• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Bible, 100%?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Strife

The name is Daniel!
Feb 26, 2004
71
4
38
✟22,718.00
Faith
Agnostic
Well, today I turned on my television and decided to check what was on the history channel. I was watching a few mins of several programs of Jesus Christ (what a councidence, I'm guessing becuse of easter!). When the programs cut to a commercial break, I saw a commercial that was going to be broadcast soon titled "Banned from the Bible". I soon did a search on the internet on this because it really got my attention. And this is what I got from a site...

BANNED FROM THE BIBLE examines the stories in some of these books, how
they were rediscovered and what they might mean to us today. Included are:

* The Life of Adam and Eve: A more detailed story of creation than what
is found in Genesis, this book includes jealous angels, a more devious
serpent, and more information about Eve's fall from grace from her
point of view.

* The Book of Jubilees: This obscure Hebrew text offers an answer to a
question that has vexed Christians for centuries -- if Adam and Eve
only had sons, and if no other humans existed, who gave birth to
humanity? This text reveals that Adam and Eve had nine children and
that Cain's younger sister Awan became his wife. The idea that humanity
was born of incest would have been radical -- and heretical.

* The Book of Enoch: This scripture reads like a modern day action film,
telling of fallen angels, bloodthirsty giants, an earth that had become
home to an increasingly flawed humanity and a divine judgment to be
rendered though denied a place in most Western Bibles; it has been used
for centuries by Ethiopian Christians. Large portions of this book were
found as part of the Dead Sea Scrolls.

* The Infancy Gospel of Thomas: The only book that deals with young
Jesus, it indicates that Jesus was a strong-willed child who one
historian describes as "Dennis the Menace as God." The book reveals
that at age five, Jesus may have killed a boy by pushing push him off a
roof and then resurrected him. Perhaps too disturbing for inclusion in
the Bible, this book seems to contain traditions, also known to the
Koran.

* The Protovangelion of James: This book offers details of the life of
the Virgin Mary, her parents, her birth and her youth, stories not
found in the New Testament Gospels but was beloved by many early
Christians.

* The Gospel of Mary: This Gnostic Text reveals that Mary Magdalene may
have been an apostle, perhaps even a leading apostle, not a prostitute.
While some texts in the Bible seem to deny women a voice in the
Christian community, this texts helps spark the debate about the role
of women in the church.

* The Gospel of Nicodemus: This is the story of Jesus's trial and
execution and his descent into hell. According to this gospel the
Savior asserts his power over Satan by freeing patriarchs such as Adam,
Isaiah and Abraham from Hell.

* The Apocalypse of Peter: Peter's apocalypse suggests that there is a
way out of punishment for evildoers and implies that the threat of the
apocalypse is a way for God to scare people into living a moral life,
and committing fewer sins.

Now your telling me that these were purposely taken out of the original context of the Bible? Is this saying that by taking away this information that is "to hot for christians" necessary? Why hide the truth?
 
  • Like
Reactions: BarbB

marc

Regular Member
Feb 15, 2003
183
15
53
Montana
Visit site
✟440.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Dear Strife,

I would be careful on anything that says it's banned from the Bible. The devil is a master at leading people away from the Lord. If you really want to know more about the Bible, turn off the TV, and go to firefighters for Christ. There is a guy named Chuck Missler who does a book by book study of the Bible. I guarantee you he will answer all your questions about the Bible's validitiy the way it is. The study is free, but well worth the time. He also addresses studies done on the Bible to prove it is 100% accurate. Firefighters for Christ is online too! Don't be afraid to ask the author of it for an answer in prayer!

with Love, Marc's wife
 
Upvote 0

Rafael

Only time enough for love
Jul 25, 2002
2,570
319
74
Midwest
Visit site
✟6,445.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
God is powerful enough to preserve His Word for man through history, and is not an impotent or puny God. All the questions and darts of doubt fired at the God's Word have a source in satan who has worked very hard through the centuries to subvert the work of God's Holy Spirit of truth with lies and half-truths. The literature that has been rejected, has been so for a reason - it was not authored and inspired by the Holy Spirit of God, but for other reasons that the Lord knows and protects His flock from.

