PDA

View Full Version : How Much of the Bible Do You Own?



Jemand
May 6th 2012, 06:02 PM
When we compare the Bibles used by various Christian groups, we find the following writings that are not found in the Protestant Canon but which are found in the Bibles of other Christian groups:

Books and Additions to Esther and Daniel that are in the Roman Catholic, Greek, and Slavonic Bibles

Tobit
Judith
The Additions to the Book of Esther found in the Greek Version
The Wisdom of Solomon
Ecclesiasticus, or the Wisdom of Jesus, Son of Sirach
Baruch
The Letter of Jeremiah (Baruch ch. 6)
The Additions to the Greek Book of Daniel
The Prayer of Azariah and the Song of the Three Jews
Susanna
Bel and the Dragon
1 Maccabees
2 Maccabees

Books in the Greek and Slavonic Bibles; Not in the Roman Catholic Canon

1 Esdras (2 Esdras in the Slavonic Bible, 3 Esdras in Appendix to the Vulgate)
The Prayer of Manasseh
Psalm 151
3 Maccabees

A composite book in the Slavonic Bible and in the Latin Vulgate Appendix

2 Esdras (3 Esdras in the Slavonic Bible, 4 Esdras in the Vulgate Appendix; “Esdras” is the Greek form of “Era”)

(Note: In the Latin Vulgate, Ezra- Nehemiah are 1 and 2 Esdras.)

A book in an Appendix to the Greek Bible

4 Maccabees (This book is included in two important Bibles from the fourth and fifth century.)

In my personal library, I have well over 100 bibles, and only two of them, an edition of the English Standard Version and an edition of the New Revised Standard Version, include all of the books and additions to Esther and Daniel that I have listed above.

Slug1
May 6th 2012, 06:30 PM
Another thing also... Paul wrote a total of FOUR letters to the Corinthians. Two are lost as of right now and the other two, since they were not lost, made the cannon.

Why do MANY in the Body of Christ claim that the Bible is perfect?????????????

Watchman
May 6th 2012, 06:43 PM
Outstanding OP, Jemand. I suppose my question would be: how are we to know which writings are theopneustos? Hopefully, this discussion will have some participation, because I'm betting you have a wealth of information to contribute.

W :)

TrustGzus
May 6th 2012, 07:16 PM
A couple thoughts:

Define Bible.

Because a group includes a book in their collection does that automatically make it theopneustos?

Yes, there are letters of Paul we don't have. Such as extra writing(s) to the Corinthians. We don't have his letter to the Laodiceans. But is every writing of Paul theopneustos?

Also, it is not the same thing to say All Scripture is theopnuestos as to say All theopneustos writings are Scirpture.

Things to think about.

Slug1
May 6th 2012, 07:46 PM
A couple thoughts:

Define Bible.

Because a group includes a book in their collection does that automatically make it theopneustos?

Yes, there are letters of Paul we don't have. Such as extra writing(s) to the Corinthians. We don't have his letter to the Laodiceans. But is every writing of Paul theopneustos?

Also, it is not the same thing to say All Scripture is theopnuestos as to say All theopneustos writings are Scirpture.

Things to think about.I have thought about it... thus the reason I ask how people can say the Bible is "the perfect" when specific letters that were written by Apostles, are missing or other men determined not to include. Heck, half the NT was not fully agreed on and some books barely squeezed into the final cannan of "mans" choice. The Revelation almost didn't make it into the cannon.

Honestly, I feel the loss of scripture is to show us that the Bible is not... "the perfect".

Things to think about :P

-SEEKING-
May 6th 2012, 08:20 PM
Honestly, I feel the loss of scripture is to show us that the Bible is not... "the perfect".

Things to think about :P

WOW! That's heavy dude. Never thought of it that way.

Slug1
May 6th 2012, 08:41 PM
WOW! That's heavy dude. Never thought of it that way.My ESV Study Bible is heavy, my NKJV Bible isn't that heavy :P :lol:

Watchman
May 6th 2012, 10:07 PM
My ESV Study Bible is heavy, my NKJV Bible isn't that heavy :P :lol:

I used to own a 4 translation parallel Bible...weighty, that one!

HoboTone
May 6th 2012, 11:20 PM
Another thing also... Paul wrote a total of FOUR letters to the Corinthians. Two are lost as of right now and the other two, since they were not lost, made the cannon.

Why do MANY in the Body of Christ claim that the Bible is perfect?????????????
Does not having having all the manuscripts make the ones we do have imperfect? I don't disagree with you, just wondering if you could elaborate a bit.

jesse
May 7th 2012, 12:25 AM
Apocrypha - Spurious, Hidden, Esoteric. The word implies that the books are non inspired.

I wonder what it is that people hope to find in some other writings. A new means of salvation? Most of us don't even understand the scripture we do have.

