Everyone should know that the Bible as it is now, isn’t even close to what is was back in the day. The Council(s) of Nicaea, the James revisions, etc. etc, all of them have edited and also removed books from the Bible.

Stuff that was removed from the Bible is still in the Koran and the Talmud. In fact, the Koran talks about Jesus more than the Bible. While other books aren’t in any of the three, but used to be part of early Christian doctrine.

I’m just wondering if anyone has read any of these? What are your thoughts on them?

Personally I think you need to read everything, Bible, Koran, Talmud, and all the various texts that used to accompany them. They are, after all, texts of the exact same god.  I place more credence in things that used to be “canon,” than I do in Constantine’s personal opinion on the matter.

If you do want to read some of them, here’s a link I found that has most of the stuff from back in the day.

Have fun: reluctant-messenger.com/lost_forgotten_books.htm I don't know about the rest of this site. I just linked it because it's got most of the books up.

good luck, im sure you will have a rough path ahead with this crowd.

Heh, I know. I've kinda ventured into some of the religiousy threads here. It's either "god is dead" or "if your not devote christian and hate fags, ur gonna burn."


Maybe some folks that aren't so polar will get some use out of the link though.

Quoted: "if your not devote christian and hate fags, ur gonna burn."

who said that?

Are you referring to OT or NT?

Because the OT scriptures were complete LONG before those revisions you mentioned.

Tag for the carnage!

A very useful link, thanks.

I have ready the OT, the NT, the koran and the Talmud, among other religious works and works by religious leaders.


First and foremost, the koran is NOT a book of the "exact same Giod" as the others, it is diametrically opposite from the God I worship, so much so that it makes me ill to re-read it (though I do, one must know the enemy to properly fight him)


there are yet more books that were excluded from the scriptures that I should like to read, but they require me to find scans fo them, and to learn dead languages. when I ahve time I will devote myself to such endeavors, at this juncture of my life I just don't have the time for that

Quoted: In fact, the Koran talks about Jesus more than the Bible.

You don't know what you are talking about.

Personally I think you need to read everything, Bible, Koran, Talmud, and all the various texts that used to accompany them. They are, after all, texts of the exact same god.

Once again, you don't know what you are talking about.

Christians certainly do not worship Allah.  Allah is the Moon God and is not, was not, and never will be the same as the God of Christianity.

Now, don't get me wrong.  You have every right to believe any silly thing you please.

But please do not come here and post this drivel and insult Christians who know better.

Quoted: Are you referring to OT or NT? Because the OT scriptures were complete LONG before those revisions you mentioned.

Both. For example the book of Enoch used to be part of the OT. Stuff has been removed and edited in both the OT and NT.

Quoted: Quoted: "if your not devote christian and hate fags, ur gonna burn." who said that?

I ask again, who said that?

or are you just exaggerating to make your point?

Yeah, I have to call BS on this one...

The Talmud may be a legitimate ancestor to the christian bible, but the Koran was written by someone completely outside the circle of Christianity who claimed to be a prophet.  It is no more sacred scripture than the book of mormon.

It was a tool for this asshole to raise an army and make himself a substitute for God.

Yeah, they may claim to worship the same God Christians do, but the Koran is not God's word...

Quoted: Quoted: Are you referring to OT or NT? Because the OT scriptures were complete LONG before those revisions you mentioned. Both. For example the book of Enoch used to be part of the OT. Stuff has been removed and edited in both the OT and NT.

Actually, the first edition of the king James Version included the apocrypha.  It placed them in between the OT and NT with a disclaimer that the editors did not believe them to be inspired scripture, but worthwhile of study anyways.

Quoted: You don't know what you are talking about.

Then explain why there are several more stories of Jesus in the Koran than in the bible.

Once again, you don't know what you are talking about. Christians certainly do not worship Allah.  Allah is the Moon God and is not, was not, and never will be the same as the God of Christianity. Now, don't get me wrong.  You have every right to believe any silly thing you please. But please do not come here and post this drivel and insult Christians who know better.

A pencil in German is called a bleistift. Does that mean that they are different? No.  Allah is Elohim is God is Yahweh, the same god for the same prophets mentioned in all three books.  Elohim, is plural for Eloah; as in the same as ilah.  

Apparently you don't know better as you don't even know that "Allah" and "Elohim" are derivations of the same word in the original Hebrew.

