Missing Scriptures

Discussion in '2003 Archive' started by ColoradoFB, Jul 29, 2003.

  1. ColoradoFB

    ColoradoFB
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2003
    Messages:
    587
    Likes Received:
    0
    Here is a question for those who believe that the Bible has been supernaturally preserved over the ages:

    If the bible is totally inerrant and complete, why does it reference other books as scripture that are not in the canon of today's Bibles? If the current canonical books see them as trustworthy, why are they not in the canon? Are they lost, but should be canonical? I am interested in your views.

    Thanks

    A few examples:

    The book of the prophet Iddo
    2 Chronicles 13:22 The rest of the acts of Abi'jah, his ways and his sayings, are written in the story of the prophet Iddo.

    The Chronicles of Samuel
    The Chronicles of Nathan
    The Chronicles of Gad

    1 Chronicles 29:29-30 Now the acts of King David, from first to last, are written in the Chronicles of Samuel the seer, and in the Chronicles of Nathan the prophet, and in the Chronicles of Gad the seer, with accounts of all his rule and his might and of the circumstances that came upon him and upon Israel, and upon all the kingdoms of the countries.

    The Book of the Wars of the LORD
    Numbers 21:14-15 Wherefore it is said in the Book of the Wars of the LORD, "Waheb in Suphah, and the valleys of the Arnon, and the slope of the valleys that extends to the seat of Ar, and leans to the border of Moab."
     
  2. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    Because they contain information that the author was inspired to included.

    Because "inspired" and "canoncical" are not the same as "trustworthy." Many things are trustworthy but do not have the divine imprimatur that caused them to be recognized as canonical.

    Yes, but no.
     
  3. BrianT

    BrianT
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2002
    Messages:
    3,516
    Likes Received:
    0
    Your examples reference other books, but they don't reference them "as scripture".
     
  4. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    Reading Brian's response made me realize I didn't read carefully the first time. I stand by my previous comments but let me clarify that the Bible does not refer to these other books as "Scripture."
     
  5. ColoradoFB

    ColoradoFB
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2003
    Messages:
    587
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well, I would add that neither do most references to canonical writings refer to them as scripture directly either. However, it does refer to some of these as "prophets". Therefore, this would beg the question of why are some prophets considered non-canonical & others canonical (outside the fact that canon was a committee selection).
     
  6. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,118
    Likes Received:
    319
    The Sovereignty of God.

    HankD
     
  7. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    Inspiration and preservation.
     
  8. BrianT

    BrianT
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2002
    Messages:
    3,516
    Likes Received:
    0
    HankD and Pastor Larry made great responses. Just to expand a little: just because a true prophet writes something, that doesn't make that writing "scripture". In other words, only what is divinely inspired when that prophet writes is "scripture", and not everything a prophet a writes. And some prophets never wrote any scripture at all. Iddo would be one, as would Nathan, as you referred to. Elijah would be another.

    I trust that God guided the early church to decide upon the list of books that make up the canon, not adding books and not missing any either.
     
  9. Jesus is Lord

    Jesus is Lord
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2002
    Messages:
    260
    Likes Received:
    0
    The examples you gave are in the context of historical information. Even satanists can write down correct historical information that are useful for following generations. That doesn´t make them inspired.

    But what about the Book of Enoch? It is referred to in Jude 14-15. Here an inspired writer of the NT is quoting a prophecy and makes it Holy Scripture.. what about the rest of the book :confused:
     
  10. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    That particular prophecy became Holy Scripture when it was cited by Jude. It says nothing about the rest of the book. That clearly is not Holy Scripture.
     
  11. Doubting Thomas

    Doubting Thomas
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2003
    Messages:
    2,615
    Likes Received:
    6
    The Book of Enoch, I believe, is included in the canon of the Ethiopian Church. However, pretty much everyone else doesn't regard it as canonical. Pastor Larry's explanation as to why Enoch can still be quoted in Scripture, yet not be Scripture itself, is correct.
     
  12. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    Just out of curiosity (never having thoroughly read the book of Enoch), but is there anything in the book of Enoch that clearly (not just vaguely) contradicts the 66 book scripture?

    I think that all Christians whould endeavor to read and study the apoctypha. We need not consider them inspired in like and kind, but they are. in the very least, better biblical commentary than most of the contemporary commentaries that are on the shelves today.
     
  13. Jesus is Lord

    Jesus is Lord
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2002
    Messages:
    260
    Likes Received:
    0
    I believe with all of my heart that the Book of Enoch is not Holy Scripture. But if one of his prophecies is, he must be a prophet of God :confused:
     
  14. Paul of Eugene

    Paul of Eugene
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2001
    Messages:
    2,782
    Likes Received:
    0
    The book of Enoch is easily available ON LINE - just use "book of Enoch" in your search window. You'll find it is so weird that it is a blessing not to have it in our canon.
     
  15. Jesus is Lord

    Jesus is Lord
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2002
    Messages:
    260
    Likes Received:
    0
    I know. I even have a hard copy. It is weird and absolutely NOT biblical. But... the Bible quotes a prophecy of Enoch. That means he was a prophet of God...
     
  16. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    Scripture also quotes Satan but that doens't make him a prophet of God. It would be better to say that the author of the prophecy of Enoch said something that was true. Let's not extend prophethood to it.
     
  17. Singleman

    Singleman
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2002
    Messages:
    88
    Likes Received:
    0
    ^Also, Paul quotes pagan writers on occasion (e.g., Acts 17:28; Titus 1:12). That doesn't mean they were inspired, just insightful on a particular subject.
     

Share This Page

Loading...