Lost Books of The Bible

29 posts / 0 new
Last post
FundyMormonGrimes
FundyMormonGrimes's picture
Lost Books of The Bible

Hello does anyone know where I can find copies of the lost books of the bible?

I know at one time it was voted on what would be kept in the bible and what would be taken out. I would like to have copies of the books that were taken out of the bible.

I appreciate the help.

Thanks!

Famman32
Famman32's picture
Lost books

Comment: 

I found some the otherday and they were called the Apocrypha. And if you google them they are on line.

Garrison
doubtfully

Comment: 

there was ever any kind of authoritative "vote" on the subject.  Not by any organized church, or any persons who could have been presumed to have a knowledge base that would have qualified the selection.

The Roman period Christians had a lot of stuff, writing from the people of the era of early Christianity.  Some was more highly regarded than others, that' all.

It took reformers, Protestants, to utterly reject some of the material, and some was not credible to many people even in the dark ages, particularly as the Protestant Reformation unfolded, so the folks who produced the King James Bible, who made many decisions by "vote" did choose to omit them.

It helped to distingnuish the Church of England from the Catholics a bit, but since the set of Aposrypha indluded in the Latin Vulgate was not studied, or referenced, much, even by Catholics, it was no big deal.

If Mormons want more scriptures to study, they are probably out of luck because it takes a unanimous vote to change or produce anything new anymore.  And don't look for the Apocrypha to be included any time soon.

Garrison

Lion
The books of Jasher and Enoch

Comment: 

The books of Jasher and Enoch are supposedly mentioned in the Bible. 

 

 

Verifyveritas76
Additional extra? Biblical books

Comment: 

 

There are several that I'm familiar with and would recommend. The books of Enoch and Jasher are both good reading, Josephus is also a good read.  I like the translation by William Whiston. It is laid out much like our Old Testament and easy to find cowitness with.  I like much of RH Charles works.  There is also The Dead Sea Scrolls published by HarperOne.  Translated by Michael Wise, Martin Abegg Jr, and Edward Cook.  The Lost Books of the Bible edited by Rutherford H Platt, Jr. published by the apocryphile press.  Also one called The Other Bible by HarperOne publishers.

 

 

Verifyveritas76
Also

Comment: 

 

Also the book of Jubilees or Little Genesis is a very informative good read.  There is another book that has just come to light since 2015   Gad the Seer  by Ken Johnson   

Most of these books are available on Amazon or Barnes & Noble

Verifyveritas76
Additional source

Comment: 

There is also a Great website called earlychristianwritings.com. It has archived hundreds of manuscripts that have been translated into English, sometimes with multiple translations, as well as commentaries on the dating and content.  Most of the manuscripts are from the first century on.  

joelynne
There are no Lost Books of the Bible

Comment: 

You have the Bible and then you have the Catholic Church chose later on to add some stuff such as the Apocrypha. You will find no Dead Sea Scrolls to match the Apocrypha because it wasn't originally part of the Bible

we are a couple he is 56 and she is 45 looking for that someone to join our family.We have 5 children and own our home. We are looking for a sister wife who is open to being a naturalist as well as bringing more children into the fold

Rock
the reality of bible books

Comment: 

the history of the bible as we know it is easily verified.
the council of Nicea, 325AD, the STATE organized a meeting of the different sects of christianity to create a STATE governed church. This would be the same today as if Trump called all Heads of Christian churches in to decide what the 'new doctrine' would be and TRUMP would be the President of that Church. ...actually, not. It would be more akin to say OBAMA being the president because Constantine, the leader of new church was not even Christian. Yes, I do realize that Obama 'says' he is Christian.

this is how it was. like it or not.

so, there were at least 1500 different scrolls that were extant in those times to choose from. 66 scrolls were chosen. Interesting number. Those 66 were chosen to conform to the STATE propagandized version of Christianity. Those 'christians' that would not subscribe to the STATE church aka 'the great church' and continued meeting under their previous doctrines, were hunted down as heretics and killed. yah, that's true too. What would you do if Obama was the new leader of the Church of USA?...and your church was DISSOLVED? Well, that is what happened.

