Is the Bible Complete? Are Some Books Missing from the Bible?

The Claim: The Bible Is Missing Books

You sometimes come across videos saying the Bible is not complete, there are some books missing from the Bible.

Some even say that the Septuagint and the Dead Sea Scrolls had more books than are contained in the Bible (so the church removed some of the books).

I once approached someone and he said: how do we know that we are reading the correct Bible, because some Bibles — for example the Protestant Bible contains 66 books, the Catholic Bible contains 73 books, the Eastern Orthodox contains 76–79 books, and the Ethiopian Bible contains 81 books, although some versions list up to 88 books. So how do we know that we have the correct amount of books in the Bible?

The Bible Means “The Books” — But Which Ones?

So now — the Bible means “the books.” It is a compilation of books. Now the question is: which books? Because there were a lot of Jewish manuscripts. So it is a compilation of books that point to Jesus (or books that were considered divine), and when the church was compiling these books they had some criteria for compiling them, which were:

• Apostolicity: does it come from an apostle or someone who knew an apostle?
• Orthodoxy: does it represent the right teaching and is there embellishment?
• Catholicity: is it accepted in the universal church?

However, these criteria were for most books of the New Testament only, since the Old Testament was already compiled and considered as scripture to the Jews.

And in another blog we would talk about how the books of the Old Testament and New Testament books were chosen. But here we would talk about why different sects of Christians have different numbers of books of the Bible.

What Is a Biblical Canon?

When we talk about the compilation of the Bible we often hear a word like Biblical Canon. So canon means an accepted rule, standard, or official list. It is from a Hebrew–Greek word meaning “cane” or “measuring rod,” and it was passed into Christian usage to mean norm or rule of faith.

And that is why some Bibles contain more books than others — just because to them the additional books are also considered as a rule of faith.

The word itself comes from the Greek kanōn (κανών), borrowed from the Semitic root for a straight reed or measuring stick. When early church writers applied it to Scripture, they meant it in exactly that sense: a straight-edge against which all teaching could be measured.

Anyways let’s go all the way back to the 11th century.

The East-West Schism (1054 AD)

In 1054 the East-West Schism separated the Orthodox from the Catholics because the Bishop of Rome (Pope) claimed supreme authority over the Roman Catholic Church (Western Christianity) while the Eastern church followed a group of Patriarchs (Eastern Orthodox Church).

Also the Western church added a phrase to the Nicene Creed about the Holy Spirit (“…who proceeds from the Father and the Son”) — a clause known as the Filioque (“and the Son” in Latin) — while the Eastern church rejected this addition. And finally, the Pope and the Patriarch of Constantinople excommunicated each other.

Now before Martin Luther came into the picture, the Catholic Church used the Latin Vulgate in the West while Greek Bibles (the Septuagint) were used in the East.

The Filioque controversy was not a minor dispute. It represented a fundamental disagreement about the procession of the Holy Spirit and, beneath that, about whether Rome had the authority to unilaterally alter a creed that had been agreed by an ecumenical council. These two churches had been drifting apart for centuries; 1054 was the formal breaking point.

Martin Luther and the Protestant Reformation (1517)

Then on October 31, 1517, a German monk, Martin Luther nailed the 95 Theses to the door of a church in Wittenberg — a list of arguments against Catholic Church practices. He argued that:

• Salvation comes through faith alone (Romans 1:17).
• The Bible, not the Pope, is the ultimate authority.
• Church traditions that contradict Scripture should be rejected.

So Luther then went back to the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh), and this Hebrew text didn’t include the deuterocanonical books. So Luther moved those seven books out of the Old Testament and he placed them between the Old and the New Testament, and they were referred to as Intertestamental Books.

Luther’s return to the Hebrew canon was a significant historical move. The Catholic Church had long relied on the Septuagint — the Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures — which included these additional books. Luther’s principle of Sola Scriptura (Scripture alone) and his return to Hebrew sources meant that for him, only what the Jews themselves had canonised carried full scriptural weight.

Luther’s Reasons for Moving the Deuterocanonical Books

And his reason for this was:

• The writers of these books themselves don’t say they’re inspired — they are silent about the inspiration of the books they wrote.
• Future Bible writers of the New Testament didn’t refer to them as Scripture, unlike the way they refer to the Hebrew canon.
• They contained teachings that contradicted the already established Scriptures, like:
  • Giving money to atone for sins (Sirach 3:30; Tobit 4:10).
  • Praying to the dead (2 Maccabees 12:43–45).
  • Praying to saints and asking them for prayer (2 Maccabees 15:12–16).

