Books of the bible

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
jandian

jandian

Senior Member
#1
Feb 12, 2011
772
11
18
#1
Are all the books meant for the bible in the bible?

Joshua 10:13 And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the book of Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day.
2 Samuel 1:18 (Also he bade them teach the children of Judah the use of the bow: behold, it is written in the book of Jasher.)
Where is the book of Jasher?

Nathan the Prophet
1 Chronicles 29:29Now the acts of David the king, first and last, behold, they are written in the book of Samuel the seer, and in the book of Nathan the prophet, and in the book of Gad the seer,
2 Chronicles 9:29 Now the rest of the acts of Solomon, first and last, are they not written in the book of Nathan the prophet, and in the prophecy of Ahijah the Shilonite, and in the visions of Iddo the seer against Jeroboam the son of Nebat?

Where is the book of Nathan the Prophet?

And there are quite a few more
 
I

IntoTheVoid

Banned
#2
Sep 14, 2013
915
5
0
#2
Out of curiosity, does it say in any books of the bible that a bible should be compiled? And does it mention in the bible what books are to be included?
 
jandian

jandian

Senior Member
#3
Feb 12, 2011
772
11
18
#3
IntoTheVoid said:
Out of curiosity, does it say in any books of the bible that a bible should be compiled? And does it mention in the bible what books are to be included?
Click to expand...
No it doesn't
So then are you suggesting that even though these books are not in the bible, it may be books we are suppose to read?
Just curious of your opinion myself :)
 
I

IntoTheVoid

Banned
#4
Sep 14, 2013
915
5
0
#4
Oh I was thinking of something else entirely.

I was thinking if it wasn't gods orders to do it then man decided to compile them. Was just thinking of the HUGE responsibility those elect people had. Quite overwhelming!
 
jandian

jandian

Senior Member
#5
Feb 12, 2011
772
11
18
#5
OK
So in the book of Chronicles when you come upon some stories you are told is it not written in the book of KIngs? Then you can go to the book of Kings and find the stories just as advised.

But the same thing happens about the book of Jasher and other books; however they are not in the bible for me to go reference the story

If the a book in the bible tells us its there for us to read, why is it not there?
 
I

IntoTheVoid

Banned
#6
Sep 14, 2013
915
5
0
#6
jandian said:
OK
So in the book of Chronicles when you come upon some stories you are told is it not written in the book of KIngs? Then you can go to the book of Kings and find the stories just as advised.

But the same thing happens about the book of Jasher and other books; however they are not in the bible for me to go reference the story

If the a book in the bible tells us its there for us to read, why is it not there?
Click to expand...
Are these books available elsewhere to read?

I'd look at it as a reference. The author is obviously referencing another book he felt was relevant at the time. Maybe that book was widely circulated or discussed at the time and the author assumed every one would know what he meant.
 
jandian

jandian

Senior Member
#7
Feb 12, 2011
772
11
18
#7
IntoTheVoid said:
Are these books available elsewhere to read?

I'd look at it as a reference. The author is obviously referencing another book he felt was relevant at the time. Maybe that book was widely circulated or discussed at the time and the author assumed every one would know what he meant.
Click to expand...
It is available.

Actually some researchers say that they were 80 books in the first 1613 King James Bible and over time they were pilfered out. So they say
 
I

IntoTheVoid

Banned
#8
Sep 14, 2013
915
5
0
#8
Well maybe references like these made it easier to trim it down. It still gives people the option to seek this text out as extra curricular reading without having the headache of deciding if it should be included or not lol
 
jandian

jandian

Senior Member
#9
Feb 12, 2011
772
11
18
#9
I hear you.
though some believe that they should not be read if its not in the bible
 
Apostol2013

Apostol2013

Senior Member
#10
Jan 27, 2013
2,105
39
48
#10
I have studied many books although convincing the language does not concord with the time making multiple inconsistencies i am in the hobby of researching the validity of each of the books some are not there for a reason but i sugest to research each manuscript with care ....God bless ....study to make thyself aproved
 
Starcrash

Starcrash

Banned
#11
Aug 5, 2013
624
2
0
#11
It should be noted that Matthew 2:23 includes an allusion to a prophesy never made in the Old Testament ("that He would be called a Nazarene"). Perhaps he was looking at a book that was in his personal bible at the time, but was lost to time. It is strange that such "books of the prophets" wouldn't have made it into the bible, whether or not you believe that the bible was divinely inspired.

I find it strange that the book of Enoch is not in the bible, as it was a strong part of Jewish tradition (and shaped most modern beliefs about Satan). Neither is 1 Maccabees, a book of Jewish history. While it's clear for many reason why the book of Thomas didn't make it into the bible (it includes Jesus sinning as a child by turning friends into frogs and even killing one of them), the belief about Jesus' father Joseph being a tradesman is drawn from only that source. There are already contradictions in the bible -- I'm sure the inclusion of these books wouldn't have hurt Christianity's reputation any more than the Satanic Verses ruined Islam.
 
crossnote

crossnote

Senior Member
#13
Nov 24, 2012
30,707
3,650
113
#13
There also is a missing letter to the Corinthians but so what? In God's Providence I believe what we have is sufficient and 'complete' and exactly what God has intended and has served the Church well all these centuries.
Many of the 'spurious' books that show up on the scene from time to time only end up being self evident frauds introducing false teachings.
 
RedTent

RedTent

Banned
#14
Oct 31, 2011
8,200
182
0
#14
I am very thankful for the men who have studied all these books to sort out the ones they feel are from God. When I have looked into reasons they find for choosing the books they did, it seems to me they did a wonderful work for us.