those that say that the bible has all the 'true books' in it and any other scrolls which were shelved at the time of the creation of the State church are 'heresy' ,...is an uneducated nitwit.

the book of Jasher, for example is regarded by orthodox Jews as being a more accurate account of the books of Genesis and Exodus, yet Constantine and crew didn't see it that way. I wonder why?

there are many of those ancient scrolls which have been translated which are available today. The majority are still hidden in the VATICAN., never seeing the light of day... i wonder why! lol.

I had the opportunity to have met Glenn Kimball , a past historian for the LDS church. He is a scholar in Aramaic, Hebrew etc and was one of the translators for the Nag Hammadi scrolls. He is one of the very few that has accessed the Vatican library and the catacombs under the Vatican. He gave me some good first hand information on these subjects that really opened my eyes. The truth of these matters is quite mindblowing. Everyone wants to live in their little box with fingers in their ears and eyes shut so as to not be exposed to anything that violates their little 'safe' world.

the 'lost books of the bible' is an actual book containing several of the scrolls that were passed up in the council of Nicea. They are excellent references and educational to read. I would highly recommend it for a start. https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_2/143-9138212-1572825?url=search...

those that wish to really dive into the deeper rabbit hole , try reading the 'nag hammadi library'. These were scrolls found in "Nag Hammadi' in caves,. These texts are based on gnostic christian teachings and contain many quotes of Jesus which most today would call 'heretical' including the Book of Mary where the apostles described Christ as 'kissing Mary on the mouth'. Also, in the Nag Hammadi, it is taught that the Holy Ghost is female. Funny how Joseph Smith agreed with both of these claims above. ...Mary was the wife of Christ and that the Holy Ghost was female. Hmmm. I guess he was a nutjob for believing in such heretical nonsense, right?

Gnosticism was the more modern (post Christ) derivation of Gnosis. Gnosis is the opposite of Agnostic. Gnostic is 'God can be known'. (Agnostic means 'God cannot be known')

The fundamental teaching of Gnosis/Gnosticism is the striving for the resurrection through Christ in this life. ...

well. I have no intention of offending anyone. my only intention is to crack open a few doors that will benefit anyone that dares to go on.

Verifyveritas76
All truth

Comment: 

There is a fallacy perpetrated in many Christian circles today.  It follows the line of thought that because all of the Bible is true, thus the Bible is all truth.  That nothing existing outside the 66 books has any divine authority whatsoever.  That anything not contained within the express text of the 66 books is automatically untrue.  

If you stop to think through that statement for more than 30 seconds, the fallacy becomes immediately obvious.  If still in doubt, consider the words of the apostles when they commented that there were many things left unwritten and that if they had been written, the books of the world could not contain them.  That was contextually true at the ascension of Christ.  Then you have 13 books, mentioned in Scripture as being divinely inspired and thus authoritative.

There are thirteen books recorded in the Old Testament that are recommended reading for us. Book of the Wars of the Lord (Num. 21:14) Book of Jasher (Josh. 10:13) Annals of Jehu (2 Chr. 20:34) Treatise of the Book of the Kings (2 Chr. 24:27) Chronicles of Kings (Esther 2:23; 6:1) Acts of Solomon (1 King. 11:41) Sayings of the Seers (2 Chr. 33:19) Chronicles of King David (1 Chr. 27:24) Book of Gad the Seer (1 Chr. 29:29) Book of the Prophet Iddo (2 Chr. 13:22) Prophecy of Ahijah the Shilonite (2 Chr. 9:29) Shemaiah the Prophet (2 Chr. 12:15) Book of Nathan the Prophet (1 Chr. 29:29) Book of Samuel the Seer (1 Chr. 29:29)

