Is the Christian Bible Complete?

Is the Christian Bible Complete?

Have you ever stopped to consider how the Christian Bible came about? There is no 

divine contents page to inform us which books should be included, so just how did the 

collection of writings that make up scripture come into being?

The list of books that constitute the Bible are known as the canon. Historically, the 

canon came about through a process. The most widely accepted criterion among the 

early Church Fathers by which a book should be included or rejected in the canon was 

“apostolicity” [1]. For them, apostolicity meant that a book’s authorship could be traced 

back either to an apostle of Jesus or to someone in close proximity to an apostle.

The problem is that there are books in the New Testament which are completely 

anonymous, we literally have no idea who authored them, so we cannot verify theirorigin. A good example is the Book of Hebrews. Traditionally, its author was believed to

be Paul the Apostle, and it was included in the collected writings of Paul from a very

early date. However, doubts about Pauline authorship have been raised since the

second century. Eusebius recorded that “some have rejected the Epistle to the

Hebrews, saying that it is disputed by the church of Rome, on the ground that it

was not written by Paul” [2]. Tertullian attributed the epistle to Barnabas, and while

Origen commended those churches that attributed Hebrews to Paul, his own judgement

was: “But as to who wrote the epistle, only God knows the truth” [3]. Some of the

reasons for doubting Paul as its author is the fact that the text as it has been passed

down to the present time is internally anonymous. The book also has notable stylistic

differences compared to Paul’s other writings. Some have tried to justify such

discrepancies by claiming that Jewish hatred of Paul led to him writing it anonymously

and changing his style of writing. The fourth century bishop Severian of Gabala wrote:

The heretics say that this epistle is not Paul’s, and they offer as their first proof of this

that his name is not subscribed as in the other epistles. Second, his vocabulary is

different, that is, it is foreign to Paul’s customary word choice and usage. One must

know, however, that Paul was hated by the Jews on the grounds that he was teaching

apostasy from the law…[…]. Therefore, writing something useful to the Hebrews, he

does not append his name, so that they might not lose any advantage they could have

derived from the letter because of their hatred against him. And he writes to them in the

tongue of the Hebrews, which was also translated by one of his disciples… [4]

The problem with this explanation is that it is pure speculation. The consensus among

most modern scholars is that the author is unknown and the evidence against Pauline

authorship is considered too solid to be disputed. New Testament scholar Donald

Guthrie commented that “most modern writers find more difficulty in imagining

how this Epistle was ever attributed to Paul than in disposing of the theory” [6].

Professor of New Testament studies Daniel Wallace, who holds to the traditional

authorship of the other epistles, states that “the arguments against Pauline

authorship, however, are conclusive” [7]. F. F. Bruce, one of the most highly

regarded New Testament scholars and a conservative Christian wrote: “The author of

“The Shepherd of Hermas” is not known. So is Hebrews, the anonymous Epistle

that we today find bound up with the Pauline writings” [8].

In light of these serious doubts about the origin of at least some of the books of the

New Testament, we cannot affirm with certainty that there is a connection between

those books and the apostles of Jesus. In other words, their apostolicity is brought into

question, and by extension so is the soundness of the canon since apostolicity was its

foundation in the early Church. A Christian may say let’s put aside such man-made

standards, instead let’s just look to see what the earliest believers were reading and

take that as the inspired canon. This does not help us, as in the first few centuries of

Christianity different groups had different canons. For example, the Codex Sinaiticus,

which is the oldest surviving complete Bible, included the writings known as the Epistle

of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas. The Codex Alexandrinus, another early

Bible, included the writings known as the First and Second Epistles of Clement. These two canons not only differed from one another but also are different when compared to

the canons of today.

In the first few centuries of Christianity, there was no such thing as a standard list of

books. In fact, the idea of an official canon did not come about until much later. The

“closed canon” of the New Testament has its beginnings in 367 CE when bishop

Athanasius wrote a letter to his church instructing Christians to recognise 27 books as

inspired literature. It is important to note that prior to Athanasius, no single Christian

authority ever instructed anyone to have only 27 books in their canon of the New

Testament. For various reasons, it became necessary for the Church to know exactly

what books were divinely authoritative. This helped in the establishment of Christian

doctrine and determined what should be read in church services. Even today, Christian

Bibles have different canons, ranging from the 66 books of Protestants, 73 books of the

Roman Catholic Church, and 81 books of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church. So before

answering the question of whether the Christian Bible is complete, they must first tackle

the problem of which version of the Bible is the correct one.

