Diferencia entre revisiones de «Pregunta: ¿Qué significa el Libro de Mormón cuando dice que cosas "claras y preciosas" han sido sacadas de la Biblia?»

Línea 1: Línea 1:
 
{| style="margin: 0em 0em 0em 0em; border: 0px; align="right" cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0  
 
{| style="margin: 0em 0em 0em 0em; border: 0px; align="right" cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0  
  
 
+
Artículo traducido y redactado con permiso de FAIRLDS por: [mailto:[email protected] Andrew Miller]
  
 
==La pregunta==
 
==La pregunta==

Revisión del 10:21 4 nov 2007

Artículo traducido y redactado con permiso de FAIRLDS por: Andrew Miller

La pregunta

Me enteré que la Biblia menciona “escrituras perdidas.” ¿Qué es eso, y cuáles son las implicaciones de ello en cuanto a la doctrina evangélica o protestante de la inerrancia y suficiencia de la Biblia?


La respuesta

“Las escrituras perdidas” tiene referencia a los escritos mencionados o citados en la Biblia pero que no se encuentran en ella misma. Algunos de estos escritos se conocen hoy en día por otras fuentes, pero mucho no se conocen.

Ejemplos de escrituras perdidas

Escrito perdido Cita bíblica
El libro de las batallas de Jehová Números 21:14
El libro de Jaser Josué 10:13, 2 Samuel 1:18
El libro de los hechos de Salomón 1 Reyes 11:41
El libro de las crónicas de Samuel vidente 1 Crónicas 29:29
El libro de las crónicas de Gad vidente 1 Crónicas 29:29
El libro de las crónicas del profeta Natán 1 Crónicas 29:29, 2 Crónicas 9:29
La profecía de Ahías 2 Crónicas 9:29
La profecía del vidente Iddo 2 Crónicas 9:29, 2 Crónicas 12:15, 2 Crónicas 13:22
El leibro del profeta Semaías 2 Crónicas 12:15
Las palabras de Jehú hijo de Hanani 2 Crónicas 20:34
Las palabras de los videntes 2 Crónicas 33:19
La verdadera primera epístola de Pablo a los Corintios 1 Corintios 5:9
La primera epístula de Pablo a los Efesios Efesios 3:3
La epístula de Pablo a la iglesia en Laodicea Colosenses 4:16
El libro de Enoch San Judas 1:14-15



Examples of canonical differences among Bibles

The picture is further complicated by the fact that Christians have not always agreed on the "canon"—that is, they have not always agreed upon which writings were "scripture" and which were not.

Some examples of these variations:

Christian Person or Group Difference in canon from Protestant Bible (eg KJV)
Catholics Apocrypha is canonical
Orthodox Apocrypha is canonical
Clement of Alexanderia (A.D. 200) Included in canon:
  • Epistle of Barnabas
  • Epistle of Clement
  • The Preaching of Peter[1]
Roman Christians (circa A.D. 200) Included in canon:
  • Revelation of Peter
  • Wisdom of Solomon

Excluded from canon:

  • Hebrews
  • 1 Peter
  • 2 Peter
  • 3 John[2]
Origen (date) Included in canon:
  • Epistle of Barnabas
  • Shepherd of Hermas[3]

Excluded from canon:

  • James
  • Jude
  • 2 John
  • Those disputed by Rome(see above)[4]
Syriac Peshitta Excluded from the canon:
  • 2 Peter
  • 2 John
  • 3 John
  • Jude
  • Revelation of St. John[5]
Armenian Church Included in canon:
  • 3 Corinthians

Excluded from canon:

  • Revelation of St. John prior to 12th century[6]
Ethiopian Church Included in canon:
  • Sinodos
  • Clement
  • Book of the Covenant
  • Didascalia[7]
Martin Luther Considered Epistle of James "a right strawy epistle."[8] Also didn't agree with Sermon on the Mount because didn't match his "grace only" theology.

Implications for inerrancy and sufficiency doctrine of the Bible

All these canons cannot be correct. Why must we accept that the critic's Bible is complete and inerrant? By what authority is this declared? Such an authority would have to be outside the Bible, thus demonstrating that there is some other source for the Word of God besides the Bible.

Furthermore, one should remember that Biblical writers were not aware of the Bible canon, because the Bible was not compiled until centuries later. Thus, Biblical writers cannot have referred to completeness and sufficiency of the canon, because the canon did not exist.

Conclusion

1. Biblical writers considered writings not in the present canon to be scriptural writings.
2. Christian groups do not agree on what constitutes the Biblical canon—any claim that the canon is closed, complete, and sufficient must answer:

a) which canon?
b) what establishes this canon as authoritative and not some other?

3. Differences in canon between Christian groups and Biblical authors' clear belief in the scriptural status of other non-Biblical texts argue against a coherent doctrine of Biblical sufficiency and inerrancy drawn from the Bible itself. Such a claim must come from outside the Bible.

Endnotes

  1. [back]  Plantilla:ComparingLDSBeliefs
  2. [back]  Mike Ash, "Is the Bible Complete?": 1. PDF link
  3. [back]  Plantilla:ComparingLDSBeliefs; citing Clyde L. Manschreck, A History of Christianity in the World, 2d. ed. (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1985), 52.
  4. [back]  Mike Ash, "Is the Bible Complete?": 1. PDF link
  5. [back]  William J. Hamblin and Daniel C. Peterson, "The Evangelical Is Our Brother (Review of How Wide the Divide? A Mormon and an Evangelical in Conversation)," FARMS Review of Books 11/2 (1999): 178–209. off-site (Inglés); citing Kurt Aland, Nestle-Aland Greek-English New Testament, 5th ed. (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1990), 769–75; see also Craig A. Evans, Noncanonical Writings and New Testament Interpretation (Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1992), 190–219, who provides almost 1,500 quotations, allusions, and parallels between noncanonical sources and the New Testament.
  6. [back] William J. Hamblin and Daniel C. Peterson, "The Evangelical Is Our Brother (Review of How Wide the Divide? A Mormon and an Evangelical in Conversation)," FARMS Review of Books 11/2 (1999): 178–209. off-site (Inglés)
  7. [back] William J. Hamblin and Daniel C. Peterson, "The Evangelical Is Our Brother (Review of How Wide the Divide? A Mormon and an Evangelical in Conversation)," FARMS Review of Books 11/2 (1999): 178–209. off-site (Inglés)
  8. [back]  Timothy George, "'A Right Strawy Epistle': Reformation Perspectives on James," The Southern Baptist Journal of Theology (Fall 2000), 20–31. PDF link