Obviously, this list does not include the Book of Enoch, Little Genesis or Jubilees.  The first of which was begun by Enoch and finished by Noah and handed down at least to Levi.  The second was probably written by the same author of Jasher, (who some say was most likely Samuel) and that he is the most likely author of the books of the Judges and 1 Samuel.  Though many would claim that there are a multitude of copyist and transcription errors in Enoch and Jasher, at the time of Christ they were no doubt intact, and referenced as Scripturally authoritative by the apostles.  In some cases, like the book of Gad the Seer, certain Biblically referenced ideas have their origins like:   

Scriptural Allusions to the book of Gad the Seer In addition to being directly named in 1 Chronicles 29:29-30 and 2 Chronicles 29:25, there are allusions to the Book of Gad the Seer in several places in the Bible. The Hebrew idiom “face to face” mentioned by Paul in 1 Corinthians 13:12 is in Gad 12:17. The term “New Jerusalem” used by Paul in Galatians 4:26 and by John in Revelation 21:2, was first used in a sermon by King David written in Gad 12:16. Psalm 144 is written in Gad 11 and Psalm 145 is found in Gad 10. David’s sin of counting the people recorded in 1 Chronicles 21 and 2 Samuel 24 is recorded in Gad 7. The war between Michael and Satan referenced in Revelation 12:7 and Daniel 12:1 is found in Gad 2:26. There are many other examples throughout the book.

The above excerpts were taken from the above referenced book and commentary by Ken Johnson.

Another book that is strictly historical in nature, The Antiquities of the Jews, by Flavius Josephus, is incredibly informative as to the first century perspective of the Old Testament.  It gives a great parallel view of the events of Creation, the Patriarchs, The Exodus and the Law, the kings through Herod history.  The interesting thing is that Josephus' chronology and history matches fairly well with the account of Jasher that we have available today.  This seems to be a strange coincidence until you read Josephus' accounts and realize that at the fall of Jerusalem, he was in the unusual position of being a personal friend of Titus, and was granted certain favors, like receiving pardons for several of his friends, and being allowed to collect any documents or books that survived the battle.  He records that he collected all of the sacred manuscripts to be found and these were the basis of his Histories.  His is also the only surviving eyewitness account of the fall of Jerusalem.

Even if one were to consider the above books to be nothing more than history books, there is still a vast amount of truth contained within them. Much of the information expressed in them directly puts to shame some of the dogma that has been force fed as truth because it has been handed down by "faithful" men.

Verifyveritas76
Lost Books

Comment: 

You also have some very interesting letters to the churches from the first century like the letters from Clement to the Corinthians.  These letters were in serious contention for inclusion at the Council of Nicea, but were rejected because of a mention of lands beyond the western sea.  Obviously a mistake, an thus an untrustable letter, maybe even borderline heresy because everyone knows that there are no lands beyond the western sea (in case you didn't get that, if you were located in Rome, or NIcea, the western sea would be the Atlantic).

Other interesting documents to be found in earlychristianwritings.com are the Epistle of Barnabas, the Epistula Apostlorum and the Didache.  Among many others including some incredible first through third century Christian Apologist.

Verifyveritas76
For the record

Comment: 

For the record, I do not endorse everything that is to be found in earlychristianwritings.com.  As with everything, try the spirits, Prove all things and hold fast to that which is good.  I also do not endorse the Gnostic writings.  I have studied it  to some degree and have rejected it based upon its origins in the first century.  It was espoused and promoted by at least Simon the Magi (Sorcerer) and the deacon Nicholas (the originator of the Nicolaitans).  The gnostic sources and teachings were resoundingly rejected by the first and second century Christians as well as John the Revelator as being the doctrines of Baalam, Nicolaitans and Jezebel.  

This statement is not meant to offend, simply to inform.  It is presented with all the kindness and grace I know how to offer.  If you find yourself disagreeing for whatever reason, that's ok.  I am simply presenting what I have found to be true to date.

