What Can We Learn From The Books Not Included In The Bible??

[Who me]

16 hours ago, debrakay said:

did not mean to imply the Bible is not complete. 

B B gave a good sumary of the reasons why many books were not included in the bible.

If you are going to read them do so with skeptical eyes. What they say is not scripture and is to be judged by scripture.

[TrueFollowerOfChrist]

This myth has been going on for a long time and is a common argument by unbelievers to attack Christianity. However to those who study their history, there is NO SUCH THING as books that were removed from the Bible. There are many many books that were never included or never gained wide acceptance that some people today believe should have been included. However if you do read those books, it's not difficult to see why the church never accepted them. For example, the famous Gospel of Thomas actually says that women should become men because women can't inherit the kingdom of God. The other reason most of those books were not included is because they were forgeries. They were not actually written by the authors claimed. They were written in the 2nd - 5th centuries. So the reasons that books were never included in the first place are very good reasons. I don't believe it's a sin to read them, but make sure you already have a firm foundation in scripture. Reading them will not help your relationship with God or help you understand scripture any better. For example, the movie NOAH with Russell Crowe was based somewhat on the book of Enoch. It is not scriptural and can make your interpretation of real scripture become twisted and false. AMEN

[Jayne]

2 hours ago, TrueFollowerOfChrist said:

This myth has been going on for a long time and is a common argument by unbelievers to attack Christianity. However to those who study their history, there is NO SUCH THING as books that were removed from the Bible. There are many many books that were never included or never gained wide acceptance that some people today believe should have been included. However if you do read those books, it's not difficult to see why the church never accepted them. For example, the famous Gospel of Thomas actually says that women should become men because women can't inherit the kingdom of God. The other reason most of those books were not included is because they were forgeries. They were not actually written by the authors claimed. They were written in the 2nd - 5th centuries. So the reasons that books were never included in the first place are very good reasons. I don't believe it's a sin to read them, but make sure you already have a firm foundation in scripture. Reading them will not help your relationship with God or help you understand scripture any better. For example, the movie NOAH with Russell Crowe was based somewhat on the book of Enoch. It is not scriptural and can make your interpretation of real scripture become twisted and false. AMEN

Amen!!  One  will NEVER recognize the lies until one understand the truth like the back of their own hand.

If one doesn't not know the truth, the lies all make sense and THAT'S the plan  of the devil.

[Bluedragon]

The books left out were written well beyond the lives of the authors of the New Testament. In most if not all cases, the true author is highly suspect. 

Want to read fiction, written several hundred years after the death of the founder? Try the Koran. 

[debrakay]

6 hours ago, TrueFollowerOfChrist said:

This myth has been going on for a long time and is a common argument by unbelievers to attack Christianity. However to those who study their history, there is NO SUCH THING as books that were removed from the Bible. There are many many books that were never included or never gained wide acceptance that some people today believe should have been included. However if you do read those books, it's not difficult to see why the church never accepted them. For example, the famous Gospel of Thomas actually says that women should become men because women can't inherit the kingdom of God. The other reason most of those books were not included is because they were forgeries. They were not actually written by the authors claimed. They were written in the 2nd - 5th centuries. So the reasons that books were never included in the first place are very good reasons. I don't believe it's a sin to read them, but make sure you already have a firm foundation in scripture. Reading them will not help your relationship with God or help you understand scripture any better. For example, the movie NOAH with Russell Crowe was based somewhat on the book of Enoch. It is not scriptural and can make your interpretation of real scripture become twisted and false. AMEN

I should probably retitle this thread as I do know there were no books removed from the completed Bible.  Many books were not included after years of study and contemplation by many wise men pulling the Holy Bible into one book.  I am sure they were led by the Holy Spirit to come up with the books they did include.  

All who are filled with the Holy Spirit are led by him to all things worthy.

[debrakay]

1 hour ago, Bluedragon said:

The books left out were written well beyond the lives of the authors of the New Testament. In most if not all cases, the true author is highly suspect. 

Want to read fiction, written several hundred years after the death of the founder? Try the Koran. 

It's great history to read how long is took and who was involved in the development of the King James Version of the Bible. It is a great story all in itself and totally shows the move of the Holy Spirit in all of it!!

Father God is so awesome and always 100% right with every "jot and tittle"!!

Muhammud and his allah, not so much.  Yikes! 

[TrueFollowerOfChrist]

12 hours ago, debrakay said:

I should probably retitle this thread as I do know there were no books removed from the completed Bible.  Many books were not included after years of study and contemplation by many wise men pulling the Holy Bible into one book.  I am sure they were led by the Holy Spirit to come up with the books they did include.  

All who are filled with the Holy Spirit are led by him to all things worthy.

