I think you can get a bible with the missing books in it also you can get one were the scriptures are in order as they happened our bible is not chronologically in order...
I had a friend when we lived in Houston who had an old (400 years old I believe) Bible from his homeland of Ethiopia. It contained the Book of Enoch I know for sure... maybe others.
Fortunately, there is historical evidence about the other 2 letters from Paul to Corinth. Also, the letters to Corinth tell us about those letters. One of them was notoriously referred to as the "sorrowful letter" (ref. in 2 Cor 2:4). We know one letter was extremely harsh and sharp and the other apologetic, warm and soft.
Those who are just learning some of this should research great works published about the Biblical canon, and the great pains the Church Fathers took to decide which should be included. There was much criteria -- including going by things that were already being read in congregations, works written by apostles vs non-apostles (there were hundreds of copies of other books by non-apostles), the work had to be free of contradiction (way of weeding out the pseudo-epistles that were fraudulently being copied), dating of when books were written, etc.... some of our favorite books were once on the chopping block (I and II Peter for example) because of issues with orthodoxy. So there were scores of reasons for the current canon. That said, there is till much value, and accessible to some of these older books. Most of the historians have records (Eusebius, Justin, etc).
Fortunately, there is historical evidence about the other 2 letters from Paul to Corinth. Also, the letters to Corinth tell us about those letters. One of them was notoriously referred to as the "sorrowful letter" (ref. in 2 Cor 2:4). We know one letter was extremely harsh and sharp and the other apologetic, warm and soft.
Those who are just learning some of this should research great works published about the Biblical canon, and the great pains the Church Fathers took to decide which should be included. There was much criteria -- including going by things that were already being read in congregations, works written by apostles vs non-apostles (there were hundreds of copies of other books by non-apostles), the work had to be free of contradiction (way of weeding out the pseudo-epistles that were fraudulently being copied), dating of when books were written, etc.... some of our favorite books were once on the chopping block (I and II Peter for example) because of issues with orthodoxy. So there were scores of reasons for the current canon. That said, there is till much value, and accessible to some of these older books. Most of the historians have records (Eusebius, Justin, etc).
I'm not being argumentative here.... simply asking a true question.
Who are the church fathers that you speak of that worked so hard to lay the current canon out
However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come. 14 He will glorify Me, for He will take of what is Mine and declare it to you. 15 All things that the Father has are Mine. Therefore I said that He will take of Mine and declare it to you.
16 “A little while, and you will not see Me; and again a little while, and you will see Me, because I go to the Father.”
17 Then some of His disciples said among themselves, “What is this that He says to us, ‘A little while, and you will not see Me; and again a little while, and you will see Me’; and, ‘because I go to the Father’?” 18 They said therefore, “What is this that He says, ‘A little while’? We do not know what He is saying.”
19 Now Jesus knew that they desired to ask Him, and He said to them, “Are you inquiring among yourselves about what I said, ‘A little while, and you will not see Me; and again a little while, and you will see Me’? 20 Most assuredly, I say to you that you will weep and lament, but the world will rejoice; and you will be sorrowful, but your sorrow will be turned into joy
I'm not being argumentative here.... simply asking a true question.
Who are the church fathers that you speak of that worked so hard to lay the current canon out
Hi Digging4Truth!
They are the early writers, theologians and church leaders. The earliest were called the Apostolic Father (obviously they've been hijacked by the RCC as their own): Clement of Rome, Ignatius of Antioch, etc... Among there extra-biblical writings were the didache. Ironically, one of the "church fathers", Tertullian, was responsible for the eventual language used to describe the doctrine of the Trinity -- well, the irony, is that later he opposed his own doctrine and joined the Montanus, pretty close to oneness pentecostals!
There names are vasts, and any library search will get you plenty to read on. It was these men in the 2nd & 3rd Century that eventually helped complete the NT canon.
__________________
People who are always looking for fault,can find it easily all they have to do,is look into their mirror.
There they can find plenty of fault.
__________________
People who are always looking for fault,can find it easily all they have to do,is look into their mirror.
There they can find plenty of fault.
__________________
People who are always looking for fault,can find it easily all they have to do,is look into their mirror.
There they can find plenty of fault.
Linear Mode