The link for firefighters is http://www.firefighters.org/ and yes, Chuck Missler can be listened to on MP3 files - a very good teacher.

I hope you will be stimulated to find God more powerful than all the lies and half-truths brought against Him, whether written or spoken, as you seek Him and His truth.
 
Upvote 0

Momzilla

Gettin' that old time religion!
Feb 12, 2004
1,317
88
56
Greenville, SC
✟24,459.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
As usual, Raphe is right on target. When the canon of the Bible was selected, the church fathers of the time had a large number of books to choose from. Guided by the Holy Spirit, they chose the set of books we currently know as the Bible (note: Catholic/Orthodox bibles contain seven(?) books known either as the "Apocrypha" or the "Deuterocanonicals"; these books are not found in Protestant Bibles)

The books that were rejected were rejected for good reason. Take the "Gospel of Thomas", for example. GoT is a gnostic text consisting almost entirely of collected sayings purportedly by Jesus. It lacks several of the characteristics found in the canonical gospels. Most notably, the GoT is not tied to, and does not attempt to make sense of, OT scriptures in the way that all the canonical gospels do. Plus, gnosticism was considered by the early church, and is still considered today, to be a form of heresy.

The various books you've listed in the OP have various status in the church today; For example, IIRC, Orthodox read and refer to the Protoevangielion of James, although it is not canonical.
 
Upvote 0

PRMan

Part-Time Bible Scholar
Oct 3, 2003
41
4
55
Yorba Linda, CA
Visit site
✟22,920.00
Faith
Pentecostal
At Vanguard University, I had a class in Pseudopigraphical Literature and in it we read several of these books. When deciding which books to DIE for :eek:, church fathers decided that they would not include books of questionable authorship.

Obviously, since the Book of Enoch was only around for about 200 years instead of since the time of Enoch, it was excluded since it begins with a lie. Now, some of the theology in there is interesting and potentially enlightening (especially about the Nephilim passages and the nature of Heaven and Hades), but how can you trust a book that starts out by claiming to be from pre-flood days but that has only been around for 200 years. Jude actually quotes from this book:

14Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about these men: "See, the Lord is coming with thousands upon thousands of his holy ones 15to judge everyone, and to convict all the ungodly of all the ungodly acts they have done in the ungodly way, and of all the harsh words ungodly sinners have spoken against him."

as well as the Assumption of Moses. But if you actually read 1 Enoch, you will quickly see that it doesn't hold up to Biblical standards (my professor actually disagreed but didn't grade you down if you thought otherwise). It's in a book called "The Old Testament Psuedipigrapha".

The short answer, nobody was willing to die for it, unlike the gospels, the letters of Paul and John and our current Old Testament. If I'm not mistaken, the Apocrypha was added when you could no longer be killed for being a Christian.
 
Upvote 0

Sketcher

Born Imperishable
Feb 23, 2004
39,039
9,471
✟417,428.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
A few things to clear up: There is an OT Apocrypha (what the Catholics have) and a NT Apocrypha (Gnostic forgeries which the Church rejected).

There is the Gospel of Thomas, which contradicts Scripture in many ways. One of them being a statement where He says that women must first become men if they want to enter Heaven. This is totally inconsistent with Christ's real teachings as well as Paul's.

Then there is the Infacy Gospel of Thomas, which is different. It directly contradicts John 2:11, which states that the first miricle of Jesus was in His life, at the wedding in Cana.
 
