Posted on 02/19/2010 7:42:49 AM PST by restornu
The so-called lost books of the Bible are those documents that are mentioned in the Bible in such a way that it is evident they were considered authentic and valuable, but that are not found in the Bible today. Sometimes called missing scripture, they consist of at least the following:
Book of the Wars of the Lord Numbers 21:14
Book of Jasher Joshua 10:13; 2 Samuel 1:18
Book of the acts of Solomon 1 Kings 11:41
Book of Samuel the seer 1 Chronicles 29:29
Book of Gad the seer 1 Chronicles 29:29
Book of Nathan the prophet 1 Chronicles 29:29; 2 Chronicles 9:29
Prophecy of Ahijah 2 Chronicles 9:29
Visions of Iddo the Seer 2 Chronicles 9:29; 12:15; 13:22
Book of Shemaiah 2 Chronicles 12:15
Book of Jehu 2 Chronicles 20:34
Sayings of the Seers 2 Chronicles 33:19
An epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, earlier than our present 1 Corinthians 1 Corinthians 5:9
An earlier epistle to the Ephesians Ephesians 3:3
Epistle to the Laodiceans Colosians 4:16
Prophecies of Enoch, known to Jude Jude 1:14
Book of the covenant Exodus 24:7 (may or may not be included in the current book of Exodus)
The Manner of the Kingdom, written by Samuel 1 Samuel 10:25
Acts of Uzziah, written by Isaiah 2 Chronicles 26:22
The "Acts of Abijah...in the Story of the Prophet Iddo" 2 Chronicles 13:22 (seems to not be the same as the Prophecy of Ahijah or the Visions of Iddo)
The foregoing items attest to the fact that our present Bible does not contain all of the word of the Lord that He gave to His people in former times, and remind us that the Bible, in its present form, is rather incomplete. Matthew's reference to a prophecy that Jesus would be a Nazarene (2:23) is interesting when it is considered that our present Old Testament seems to have no such statement. There is a possibility, however, that Matthew alluded to Isaiah 11:1, which prophesies of the Messiah as a Branch from the root of Jesse, the father of David. The Hebrew word for branch in this case is netzer, the source word of Nazarene and Nazareth. Additional references to the Branch as the Savior and Messiah are found in Jeremiah 23:5; 33:15; Zechariah 3:8; 6:12; these use a synonymous Hebrew word for branch, tzemakh.
Luke noted (Luke 1:1) that "many" had written about "those things which are most surely believed among us," yet our Bible has only two earlier Gospels, those of Matthew and Mark (John having been written after Luke). The Bible doesn't contain the earlier books to which Luke had reference. The books of 1-2 Kings frequently speak of the "rest of the acts" of the kings contained in the Chronicles of the Kings of Judah and the Chronicles of the Kings of Israel. Some readers undoubtedly believe that these refer to the books known as 1 and 2 Chronicles in our present Bibles. But an examination of the latter shows that they generally do not reveal any of the additional information about these kings that we expect to find there. Moreover, there is good evidence that the biblical books of Chronicles are really later reworkings of 2 Samuel and 1-2 Kings, with deletion of much more material than they add. Consequently, they cannot be the chronicles referred to in the earlier books.
Another reference to a writing not found in the Bible is in 2 Chronicles 35:25, where we read that Jeremiah's lamentation for the slain king Josiah is "written in the lamentations." Many Bible readers have assumed that Josiah is the "anointed of the Lord...taken in their pits," mentioned in Lamentations 4:20. There are two problems with this identification, however: 1) The book of Lamentations was written after the destruction of Jerusalem in 586 BC, two decades after the death of Josiah, and 2) The "anointed of the Lord" taken in the pit clearly refers to the last king of Judah, Zedekiah, who, at the time the Babylonians took Jerusalem, was caught "in their pit" and taken captive to Babylon (Ezekiel 19:8-9). In connection with the Nazarene prophecy, we might add that the scriptural quotes by Jesus found in Luke 11:49 and John 7:38 are not found in today's Old Testament. Similar unsupported quotes are found in Ephesians 5:14 and James 4:5f, as well as in Acts 20:35, where Paul attributes to Jesus a saying found nowhere else in the Bible, including the Gospels.
