For those who use the Bible as their main religious text?

The previous answers are rather interesting. I noticed that no one mentioned the gospel of Judas, for example.

No matter what evidence is presented, you can't reason with someone that takes things 'on faith.' Most people will say that God controls things and what He wants in the Bible is in the Bible. Although I can't exactly reconcile that with free will myself - if we have the will to do what we want, couldn't someone have made a mistake and left a book out? Even if you point out mistranslations - for example, 'Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live' is correctly translated as 'Thou shalt not suffer a POISONER to live', they still come up with a 'reason' that the Bible is correct.

For instance?

Ah, the Apocrypha! Well, Catholic and Orthodox churches still have them, and they don't really add all that much extra to doctrine or moral teaching. There's an adventure story (Tobit), some tales of Jewish heroism (Judith, Maccabees, additions to Daniel and Esther), yet more proverbs (Wisdom, Sirach), and some commentary by Jeremiah's secretary (Baruch), inspiring in places but nothing that hasn't been essentially told elsewhere.

There are OTHER books, commonly called "pseudepigrapha", that were never seriously considered because they just didn't fit with Jewish and Christian theology. Essentially, ANYONE can write a book and call it "holy". It's really up to the elders of a faith to decide whether it truly merits the classification. There are astronomical treatises (Jubilees, Enoch), so-called histories (Jasher), and assorted embellishments of older stories to fill in gaps (Aristeas, Pilate). There are Christian adventure stories that obviously are intended to pad the biographies of the Holy Family and Apostles (Protoevangelion, Acts of Peter and Paul), and "gospels" that purport to reveal hidden meanings in the other gospels (Thomas, Philip, Mary Magdalen, Hermas). The reasons for their categorical rejections was the fact that they added nothing substantial to the faith or they promoted doctrines that contradicted established doctrines.

These books were undeniably suppressed by the Church after it achieved legal legitimacy in the Roman Empire, but many manuscripts and portions have been rediscovered and publicized for anyone to read. Their appropriateness as "scripture" can be judged by anyone who chooses to. Most readers find a strange, hard-to-implement "Christianity" in them with clear cultural biases in them, but a few try to adapt their ideas to modern sensibilities, even without the approval of mainline faiths.

There is only so much a text can do for an adherent. The Christian faith, in all its sects and denominations, has certain ideas, interpretations and practices in place. Every faith endures a small amount of cultural syncretization but it can't be all faiths at once. And the books that simply don't fit can't be regarded as "missing".

No missing parts nor issues

only in the mind of the ones who wish to disobey its Truths

Its of No private interpretation and its Spiritually discerned

without the Spirit of God , you wouldn't know anything about it anyway .

And the Bible is Not a religion

I have a KJV with the Apocrypha and I have read it. The only books that could be and as far as I can determine, true are: 1&2 Esdras, and 1&2 Maccabees, and the Prayer of Maccabee. As for the others, there is sufficient evidence within themselves to prove that they are fakes.

The Bible is a story of faith. It is not the beginning or the end of faith. The father of Judaism which spawned Christianity chose to follow God before the Bible was written. Jesus Christ walked the earth and taught as a Rabbi before the NT was written.

I do not hold the Bible as the completed work of God because it is still being revealed every day.

The Roman Catholic Bibles have extra books in the Old Testament. They do not affect Christianity. Both RC and Protestant New Testaments (Christian scriptures) have the exact same Bible books so none are lost.

Debbie

I think you're talking about the Apocrypha. It was never a part of the Bible, just something that was put in between the Old, and New Testament as stated in the 1611 KJB.

No, it does not bother me. God cared enough to see that the Bible existed, why would you think He would allow books that He wanted included to be excluded? The council members of Nicea may have felt a heavy burden when choosing books, however it was God's plan that was carried out, not theirs.

I am not bothered with Gods plan.

You do know that the bible contains many "books" dont you?

So no it doesn't bother me, because I can read as many or as few of the books that are contained in it ....

The bible dosn't have to be read cover to cover, in one sitting like a story book, you can pick it up and read a few verses, or one just one chapter, and be inspired or learn something.. so you question is irrelevant..

Devo

My answer would be that the bible... as we know it talks continuously about faith and belief. Therefore I feel that which is missing was good if it was of GOD. We will never find it. That which we do have is powerful beyond our imagination.