Are scriptures missing from the Bible?

by tika 23 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Sarah Smiles

  YOU can trust the Bible as a reliable source on how to guide your life,also Moses had scribes. Some people are not aware of the schools of thoughts when they handed down the oral commandments.

  Read the other books for yourself and you will see that they do not compare as trust worthy as the Bible. However, you will read a quote from the Book of Thomas and wonder how did he have this quote from Jesus. Well anyhow, even Jehovah says when reading about the works of the Kings is it not written in the other books? Then you can read in the 2 Kings and realize not all the accounts of the kings are in there, and etc,. However, for us today does it matter? NO because 1 and 2 kings expresses what we need to know! So read the other books as well as the false books. They are fun but I do not take them serious as holy scriptures and although John quotes from the book of Enoch and we can find the book I do not take the book of Enoch as God word and written with Holy Spirit! Recently, someone posted something about Romans 8 those other books just do not hold the love that the bible explains. They lack!

  Also, historical writers are making money on these others books but if they go against the bible then it is not by HOLY SPIRT or God WORD when in fact it wrong. Sure they could have some saying of Jesus. Historical theology just wonder why some of the saying in such books are there prior to the writings of the N.T. Take the entire book and not just the a saying that is in these other books and judge for your self. In my view point they are not worth it but just fables with some truths and that is the makings of good fiction writers. They had a lot of time on their hands but I am sure a good fiction writer could have done a better job the some of these other books.

  The Mormon book is fiction and does not belong with ANY books of the Bible, and anyone who thinks so suffers from some sort of delusion.
• 

  drew sagan

  There are many books that never made it into an official list of Biblicial canon.
  
  early Christian Writings
• 

  Aleman

  There is an interesting book I know they excluded from the Holy Bible of today that even the apostols once read. It is the book of Enoc. The proof; in the book of Jude verse 14 has a passage where he states what Enoc wrote on his book that seems to be missing in the Bible of today. My question is, why take this very important and valuable book from the Bible of today?

  -Aleman
• 

  SacrificialLoon

  The omitted books are collectively called the apocrypha.
• 

  jwfacts

  The way people conceive "The Bible" creates confusion. God did not write "the Bible" and hand mankind it as a collection of 66 books. John did not write Revelation and then close the Bible Canon. Rather, countless letters and books were written over many centuries. It was not until Constantine 300 years after Jesus that exactly which of these writings were selected to appear together collectively as the Bible we now have. Even then it was not agreed upon, and to this day different religious groups accept different books as being inspired and being worhty of inclusion in the Bible. Protestants, Catholics and Orthodox religions each have a different collection of books in what they count as "the Bible".

  http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/NTcanon.html contains an enlightening discussion on how the history of how the books comprising the Bible canon were chosen.
• 

  Chalam

  In a word "no".
  
  If you want an informed view as to that answer then listen here
  
  http://tapecenter.scottsdalebible.com/sermons/090405SysTheo.MP3
  
  http://tapecenter.scottsdalebible.com/sermons/091105SysTheo.MP3
  
  http://www.theopedia.com/Wayne_Grudem
  
  Regards,
  Stephen
• 

  BurnTheShips

  There are many books that never made it into an official list of Biblicial canon.
  
  early Christian Writings

  One of my favorite sites! Good one Drew. Oh and Sarah, I enjoyed your post! Don't be a stranger! Burn
• 

  SusanHere

  How about these ones:

  BIBLE DICTIONARY
  Lost Books The so-called lost books of the Bible are those documents that are mentioned in the Bible in such a way that it is evident they are considered authentic and valuable, but that are not found in the Bible today. Sometimes called missing scripture, they consist of at least the following: book of the Wars of the Lord (Num. 21: 14); book of Jasher (Josh. 10: 13; 2 Sam. 1: 18); book of the acts of Solomon (1 Kgs. 11: 41); book of Samuel the seer (1 Chr. 29: 29); book of Gad the seer (1 Chr. 29: 29); book of Nathan the prophet (1 Chr. 29: 29; 2 Chr. 9: 29); prophecy of Ahijah (2 Chr. 9: 29); visions of Iddo the seer (2 Chr. 9: 29; 2 Chr. 12: 15; 2 Chr. 13: 22); book of Shemaiah (2 Chr. 12: 15); book of Jehu (2 Chr. 20: 34); sayings of the seers (2 Chr. 33: 19); an epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, earlier than our present 1 Corinthians (1 Cor. 5: 9); possibly an earlier epistle to the Ephesians (Eph. 3: 3); an epistle to the Church at Laodicea (Col. 4: 16); and some prophecies of Enoch, known to Jude (Jude 1: 14). To these rather clear references to inspired writings other than our current Bible may be added another list that has allusions to writings that may or may not be contained within our present text, but may perhaps be known by a different title; for example, the book of the covenant (Ex. 24: 7), which may or may not be included in the current book of Exodus; the manner of the kingdom, written by Samuel (1 Sam. 10: 25); the rest of the acts of Uzziah written by Isaiah (2 Chr. 26: 22). The foregoing items attest to the fact that our present Bible does not contain all of the word of the Lord that he gave to his people in former times, and remind us that the Bible, in its present form, is rather incomplete. Matthew’s reference to a prophecy that Jesus would be a Nazarene (Matt. 2: 23) is interesting when it is considered that our present O.T. seems to have no statement as such. There is a possibility, however, that Matthew alluded to Isaiah 11: 1, which prophesies of the Messiah as a Branch from the root of Jesse, the father of David. The Hebrew word for branch in this case is netzer, the source word of Nazarene and Nazareth. Additional references to the Branch as the Savior and Messiah are found in Jer. 23: 5; Jer. 33: 15; Zech. 3: 8; Zech. 6: 12; these use a synonymous Hebrew word for branch, tzemakh. Rather cool, I thought. SusanHere
• 

  jwfacts

  Chalam, this really does not address the fact that there is no agreement on what the Bible Canon really should be, or that it took 300 years to come to any sort of consensus of which should and should not be included. The argumentation is very much like a Watchtower article, present the positive information and skim over the inconvenient truths.

  Susan, very interesting information.
• 

  Chalam

  Hi jwfacts,
  Just wondering if you listened to both of the audio files which relate directly to this subject?
  
  If so, what questions do you still have?
  
  Regards,
  Stephen