are there books left out of the bible?

[KingdomSeeker]

Did catholics add, or did protestants.. take away.. or do you think they never belonged? What are your thoughts.

[RickD]

Did catholics add, or did protestants.. take away.. or do you think they never belonged? What are your thoughts.

It would probably depend on whom you ask. I would guess that protestants would say that the added books in the Roman Catholic Bible don't belong. The catholics would probably say that the protestant Bibles are missing something.

[RickD]

Protestants makes the same way as the catholic, and they are hoping to foster love together for God's words. In fact, they are working on the handwritten bible with the Protestants. I think they have just belonged to the catholic.

Is there someone here who has the gift of translating foreign tongues? We need help with this post.

[kmr]

I'm certainly no expert on this matter, but for the most part what I've seen is that the books left out were either very irrelevant, poorly supported, seemingly uninspired, or better communicated by the books that are included. Personally, I think that between the Catholic and Protestant bibles, the books left out of Protestant bible were not much needed to communicate God's word, although they are very nice to read as additional resource regardless. They certainly could be included, for what I've seen, at least. I believe, however, that it would be important to look at the books left out of the Christian Old Testament from the Jewish scriptures and see if they have any significant importance.

[rampstew]

I'm certainly no expert on this matter, but for the most part what I've seen is that the books left out were either very irrelevant, poorly supported, seemingly uninspired, or better communicated by the books that are included. Personally, I think that between the Catholic and Protestant bibles, the books left out of Protestant bible were not much needed to communicate God's word, although they are very nice to read as additional resource regardless. They certainly could be included, for what I've seen, at least. I believe, however, that it would be important to look at the books left out of the Christian Old Testament from the Jewish scriptures and see if they have any significant importance.

Maybe, just maybe, a bunch of people who believed in the same "Jesus" didn't follow the same scriptures, and maybe they just took what was popular and desirable to the masses.

[jlay]

Maybe, just maybe, a bunch of people who believed in the same "Jesus" didn't follow the same scriptures, and maybe they just took what was popular and desirable to the masses.

Asside from just making an arbitrary statement, what evidence do you have?

[zackabba1]

I'll do a very quick and simple answer: no.

There are books like the Shepard of Hermas that can be reliable at points, but aren't divinely inspired (fully).

The extra books in the Catholic Bible aren't divinely inspired, and contradict the rest of the Bible at points.

[Byblos]

I'll do a very quick and simple answer: no.

There are books like the Shepard of Hermas that can be reliable at points, but aren't divinely inspired (fully).

The extra books in the Catholic Bible aren't divinely inspired, and contradict the rest of the Bible at points.

Okey dokey, we'll just take your word for it.

[zackabba1]

Well, I mean, I can tell you why if you need me to.

If not, that's alright too.

[Byblos]

Well, I mean, I can tell you why if you need me to.

If not, that's alright too.

Then please go right ahead.

[RickD]

I'll do a very quick and simple answer: no.

There are books like the Shepard of Hermas that can be reliable at points, but aren't divinely inspired (fully).

The extra books in the Catholic Bible aren't divinely inspired, and contradict the rest of the Bible at points.

I'd also like to see the proof that the extra books in the Catholic Bible aren't inspired, and contradict the rest of the Bible. Please share your proof.

[ryeguy123]

catholics added the apocrytpha was added to the bible at the council of trent

[Byblos]

catholics added the apocrytpha was added to the bible at the council of trent

Now all you have left to do is prove it.

[Seraph]

I recall being taught in a world history class that the Old Testament books contained in the Catholic Bible not found in the Protestant Bible such as 1st and 2nd Maccabees and Tobit were originally omitted from the Bible Canon in early church history for either not being relevant or for having shady theology but were later added by the Catholic Church at the Council of Trent in retaliation to the Protestant Reformation. The Protestants were beginning to embrace doctrines in opposition to the creeds of the Catholic Church (such as salvation through faith and faith alone) and were citing the Bible to support their claims so the Catholic Church elected to add these books back into their Bible to help rebuke the Protestant's claims.

As for books like the Gospels of Judas and Thomas, those were found to be written by Gnostics masquerading as the Apostles and adding their own ideas to them so they were omitted very early on.

[Byblos]

I recall being taught in a world history class that the Old Testament books contained in the Catholic Bible not found in the Protestant Bible such as 1st and 2nd Maccabees and Tobit were originally omitted from the Bible Canon in early church history for either not being relevant or for having shady theology but were later added by the Catholic Church at the Council of Trent in retaliation to the Protestant Reformation. The Protestants were beginning to embrace doctrines in opposition to the creeds of the Catholic Church (such as salvation through faith and faith alone) and were citing the Bible to support their claims so the Catholic Church elected to add these books back into their Bible to help rebuke the Protestant's claims.

The only problem with this history is that it is not history at all. These deuterocanonical books were and are part of the Septuagint which dates prior to both the Masoretic text and the Latin Vulgate. The Septuagint was widely used in Jesus' era and often used as a source by Him. To say that the Catholic church added these books is false. If anyone wants to claim that they were added then blame Jesus.

As for books like the Gospels of Judas and Thomas, those were found to be written by Gnostics masquerading as the Apostles and adding their own ideas to them so they were omitted very early on.

Who do you think found them to be gnostic writings and, more importantly, why do you take their word for it?