That there is apparently a whole lotta books that aren't part of the bible? I think it's referred to as the Apocrypha! Why weren't they included?
just curious!
thanks all
2006-11-30 02:24:33 · 16 answers · asked by -♦One-♦-Love♦- 7 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
The early Catholic church left out a lot of books that should have been included in the bible.
2006-11-30 14:31:54 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes there are many apocryphal books, including at least 10 gospels, nearly a hundred letters, and a few dozen other texts. They were not included in the Bible when the bishops of the Catholic Church compiled the Bible because the Holy Spirit did not lead the bishops to include them. In order for the Bible to have any real value as God's Word, one must believe (1) that the individual texts were divinely inspired, and (2) that the decisions of the Catholic Church regarding which texts were to be included in the Bible were also divinely inspired, and infallible. The Bible as compiled once and for all time at the end of the 4th Century included 73 divinely inspired texts, 46 Old Testament and 27 New Testament. Either you accept these 73 books or you don't. Luther apparently did not accept the Canon of Scripture as infallible because he intended to remove 10 books from God's Word, 7 Old Testament books and 3 New Testament books. Fortunately his followers wouldn't hear of removing the writings of the Apostles, so he backed down on doing violence to the New Testament. If he had his way, Protestants would have an incomplete Bible of 63 books instead of an incomplete Bible of 66 books. However, since Luther did believe that the original Canon of Scripture included 10 non-inspired books, he therefore did not consider the choices of the Biblical books to be infallible, and therefore he had no basis for accepting any of the Bible as God's word. After all, if the Church made 10 errors in its selection of 73 books, there is a good chance it made other errors too, so some of the remaining books are probably not divinely inspired either. It's all or nothing. Either you accept the Canon of Scripture as infallibly defined, or you have no sound basis for accepting anything. Luther certainly was not infallible, as shown by his choices of New Testament books to be trashed.
.
2006-11-30 11:26:09 · answer #2 · answered by PaulCyp 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Q. 1. What is the Apocrypha?
A. 1. It is the term under which is sometimes listed in the Protestant Holy Bibles the seven Books of the Old Testament that are found in the Catholic Bible.
Q. 2. What are these seven Books of the Old Testament?
A. 2. They are the Books of Tobit, Judith, First and Second Maccabees, Wisdom, Sirach (sometimes called Ecclesiasticus), and Baruch (plus additions to Esther and Daniel).
As a general rule, the Protestant Holy Bibles contain only 66 Books while the Catholic Holy Bibles contain 73 Books, 46 in the Old Testament and 27 in the New Testament. When the Protestant Holy Bibles do list the additional seven Books, they are listed under the title of "Apocrypha" which means "hidden books.
Until the sixteen century, there was little disagreement about the Books of the Holy Bible. Around that time, Martin Luther (founder of the Lutheran Church) and other Protestant Churches rejected the established list of Books that were found in the Catholic Holy Bible.
Following this dissent, in 1546, the Council of Trent defined the Alexandrian list (not the Palestinian list [Jewish]) of Books as the official list of Old Testament Books. At the same time, it reaffirmed the traditional list of New Testament Books. As such, today's Books that are contained in the Old Testament and the New Testament are the exact same Books that were defined at a number of Catholic Church Councils, namely at Rome in 382 A.D., at Hippo in 393 A.D. and at Carthage in 397 A.D.
NOTE: The Jewish Torah also does not include these OT books as they were considered to follow to closely to the Christian beliefs, but ONLY after the death and resurrection of Jesus.
2006-11-30 12:17:05 · answer #3 · answered by Bob 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There are a number of books that are religious in nature but not included in the Bible that most people use today. Even between the Catholic and Protestant Bibles there are differences.
Most of what we know as the Bible today owes it's origin to the Conference of Nicea which was a project of Constantine's to standardize what the Bible is. Some books were accepted and some were not.
Google the Conference of Nicea to find out more.
2006-11-30 10:32:25 · answer #4 · answered by namsaev 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The Apocrypha I think refers more to the Old Testament. There were other books removed when Constantine because the first Holy Roman Emperor. The purpose behind removing books was to unify the Roman Empire and the religion. I would guess the same could be said of the Aprocrypha. It makes you wonder what was in those books though, doesn't it.
2006-11-30 10:29:09 · answer #5 · answered by Angel Baby 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Because they were studied and determined that they were not divinely inspired, or that they did not add anything that was not already covered.
There are TONS of ancient writings, many have nothing to do with religion.
It is the responsibility of the Church to determine which ones are relevant. The Church was the institution started by Jesus for this purpose (among others) there is no way any of us could translate, read, take in the correct context, and understand even a few of the ancient writings on our own.
I put my trust in the Catholic Church for this.
Good Question!
Peace!
2006-11-30 10:31:53 · answer #6 · answered by C 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ANY "CONTRADICTIONS"!!
Doesn't anybody READ the history of their own faith anymore??
The Apocryphal (or Deutero-Canonical) book were not accepted by the Jewish scholars who compiled Jewish of the Old Testament because they were not written in Hebrew. Even the parts of Daniel (The Song of Three Children, etc.) were left OUT simply because the only manuscripts that could be found were written in Aramaic.
2006-11-30 10:31:10 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
In each of those books some teachings that don't line up with the included books is found. They are worth knowing about but to place your eternal destiny it's better to stay with the cannon.... Jim
2006-11-30 10:54:56 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
2 Peter 1 and verse 3 tells us that we've been given all things that pertain to life and godliness, so we have everything in the Bible we need. If God had felt we needed to know something in those books, they would have been included.
2006-11-30 10:42:30 · answer #9 · answered by Dr. Quest 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They were not included because they were not able to fit into the Christian-based government structure that was to be formed by the Council of Nicea in 325 CE.
It's sad that people readily believe the church propaganda that denounces the apocrypha.
2006-11-30 10:29:29 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