I also wonder on what grounds some reject the book of Mormon? We are supposed to be knowledgeable enough to accept the bible and reject the book of Mormon or the Quaran but somehow apocryphal books have us stumped?

Quickened
May 7th 2012, 12:33 AM
Is this thread a spinoff from another thread?

Quickened
May 7th 2012, 12:35 AM
Another thing also... Paul wrote a total of FOUR letters to the Corinthians. Two are lost as of right now and the other two, since they were not lost, made the cannon.

Why do MANY in the Body of Christ claim that the Bible is perfect?????????????

Because God retained his word and preserved what he intended for man.

Quickened
May 7th 2012, 12:51 AM
Outstanding OP, Jemand. I suppose my question would be: how are we to know which writings are theopneustos? Hopefully, this discussion will have some participation, because I'm betting you have a wealth of information to contribute.

W :)


To answer your question any writing claimed to be from God would meet certain criteria.

In the early church when the bible was being assembled there were a number of writings floating around that were simply not inspired. Some of those are easy to pick out. Perhaps they are in opposition to God's scripture. For example if one of these books said something that we all knew to be directly in contrast with one of the commandments.

In regards to the Roman Catholic Apocrypha it wasn't seen as inspired even prior to Christ. The protestant OT is exactly the OT that the Jews had. Though some of the books were grouped together. Jeremiah and Lamentations for example. They never accepted books like Tobit as inspired. Some are seen as historical as in 1 Maccabees but the second book contained obvious errors.

I am actually in the middle of working on a book on the canon of the Christian church because this topic comes up often enough. It's just going to take some time.... going through the documents and all that.

Tobit is a good one to look at. It really feels like it was written by a Pharisee for teaching purposes. It comes across as meritorious and superstitious. The problem is that various Catholic bibles contain rather different versions. The verse numbering is off and sometimes entire portions of the text are changed or added/omitted. That's really what's been slowing me down because a newer St Joseph edition NAB will differ greatly from a Douay-Rhiems from decades ago. Finding out why the changes were made is even more difficult.

That said the protestant bible we have today contains the same Old Testament as the Jew's had in the time of Christ and going forward. While there have been some discussions as Christians poured over these documents (ie. Hebrews, Revelations) we can be assured that we have God's word as He intended us to have

Reynolds357
May 7th 2012, 02:29 AM
Another thing also... Paul wrote a total of FOUR letters to the Corinthians. Two are lost as of right now and the other two, since they were not lost, made the cannon.

Why do MANY in the Body of Christ claim that the Bible is perfect?????????????
Because they need it to be "perfect" to claim tongues ceased.

Watchman
May 7th 2012, 02:41 AM
Because they need it to be "perfect" to claim tongues ceased.
...and prophecy, and knowledge, and a partridge in a pear tree.

TrustGzus
May 7th 2012, 03:33 AM
I have thought about it... thus the reason I ask how people can say the Bible is "the perfect" when specific letters that were written by Apostles, are missing or other men determined not to include. Heck, half the NT was not fully agreed on and some books barely squeezed into the final cannan of "mans" choice. The Revelation almost didn't make it into the cannon.

Honestly, I feel the loss of scripture is to show us that the Bible is not... "the perfect".

Things to think about :P

I believe that the canon is potentially a fallible collection of infallible books. The canon may not be perfect. However, by implying that we don't have a perfect Bible by saying it doesn't include writings by the apostles is a critique against God, not man because those epistles aren't even preserved. It's not as if we have them and men fallibly left them out. Those weren't preserved. There is nowhere you can go to read them. So if we have an imperfect Bible for that reason, then was God impotent in preserving what should have been preserved?

I think the simplest solution is God in his omnipotence preserved everything that he wanted preserved. Man can fallibly include or not include books that are preserved.

HoboTone
May 7th 2012, 03:57 AM
I believe that the canon is potentially a fallible collection of infallible books. The canon may not be perfect. However, by implying that we don't have a perfect Bible by saying it doesn't include writings by the apostles is a critique against God, not man because those epistles aren't even preserved. It's not as if we have them and men fallibly left them out. Those weren't preserved. There is nowhere you can go to read them. So if we have an imperfect Bible for that reason, then was God impotent in preserving what should have been preserved?

I think the simplest solution is God in his omnipotence preserved everything that he wanted preserved. Man can fallibly include or not include books that are preserved.
This seems like wisdom to me.

PJW
May 7th 2012, 03:57 AM
Jesus said, "And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." Then He said, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin." (John 8:32, 34)
If the "deleted" books can free you from sin, then they are the truth, and they are to be used by Christians. However, the books in the King James version were enough to free me from committing sin, so I don't need other manuscripts.
Thanks be to God!

John 8:32
May 7th 2012, 12:40 PM
Another thing also... Paul wrote a total of FOUR letters to the Corinthians. Two are lost as of right now and the other two, since they were not lost, made the cannon.