Quoted: . . . In fact, the Koran talks about Jesus more than the Bible. . . . .  . They are, after all, texts of the exact same god.  I place more credence in things that used to be “canon,” than I do in Constantine’s personal opinion on the matter. <snip>

It's fairly easy to take a look at Islam and Judaism and Christianity and realize the core values of the Koran aren't shared in the OT and NT and visa versa.  

Muslims may claim that Allah is the God of Abraham and Moses, but that's where the similarities stop.

Oh this will be good....

Death to the infidel!

G

Holy tag batman, there's a storm a brewin'.

Quoted: It's fairly easy to take a look at Islam and Judaism and Christianity and realize the core values of the Koran aren't shared in the OT and NT and visa versa.   Muslims may claim that Allah is the God of Abraham and Moses, but that's where the similarities stop.

You could make the same claim for OT vs NT.  Noticably different god in both.

Hey, I posted the links because there is value that can be taken from all three main books and the sub-books. ANYTHING can be warped and twisted. OT is worse than the Koran when it comes to how to treat other people. But that's not what I'm talking about.  I posted the link because folks that aren't close minded will be able to get good stuff out of it. These books used to be part of the core of christianity.  

The koran as a whole I'm not to fond of. But once again; the link I put up has the stuff, that if it wasnt for one incredibly vain ruler, would be in the bible now.

I thought we had a religion forum ?. Oh, we still do. It isn't here , but we still do.

I love when 'un-read' people drop in

TAG.

I think that one of the books that wasn't included is called "The Book of War."

Now that might be an interesting read .

Yup...I took a grad level course many years ago entitled, "The Search for The Historical Jesus".  Fascinating class.  The prof was James M. Robinson.

He spent about 1/2 of the year working digs in the Holy Land and the rest trying to fill our heads with stuff other than mush.

Afraid it didn't work very well though...

Strange...I think I got an A.  Did my term paper on the role of John The Baptist.  

VERY interesting class.

Anybody got my Gospel Parallels?  I lent my copy out and it ran off!

How's Islam feel about child pron?  I might convert since they are all for gun rights.

Quoted: Quoted: It's fairly easy to take a look at Islam and Judaism and Christianity and realize the core values of the Koran aren't shared in the OT and NT and visa versa.   Muslims may claim that Allah is the God of Abraham and Moses, but that's where the similarities stop. You could make the same claim for OT vs NT.  Noticably different god in both.

You obviously haven't read either one.  Or even the commentaries by any decent theologian over the past 500 years.

The OT and NT are about Christ.

Allah is the false god of satan given to a peodphile who believed some of it. He even said he originally thought a demon was giving him the devil's book

Wow....is it a full moon?

TAG

Quoted: In fact, the Koran talks about Jesus more than the Bible.

You mean when it says if you believe that Jesus is the son of God that muslims must kill you.

You might be right.

Quoted: Once again, you don't know what you are talking about. Christians certainly do not worship Allah.  Allah is the Moon God and is not, was not, and never will be the same as the God of Christianity. Now, don't get me wrong.  You have every right to believe any silly thing you please. But please do not come here and post this drivel and insult Christians who know better. A pencil in German is called a bleistift. Does that mean that they are different? No.  Allah is Elohim is God is Yahweh, the same god for the same prophets mentioned in all three books.  Elohim, is plural for Eloah; as in the same as ilah.   Apparently you don't know better as you don't even know that "Allah" and "Elohim" are derivations of the same word in the original Hebrew.

You're being obtuse, is it deliberate?

I'll use an example any gun nut should understand.  Some people call an assault rifle a machinegun and an assault weapon or a carbine.  It doesn't mean that they are anywhere near the same thing.  The god of the Koran is NOT anywhere close to the God described in Jewish and Christian holy books.

You have a good point about the aprocrapha and I believe that it is a worthwhile way to spend your time to investigate them, with a grain of salt, but you're basic attack on Christianity is as old as the hills and we're seeing right thru it.  You'll have to do better.

Quoted: They are, after all, texts of the exact same god.

Thats total BS. Do the research. Look up Allah and Moon God in google.
I could post the links but you need to FEED your own mind and acheive enlightenment.

Thats borderline blashpemy.

Quoted: Quoted: They are, after all, texts of the exact same god.   Thats total BS. Do the research. Look up Allah and Moon God in google. I could post the links but you need to FEED your own mind and acheive enlightenment. Thats borderline blashpemy.

You do realize that Jack Chick is not a reliable source, right?

