The bibles missing books

by jacethespace 28 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  PSacramento

  There are many different "canons" out there, most of us are familar with the Catholica dn protestant one, but there are others, some older, that have more books.

  In the OT and NT there are "aprocrypha", ancient writings that are NOt part of the standard but are still quote in some passages of the "approved" OT and NT.

  Typically some of the books are left out because the authorship is called into question, others because of the date, others because they are controversial and may go against the mainstream thought at the time of "canonization".

  Most of these books are available to all so one is certianly able to judge for oneself their validity or lack there of.

  Remember, Revelation was NOT part of the common canon for sometime.
• 

  Spike Tassel

  Revelation's "late-date" canonicity is no problem for me. It caps everything off rather well, in my honest opinion.
• 

  PSacramento

  Spike,

  Have you ever read 1Enoch ?
• 

  Spike Tassel

  PSacramento, not as per se, though Reniaa posted a link to it, which I did glance at
• 

  Tuesday

  I would be surprised if you could find anywhere that the bible says read some such book. it might in passing mentions items from a couple non-bible secular books of the time but that doesn't make them part of the bible. You need to provide proof of your statements.

  You have to be kidding on this one, right. I mean there's even a Wikipedia article regarding it.

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-canonical_books_referenced_in_the_Bible

  It's like if I make a parody or a comment about a movie, you have to see the movie to get it completely. Same thing here, if the bible is referencing another book that is not included inside it then wouldn't it make sense you should read that book as well to get what the bible is referencing?
• 

  reniaa

  By the time Jesus came the hebrew scrolls considered inspired are as we have today, Jesus did make a point of mentioning Daniel prophecies so giving that book particular attention so surely if any were missing or at that time needing to be lifted to canoncitity you think he would have done it as with Daniel?

  And on the greek scripture the time period to be part of the canon was very small and those within it are quite set. Revelation was only doubted because of content, with it's talk on resurrection and armageddon very much at odds with you die and goto heaven or hell doctrine of the later trinitarians.

  Finally you talk of the appocrypha but have any of you read them?

  Try enoch and it's obsession with Angels sex lifes and maybe you will see how far removed they are from the actual books we do use in the bible.

  While some non-inspired imperfect books might have info worth refering too by inspired authors this does not make them canon and never did.

  Reniaa
• 

  Finally-Free

  Try enoch and it's obsession with Angels sex lifes

  Yes, and the rest of the bible is obsessed with human sex and violence. I can't see that one is any better than the other.

  W
• 

  PSacramento

  Enoch is as obsessed with that stuff as all the other writers were, in terms f violence, it takes a back seat to Revelation.

  Matter of fact, Enoch and Revelation share much in common.

  Also, we need to remember that Enoch was probably originally written during or right after the time of Babylonian captivity, it makes use of the Angelic names, much like Daniel, something the Hebrew picked up from the Babylonians, tell them angels had no names.

  Funny thing, Daniel eludes to multiple archangels, he mentions Michael as ONE of the chief Princes, Enouch names the rest.
• 

  sir82

  No matter how you slice it, persons who lived centuries after the apostles were the ones who picked, out of many dozens of options, the 27 books in the "official" NT canon.

  Persons who lived even a decade after the last of the apostles died were, according to the Watchtower, "apostate". The people who picked the 27 picks and rejected all the others also believed in a trinity, in a literal hellfire, and in an immortal soul.

  And if one tries to argue, "well, God saw to it that even though they were 'apostate' they happened to get it right".....well, if God was that involved, why couldn't he keep his personal name from being erased the 237 times the NWT has it in the New Testament?
• 

  PSacramento

  Well, there is also the case that, IF there is one church that has an "unbroken" line to the apostles, its the RCC or perhaps/aslo the Orthodox church.

  Everyone else is an "off shot" of them.

  So, in theory, all of us are apostates.