If you could choose one book that isn't in the Bible

  • Thread starter Thread starter Thomasbradley312
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

Thomasbradley312

Guest
Okay this is a hypothetical question.
If there was one book you have read that is an apocryphal/extra canonical text, which is not part of the biblical canon that after reading you thought to yourself you wish it was, which book would you choose?
I would have to go with the Shepherd of Hermas.
 
Last edited:
Was going to say I’d never read any, but the Didache is one that every Christian regardless of stripe should read. It is a quick read and a fascinating glance into the earliest Church - during the life of Saint John the Appostle.
 
Not sure. I don’t know if anyone knows for sure.
For example, Saint Irenaues cited the Shepherd as scripture in Against Heresies. In fact quite a few non canonical texts were viewed by Church Fathers as scripture. Now most on this forum act like they are some sort of dangerous writing. Iranaeus says Truly, then, the Scripture declared, which says, “First of all believe that there is one God, who has established all things, and completed them, and having caused that from what had no being, all things should come into existence. He who contains all things, and is Himself contained by no one.” [Book 2, First Commandment, of the Shepherd of Hermas]. Rightly also has Malachi said among the prophets: “Is it not one God who hath established us? Have we not all one Father?” (4.20.2. of Adversus Haereses )
 
Last edited:
Thomasbradley312 said:
Not sure. I don’t know if anyone knows for sure.
Click to expand...
The short answer is that certain books, like the Shepherd of Hermas, were not universally considered sacred texts, so did not make the canon. They were in some early codices and not in others. I am sure there is a longer answer which I have not researched.
 
Tolle_Lege said:
40.png
Nihilo:
The Catechism of course.
Click to expand...
Which one ?
Click to expand...
lol. The! I said it in my post.

Kidding. The English Catechism of the Church, in English, and if I get two books, then I’d want the Latin as my second choice (so that I could learn Latin).

(By ‘Catechism of the Church,’ I’m merely conceding the point being argued there implicitly by the otherwise superfluous word “Catholic.” Jesus only founded One Church, after all. So therefore someone gets to call theirs “The Catechism of the Church,” and that’s her.) 😀
 
Last edited:
True. But books that weren’t universally accepted did make it. For example , the east did not embrace Revelation. The west did not embrace Hebrews.
Also , 2 Peter was slow to be accepted. A few Fathers doubted it was written by Peter.( Which is kind of the census today among scholars).
 
Last edited:
I have a collection of Early Christianity texts from the Coptic tradition about Virgin Mary and her family, visions received presumably by the Patriarchs of Alexandria. It’s called “Virgin Mary in the pious tradition of Early Christians”. I would choose that. It also includes certain texts that are actually prayers to her, and others that descript the visions she sent to the Patriarchs etc.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top