Christians can you be certain your bible is trust worthy?

[exchemist]

What "seems to you" wasn't my experience, for one. I was able to 1) ask God for persuasive evidence, since the burden of proof is His 2) find independent corroborations of prophecy and the Christ outside the Bible.

I approached my own conversion tentatively, knowing I would face difficult times from friends and family as a Jew. I sought evidence, and found it.

That's interesting. Can you give examples of the independent corroborations of prophecy? I can see that could be quite compelling to an outsider.

 

[ChristineM]

Do you consider Newtonian mechanics "wrong"?

Or just a version of mechanics that was later found to be incomplete or approximate?

What straw man is this? It is not me contradicting myself here... You may notice i quoted the claim and its contradiction.

However perhaps you can tell me how a document can be complete/accurate/right without access to all the data.

 

[shmogie]

I repeat, you said "When the KJV was compiled, the scholars did not have complete access to all of the extant Koine Greek foundation documents ( called witnesses) throughout the world.

Every translation comes from these"

So it didnt have the relevant data, was incomplete but you say it was not wrong. Could you explain how this works please?

Interpretation is what the individual wants it to mean, that is usually weighted by their chosen version of the faith and which particular bible they choose!

Or paragraphs or verses.

If a printing of War and Peace omits 6 words throughout the book, and you are told at the beginning that they had been left out, and what they were, is that copy wrong ? Do you then miss the meaning of every chapter, or the entire book ?

 

[ChristineM]

If a printing of War and Peace omits 6 words throughout the book, and you are told at the beginning that they had been left out, and what they were, is that copy wrong ? Do you then miss the meaning of every chapter, or the entire book ?

I am not talking 6 words and you know it. I provided 4 verse numbers for you to compare. You couldnt do it. There are many, many more examples of discrepancies and omissions, mistranslations and errors.

 

[exchemist]

What straw man is this? It is not me contradicting myself here... You may notice i quoted the claim and its contradiction.

However perhaps you can tell me how a document can be complete/accurate/right without access to all the data.

That's OK, if you answer my question, I can explain.

 

[shmogie]

I am not talking 6 words and you know it. I provided 4 verse numbers for you to compare. You couldnt do it. There are many, many more examples of discrepancies and omissions, mistranslations and errors.

I compared them to two later translations, the meanings of the chapters weren´t altered by the omission.

I have been down this road before, you believe that because there are variations in translations, the message of the Book is unreliable.

I believe, based upon study by myself and extensive research by others, that this is not the case.

I don´t want to argue about it, our positions are clear

Let´s leave it at that

 

[ChristineM]

That's OK, if you answer my question, I can explain.

I am not in to answering straw men. If you dont want to explain thats up to you!

 

[ChristineM]

I compared them to two later translations, the meanings of the chapters weren´t altered by the omission.

I have been down this road before, you believe that because there are variations in translations, the message of the Book is unreliable.

I believe, based upon study by myself and extensive research by others, that this is not the case.

I don´t want to argue about it, our positions are clear

Let´s leave it at that

You didnt compare the niv and kjv as i requested.

And as i have said before, the message is down to personal interpretation.

Your belief is yours, mine is mine.

Ok

 

[exchemist]

I am not in to answering straw men. If you dont want to explain thats up to you!

Tant pis.

 

[ChristineM]

Tant pis.

Bof

 

[Milton Platt]

Hey brother, lots of lies, that's for sure. But is the Bible lying, or are people lying?

Perhaps it is the people who wrote the Bible that are lying?

 

[Dell]

Christianity derive from Judaism. Islam derive from Christianity and Judaism. These 3 religion got the same god and is the only 3 religion that believe there is only one god. The 3 religions believe its god is one and only true god and believe their god is always right and all other gods are lying evil demonic false gods pretending to be god AKA Satan. However, what if there is a plot twist and those other gods are the real gods and the god of Christianity, Islam and Judaism Yahweh, is actually the one that is truly a lying evil demonic false god pretending to be god? This is especially considering the bible got many disturbing teachings which is why we need the Protestant Reformation and even after that there are still many problem, due to not been able to change the bible itself (it is no wonder the Mormons threw the bible out and write up a new book of Mormon.

