This is a question for Christians do you think bible is complete or has it been tampered with IE missing books

Question

For instance enoch should of been right after Genesis it explains the giants in the which where the children of fallen angels......

Answer 1

No one has the slightest physical evidence to support a historical Jesus; no artifacts, dwelling, works of carpentry, or self-written manuscripts. All claims about Jesus derive from writings of other people. There occurs no contemporary Roman record that shows Pontius Pilate executing a man named Jesus. Devastating to historians, there occurs not a single contemporary writing that mentions Jesus. All documents about Jesus got written well after the life of the alleged Jesus from either: unknown authors, people who had never met an earthly Jesus, or from fraudulent, mythical or allegorical writings. Although one can argue that many of these writings come from fraud or interpolations, I will use the information and dates to show that even if these sources did not come from interpolations, they could still not serve as reliable evidence for a historical Jesus, simply because all sources derive from hearsay accounts.

Hearsay means information derived from other people rather than on a witness' own knowledge.

Courts of law do not generally allow hearsay as testimony, and nor does honest modern scholarship. Hearsay provides no proof or good evidence, and therefore, we should dismiss it.

If you do not understand this, imagine yourself confronted with a charge for a crime which you know you did not commit. You feel confident that no one can prove guilt because you know that there exists no evidence whatsoever for the charge against you. Now imagine that you stand present in a court of law that allows hearsay as evidence. When the prosecution presents its case, everyone who takes the stand against you claims that you committed the crime, not as a witness themselves, but solely because other people said so. None of these other people, mind you, ever show up in court, nor can anyone find them.

Hearsay does not work as evidence because we have no way of knowing whether the person lies, or simply bases his or her information on wrongful belief or bias. We know from history about witchcraft trials and kangaroo courts that hearsay provides neither reliable nor fair statements of evidence. We know that mythology can arise out of no good information whatsoever. We live in a world where many people believe in demons, UFOs, ghosts, or monsters, and an innumerable number of fantasies believed as fact taken from nothing but belief and hearsay. It derives from these reasons why hearsay cannot serves as good evidence, and the same reasoning must go against the claims of a historical Jesus or any other historical person.

Authors of ancient history today, of course, can only write from indirect observation in a time far removed from their aim. But a valid historian's own writing gets cited with sources that trace to the subject themselves, or to eyewitnesses and artifacts. For example a historian today who writes about the life of George Washington, of course, can not serve as an eyewitness, but he can provide citations to documents which give personal or eyewitness accounts. None of the historians about Jesus give reliable sources to eyewitnesses, therefore all we have remains as hearsay.

But there is proof that matthew was killed in rome before he wrote the first word in the bible so how can it be true

Answer 2

Good question. The scripture of the Jews and the Christian Scripture is intact. The lost books of Jasher and the Wars of Jehovah are referenced in the Bible but are lost right now.

FAQ: What books are in the Word and what are apocrypha?


"The books of the Word are all those which have the internal sense; but those books which have not the internal sense, are not the Word. The books of the Word, in the Old Testament, are the five Books of Moses, the Book of Joshua, the Book of Judges, the two Books of Samuel, the two Books of Kings, the Psalms of David, the Prophets Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel, Daniel, Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi: and in the New Testament, the four Evangelists, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John; and the Apocalypse. The rest have not the internal sense" (Arcana Coelestia n. 10325 or Heavenly Doctrine n. 266).





FAQ: Why different testaments and books in the Word?


"As regards the Word particularly, it has existed in every age, though not the Word we possess at the present day. Another Word existed in the Most Ancient Church before the Flood, and yet another Word in the Ancient Church after the Flood. Then came the Word written through Moses and the Prophets in the Jewish Church, and finally the Word written through the Evangelists in the new Church. The reason why the Word has existed in every age is that by means of the Word there is a communication between heaven and earth, and also that the Word deals with goodness and truth, by which a person is enabled to live in eternal happiness. In the internal sense therefore the Lord alone is the subject, for all goodness and truth are derived from Him" (Arcana Coelestia n. 2895).

Answer 3

The Bible has not been "tampered with," as you put it. However, you do make a good point. Although the Canon has not been changed (i.e. books have not been taken away as far as I know), it is true that the Canon had to be developed. Two thousand years ago there were many people writing Bible stories (and many scholars and religious peoples of the day knew of these stories). Interestingly, though, some of these stories made it into the Biblical Canon and some of them did not. So the question that many people seem to ignore is: since other books almost made it into the Bible, doesn't this show that the Canon was developed by human beings (and not God) to best fit the religion?