 

Rock
Gnosis/Gnostic

Comment: 

I enjoyed your comments, and no worries on offending.... only beliefs can be offended and affixing ourselves to a 'belief' certainly precludes any real possibility of going from belief to the experience of the truth. Beliefs are necessary to start...but they certainly are only a stepping stone..

I hadn't studied the connection of ancient 'Gnosis' to Post Christ, 'Gnosticism' for about 25 yrs ...so i thought i'd get a refresher using the all powerful 'google'. LOL.

i was surprised to find how little was easily available in regards to ancient Gnosis doing searches.

I have a few old books on the subject, but they are boxed up at this time, and perhaps I'll get them out later for referencing .

As far as John the Revelator and notable first century christians denouncing Gnosis/Gnosticism, you'd have to cite the references for me to follow those conclusions.

Gnosticsm was the outgrowth of the much earlier system of Gnosis. Gnosis dates back at least to 2000bc. 'Gnostic' was the term created for those of Gnosis during the period after Christ was born.

Of course, i have to concede that modern christians regard Gnostic doctrine to be heretical and perhaps even blasphemous.

But then again, nearly 1 BILLION Christians consider Mormonism as heretical and blasphemous. LOL Go figure!

Belief is not fact no matter how much to the contrary our egos fight for the proud position of being 'right'.

As far as Gnostic doctrine goes, I personally believe there is alot to be learned from it. Just as I consider Buddhism, Taoism, and Cabalism to be valuable sources of 'truth'.

There are very few things that I know for certain and one of them is that Christ lives and what he tried to convey while here is not being taught with any real clarity nor depth by any Church on this earth.

The fundamental difference between typical Christianity and Gnosticism is modern Christians operate on belief. Gnostics taught that belief is merely a stepping stone and the EXPERIENCE of the truth is what is necessary. The depth of that experience and frequency of that union with God becomes GNOSIS (knowing). Belief is not functional really unless it leads one to the union with God in THIS life. That is Gnosis.

The concept of attaining union with God in this life is offensive to most modern Christians. I am not referring to an answered prayer or the enjoyment of the spirit testifying certain truths. I am speaking of having the mind of Christ in THIS life. Right now. As Christ prayed for his disciples that they would be one with the father as Christ was.

ok...i'm off the soapbox :)

Pluto8
Pluto8's picture
Interesting discussion. Maccabees 1 and 2

Comment: 

Were removed in order to cover up the Edomite takeover of Judah in the century prior to Christ's birth. By the time of His birth they had assassinated everyone else of the royal house of Judah and had replaced them (Herod) Much has been hidden from us until the modern era, when, as the angel speaking to Daniel said: "Knowledge will be much increased". Many of the books mentioned by others in this thread were referenced in the "accepted" 66 scrolls by others, such as Jasher. The Book of Adam and Eve is very helpful as are the Dead Sea Scrolls mentioning the War between the Children of Light and the Children of Darkness... a literal race/DNA war that continues to this day with 99% of us not even realizing it's ON

If you don't stand for something you will fall for anything

Verifyveritas76
An interesting thread about the royal and Aaronic lines

Comment: 

Www.biblesearchers.com/yahshua/davidian/dynasty2.shtml

Another guy referred me to this site recently and I havent had time to completely verify all of the genealogical claims but the work I can see is pretty impressive and mind blowing if true.

Not all of the royal line was killed off and not all of the Aaronic line was killed off per Josephus.  These guys have managed to put together the lineages from Zorrubabel and the High Priest that fled to Egypt from Antiochus Epiphanes.  Both of these lines (according to them) merge in an incredible, divinely orchestrated way in the families of Jesus Christ and John the Baptizer.

