 10. These will be thrown out because they reject his grace. They are the initial sons or subjects of the Kingdom. God gave them the first priority for Salvation but was rejected time and time again.

I don't think there's in any sense punishment for believers anymore. I strongly believe 3rd judgement mentioned in your post is referring to Israel.
It would be unrighteous for God to punish Jesus and punish us again.



This post has been edited by unknown warrior: Oct 4 2014, 12:59 PM

So, your "thrown out" = lose salvation?

Everyone in this world walk according to the law. In experience, many times believers rather walk according to the law then the person of Christ. I mean even I have made a lot of "self-made" laws .... so am I saved?

A good example are the Galatians ...

1 O foolish Galatians, who has bewitched you, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was openly portrayed crucified?

2 This only I wish to learn from you, Did you receive the Spirit out of the works of law or out of the hearing of faith?

3 Are you so foolish? Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected [so that is a walk required] by the flesh?

I think Paul was quite clear even though the Galatians were "deceived" back to the law .... they are saved. Otherwise, the phrase "receive the Spirit" or "begun by the Spirit" .... will be ... very fickle indeed?

Well ... I guess everyone is trying to hold on to "I don't think there's in any sense punishment for believers anymore" ... then what is Paul talking about then if it is not losing the salvation?

If Paul mentioned that we need to be brought to maturity ... then what about those who are not matured? Then how?

This post has been edited by pehkay: Oct 4 2014, 12:57 PM

The Galatians did not reject Jesus, they accepted him no? Otherwise Paul would have not referred them as a Church (ver 1) but as you said, they were deceived back to the Law and Paul exhorted them.

The Jews totally rejected Jesus even after receiving the knowledge of the truth. That's the difference.
I mean they have seen his miracle with their eyes. Who else but God who is able to heal, cleanse, raise and restore those afflicted.
They saw him the flesh, proclaiming God's word and yet rejected him vehemently. The only way of atonement for sin which is by grace and through Faith.

Punishment for maturity? I mean if fear and punishment are to be our teacher for maturity I would think it's would make a very poor teacher because The one who fears is not made perfect in love? (1 John 4:18). IMO it causes insincerity. That's why we have many unrepentant Christians, so to speak.

Granted God does correction but I think he does it with gentleness and love, no? It's a kind of stirring of the Heart. Unless I got your meaning wrong.

This post has been edited by unknown warrior: Oct 4 2014, 02:43 PM

Sorry for the late reply ... some errands.

Ah yes, if it the Jews .... but the Jews aren't the recipient of the parable in Matthew 25. It was only spoken privately to the disciples. Definitely the Jews won't wait for the Bridegroom or serve God as stewards as depicted in Matthew 25. The parable starts with the "kingdom of the heaven will be liken ...."

Regarding "fear and punishment" I think that kind of reaction is too negative. Firstly, then we should be positive to enjoy Christ to be a full grown man for God's expression. Paul is always charging us positively, forgetting the things behind; run telling us positively - forget the things behind ... run to claim the reward ... finish the race.

If we are Christians .... just because of the judgement seat .... what a pitiful Christian we will be. Yet we sometimes need this. Sometimes I am discouraged, the realization of a coming judgement is very sobering.

Yet, there is the matter of the gospel of the kingdom in contrast with the gospel of grace. The truth is always balanced. The highest enjoyment of grace is to meet the highest requirement of the kingdom. Matthew and John are sisters books. The kingdom and grace goes together. God's grace requires His strict dealing and vice versa.

It is a matter of God's righteousness (Psa 89:14). Peter was even stronger in his epistle. But while His governmental hand is there, His grace is there simultaneously.

Because of our natural concepts, we are prone to consider that the first item of the New Testament gospel is the forgiveness of sins and the second item is eternal life. Negatively our sins have been forgiven and positively we have eternal life. But in fact the first word of the New Testament gospel was to repent for the sake of the kingdom of the heavens (Matt. 3:2; 4:17). We need forgiveness of sins so that we can have eternal life, and we need eternal life so that we can be under the heavenly rule. The kingdom is the requirement of the gospel, and the life is the supply of the gospel. What the gospel requires, it also supplies. The gospel requires us to be governed and ruled by the heavens. The gospel also supplies us with the divine life for us to fulfill the requirements of the kingdom.