Why do MANY in the Body of Christ claim that the Bible is perfect?????????????

The God we worship is quite able to preserve the scripture He wishes to preserve and has preserved all that is necessary. After all, Christ said...

Mat 28:18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

Having ALL POWER would include the ability to canonize the scripture He wishes for us to have.

Quickened
May 7th 2012, 01:29 PM
I have thought about it... thus the reason I ask how people can say the Bible is "the perfect" when specific letters that were written by Apostles, are missing or other men determined not to include. Heck, half the NT was not fully agreed on and some books barely squeezed into the final cannan of "mans" choice. The Revelation almost didn't make it into the cannon.

Was every word written by the Apostles the absolute word of God? Let me clarify the minute they get the spirit was there any point at which what they wrote wasn't inspired?
1 Corinthians 7:6 would display this. Paul here is giving his own personal opinion. He wishes for reasons he goes into that people could be like him so they could serve the Lord without distraction. That they could focus solely on the Lord. Paul then acknowledges that each one has his own gift. Some simply will not be able to exercise self control while some will.

7:6 isn't God's command to live a certain way but Pauls personal feelings. As the chapter wanes on we see how God would instruct man.

There is no doubt that what Paul has written was scripture because Peter even mentions it as such


2Pe 3:15 And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him,
2Pe 3:16 as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures.


This doesn't mean though that the bible is imperfect simply because a letter written to the corinthians is missing. Couldn't it have been written in the same spirit as that verse I quoted? Which leads me to the other part of your post


Honestly, I feel the loss of scripture is to show us that the Bible is not... "the perfect".

There is no loss of scripture. Around the time of Marcion he attempted to compile his own bible. This included Luke, Romans, The letters to the Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, Thessalonians and Philemon. The true church had to respond to this because truly there were things missing (ie the entire OT and other letters outside of Paul) that were actively being used by the church. Marcion was a heretic and through refuting him the physical church that God had at that time got together and discussed what really is considered canon.

As i have stated the church excepted the Jewish OT which is what we have today. While the New testament was always discussed by various individuals you can see that the canon we have for that was pretty much agreed upon by 130AD as seen by the writings of Irenaeus. Then again in 185 by Origen.

In fact when it comes to canon the Protestants and Romanists actually agree on the letters there in. So i would say that there has been no question historically of the books we have today. By that I mean yes there were other inclusions but they weren't universial. While some questioned the Apocalypse of Peter, The Shepard of Hermes, Etc they were essentially never included as canon as time moved on. Where there questions about Hebrews or revelations? Of course. That should by no reason cast any doubt though.

I mean look at Hebrews. It's written by an unknown author. One of the rules of NT literature was that it needed to be written by an apostle directly or by someone directly affiliated with an apostle. It was both unknown and rather difficult. In fact one could say that the most difficult books of scripture were the ones that were the most carefully, prayerfully considered and thought about concerning whether they were inspired or not.

Colight
May 7th 2012, 01:32 PM
Because they need it to be "perfect" to claim tongues ceased.
The Scripture states..
Tongues ceased thru their own use.
They are in no way was tied to the complete.


For they was a sign to the unbelieving jews and thru their use fulfilled their purpose as a sign.

Knowledge and prophecy was what was partial, we have complete knowledge and prophecy for the church contained in the bible we have today..
Many have attained spiritual maturity and total occupation with Christ thru our current scripture.
We have the COMPLETE doctrine for the church.
We are completely equipped for our Christian walk.

shepherdsword
May 8th 2012, 01:41 PM
Another thing also... Paul wrote a total of FOUR letters to the Corinthians. Two are lost as of right now and the other two, since they were not lost, made the cannon.

Why do MANY in the Body of Christ claim that the Bible is perfect?????????????


I believe the Bible is "perfect" (greek "telos" or complete) because God has preserved the inspired writings. However,this isn't the "perfect" that is referred to in 1Cor. The "perfect" or "completion" spoken of there is of course the the finalization of God's eternal plan when the Lord hands up the kingdom to the Father. Paul tells us what the "perfect" is:

1Co 15:24 Then cometh the end,(same word used for "perfect" in 1Cor 13;10 "TELOS ")when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.

Paul defines the "perfect" or "end"(same greek word) as the delivering up of the kingdom by Jesus to the Father.
It is undeniable and indisputable.

John 8:32
May 8th 2012, 01:51 PM
How much of the Bible do we need...

Joh 21:25 And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.

I have complete faith in God that He has given me all I need...

Php 4:19 But my God shall supply all your need according to his riches in glory by Christ Jesus.

ChristianCoffee
May 8th 2012, 03:42 PM
How much of the Bible do we need...

Joh 21:25 And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.

I have complete faith in God that He has given me all I need...

Php 4:19 But my God shall supply all your need according to his riches in glory by Christ Jesus.


And here is a post here I agree 100% with.