Pluto8
Pluto8's picture
The Royal line

Comment: 

 

True royal house of Judah was inherent in the Messiah. The Edomite imposter jews killed Him, but even so, long before both of the two lines of Judah had escaped through Egypt, to Spain, then to Ireland, then Scotland and eventually the USA, New jerUSAlem.  https://www.amazon.com/Stone-Kingdom-America-Raymond-Capt/dp/0934666652  and  http://israelect.com/reference/WillieMartin/StoneofDestiny.htm  Here is a site with the big truth  anglo-saxonisrael.com

 

If you don't stand for something you will fall for anything

Rock
genetic lines

Comment: 

    It would appear, from biblical and other historical records, that there are many different origins of people on the planet. We have to ask ourselves: Were all the descendents of 'the sons of God' 'that came down to the daughters of men' killed in the flood? Well, the bible says that all humans perished except Noah and his group. Yet, aborigines in Australia as well as others describe surviving the event.  We do need to keep in mind that the Old Testament was written by men from the perspectives of men AND it was passed on as an oral story for at least 2500 yrs before it was put down on paypyrus! Can it really be as accurate as many would like it to be?

Now, how about the 'land of Nod'? Genesis states that Cain went to the land of Nod to settle and took a wife. Hmm. And who was this woman? Who were her parents?  See the book of Enoch for more on this.

Then we have Plato, one of the most celebrated and intelligent writers of the world's history. He writes of the land of 'Atlantis'. hmm. Today's scholars fully acknowledge the brilliance of Plato, but they totally ignore this part of his writing and if they do comment they deride Plato for it. Yah, ok.

Then you have the origins of the 'caucasions'. Which the earliest ancient greek writings tell a more ancient story of  a  'sudden appearance' of white skinned people from the Caucasoid Mtns.

and why am i giving this odd history?

perhaps just to give a broader perspective of life on earth.

Some of us may be descendents of Atlanteans or perhaps other worlds :)

 

Pluto8
Pluto8's picture
Genetic and time lines

Comment: 

Rock, as you stated, the actual full-on flood could not have been world wide, but must have been regional. Chinese also report surviving it's perimeter. It's purpose was to destroy most of the descendants of Satan and the fallen angels mixed with human females, who were largely concentrated in that area of the Middle East. The heart of this plan was to make the area temporarily safe for Yahweh's chosen race of Israel, who Christ clearly stated was the only people he came to reach. David spent his entire life killing the remaining demon spawn, starting with Goliath. So some did survive. There were civilizations and peoples before Adam and Eve were placed on the planet, yet Yahweh chose to place a seed race on this rock, made in his image, to be His servant race, his literal children. Sad to say most of them today have no idea who they are, and throughout time have spit in their Maker's face. But a remnant will return to serve Him, and will have total power over the Earth, and I believe they will terraform and seed the galaxy, and perhaps, eventually the cosmos

If you don't stand for something you will fall for anything

Rock
genetic lines cont

Comment: 

Good points, Pluto

I do have one point of view that is a bit unusual and that is that there may be humans on this planet that are from other lines other than Adam and Eve which are actually highly evolved and benevolent beings. In other words, not all 'good' people are decendents of Adam.

I do believe that this planet was initially intended for the exclusive habitation of Jehovah's creations, but the world has interlopers which are here to perform various 'other functions' for the best outcome on a universal scale.

I have no evidence for my 'theories' but lets just say that there are many levels and methods to the evolution and perfection of man and some of those may come from other worlds or even other dimensions.

Most would assume from my statement above that anything from other worlds or other dimensions, since they are not from Jehovah, must therefore be of  evil. Well, that is something that cannot be proven or disproven. lol. I do concede that there are races that are from other worlds and dimensions which are here to destroy man and destroy the plan of salvation . These are those that are of the 'dragon' as spoken of in the book of revelations. The same dragon with which Lucifer joined.

Apostle
Actually lucifer

Comment: 

Wasn't the devil or any created being. Lucifer in Isaiah 14:12 was a proverb against a king. Read Isaiah 14:4-16. I know people like to cull the verses to prove their doctrine is true and correct.  But the scriptures have to be taken as a whole and most times that requires reading a few verses before and after your "proof".

 

"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."
Gandhi

Rock
satan lucifer dragon

Comment: 

Hey Apostle,

What is your take on Revelations 12: 7-9?

those were the scriptures I was referring to.