Upvote 0

Blazin4Christ

Glory to God, and God alone.
Mar 16, 2004
556
32
U.S.A., East Coast,
✟912.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Republican
the Bible is 100% true, all of it the Old and New TEstament, the books yuo are talking about are Apocryphal books and were in the original Bible, but they were set apart because they were not God inspired, the KJV was the 3rd version of the Bible ever created and it is 100% accurate, almost no other translation is, the only reason it was left out was because it was not God inspired and/or false
 
Upvote 0

Blazin4Christ

Glory to God, and God alone.
Mar 16, 2004
556
32
U.S.A., East Coast,
✟912.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Republican
Palatka44 said:
Amen, Blazin4Christ! Steel yourself for the onslaught of critizism regarding the KJV and know that I too agree and will stand with you.

lol I owned a copy of every translation, only one I never found a contradiction or a missing verse in was KJV, anyways back on topic, it says in 1 Timothy I believe, that scripture is given by influence of GOd, or its only correct and true and profitable if God appointed it, but he did not apoint the apocrypha
 
Upvote 0

Claude J Robichaud

Active Member
Apr 6, 2004
208
3
60
Ontario, Canada
✟370.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Strife said:
Well, today I turned on my television and decided to check what was on the history channel. I was watching a few mins of several programs of Jesus Christ (what a councidence, I'm guessing becuse of easter!). When the programs cut to a commercial break, I saw a commercial that was going to be broadcast soon titled "Banned from the Bible". I soon did a search on the internet on this because it really got my attention. And this is what I got from a site...

BANNED FROM THE BIBLE examines the stories in some of these books, how
they were rediscovered and what they might mean to us today. Included are:

* The Life of Adam and Eve: A more detailed story of creation than what
is found in Genesis, this book includes jealous angels, a more devious
serpent, and more information about Eve's fall from grace from her
point of view.

* The Book of Jubilees: This obscure Hebrew text offers an answer to a
question that has vexed Christians for centuries -- if Adam and Eve
only had sons, and if no other humans existed, who gave birth to
humanity? This text reveals that Adam and Eve had nine children and
that Cain's younger sister Awan became his wife. The idea that humanity
was born of incest would have been radical -- and heretical.

* The Book of Enoch: This scripture reads like a modern day action film,
telling of fallen angels, bloodthirsty giants, an earth that had become
home to an increasingly flawed humanity and a divine judgment to be
rendered though denied a place in most Western Bibles; it has been used
for centuries by Ethiopian Christians. Large portions of this book were
found as part of the Dead Sea Scrolls.

* The Infancy Gospel of Thomas: The only book that deals with young
Jesus, it indicates that Jesus was a strong-willed child who one
historian describes as "Dennis the Menace as God." The book reveals
that at age five, Jesus may have killed a boy by pushing push him off a
roof and then resurrected him. Perhaps too disturbing for inclusion in
the Bible, this book seems to contain traditions, also known to the
Koran.

* The Protovangelion of James: This book offers details of the life of
the Virgin Mary, her parents, her birth and her youth, stories not
found in the New Testament Gospels but was beloved by many early
Christians.

* The Gospel of Mary: This Gnostic Text reveals that Mary Magdalene may
have been an apostle, perhaps even a leading apostle, not a prostitute.
While some texts in the Bible seem to deny women a voice in the
Christian community, this texts helps spark the debate about the role
of women in the church.

* The Gospel of Nicodemus: This is the story of Jesus's trial and
execution and his descent into hell. According to this gospel the
Savior asserts his power over Satan by freeing patriarchs such as Adam,
Isaiah and Abraham from Hell.

* The Apocalypse of Peter: Peter's apocalypse suggests that there is a
way out of punishment for evildoers and implies that the threat of the
apocalypse is a way for God to scare people into living a moral life,
and committing fewer sins.

Now your telling me that these were purposely taken out of the original context of the Bible? Is this saying that by taking away this information that is "to hot for christians" necessary? Why hide the truth?

I have read the majority of the books that you mentioned above. While a few of them where highly esteemed by the church councils that decided which books would be canonized, the majority of them were discredited for obvious reasons. Many mythical tales were developed about the person of Jesus during the early centuries. The church councils also had corrupted duplicates of the original texts to deal with. Many factors were taken into consideration in determining which books were chosen and which ones were ommitted. The councils did not undertake this task lightly but weighed, and scrutinized each book carefully.