If we are going to meet the requirements of such a high standard, we must have a life that is on an equally high plane. Otherwise, we cannot meet such a high standard. Only the divine life can meet such a high standard. Only the divine life can meet the requirements of the heavenly government. The kingdom is the requirement of the New Testament gospel, and the eternal life, which is Christ Himself, is the supply. The divine life can fulfill the requirements of the kingdom. Once we see the matter of the kingdom, we can see how high a standard is required by the gospel. After we are saved, we have a heavenly requirement within us demanding us to live on a high level. This level can be reached only by the supply of the divine life.

We have to look beyond the dealings to God's goal to produce mature sons of God. This is why Paul's ministry was to present every man mature, full grown in Christ for the one new man (Col. 1:28-29; 3:10-11). It is either we lose the soul life this age or the next age (Matthew 16:25).

We are all going to arrive sooner or later. Why not sooner?

It is NOT a matter of sins. It is that our soul is not filled with Christ. This is to neglect His salvation. So, if we escape being matured in this age of grace. He will make sure we will all mature in the next. It is really mercy (like a 2nd chance) ... and God will definitely gain what He wants.

If you don't like the word punishment, you can decide ... perfecting, maturing, dealing .... however we put it .... we can never deny the reality of the kingdom, the kingdom in its reality, is an exercise and discipline for us in the church today (Matt. 5:3, 10, 20; 7:21). However, His grace is there. Marvelous!

Hope it helps ...

God know when to deal with you

Hebrews 12:7

7 It is for discipline that you endure; God deals with you as with sons. For what son is there whom the father does not discipline?

Hebrews 12:8

8 But if you are without discipline, of which all sons have become partakers, then you are illegitimate and not sons.

Hebrews 12:11

11 Now no discipline at the present time seems to be a matter of joy, but of grief; but afterward it yields the peaceable fruit of righteousness to those who have been exercised by it.

This post has been edited by pehkay: Oct 4 2014, 05:26 PM

So your teaching does not produce a false sense of security? Because as far as I understand, your belief system is a pseudo works system. And we know that we are saved by faith and not works. The bible is pretty clear on that. You are trying to introduce more confusion obviously.
1 Corinthians 14
33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

And what is this with false sense of security. God wants us to be secured in our faith. Hebrews 10:22-23. Why are you preaching otherwise?

As for waiting for the Bridegroom. Jesus did not identify those people who did not fill the oil lamps as believers because Jesus states that the Bridegroom did not know them. Remember, Jesus also says that He knows his sheep. Non Believers are not his sheeps and so Jesus do not know them.

The passage on the wise and foolish is most likely to refer to people who did not stay the course. They could have some knowledge of Christianity and could even be believers at one point of time but then they decided to not stay on the path. By the time Christ comes, it would be too late. Jesus was telling us that we should always stay on the course.

And Matthew 5:15:16 is obviously taken out of context. It just states that the truth should not be hidden but be shown openly. Nothing to do at all with what you are teaching at all.

Laodicea is talking about church discipline. Yes God will discipline those he loves in this life. Again, what does it has got to do with what you are teaching?

Obviously talking to believers. And your point?

God wants us to be secured in him. So if you are not secured in Him, you have to start questioning yourself.

This post has been edited by sylar111: Oct 4 2014, 06:51 PM

No scripture to proof your so called discipline in the next life.

The discipline you are talking about will happen in this life. Not the next.

Again you are indirectly preaching a works based salvation and not a faith based.
' Only the divine life can meet such a high standard'

Paul and Jesus has said time and time again that we are justified by faith and not works. Faith produces works. Obviously you have no understanding of this.