**Hyperlinks removed by moderator**

Science viewpoint:
1. There is NO such things as miracles. So that cuts out most of the Gospels, Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Daniel, Ezekiel, etc... this is a most MAJOR bible compromise of truth that affects most Christian doctrines from creation to Moses to Jesus.
2. There is NO such thing as prophecy as in knowing the future. So that cuts out some of Daniel, the Gospels, Isaiah, Revelations, Thessalonians, etc... that affects doctrines of the 1st and 2nd coming of the messiah and the apocalypse.
3. There is NO evidence of Adam and Eve. The first human homosepiens came to be about 200,000+ years ago in Africa. No DNA evidence of Adam and eve tracing back to the earliest human Male female pair. That affects the doctrine of sin and curse upon all earth.
2. There is NO geological evidence for a global flood nor dna evidence of all animal species or humans narrowed down to pairs at the same time. That means a myth was used as truth throughout the bible... i.e. by Jesus and Paul.
3. There is No archeological evidence for an exodus of a high population of Hebrews out of Egypt. This compromises the whole Hebrew origin as Gods chosen people delivered from the Egyptians by signs and wonders. Again another myth used as truth though out the bible.
4. There is NO authentic original manuscript. Most all scholars of manuscripts agree that earliest manuscripts used in translation of the bible were not written by eye witnesses, but by oral traditions of a stories passed down. I.e. the Gospel of Mark was written 40 years after the death of Jesus and John was written 65 years after and not even authored by John the apostile. That problem of author forgery is a problem for a 3rd of the epistles of Paul, mostly the pastoral epistles. Until the compilation of the 1st new testament cannon the manuscripts used in the translations where hand copies of copies of copies of copies handed down from all kinds of different Christian sects. This compromises what was actually the true sayings of Jesus or the apostles. The fruit of this is how many different denominations of Christianity exist today.
5. Finally there is NO logic to the current bible... if God wants man know him, why is it the only thing he throws out there for us is a bible full of errors, contradictions, myths, used by 100s of different sects with a different interpretation of it, all claiming they have the truth.

 

[joelr]

this is a great question and points made. I use scripture because he claim Hebrew text doesn't match jesus being the Christ so I used a scriptural breakdown to prove that's not the case. but when speaking to you a non Christian I'd stick to Historical Accuracy. for example The Bible prophesied Alexander the Great's reign in great detail over hundreds of years prior to it happening. It does not name Alexander by name but it gives detail to his reign how long it last how it gets broken up and who the powers were given to after Alexander's death and specific detail. that's one example I have no problem explaining in full detail I'm spit balling the information but I can send you articles that leave references and proof to back up this claim. I can also reason Jesus historical existence as well In detail. I can explain alot in reference to historical accuracy.

Scholarship dates Daniel to 2nd century. There is no doubt about that.

Every possible mention of Jesus is covered by this panel of experts:

even the forgeries by the church. Any authentic mention of Jesus outside the gospels are referencing people who follow the gospels, that's it.
To sum up the conclusions, besides faith, the historical evidence give no indication that any of those events are real.

Outside of the gospels there is nothing else that supports it.

The gospels themselves are copies of Mark told in a mythological style and obviously influenced by earlier pagan myths.


But pointing to any biblical prophecy opens the door to contrast how many failed prophecies there are, which are many. I'm not an expert on that but there is a book on it by C. Sandoval.

 

[joelr]

Christianity derive from Judaism. Islam derive from Christianity and Judaism. These 3 religion got the same god and is the only 3 religion that believe there is only one god. The 3 religions believe its god is one and only true god and believe their god is always right and all other gods are lying evil demonic false gods pretending to be god AKA Satan. However, what if there is a plot twist and those other gods are the real gods and the god of Christianity, Islam and Judaism Yahweh, is actually the one that is truly a lying evil demonic false god pretending to be god? This is especially considering the bible got many disturbing teachings which is why we need the Protestant Reformation and even after that there are still many problem, due to not been able to change the bible itself (it is no wonder the Mormons threw the bible out and write up a new book of Mormon.

**Hyperlinks removed by moderator**

That's completely wrong.
Most religions have 1 supreme God.
Hindus have lower "gods" or personal deities who are still aspects of the true total God.
There is ZERO difference with concepts in Christianity like angels, saints, holy trinity, son of god, it doesn't matter that Christians will say "that's different because those are (insert some silly word)", they are still supernatural beings, be they part of god, created by god, whatever, it's truly semantics.

Same thing, one God and other deities flying around pulling people out of ditches or whatever they do.
Where Jesus is also God Krishna is also part of the ultimate God Brahman.

 

[ObjectOfMercy]

If preaching scripture were persuasive, why are so many people still unpersuaded?

