What are the seven books missing from the protestant bible?

Answer 1

These missing books are from the Old and New Testaments.

Book of Covenants

Book of wars of the Lord

Book of Jasher

A book of Statutes

Book of Acts of Solomon

Books of Nathan and Gad

Prophecy of Ahijah and Visions of Iddo

Book of Shemaiah

Book of Jehu

Acts of Uzziah written by Isaiah

Sayings of the Seers

Apistle of Paul to the Ephesians and to the Laodiceans

Apistle of Jude

The Propheces of Enoch

All of these books are mentioned in Bible.

Answer 2

The Apocrypha books

Roman Catholic AnswerThe books missing from the protestant Bibles are the Deutrocanonical books or "second canon". They are mistakenly called the Apocrypha by protestants who do not recognize the difference between the Apocrypha (which is not part of the canon of Scripture) and the Deutrocanon (which has always been a part of Scripture). The Old Testament that Jesus quoted from contained the Deutrocanon. The protestants rejected them.

The reason given is that the Hebrew Bible did not contain them, but this does not hold up to the facts. Even the so called Council of Jamnia can not be historically proven. The main reasons are 1) they contain clear support for Catholic doctrines that have been rejected by the "reformers", and they are supported by the Catholic Church. For an exhaustive, scholarly, completely documented coverage of the whole story, read Why Catholic Bibles are Bigger, The Untold Story of the Lost Books of the Protestant Bible, by Gary G. Michuta

from A Catholic Dictionary, edited by Donald Attwater, Second edition, revised 1957

Apocrypha

Books erroneously held to be inspired and to be included in the canon of Scripture, but rejected as such by the Church, such as III and IV Esdras, III and IV Maccabees, Prayer of Manasses, 3rd Epistle to the Corinthians, and the Gospel of James. Books style "apocrypha" in Protestant editions of the Bible are not necessarily such in the eyes of the Catholic Church.

Deutero-Canonical books

Those books of the O.T. whose place in the canon was not admitted till after that of the other books. They are Tobias, Judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, 1 and 2 Machabees, ver. 4 of chapt. X to the end of Esther, and Daniel, ver. 24 of chap. Iii to ver 3 of chap 8v and chaps. Xiii and xiv. Their authority is equal with that of the other books of the bible and is so admitted by all the Eastern dissident churches, except that Greek and Russian Orthodox theologians have now for some time been questioning it. Protestants have always rejected them because they are not included in the Hebrew Bible of the Jews.

　

Canon of Scripture

Is the list of inspire books of the Old and New Testaments. Inclusion in the canon does not confer anything to the internal character of a book, but is only the Church's teaching of the fact of its antecedent inspiration. The N.T. canon is the same as that at present commonly received among non-Catholic Christians; the O.T. canon contains in addition the deutero-canonical books (see above). These books and fragments are usually called Deuterocanoica, or of the second canon, not because their inspiration is in any way different from that of the others, but because the inspiration of the books at present in the Jewish Bible was definitely proclaimed by the Jewish authorities previous to Christ, whereas the inspiration of the Deuterocanonica, tentatively held but later rejected by the Jews, was definitely proclaimed in the Christian dispensation. The Protestant reformers, denying the infallibility of The Church, returned to the Jewish canon; the Council of Trent reaffirmed acceptance of the Christian one. Doubts expressed by individuals in certain places and periods about the canonical status of Hebrews, Apocalypse (Revelation) and some canonical epistles in the N.T. and the Deuterocanonica in the O.T., were thus declared incompatible with Catholic faith.

from Catholicism and Fundamentalism - The Attack on "Romanism" by "Bible Christians" by Karl Keating, Ignatius Press, 1988

William G. Most discussing comments made in 1910 by Gerald Birney Smith, professor at the University of Chicago and speaker at that year's Baptist Congress...