You are looking at the issue of perfection from man's perspective and not God. What makes you think that God cannot perfect us?
1 Corinthians 15
50 I tell you this, brothers: flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. 51 Behold! I tell you a mystery. We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, 52 in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed. 53 For this perishable body must put on the imperishable, and this mortal body must put on immortality. 54 When the perishable puts on the imperishable, and the mortal puts on immortality, then shall come to pass the saying that is written:

“Death is swallowed up in victory.”
55 “O death, where is your victory?
O death, where is your sting?”
56 The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law. 57 But thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.

58 Therefore, my beloved brothers, be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, knowing that in the Lord your labor is not in vain.

See. It's plain obvious that when we go into heaven, sin will be defeated and we will be in perfectness.

Why do you not trust God to bring us into perfection? Is it because you have no faith or you do not believe?

This post has been edited by sylar111: Oct 4 2014, 06:53 PM

Hi pehkay

I would like to know, what is considered as fully matured in your opinion?
How is maturity measured for a Christian and what is the benchmark?
What do you consider as an immature Christian? Do you consider yourself as matured and will not require training after this life?
What sort of training does an immature Christian needs to go through and how long does this training take?

Sorry for asking so many questions.

Do remember that this is not about initial salvation. And no, I am not matured XD ... the process will take our whole life. Salvation in our spirit is instantaneous (regeneration) but transformation (Rom 12:1; 2 Cor. 3:18) and maturity in our soul (mind, emotion, will) will require our whole life. The Lord will measured to us a course like Paul says (so there is no comparison between believers). Paul was able to say he finished it and a crown awaits him. But, he only mentioned this at the end of his life in his Epistle to Timothy.

The topic is soo big ... maybe I can just share a little and what questions you may have, you can ask as we go. I will start with vision or seeing what growth of life is:

GROWING WITH THE GROWTH OF GOD

First Corinthians 3:6-7 says, “I planted, Apollos watered, but God made to grow; so that neither is the one who plants anything nor the one who waters, but the One who makes to grow, God.” Verse 9 says, “For we are God’s fellow workers; you are God’s farm, God’s building.” Growth in these verses is not the growth in knowledge because here Paul speaks of a farm. Planting and watering are not related to knowledge. To plant is not to instruct but to nourish by supplying the plant with fertile soil. Likewise, to water is not to teach but to supply the plant with nutrients in the water. This is related to life.

Colossians 2:19 says, “Holding the Head, out from whom all the Body, by means of the joints and bands being supplied and knit together, grows with the growth of God.” These verses show us that to grow is to grow with something. If a young boy does not eat or drink, he will have nothing with which to grow. One cannot grow with nothing. Rather, without something with which to grow, one will die. Dietitians tell us that we are what we eat. If we eat beef, we will be constituted with the meat of the cow. If we eat fish, we will be constituted with fish.

To grow in the divine life is to have the increase of God in us.

1) The increase of the element of God means that more of God Himself has been mingled with us and received by us to become our element. Therefore, the real growth of life is the increase of God’s life within us. Life is God Himself (John 1:4; 10:10; 11:25; 14:6). When life grows in us, God is increased in us. Life grows and increases to an extent that we may be filled unto all the fullness of God. This is the final word of Ephesians 3:19.

2) Colossians 3:4 says that Christ is our life. Thus, growth of life is the increase of Christ within us. The more we love Christ and pursue Christ (Gal. 4:19), the more the measure of the stature of Christ will increase within us (Eph 4:13). This is the real growth of life.

3) Life is God, life is Christ, and life is also the Holy Spirit (Rom 8:2). Therefore, to grow in life is to allow the Holy Spirit to gain more ground in us (Eph. 3:17)

The above three points—the increase of the element of God, the increase of the measure of the stature of Christ, and the expansion of the ground of the Holy Spirit—are on God’s side. On our side, the growth of life is the decrease of our human element, that is, the decrease of the flavor of man and the increase of the flavor of God.

