The entire bible..unedited?

Question

Most people today receive the writings arranged and bound together in their Bibles as Holy Scripture simply because that is what they find bound together under that title in a book they have purchased at the bookstore. Many Protestants are also aware of the fact that in choosing a Bible one must avoid the shelf labelled "Roman Catholic Bibles," because these are designed to promote Catholic beliefs and they also contain some books that we do not even receive as Scripture — the ones we refer to as belonging to the "Apocrypha." But why do we reject these books? Very few of us have even read them.. And so it is evident that most of us receive certain books and reject others not because we have personally evaluated them in any way, but because we trust that someone else has evaluated them and decided rightly concerning this matter? Is there a book out there with ALL of the books of the bible?

and please spare me the details on the apocrypha..i know all about it...im more or less also referring to the books in the bible that are MENTIONED in the bible, and yet somehow missed being "canonized"

Answer 1

People seem to think that the Bible was one big book written all at once. But books weren't invented before the 1st Century CE. The books of the Bible were on scrolls, separate scrolls, since a single scroll of the Bible would be too unwieldy to handle (not to mention to rewind to the beginning).

The books of the Hebrew Bible were not all accepted at once, either. During the time of the Kings, there was only the Torah, the first five books, and these are still considered as the most inspired by Jews of today. During the exile, some of the books of the prophets (Joshua to Ezra-Nehemiah plus the ones Christians call prophets) were written down, but only accepted later. The "wisdom" books and other writings were composed even later. Nothing was compiled into an authoritative "canon" until that legendary council at Jamnia in 90 CE, when the list of Hebrew scriptures was finalized by the rabbis of the day.

But 350 years before that, the scriptures were translated into Greek for the Jews living in Alexandria. Their translation, the Septuagint, had more books in it than the official list. These extra books and passages would eventually be called the "Apocrypha", but they were an integral part of the Septuagint, the scripture version quoted in the gospels. the Christians accepted these books because they weren't at the Jewish council that rejected them.

A "New" Testament wasn't supposed to be written because Jesus was coming right back. It wasn't until the apostles were old or dead that people thought about collecting the stories and teachings of Jesus and writing them down. They started collecting Paul's letters and writing the gospels, then argued for the next 200-odd years about which books were inspired and which weren't. Several lists were drawn up and they didn't agree, not until the ecumenical councils of the 4th Century. A few items, like the letters of Clement and Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas didn't make the final cut and some, like Hebrews, Jude and Revelation, barely made it in.

There were some writings that never made anyone's authoritative list. They were usually pious embellishments of other accounts, unenlightening adventure stories with miraculous bits thrown in, or the famous Gnostic texts, which painted a very different theology from the predominant orthodoxy. There were even a few "Jewish" scriptures with an obvious Christian subtext that didn't fool anyone.

Since the decision, every surviving Christian sect and denominantion agrees on the books of the New Testament. There is disagreement about the Hebrew canon. Protestants generally go with the Jewish list. Roman Catholics include the Apocrypha. The Orthodox church has a few more (3 and 4 Maccabees, Prayer of Manasseh, Psalm 151, etc.). the Coptic church even has one or two more.

I have an ecumenical RSV translation with the Catholic and Orthodox books. I don't know who else has done this in English, although you might check with your local Orthodox church.

As for the "pseudepigrapha", the books that were rejected outright, some have never been found (e.g. the Book of Jasher), but the survivors are easy to find online, in the public library and at some larger bookstores. The texts are old, often incomplete, and reflect a very different culture from ours. A few are tedious to read, or even silly, but some offer a curious look at an alternate form of "Christianity". You can get an idea from the links.