God is not trying to save all, that's why. The Bible teaches this. God has an elect people. He will surely save them. They will hear the preaching and believe it. But to the non-elect the gospel is intended otherwise. Hear 2 Corinthians 2:15-17...

15 For we are unto God a sweet savour of Christ, in them that are saved, and in them that perish:

16 To the one we are the savour of death unto death; and to the other the savour of life unto life. And who is sufficient for these things?

17 For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ.

 

[exchemist]

Yes, Thanks.
Fair enough. Translating one language to another can be challenging, especially an ancient one, I suppose.

I don't find that "accusing them of being wolves and vipers" have anything to do with one simply not being as familiar with the Bible, as another might be. I'll explain.
Wolves and vipers are not the same as lambs and doves. One can easily tell the difference in behavior.

When Jesus and his apostles said what they did, they were speaking the truth, I believe. Do you believe they were? So I believe a true Christian would identify with their words, and agree with them. Do you?

Many who call themselves Christians, do not really believe the Bible to be the word of God. I'm not saying this because I can say it, or as an opinion.
I have heard it "straight from the horses' mouth". Yes, I have spoken to some who will tell you up front that they don't believe that these "stories" are real historical events, and some go even further to say that the men who wrote these things wrote from their own ideas and understanding, and so these writings are not relevant to our time. Many of my friends relate the same, or similar experiences.
These persons therefore - according to scripture, put themselves in opposition to the foundation of the Christian congregation - Jesus Christ, and the true body of Christ.

This is not an idea from my head. It's Biblical.
Anyone who reads the Bible, should be able to see that Jesus and the disciples viewed all of the Hebrew scriptures, which they quoted, as true historical events.

It is written in scripture that false prophets, and apostates would lead away many, and they would parade as Jesus disciples, but the scriptures makes it plain that they are imitations - not real; false.
This is written throughout the Greek scriptures. I won't bother to reference them. Those who have thoroughly read these books, know this to be a fact.

To say that the Bible to me seems the same as saying that the Bible is rather flawed (I used flawed, but maybe that might not be the word you would use, so perhaps you can say what you would rather use, or correct me if my interpretation is flawed), therefore it is unreasonable to expect that it would not be misinterpreted.

Let me say, in behalf of my fellow brothers (that means sisters too), We know that it is highly likely the Bible - in some areas, can be misinterpreted, even misunderstood, and we don't claim to understand it perfectly. In fact, we don't expect that anyone alive today will be able to get everything perfect - In the future... maybe; In the new world... for sure.
Nor do we feel that people should not use their intelligence, and examine it with an open mind - which I think is different to being critical with a closed judgmental mindset.

That said, I think everyone has that obligation to choose to examine things for themselves, and choose their own path. My fellow brothers believe this. We don't believe one should follow something blindly.
We want and hope for people to make informed decisions. It doesn't please us for someone to get involved in religion for which they have little or no knowledge about.

So in conclusion...
I can understand that a person that is uncertain about religion, or whether or not the Bible contains the truth, might find it hard to agree to things it says, including what Jesus and his apostles said. They would also find it difficult to understand or accept what his true followers today say and do, and that's understandable, because the person isn't clear on the Bible's teachings, and message.
So for example, they may find it hard to accept that there can only be one right way to worship God, and may feel that various ways are also acceptable, but this is because they do not accept that the Bible is truth, or the word of God.

However, for one to identify as a Christian, one must identify as a follower of Christ - his teachings and example, according to what Christian meant to Jesus' first century followers.
To represent the Bible, one must be able to teach and live by the Bible's message.
I don't see how it works otherwise.

When the Bible for example says...
2 Corinthians 6:14-18
14 Do not become unevenly yoked with unbelievers. For what fellowship do righteousness and lawlessness have? Or what sharing does light have with darkness? 15 Further, what harmony is there between Christ and Belial? Or what does a believer share in common with an unbeliever? 16 And what agreement does God’s temple have with idols? For we are a temple of a living God; just as God said: “I will reside among them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they will be my people.” 17 “‘Therefore, get out from among them, and separate yourselves,’ says Jehovah, ‘and quit touching the unclean thing’”; “‘and I will take you in.’” 18 “‘And I will become a father to you, and you will become sons and daughters to me,’ says Jehovah, the Almighty.”
Do we understand clearly what we are being commanded to do, so as to act in harmony with it, or do we feel that any interpretation is fine?

I believe when Jesus acts, on that day, none of us can use interpretation as an excuse for not knowing and obeying. 2 Thessalonians 1:6-9
For me, it comes down to one thing, how honest at heart we are. If we are truly honest at heart, then we will understand, because we will humbly learn and obey, what can be seen as the truth.