2 Cor. 4:7-18 - Living a Crucified Life for the Manifestation of the Resurrection Life by the Power of the Treasure in the Earthen Vessels

The growth of life is also the breaking of the natural life (Gal 2:20). In regard to the flesh, the focus of breaking is on its corruption and its opposition to God. In regard to the self, the focus of breaking is on our thoughts and views. In regard to the natural life, the focus of breaking is on our skills, ability, and capability. Concerning these things, the more they are broken, the more the life within will grow. Thus, the growth of life, on the negative side, refers to the decrease of the human element and also to the breaking of our natural life.

The breaking of the natural life and the decrease of the human element are related to the growth of life (John 3:30). In contrast, does the improvement of behavior cause the human element to decrease? Improvement in behavior means that our behavior, which originally was not good, has improved and that we can even be more successful and considerate in dealing with people and matters. However, such improvement does not cause our human element to decrease ; instead, it causes our human element to increase. It not only increases, but it is even strengthened.

The more a person’s behavior improves, the more the self is strengthened (Matt. 16:24). Similarly, expressions of piety cause the human element only to increase. The mere expression of piety will cause one to be strengthened rather than diminished. Hence, this is not the growth of life. Zeal in service, in the same way, causes an increase only in the human element. This is true concerning the increase of knowledge, the abounding in gifts, and the increase of power. All of these things only increase the human element and cannot cause one to have the growth of life.

The growth of life depends on the increase of God and Christ within us—all other aspects should decrease. If we desire to grow in life, our gifts must be stripped by God, and our shell of godliness and piety must be knocked down and broken by God. Our knowledgeable mind, our gifts, and our power must be shattered by God so that the Holy Spirit will have a way to be released. The growth of life depends upon the increase of God, Christ, and the Holy Spirit within us. Everything else must decrease.

The Subduing of Every Part of the Soul

Furthermore, the growth of life subdues every part of our soul. The more our soul is subdued, the more life grows, and the more our soul decreases, the more life increases. This is a certain fact. When we meet a saint, there is no need to measure what has been increased in him; rather, we should observe what has been decreased in him and whether he has been poured out and broken. If there is a decrease of himself, then God, Christ, and the Holy Spirit have surely gained ground in him and have increased in him. Only this is the real growth of life.

The real growth of life is not the improvement of behavior, the expression of piety, zealousness in service, an increase of knowledge, an abounding in gifts, or an increase of power. Rather, the real growth of life is the increase of the element of God, the increase of the measure of the stature of Christ, the expansion of the ground of the Holy Spirit, the decrease of the human element, the breaking of the natural life, and the subduing of every part of the soul. On the positive side, growth in life is the increase of the Triune God within us, the increase of the measure of the stature of Christ, and the expanding of the ground of the Holy Spirit. On the negative side, it is the breaking, consuming, and reducing of our outer man, that is, the decrease of our human element, the breaking of our natural life, and the subduing of every part of our soul.

---------------------------------------

Are we there? Do we love God with our entire being? Do we still the world within us? Is Matthew 5-7 characterize our church life? Are we fleshly? Can we build with others? We still commit sins. We are always for the self. These are the negatives only.

Are you fully sanctified (Hebrews 2:11)? renewed (2 Corinthians 4:16)? transformed (1 Cor 12:1)? conformed (2 Cor 3:18)? glorified (Rom. 8:29)?

How about those I listed https://forum.lowyat.net/topic/3197598/+1880# You know the answer lar. XD XD

May the Lord graced you to grow!!

This post has been edited by pehkay: Oct 5 2014, 01:58 PM

Wow! Thank you for the swift and lengthy reply. But i still don't understand after reading over a few times.
Some of the words make me more confused.
Maybe i will just summon ThePope

Heehe .... we can start with life .... the divine life.

Well, are you are familiar with John 11:25? Jesus said to her, I am the resurrection and the life. The Lord is the embodiment of LIFE.


John 10:10 The thief does not come except to steal and kill and destroy; I have come that they may have life and may have it abundantly.

Here the Greek Word, zoe. This word is used in the New Testament for the eternal, divine life or God's life.

John 10:11 I am the good Shepherd; the good Shepherd lays down His life for the sheep.