Apostle
Rock

Comment: 

Lucifer was only used once in the Bible and that was in Isaiah. I believe the book of Revelation is an allegory. Satan was not the being the church teaches. In order for Satan to plot a rebellion would mean God isn't who He claims. He created a being that plotted to overthrow Him and was unaware of the plot? But then again the church teaches the devil is more powerful than God. The church will protest and say they don't but they teach the devil will take more souls to hell than God will save. They talk about all this power Satan has then call him defeated but he still has power? 

"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."
Gandhi

Pluto8
Pluto8's picture
Rev 12 tells us that Satan

Comment: 

Rev 12 tells us that Satan and his army of fallen angels were cast into the earth, Rev 12:12  

12 Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time.

~~
And then again when Satan spoke to Messiah on the tower top and offered Yashua the world if He would bend His knee to Satan.. Yashua never disagreed that Satan had that power, He merely told Satan to get out of His way (foreshadowing His return as the Warlord of Yahweh to destroy all evil) Demons are very real

 

If you don't stand for something you will fall for anything

Apostle
Yes demons

Comment: 

Are real. But there was no Rebellion led by a created being named Lucifer. Revelation is a book of allegories and to try and make it other than that is folly at best
God has never created any being that has tried to Rebel against him other than mankind.

"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."
Gandhi

Cam777
We can agree to disagree.

Comment: 

nnvvmm

psalm 91

Apostle
I have seen many things

Comment: 

Lucifer is the name that was used in a proverb to a king. That is biblical and I will believe the bible over the lies taught from the pulpits. You know nothing about me or my life before I was born again.

"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."
Gandhi

Apostle
Not very likely.

Comment: 

You feel free to disagree with truth. That's the wonderful thing about truth it remains truth even when people try to change truth into a lie.

"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."
Gandhi

TheFamily4You
TheFamily4You's picture
Background

Comment: 

The bible was formed at the first Council of Nicaea, 325 A.D. under the direction of Emperor Constantine, aka The Holy Roman Emperor. He made Christianity the official religion of Rome to keep his mother from being put to death under Roman Law for practicing Christianity. He, himself remained a pagan until his death bed, when he could not resist being baptised Christian.

Kelly

Garrison
miscellania

Comment: 

Any opinion of the origins of the Bible that does not recognize the work/life of St. Jerome has got to be wanting.  It is true that some materials were gathered prior to Constantine and considered  "holy", such as letters of Paul and the Hebrew Old Testament.   Later, William Tyndale and Martin Luther did significant translation works, along with others generally considered less influential.

Anyone taking a stand on a doctrinal issue of current concern, throwing dissmissive opinions about for whatever doesn't fit your doctrine, deserves questioning if not dissmissive opinions in return.  

I like simple schematics of human progress/the works/words of God.  With focus on things that are relevant to understanding a simpler big picture.  If you just want to throw out spectacularly original views, perhaps we could get you a spot on Coast to Coast some night in the third hour of the program.....

The Mormon schema of creation is at least logical in some respects..... we have always existed in some sense as a personage of comprehension/will (an "intelligence").  But to be here in this world we were first organized in a spiritual form as  a son/daughter of God, in His image, and lived with HIm for some time.  In coming to this Life/earth, we needed earthly parents to give us a physical body.   

If we will obey the commands of God and live worthily, we may return to His presence.  If we do not, there are other conditions of post-mortal life commensurate with what we lived worthy to receive.

God would never, never.... as in never ever..... break a covenant with His spiritual children to deprive them of their freedom or agency.  Thus, a character like "Lucifer" or a "Satan" is possible because of a choice of opposition/rebellion, as well as many kinds of other deviants/disobedients, both of "spiritual" or "mortal" form, or even post-mortal forms..... whatever they may be.

The thing we should focus on is the teachings of Christ, and in following those teachings becoming more like our Heavenly parents, living worthy of all of the possible blessings God has to offer.....

Garrison