Lost Books of The Bible (salvation, churches, Revelation, Jerusalem)

[bigthirsty]

I know they aren't lost.. just not presented in the Protestant sense right?

I believe they are in the Catholic version of the Bible. Any reason why they are left out of one and not the other?

Does it have to do with the "divineness" of the article" in question or is it for some other reason?

[kaykay]

From a protestant point of view, as I understand it, the books in question are just not considered to be inspired in the same sense the other books in the Protestant canon are. I think this determination was made because of the content of them.

[Marodi]

lost books?

There were a ton of books that were chosen not to be put into the bible for continuity and factual conflicts. There's a gospel of doubting thomas, mary magdelne, among many other books.

[TexasNick]

Originally Posted by Marodi

lost books?

There were a ton of books that were chosen not to be put into the bible for continuity and factual conflicts. There's a gospel of doubting thomas, mary magdelne, among many other books.

It goes back to the Council of Nicia (sp?). The church was worried about all the forgeries and counterfeits that sprung up as a result of competing religions, etc. As you can imagine, over the years, "additional" books sprung out and now we have conspiracy theories. It's really simple. People who didn't know any better ended up devouring books like the Da Vinci Code which have already been hammered down by Christian and New Testament scholars.

[PhillyChief]

No, they convened the council mainly due to Marcion. He was the first to compile a bible and the church wasn't crazy about his views so they had to say which gospels to use and which not to. Their decisions were largely based on what would make it most marketable. They tacked on the old testament to give it some sort of legitimacy, so it didn't appear like a new cult but rather a very old religion.

Gnostics weren't going to be a good sell because they were all about having knowledge in order to get salvation and that's a hard sell. Marcion thought the god of the old testament had to be different from the god of the old testament. Ebonites thought you had to be fully Jewish, meaning circumcision, and that's probably the hardest of all sells.

[GreenTeaCRV]

Originally Posted by bigthirsty

I know they aren't lost.. just not presented in the Protestant sense right?

I believe they are in the Catholic version of the Bible. Any reason why they are left out of one and not the other?

Does it have to do with the "divineness" of the article" in question or is it for some other reason?

Yes, the Catholic Bible have 7 more book in the OT( Tobit, Judith, 1 & 2 Maccabees, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, and Baruch) and some additions to the books of Esther and Daniel... Greek Orthodox use the same books as the Catholics and add some more (1 & 2 Esdras, 3 & 4 Maccabees, Psalm 151)...

Protestant Reformer Martin Luther was the one to remove the others books and called them Apocrypha after seeing Jerusalem Jews didn't have them in their Scriptures eventhough the Greek Jews did (Septuagint)... Martin Luther even latter removed other books from his bible like the books of James, Revelation, and others...

Just as today, Christians of the past have always have their dissagreements which is canonical or not... One will say the Holy Spirit told them this and the other will say the Holy Spirit told them something different... Thats why we have a smorgesborge of Churches to pick from today...

Hope this helps & Keep Jesus first

[beef tornado]

As if anyone here needed another site to waste time on

Sacred Texts Timeline

[TexasNick]

The other thing is all those other books came at a much longer date.

[goldengrain]

The copies of the NT books are mostly written well after direct observers of Christ (if he existed) had died. The oldest book is written at least 40 (most scholors say 100) years after Christ's death. The Council of Nicea gave us this compilation, and sifted through many books to find a group that seems to agree with each other. There are supposed to be many texts in the Vatican library that would throw light on what is true, what is not, etc, but the Vatican does not allow browsing of their manuscripts, so we are stuck with what this group of power grabbers, so many years ago, thought suited their concepts.

There are thoughts that the early Christians believed in reincarnation. There is some comment in which Christ is asked if he is Elijah, knowing that this man had been dead for a long time. There is no record, upon hearing this question, that the crowd asked the questioner if he were nuts, meaning they all had some sort of belief that they shared about this kind of thing and the question did not strike them as unusual.

I don't LIKE the idea of reincarnation, but it makes more sense to me. We know how much our being is influenced by the nurturing of our parents and environment. We know our genes contribute much to who we think we are. Can we possibly get it all right, born in only one country to one set of values, etc, in one life? It makes little sense. It is more logical that if we hurt someone, we have a shot being on the other side, to understand how that feels. It makes sense that, life by life, as we learn more and more compassion and understanding and gain wisdom, that we become more and more refined, until we reach a point in which this life on earth can offer us no further experiences for our growth, and we just naturally no longer incarnate here. It is tedious, but fair and follows a sort of natural path towards something better.

[Bellinghamite]

Originally Posted by GreenTeaCRV

Yes, the Catholic Bible have 7 more book in the OT( Tobit, Judith, 1 & 2 Maccabees, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, and Baruch) and some additions to the books of Esther and Daniel... Greek Orthodox use the same books as the Catholics and add some more (1 & 2 Esdras, 3 & 4 Maccabees, Psalm 151)...

Protestant Reformer Martin Luther was the one to remove the others books and called them Apocrypha after seeing Jerusalem Jews didn't have them in their Scriptures eventhough the Greek Jews did (Septuagint)... Martin Luther even latter removed other books from his bible like the books of James, Revelation, and others...

Yes, and most of the time when St. Paul quoted from the OT in his various letters he quoted from the Septuagint. It seems to me Luther erred here.