Christians may respond by saying that the lack of canonical unity across denominations

is not a problem as there is a subset of books common to all the canons so we should

treat these are the core inspired texts. Now it’s true that the various canons that exist

today have much overlap, such as the four Gospels, the writings of Paul, the Book of

Acts and so on. But even if we take this approach and just consider the books that are

common to all canons, we still face serious questions about its completeness. Within

the common canon there are many internal references to books and epistles that are

now lost:

1. Missing Epistle from Laodicea

Paul, the earliest known Christian author, wrote several letters (or epistles) in Greek to

various churches. The New Testament contains many such epistles written to the

Romans, Galatians, Colossians and others. In his epistle to the Colossians, Paul gives

instructions to the Christians to exchange the epistle with the one he wrote to Laodicea:

After this letter has been read to you, see that it is also read in the church of the Laodiceans

and that you in turn read the letter from Laodicea. [Colossians 4:16]

This epistle to the Laodiceans is nowhere to be found in Bibles of today. Historically,

different groups put forward their own versions of a Laodicean epistle in order to try and

fill the “gap”, but scholars generally reject these as forgeries [9].

2. Missing Epistle to the Corinthians

The New Testament contains a series of letters that Paul wrote to a community of

Christians in Corinth. The New Testament contains two of these letters, titled ‘First

Epistle to the Corinthians (or ‘1 Corinthians’) and ‘Second Epistle to the Corinthians’ (or ‘2 Corinthians’). In the first letter that is found in the New Testament, Paul makes

mention of an earlier letter that he had already written to the Corinthians:

I have written you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people, not at all

meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or

idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world. But now I am writing you that

you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral

or greedy, an idolater or a slanderer, a drunkard or a swindler. With such a man do not

even eat. [1 Corinthians 5:9-11]

What happened to Paul’s earlier letter to the Corinthians? The New Testament does

not have it as it is lost. What we do have are the two follow-up letters that he wrote.

3. Jude and the lost Book of Enoch

The Book of Jude in the New Testament makes reference to a prophecy of Enoch:

Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about them: “See, the Lord is coming with

thousands upon thousands of his holy ones to judge everyone, and to convict all of

them of all the ungodly acts they have committed in their ungodliness, and of all the

defiant words ungodly sinners have spoken against him.” [Jude 1:14-15]

In the various canons of the Bible that exist today, such a prophecy can only be found

in the Ethiopian canon which contains the Book of Enoch:

And behold! He cometh with ten thousands of holy ones to execute judgement upon all,

and to destroy [all] the ungodly: and to convict all flesh of all the works [of their

ungodliness] which they have ungodly committed, and of all the hard things which

ungodly sinners [have spoken] against Him. [Enoch 1:9]

Even though the Ethiopian canon does contain a book called Enoch, and even though it

matches the prophecy that is quoted in Jude, there is evidence to suggest that the

Ethiopian text is incomplete. One of the startling discoveries among the Dead Sea

Scrolls was the presence of texts not found in the modern Old Testament. In 1956,

during the excavation of the Dead Sea Scrolls at Qumran, a new version of Enoch was

discovered. Now, some of these ancient scrolls do correspond to the Ethiopian version,

such as Enoch 1:9 which can be found in Qumran scroll 4Q204. But there are large

portions that are different to the Ethiopian version, such as Qumran scrolls 4Q209 and

4Q211. So even the Ethiopian canon’s version of Enoch may be incomplete.

Christians may argue that there never was such a book called Enoch and that the

version found in the Ethiopian canon is not a legitimate text. However, historically there

are many Church Fathers who considered Enoch to be divinely inspired scripture.

Tertullian believed that Jude was referring to a physical writing by Enoch and also

wrote positively concerning it: But since Enoch in the same Scripture has preached likewise concerning the Lord,

nothing at all must be rejected by us which pertains to us; and we read that ‘every

Scripture suitable for edification is divinely inspired.’ (2 Timothy 3:16) By the Jews it

may now seem to have been rejected for that very reason, just like all the other portions

nearly which tell of Christ. Nor, of course, is this fact wonderful, that they did not receive

some Scriptures which spake of Him whom even in person, speaking in their presence,

they were not to receive. To these considerations is added the fact that Enoch

possesses a testimony in the Apostle Jude. (Jude 1:14-15) [10]

Origen appeals to the Book of Enoch and the Book of Psalms, describing both as

‘Scripture’:

But some one will perhaps inquire whether we can obtain out of Scripture any grounds

for such an understanding of the subject. Now I think some such view is indicated in the

Psalms, when the prophet says, ‘My eyes have seen your imperfection;’ (Psalm 139:16)

by which the mind of the prophet, examining with keener glance the first principles of

things, and separating in thought and imagination only between matter and its qualities,

perceived the imperfection of God, which certainly is understood to be perfected by the

addition of qualities. Enoch also, in his book, speaks as follows: ‘I have walked on even

to imperfection’… [11]

4. The missing books of the Old Testament

There are a multitude of books referenced within the Old Testament that are nowhere

to be found in the canons of today:

i. The Book of Wars

Wherefore it is said in the book of the wars of the LORD, What he did in the Red sea, and

in the brooks of Arnon. [Numbers 21:14]

Here are what some Bible commentaries have to say about the Book of Wars. Barnes’

Notes on the Bible says:

Of “the book of the wars of the Lord” nothing is known except what may be gathered

from the passage before us. It was apparently a collection of sacred odes

commemorative of that triumphant progress of God’s people which this chapter records.

