The Scribe

Banned from the canonical bible, regarded as heretical, thrown away as wrong, or just left as “Apocryphal” or maybe undecided. Each sect, section or cult of Christianity, as some people see it, have different views on different views of the biblical scriptures, each taking in different canonical books. But are any true? Traditional Christianity, does not have the book of Maccabees, whereas the Catholic Church, have had it in the canonical bible and continue to read it today, however the traditional Christian bible dropped it, and other Apocryphal books in the early 1600′s (shortly after King James had issued and printed his version of the bible (which seems loosly based upon the works of Tyndale’s translation)). I’ve been looking into redesigning my website for a very specific reason, that is, because it needs to now handle a lot more information, which no doubt, I’m going to be moving to paid hosting so I can use a database to store everything in using PHP to parse the information and out put it to the user who wants it. I’m going to be looking more in depth at Apocryphal books, the so-called “Lost Gospels” and of course the canonical books a lot more, and hopefully with the help of software, produce an output in graphical form for readers to get a more generalized view of the study. It involves a lot of background reading, as well as study of the texts, although right now, one book in particular that is not canonical, which I think should be is the Book of Enoch (I Enoch, not II). This is because it is supposedly from the grandfather of Noah, Enoch, it provides a lot of background information of the history of the world and fills in some blanks. It has been in the Etheopian cannon for years but was dropped from most very early on. It was found in it’s original form on a scroll in the Dead Sea Caves, yes, it was part of the find of the “Dead Sea Scrolls”, and is a book that I, so far, see as true, regardless of author. As a word of warning though, if you yourself are interested in these books, take the correct precautions, these books, although old and may in fact be correct, may also be forgeries, after all, just because I write a book now about “The Da Vinci Code”, saying the complete opposite of Dan Brown, claiming to be Dan Brown, if found centuries later, does not mean I am in fact, Dan Brown. Logical choices, background studies, handwriting styles, and of course, common sense, all play a part in figuring these “Books” out. Don’t believe everything you read from these books without being 100% sure it is in fact true and correct.