Replies

What about books not found in the Bible but are mentioned or quoted in the Bible? There is about twenty of them. What about writings that are known to exist (and considered Gospel, but not Canon by even the Catholic Church), but are not included in the Bible. There is a few hundred of them, maybe even thousands. We don't know for sure though because not everyone can just walk into the Vatican library vaults and see what they have.

What about the Bible compilation itself during the Council of Nicaea? Entire books were removed. Sometimes because they were redundant, but sometimes they disagreed with a majority of the religious leaders. Incomplete books were left in and finished (added to). Writings may have been edited into existing books. Books were removed and mention of those books were edited out. Some just never made it in for whatever reason possibly even something as simple as space constraints.

Some we know exist but were never found. If they are found do we consider them not Gospel? Not Scripture? Heretical because they weren't included in the Bible we know now?

The first epistle of Peter to the Corinthians? Not 1 Corinthians but the actual first epistle. If found what do we consider it?

Gospels of Peter, Thomas, Matthias the Acts of Andrew and Jon The Apocalypse of Peter? Just to name a few that are known were in the Bible but removed during the Council of Nicaea. For one reason or another for the sake of majority consent when trying to unify a religion under Constantine who was not even Christian until his death bed.

Many works of Peter weren't included in the New Testament yet Peter is the Rock upon which "I will build my Church". Kind of an important person for his books to be left out except for two general epistles. If you look at who is included more you would think that Paul is the Rock and not Peter.

Were Peter's works lost, or was he considered heretical? If they were lost the Church at the time must not have considered them that important. If they were considered heretical then either the Rock fell or the Church was corrupted by Man. Were they not included because of space or were they not included because the majority at Nicaea said no?

So at some point in time even the great house of the Catholic religion who was instrumental in compiling the Bible we know today that Christian religions use in some translation was "added to, taken away from," and went "outside of scripture."

The passage particularly in Revelations 22:18-19 is probably the most oft misinterpreted as a warning against other books being considered scripture. Revelations was actually penned chronologically before 1 Peter, 2 Peter, Jude, 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, and Titus.

So did adding those books make them "of Lucifer"? If they are "of Lucifer" then why are they in the Bible and considered the infallible Word of God?

Reading those verses as you do actually nullifies much of the Bible itself.