Quoted: A pencil in German is called a bleistift. Does that mean that they are different? No.  Allah is Elohim is God is Yahweh, the same god for the same prophets mentioned in all three books.  Elohim, is plural for Eloah; as in the same as ilah.   Apparently you don't know better as you don't even know that "Allah" and "Elohim" are derivations of the same word in the original Hebrew.

Dude, WTF??? Did you got to church in UTAH?  Elohim is hebrew, Al ilah is the PROPER ARABIC form of the bastardized word ALLAH. Allah is not the Christian god. Never was, never will be.

No.  I've never even read the abridged version.  


Cheers

When you sing Malay hymms in a Catholic church in Malaysia, you sing songs about Allah.  It's a little weird at first, but Allah is just the word for God.  Arabic Christian churches certainly refer to God as Allah.  

Muslims and Christians certainly worship the same God, in the sense that they both believe that there is only one true God who revealed himself through the prophets.  It's the instruction manual (Bible vs Koran) that they have major disagreements on....

Quoted: Quoted: A pencil in German is called a bleistift. Does that mean that they are different? No.  Allah is Elohim is God is Yahweh, the same god for the same prophets mentioned in all three books.  Elohim, is plural for Eloah; as in the same as ilah.   Apparently you don't know better as you don't even know that "Allah" and "Elohim" are derivations of the same word in the original Hebrew. Dude, WTF??? Did you got to church in UTAH?  Elohim is hebrew, Al ilah is the PROPER ARABIC form of the bastardized word ALLAH. Allah is not the Christian god. Never was, never will be.

Technically, elohim is a Hebrew plural masculine word that uses the grammar of singular words, and is of unknown origin. Al-ilaah is Arabic for "the god (masculine)."

And you're correct in saying that Allah is not the Christian god, at least not for those who believe in the trinity, because Allah is more akin to iehowah, i. e. YHVH, Jehovah, Jah, or the Jewish god, in that Allah is singular, rather than composed of three parts.

ETA: In Islaam, Jesus is considered, along with Noah, Adam, Moses, Mohammed, and a host of others, to be a prophet of Allah.

And, as to the moon-god claim, I present to you a series of rebuttals, from islaamic scholars:

islamic-awareness.org

mostmerciful.com (seems quite zealous, however)

answering-christianity.com

BTW: I am not a muslim, I am agnostic.

Quoted: Quoted: They are, after all, texts of the exact same god.   Thats total BS. Do the research. Look up Allah and Moon God in google. I could post the links but you need to FEED your own mind and acheive enlightenment. Thats borderline blashpemy.

Sigh…

www.mostmerciful.com/moongod.htm
www.answering-christianity.com/moon_god.htm

Or you could have read the Koran yourself and known that Allah is not a “moon god.”

Like I already said. Elohim and Allah both come from the Hebrew El. All used interchangeably in the original Hebrew in the bible itself.



But it seems like lots of you are missing the point. I mean the past 20 years I’ve been going to church, including 4 years of seminary, doesn’t really mean I’m Christian. You guys uncovered my evil diabolical plot to take down all those who believe in Christ. How dare I suggest that Elohim is the same god as El (even though it states as much in the bible). I’ll surely burn in hell for thinking the great “I Am” in Christianity is the same as the great “I Am” in Judaism.  

Continue the personal attacks, show that Christian love. I mean common, suggesting that people check out books that used to be the basis of Christianity (I’m not talking about the Koran) until a pagan King had them removed, is surely blasphemy.

tag for 15+ pages

Let me reemphasis my last point as I’m sure the zealots will miss it in their self-righteous furry.

So you don’t believe El as explicitly stated as being the god of Adam, Moses, Abraham, etc in all three books is the same, that’s fine. That’s just my opinion.

But if you haven’t read the books that used to be part of the basis of Christianity before a pagen king had them removed, then you should read them.


You can keep calling me names and attacking me though. It’s shows just how Christian you really are…
edit - I thought I addressed this earlier, but I guess I didnt

The Talmud may be a legitimate ancestor to the christian bible, but the Koran was written by someone completely outside the circle of Christianity who claimed to be a prophet. It is no more sacred scripture than the book of mormon.

I didnt claim that either the Talmud or the Koran were the ancestors of the Bible. I didnt claim anything as being the ancestor of the bible. I linked to what used to be in it.  Read next time.  

Outside of a few enlightened responses by MagKnightX and a couple others, this thread is chock full of BS.  Rarely have I ever seen more hearsay, conjecture, and outright lies on such a subject.

