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.
Now there was a group that selected a group of writing that there thought should be included in the scriptures. Were there others writing that they could have added ? I think so. Are there prophets writing today ? I think so.
Is there more expination.
Thank you can give me the reference.
http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Holman-Christian-Standard-Bible-HCSB/
Is this the Christian Bible ?
I had the other thread pulled, since I am not anti catholic.
Here is a new thread just for you, Resty, that is OPEN for debate.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2455799/posts?page=1
***
That is a falsehood you are telling reaganaut the thread was pulled because
This thread has been pulled. Pulled on 02/20/2010 12:55:08 PM PST by Admin Moderator, reason: CARM not allowed on RF
I am not lying. I ping the rel moderator to have the thread pulled twice BEFORE you started posting.
***
Says who?
Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.
2 Corinthians 3:
2 Ye are our epistle written in our hearts, known and read of all men:
3 Forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart.
4 And such trust have we through Christ to God-ward:
5 Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think any thing as of ourselves; but our sufficiency is of God;
6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.
***
17 Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.
Our feelings do not interpret scripture. If they did then there is no absolute truth. We are to be like the Bereans and test feelings against the Bible.
That is hard if you have a weak view of the Bible.
falsehood!
truth, just not what the LDS want to hear.
Are you sure it seems you do a lot of dismissing scripture when it does not fit the brainwashed template
Ditto.
I take scripture in context, not cherry pick verses out of context like the LDS.
You misunderstand. Very little if anything is known about the how the NT came to be. The original manuscripts are long gone and the best we have are copies of copies of copies well after the originals were written.
The history of the modern LDS scriptures is in stark contrast, i.e. the original authors are known and the history of the scriptures to the current date is known. That cannot be said for any book in the Bible. Mormons know no more nor less than anyone else about the creation of the Biblical text. So your references to Bible classes are meaningless to the point at hand.
I don’t doubt that traditional christianity doesn’t like to hear what Ehrman has to say. But that is a bit like the kid sticking his fingers in his ears and shouting so as not to hear something they don’t want to hear. Ehrman is merely the messenger, not the message. Ignoring the facts of NT textual criticism will not make it go away. Facts are facts and that is all Ehrman and others in the field are relating.
NT textual criticism can be rather dry material and Ehrman has done the general public a service by writing “Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why” as it provides many examples of important textual variants and a broad introduction to the field of study.
I would be impressed if it was even the 1st century, but alas......
As for variants, there are many important ones, such as Pericope Adulterae. However, the most important point is that the original manuscripts are not known. In spite of this, many christians, including those of my own faith, believe the Bible to be divinely inspired and part of our canon scripture.
Well, that speaks for itself.......
The DSS MSS are first century and show the accuracy of the Bible transmission.
And the LDS (your faith) only accepts the Bible “as far as it is translated correctly” and thus sees the need for ‘extra’ scripture, btw none of which are any of the books listed above in the article. This leads to the LDS having a weak view of the Bible. I can provide quotes from your leaders if you wish. And the “gold plates” have never been found either so the LDS argument about ‘no mss evidence’ falls flat.
The variants are minuscule and do not affect doctrine as anyone who has really studied them knows.
I had the other thread pulled
Well, that speaks for itself.......
***
Before that it also read
This thread has been pulled.
Pulled on 02/20/2010 12:55:08 PM PST by Admin Moderator, reason: CARM not allowed on RF
Later the RM changed it!
it states that I pulled it. Go ahead, put the link up.
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.