1. Joined
    02 Aug '06
    Moves
    12622
    07 Jun '07 05:001 edit
    CARM's Website Papers on Alleged Missing Books from the Bible:


    http://www.carm.org/lostbooks.htm

    What do YOU hope to find in the "missing books of the Bible?"
  2. Standard memberNemesio
    Ursulakantor
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Joined
    05 Mar '02
    Moves
    32455
    07 Jun '07 05:16
    Originally posted by jaywill
    CARM's Website Papers on Alleged[b] Missing Books from the Bible:


    http://www.carm.org/lostbooks.htm

    What do YOU hope to find in the "missing books of the Bible?"[/b]
    The so-called deutero-canonical books were accepted by the early Christians and used by the Church
    for 1600 years, and judging by the quotations from Scripture attributed to Jesus, probably the text
    used by Jesus and the Apostles themselves. Why they were excised is a theological absurdity. They
    aren't missing, false Christians just fail to acknowledge them.

    Nemesio
  3. Donationrwingett
    Ming the Merciless
    Royal Oak, MI
    Joined
    09 Sep '01
    Moves
    26187
    07 Jun '07 05:21
    Originally posted by jaywill
    CARM's Website Papers on Alleged[b] Missing Books from the Bible:


    http://www.carm.org/lostbooks.htm

    What do YOU hope to find in the "missing books of the Bible?"[/b]
    Interesting stuff. I've got a book (also by Bart Ehrman) called: Lost Scriptures - Books that did not make it into the bible that deals with the topic. Ehrman lists quite a few more than CARM's website, though. Like the Apocalypse of Peter, for example.
  4. Joined
    31 May '07
    Moves
    696
    07 Jun '07 06:44
    Recent find at Nag Hammadi uncovered loads of non-canonical scripture. And it's all gnostic.
  5. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    07 Jun '07 07:041 edit
    Originally posted by Nemesio
    The so-called deutero-canonical books were accepted by the early Christians and used by the Church for 1600 years, http://www.carm.org/lostbooks.htm
    Why do you stop at 1600 years? My bible at school had the deutero-canonical books in it.
    I find that many Christians do not know the history of the Bible and believe it to be all one book or at least somehow specifically singled out as the 'scriptures' and every word being the dictated word of God.
    I guess the possibility of other books raises the ugly possibility that the ones that are included might be the wrong ones.

    I found it interesting how many people got very upset by the book and movie "The Da Vinci Code" because it suggested that there were books that conflicted with the current Bible. If they felts secure about the Bible they would have simply dismissed it as a work of fiction.
  6. Standard membergenius
    Wayward Soul
    Your Blackened Sky
    Joined
    12 Mar '02
    Moves
    15128
    07 Jun '07 09:08
    Originally posted by jaywill
    CARM's Website Papers on Alleged[b] Missing Books from the Bible:


    http://www.carm.org/lostbooks.htm

    What do YOU hope to find in the "missing books of the Bible?"[/b]
    the thing is that the Bible is just a small portion of Israels once rather extensive library. Some of these books may be false, i don't know, but not all of them are. For instance, the book of Enoch is quoted in Jude, and the RCs have the maccabees in their Bible (and i believe is seen as being historically correct by the Cs).
  7. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    07 Jun '07 09:54
    Originally posted by genius
    the thing is that the Bible is just a small portion of Israels once rather extensive library. Some of these books may be false, i don't know, but not all of them are. For instance, the book of Enoch is quoted in Jude, and the RCs have the maccabees in their Bible (and i believe is seen as being historically correct by the Cs).
    What do you mean by a book being false? Do you mean a book that has been fabricated at a later date? A book with 'false' content? A book which God didn't want in the Bible?
    And when you say 'historically correct' do you mean word for word or generally? I don't think that the Roman Catholics consider all the books of the standard bible to be entirely historically correct.
  8. Standard membergenius
    Wayward Soul
    Your Blackened Sky
    Joined
    12 Mar '02
    Moves
    15128
    07 Jun '07 10:101 edit
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    What do you mean by a book being false? Do you mean a book that has been fabricated at a later date? A book with 'false' content? A book which God didn't want in the Bible?
    And when you say 'historically correct' do you mean word for word or generally? I don't think that the Roman Catholics consider all the books of the standard bible to be entirely historically correct.
    false as in a fake book. not the musical type though-any of the things you mentioned. it was just a sweeping statement...

    and i have no idea what i meant by historically correct as i don't know much about it-i think i read somewhere that said it was considered so by the catholic church, but as for "word for word" or generally i have no idea. try wiki?