Answer 2

The library of congress is the only source that has the best complete collection of books and ancient manuscripts.
and yes, ONLY since, about the year 2000, have i known about extra biblical manuscripts that have just as much truth in them as any thing in the bible known as the new testament and the old testament.
The gospel of thomas has some sayings that have been altered in the modern day bible and can be offesive to Women, while the gospel of mary has offesive language to the heirarchy of men.
From the gnostic texts.
Some books have altered texts that are completely FALSE and so I've learned that all texts are flawed, and so I conclude even the bible has many flaws and is not a perfect preserved compilation of the words of God. many faiths go to the exact same verses in the bible and theorize the exact opposite teachings and opposite truth. One good example is the TRINITY vs the GODHEAD.
Historian Glenn kimbal was a major influence in my life in realizing the truths of ancient manuscripts and the political veiws of history that changed the gospels. He has personally read over 2 million manuscripts and says there are at least 5 million.
The first time i read the History of the church by Usebius, was an experience that opened my eyes as well. How can so much christianity exclude what Usebius gathered together from history, it could be like the book of ACTS pt3. or pt 4 or 5.
Most people wont read the Book of Mormon because of christian and catholic Censorship, for the exact same reasons that christianity only has the bible and for the exact same reason Jews wont believe in the new testament or that Jesus was THEIR MESSIAH which was prophesied.
i made the same mistakes while i grew up, and it is very hard to accept things that seem DIFFERENT.
But Paul concluded and summed up that ALL THINGS that are GOOD, "we seek after these things" as a RULE all christians should live by. Truth does not have one source yet all truth comes from the inspiration of God.

Answer 3

Yes, of course. You can easily do you own research to find out which ones are which, and why certain books were added or left out. There has been a lot written on the subject for the last 2000 years.

Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic bibles usually include the apocrypha, if that is what you are looking for.

There are other books which were left out of the bible on purpose, because their authorship was unknown, or they contradicted what Jesus & the apostles originally taught.

Here are differnet views on the subject:

Answer 4

The original translation of the bible was made by King James, thus the KJV version. This version of the bible's text seemed too hard to understand for our modern generation so they simplified it in more modern versions. The KJV bible's books were added only because they were the ones that were spiritually influenced. There are other written texts, yes, but they usually have certain verses that contradict what Jesus Christ taught. Thats why they were'nt added. What you really need to focus on, though, is what Jesus Christ said. What he taught. And the bible has never been rewritten, ever. It is very much the most scrutinized book in the world and it would definately not be subject to change on someones whim.

Answer 5

Because that's what the religous leaders a long time ago wanted to be included in the bible. Since they said the other books weren't good enough that mentality got passed on to people today. Which is funny considering how many Christians are against the Catholic Church.

Answer 6

Too many people died for the King James Version of the Bible and from the very beginning of Christianity there were false teachers writing false books. The 66 books were considered by the original church fathers as the canon books and most of these men knew the apostles of Jesus Christ and James was His brother. After the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus His brother James became a strong follower. Before the resurrection very little was mentioned of James. Peter was a wimp until after the resurrection when Peter became one of the greatest apostles performing miracles and was martyred for Christ.

Answer 7

Yes. Revised Standard Version with Apocrypha - Ecumenical Edition, or New Revised Standard Version with Apocrypha. Some Orthodox Christians accept the whole thing.

Answer 8

in the new testament,Jesus Christ quoted a book from the apocryphia, not sure which one though. That proves their authenticity. The Bible canon that catholics used was accepted by the church around 390 a.d. When the reformation came in the 1500's, luther rejected many books that Catholics had been using for thousands of years. Luther even wanted to reject the book of revelation, but failed.

Answer 9

Actually the King James Bible (protestant) is a very poor translation. The Douay Rheims is the most accurate translation available.

The King James is most likely the one edited to fit the needs of the Protestant church and is also lacking many books. I love how they twist things around. Funny.

I think you may have trouble reading the bible untranslated.

DATA: The Catholic church makes no mistakes. That's one of the benefits of being part of a religion made by Jesus. If the Pope approved it, then no mistake was made. The Pope is after all, infallible.

Answer 10

Don't get angry !....The bible is a binding of many books (Biblos), when U read the bible it talks about and Name the books by Name that are mention but are not in the bible, for what reason the bible don't say, But the books that these other bibles out here have are not mention in the bible neither does history bare them out like prophesy does. U can proof everything that is written in the bible, But not theses other so-called bible that are written by mans inspiration instead of gods.