Books of the bible.?

Question

Who can tell me all of the books of the bible known to man THAT WERE DELETED BY THE CHURCH way back in the day. Also, have you read any other version of the bible other than the King James version? You do know that this version was rewritten by Shakespeare himself don't you? And if this is the only bible you know, how can you call yourself a true christian when you've never read the latin version? there are so many mistranslations that its essentially a completely different book! What is "Hades"? Well, hades is latin for the sound your body makes when it hits the bottom of your grave. Did you know that? what else do you know about the real bible?

Answer 1

Anyway you define it, "deleted by the church" is hard to answer.

1: _The Coptic Canon of Eighty One_ pretty much disproves any theory about books being deleted by "The Church".

2: Excluding that canon, for a number of purely theoretical reasons:

Protestant Christianity deleted
* Greek Esther;
* Tobit;
* Sirach;
* Wisdom;
* Baruch, EpJer;
* Bel, Susanna, Prayer of Azariah;
* Prayer of Manassah;
* 3 Esdras, 4 Esdras;
* 1 Mac, 2 Mac, 3 Mac, 4 Mac;
* Psalm 151;

The Holy Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church deleted
* 1 Esdras, 2 Esdras;
* Prayer of Manassah;
* Psalm 151;
* 3 Mac, 4 Mac;

Martin Luther deleted:
* EpLao;
* The same list as deleted by Protestant Christianity

That covers changes since roughly 400 CE,

When the first six church councils met, they simply recognized what was, at that point in time, generally accepted practice, as being "correct practice".

Between circa 140 CE, when Marcion compiled his list of "Canonical books of the Church", until the Church councils, the debate about inclusion, or exclusion was carried out in a series of attacks, counter attacks, and public debate.

For the record, the books that were most disputed were:
* Revelation
* 3 John
* 2 John
* Jude
* 2 Peter
* The Didache

_The Didache_ was dropped from the canon, as a compromise gesture.

_1 Clement_, _2 Clement_ and _3 Corinthians_ are the best known books that are currently listed as canonical by one or more group within Orthodox Christianity, but unknown in both Roman and Protestant Christianity.

Had Marcion, and his side won the theological debate about Christianity consisted of, the current canon would have looked different. [Marcion's list only had 14 books in it.]

Obviously, the contemporary historical record only shows us what the winners thought. Whilst there are a dozen or so other candidates for possible inclusion, very few of them made it into two or more lists.

BTW, before singing the praises of the Latin, remember that it is a translation, and as apt to be a mis-translation, as not.

Answer 2

Hello friend,
You seem to have a great deal of anger behind your question.
You spoke of "Church" history, Bible versions (Latin, KJV, "real Bible"), true vs untrue Christian, Hades, and perhaps best of all, a famous playwrite.
Quite a collection of thoughts for such a young person.
May I say this about your question as a whole. You are correct about some books being included/excluded in the Canon. Also, folks would do well not to limit themselves to only one version of Scripture. Whether or not Shakespear "re-wrote" the KJV is irrelevant to the body of the question.
Your implication that a "true" Christian would read the Latin version in order to be a true Christion is absurd.
Last of all friend of mine, your real and main question is at the very end of your "question", which is this :
" what else do you know about the real bible?"
May I redirect that question back to you. I suppose that you have and know the real Bible. That's commendable. I leave you with this thought, If you DO have and know the real Bible, would It's Author be pleased with you this day?
Before you answer too quickly, remember this morning.
God bless,
2 Tim 2:7

Answer 3

All those who claim the English translation of the bible was done primarily to allow the common man to read it, neglect to mention a few important points:

1) Hardly anyone could read in those days, no matter what the language. The world was largely illiterate.

2) English was NOT the universal, worldwide language in those days. There was a much better chance of sucessfully communicating if you were able to read and speak Spanish, Greek, and yes, Latin, the official, worldwide, language of the universal church, and of all the scholarly instititions of higher learning.

3) In the mid 15th century, with the complete approval and full support of the Catholic church, Johann Gutenberg, the inventor of the movable type printing press, chose to offer the Latin Vulgate version of the Holy Bible as the very first printed book, making the bible accessible to all people, the world over, at a very economical price.

So much for the nonsense about the Catholic church trying to suppress the bible!

Answer 4

There were many scriptures that were never included in the Bible that were considered truth by the early churches. All Bibles had 14 Apocrypha books in them. The KJV had 80 books in almost all printings until the 1800's then it became hit and miss, by the late 1800's they were removed from most printings. I personally own and read from many antique Bibles such as the latin Vulgate that you mentioned. I also have a 1599 Geneva, a 1385 Wycliffe, 1660 KJV, and a later reprint of Martin luthers German Bible (though I can't read German). I also have Hebrew Bibles and Hebrew parchments from the 1600's.

Regarding Hades check my past answers, but to take it a step further, the word Hades is not latin but the Greek version of the original Hebrew word Sheol. The Latin word for Sheol and Hades is Infernus. Abbadon (Hebrew) became Gehenna (Greek) and refers to the Valley of Hinnom also refered to as Gai-ben-hinnom.