Think of the many books about the bible that have been written in the last 100 years. I love C S Lewis' Screwtape Letters. It is the same with reading what people back then had to say, but not scripture. Eusebius wrote a history in about 350 or so that gives a picture of those days. I admire anyone who can sort out some of the early writings, I am lazy enough I read what others say they say using modern day English.

We have enough writings that we can truly understand about our God. The other books are a wonderful help, we don't need them for scripture, and some just aren't truthful.
 
T

Tintin

Guest
#15
#15
I'm finding books like Enoch interesting. They may contain elements of Truth but they're not inspired and not meant to be included in the Bible.
 
D

directline2iam

Banned
#16
Jul 25, 2013
1,329
19
0
#16
IntoTheVoid said:
Out of curiosity, does it say in any books of the bible that a bible should be compiled? And does it mention in the bible what books are to be included?
Click to expand...
Ex. 34:27And the LORD said unto Moses, Write thou these words: for after the tenor of these words I have made a covenant with thee and with Israel. 28And he was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And he wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments

If Moses wrote "books" of scripture wouldn't it make sense that God would expect ALL His Word's to be included and non excluded? Therefore even when Jesus was among the people reading what? Plural, the ScriptureS. Did Jesus have only one booklet or do you think He had ALL the booklets, scrolls, whatever you want to call it at His fingertips to read from? God ordained the scriptures to be written in the old and new testament and those booklets, scriptures, are what we call the Bible. You can call the Bible anything under heaven to mean God's written Word. So God did say to write it and it is shown in proof in the scriptures.

Every Word of God will last but untruths will fade to nothing. The Holy Spirit who is God will ensure His Word will not come back to Him empty. So don't consider that the bible is only God's Word. Other writings not in the bible are His also and when and where His Word is needed to be heard, nothing can stop it from coming forth. No one can hide God's Word, no one can destroy them. Not even God as why would God destroy Himself.

Where it says, " Is it not written in the book of Jasher?" Jasher isn't the name of the book, Jasher means "the straight, or the upright." That could mean any book it's written in and obviously we have found it in the book of Joshua.
So the way I understand it, Jasher could be any inspired book of scripture.
 
Angela53510

Angela53510

Senior Member
#18
Jan 24, 2011
11,781
2,947
113
#18
This is just like the apocrypha. These are the books which appear in the Catholic Bible, but not Protestant. I have read them in Seminary, and there are some that are mostly true, like First Macabbees, and total Fiction like second Macabees. I think Judith might be another book of total fiction.

These books are valid as historical books to establish what was going on during the intertestimental period. But they were never considered to be "inspired" by God. I think that is the crux of this issue. Not whether the books existed, when they existed or whether they are true or not.

There are other lost books that are directly mentioned in the Bible. The book of the Kings of Judah and Israel are referenced at 2 Chronicles 16:11, 27:7, 32:32

Another book, The Book of the Chronicles of the Kings is referenced 45 times in the King James Bible, with a final reference at Ezra 4:15

As Crossnote mentioned, there is evidence that there was not one but TWO lost letters to the Corinthians. Jude references the book of Enoch.

So interesting to read, but not inspired by God. I have no doubt that the Holy Spirit was faithful to make sure only the truly inspired books are in the canon. I know I can trust my Bible, and reading these extra Biblical books are just for fun, or some historical information.
 
B

BeanieD

Guest
#19
#19
I don't know that they should have been added, but I DO know that the Bible we have is more than enough to learn God, to learn His truths, and give us a path to salvation.

Blessings
 
1

1disciple

Banned
#20
Nov 13, 2012
321
4
0
#20
In short, yes. All the books that are supposed to be in the Bible are in the Bible, as long as you understand what the Bible is.

So, what is the Hebrew Bible? The Hebrew Bible is a post-exilic product begun by Ezra the Scribe and finished by the scribal college that he began.

If you see Ezra citing source works that he is using for his historical narratives, I wouldn't get too excited. Ezra's task here was to create a history of the Jewish people from Creation to Babylonian captivity. His twelve books of history (often called the Dodecateuch) are a major part of this work, called the Hebrew Bible. Josephus speaks of it and we can be certain as to what books were laid up in that very Temple set of volumes that Josephus was using that had been taken from the sack of Jerusalem under TItus.

You have the 12 Books of narrative history (for there is no such thing as the Torah, as this was a later tradition that became confused as being the actual work of Moses, instead of a work of Ezra based upon Moses' books of the Wars of the Jews and his Scroll of the Law which is inserted in whole in Deuteronomy. Ezra used royal annals to compose the rest of the books into narrative and teaching form. For the entire Jewish commonwealth had practically been destroyed during the captivity, and it was Ezra's specially commisioned work to restore the Law to the people. For he is called 'Ezra the Scribe, even the Scribe of the Words of IHVH'.

Ezra wrote his 12 books of history, compiled the former works of the Prophets and along with the Psalms to comprise the first Jewish Biblical cannon. Later, the Alexandrians saw it as necessary to include the histories of the Maccabees to the Septuagint so that diaspora Jews might understand this history in light of Daniel especially. So it is all good and perfectly fine to be included in the Bible, at very least as appendices. But all in all, the Bible is the Bible. To add other books would do damage to the historical canon of Ezra. Though other books can be helpful in the study of the Bible, Ezra's original canon was thought especially important to preserve as it was and so was laid up in the Temple until the times of Josephus. This is what has come down through history as the Hebrew Bible. In NT times, the disciples eventually simply began adding the Gospel narratives and the letters, with Apocalypse to their Septuagint and making the scrolls or codices available for public readings in the churches.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.