So he placed a note on the Intertestamental Books saying they were edifying to read but not to be used to establish doctrine.

Luther’s Doubts About Certain New Testament Books

Martin Luther also had doubts about some books of the New Testament like James, Hebrews, Jude and Revelation.

He called the book of James an epistle of straw because it emphasized good works alongside faith, which conflicted with his doctrine of salvation by faith alone. Although from my reading of the book of James, James the brother of Jesus did not emphasize good works alongside faith as though good works + faith brought about salvation.

So if we read James 2, we see that James was trying to explain to the 12 tribes scattered abroad about partiality, and he used the law to explain this because these people were the 12 tribes (Israelites), so he used something they could understand to make his point. The same way Paul the apostle in his epistles would also try to use examples known to the people he was preaching to, in order to make his point. So James was saying: if they show partiality and claim to be good in other areas, just like the law says “For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all.”

So James was telling the people that just as Matthew 5:48 says “Therefore you shall be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect.”

And that is why in chapter 1 of James he told them not to only be hearers of the word of God but also to be doers. And he ended chapter 2 by saying faith without works is dead, in that the proof that we believe is in our actions.

One phrase I heard someone say that I really love was: “we do not do good works to be saved but we are saved to do good works” — as Paul would put it in Ephesians 2:8–10:

“For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them.” — Ephesians 2:8–10 (NKJV)

The Protestant Bible: From 80 Books to 66

Anyways back to Martin Luther. So in his German Bible translation he placed the books of James, Hebrews, Jude and Revelation at the back with a note expressing his reservations. The result of Martin Luther’s work was 39 Old Testament and 27 New Testament books with the 14 Apocrypha books in between them (Intertestamental Books), making it 80 books.

And when the King James Bible was commissioned in 1611 in Protestant England, it also had 80 books like Luther’s Bible, including the Intertestamental Apocrypha. The only difference was that the books 3 and 4 Esdras were named as 1 and 2 Esdras.

All future Protestant versions followed this model until the mid-1800s.

In 1855, a decision was made to leave out the Apocrypha in the publication of Protestant Bibles. Since it was deemed less important, why not cut publication costs by removing it altogether? Since then, the majority of Protestant Bibles have 66 books, with a 39-book Old Testament and 27 books of the New Testament.

This is a fact that surprises many people: the reason most Protestants today read a 66-book Bible is not a theological decision made by Luther or Calvin or the early Reformers — it is an economic decision made by 19th-century publishers.

The Catholic Bible: The Council of Trent and 73 Books

Now over to the Catholic Bible.

In response to the Protestant Reformation by Martin Luther, the Catholic Church held a meeting known as the Council of Trent, and formally declared in 1546 that these books were fully canonical for the Catholic Church.

This meeting was not held to choose the books that would be considered Scripture, since before this time the Latin Vulgate contained these additional books, and the Latin Bible was widely used. And although Saint Jerome translated the deuterocanonical books of Tobias (Tobit) and Judith from Aramaic originals, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus (Sirach), Baruch and Maccabees I and II were left untranslated from the Vetus Latina by St. Jerome, but were inherited from Old Latin translations. Saint Jerome still considered these books outside the Hebrew canon to be read for edification but not for establishing doctrine in the same way as canonical Scripture.

However, despite Jerome’s opinion, the Catholics considered them fully canonical as Scripture, and they were even quoted by some earlier church fathers.

Church Fathers Who Quoted the Deuterocanonical Books

Augustine of Hippo

In On Christian Doctrine 2.8.13 (c. 397 AD), he writes:

“The whole canon of Scripture, on which we say this judgment is to be exercised, is contained in the following books: … five books of Solomon … Tobit, Judith … and the two books of Maccabees.” — Augustine of Hippo

The “five books of Solomon” in Augustine’s reckoning included: Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Wisdom, and Sirach (Ecclesiasticus).

Cyprian of Carthage

Quoting Sirach: “It is written: ‘Be not boastful in the time of thy distress…’” — from Sirach 3:24.

Quoting Tobit: “In Tobias also the angel says: ‘Prayer is good with fasting and almsgiving.’” — from Tobit 12:8.