??? It seems we are irretrievably talking at cross purposes. Let's leave it.

 

[shmogie]

Science viewpoint:
1. There is NO such things as miracles. So that cuts out most of the Gospels, Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Daniel, Ezekiel, etc... this is a most MAJOR bible compromise of truth that affects most Christian doctrines from creation to Moses to Jesus.
2. There is NO such thing as prophecy as in knowing the future. So that cuts out some of Daniel, the Gospels, Isaiah, Revelations, Thessalonians, etc... that affects doctrines of the 1st and 2nd coming of the messiah and the apocalypse.
3. There is NO evidence of Adam and Eve. The first human homosepiens came to be about 200,000+ years ago in Africa. No DNA evidence of Adam and eve tracing back to the earliest human Male female pair. That affects the doctrine of sin and curse upon all earth.
2. There is NO geological evidence for a global flood nor dna evidence of all animal species or humans narrowed down to pairs at the same time. That means a myth was used as truth throughout the bible... i.e. by Jesus and Paul.
3. There is No archeological evidence for an exodus of a high population of Hebrews out of Egypt. This compromises the whole Hebrew origin as Gods chosen people delivered from the Egyptians by signs and wonders. Again another myth used as truth though out the bible.
4. There is NO authentic original manuscript. Most all scholars of manuscripts agree that earliest manuscripts used in translation of the bible were not written by eye witnesses, but by oral traditions of a stories passed down. I.e. the Gospel of Mark was written 40 years after the death of Jesus and John was written 65 years after and not even authored by John the apostile. That problem of author forgery is a problem for a 3rd of the epistles of Paul, mostly the pastoral epistles. Until the compilation of the 1st new testament cannon the manuscripts used in the translations where hand copies of copies of copies of copies handed down from all kinds of different Christian sects. This compromises what was actually the true sayings of Jesus or the apostles. The fruit of this is how many different denominations of Christianity exist today.
5. Finally there is NO logic to the current bible... if God wants man know him, why is it the only thing he throws out there for us is a bible full of errors, contradictions, myths, used by 100s of different sects with a different interpretation of it, all claiming they have the truth.

Of course, you are assuming that science is the arbiter of truth. That is nonsense, and actually degrading to the scientific method.

Science sa

Science viewpoint:
1. There is NO such things as miracles. So that cuts out most of the Gospels, Genesis, Exodus, Judges, Daniel, Ezekiel, etc... this is a most MAJOR bible compromise of truth that affects most Christian doctrines from creation to Moses to Jesus.
2. There is NO such thing as prophecy as in knowing the future. So that cuts out some of Daniel, the Gospels, Isaiah, Revelations, Thessalonians, etc... that affects doctrines of the 1st and 2nd coming of the messiah and the apocalypse.
3. There is NO evidence of Adam and Eve. The first human homosepiens came to be about 200,000+ years ago in Africa. No DNA evidence of Adam and eve tracing back to the earliest human Male female pair. That affects the doctrine of sin and curse upon all earth.
2. There is NO geological evidence for a global flood nor dna evidence of all animal species or humans narrowed down to pairs at the same time. That means a myth was used as truth throughout the bible... i.e. by Jesus and Paul.
3. There is No archeological evidence for an exodus of a high population of Hebrews out of Egypt. This compromises the whole Hebrew origin as Gods chosen people delivered from the Egyptians by signs and wonders. Again another myth used as truth though out the bible.
4. There is NO authentic original manuscript. Most all scholars of manuscripts agree that earliest manuscripts used in translation of the bible were not written by eye witnesses, but by oral traditions of a stories passed down. I.e. the Gospel of Mark was written 40 years after the death of Jesus and John was written 65 years after and not even authored by John the apostile. That problem of author forgery is a problem for a 3rd of the epistles of Paul, mostly the pastoral epistles. Until the compilation of the 1st new testament cannon the manuscripts used in the translations where hand copies of copies of copies of copies handed down from all kinds of different Christian sects. This compromises what was actually the true sayings of Jesus or the apostles. The fruit of this is how many different denominations of Christianity exist today.
5. Finally there is NO logic to the current bible... if God wants man know him, why is it the only thing he throws out there for us is a bible full of errors, contradictions, myths, used by 100s of different sects with a different interpretation of it, all claiming they have the truth.

You are emphatic with your NO's, and your adamant no's are not true at all. Everything you cite has counter, thorough scholarship to refute it.

