The Missing Books of the Bible - Page 2

iKwak · 09-30-2003, 11:43 PM

Fascinating.

Wonder if those books do exist or ever be found.

DeaconJustin · 11-23-2003, 07:47 PM

If you want to get technical, nothing is missing from the New Testament. It was canonized by the bishops of the early Church, and presumably closed afterwords. A mention of other gospels or epistles doesn't mean that they are, or ever were, a part of the New Testament. I'm of the opinion that defining a canon of scripture was a bad thing.

Dave the Web · 11-24-2003, 09:40 AM

I agree that the missing books of early belief are simply that. I am sometimes surprised at the extent to which canonisation was so narrow.
I am also seeing strange " throughout this thread. Is that an issue that was supposed to have been resolved before now?

Marsh · 03-09-2004, 06:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeaconJustin

If you want to get technical, nothing is missing from the New Testament. It was canonized by the bishops of the early Church, and presumably closed afterwords. A mention of other gospels or epistles doesn't mean that they are, or ever were, a part of the New Testament. I'm of the opinion that defining a canon of scripture was a bad thing.

I agree. You know, the worst part about churches is the fact that they are run by people, and people have personal agendas, and truth doesn't always fit into those agendas. Think about it for a second: at some point, these bishops had the power to include or exclude things may in fact be as true as the Gospels. What if what is good for God wasn't good for the bishops?

Thank God for the Holy Spirit; no human's agenda will ever take him away from us!

By the way, do you think Malachi's prophecy that Elijah will come and restore all things before the end applies to the Bible?

I, Brian · 03-09-2004, 10:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marsh

I agree. You know, the worst part about churches is the fact that they are run by people, and people have personal agendas, and truth doesn't always fit into those agendas. Think about it for a second: at some point, these bishops had the power to include or exclude things may in fact be as true as the Gospels. What if what is good for God wasn't good for the bishops?

Absolutely - and although I haven't yet encountered a proper write up of the meeting, the (unverified) supposed excerpts I have come across are hardly pretty. There was some fierce arguing going on in there, not least between the Athanasian and Arian groups. Ultimately, there is always the very real danger that politics - not least that of Constantine - played a very real role to some degree in the decision making.

That being said, it has to be added that from the writings of the Early Church Fathers that are preserved, there tends to be a general agreement on the core books that were read extensively in the early church - the four Gospels, for example, especially from the middle of the second century (notably, though, after Marcion's Diatession made it's appearance). It's the Epistles that can be particularly problematic for choice of inclusion in the NT.

bananabrain · 03-09-2004, 03:29 PM

Quote:

By the way, do you think Malachi's prophecy that Elijah will come and restore all things before the end applies to the Bible?

halachic judaism is certainly working on that assumption - a lot of arguments that are currently in a state of deadlock on a number of issues are waiting for him to resolve them. come to think of it, that might just be why he hasn't shown up yet - he's seen his in-tray. deary me.

b'shalom

bananabrain

DeaconJustin · 03-09-2004, 03:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marsh

I agree. You know, the worst part about churches is the fact that they are run by people, and people have personal agendas, and truth doesn't always fit into those agendas. Think about it for a second: at some point, these bishops had the power to include or exclude things may in fact be as true as the Gospels. What if what is good for God wasn't good for the bishops?

Thank God for the Holy Spirit; no human's agenda will ever take him away from us!

By the way, do you think Malachi's prophecy that Elijah will come and restore all things before the end applies to the Bible?

Whether one can reliably say that no human agenda can take the Holy Spirit from the Church is touchy at best; I think, at the very least, people can ignore what they're being told in favour of their own agendas. It's funny, because lately, we seem to assume that everything we are doing is guided by the Holy Spirit and that we're doing the will of God. We never stop to wonder if maybe, just maybe we're following the advice of that other cosmic figure, whose lot in life is to deceive.

The Epistles are an interesting problem in terms of the Biblical canon. An Epistle is simply a letter of instruction written by a bishop to address a specific problem with the church in a specific place. Paul wrote them, James wrote them, Peter wrote them, Clement wrote them, John Paul II writes them, and so does Bartholomeos I. Epistles, ancient and modern, are issue-specific documents. They were included in the canon, at least from my point of view, as a guide for the successors of the apostles in dealing with certain issues; they weren't ever meant to be elevated to near the same status as the gospels.

I, Brian · 03-09-2004, 04:43 PM

Good point - and if I may qualify my earlier comment - it was which Epistles should be included in the canon that was particularly problematic. Some were included despite particular questions - not least of authenticity - and other popular texts, such as the Shepherd of Hermas and I Clement, were somewhat surprisingly omitted from the final canon (but are present in some older Codices).

Marsh · 03-11-2004, 04:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeaconJustin

Whether one can reliably say that no human agenda can take the Holy Spirit from the Church is touchy at best; I think, at the very least, people can ignore what they're being told in favour of their own agendas. It's funny, because lately, we seem to assume that everything we are doing is guided by the Holy Spirit and that we're doing the will of God. We never stop to wonder if maybe, just maybe we're following the advice of that other cosmic figure, whose lot in life is to deceive.