I noticed the title of the thread changed, so I figured I'd respond to it. So the answer is that it depends on which books you read. Of all the books that are not in the Bible, I think the best ones to read are the Macabbees. This is because there is no error in them. They are very historically accurate. The only reason they are not in the Bible is because they were not considered divinely inspired scripture, just regular history. But they are excellent books. So some books are actually good to read and are accurate and true, they just were inspired by man, not God. 

[debrakay]

2 hours ago, TrueFollowerOfChrist said:

I noticed the title of the thread changed, so I figured I'd respond to it. So the answer is that it depends on which books you read. Of all the books that are not in the Bible, I think the best ones to read are the Macabbees. This is because there is no error in them. They are very historically accurate. The only reason they are not in the Bible is because they were not considered divinely inspired scripture, just regular history. But they are excellent books. So some books are actually good to read and are accurate and true, they just were inspired by man, not God. 

I am still learning to chose my words wisely and this thread title was one of my learning lessons.  Thank you @Omegaman 3.0 for the assistance! 

Much of the Bible seems to be regular history much like the Maccabees. Don't you think this would be the same for some of the Old Testament books like Samuel 1 &2, Kings 1 & 2, Chronicles 1 & 2, and others?  

I don't question the final word of God but wonder how he inspired Jerome and the rest of the council members.  I know most of the books had been compiled by the Councils of Nicea and Constantinople and Jerome over many decades but Jerome seemed to play a major role in the assembly of the Bible.  

Martin Luther is another person I think about as far as being led by the power of the Holy Spirit. Billy Graham too from an evangelical standpoint.  There are so many God inspired people who inspire us today.  Divine inspiration is everywhere the Holy Spirit moves and we listen and respond.  Even right here on Worthy! 

Edited August 7, 2022 by debrakay
clarity :)

[TrueFollowerOfChrist]

22 hours ago, debrakay said:

I am still learning to chose my words wisely and this thread title was one of my learning lessons.  Thank you @Omegaman 3.0 for the assistance! 

Much of the Bible seems to be regular history much like the Maccabees. Don't you think this would be the same for some of the Old Testament books like Samuel 1 &2, Kings 1 & 2, Chronicles 1 & 2, and others?  

I don't question the final word of God but wonder how he inspired Jerome and the rest of the council members.  I know most of the books had been compiled by the Councils of Nicea and Constantinople and Jerome over many decades but Jerome seemed to play a major role in the assembly of the Bible.  

Martin Luther is another person I think about as far as being led by the power of the Holy Spirit. Billy Graham too from an evangelical standpoint.  There are so many God inspired people who inspire us today.  Divine inspiration is everywhere the Holy Spirit moves and we listen and respond.  Even right here on Worthy! 

This is only my opinion, but I'm guessing that the old testament books show God's hand at work, so those were clearly inspired. I honestly don't know why the Jews decided the maccabees weren't inspired. But I trust that God didn't want them included for some reason. I do disagree however that certain council's actually picked which books were to be in the Bible. The official Bible as we know today with it's 66 books was already in wide acceptance by the 4th century. Various churches in different geographic regions had their books and other regions had their books. I think Jerome was the first to compile the common books that all the regions shared, but don't quote me on that. Over time it simply became apparent that dinner books were inspired and others were not. Eventually the number of inspired books stopped at 66. As far as people like Martin Luther and Billy Graham, your right that God spoke to them. God speaks to millions of people now, but that doesn't mean that what we write now should be crammed into the Bible as additional scripture. We DEFINITELY can learn from what Godly people write, and hopefully that is the reason most people are in this forum. I read lots of books by spirit filled believers. I don't consider their books equal with scripture, but I definitely learn things and sometimes scripture becomes more clear after reading what other more learned men wrote. I hope you don't think I'm trying to argue. I actually agree with what you said. So God Bless and Peace to you.

[Jayne]

57 minutes ago, TrueFollowerOfChrist said:

This is only my opinion, but I'm guessing that the old testament books show God's hand at work, so those were clearly inspired. I honestly don't know why the Jews decided the maccabees weren't inspired. But I trust that God didn't want them included for some reason. 

Well, as far as 2 Maccabbees is concerned, chapter 12 recounts a story of a battle in Adullam.

As the bodies of the dead were gathered for burial, it was found that each dead man was wearing an idolatrous amulet to a false god under his tunic.  The ones surviving the battle were convinced that this is why they died and they praised God  for being just.

If it ended there - alright.

But  it goes on to say that the soldiers who did not die took up a collection of about 2000 silver drachmas.  They sent them to Jerusalem for an "expiatory sacrifice" for the dead.  Expiatory meaning "atonement".  Silver does not atone for sins.  Only blood.

It FURTHER goes to say that this was to absolve the dead from their sins because of the resurrection - that if the dead did not rise again, then it would be "it would have been superfluous and foolish to pray for the dead."

Unfortunately, it says "it was a holy and pious thought" to pay silver drachmas to pay for the sins of the dead.

This, in my opinion is why the Maccabbees are not holy scripture.