Ambrose

From On the Duties of the Clergy: “Scripture says: ‘Prayer is good with fasting and almsgiving.’” — again quoting Tobit 12:8.

Irenaeus of Lyons

In Against Heresies 5.35.1, Irenaeus cites Baruch as prophecy of Jeremiah: “And therefore Jeremiah says… ‘This is our God, and there shall none other be accounted of in comparison with him…’” — from Baruch 3:35–37.

These citations span the 2nd through 5th centuries. The church fathers who quoted these books as Scripture were not fringe figures — Augustine, Cyprian, Ambrose, and Irenaeus are among the most foundational voices in Christian theological history.

So after the meeting (Council of Trent), the theologian Sixtus of Siena began revising the Latin Vulgate, and in his work Bibliotheca Sancta in 1566, he coined the term deuterocanonical — meaning “second canon” — to refer to the new canon that was not part of the original Hebrew Bible but had been accepted as canonical.

The Clementine Vulgate and 76 Books

Then Pope Sixtus V issued the Sixtine Vulgate in 1590, but it contained many printing and editorial problems. So after his death it was revised again.

Then Pope Clement VIII issued the corrected Clementine Vulgate in 1592. The Clementine Vulgate included in an appendix:

• Prayer of Manasseh
• 3 Esdras (often called 1 Esdras in Septuagint traditions)
• 4 Esdras (sometimes called 2 Esdras in some traditions)

These were not treated as canonical Scripture by Trent. Instead, they were included for historical value, liturgical familiarity, scholarly preservation, and because many Christians had long read them.

This brought the Latin Vulgate to a total of 76 books. And this has been replicated in all future versions and translations of the Vulgate.

In 1582, the Catholic Church allowed for the translation of the Vulgate into English, and the Douay-Rheims Bible was published in 1609–10 as the first Catholic English translation. This became the predecessor of later Catholic Bibles. However, some editions included the appendix books separately; others omitted them from the main body. But Catholic doctrine still recognised only the 73-book canon defined at Trent.

So the Catholic Bible contains 73 books — 7 more than the Protestant Bible. These additional seven books are Tobit, Judith, 1 & 2 Maccabees, Wisdom, Sirach, and Baruch. Also Daniel and Esther contain additional sections. The reason why the Catholic Bible is 73 but the initial Protestant Bible was 80 is because there were texts in the Protestant Bible before 1855 that were not considered Scripture by Catholics — however, they were read by early Christians, and that’s why Martin Luther said they were edifying to read but not to be used to establish doctrine.

The Eastern Orthodox Bible (76–79 Books)

The Orthodox Old Testament is also based on the Septuagint — the same Greek Bible that influenced the Catholic Bible. But it goes slightly further than the Catholic Bible. Most Orthodox churches include 3rd Maccabees, Psalm 151, and the Prayer of Manasseh. Also included in some Orthodox Bibles are 4th Maccabees and 3rd & 4th Esdras as well, and that is why the Eastern Orthodox Bible varies from 76–79 books.

The Eastern Orthodox tradition has never produced a single binding canon council equivalent to Trent. Different Orthodox churches (Greek, Russian, Serbian, Antiochian) have slightly different practices regarding which books are included, which is why the range rather than a fixed number is given.

The Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Bible (81–88 Books)

Christianity arrived in Ethiopia in the 4th century, around 330 AD, when a Syrian scholar named Frumentius converted the Ethiopian King Ezana and became the first bishop of the Ethiopian church.

First, Frumentius and his brother Edesius, from Tyre (modern-day Lebanon), were traveling on a Red Sea expedition with their Christian uncle, Meropius. Their ship docked in Ethiopia for supplies, but local hostility resulted in the crew being massacred. Only the two brothers were spared and brought to the royal court in Aksum as slaves.

Over time, the brothers gained the king’s favour and were freed. Frumentius stayed to tutor the young heir, Prince Ezana. During this time they laid the groundwork for Christianity by supporting local merchants and teaching the faith. Once the prince took the throne, Frumentius traveled to Alexandria and asked Patriarch Athanasius to send priests to fully evangelise the region. What Frumentius took back to Ethiopia was a library of Greek texts — some were Scripture, but others were popular Jewish and Christian writings, many of which were translated into Ge’ez.

Athanasius recognised Frumentius’s dedication and appointed him as the first bishop of Ethiopia. Frumentius returned to Aksum to build churches, baptise King Ezana, and organise the Ethiopian Orthodox Church.

