Is it true that the Bible has excluded some passages?

Question

As far as I've heard, the Bible doesn't include everything and there are passages that have been kept by humans from humans.

Answer 1

could be.

Answer 2

The problem with defining the Bible is that it is a collection of books, some related, some not. Originally, it wasn't even written but transmitted orally through generations by trained speakers. When Israel and Judah were in danger of being overrun by foreign powers, they got serious about writing stuff down, but not everything, because it didn't all exist yet.

The Torah, the first five books, were written down first. During the Babylonian Exile, the books of the Prophets were added. Even after the return, more writings were added. They weren't pages in a book but separate scrolls that could be added and removed as desired.

In the Third Century BCE, the Hebrew Bible was translated into Greek for the Jews living in Alexandria, Egypt. It was this translation that was familiar to the early Christians. After the fall of Jerusalem in 70 CE, some Jews decided it was time to finalize the text. In 90, they met to evaluate the books to be considered. Some books, like the Book of Jubilees and the Secrets of Enoch, were too esoteric to be useful. Some were pious or apocalyptic embellishments of existing stories. They also decided that no books written after the time of Ezra would be included. Now, there were some books that claimed to be written before Ezra that probably weren't but these people had no way to determine that. Effectively, they selected the books that make up the Protestant canon today. The Septuagint had more books, but none of them survived in Hebrew, so it was assumed that they were too late to qualify. The extra books are now known to the Protestants as the Apocrypha.

Christians weren't invited to that meeting, so they continued to regard the entire Septuagint as inspired. They had some discussions of their own about the literature that was accumulating in their own sphere. Some accepted all four standard gospels, some only one or two. Some felt the letter to the Hebrews should be tossed because it didn't indicate an author. Revelation was too symbolic to be useful at all. Several of Paul's letters didn't seem genuine and nether did Peter's. Others argued that the Shepherd of Hermas, and the letters of Barnabas and Clement should be included. Only in the Fourth Century CE did the list get finalized. Books that were never considered were the Gnostic "gospels" because they espoused a theology very incompatible with orthodox Christianity, and several books that appeared to be pious but pointless elaborations of the lives of Jesus and the apostles, adventure stories if you will. Among these were the Acts of Peter and Paul, the "Infancy" gospels and the Letter of Pontius Pilate.

Eventually, Greek began to decline in the Western Roman Empire. A scholar named Jerome was asked by the pope to make a new Latin translation of the Septuagint and the New Testament for the people. He resisted until he saw what was available. In his work, he suddenly realized that it would be more prudent to translate the Hebrew books from the Hebrew rather than the Greek. That's when he discovered the difference between the two. Not knowing how to handle the discrepancy, he decided to put the Greek-only books in a separate section so people would know the difference. They were still part of the Bible, but distinct by their lack of Hebrew sources. Jerome's effort was called the "Common" (Latin: "Vulgate") Bible.

In the 1500s, when Martin Luther broke away from the Catholic church, scripture became a big issue once again. Because of their contention that Rome had drifted from true Christianity, Protestants needed a new historical justifications for their dissident doctrines. Luther re-examined the Bible and discovered that the doctrines he protested were most clearly represented in the Apocrypha. Since they had been placed all together, thanks to Jerome, it was a simple matter to toss the offending books out entirely. (He wasn't too keen on the Letter of James either, but rejecting that would have been harder to justify.) Catholics maintained their books in the original Septuagint order (which, by the way, is not the Hebrew order either).

Beyond the selection of books, there are specific passages that don't agree among the manuscripts. The "originals" are long crumbled to dust. There are 10th Century manuscripts that are the basis of some translations. Others use 5th Century manuscripts. The 10th Century manuscripts have more passages than the 5th Century ones. Were they embellished or were the older ones defective? Some verses aren't a big deal but others have been used to validate major doctrines such as the Trinity.

It's not a conspiracy to keep people from the "truth". Decisions were made, sincerely, at several times, by different groups, to choose which scriptures were consistent with the beliefs of the people. Some decisions were made as the result of new discoveries among old manuscripts (such as the Dead Sea Scrolls). But no one is intentionally trying to keep secrets. The rejected books and disputed passages are available to be examined. Some are interesting, some are dull, but most quickly reveal the reasons they didn't make the cut.

Answer 3

What do you mean by "everything"?

It is true that the Bible does not include much of Jesus' childhood. It is true that there is a gap in time between the Old Testament and New Testament. It does not include every piece of history that happened from the beginning of time. So, no, the bible does not include everything. It is a collection of writings. What George said about the council picking what would be included in the Bible is correct. Much more was written and deemed to be not considered "gospel."

Are you talking about the gnostic gospels? These are some of the other writing of the time that did not make it into the Bible. They include writings of Mary Magdalene and some others. I have only glanced at them, but they are quite interesting. But are they the inspired word of God? That answer was determined to be "no."

I, personally, believe that the Bible includes everything it needs to include. I think Jesus' message of salvation is quite clear.