Gk. psuche, soul; i.e., soul-life, and so in the succeeding verses. As a man, the Lord has the psuche life, the human life, and as God, He has the zoe life, the divine life. He laid down His soul, His psuche life, His human life, to accomplish redemption for His sheep (vv. 15, 17-18) that they may share His zoe life, His divine life (v. 10b), the eternal life (v. 28), by which they can be formed into one flock under Himself as the one Shepherd.

This post has been edited by pehkay: Oct 5 2014, 04:09 PM

Hi Ms. ThePharmacist,

I am neither pope, pehkay but i would like to share something. hopefully it would be helpful.

Have you prayed like this: "Lord Jesus, help me to understand PehKay writings. I don't understand his writings. But I know YOU love me. I know YOU want me to be a mature Christian."

If you already did and still blur..blur... then maybe @ThePope can help further. perhaps he is tired leading worship today

What do you think Bro?

Though Jesus spoke the Parables to the disciples but the Bible mention quite clear it's not for them.

Matthew 13:10-13
10 The disciples came to him and asked, “Why do you speak to the people in parables?”

11 He replied, “Because the knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them. 12Whoever has will be given more, and they will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what they have will be taken from them. 13 This is why I speak to them in parables:

“Though seeing, they do not see;
though hearing, they do not hear or understand.

If you look at verse 11, it says there, the secrets of the kingdom is given to you BUT NOT TO THEM. That means Jesus reveals the meaning to the disciples but not to the rest which would include the Pharisees, High Priests, etc.

If you see Matthew 25, Jesus spoke in Parables and in Matthew 26 ver 3,

It' says there

3 THEN the chief priests and the elders of the people assembled in the palace of the high priest, whose name was Caiaphas, 4 and they schemed to arrest Jesus secretly and kill him.

The Word THEN there means prior to this, they were there hearing what Jesus spoke in Parables to the disciples in Matthew 25. It wouldn't make sense to say then they assembled........if they were not in another place. And why would they scheme to kill if they had not been stirred to anger by the Parables? Matthew 24 did indicate that Jesus spoke on the Mount of Olive. That level of plain would hardly contain Jesus voice. I believe it was intended for the Jews.

What do you think?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why I find this important is because When Jesus makes reference to Weeping and Gnashing, I don't think He's referring to born again believers.

From what is gathered in the Bible. Most of the time the Parables are spoken in the presence of the Jews. They are the first fruit that He meant to saved but was rejected again and again. I believe those who reject Him are the ones who will be thrown out where there is weeping and gnashing.

And Matthew 13:10-13 explains why.

It addresses the Jews (High Priests, Teachers of the Law, Pharisees, Sanhedrin) who don't have a heart for God and don't value God's word.
They value the things of the world more than God. Not only them, to those likewise.




This post has been edited by unknown warrior: Oct 5 2014, 08:30 PM

Please don't call me the pope la. It's not in the Bible.

For me Maturity is simple.

Jesus makes everything simple, didn't he?
He crushed all the 613 Jewish Laws into 2 Laws.

If you want to talk about Practicality, I define it like this:

Maturity is reached when

1. You love your neighbours and enemies.
2. You know you're Righteous by Faith.

You don't need so many rules law or regulations for Christian living.

Just keep this perspective and you'll do fine. Practise this 2 first and it will automatically branch out to the rest.


1 John 4:12
No one has ever seen God; but if we love one another, God lives in us and his love is made complete in us.


P.S: It may seem and sound simple but trust me, doing those 2 is divinely deep spiritually.

This post has been edited by unknown warrior: Oct 6 2014, 10:45 AM

Matthew 22:37
If we follow what you say, then how are we going to love God with all our heart, our mind and our soul.

You can write whatever essay you want to write. You can confused others, but you will never confuse me.

You see Pehkey. You do not answer me anymore. Because you know I have all of the answers to deal with your different teachings. You know that you could be wrong but then you are already at a stage whereby you just cannot admit that you are wrong anymore because if you do, you lose everything which you have been holding on so far.

