Dr.GH

It was suggested that this readers of this area of IIBB might find the following interesting;

It is varyingly amusing and irritating that biblical "literalists" are among the least literal readers (or quoters) of the Bible. As an obvious example, "literalists" happily ignore that in 1 Timothy 1:4 and Titus 3:9, Paul advises us to ignore "Jewish fables and endless genealogies." The genealogies of Gen 10, Chr 1-9, Mt 1, and Lk 3 are one of the key ways creationists have 'proved' the Earth to be about 6,000 years old. Again, in Titus 1:14, Paul tells us to ignore Jewish fables. Wouldn't that mean much of the Old Testament, if not most of Genesis? Also: 2 Corinthans 3:6 "He has made us competent as ministers of a new covenant--not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life."

A popular "literalist" misconception is that the Bible is perfect, complete and inerrant, or that it claims internally to be. A folk tradition that the Torah, or first 5 books of the Bible were written by the prophet Moses under the direct "God breathed" inspiration of God. Nowhere does the Pentateuch assert that it was written entirely by the hand of Moses under the direct inspiration of God. Quite the opposite in fact. Below is a compilation of biblical references to extra-biblical books which were acknowledged by biblical authors as their sources, or are provided to the reader interested in further information, or most significantly: provided as authoritative support for biblical passages. 1 Kings 11:41 is an example of all three of these motivations contained in a single verse.

The verses below are largely the current results of my study of the Pentateuch: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. The rest of the Bible has many further examples that are also of interest, but merely quoting the verses takes nearly 8 text pages. I'll post more if people find the first portion interesting.

They are taken within English translations of the Bible with the selective preference toward the King James Translation favored by literalist Protestants. The Christian community outside of biblical scholars have rarely bothered with the other critical scared Jewish teaching, the Midrash and the Talmod (AKA Talmud). There however we find many more examples that the Jewish scrolls complied into the "Old Testament" often were directly produced from, or relied on non-biblical works for information, and authority.

I have merely quoted the relevant verses for the most part, but have written some occasional comments.

Numbers 21:14
Therefore it is said in the "Book of the Wars of the LORD (YHWH)," ...
See also "The Song of the Wars of Yahweh."

Deuteronomy 31:24
And it came to pass, when Moses had made an end of writing the words of this law in a Book, until they were finished,

Deuteronomy 31:26
Take this "Book of the Law," and put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of the LORD (YHWH) your God, that it may be there for a witness against thee.

(This is the only book directly, and repeatedly referred to as authored by Moses. See also Deuteronomy 31:24. Elsewhere it is referred to as "The Law of Moses" e.g.. 1 Kings 2:3 and "Book of the Law of Moses" Joshua 23:6, "Book of the law of the LORD" 2 Chronicles 17:9,"The Law of Moses given by YHWH" Ezra 7:6 {many scholars argue that Ezra was in fact redactor of the Pentateuch and so Ezra 7:6 is the first mention of what is a new scroll incorporating the "Book of the law of the LORD" attributed to Moses. Jerimiah is also a strong candidate as a major Torah author}.). (This is not "The Book of the Law of YHWH" authored by Joshua see Joshua 24:26).

Tigers!

If you could please clarify for me which Jewish fables & endless genealogies Paul was referring to it would save me some time.

I think you have fallen prey to the following
Paul mentions "Jewish fables and endless genealogies"
The OT is Jewish and has some genealogies in it
Therefore Paul was referring to OT.

I don't know which bible literalists you refer to but certainly in the Baptist tradition in Australia has always noted that Moses was the compiler/collector/editor of the Pentateuch into roughly the form we have today. Made it's different in the USA.

Jack the Bodiless

Presumably such a list should also include the Book of Jasher (mentioned in Joshua 10:13 and 2 Samuel 1:18) and the Book of Enoch (referenced, and quoted from, in Jude 1:14).

Savagemutt

Thanks for posting this, Doc. I hope the crossing of E/C and BH&C nerds scholars doesn't cause the universe to explode.

ETA: Are some of these books suspected to just be the source materials for what the OT was later compiled into? Is "The Book of Law" perhaps the source for the "law" books of the bible?

Dean Anderson

If we assume that this "Book of the Law" is the same one that the priest Hilkiah mysteriously "finds" and presents to King Josiah, does this still count as an "extra-Biblical" book?

Friedman makes an excellent case, if I remember correctly, for this "Book of the Law" being much of Deuteronomy itself rather than a separate extra-Biblical work.

But I suppose anyone giving any credence to Friedman's work on the DH is not likely to believe in Mosaic authorship or inerrancy anyway...

Codec

There is quite a good list at Non-canonical books referenced in the Bible.

Dr.GH

Thanks!

That is good.

I'll cross check with the lists I have been making.:wave:

Dr.GH

Other than some "still inspired" fundamentalisms, this is also a good article that was linked from the Wikipedia.

There will probably not be total agreement (ever) over the exact lists depending on how one translates the Hebrew titles, or determines that a title is a seperate text, denoting a named section of a book, or a synonym/alternate title.

Niall Armstrong

As far as I can tell from the various translations at hand, and my insufficient Greek, the writer of the pastoral epistles (Paul or pseudo-Paul, Titus 3:9 is another reference) does NOT talk about Jewish fables & genealogies. It is the "They want to be teachers of the law" (1 Tim 1:7) that is normally used to identify the former as applying to Jews. There is nothing in this that says that these people are anything but Christians (just not of the pauline kind). Nor have I ever found anyone who could identify what Jews or genealogies are spoken of here. This could therefore be construed to be evidence of Doherty's thesis of non-mythical Christians, who would find the gospels of Mark, Matthew and Luke to consist of endless genealogies and old wives tales

Of course there may have been other, more blatant, texts disapproving of these fables, within the Xian tradition, but these would not have survived the shift to belief in an historic Jesus

WishboneDawn

I had a fellow christian who was very literal in her reading explain to me that that scripture meant a christian should not read ANY fiction. No fairy tales or even Narnia for her kids, poor things.