Answer 4

It is a mass of conflicting impulses . It all started under the Hellenistic era when Greek was influenced through out the known world. When everything was translated into Greek. For example the word “young maiden “ was replaced with the word “Virgin “,when it was translated from the original Hebrew to Greek, In the passage the new testament authors refer to as some future prophecy concerning Jesus. It is indicative that authors were reading the Greek translations of the old Testament. So they actually made up an event to fit what they believed to be a prophecy. This is an historical Fact” They screwed up” Proof that it was all about deceiving people from the very start“, Now the whole Christ event is subject to suspicion .

Answer 5

no the bible does not include everything that is a part of the Jewish and christian sacred mythos

Example: the fall of Satan is a big concept in Christianity (can't have hell without Satan the fallen archangel) However, the story of the fall of Satan is nowhere in the bible. it is in the book of Enoch

Here is what happened from a historical perspective. the word "Bible" is a Greek word literally meaning "books" this is because long before the concept of stacks of paper being bound along one edge (the modern book) was invented all the "books" of the bible (Genesis, Exodus, judges, job, ect) were scrolls that were meant to be stand alone sacred stories. There were no order to these scrolls or list of what scrolls everyone needs to read. So there were tons of these scrolls and eveyone just read what was available to them.

Well eventually the book was invented and all the religious leaders basically got together and decided that they should have 1 official book. So they sifted through all the hundreds of scrolls and inevitably a lot of them hit the cutting room floor. The ones that stayed were the ones that the religious authorities of the time felt were the ones that reflected that which is most important to the beliefs of the church.

Answer 6

it is not so much that it excluded some passages as only included some of the many writings thaty were brought to the council of trent. As christianity grew as a religion there was a time before we had a Bible. people would gather and teachers would teach and people wrote down news about jesus we call these Gosples. Letters were sent from teachers like the Apostle Paul to help churces these are called epistles. the Jews had a collection of writings in existance that we call the Old testiment.

Many gosples were written and by the way Mark and luke were not Apostles but disciples of the Apostles who were led by the Holly Spirit to record what they had been taught through men by the Holly Spirit as the Holly Spirit Brought it to rememberance

At this Council It was noted that many gosples and epistles did in fact contradict others and therefore were not inspired. The councils purpose was to allow God to use them by the Holy Spirits leadin to gather those books that were inspired into one book wich would be the Bible. It is by the same faith that some call foolish that those who believe in the divine inspiration of the writing of the bible was there at the council of trent . Simply put I believe the same God that keeps our planet from spinning of into the sun is able to keep the integrity of the Bible.

Books are writen today , they are not inspired.Some are helpful some aren't the same can be said for those things that were brought to the council of trent but deemed non inspired

Answer 7

Of course.
The Bible did not come in one piece, as a lot of people mistakenly believe. The Catholic Church made decisions throughout Antiquity and the Middle Ages about what should be included in the Holy Canon and what should be left out. Other works were still considered sacred, but left out of the Bible. Religious scholars worked from different translations of Hebrew and Greek texts to come up with the Bible we know today, making decisions along the way as to interpretation, and deciding which version was right when they differed (which happened frequently).
If you pick up a Catholic Bible, you will also see books (Maccabees, Tobie...) which the protestant have removed. That's because protestants do not consider these books sacred and differ from the Catholic Church as to what should constitute the Bible.

Answer 8

you're absolutely Right my dear!!
The Church have excluded passages of the Bible, the Church on the late 1800's claimed that they have identified some passages of the bible which was written by people who did not have the "divine guidance", thus they removed those passages from the bible.( I think the church did it because there are too many passages in the bible in the past that are questionable, and they choose to be safe! how did they identify which author has the divine guidance anyway?)

Answer 9

The Apocrypha (the books that have been bumped off) have been never considered Holy Scripture (nor did they ever declare to be) via the Jews or the early Church. Jerome blanketed them in the Latin Vulgate as "historic tellers." He did no longer even have faith that they have got been on a similar point because of the fact the Holy Scripture. So, whilst Protestants all started translating the Bible for themselves, they left those out because of the fact they weren't surely Scripture. additionally, a brilliant form of Catholic doctrine comes from those books (like the belief of purgatory and baptism for the lifeless). Protestants found out that they weren't in contract with the honestly Holy Scripture so, returned, they left them out.

Answer 10

Yes, this is true. Apparently the gospel of Peter and Thomas were left out by humans as they're were different to the other gospels and also those making the bible wanted only 4 gospels, not 6.

Answer 11

Everytime a book is revised, some things are deleted, and some things are added. Now think... how many times has the Bible been revised? Depending on what Bible you read, around 30 times. That's 30 time's things have been deleted or added or both. It's safe to say that you are not reading the original Bible. People revise things with a purpose, and that purpose is to add their beliefs, or what they think you should read. Not to mention everything that is lost in the original translation through the languages.