I’m sure God didn’t send a memo.
Some man or committee decided which spiritual writing deserved to be in the Bible.
So who did it and what made them decide which writings belonged?
It depends which Bible. At some point in the first millenia, a bunch of church people got together and decieded which texts were cannonical. The Gospels of Thomas and Mary Magdeline, for example, did not make the cut.
Of course, this is before Protestants left the Catholic Church and decided that certain books (such as Judith or Macabees 1 & 2) were “Apocrophal” and should be left out. Hence the name, “The Apocropha.”
Of course, the Book of Mormon is used in yet another branch of Christianity.
Kinda makes you want to become agnostic.
They’re still fighting over it. There are New Testament Apocrypha, which are not accepted by many sects, and Old Testament Apocrypha, which the Roman Catholic church likes. Then there are the Pseudepigrapha and the apocryphal works found at Qumran. Someone with an interest in this will undoubtedly come along and expand on/correct this information.
In addition to Cecil’s column on the Apocrypha there is an excellent series of Staff Reports on the subject.
Who wrote the Bible? (Part 1)
Who wrote the Bible? (Part 2)
Who wrote the Bible? (Part 3)
Who wrote the Bible? (Part 4)
Who wrote the Bible? (Part 5)
IANAM but they will tell you the Book of Mormon doesn’t replace the bible but is in addition as another testament of Jesus Christ. They also add Doctrine and Coventnants and Pearl of Great Price. FWIW they use the King James bible just as many mainline protestants do.
Of particular interest is Part 5, “Who decided which books should be included and which excluded from the Bible(s)? Why are there differences in the Bibles for Catholics, Protestants, and Jews?”
Oh, geez. I wasn’t implying it was a replacement any more than the New Testament is a replacement for the Old. I meant to use Mormons as yet another example of how different denominations of Christianity use different variations of holy texts.