The Missing Books Argument - by Lloyd Sharp

One of the oldest arguments made by those who are LDS has to do with the claim of missing books of the Bible. This wellworn claim states that books such as the Book of Jasher (2 Sam 1:18) and other books mentioned in the Bible are lost scripture. This missing scripture, critics claim, is proof of intentional tampering with the Word of God. However, how can we be sure they were meant to be part of the Bible? The answer is simple, if God wanted these writings to be in the Bible they would be there. With God, all things are possible (Mat 19:26) and He can do everything He wishes (Job 42:2). Arguing otherwise infringes upon the sovereignty of God.

Let's explore the validity of these claims as well as the double standard created by using this argument.

The Unfair Assumption

In order for this argument to hold water, a basic assumption is made. That is that all books mentioned in the Bible should be part of the Bible.

First century Jews, however, did not teach that these books were 'missing scripture'. Flavius Joseph, a 1st century historian and devout Jew wrote: "For we have not an innumerable multitude of books among us, disagreeing from and contradicting one another [as the Greeks have], but only twenty-two books, which contain the records of all the past times; which are justly believed to be divine" (Against Apion 1.8, Josephus the Complete Works by William Whiston 1998 edition p. 929, Emphasis Added).

These twenty-two books mentioned by Josephus are the books of our current Old Testament. However, the number of books differs because Protestants divide Kings, Samuel, Chronicles etc. into two books each. The Jews also considered the Minor Prophets as one book. Nowhere in any of the writings of Josephus do we see that the alleged missing books were considered scripture. The idea that people had intentionally altered scripture also seemed foreign to first century Jews: "and how firmly we have given credit to those books of our own nation is evident by what we do; for during so many ages as have already passed, no one has been so bold as either to add anything to them, take anything from them, or to make any change in them; but it becomes natural to all Jews, immediately and from their very birth, to esteem those books to contain divine doctrines, and to persist in them, and, if occasion be, willingly to die for them" (Against Apion 1.8.42, Josephus the Complete Works by William Whiston 1998 edition p930, Emphasis Added).

In regards to the alleged 'missing scriptures' Christian apologist James White states: "Many of the books mentioned above were obviously secular in nature; that is, they were public or royal records….[sic]Why cannot the Bible even mention the existence of secular writings without making those writings part of the Scriptures? If the Bible were being written today, and the Bible were to mention, for example, a national newspaper, would that automatically make the newspaper part of Scripture? For example, let's say that a prophet of God was attacked in an editorial written in a particular newspaper. The writer of Scripture mentions this. Does this mean that the newspaper becomes part of the inspired Word of God? If so, for what reason? So, when 1 Kings 11:41 mentions the "book of the acts of Solomon," it would be similar to mentioning the Congressional Record or something of that kind" (White, Letters to a Mormon Elder p 43-44, Emphasis Original).

And what of the writings that are of a religious nature? Books like Nathan the Prophet (1 Chr 29:29) and the Prophecy of Ahijah (2 Chr 9:29) are not said to be inspired of God. Again White rightly states: "The same example as used above is relevant here. If the Bible were being written today, and a particular religious leader was mentioned, and, rather than listing everything that this particular person did, the writer of Scripture were to say, "now, the rest that this person did is written in this book…," does that book automatically become inspired because the Scripture writer refers someone to it for further information, if they desire it? I don't believe so" (White, Letters to a Mormon Elder p. 44).

The Double Standard

While the argument of 'missing scriptures' seems viable on the surface, when we probe deeper we see a double standard at play here. The Book of Mormon mentions several writings that are not part of the Book of Mormon canon. The following list of 'missing scriptures' from the Book of Mormon was found on just a cursory study:

Book of Remembrance - 3 Nephi 24:16
Prophecies of Zenos - 1 Nephi 19:10: Jacob 5:1
Prophecies of Zenock - 1 Nephi 19:10
Prophecies of Neum - 1 Nephi 19:10
Missing Plates from Laban - 1Nephi 3:3-4
Lost Teachings of Benjamin - Mosiah 1:8
Lost Word of Amulek - Alma 9:34
Lost Words of Alma - Alma 13:31
Lost Teachings of Alma - Alma 8:1
Lost Teachings of Helaman - Helaman 5:13

Few Mormons would be willing to concede that the Book of Mormon is incomplete due to intentional tampering. Despite this, when we apply the same standard used by this argument, the Book of Mormon comes up incomplete. The double standard becomes even more evident when we see that the LDS church has not restored any of these 'missing scriptures' that are said to be in the Bible.

Conclusion

The Bible is not missing any scripture. Rather it is exactly as God intended it to be. Christians can safely say that these alleged 'missing scriptures' have never been considered scripture in the history of Biblical Christianity or Judaism. "And the words of the Lord are flawless, like silver refined in a furnace of clay, purified seven times" (Psalm 12:6).

Back to No Comparison or The Bible