400 B.C.

The Old Testament began to be translated into Aramaic. This translation is called the Aramaic Targums. This translation helped the Jewish people, who began to speak Aramaic from the time of their captivity in Babylon, to understand the Old Testament in the language that they commonly spoke. In the first century Palestine of Jesus' day, Aramaic was still the commonly spoken language. For example maranatha: "Our Lord has come," 1 Corinthians 16:22 is an example of an Aramaic word that is used in the New Testament.
250 B.C. The Old Testament was translated into Greek. This translation is known as the Septuagint. It is sometimes designated "LXX" (which is Roman numeral for "70") because it was believed that 70 to 72 translators worked to translate the Hebrew Old Testament in Greek. The Septuagint was often used by New Testament writers when they quoted from the Old Testament. The LXX was translation of the Old Testament that was used by the early Church.

1. The following is a list of the oldest Greek LXX translations of the Old Testament that are still in existence.
Chester Beatty Papyri: Contains nine Old Testament Books in the Greek Septuagint and dates between 100-400 A.D.
Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus each contain almost the entire Old Testament of the Greek Septuagint and they both date around 350 A.D.
The New Testament

Autographs
45- 95 A.D. The New Testament was written in Greek. The Pauline Epistles, the Gospel of Mark, the Gospel of Luke, and the book of Acts are all dated from 45-63 A.D. The Gospel of John and the Revelation may have been written as late as 95 A.D.

Manuscripts
There are over 5,600 early Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament that are still in existence. The oldest manuscripts were written on papyrus and the later manuscripts were written on leather called parchment.

125 A.D. The New Testament manuscript which dates most closely to the original autograph was copied around 125 A.D, within 35 years of the original. It is designated "p 52" and contains a small portion of John 18. (The "p" stands for papyrus.)
200 A.D. Bodmer p 66 a papyrus manuscript which contains a large part of the Gospel of John.
200 A.D. Chester Beatty Biblical papyrus p 46 contains the Pauline Epistles and Hebrews.
225 A.D. Bodmer Papyrus p 75 contains the Gospels of Luke and John.
250-300 A.D. Chester Beatty Biblical papyrus p 45 contains portions of the four Gospels and Acts.
350 A.D. Codex Sinaiticus contains the entire New Testament and almost the entire Old Testament in Greek. It was discovered by a German scholar Tisendorf in 1856 at an Orthodox monastery at Mt. Sinai.
350 A.D. Codex Vaticanus: {B} is an almost complete New Testament. It was cataloged as being in the Vatican Library since 1475.
Translations
Early translations of the New Testament can give important insight into the underlying Greek manuscripts from which they were translated.

180 A.D. Early translations of the New Testament from Greek into Latin, Syriac, and Coptic versions began about 180 A.D.
195 A.D. The name of the first translation of the Old and New Testaments into Latin was termed Old Latin, both Testaments having been translated from the Greek. Parts of the Old Latin were found in quotes by the church father Tertullian, who lived around 160-220 A.D. in north Africa and wrote treatises on theology.
300 A.D. The Old Syriac was a translation of the New Testament from the Greek into Syriac.
300 A.D. The Coptic Versions: Coptic was spoken in four dialects in Egypt. The Bible was translated into each of these four dialects.
380 A.D. The Latin Vulgate was translated by St. Jerome. He translated into Latin the Old Testament from the Hebrew and the New Testament from Greek. The Latin Vulgate became the Bible of the Western Church until the Protestant Reformation in the 1500's. It continues to be the authoritative translation of the Roman Catholic Church to this day. The Protestant Reformation saw an increase in translations of the Bible into the common languages of the people.
Other early translations of the Bible were in Armenian, Georgian, and Ethiopic, Slavic, and Gothic.
1380 A.D. The first English translation of the Bible was by John Wycliffe. He translated the Bible into English from the Latin Vulgate. This was a translation from a translation and not a translation from the original Hebrew and Greek. Wycliffe was forced to translate from the Latin Vulgate because he did not know Hebrew or Greek.
The Advent of Printing
Printing greatly aided the transmission of the biblical texts.