Your statements re the NT texts and foundation documents is a minority opinion, not based in verifiable fact.

You state that there is no logic to the Bible. Am I to assume that you have been granted the mantle of the determiner of all logic , thus making what I find logical voided by your opinion ?

Within the rules governing science, there is no mechanism to measure or quantify a miracle. That doesn't mean they don't occur, in fact they do, it only means they aren';t reproducible or consistently observable by science.

Science can only find truth when that truth is within the pervue of science, many things are not.

 

[nPeace]

Of course, you are assuming that science is the arbiter of truth. That is nonsense, and actually degrading to the scientific method.

Science sa

You are emphatic with your NO's, and your adamant no's are not true at all. Everything you cite has counter, thorough scholarship to refute it.

Your statements re the NT texts and foundation documents is a minority opinion, not based in verifiable fact.

You state that there is no logic to the Bible. Am I to assume that you have been granted the mantle of the determiner of all logic , thus making what I find logical voided by your opinion ?

Within the rules governing science, there is no mechanism to measure or quantify a miracle. That doesn't mean they don't occur, in fact they do, it only means they aren';t reproducible or consistently observable by science.

Science can only find truth when that truth is within the pervue of science, many things are not.

I tried explaining this to Dell before.

 

[LiveByFaithNotSight]

Scholarship dates Daniel to 2nd century. There is no doubt about that.

Every possible mention of Jesus is covered by this panel of experts:

even the forgeries by the church. Any authentic mention of Jesus outside the gospels are referencing people who follow the gospels, that's it.
To sum up the conclusions, besides faith, the historical evidence give no indication that any of those events are real.

Outside of the gospels there is nothing else that supports it.

The gospels themselves are copies of Mark told in a mythological style and obviously influenced by earlier pagan myths.


But pointing to any biblical prophecy opens the door to contrast how many failed prophecies there are, which are many. I'm not an expert on that but there is a book on it by C. Sandoval.

Authenticity. Some critics question the authenticity of Daniel, assuming the position taken by a third-century heathen philosopher and enemy of Christianity, Porphyry, who contended that the book of Daniel was forged by a Palestinian Jew of the time of Antiochus Epiphanes. This forger, he theorized, took past events and made them appear to be prophecies. The genuineness of the book of Daniel was not seriously questioned, however, from that day until the early part of the 18th century. Jesus Christ’s own acceptance of Daniel’s prophecy is an even more significant evidence of its authenticity.—Mt 24:15; Da 11:31.

Historical. Several manuscripts of parts of the book of Daniel were found in the Dead Sea caves. The earliest manuscript dates from the first half of the first century B.C.E.; the book of Daniel was an accepted part of the Scriptures in that time and was so well known to the Jews that many copies had already been made of it. That it was recognized as a canonical book of that time is supported by the writer of the Apocryphal, but historical, book of First Maccabees (2:59, 60), who made reference to Daniel’s deliverance from the den of lions, and that of the three Hebrews from the fiery furnace.

We have also the testimony of the Jewish historian Josephus, who states that the prophecies of Daniel were shown to Alexander the Great when he entered Jerusalem. This occurred in about 332 B.C.E., more than 150 years before the Maccabean period. Josephus says of the event: “When the book of Daniel was shown to him, in which he had declared that one of the Greeks would destroy the empire of the Persians, he believed himself to be the one indicated.” (Jewish Antiquities, XI, 337 [viii, 5]) History also recounts that Alexander bestowed great favors on the Jews, and this is believed to have been because of what Daniel said about him in prophecy.

Language. Daniel 1:1–2:4a and 8:1–12:13 are written in Hebrew, while Daniel 2:4b–7:28 is written in Aramaic. Regarding the vocabulary used in the Aramaic portion of Daniel, The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia (Vol. 1, p. 860) says: “When the Aramaic vocabulary of Daniel is examined, nine-tenths of it can be attested immediately from West Semitic inscriptions, or papyri from the 5th cent. B.C. or earlier. The remaining words have been found in sources such as Nabatean or Palmyrene Aramaic, which are later than the 5th cent. B.C. While it is at least theoretically possible that this small balance of vocabulary suddenly originated after the 5th cent. B.C., it is equally possible to argue from a fifth-century B.C. written form to an earlier oral one. By far the most probable explanation, however, is that the missing tenth represents nothing more serious than a gap in our current knowledge of the linguistic situation, which we may confidently expect to be filled in process of time.”—Edited by G. Bromiley, 1979.