From it is taken the ensuing fragment of ancient poetry relating to the passage of the

Arnon River, and probably also the Song of the Well, and the Ode on the Conquest of the

Kingdom of Sihon Numbers 21:17-18, Numbers 21:27-30.

Clarke’s Commentary on the Bible says:

The book of the wars of the Lord — There are endless conjectures about this book, both

among ancients and moderns. Dr. Lightfoot’s opinion is the most simple, and to me bears the greatest appearance of being the true one. “This book seems to have been

some book of remembrances and directions, written by Moses for Joshua’s private

instruction for the management of the wars after him. See Exodus 17:14-16. It may be

that this was the same book which is called the book of Jasher, i. e., the book of the

upright, or a directory for Joshua, from Moses, what to do and what to expect in his

wars; and in this book it seems as if Moses directed the setting up of archery, see 2

Samuel 1:18, and warrants Joshua to command the sun, and expect its obedience,

Joshua 10:13.”

Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible says:

Wherefore it is said in the book of the wars of the Lord… A history of wars in former

times, which the Lord had suffered to be in the world; and which, as Aben Ezra thinks,

reached from the times of Abraham and so might begin with the battle of the kings in his

time, and take in others in later times, and particularly those of Sihon, king of the

Amorites, and his conquests of some parts of Moab; and to this book, which might be

written by some one of those nations.

Geneva Study Bible says: “Which seems to be the book of the Judges, or as some

think, a book which is lost”.

ii. The Books of Chronicles

The Old Testament books of 1 Chronicles and 2 Chronicles both make mention of a

number of seemingly lost books which are said to have recorded the events of the lives

of David and Solomon:

As for the events of King David’s reign, from beginning to end, they are written in the

records of Samuel the seer, the records of Nathan the prophet and the records of Gad

the seer. [1 Chronicles 29:29]

As for the other events of Solomon’s reign, from beginning to end, are they not written in

the records of Nathan the prophet, in the prophecy of Ahijah the Shilonite and in the

visions of Iddo the seer concerning Jeroboam son of Nebat? [2 Chronicles 9:29]

The Prophet Nathan seems to be an important individual. Not only are his lost writings

mentioned in both 1 Chronicles and 2 Chronicles, but he features prominently in the

lives of David and Solomon throughout the Old Testament:

• He forbade David from building a temple (2 Samuel 7; 1 Chronicles 17:1-15);

• He rebuked David about Bathsheba (2 Samuel 12);

• He anointed Solomon (1 Kings 38-39).

Clarke’s Commentary on 1 Chronicles 29:29: All these were written by three eminent men, personally acquainted with him through the

principal part of his life; these were Samuel and Gad the seers, and Nathan the prophet.

These writings are all lost, except the particulars interspersed in the books of Samuel,

Kings, and Chronicles, none of which are the records mentioned here.

Clarke took the same approach to 2 Chronicles 9:29: “These books are all lost”.

According to the Geneva Study Bible, “The books of Nathan and Gad are thought to

have been lost in the captivity”.

Scofield Reference Notes simply said, “These books have perished”.

CONCLUSION

The situation with the Christian Bible today with its diversity of canons poses some

serious problems. Different denominations have different collections of books in their

Bibles, yet they all make the claim that they possess the word of God. If Christianity is

the truth and God wants mankind to follow it as a religion, then why did He not protect

its foundation, the scriptures? We’ve looked at some proposed solutions for this

problem of canon diversity, but ultimately the issue of incompleteness impacts all

canons due to the presence of internal references to missing writings, both in the Old

Testament and New.

This lack of uniformity across the canons is a direct result of the Bible not defining its

own contents. A list of books did not simply drop from the heavens, nor does the Bible

contain a divine contents page. Rather, the different lists of books that exist today all

came about through a process. This undermines the claim that the Bible alone is

sufficient for salvation (a position known as “Sola Scriptura”, meaning Scripture alone),

as the Bible itself relies upon later traditions to define itself.

I invite my Christian readers to investigate the Qur’an, the foundational scripture of

Islam. Muslims have no doubt about the Qur’an’s completeness. Not only does it clearly

define itself, it is that which was revealed to and recited by the Prophet Muhammad

(peace be upon him), but it was also memorised in its entirety during his lifetime. Even

after the Prophet’s death, when Muslims were faced with the task of compiling it into

book form for the first time, there was no disagreement among them about its content.

The fruits of this are that Muslims today, regardless of denomination or sect, all

possess the same Qur’an.