    EDIT: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1_Maccabees says that "Because of the accuracy of the historical account...", so wiki says its accurate too...😛
  9. Joined
    03 Sep '06
    Moves
    9895
    07 Jun '07 12:12
    Originally posted by jaywill
    CARM's Website Papers on Alleged[b] Missing Books from the Bible:


    http://www.carm.org/lostbooks.htm

    What do YOU hope to find in the "missing books of the Bible?"[/b]
    What do YOU hope to find in the "missing books of the Bible?"

    You will find something like this:


    The Wisdom of Solomon

    10 1 WISDOM IT WAS who kept guard over the first father of the human race, when he alone had yet been made; she saved him after his fall, 2 3 and gave him the strength to master all things. It was because a wicked man forsook her in his anger that he murdered his brother in a fit of rage

    4 and so destroyed himself.


    It simply says that our father "Adam" was saved from the first day he falls by the wisdom given to him.
  10. England
    Joined
    15 Nov '03
    Moves
    33497
    07 Jun '07 12:26
    Originally posted by jaywill
    CARM's Website Papers on Alleged[b] Missing Books from the Bible:


    http://www.carm.org/lostbooks.htm

    What do YOU hope to find in the "missing books of the Bible?"[/b]
    There are books not included, as a very early pope decided what was to be included. Apocrypha has several, the jewish community have others.
    One in my mind gives Ezra a higher prominance than in the old testerment, given by god some challenges. p.s. hallo again
  11. Standard memberblakbuzzrd
    Buzzardus Maximus
    Joined
    03 Oct '05
    Moves
    23729
    07 Jun '07 14:531 edit
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    What do you mean by a book being false? Do you mean a book that has been fabricated at a later date? A book with 'false' content? A book which God didn't want in the Bible?
    And when you say 'historically correct' do you mean word for word or generally? I don't think that the Roman Catholics consider all the books of the standard bible to be entirely historically correct.
    I'd hazard a guess he means that they are pseudepigrapha -- books ascribed to someone who is not actually the author.
  12. Joined
    05 Jan '04
    Moves
    45179
    07 Jun '07 15:23
    On a related topic, archaeologists have also recently discovered a first page to the Bible. It reads:

    Dedicated to Katherine, my love.

    The events and characters depicted in this work are fictitious and any resemblance to persons living or dead is purely coincidental.
  13. Standard memberblakbuzzrd
    Buzzardus Maximus
    Joined
    03 Oct '05
    Moves
    23729
    07 Jun '07 18:47
    Originally posted by darvlay
    On a related topic, archaeologists have also recently discovered a first page to the Bible. It reads:

    Dedicated to Katherine, my love.

    The events and characters depicted in this work are fictitious and any resemblance to persons living or dead is purely coincidental.
    Are you actually reading what you write?

    The source you cite actually has been proven to be a later, less reliable copy of the inscription.

    The shortest and roughest (and therefore probably the earliest and most accurate) version of this inscription used the diminutive nickname "Katey," rather than the more formal "Katherine."

    Moreover, the so-called "disclaimer" as you reference it hinges upon the term "fictitious," which scholars now agree was a scribal emendation of "factious," which means given to bickering, bitching, and all-around infighting. Here's a link to an online dictionary (my favorite kind): http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/factious

    The rest of the line ("Any resemblance" & etc.) is clearly a later insertion -- true, it is visible as marginalia in middle-8th-century copies, but the margins in earlier copies were completely filled with juvenile caricatures of naked women.

    The author was originally probably explaining how much arguing and in-fighting the text would describe, and how much it would in turn cause.

    Sheesh. You try to infer your own authority, and pawn yourself off as an expert, but it's all too easy for me to call you out.

    Also: booya.
  14. Standard memberfrogstomp
    Bruno's Ghost
    In a hot place
    Joined
    11 Sep '04
    Moves
    7707
    10 Jun '07 23:32
    Originally posted by stoker
    There are books not included, as a very early pope decided what was to be included. Apocrypha has several, the jewish community have others.
    One in my mind gives Ezra a higher prominance than in the old testerment, given by god some challenges. p.s. hallo again
    Do you mean Pope Constintine?
  15. Standard memberfrogstomp
    Bruno's Ghost
    In a hot place
    Joined
    11 Sep '04
    Moves
    7707
    10 Jun '07 23:37
    Originally posted by doodinthemood
    Recent find at Nag Hammadi uncovered loads of non-canonical scripture. And it's all gnostic.
    Gnostic was only a name the early RCC gave to christian writing that it didn't want to think about.
Back to Top