So the Ethiopian Bible contains more books than any other Bible, ranging from 81–88 books, because in 451 AD a meeting was held to talk about the nature of Jesus. This was called the Council of Chalcedon.

The Council of Chalcedon (Catholic/Eastern Orthodox) defined two distinct natures in Christ — divine and human. The Ethiopian Church held the Miaphysite view: one unified, divine-human nature (“Tewahedo” means “unified” in Ge’ez). After the split, by the 7th century, Islam rapidly expanded across the Middle East and North Africa, completely altering East African geopolitics.

As a result of this, the Ethiopian church was cut off from the rest of the Christian world. The Scottish historian Edward Gibbon famously wrote:

“Encompassed on all sides by the enemies of their religion, the Ethiopians slept near a thousand years, forgetful of the world, by whom they were forgotten.” — Edward Gibbon, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire

Because Ethiopia was geographically isolated for centuries, its ancient manuscripts were never subjected to the canon-trimming debates of the European Protestant Reformation or the Catholic Counter-Reformation.

And that is why they have books like the Book of Enoch, Jubilees, and Meqabyan (Ethiopian Maccabees) — because although most of them are classified as Apocryphas, they were read by most early Christians, so that is why they were added in the Ethiopian Bible as Scripture.

The Book of Enoch is particularly significant here. It was also referenced by Jude in Jude 1:14–15:

“Now Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about these men also, saying, ‘Behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of His saints, to execute judgment on all, to convict all who are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have committed in an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things which ungodly sinners have spoken against Him.’” — Jude 1:14–15 (NKJV)

This is referencing 1 Enoch 1:9 (R. H. Charles translation):

“And behold! He cometh with ten thousands of His holy ones to execute judgment upon all, and to destroy all the ungodly: and to convict all flesh of all the works of their ungodliness which they have ungodly committed, and of all the hard things which ungodly sinners have spoken against Him.” — 1 Enoch 1:9 (R. H. Charles translation)

However, although it was quoted, it was not considered as Scripture — and that is why no other Bible except the Tewahedo Bible contains it, because as I said, its manuscripts were never subjected to the canon-trimming debates of the European Protestant Reformation or the Catholic Counter-Reformation.

Also we have to know that the fact Jude quoted Enoch does not mean he proved Enoch was Scripture, because the New Testament authors sometimes quote sources that are not part of the Bible. For example:

• Paul the Apostle quotes Greek poets in Acts 17:28.
• Paul quotes Epimenides in Titus 1:12.
• Jude also alludes to a story about Michael and the devil disputing over Moses’ body (Jude 9), a tradition found in the lost work known as the Assumption of Moses.

Quoting a source is not the same as canonising it. An author can draw on a well-known text to make a point without elevating that text to the level of Scripture. The New Testament writers did this freely — reaching into Jewish, Greek, and early Christian literature for illustrations, prophecies, and cultural touchstones. What determined whether a book entered the canon was not whether it was ever quoted, but whether it met the criteria of apostolicity, orthodoxy, and catholicity — and whether the church as a whole, over time, received it as the word of God.

The Takeout: So Which Bible Do I Read?

So now what is the takeout from this?

The four Bibles all share the same 27 books of the New Testament and the same 39 books of the Old Testament; differences are only in the additional books that were included in the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible). So that concept of the Bible being incomplete is wrong — because there was never anything referred to as a complete Bible. However, as I already stated, regardless, all agreed on the 39 OT and 27 NT.

So now some might ask: which Bible do I read? This is a good question, and I like what Martin Luther did — he didn’t entirely remove the Apocrypha but he said that you could read them as historical books but not use them for doctrine (teaching), since their teachings contradict the core beliefs of Christianity.

However, most people who want to read the additional books — I just usually ask: have you read all the 66 books which are core-accepted and seen Christ in them, as the apostles did? Before you say that you are looking for extra books to get extra revelations.

“By the way, mind you — the revelation of Christ is progressive. Even if you have read the core accepted 66 books before as I have done, any time you read them again you get something new, because the word of God is life, we cannot exhaust it.” — Angel Kanu

If you are a believer and you are honest with yourself, you will see that if you have read the Bible before and you are reading it again, sometimes you would be like — I have read the Bible before, how come it is as though I have not seen this before, as though you are reading it for the first time.