Lost books of bible question

The "book of Judas" is a Gnostic text. Many Gnostic texts were rejected from the New Testament, because they teach a different faith than Christianity. The New Testament books of the Bible are older than these texts, and had to pass two tests: Apostolic authorship, and theological fit. The Gnostic texts like Judas and Thomas and the rest of them failed these tests.

Zimmer, there were all sorts of books being written in the first century by all sorts of people. Many different sects claiming Christ arose. Not all of either of these was necessarily true, but in time the consensus of the churches...and then two church councils...made the decision as to inspired or not inspired.

Most of those other books, by the way, refer to Bible personalities but what they tell is not at all in synch with the rest of the Bible, and I'm sure you know that continuity and consistency are key characteristics of the Bible books.

Zimmer36 said:

So who wrote the gnostic stuff? And what purpose? To lead ppl astray?

Click to expand...

I don't think we can say that, but all manner of people, even today, think they've had visions, inspirations, insights, and also were commissioned to tell the world about it.

Zimmer36 said:

So who wrote the gnostic stuff? And what purpose? To lead ppl astray?

Click to expand...

Gnostic teachers wrote them, not the disciples. They would have written them to promote their own religions. Christianity was a rising tide, and Gnostics must have figured the best way to grow their own faith was to appropriate the momentum of Christianity itself, and the way to do that would have been to produce pseudo-Christian teachers and works.

Sketcher said:

e

Click to expand...

Actually the Gospel of Thomas is no more gnostic than the Gospel of John and some Biblical scholars believe that parts of it might actually predate the canonical gospels. If you had never read GThom before you would find about 60% to be near identical to them.

The canonical NT warns of false teachers so it's no surprise that they existed in the early church period.

JackRT said:

Actually the Gospel of Thomas is no more gnostic than the Gospel of John and some Biblical scholars believe that parts of it might actually predate the canonical gospels. If you had never read GThom before you would find about 60% to be near identical to them.

Click to expand...

Other Biblical scholars disagree. And it's pretty far from "near identical" to the four Gospels in the New Testament. The polytheism and the treatment of the resurrection body and women in it are absolutely non-Christian.

Zimmer36 said:

Came across a book by joseph lumpkin called Lost Books of the Bible...read thro some reviews and stuff and beginning to wonder why were there books left out like this? Some say they lean toward catholicism and one mentioned book of Judas which paints a different portrait of the Jesus we know,etc etc and that basically man picked and chose which books to put in bible for political reasons and stuff. As a new Christian seeking truth stuff like this just confuses me and makes me question my own belief. How are we supposed to have strong belief and faith when early Christianity and the books of the Bible have so much confusing “hidden” history, etc?

Click to expand...

I don't like the book of Joseph Lumpkin, which includes also texts such as the Book of Jasher which is a text of the Mormons.

However some books included therein is very intresting, such as the Book of Enoch, quoted as Scripture in Jude 1:14–15

Other more important "missing books" are not listed: for example the most ancient and important volume of the Bible, the Codex Sinaiticus, includes also the Epistle of Barnabas and the The Shepherd of Hermas, which are not considered Bible nowasdays
The other early Volume of the Bible, the Codex Alexandrinus, includes also all four books of Maccabees, and the two letters of Clement.

If they aren't and weren't in the Bible they are not books "of the Bible". Each has to be separately assessed.

Enoch I & II, which are not Hebrew *, contain as good old legends as any others (personal names were international): Jude only quoted a small part, like Paul quotes classical poets, to illustrate something in other words. Jesus is always using proverbs prevalent across many nations (I think Jesus smiled rather a lot and His followers split their sides).

Hermas the Shepherd is considered uplifting reading.

It's strongly necessary that we depart from the superstitious Kuhlmannist and Falwellist attitude to words that has destroyed most Christians' knowledge of all sciences in the last 40 years. Words allude and we only get meanings once several spectrums of allusion intersect. That was how language always did work for the entire human race thus far, and I and my neighbours of similar age knew this from infancy, and I remember a lesson in class at age approximately 9 reminding us of that.

* one part is Slavic and one part is Ethiopic. It is fairly clear they draw on some older things. In some countries Christian monks happened to be the only personnel available to copy secular as well as sacred texts.

Zimmer36 said:

Came across a book by joseph lumpkin called Lost Books of the Bible...read thro some reviews and stuff and beginning to wonder why were there books left out like this? Some say they lean toward catholicism and one mentioned book of Judas which paints a different portrait of the Jesus we know,etc etc and that basically man picked and chose which books to put in bible for political reasons and stuff. As a new Christian seeking truth stuff like this just confuses me and makes me question my own belief. How are we supposed to have strong belief and faith when early Christianity and the books of the Bible have so much confusing “hidden” history, etc?

Click to expand...

Like others are saying, most are writings exclusive to particular regions or sects. The New Testament we have now were read widely across the known Christian world. "Universal" acceptance if you will, along with old traditions behind them of Apostolic origin.

There are a handful of extra writings that are useful though and were more popular than others. Just not universal, like the NT. The Shepherd of Hermas spread out quite a bit.

The Gnostic writings are the worst of the bunch. They teach an entirely different "gospel", that isn't really "good news" at all. In Gnosticism, salvation isn't what matters, but those who hold the secrets of knowledge (gnosis). It promotes elitism and heirarchies of membership, much like modern "degrees" in Freemasonry, where some are more privy to "secret knowledge" than others. But Christ didn't come to play favorites, and freely gave the good news to everyone. And specifically said that the least of his Kingdom, and even children, will be the greatest, while those who presume to be great will be the least. It's the opposite of elitism.

We can see Satan is ever busy seeking to urge religious people to change the Bible ---perverting God's Holy Word to man. I hold to the KJV Bible in general, and use the Scofield KJV Study Bible to also show any errors in wordings from men's writings over the years, to fit their choices ---all men fail somewhat in their works for no man is perfect. The meaning of certain words are corrected in the Scofield study version, to more clearly explain meanings, rather than man's modern language choices, which often misuses words from the established versions by Godly teachers to give them liberty to do as they please.

a_ntv, post: However some books included therein is very interesting, such as the Book of Enoch, quoted as Scripture in Jude 1:14–15

We been arguing on the validity of the modern.Ethiopian text on the Messianic Site, any wishing to read that argument should check the site out.

As for the quote you reference, though Jude quoted Enoch, the text of the modern Enoch does not match one to one Jude's quote. The word myriads is changed to ten thousand yet Jude and Enoch meant myriads "a multitude to numerous to count"!

One could say that error that there is small and it is, it should not effect our lives or faith, but if that one word came through from Hebrew to Ethiopian wrong what of other words? The Dead Sea scrolls shows Enoch in Hebrew, and when Jude wrote his letter, these scrolls were hole and in Hebrew, that not true of the modern text. Perhaps the early church when they formed Canon also could not find that Hebrew text.

Of course we only know this because of that argument on the Messianic site started us searching for the truth. Yet we are Biblical scholars who study the Sacred Scriptures in their original language, not a new believer!




Zimmer: Our advice is to stick to the Sacred Scriptures and Canon works. These will challenge your faith but in time ground it more deeply. Also work on buiding your pray life, starting with the Our Father, Matt6.9-13, and spontaneous prays of thanks giving and love. In time He may call you to study other things, but you need a very strong faith and understanding before attempting material that was left from the Canon.