The questionable books were not omitted in an attempt to hide any truth. They were rejected because they were found wanting in truth or corrupted in transcription, or in contradiction to well established Christian teachings on one or more points. A few of them were discarded for only very trivial reasons. For example, many epistles were written by church fathers that suceeded the apostles. Although the letter content was approved of, they were not canonized because they were not deemed apostolical.

GOD BLESS

Copernicus :priest:
 
Upvote 0

Tangnefedd

A Liberal Christian
Feb 10, 2004
3,555
26
75
✟26,400.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Blazin4Christ said:
the Bible is 100% true, all of it the Old and New TEstament, the books yuo are talking about are Apocryphal books and were in the original Bible, but they were set apart because they were not God inspired, the KJV was the 3rd version of the Bible ever created and it is 100% accurate, almost no other translation is, the only reason it was left out was because it was not God inspired and/or false

It depends what you mean by 100% true, if you mean literally true, then very few folk believe that, there are too many contradictions in it for that to be the case. I don't think it was ever meant as a historical document. When the Bible was put together we can never be sure that what was put in, and what was kept out was correct. but maybe some of the stuff that was excluded was just as valid as that included!
 
Upvote 0

reverend B

Senior Veteran
Feb 23, 2004
5,280
666
67
North Carolina
✟23,908.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Politics
US-Others
the kjv seems to be an idol to me. people worship the translation instead of the word of God. to those who feel there is no other version worth anything, explain to me why you believe this. i have never understood it. when we translate the bible word for word we do not come up with the poetry that the kjv demonstrates. so they made a choice to make it sound beautiful. is this more inspired than the the people who actually wrote it were? it is a translation. why do you defend it like it is the original text? help me understand your position.

yours in Christ
 
Upvote 0

Claude J Robichaud

Active Member
Apr 6, 2004
208
3
60
Ontario, Canada
✟370.00
Faith
Non-Denom
reverend B said:
the kjv seems to be an idol to me. people worship the translation instead of the word of God. to those who feel there is no other version worth anything, explain to me why you believe this. i have never understood it. when we translate the bible word for word we do not come up with the poetry that the kjv demonstrates. so they made a choice to make it sound beautiful. is this more inspired than the the people who actually wrote it were? it is a translation. why do you defend it like it is the original text? help me understand your position.

yours in Christ


I'm entirely in agreement with you, Reverend B

The Word of God was not only given to the English speaking nations of the world. I'm of French Canadian heritage and we too have translations of the scriptures in our own language. I don't understand where some of these silly notions come from. I thank God, however, that it doesn't influence the men and women of God who have translated the scriptures into numerous languages. The whole gospel to the whole world is my motto. ;)

GOD BLESS

Copernicus
 
Upvote 0

Blazin4Christ

Glory to God, and God alone.
Mar 16, 2004
556
32
U.S.A., East Coast,
✟912.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Republican
I'm not "in love" with it, but it is the only version I have ever found with no contradictions and such thats the only reason, I didn't even realize its poetic till now ^_^, but thats all, its just the only version I trust as a BIble
 
Upvote 0

reverend B

Senior Veteran
Feb 23, 2004
5,280
666
67
North Carolina
✟23,908.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Politics
US-Others
Blazin4Christ said:
I'm not "in love" with it, but it is the only version I have ever found with no contradictions and such thats the only reason, I didn't even realize its poetic till now ^_^, but thats all, its just the only version I trust as a BIble
blazin,
all the errors seen in one version are in another. did Jesus first meet Simon Peter and Andrew at the Sea of Galilee, as reported in Matthew, or at the River Jordan, as told by John? John says Jesus carried his own cross but Matthew says he did not. there are many such things in the bible that are incidental to my faith and belief in the ministry of Jesus Christ. we should not find ourselves wanting in truth to deny such things and look foolish to those who may be trying to come to God through us. the kjv supports these and a hundred other contradictions. but the message of Jesus Christ is inerrant. Christ is inerrant. it's ok to like something the best, but don't make your favorite a prohibition to others. if you have seen no errors and you are not even aware of it's beautiful poetry, i have to assume you have not read it with a great deal of attention.
the truth will set you free.

yours in Christ
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.