There is a church here in Singapore that was known as a place of healing in the 70s and 80s. Miracles of healing used to happen there, from what I can gather, on a regular basis (even to the point of several per service). At a certain point, they were warned by a prophet that pride was entering the church, and that if they did not take steps to change things, they would lose their gift of healing. They lost it.

I basically agree with you, Deacon: our Holy Spirit can come and go as he pleases, and I think it's clear that he leaves churches when he is ignored because of the kinds of agendas we've been talking about. Still, I don't think he can be taken from individuals because of the pride of the rest of the congregation, because I don't think he would leave one person because of another's sin.

17th Angel · 06-19-2008, 11:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Ecumenical

Missing books are a shame. Destroyed books are a tragedy. That is why we need to value what we have even more.

Old yes I know, but I wished to hit on this point..... (great quote by the way.)

Could you please (I am not going to paste it as I wish for you to look in your bible.) Book: ACTS: Chapter 19. Verses 19 to 20.... Can you please explain this to me? So that I am clear? As I feel I maybe taking it the wrong way....

Thank you.

juantoo3 · 06-20-2008, 05:00 AM

Old? That is an understatement! That quote is from 2003, April! It's growing hair!

I never "met" Mr. Ecumenical, that's how long ago. This is a full eight months before I signed on here! I don't think you're gonna get him to answer, Angel...

Might be my bad, we'll see:

Acts 19:19 Many of them also which used curious arts brought their books together, and burned them before all men: and they counted the price of them, and found it fifty thousand pieces of silver.

Acts 19:20 So mightily grew the word of God and prevailed.

In my humble opinion, I think it is explained pretty clearly in the preceeding few verses.

17th Angel · 06-20-2008, 08:04 AM

Reading those two verses it seems "burn anything that isn't teaching you of christianity." Which I see as wrong... And commented on the other christians comment about tragedy to destroy books...

Reading the entire chapter over again (twice) I still not sure I think I need help explaining it... They burned the books in fear that another would become possesed by a demon? (shruggs shoulders) although wrong to destroy books and I guess they should have taken refuge in that which they seemed to not know (Holy spirit) they instead burned the books? So the bible isn't saying burn all books that are not christian it is just giving an account of what happened to the people paul met? (help lol)

juantoo3 · 06-20-2008, 08:37 AM

Dude, leading up to this point some boys was fooling around playing with devils, and the devils jumped on 'em. Yeah, I'm makin a little light of the subject, but that is what the passage says. The devils acknowledged they recognized (and obeyed) Jesus, but did not recognize these kids. Long story short, the kids was playing with fire and they got their fingers burned good.

Those who knew them and witnessed the event brought their *witchcraft* books to be destroyed...to prevent a further occurrence.

Stay with the context and the subject matter. It's really not all that difficult. When you get to pick and pull out of context a person can make the Bible seem to state all kinds of silly things that are just not what the writers meant at all.

mee · 06-20-2008, 08:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex P

Reading those two verses it seems "burn anything that isn't teaching you of christianity." Which I see as wrong... And commented on the other christians comment about tragedy to destroy books...

Reading the entire chapter over again (twice) I still not sure I think I need help explaining it... They burned the books in fear that another would become possesed by a demon? (shruggs shoulders) although wrong to destroy books and I guess they should have taken refuge in that which they seemed to not know (Holy spirit) they instead burned the books? So the bible isn't saying burn all books that are not christian it is just giving an account of what happened to the people paul met? (help lol)

i think it was more like they were making it public that they were not needed anymore .
because they had become christians they now knew that the teachings in those books were wrong , it is a bit like casting of wrong teachings when we come to an accurate knowledge of the truth . ..... gone for good .....

The Scriptural advice is direct

Have nothing to do with spiritism.

What if we have been sharing in some practice of spiritism and now want to break free?

we can follow the example of early Christians in the city of Ephesus.
When they accepted "the word of Jehovah," the Bible says, "quite a number of those who practiced magical arts brought their books together and burned them up before everybody." Those books were costly.
They were worth 50,000 pieces of silver. (Acts 19:19, 20) Yet, Christians in Ephesus did not hesitate to destroy them.

juantoo3 · 06-20-2008, 09:44 AM

Cite your sources Mee. It's pretty obvious, you don't even bother to change the font.

I think we have to discern between spiritism and magical arts in this case. Even when I wrote the term "witchcraft" I was uncomfortable, I'm not quite sure that's the term I want to use. Whatever, the books that were destroyed dealt with arcane and occult subject matter, I would think at least in part specifically necromancy. Necromancy has been forbidden in Judaism going back thousands of years. The example that comes readily to mind is that of King Saul when he sought out the witch (of Endor?).