Did the men who edited the bible miss something?

Question

The book of Jude makes reference to the "Assumption of Moses" and direct quotes from the "Book on Enoch". How can the bible be the "pure word of god" if it requires apocryphal pseudepigraphical books be considered to make it complete.

There are many other examples, but the one in Jude is most glaring.

Dimple Girl: why was Enoch excluded then?

Catholic Crusader: ya, ya... the catholics don't consider Enoch canonical either... but direct quotes from it are??? a lot of sense that makes

Answer 1

They didn't miss anything. They purposefully left it out. That way it conformed to what they wanted the belief system to be.

Answer 2

Well I'm not a Christian, an i have my own view of how everything is made..

The bible is heavily edited or so called "Re written to make everyone understand it better"... where i see it as it leaves you with the unknown/not being able to determine wether it is true or not, but thats religion in politics for you.. they constantly adjust the books to hand it to the people, and have it up to date with the science so people could not see that it is Untrue...But thats what i mean by the politics of the religion, they adjust it for the consumer to keep the believer....

I honestly don't know if god is real or not, i find it more that amazing life is just a random sequence, and that it is just abstracts of physics that make all of life an the stars... My god would have to be The Earth and Sun which gave light an creation to everything on the planet..

*****
They "reinterpret" the bible so much, that its not impossible that it would contradict other books of that the bible follows..
Blast, the editor mistakes!
*****

Thats my thoughts to it, when i look at the bible.. i just not sure.. cause the crusades were to kill off all the pagans...
an if you pay close attention to the bible.. to the stories, such as placeing lamb blood upon the door so god would have mercie on the soul.... Voodoo witch doctors, would place blood on others homes/huts so that BAD EVIL spirits would leave that home an not inflict any curse onto it.. so the lamb blood on door.. thats a voodoo tradition.... the spring rabbit, A pagan(witchcraft) tradition, same as the xmas tree, and halloween pumpkin, all of thoses are pagan traditions...
Killing the first born child, that was a heretic/Freemason tradition.. wasn't called Freemason, but it was a tradition that some barbaric culture followed before the crusaders killed them off.. so the bible is wrong about that.. it wasn't a jesus tradition.. it was a small group of ppl that did that..

all that is why i don't really believe in the bible's god.. The bible seems to be sketched together with a bunch of old pagan, voodoo witches, and heretics, traditions that were whiped out/ almost whiped out during the crusades..

hope some of that helped i put *** around the part that might answer your question, about re editing..

Merry Chrismas

Answer 3

There are many books of scripture that have been left out of the Bible. The Nag Hammadi gospels were written before the gospels that were included in the Bible. They were hidden until the twentieth century and have finally been translated. The reason they were hidden was that the Church were burning many scriptures. The scriptures written by people who actually knew Jesus (such as Thomas, Philip and Mary Magdalene) were rejected in favour of books that were written down later. The Council of Nicea chose the books to include in the Bible, they chose those books which would enable them to continue their suppression of women and peasants, and their control over the people. They only translated them into Latin at first so that only priests and academics could read them and interpret them for the people, they didn't want ordinary people to become spiritually enlightened.

The Book of Enoch is part of the official apocrypha, it gives an interesting account of Enoch's travels in higher dimensions.

The Bible isn't the pure word of God. It is inspired scripture received from the divine and written down and mistranslated by men. The difference between what is said in the Nag Hammadi gospels and the ones in our Bibles raises questions about the extent to which the Church edited the gospels we know today.

Answer 4

The Bible did not drop out of the skies bound in black leather. The chapters and books that found their way into the Book were accumulated for centuries before they were put together in what we call the Bible. You know there are several versions of the Bible...some have different or more books that does the KJV.

I think it was Constintine who brought together scholars and clergy and in essence said put together a book of God so I can give it to my citizens so they may be Christians so they got together and picked and sorted and finally came up with a Bible....

Of course things were left out. He wanted to have a Bible that would prove itself so items were not chosen if they dissented from the approved view of what the book should be.

You can be a Christian but never be a fool. Take the Bible for what it is.....You might want to look up Gnosticism and read the Gospel of Mary Magdalene and others that appear in the Gnostic texts.

Remember the Bible was assembled with a goal...and spitituialism and Christianity may not have been a true goal. Can you say "Politics"

Answer 5

I think the men missed alot. Like everything of real value to humanity.
Is a member of Opus De in here tonight. It sure sounds like it from some OK well one of the answers on here. ?
Anything that the Catholic Church didn't agree with got taken out or banned. Anyone who didn't believe what the Catholic Church told them to were branded as heretics and murdered. Look up CATHARS on-line and you'll see what I mean. I'm not even getting into what they did to Pagans, but just to other Christians. Most of the bible that we know, at least the new testament was written by Paul, That's why many people call it the Paulinien version of the bible. This man never even new Jesus, but claimed to know everyhting about him. Come on people he made it up as he went along. It's not what Jesus wanted, Just look at the vilification of women, It's what paul wanted.

Answer 6

There are lots of books that people claim are additional books of the bible, that were exluded from the original.
However, they really dont make sense if you put them in the context of the rest of the Bible.
The book of Jude and the book of Enoch should not be considered legitimate books of the Bible.

Answer 7

In my experience, none have ever claimed it to be the "complete" word of GOD. I believe that the large number of uncannonized books, not included in the modern Bible, represent with the same degree of certainty, all the currently accepted ones. History shows how at the time publication, an arbitrary aspect was introduced, which disallowed some books. Much can be said of what a complete bible would constitute, but contemporary theology avoids this specific topic.

Answer 8

There are a number of books out there on the dead sea scrolls and the "lost" books of the bible.

Before Christ, there were many sects of Jews, each having different texts to teach from, including what we now call the old testament.

Do a little research and come up with your own conclusions.

Answer 9

I think they missed a whole hell of a lot. The fact that it was written and edited by MEN only is my first issue with it.

If you want to understand the bible, try reading it in it's original language - not the version that's been translated 3 times.

Personally, I don't want to understand it.

Answer 10

Simple: The book of Enoch is an inspired book.

Answer 11

Because the bible was written by men, edited by men, compiled by men and men decided what was going to be part of the bible and what was not going to be part of the bible.

Also, in translating the bible, words get changed. Sometimes it makes no difference, and other times it changes the meaning, or possible meanings of a passage considerably.