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.
Mormonism from the start denegrated the bible. From placing the qualifier “translated correctly” ONLY to the bible, while exempting the bom (as well as the book of abraham).
Smith declared the bom the “most correct book” - once again, placing the bible at a lower level of recognition within mormonism.
Seven times in the space of seven verses quoted below from First Nephi chapter thirteen, the Book of Mormon dogmatically asserts: “there are many plain and precious things taken away from the book, which is the book of the Lamb of God.”
Smith was given a commandment from God to fix the KJV and restore those plain and precious parts removed. Yet more times than not - smith’s translation showed him to be spurious in his editing. Again, FIXING the KJV further points to lds holding the bible in lesser regard.
smith would have been wise to heed the proverb:
“Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.” —Proverbs 30:5-6
Yet smith ‘added’ not only by changing the KJV (without any textural support), he added three other works.
The bom is not even credited to contain a factional history of the new world - infact it is rebuffed at every turn and at least 9 active theories are out there trying to just LOCATE where the events occured at.
the book of abraham was ‘translated’ from an egyptian funeral prayer scroll that was not even remotely resembling anything that smith ‘translated’.
now an infantile attempt to obscure these very issues. Ladies and gentile men do you believe the unoffical mormon accout by a mormon, or others who are unafraid to actually cite mormon teachings against the bible.
But you’re not? You haven’t addressed many/any of G’s points and counterpoints. You have consistently addressed G’s points by stating that G is trying tell you what you believe. He has demonstrated repeatedly through scripture and intellectual argument that he knows what he’s talking about. I am almost convinced that G knows more about mormonism than you.
LOL! You really should read aloud what you are typing. It's quite funny!
Your lack of responses to his numerous questions is a comedy act that belongs at the improv. But glad to be of service.
What of the Book of Abraham? How correct is that book TD?
How correctly was it translated?
Nor do I expect him to anymore SZ. At this stage of the discussion the mormon defense is in full obfuscation mode, fully tying itself into a gordian knot and double speak.
yep, full obfuscation mode - just as i predicted
Now we’re looking at the typical tactic used by those losing the debate, try to isolate and marginalize your opponent. Ridicule the messenger.
Your contempt towards an apostate is noted TD. But the essential takeaway from this is that you refuse to address the question.
“Sophmoric”, how quaint of a response, at least you didn’t accuse me of telling you what you supposedly believe. That would have been a sophmoric answer.
I agree! Although, you, like Godzilla, don’t believe what I say I, and other Mormons, believe.
- - - - - - -
I USED TO BE LDS. Therefore I know what you STATE you believe is NOT what the LDS church teaches or what most rank and file LDS believe.
If the Bible has errors in matters of faith and doctrine (what Biblical Inerrancy means to most Christians) HOW can it be trustworthy? That is illogical.
Or at least, you believe what I believe is at odds with what my church teaches, even though my church and I would disagree with you on that point.
- - - - - - -
Incorrect. I know what the LDS church teaches regarding this matter as I used to be LDS, and was taught and taught others that the Bible is full of errors and thus is not trustworthy. Hence the need for new scripture.
You have consistently addressed G’s points by stating that G is trying tell you what you believe. ...I am almost convinced that G knows more about mormonism than you.
- - - - - - - -
I AM convinced.
I am now as well. It was intended as an opening for him to prove otherwise and he blinked.
Are you trying to tell me that you have a fetish for men of straw?
He has no answers or testimomy, so he is projecting now.
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.