Just like those missing books from the Bible. Amazing!
Chick has some very rude and nasty things to say about Mormonism. Trust me, restornu, you do not want to go there.
That is not what that passage is saying. Gundry was pointing out that since PEOPLE were involved as well as God, the whole extant documents are still inspired.
AFA citing ehrman as a favorable source, you may well pay heed to Gundry's summary
Earlier, I mentioned Ehrman's purpose "in part" to introduce lay readers to New Testament textual criticism. He makes quite clear his further and ultimate purpose to dysangelize them— in other words, to proclaim New Testament textual criticism as bad news to all who believe the Bible to be God's word.
And that includes mormons.
Interpret...
Really Resty? What do you expect it to reveal that you don't already need to know?
Precisely! I’ve been studying and discussing THAT one for over two decades.
From the Random House Dictionary:
Antagonism: 1. Active hostility or opposition. 2. an opposing force or tendency.
Related verb:
Antagonize: to provoke or incur the hostility of.
I don't know how you can look at the original article and not call it antagonistic. It seems to be a clear shot across the bow of those who hold to inerrancy and sufficiency of the Bible.
You do know that "ecumenical" means something that promotes Christian unity? How can a controversial article be posted as an "ecumenical" thread when the vast majority of Christians would be offended by the implications of it?
I don’t know how you can look at the original article and not call it antagonistic. It seems to be a clear shot across the bow of those who hold to inerrancy and sufficiency of the Bible.
****
If one is sincere one will recognized there are many verses in the Bible that disagree with this Idealist who thinks the Bible is inerrant and sufficient.
This is really not meant to be contentious or a shot across the bow.
There are others who also love the Bible besides the Idealist and are frustrated when reading and comes across references to another book or verse it is not to be found.
Ecumenical means all who love their Bible have a right to defend or address some discrepancy in a cordial matter!
The Word of the God is inerrant!
That is not the same about the manuscripts especially when we don’t even have the originals to compare to the 3 or 4 generation copies of collections of manuscripts that the Bible is composed.
Some like to justify saying God is in Control yet we do not have the original works during the time the Lord gave revelations to His prophets!
When I have quoted scripture to show how the Lord warn His children than some like to tie that warning to another saturation, but if the world can do evil in that situation does it not stand to reason the world can do evil when and where it would like too when the children deny it is impossible to follow the Lord Commandments?
Those who deny the covenants of the Lord have no promise here or in Heaven they have no authority to bind here on earth on in Heaven!
What we have today in the Bible is exactly what our Heavenly Father wanted in there. Nothing more and nothing less. It is he that preserves his word forever, not man.
What we have today in the Bible is exactly what our Heavenly Father wanted in there. Nothing more and nothing less. It is he that preserves his word forever, not man.
***
And who inform you?
I don’t share Gundry’s opinion on the first or the second point. NT textual criticism doesn’t harm the NT, but rather strengthens it. What it does weaken are the false traditions that have arisen around the Bible. Gundry and others tend to conflate the two. Now doubt that is part of Ehrman’s problem. It is not a problem for Mormons. Mormons know alot more about how scriptures are made than traditional christianity. :-)
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
There, I fixed it for you. I don' see how you can say Gundry is counter textural criticism - if anything he is counter the presentation of textural criticism a la ehrman. ehrman's sole purpose is to deconstruct the bible. He misrepresents the traditions surrounding the bible.
Who informs me? Well...how about belief in an all powerful, all knowing God who is able to preserve his word just like he said he would.
Isaiah 40:8 (King James Version)
The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever.
Matthew 24:35 (King James Version)
Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.