1456 A.D. Gutenberg produced the first printed Bible in Latin. Printing revolutionized the way books were made. From now on books could be published in great numbers and at a lower cost.
1514 A.D. The Greek New Testament was printed for the first time by Erasmus. He based his Greek New Testament from only five Greek manuscripts, the oldest of which dated only as far back as the twelfth century. With minor revisions, Erasmus' Greek New Testament came to be known as the Textus Receptus or the "received texts."
1522 A. D. Polyglot Bible was published. The Old Testament was in Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, and Latin and the New Testament in Latin and Greek. Erasmus used the Polyglot to revise later editions of his New Testament. Tyndale made use of the Polyglot in his translation on the Old Testament into English which he did not complete because he was martyred in 1534.
1611 A.D. The King James Version into English from the original Hebrew and Greek. The King James translators of the New Testament used the Textus Receptus as the basis for their translations.
1968 A.D. The United Bible Societies 4th Edition of the Greek New Testament. This Greek New Testament made use of the oldest Greek manuscripts which date from 175 A.D. This was the Greek New Testament text from which the NASV and the NIV were translated.
1971 A.D. The New American Standard Version (NASV) was published. It makes use of the wealth of much older Hebrew and Greek manuscripts now available that weren't available at the time of the translation of the KJV. Its wording and sentence structure closely follow the Greek in more of a word for word style.
1983 A.D. The New International Version (NIV) was published. It also made use of the oldest manuscript evidence. It is more of a "thought-for-thought" translation and reads more easily than the NASV.
As an example of the contrast between word-for-word and thought-for-thought translations, notice below the translation of the Greek word "hagios-holy"
NASV Hebrews 9:25. "...the high priest enters the holy place year by year with blood not his own."
NIV Hebrews 9:25. "...the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood that is not his own."
The NIV supplies "understood" information about the Day of Atonement, namely that the high priest's duties took place in the compartment of the temple known specifically as the Most Holy Place. Note that the NASV simply says "holy place" reflecting the more literal translation of "hagios."
The Integrity of the Manuscript Evidence
As with any ancient book transmitted through a number of handwritten manuscripts, the question naturally arises as to how confident can we be that we have anything resembling the autograph. Let us now look at what evidences we have for the integrity of the New Testament manuscripts. Let us look at the number of manuscripts and how close they date to the autographs of the Bible as compared with other ancient writings of similar age.

Tacitus, the Roman historian, wrote his Annals of Imperial Rome in about A.D. 116. Only one manuscript of his work remains. It was copied about 850 A.D.
Josephus, a Jewish historian, wrote The Jewish War shortly after 70 A.D. There are nine manuscripts in Greek which date from 1000-1200 A.D. and one Latin translation from around 400 A.D.
Homer's Iliad was written around 800 B.C. It was as important to ancient Greeks as the Bible was to the Hebrews. There are over 650 manuscripts remaining but they date from 200 to 300 A.D. which is over a thousand years after the Iliad was written.
The Old Testament autographs were written 1450 - 400 B. C.
The Dead Sea Scrolls date between 200 B.C. to 70 A. D and date within 300 years from when the last book of the Old Testament was written.
Two almost complete Greek LXX translations of the Old Testament date about 350 A. D.
The oldest complete Hebrew Old Testament dates about 950 A. D.
Genesis-Deuteronomy were written over 1200 years before the Dead Sea Scrolls.
Codex Vaticanus is an almost complete Greek translation of the Old Testament dating around 350 A.D. The Aleppo Codex is the oldest complete Old Testament manuscript in Hebrew and was copied around 950 A.D. The Dead Sea Scrolls date from within 200-300 years from the last book of the Old Testament. However since the five books of Moses were written about 1450- 1400 B.C. the Dead Sea Scrolls still come almost 1200 years after the first books of the Old Testament were written.