Ultimately, you have to ask yourself one question when you broach the subject of the completeness of the Bible.  Would God allow His word to be watered down, sliced up, and generally eviscerated to such a degree that a searching Christian is completely incapable of finding His book in it's entirety?

The Bible as we have it today was written by approximately 40 men over the course of 1,500 years.  These men came from vastly differing geographical locations, social statuses, and occupations.  Just to give you a brief idea of how exceedingly different these people were; Isaiah was a prophet, Ezra was a priest, Matthew was a tax-collector, John was a fisherman, Paul was a tentmaker, and Moses was a nobleman turned shepherd.  Even considering their huge variance in authors and time periods, the Bible as a whole is uncontradictory and error-free.  The authors present different perspectives, but they all proclaim the same one true God, and the same one way of salvation.

Consider how much work God put into getting ~40 men to write 66 books that formed a single coherent library, do you really think he's going to let some heretic come along and throw out stuff at random?  Not a chance!  God's word has persisted through some amazing trials that completely defy contemporary reasoning.  In the middle ages, the Spanish arm of the Catholic Church began to persecute the Waldenses, a group of people that were the equivalent of contemporary Baptist/Evangelical churches.  The Catholic church performed atrocities beyond imagination, committing horrendous acts that make Himmler look like a saint by comparison.  The persecuted churches had to meet secretly, and - being subject to random searches by authorities - were unable to keep Bibles in their posession for fear of being "found out."  Do you know what they did to compensate?  Memorized it.

Each church needed a full Bible available to them, so every family was required to memorize at least two New Testament books.  Each book was memorized by at least two families, so it would still be available to the church if one of the families was caught and murdered.  If you'd like more information on just what I mean by "horrendous," please pick up a copy of "History of the Evangelical Churches of the Valleys of Piemont."  It is horrifically graphic, but it'll reveal a lot about what it really means to be a Christian in the face of adversity.

Trust me, if God can preserve His word in this gruesome situation, He can certainly preserve it from the various Nicene Councils.  If you trust and accept the Bible as the inspired, inerrant word of God, it is incomprehensible to me how  you could think that God would allow His word to be eviscerated in virtually every single form.

-James

I have read the book of Talbot. It was pretty good. Basically its about an angel testing a mans faith - as ordered by God.

Catholics still have, but downplay, the Apocratha (sp?).

Religion isnt always absolute. One might want to pick up a bible with these books - they stil have good messages.

I call on all of these books you speak of.

Quoted: Or you could have read the Koran yourself and known that Allah is not a “moon god.”

The islam god is not a GOD at all. It's simply something some kook (Muhammad) made up to gain power, murder people, rape women and children and to steal from those victims.
Muhammad is islams sole prophet. The one and only person that claims to have spoken to allah. There is no other person or evidence that this god exists. Its a terrible prank that has many victims.

Going to have to tag this one.

I've already learned some things.  Reading through the future nonsense and personal attacks before the predictable lock, I think I'll be able to learn some more; and one can never learn too much.  

Quoted: I call on all of these books you speak of.

The Gnostic books of the Bible do exist.  There is no denying their existance.  The works have been published.  I have read many of them.  Laymen reading them for the first time often assume that these "lost parts" are really biblical tracts when in fact they are not.

The early writings have been dug up all over the ancient world.  During the formation and assembly of the Bible by the early Christian scholars and priests, those Gnostic writings were excluded and declared heretical and the parts of the Bible we have now were included in our Bible and declared the Holy Word Of God.

Not all of the ancients got published!  

Quoted: Ultimately, you have to ask yourself one question when you broach the subject of the completeness of the Bible.  Would God allow His word to be watered down, sliced up, and generally eviscerated to such a degree that a searching Christian is completely incapable of finding His book in it's entirety?

God's word as you read it is certainly different from God's word as it was written 1900 years ago (unless your Greek is pretty good).  Translation from one language to another clearly changes meanings.

Look at 1 John 1:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came to be through him, and without him nothing came to be. What came to be   through him was life, and this life was the light of the human race; the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.

Now look at the same verse:

That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life; 2(For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us;)

Which one is the "real" start of the Book of John?  They both follow the same general idea, but one is the literal translation from the Greek, and the other has things that are not mentioned in the original Greek at all.  But both are accepted by (different) Christians as the word of God.

