How can we trust the Bible when there are missing books (e.g., the Book of Enoch, the Gospel of Thomas)? Understanding the Question: Are There “Missing” Books of the Bible? Many raise the concern that if certain texts like the Book of Enoch or the Gospel of Thomas exist outside the recognized canon of Scripture, then perhaps the Bible is incomplete or unreliable. This question invites a careful look at why these works are not part of the standard biblical canon and how we can be confident the Bible as we have it is trustworthy. 1. Canon Recognition in History The process by which the biblical books were accepted did not occur haphazardly. Early Jewish communities and the early church recognized which writings were authoritative. By the late first century AD, the core of the Old Testament was firmly established, evidenced by the Dead Sea Scrolls (discovered in 1947 in Qumran), which show remarkable consistency with the modern Hebrew text. Regarding the New Testament, early Christian congregations discerned legitimate apostolic writings from questionable ones. Key councils (e.g., the Councils of Hippo [AD 393] and Carthage [AD 397]) affirmed the content already widely recognized as Scripture. This careful process of canon recognition—rather than arbitrary selection—demonstrates that what we have today was embraced by believers close to the time of the apostles. 2. Criteria for Canonicity The early church primarily considered three criteria when discerning whether a book was inspired: - Apostolic Origin or Oversight: The text had to be written by an apostle or someone directly connected to them (Luke was a companion of Paul, Mark was a companion of Peter, etc.). - Consistency with Established Scripture: A writing had to align doctrinally with what was already recognized as God’s Word, including the Old Testament and the teachings of Jesus and His apostles. - Widespread Acceptance among Early Believers: A genuine inspired text was typically used in worship and teaching across many geographical regions. Texts such as the Gospel of Thomas, written much later (most scholars date it to the mid- to late-2nd century), failed on these criteria. There is little evidence it was composed by the apostle Thomas or supervised by one of the apostles, and it conflicts theologically with the four canonical Gospels. 3. The Case of the Book of Enoch The Book of Enoch holds historic interest. Indeed, the New Testament Book of Jude quotes from or alludes to a saying found in 1 Enoch (see Jude 1:14–15). However, citation does not automatically confer canonical status. For example, Paul quoted pagan poets (Acts 17:28; Titus 1:12), yet no one would consider those poets’ collections Scripture. The Ethiopian Orthodox Church includes 1 Enoch in its canon, but for the majority of Jewish and Christian communities, this text was respected as a religious or historical document rather than recognized as inspired. Overall, while 1 Enoch offers cultural insight, it does not meet the early church’s crucial tests for canonicity. 4. The Gnostic Gospels (e.g., Gospel of Thomas) Works like the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Judas, and others classified as “Gnostic gospels” emerged largely in the second and third centuries AD. They present a different picture of Jesus—one closer to the esoteric mystical ideas of Gnosticism, which taught secret knowledge as the means to salvation. Their late composition date, theological discrepancies, and near-complete lack of recognition in the early centuries by mainstream Christians are strong reasons why they were not accepted as part of the biblical canon. Instead, believers maintained the four canonical Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) from the earliest records of church history. 5. Biblical Integrity and Consistency Believers understand Scripture to be both divinely inspired and self-consistent. According to 2 Timothy 3:16: “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for instruction, for conviction, for correction, and for training in righteousness.” The continuity of major biblical themes—creation, fall, redemption, and restoration—persists through all 66 books in the canon. Ancient Christian exegetes commented on the internal harmony among these books, which further testified to their divine authorship. Manuscript evidence likewise affirms the Bible’s reliability. Thousands of ancient Greek manuscripts of the New Testament, along with early translations (Latin, Syriac, Coptic), show remarkable fidelity across centuries. The small variations that exist do not challenge key doctrines, and these variations are far fewer than in other works of antiquity. 6. Scriptural Self-Attestation and Apostolic Authority When readers ask about so-called “missing” books, an important consideration is how Scripture describes itself. Jesus referenced the Old Testament as a completed body of revelation (Luke 24:44: “He said to them, ‘These are the words I spoke to you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about Me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets, and the Psalms.’”). This threefold partition (Law, Prophets, Writings/Psalms) matched the Hebrew Scriptures recognized in Jesus’ day. The apostles, instructed by Jesus, carried forward this authoritative teaching in their letters. Those letters that the early church recognized as authentic (e.g., Paul’s letters, John’s letters) form our New Testament. 7. Alleged “Lost” Letters or Books Scripture does refer to or hint at letters we do not possess today (e.g., 1 Corinthians 5:9 seems to mention a previous letter of Paul). If a text was lost and not preserved, Christians conclude that God, by His providence, did not intend that writing to be part of Scripture. Trust in God’s sovereignty (cf. Isaiah 55:9–11) leads believers to conclude that what the Holy Spirit desired the church to have as Scripture has indeed been preserved. Thus, the Bible’s completeness rests not merely in human decisions but in the ultimate guidance of God, ensuring no essential truths are absent or hidden. 8. Historical and Archaeological Corroboration Archaeological discoveries repeatedly mirror the names, places, and events found within the canonical books. Excavations in Israel frequently shed light on biblical customs or confirm the existence of places like Jericho, Jerusalem, and Bethlehem in the relevant time periods. While archaeology does not “prove” faith, it provides context and external attestation that align with Scripture’s historical claims. For instance, the “Pilate Stone” discovered at Caesarea Maritima in 1961 corroborates Pontius Pilate as a historical figure matching biblical accounts. Other artifacts, such as the Tel Dan Stele (mentioning the “House of David”), or the cylinder of Cyrus the Great (reflected in the events of Ezra 1:1–4), lend further credibility to the scriptural narrative. 9. The Role of Faith and Reason Reason-based inquiries into the biblical canon are not opposed to faith. Indeed, thoughtful exploration can strengthen confidence in Scripture. Yet, Scripture also teaches that faith—trusting in the unfailing promise of God and the completed work of Jesus—is central to receiving its life-changing truths (Hebrews 11:1: “Now faith is the assurance of what we hope for and the certainty of what we do not see.”). As people examine historical, manuscript, and archaeological evidence for the Bible, they often find rational support that complements the spiritual certainty the Holy Spirit provides. 10. Conclusion: Why We Can Trust the Bible The absence of certain ancient writings from the biblical canon does not imply a deficiency in Scripture. Instead, it underscores the careful, historically grounded process by which the canon was recognized. Books like the Book of Enoch or the Gospel of Thomas might bear historical or cultural interest, but they did not align with the recognized marks of divine inspiration shared by the canonical Scriptures. Today, the substantial manuscript record, the corroboration of historical details, and the internal consistency of biblical theology converge to uphold the Bible’s integrity. There is every reason to trust that God has preserved His Word for all generations, providing a complete guide “for instruction, for conviction, for correction, and for training in righteousness” (2 Timothy 3:16) without the necessity of adding extra books that were never part of God’s design for Scripture. |
    |