Books that almost made it into the Bible

  • Thread starter Thread starter AJB328
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

AJB328

Guest
I remember reading an article a while back that had a list of books almost considered for the formal canon or ones that were widley read in the first and second centuries (and by almost considered, I don’t mean some History Channel conspiracy theory garbage)

The only two I can remember from the article were the Didache and the Shepard of Hermas. Does anyone know of any other books that were written early enough for consideration?
 
AJB328 said:
I remember reading an article a while back that had a list of books almost considered for the formal canon or ones that were widley read in the first and second centuries (and by almost considered, I don’t mean some History Channel conspiracy theory garbage)

The only two I can remember from the article were the Didache and the Shepard of Hermas. Does anyone know of any other books that were written early enough for consideration?
Click to expand...
An earlier poster mentioned 1 Clement. In addition, I have seen some info re the Letter to the Laodiceans that makes me wonder if it was considered for inclusion. If my understanding is correct, that letter appears in many Latin bibles and translations in every century between the 300s and the 1500s. I’m not aware of any scholars from any year who actually said it was canonical, and I’m aware of some texts that seem to deny its canonicity in a couple different centuries. But, at least to me, it would seem very confusing to include it in so many copies of the Bible if no one thought it counted. Perhaps there were written notices explaining that it wasn’t in the Canon.
 
Wasn’t the Gospel of Peter on that list, too?

Glad we have a living authority to settle these matters. It’s not like the New Testament fell from Heaven assembled.
 
Well…for some people, the game isn’t over yet. There are a few groups out there that claim the canon is still a work in process. Their most formidable entry is “A New New Testament”, which incorporates additional gospels, epistles, etc, right alongside the familiar ones, not in an appendix.

More than History Channel conspiracy garbage, they take it a step further, and claim to be adding certain books - voted on by a panel - to the NT canon, now. It isn’t just liberal scholars, but some heavy denominational administrators from the Mainline. In a few years, I think you will see rival panels, which may choose to add - or subtract - different books from the familiar 27. You may have a Bible study with 10 people, and no 2 have exactly the same books in their “New Testament”.

This puts the need, in the 21st century, for the living Magisterium, in a different light.
 
AJB328 said:
I remember reading an article a while back that had a list of books almost considered for the formal canon or ones that were widley read in the first and second centuries (and by almost considered, I don’t mean some History Channel conspiracy theory garbage)

The only two I can remember from the article were the Didache and the Shepard of Hermas. Does anyone know of any other books that were written early enough for consideration?
Click to expand...
ntcanon.org/table.shtml
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top