The New Testament autographs were written between 45-95 A. D.
There are 5,664 Greek manuscripts some dating as early as 125 A. D. and an complete New Testament that dates from 350 A. D.
8,000 to 10,000 Latin Vulgate manuscripts.
8,000 manuscripts in Ethiopic, Coptic, Slavic, Syriac, and Armenian.
In addition, the complete New Testament could be reproduced from the quotes that were made from it by the early church fathers in their letters and sermons.
Authorship and dating of the New Testament books
Skeptics and liberal Christian scholars both seek to date the New Testament books as late first century or early second century writings. They contend that these books were not written by eyewitnesses but rather by second or third hand sources. This allowed for the development of what they view as myths concerning Jesus. For example, they would deny that Jesus actually foretold the destruction of Jerusalem. Rather they would contend that later Christian writers "put these words into his mouth."

Many of the New Testament books claim to be written by eyewitnesses.
The Gospel of John claims to be written by the disciple of the Lord. Recent archeological research has confirmed both the existence of the Pool of Bethesda and that it had five porticoes as described in John 5:2. This correct reference to an incidental detail lends credibility to the claim that the Gospel of John was written by John who as an eyewitness knew Jerusalem before it was destroyed in 70 A. D.
Paul signed his epistles with his own hand. He was writing to churches who knew him. These churches were able to authenticate that these epistles had come from his hands (Galatians 6:11). Clement an associate of Paul's wrote to the Corinthian Church in 97 A. D. urging them to heed the epistle that Paul had sent them.
The following facts strongly suggest that both the Gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts were written prior to 65 A.D. This lends credibility to the author's (Luke) claim to be an eyewitness to Paul's missionary journeys. This would date Mark prior to 65 A.D. and the Pauline epistles between 49-63 A.D.
Acts records the beginning history of the church with persecutions and martyrdoms being mentioned repeatedly. Three men; Peter, Paul, and James the brother of Jesus all play leading roles throughout the book. They were all martyred by 67 A.D., but their martyrdoms are not recorded in Acts.
The church in Jerusalem played a central role in the Book of Acts, but the destruction of the city in 70 A.D. was not mentioned. The Jewish historian Josephus cited the siege and destruction of Jerusalem as befalling the Jews because of their unjust killing of James the brother of Jesus.
The Book of Acts ends with Paul in Rome under house arrest in 62 A.D. In 64 A.D., Nero blamed and persecuted the Christians for the fire that burned down the city of Rome. Paul himself was martyred by 65 A.D. in Rome. Again, neither the terrible persecution of the Christians in Rome nor Paul's martyrdom are mentioned.

Conclusion: These books, Luke-Acts, were written while Luke was an eyewitness to many of the events, and had opportunity to research portions that he was not an eyewitness to.
The church fathers bear witness to even earlier New Testament manuscripts
The earliest manuscripts we have of major portions of the New Testament are p 45, p 46, p66, and p 75, and they date from 175-250 A. D. The early church fathers (97-180 A.D.) bear witness to even earlier New Testament manuscripts by quoting from all but one of the New Testament books. They are also in the position to authenticate those books, written by the apostles or their close associates, from later books such as the gospel of Thomas that claimed to have been written by the apostles, but were not.

Clement (30-100 A.D.) wrote an epistle to the Corinthian Church around 97 A.D. He reminded them to heed the epistle that Paul had written to them years before. Recall that Clement had labored with Paul (Philippians 4:3). He quoted from the following New Testament books: Luke, Acts, Romans, 1 Corinthians, Ephesians, Titus, 1 and 2 Peter, Hebrews, and James.
The apostolic fathers Ignatius (30-107 A.D.), Polycarp (65-155 A.D.), and Papias (70-155 A.D.) cite verses from every New Testament book except 2 and 3 John. They thereby authenticated nearly the entire New Testament. Both Ignatius and Polycarp were disciples of the apostle John.
Justin Martyr, (110-165 A.D.), cited verses from the following 13 books of the New Testament: Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Acts, Romans, 1 Corinthians, Galatians, 2 Thessalonians, Hebrews, 1 and 2 Peter, and Revelation.
Irenaeus, (120-202 A.D.), wrote a five volume work Against Heresies in which,
He quoted from every book of the New Testament but 3 John.
He quoted from the New Testament books over 1,200 times.