There are some so-called Persian words in Daniel, but in view of the frequent dealings that the Jews had with Babylonians, Medes, Persians, and others, this is not unusual. Furthermore, most of the foreign names used by Daniel are names of officials, articles of clothing, legal terms, and such, for which the Hebrew or Aramaic of the time apparently had no equally suitable terms. Daniel was writing for his people who were for the most part in Babylonia, and many were scattered in other places at this time. Therefore, he wrote in language that would be understandable to them.

Doctrinal. Some critics object because Daniel alludes to the resurrection. (Da 12:13) They assume that this is a doctrine that was developed later or was taken from a pagan belief, but the reference in Daniel is in agreement with the rest of the Hebrew Scriptures, which contains statements of belief in a resurrection. (Job 14:13, 15; Ps 16:10) Also, there are actual instances of resurrection. (1Ki 17:21, 22;2Ki 4:22-37; 13:20, 21) And on no less authority than the apostle Paul we have the statement that Abraham had faith in the raising up of the dead (Heb 11:17-19) and also that other faithful servants of God of ancient times looked forward to the resurrection. (Heb 11:13, 35-40; Ro 4:16, 17) Jesus himself said: “But that the dead are raised up even Moses disclosed, in the account about the thornbush, when he calls Jehovah ‘the God of Abraham and God of Isaac and God of Jacob.’”—Lu 20:37.

Those who claim that the book is not really prophetic but was written after the events occurred would have to move up the time of writing of the book beyond the days of Jesus’ ministry on earth, for the ninth chapter admittedly contains a prophecy concerning the Messiah’s appearance and sacrifice. (Da 9:25-27) Also, the prophecy continues on and recounts the history of the kingdoms that would rule right down to “the time of the end,” when they will be destroyed by the Kingdom of God in the hands of his Messiah.—Da 7:9-14, 25-27; 2:44; 11:35, 40.

 

[nPeace]

Scholarship dates Daniel to 2nd century. There is no doubt about that.

Every possible mention of Jesus is covered by this panel of experts:

even the forgeries by the church. Any authentic mention of Jesus outside the gospels are referencing people who follow the gospels, that's it.
To sum up the conclusions, besides faith, the historical evidence give no indication that any of those events are real.

Outside of the gospels there is nothing else that supports it.

The gospels themselves are copies of Mark told in a mythological style and obviously influenced by earlier pagan myths.


But pointing to any biblical prophecy opens the door to contrast how many failed prophecies there are, which are many. I'm not an expert on that but there is a book on it by C. Sandoval.

The Dead Sea Scrolls have been called the greatest manuscript find of all time. Discovered between 1947 and 1956, the Dead Sea Scrolls comprise some 800 documents but in many tens of thousands of fragments. The Scrolls date from around 250 B.C. to 68 A.D. and were written in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek; they contain Biblical and apocryphal works, prayers and legal texts and sectarian documents.

This priceless collection of ancient manuscripts is invaluable to our understanding of the history of Judaism, the development of the Hebrew Bible, and the beginnings of Christianity.

Biblical books found
There are 225 Biblical texts included in the Dead Sea Scroll documents, or around 22% of the total, and with deuterocanonical books the number increases to 235. The Dead Sea Scrolls contain parts of all but one of the books of the Tanakh of the Hebrew Bible and the Old Testament protocanon. They also include four of the deuterocanonical books included in Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Bibles: Tobit, Ben Sirach, Baruch 6 (also known as the Letter or Epistle of Jeremiah), and Psalm 151. The Book of Esther has not yet been found and scholars believe Esther is missing because, as a Jew, her marriage to a Persian king may have been looked down upon by the inhabitants of Qumran, or because the book has the Purim festival which is not included in the Qumran calendar.:180 Listed below are the most represented books, along with the deuterocanonicals, of the Bible found among the Dead Sea Scrolls, including the number of translatable Dead Sea texts that represent a copy of scripture from each Biblical book:

Psalms 39
Deuteronomy 33
1 Enoch 25
Genesis 24
Isaiah 22
Jubilees 21
Exodus 18
Leviticus 17
Numbers 11
Minor Prophets 10
Daniel 8
Jeremiah 6
Ezekiel 6
Job 6
Tobit 5
1 & 2 Kings 4
1 & 2 Samuel 4
Judges 4
Song of Songs (Canticles) 4
Ruth 4
Lamentations 4
Sirach 3
Ecclesiastes 2
Joshua 2

Are The Gospels Reliable?