Most notes that "what Professor Smith demonstrates is that for a Protestant there simply is no way to know which books are inspired. That means, in practice, that a Protestant, if he is logical should not appeal to Scripture to prove anything; he ha no sure mans of knowing which books are part of Scripture (William G. Most, Free from All Error, Libertyville, Ill.: Franciscan Marytown Press, 1985, 9-11)

One consequence of this inability to ascertain the canon has been that the Protestant Bible is an incomplete Bible, Missing are the books of Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, and the two books of Maccabees, as well as sections of Ester and Daniel. These are known to Catholics as the deutero-canonical works. They are just as much a part of the Bible as the rest of the Old Testament, the proto-canonical books. ...

However easy it may have been for the Reformers to say that some books are inspired and thus in the canon, while others are not, they in fact had no solid grounds for making such determinations. Ultimately, an infallible authority is needed if we are to know what belongs in the Bible and what does not. Without such an authority, we are left to our own prejudices, and we cannot tell if our prejudices lead us in the right direction.

The advantages of the Catholic approach to proving inspiration are two. First, the inspiration is really proved, not just "felt". Second, the main fact behind the proof - the fact of an infallible, teaching Church - leads one naturally to an answer to the problem that troubled the Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 8:31): How is one to know what interpretations are right? The same Church that authenticates the Bible, that establishes its inspiration, is the authority set up by Christ to interpret his word.

from A Biblical Defense of Catholicism by Dave Armstrong; Sophia Institute Press, 2003

For further related reading, see the author's website (listed below)

They were included in the Septuagint, which was the "Bible" of the Apostles. They usually quoted the Old Testament Scriptures (in the text of the New Testament) from the Septuagint.

Almost all of the Church Fathers regarded the Septuagint as the standard form of the Old Testament. The deuterocanonical books were in no way differentiated from the other books in the Septuagint, and were generally regarded as canonical. St. Augustine thought the Septuagint was apostolically sanctioned and inspired, and this was the consensus in the early Church.

Many Church Fathers (such as St. Irenaeus, St. Cyprian, and Tertullian) cite these books as Scripture without distinction. Others, mostly from the East (for example, St. Athanasius, St. Cyril of Jerusalem, and St. Gregory Nazianzen) recognized some distinction, but nevertheless still customarily cited the deuterocanonical books as Scripture. St. Jerome, who translated the Hebrew Bible into Latin (the Vulgate, early fifth century), was an exception to the rule (the Church has never held that individual Fathers are infallible).

The Church councils at Hippo (393) and Carthage (397, 419), influenced heavily by St. Augustine, listed the deuterocanonical books as Scripture, which was simply an endorsement of what had become the general consensus of the Church in the West and most of the East. Thus, the Council of Trent merely reiterated in stronger terms what had already been decided eleven and a half centuries earlier, and which had never been seriously challenged until the onset of Protestantism.

Since these councils also finalized the sixty-six canonical books that all Christians accept, it is quit arbitrary for Protestants selectively to delete seven books from this authoritative Canon. This is all the more curious when the complicated, controversial history of the New Testament is understood.

Pope Innocent I concurred with and sanctioned the canonical ruling of the above councils (Letter to Exsuperius, Bishop of Toulouse) in 405.

The earliest Greek manuscripts of the Old Testament, such as Codex Sinaiticus (fourth century) and Codex Alexandrinus ©. 450) include all of the deuterocanonical books mixed in with the others and not separated.

The practice of collecting the deuterocanonical books into a separate unit dates back no further than 1520 (in other words, it was a novel innovation of Protestantism). This is admitted by, for example, the Protestant New English Bible in its "Introduction to the Apocrypha".

Protestants, following Martin Luther, removed the deuterocanonical books from their Bibles, due to their clear teaching of doctrines that had been recently repudiated by Protestants, such as prayers for the dead (Tob. 12:12; 2 Mac. 12:39-45; cf. 1 Cor. 15:29), the intercession of dead saints (2 Mac. 15:14; cf. Rev. 6:9-10), and the intermediary intercession of angels (Tob. 12:12, 15; cf. Rev. 5: 8, 8:3-4). We know this from plain statements of Luther and other reformers.