You ask if God would allow his word to be watered down, but I would argue that God gave us his word nearly 2000 years ago, and it has been up to the Christian community to protect it.  Whether we've done a good job or not is probably an open debate.  Throughout the history of Christianity, there have been major debates about key Christian theological points.  For example, there were early Christians who maintained that Christ was merely a man.  Others maintained that he was not a man at all, but purely a God.  Some denied the trinity.  Some Christians thought that Christ's message was only meant for the Jews, and that spreading it to the gentiles would be blasphemy.  

God's word has certainly been watered down and interpreted, but the core messages of Christianity remain the same (and they do even if you read the Gnostic writings).

Quoted: Everyone should know that the Bible as it is now, isn’t even close to what is was back in the day. The Council(s) of Nicaea, the James revisions, etc. etc, all of them have edited and also removed books from the Bible.

Most of the apocrypha falls into three categories: an attempt to fill in holes in the canonical books, filling in gaps in the new testament, or gnostic texts about Jesus.

Book of Enoch, Life of Adam & Eve, Book of Jubilees.  Trying to fill in gaps in Genesis mainly.

Infancy Gospel of Thomas, childhood of Jesus, interesting.

Gospel of Mary, Gospel of Thomas are gnostic stuff.  Personally, I think gnosticism is a bunch of bullshit.  Seeking "secret" knowledge about Christ is just a distraction from the what is in the canonical gospels.  Read if you want, but these are pretty lame.

Quoted: Quoted: It's fairly easy to take a look at Islam and Judaism and Christianity and realize the core values of the Koran aren't shared in the OT and NT and visa versa.   Muslims may claim that Allah is the God of Abraham and Moses, but that's where the similarities stop. You could make the same claim for OT vs NT. Noticeably different god in both.

Bzzzzttt..
Go back and read the texts to find out why.
Cliff Notes for those in haste.

The same GOD that nailed the door shut for Noah, called Abram from Chaldea, talked to Moses from the burning bush,  and wrote the BIG TEN in stone at the top of Mount Sinai is the same GOD that hung on a cross for man's sins at Calvary. Few people realize that HE came back as a man to give men a hope of redemption of having broken HIS laws that HE laid down. HE also said HE would come back and cleanse the third temple and set up HIS throne in Jerusalem. Something that the Muslim infidels would fall out frothing at the mouth if you told them.

The heresy of GOD and allah being the same is a popular tool of liberalism in its attacks on Christianity. This is due to liberalism and Christianity being the antithesis of the other; and one cannot be both a Christian and a liberal.

Please do not fall for their politically correct heresy.

wganz
¶

Quoted: Quoted: Ultimately, you have to ask yourself one question when you broach the subject of the completeness of the Bible.  Would God allow His word to be watered down, sliced up, and generally eviscerated to such a degree that a searching Christian is completely incapable of finding His book in it's entirety? God's word as you read it is certainly different from God's word as it was written 1900 years ago (unless your Greek is pretty good).  Translation from one language to another clearly changes meanings. Look at 1 John 1: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came to be through him, and without him nothing came to be. What came to be   through him was life, and this life was the light of the human race; the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it. Now look at the same verse: That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life; 2(For the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us;) Which one is the "real" start of the Book of John?  They both follow the same general idea, but one is the literal translation from the Greek, and the other has things that are not mentioned in the original Greek at all.  But both are accepted by (different) Christians as the word of God. You ask if God would allow his word to be watered down, but I would argue that God gave us his word nearly 2000 years ago, and it has been up to the Christian community to protect it.  Whether we've done a good job or not is probably an open debate.  Throughout the history of Christianity, there have been major debates about key Christian theological points.  For example, there were early Christians who maintained that Christ was merely a man.  Others maintained that he was not a man at all, but purely a God.  Some denied the trinity.  Some Christians thought that Christ's message was only meant for the Jews, and that spreading it to the gentiles would be blasphemy.   God's word has certainly been watered down and interpreted, but the core messages of Christianity remain the same (and they do even if you read the Gnostic writings).

You don't even know what you are talking about.  You quoted two different passages from two completely different portions of the New Testament.  They are not translations of the same text!!!   Your first verse is from  THE GOSPEL of John 1:1-3  Your second verse is from THE BOOK of FIRST John 1:1-3.  You have Gospel of John 1:1-3 verses up in  your  BOOK of FIRST John 1:1-3 quote.  They are from DIFFERENT BOOKS WRITTEN BY THE SAME AUTHOR!!!!

Your Bible Fu is lacking grasshopper,

patsue