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

[Alive]

May I suggest a reason for the bible as we have it?

First, I am convinced  that the primary reason for scripture is to reveal Christ and that God provided just what He wanted us to have for that purpose. The precise picture of and leading to the Word. Either less or more, would change that picture.

[TrueFollowerOfChrist]

5 hours ago, Jayne said:

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.

 

Interesting. I wonder if that's where the Catholic Church got the idea of indulgences. Thanks for the history. I actually didn't know that. 

[Jayne]

19 minutes ago, TrueFollowerOfChrist said:

Interesting. I wonder if that's where the Catholic Church got the idea of indulgences. Thanks for the history. I actually didn't know that. 

Indulgences?  I just don't know when they started.

[Marathoner]

6 hours ago, Jayne said:

Indulgences?  I just don't know when they started.

I checked on that and from what I found (from a document on the University of Missouri-Kansas City website), plenary indulgences were offered by The Vatican beginning in 1095. The article referenced a Roman Catholic source, for what that's worth.

Edited August 9, 2022 by Marathoner

[Jayne]

22 minutes ago, Marathoner said:

I checked on that and from what I found (from a document on the University of Missouri-Kansas City website), plenary indulgences were offered by The Vatican beginning in 1095. The article referenced a Roman Catholic source, for what that's worth.

Thanks.

I did Google "Medici indulgences" a little while ago because I assumed that that terrible family would have participated in them.

I was led to a few sites that said that Pope Leo X was noted for selling indulgences escpecially to those who contribed money for the rebuilding of St. Peter's Basilica.

He, by the way, WAS a Medici.  I didn't know that.

Nothing like donating large sums of money to a building campaign and having your sins washed away!  Not!!

Edited August 9, 2022 by Jayne

[Willa]

The Didache  was a very early Christian writing that was used to disciple new converts.  It was written during the time that the Gospels were written.  It is interesting for its historical background of the early church, how it functioned and what it taught.  For instance, it taught there should be fasting and prayers before baptism and how that the baptism should be preformed. It should not be used for doctrine.

The books not included in the New Testament but which are often called lost books are most often written by members of the Gnostic cult in the 2nd or 3rd centuries.  They often wrote simply blasphemous things.  As a child, Jesus didn't kill some kid, for instance.  How do we know that?  Many New Testament books refer to Jesus as being without sin, and the whole message of our redemption is founded on that.  He was the perfect Lamb of God.  New believers can easily be led astray by the claims of the Gnostics.  As others have said, it is OK for people to read them who read their Bibles often over many years.  We learn to recognize  the false by first getting familiar with the truth of God's word.  It also helps to keep on being filled with the Holy Spirit Who leads us into all truth.

The Old Testament Apocrypha was not in the original Hebrew manuscript which is why Luther rejected them.  They were added later.  As others have said, some of these have historical value. Luther considered them good to read, but some contain really weird stuff, like Bell and the Dragon.  Some have blatant historical errors in them.  We believe they cannot be inspired of God if they contain such error. 

2 Maccabees 12: 44-45 in the Apocrypha contains a story about Judas who inspects the bodies of many slain in a battle and finds they all had idols carried on them that they had prayed to.  So Judas takes up an offering for them for a sin offering to atone for the dead, and prayed for them.  To my knowledge this was not Jewish practice.  

This is where the Catholic Church gets the blasphemous doctrine of praying for the dead, and being able to buy a loved one out of hell or purgatory.  By doing this they completely nullify the sufficiency of the blood of Jesus Christ to pay for our sin.  If this were used for historical use alone it might be OK, or even as a picture of what Christ would do on the Cross.  But it was used by the church to establish doctrines that allowed people to pray to and for the dead as well as to pay the church to get dead loved ones into heaven by holding special masses and to give money to atone for their sins, thus bypassing the sufficiency of His shed blood!. " Catholic authorities admit that there is no explicit authorization for prayers on behalf of the dead in the sixty-six books of canonical Scripture. Instead, they appeal to the Apocrypha (2 Maccabees 12:45), church tradition, the decree of the Council of Trent, etc., to defend the practice.  Got Questions.

 Jesus Himself condemned this as trying to get into the sheepfold another way than through Him, the door.  Many other scriptures also refute these practices on every level.  However,  historical errors alone were sufficient for not believing the Maccabees to be sacred infallible Scripture.

[JohnD]

I used to wonder the same thing until someone gave me this example;

A man who worked for the U.S. Treasury Department was asked how they were trained to spot counterfeits.

Were they schooled in all the ways U.S. currency could be forgered?

He replied, no. We are trained in the genuine currency so that any fraud stands out like a sore thumb.

This is not to say you cannot know or read non-biblical books, rather that you must find the Truth and that

is only purely in the Word of God. 

Other books / sources may contain truth, but along with the credence give the source as that of knowledge comes

untruth from human shortsightedness, superstition, opinion, concoction, convoluted supposition etc.  

This is why Jesus told the demons who said he is the Holy One of Israel to shut up. Not that he wasn't the Holy One of Israel.

Nor that it was too soon to reveal this to the children of Israel. But that the lying source of demon expression would give human credence

to their other deceptions.

It matters very much from where Truth comes.

That being said, find the Truth in God's Word learn it know it and then read / study the rest and as with the counterfeit money, the errors

in human and demonic thinking in the literature will jump out at you.