You are mistaken about Shakespreare. Shakespeare was a reader of the Geneva Bible but the KJV came out to compete with the Geneva and they lied to push it stating it was the Bible of Shakespeare and rumors today state that they even changed the wording in one of the books of Psalms to honor him. Due to these fabrications many people teach misconceptions regarding Shakespeare and the KJV.

PS: I am a Christian and put my faith in YHWH and Yeheshua as saviour. Most self claiming christians never ever study the roots of their beliefs and totally trust all the garbage their preachers read to them from their store bought outlines. I didn't list all the removed books due to time and space, if you want the ones I know of then contact me through my below site. Do not judge Chistianity on the church going crowd for that is not where you will find true Christians. There are only a few in the churches, most Christians will not remain in churches because of all the false Roman teachings.

Keep seeking the truth.

Answer 5

A great reference I found was at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Table_of_Books_of_Judeo-Christian_Scripture

I have browsed other bibles but have only read the KJV and the Reina Valera version in Spanish. The Catholic bible includes an apocrypha, which includes 6 (sometimes more) additional books of the old testament. Protestants generally don't find the Apocrypha to be divinely inspired. Jehova's Witnesses have removed portions of the bible in their translation in an effort to be more accurate to what they feel is the original (see John 8).

As far as shakespeares involvement I'm afraid you are a bit confused. Some have claimed that the playwright William Shakespeare was involved in the translation, pointing to Psalms 46 as proof, where, counting 46 words from the beginning, one comes upon the word "shake", and counting 46 words backwards from the end, one comes upon the word "spear". Additionally, Shakespeare was 46 years of age at the time of the translating. Most scholars dismiss claims of Shakespeare's involvement in translating the King James Version, and do not accept this example as evidence of his involvement. Notably, the Geneva Bible and several other earlier translations contained the same coincidence, despite several of them being published before or just shortly after Shakespeare's birth.


The crux of some religions is based on what you have said regarding mistranslations, most notably, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, or Mormons. Their most notable doctrine is the belief that the bible has become corrupt by wicked men, and that no bible exists in the pure original form. The only true way to know truth according to the Mormons is through direct revelation from God and that ANY other way is susceptible to human error and malice. They believe everybody is entitled to this revelation and that God leads his church through a living prophet. The founder of the church, Joseph Smith, actually wrote his own translation of the Bible through what he said was divine inspiration. This translation fills in many of the "missing" parts of the Bible. It can be found at www.lds.org. Interesting huh? They even have a different understanding of the word "Hades" than mainstream religion.

Answer 6

Latin was the first translation, so even you have not read the original, wich was Greek and Hebrew.

The books excluded during the first translation from Latin Vulgate was the Apocrapha, and is included in the Cathiloc Bible.

The King James was translated over 7 years, by 51 men, from the original greek and hebrew, not the secondary Latin. It was translated to give everyone a chance to read it, not just the Cathiloc church, who monopolized the Latin Vulgate version.

Books were canonozed for a reason, some were left out, as they were incomplete, their writers were in question, that validity of the author could not be verefied. Canonization occured during many diffrent councils, of not just Cathilocs, but Jewish and Christian leaders, who all agreed on the Biblical Canon.

No, this is not a cut and paste. This is research I have done.

Answer 7

Shakespeare did not rewrite the KJV of the bible.He was a friend of King James,though.Nice try, but you really should get your facts straight.Oh, yeah, and I'm not a Christian, either.I'm just a stickler for the facts.And speaking of facts, the bible that King James had translated was in 4 different languages :Greek,Latin,Hebrew and Aramaic.So of course someone's bound to screw up some where.As for books that were left out, I really don't care.I know they cut Thomas' and Mary's and someone already mentioned Apocrypha.But isn't the Bible tedious enough without the new books?

Answer 8

the missing books in the KJV are: the war of the Lord -- Num 21:14 -- book of Jasher -- 1 Sam10:25 -- the acts of Soloman -- 1 Kgs 11:41 -- book of Samuel the seerer -- Chr 29:29 -- book of Nathan the prophet -- 12:15, book of Shemaiah the prophet 13:22 tha Acts of Abijah..in the story of the prophet Iddo -- 20:34 -- the book of Jehu.
New testiment: Col 4:16, epistle from Laodicea. Jude 1:3 Enoch the prophet

Answer 9

The King James Bible was interpreted for King James and it has a huge introduction that is still preserved. I have a PDF with the long intro that nobody likes to read. It is a serious effort that is holding up well with all the newer interpretations.

http://www.mechanicsburgnewchurch.org

Answer 10

Apparently, you dont know whole lot either. Try reading a Greek version of the Bible, as it is even older and has less mistranslations than the Latin one.....

Did you know that the Bible originally had evidence that Jesus did NOT die on the cross? But, in translating it from Greek to Latin, this clue was supressed.... After the cruciFICTION, Joseph goes to Pilate and asks for Jesus' SOMA back, and Pilate agrees to release Jesus' PTOMA. SOMA is a living body, PTOMA is a dead body. Joseph KNEW Jesus wasnt dead when he asked Pilate for his SOMA back! But, when translated to Latin, corpse was used....