Other books were included in the Bible by early Christians. Why don't modern Christians consider them?

Answer 1

Because they participate in a delusion that the Bible is as it should be and think it is the only book for them. Modern Christians should consider all of the ancient sacred texts, and even newer text that has come to light, rather than depending upon what others have decided for them. I have read them all, but have found that the Urantia Book comes closer to the truth than anything else I have ever read. It is the new "Super-Bible" and was written divinely. The messages in it comes straight from God's divine messengers who have been ordered to tell us the truth as they are permitted to reveal.

Answer 2

When I looked up on google the "Lost books of the Bible" this is what I found. Which is a typical answer that you will get from most Christians.

The Pseudepigraphal books are "false writings." They are a collection of early Jewish and "Christian" writings composed between 200 BC and AD 200. However, they too were known and were never considered scripture. A list of these would be the Epistle of Barnabas, the First Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians, the Second Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians, the The letter of the Smyrnaeans or the Martyrdom of Polycarp, the The Shepherd of Hermas, the The Book of Enoch, the Gospel of Thomas (140-170 AD), the The Psalms of Solomon, the The Odes of Solomon, the The Testaments of the twelve Patriarchs, the Second Baruch, the Third Baruch, the The Books of Adam and Eve.

The Deuterocanonical (apocrypha) books are those books that were included in the Greek Septuagint (LXX) but not included in the Hebrew Bible. The recognized deuterocanonical books are 1 Esdras (150-100 BC), 2 Esdras (100 AD), Tobit (200 BC), Judith (150 BC), the Additions to Esther (140-130 BC), the Wisdom of Solomon (30 BC), Ecclesiasticus (Sirach) (132 BC), Barach (150-50 BC), the Letter of Jeremiah (300-100 BC), the Susanna (200-0 BC), Bel and the Dragon (100 BC), the Additions to Daniel (Prayer of Azariah (200-0 BC), the Prayer of Manassesh (100-0 BC), 1 Maccabees (110 BC), and 2 Maccabees (110-170 BC).1

These pseudepigraphal and deuterocanonical books were never considered scripture by the Christian church because they were not authoritative, inspired, written by either Prophets or Apostles, nor do they have the power of the word of the books of the existing Bible. Therefore, since the books are not lost and were never part of the Bible to begin with, they have no bearing on the validity of the Bible.

I do have a copy of the apocrypha and from what I seen and read there is some good stuff in there.

Answer 3

Actually the early church decided waaay back in the early 4th century exactly which books, out of several hundred, were to be included in Scripture. They settled on a total of 72.

Then, about 12 centuries later, Martin Luther dumped 6 of the Old Testament books for the crime of contradicting what he was trying to teach.

But you must remember, the inspired word of God is whatever the church SAYS is the inspired word of God. It's the church's holy book, after all. You wouldn't try to tell a Hindu he hadda include more Vedas or take out some he already has, now would you? You wouldn't tell a Muslim that he had a Q'uran with too many suras, or not enough, would you?

The Catholic Church chose the Canon of Scripture. It's THEIR book. Anyone adding to or taking from it, is at best, not a nice person, at worst, a heretic.

Answer 4

once I appeared up on google the "lost books of the Bible" it somewhat is what i found. that's a typical answer which you will get from maximum Christians. The Pseudepigraphal books are "fake writings." they're a determination of early Jewish and "Christian" writings composed between 200 BC and advert 200. even nonetheless, they too have been typical and have been never seen scripture. a catalogue of those may be the Epistle of Barnabas, the 1st Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians, the 2nd Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians, the The letter of the Smyrnaeans or the Martyrdom of Polycarp, the The Shepherd of Hermas, the The e book of Enoch, the Gospel of Thomas (one hundred forty-a hundred and seventy advert), the The Psalms of Solomon, the The Odes of Solomon, the The Testaments of the twelve Patriarchs, the 2nd Baruch, the 0.33 Baruch, the The Books of Adam and Eve. The Deuterocanonical (apocrypha) books are those books that have been secure in the Greek Septuagint (LXX) yet no longer secure in the Hebrew Bible. The known deuterocanonical books are a million Esdras (one hundred fifty-one hundred BC), 2 Esdras (one hundred advert), Tobit (200 BC), Judith (one hundred fifty BC), the Additions to Esther (one hundred forty-one hundred thirty BC), the know-how of Solomon (30 BC), Ecclesiasticus (Sirach) (132 BC), Barach (one hundred fifty-50 BC), the Letter of Jeremiah (3 hundred-one hundred BC), the Susanna (200-0 BC), Bel and the Dragon (one hundred BC), the Additions to Daniel (Prayer of Azariah (200-0 BC), the Prayer of Manassesh (one hundred-0 BC), a million Maccabees (one hundred ten BC), and a pair of Maccabees (one hundred ten-a hundred and seventy BC).a million those pseudepigraphal and deuterocanonical books have been never seen scripture by utilising the Christian church via fact they weren't authoritative, inspired, written by utilising the two Prophets or Apostles, nor have they have been given the skill of the be attentive to the books of the prevailing Bible. consequently, via fact the books are no longer lost and have been never area of the Bible to start with, they have not any bearing on the validity of the Bible. I do have a replica of the apocrypha and from what I seen and study there is a few solid stuff in there.

Answer 5

The Council of Nicea had NOTHING to do with the books of the bible or the inception of the bible. Just want to clear that up...

Read the creed........

The council decided on the divinity of the Christ. Further, there was a book that was considered a bible - The Septuagint - written long before the council was convened.

Answer 6

During the first, second and third centuries, many books were authored and said to be written by apostles. Many books that were written by their disciples where considered inspired. And many other books that we have now in our NT Bibles were hotly disputed as to the question whether or not those books were inspired. Such books as Revelation, James, Jude, Hebrews, second and third John and second Peter. Christians(Christians mind you) were disputing amongst each other on the canonicity of these books. They were also disputing on the canonicity (inspiration) of other books that are not in todays NT Bible. Books like the Apocalypse of Peter, Letter of Clement to the Corinthians, Didache, Letter of Barnabas, Acts of Peter, Acts of Paul, Acts of John, the Apocalypse of Paul and many, and many more.

Someone, or a group had to decide which would be our collection of inspired books to be included in our Bible. This group of individuals where Catholic Bishops in council (at Carthage, Hippo and Rome) as representatives of the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church chose the books to be included in our Bible.

God Bless
Robin

Answer 7

They were taken out by an early council, who decided for us what was "Christian" and what wasn't. Many modern Christians don't even know they exist, or that the Bible has been edited (and quite severely) over the years.

Answer 8

This subject has popped up a lot recently. There were other letters that were written and were considered for Canon; some were not deemed worthy, and some were just repetitive. The fact remains that Bible as it exists today is sufficient.

Answer 9

Because they came from a corrupt source in Alexandria Egypt known as the Alexandrian Manuscripts.

Answer 10

No they weren't. Read some real history. Get your facts from places besides the Internet.

The Church canonized Holy Scripture. She is the Body of Christ, filled with the Holy Spirit on the First Pentecost. She has the right...nay, the DUTY to determine which books made the canon and which did not.