Answer 4

Historically, there was a Counsel in Nicea in 736AD. Pope Iraeneus made the decision as to which books would be included and which would not, and Constantine, the Holy Roman Emperor, agreed. So, if you think that Iraeneus was a divine personage and could make that decision, then I guess you think that the Bible is complete as it stands. There were several books that "explained" other books that Iraeneus left out. Personally, I think he did it to get back at the Gnostics. The books he left out all say that you and I can go to God directly and that we don't really need priests or ministers or saints or icons. That, of course, would have been horrible to the newly rising Catholic church. So, the church truncated the Bible so that it said exactly what they wanted it to say. Also, do you notice that so many of the new protestant sects criticize the Catholics, but they still use the same Bible? Interesting, huh?

One more thought. It says in the Bible that God gave Satan dominion over the earth. Remember that Satan tempted Jesus and offered him many earthly rewards if he turned his back on God. So, if Satan does have dominion over the earth, what better way to get humans to his side than to mess with the Bible?

Answer 5

The Protestant Bible doesn't contain the apocryphal writings because the Hebrew canon didn't carry them either.

Jesus said this: "These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you-that everything written about me in the law of Moses, the Prophets, and the Psalms had to be fulfilled." (Luke 24:44) Notice that Jesus mentioned the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms. These are the three sections of Hebrew Scriptures. They are broken down into 22 books. These 22 books are the same as the 39 books of the Protestant Old Testament.

Another ancient witness to this is Flavius Josephus. In his writings, he speaks of the Hebrew Scriptures as having twenty-two books with the same three divisions as well.

While some apocryphal books may contain good history, such as I & II Macabees, some apocryphal books contain information that is contrary to Scripture. (Imagine the debates in Yahoo Answers about THOSE contradictions!)

So yes, the Bible, containing 66 books in the Old and New Testaments is complete.

Answer 6

The Bible is complete. The missing books are actually books written after the canon was official. They are a couple hundred years after the Bible was put together. They were written to try to mislead the people. Now they are being used to mislead people who don't read the Bible or understand the history of the Bible. My advice to you is to ignore them before you are led astray.

Answer 7

They were not fallen angels...

After cain killed Abel, God replaced him with Seth..

cain and his children were of and worship satan..

Abel and his children were of and worship The most high God

the two tribes merged and the evil within took over Seths people and then the whole known world turned evil... except Noah

In the spirit world there are no male and female

Mr 12:25 For when they shall rise from the dead, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage; but are as the angels which are in heaven.


and in human flesh they are as eunuchs....

Mt 19:12 For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother's womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it ..

Evil spirits can transform themselves into humans the same as the good angels....

Heb 13:2 Be not forgetful to entertain strangers: for thereby some have entertained angels unawares

sorry no sex no earth children..

They are most popular for and do if they can 99.9% of the time is to indwell in you...

Answer 8

It is correct for the most part. Not in order. As far as our needs are concerned it is sufficient, the Book of Mormon is a second witness of scripture which compliments the bible and was prepared for our day buried in the earth. The prophet Joseph Smith was commanded to translate this scripture by the power of God. It contains the fullness of the gospel. It is the most correct of any book on the earth. Imagine that. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has restored the gospel in its fullness through the prophet Joseph Smith. God has given us these scriptures as a witness that Jesus is the Christ and it is evidence that Joseph Smith is a true prophet of God in the latter-days. www. lds.org

Answer 9

No,I Think Its Complete.
Considering It Is God's Word To Help Us Understand And Come To Belive In Him,I Dont Think He Would Let Any Errors,Or Leaving It Incomplete.

Answer 10

there are some small hints to books missing from reference to them in other chapters. i have to ask my husband which ones. i do know from British history that a certain king Henry the 8th had some removed to allow him to do stuff. they even talk about that in British history. i still believe the way the movie stigmata says. it was the Catholic church that helped in the translation of the bible and we may not even know what was left out. wish i could remember the books. it has already been proven that translations from the original was interpreted wrong by those who study the original language of the bible. i believe it was a total of 4 books missing. good luck in your search.

Answer 11

No. I think it is complete. I have study the reasons book were included, others left out, and have even read translations of some of the missing books. I believe it is complete, and aside from translations in recent bible, is untampered. (Im picky about the Bible I use)