Answer 3

The book of: "THE WARS OF YAHWEH", which Numbers 21:13-14 Speak of was supposed to be another "NON CANONICAL BOOK". Which is indeed mentioned in the Scriptures, was supposedly be totally lost from so called "ACADEMICS!" It is said to have contained a nice collection of Victory songs and poems, even though some scholars say that it reeks of Israelite Military History.Joseph Barber Lightfoot, an English Theologian who lived during the 1800's Believed that this Book and the Book of Jasher were one in the same. Also this Book is cited in the "MEDIAEVAL" Book of Jasher in Chapter 90:48. And the other affairs of Joshua and his battles and reproofs which he reproved Israel, and all which had commanded them, and the name of the cities which the children of Israel possessed are written in: "THE BOOK OF THE WORDS OF JOSHUA to the children of Israel and in THE BOOK OF THE WARS OF YAHWEH, which Moses, Joshua and the children of Israel had written (*MEDIAEVAL* Jasher 90:48) as being a *COLLABORATION* Btween Moses, Joshua and the ancient children of Israel.

NAMES OF SO CALLED LOST BOOKS OF The Bible & THEIR REFERENCES WITHIN THE BIBLE WE READ TODAY!

1. "THE BOOK OF ENOCH!" Read: Jude 14-15. www.docstoc.com/docs/72770201/The-Book-of- Enoch

2. "THE BOOK OF JASHER!" Read: Joshua 10:12-13, 2 Samuel 1:18. www.docstoc.com/docs/72770371/

The-Book-of-Jasher

3. "THE BOOK OF SAMUEL THE SEER!"

4. "THE BOOK OF NATHAN THE PROPHET!"

5. "THE BOOK OF GAD THE SEER!" All three, Read:Read: 2 Chronicles 29:29-30.

6. "THE PROPHECY OF AHIJAH THE SHILONTE!"

7. "THE VISIONS OF IDDO THE SEER!" For both, read: 2 Chronicles 9:29. For IDDO Read: 2 Chronicles

13:22.& 12:15.

8. "THE BOOK OF SHEMAIAH THE PROPHET!" Read: 2 Chronicles 12:15. (Not to be confused with the

False Prophet who tried to discredit Nehemiah, Nehemiah 10:6!)

9. "THE BOOK OF THE KINGS OF ISRAEL!" Read: 2 Chronicles 33:18.

10. "THE ACTS OF SOLOMON!" Read: 1Kings 11:41.

There are More, yet I wanted to give you the 10 I have got thus far! I tell you the truth, when one seriously ask the Father in Heaven through Prayer,For wisdom-Knowledge and UNDERSTANDING of his written words And with help in applying them to ones Life, surly it will be given to you! The question is... "CAN YOU HANDEL THE TRUTH!?"

One must keep in mind that in the eyes of these early translators, it is evident that Scripture did not determine what "Dogma" was considered Canon. Yet "Dogma" determined what Scriptures was "CANON." I am so tired of hearing that these Books were removed because Certain men of Scripture intelligence decided to remove them and justify their actions with their reasons of such deceptive acts!!

remember what Scripture said in Rev 22:18-19!!! Pertaining to Adding and Removing!!

Until Next time Yahweh willing, "Shalom, Shalom, SHALOM!!" "PRINCE ODED BEN YEHUDAH"!

Answer 4

There are many. I'll start a list hope others contribute.

• Book of Enoch
• Book of Jasher
• Gospel of Thomas
• Del and the Dragon
• Sussanna and the Elders
• Book of Judith
• first and second Maccabees

Actually there aren't any books missing. See if God wanted the Bible with what is in it now, that is what he will have. If he wanted these other books, the Bible would have them, but it doesn't. If God wants something, he will have it. So, like Jonah had ran away from were god was leading him, God, in a way, pointed him back in the right direction with the whale.

Answer 5

There can be no single, unique answer to this, since the books recognized as being part of the Bible vary depending on the denomination. You can find a comparison between the books included by some of the main denominations in the Wikipedia article "Books of the Bible". You may also want to check an article on "Apocrypha".

Answer 6

Tabias, Judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiastics, Baruch, and First and Second Maccabees.

Answer 7

Here we must remember that the catholic bible has a total of 72 books six books more then the protestant bible.It may be in the old testament. and not the new testament.

Answer 8

The books not included in the Protestant version of the Bible are called the Apocrypha.