ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

Why Does The Bible Quote Books

So why does the Bible quote a dozen books no longer in the Bible?

Moderator - I might quote a Casaer to make a point, but that would not be a book for us to use in our daily Christian living. Keep things in context. I might quote something wise someone stated, but that doesn't mean everything they stated is wise or Godly.

Join Our Christian Penpals and Take The Wisdom Bible Quiz
 ---len_k on 12/11/05
     Helpful Blog Vote (10)

Reply to this BlogPost a New Blog

Ok, but you're not God and Jesus is, so when He quoted the Septuagint, I think we should sit up and take notice... don't you? In other words, everything the Lord said was and still is important. We should never disregard this in order to "make a point."
---Marybeth on 3/31/08

All of the books that were written before Jesus Christ were fulfilled in Jesus Christ so the books do not matter. The heart is the book.
---gregg8944 on 11/18/07

On the Septuagint, I would like to point out one very distinct matter that separated the Jews from the early Christians. In Isaiah, the Messiah was to be born of a "virgin" in the Septuagint translation; but only of a young woman in the Hebrew version. Even though a young woman should have been a virgin in Jewish tradition, Jews to this day use this difference against us by trying to say that we altered scripture to make Mary a virgin when any young woman conceiving normally would have served.
---lorra8574 on 5/1/07

Yes, the Bible quotes other books, some of them as scripture. The canon was produced by those with political agendas, this is basic history. (I could go into that) The actual canon voted on by Roman Bishops. Long after the canon was established, systematic theologies were created based on the accepted canon. My point is not to undermine the Bible, but to point out what Paul called a 'falling away'-apostasy had taken place after the apostles had died.

Moderator - Name books that are missing because of any political agendas and explain. Thanks.
---len_k on 5/1/07

The Bible quotes 'The book of Jasher' in Joshua.
---len_k on 12/15/05

Moderator, you ask did Jesus quote from the Septuagint? Yes, as did Paul and all the apostles and preachers.
Given that Aramaic and hebrew were not common languages in the Roman Empire, and all educated people spoke Greek, it was how the OT was communicated.

Moderator - Eloy do you believe that is a correct statement?
---mike6553 on 12/15/05

The septuagint has 70 books. 'Angels'-as a rule mean messengers, but they have several ranks, and sometimes they are very physical, and lethal. In the DeadSea Scrolls- the 'war scroll' we see the term, 'Children of light' written long before the NT, giving the term greater meaning.
---len_k on 12/15/05

Eloy; Dosen't Angel mean messenger? Where's the "error"?
---1st_cliff on 12/14/05

cliff, you are mistaken. i am a Bible Translator who has compared the texts, and the Septugint is riddled with adulterations. For example, the inspired Torah quotes "the messengers of God", whereas the scholarly but uninspired Septuagint mistranslates the scripture to read "angels of God". And there are many other errors in the Septuagint. After discovering the manifold corruptions in the text i have decidedly not to use the Septuagint as a source document in proof translating.
---Eloy on 12/14/05

Actually Eloy;the differences of Septuagint vs Masoretic text, are only grammatical,errors, spelling differences and missing words, but nothing to corrupt the meaning!both agree with the dead sea scrolls ! The worst mixup is in Jeremiah but not enough to change the meaning!(some words re-arranged)

Moderator - 1st_Cliff - have you really studied the texts close enough to know if that is true? I have not personally studied them, but have never heard anyone make that comment before.
---1st_cliff on 12/13/05

Moderator, you are correct. The Septuagint was made by the Alexandrian Jews, and contains many evident hyperboles, and added texts, and adulterations which are not present in the original Hebrew text.
---Eloy on 12/13/05

Part 2 of 2

That is why the Septuagint was created, to meet the vernacular language need of the Jewish people at that time. A Hebrew Torah would have been useless in an outlying Synagogue away from Jerusalem even if the congregation could afford to have one. The Greek Septuagint was the Torah the people used at the time of Christ. Old Testament quotations found in the New Testament do not conform to Masoretic Hebrew text renderings but conform perfectly to the Greek Septuagint
---Phil_the_Elder on 12/13/05

Part 1 of 2

Moderator - Isn't the Greek Septuagint a questionable translation all in itself?

Know it dont think so, it is the translation used by New Testament authors when quoting from the Old Testament. After the Greek conquest of Palestine most Jews other than Priest and the writers of the Dead Sea Scrolls could no longer read and write Rabbinic Hebrew.

Moderator - Jesus didn't quote from it or anybody else?
---Phil_the_Elder on 12/13/05

The main reason is because for the most part the content in the excluded books was already comprised in the Torah under different titles of books, and it would have been redundant to include text which is already in use. For example, you will still find alot of redundancy still in the Bible, like I Kings and II Chronicles; and Daniel and Revelation; etc. Our O.T. is from the "inspired" Hebrew Torah or Tanach, and the N.T. from the "inspired" Greek Constantinopolitan or Byzantine MSS.
---Eloy on 12/13/05

Len-k; The lxx (septuagint) so named for the 70 schollars that translated it from Hebrew to Greek 200bce but it strangely enough agrees with the dead sea scrolls! Eastern Orthodox still use it (lxx) in clarifying scripture. It does contain the "Apocripha" except for 2 books! The differences between this and the Masoretic text are only slight!
---1st_cliff on 12/12/05

I will name and explain the other 11, as time permits. It should be known, the Greek Septuagint contained 70'Septa meaning 70 (some copies 72) books for the Hebrew Bible, 'OT.'

Moderator - Isn't the Greek Septuagint a questionable translation all in itself?
---Len_k on 12/11/05

Read These Insightful Articles About Franchises

Book of Enoch, quoted in Jude and elsewhere. Eusibus and Ireanious said," some recieved it, others did not." They are refering to the individual church's in the empire during the second, third centuries. In a coptic manuscript, 225AD it appears alongside Revelation. It was accepted until about 400AD then rejected by Augestine. Its rejection was due mostly due to its corruption over the centuries, by translaters. A copy of it was discovered in 1800, in east Africa, dating to 200AD.

Moderator - "Its rejection was due mostly due to its corruption" Although I am not familar with the book, you appear to answer your own question as to why it isn't part of the Bible.
---len_k on 12/11/05

Copyright© 2017 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.