LOST BOOKS

. . . behold, it is written in the book of Jashar . . . (2 Sam. 1:18).

Actually, these are not the lost books of the Bible. We have all that God has ordained for us. A lot of people think the Bible isn't trustworthy and that many books were removed from it. That isn't the case. But, there were many ancient books around when the Bible was written. Here are some of them.

http://www.carm.org/lostbooks.htm

Living Martyr wrote (View Post): › LOST BOOKS . . . behold, it is written in the book of Jashar . . . (2 Sam. 118). Actually, these are not the lost books of the Bible. We have all that God has ordained for us. A lot of people think the Bible isn't trustworthy and that many books were removed from it. That isn't the case. But, there were many ancient books around when the Bible was written. Here are some of them. http//www.carm.org/lostbooks.htm

How do you know it is true that we have all scripture that God ordained for us? It seems the only way to know this is if God himself says "OK, that's it. enjoy!" Where does God do this?

There are many reasons “Gnostic” gospels were not included in the Bible. Early church leaders found consensus in determining whether ancient Christian documents were sacred by asking some basic questions: Was it written by an apostle of Christ or by someone who had direct contact with the apostles? Did the writings in question receive wide acceptance as being consistent with the teachings of Christ and the apostles? Did they bear the mark and effect of spiritual power and truth? None of the “Gnostic” gospels measure up to the New Testament standard or reliable documents. Instead of being consistent with the earliest and most reliable eyewitness accounts, and instead of resting on the foundations of the Jewish Scriptures, the “Gnostic” gospels reflect a worldview that is foreign to both Old and New testaments.


*thanx to Discovery*

Living Martyr wrote (View Post): › There are many reasons “Gnostic” gospels were not included in the Bible. Early church leaders found consensus in determining whether ancient Christian documents were sacred by asking some basic questions: Was it written by an apostle of Christ or by someone who had direct contact with the apostles? Did the writings in question receive wide acceptance as being consistent with the teachings of Christ and the apostles? Did they bear the mark and effect of spiritual power and truth? None of the “Gnostic” gospels measure up to the New Testament standard or reliable documents. Instead of being consistent with the earliest and most reliable eyewitness accounts, and instead of resting on the foundations of the Jewish Scriptures, the “Gnostic” gospels reflect a worldview that is foreign to both Old and New testaments. *thanx to Discovery*

Consensus was reached through human compromise. Most brought to the table books they had been taught were inspired, but had to leave them behind. Two examples off the top of my head that almost made it in are the Sheperd of Hermas and the Apocolypse of Peter.

Quote: › Christian documents were sacred by asking some basic questions: Was it written by an apostle of Christ or by someone who had direct contact with the apostles? Did the writings in question receive wide acceptance as being consistent with the teachings of Christ and the apostles? Did they bear the mark and effect of spiritual power and truth?

Not all of the books in the NT meet each of these requirements. Other books not in the Bible meet equally well these requirements. How was it determined that the writings in each book were consistent with the teachings of Christ and the apostles? It was by debate and compromise - human methods, fallible methods. Consider the disagreement that exists today in Christianity over only the core doctrines that are found in the Bible, then amplify that for additional books that were held sacred by some but not all. Is it easy to determine who among all the particular denominations today is right on any one issue? At least some truth is nearly always sacrificed in the name of popularity when consensus is reached. This means that there almost certainly are inspired documents that didn't make it into the Bible we have today.

I'm not putting forth gnostic documents or any other documents as canditates - I'm only saying that it is near certain that there are inspired writings that didn't make it into the Bible. This is important because many teachings from the Bible, particularly from the epistles, are spread out among many books. That is, there isn't an all encompasing sermon that gives all information in context for many issues. Thus additional inspired books would provide more of a complete picture for piecing together doctrinal understanding as is done with the Bible today, or even that all-encompasing sermon. The result would be greater clarity and unity for all Christians.

[quote=jeffry]How do you know it is true that we have all scripture that God ordained for us? It seems the only way to know this is if God himself says "OK, that's it. enjoy!" Where does God do this?[/quote]

We know because it contradicts what the Scripture says. Why would God contradict himself? These supposedly called "Lost Gospels" are just a way to stir things up and it seems they have succeeded with some.

You are right, God didn't say ok and that's it but why don't we have another book yet? This might be due to God hiding something and doesn't want to reveal it to us. Why should we even worry about such things? There are still tons of things we can learn from Scripture year after year.