Are there lost books of the Bible?
Question 1080
The Bible itself mentions books that we do not possess: the Book of the Wars of the Lord, the Book of Jashar, letters Paul apparently wrote to Corinth before our “1 Corinthians.” Were these inspired Scripture? Have we lost parts of God’s Word? Should we be troubled that our Bible is incomplete?
Books Mentioned in Scripture
It is true that the biblical authors refer to sources we no longer have. Numbers 21:14 quotes from “the Book of the Wars of the LORD.” Joshua 10:13 and 2 Samuel 1:18 cite “the Book of Jashar.” First Kings mentions “the book of the acts of Solomon” (1 Kings 11:41), “the Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Israel” (1 Kings 14:19), and similar records for Judah. First Chronicles references multiple prophetic writings: the records of Samuel the seer, Nathan the prophet, and Gad the seer (1 Chronicles 29:29).
Paul’s letters present another case. In 1 Corinthians 5:9, Paul writes, “I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people.” This refers to a previous letter—one we do not have. Some scholars believe Colossians 4:16 mentions a letter to the Laodiceans that has not survived.
These are real references to real documents. But do they mean we have lost Scripture?
Not Everything Written Was Inspired Scripture
The key distinction is between a document being useful, historical, or even written by an apostle, and a document being inspired Scripture intended for the whole Church for all time.
The Book of Jashar appears to have been a collection of Hebrew poetry celebrating Israel’s heroes—valuable to the biblical authors as a source, but not itself revelation. The various court chronicles of Israel and Judah were official records, not prophetic writings. Paul undoubtedly wrote many letters during his ministry beyond what we have in the New Testament; not every personal correspondence was intended to be Scripture.
Consider: Luke tells us that “many have undertaken to compile a narrative” about Jesus (Luke 1:1). Other accounts existed. Luke does not condemn them—he simply says he has investigated carefully and written his own orderly account. The existence of other documents does not make them inspired.
Inspiration is not about the author’s status but about God’s intention. God breathed out the Scriptures He wanted His people to have (2 Timothy 3:16). Not every word a prophet or apostle ever spoke or wrote was necessarily Scripture—only what God intended to function as His authoritative Word to His people.
Providence and Preservation
If God intended certain documents to be part of the canon, would He not have preserved them? The doctrine of providence teaches that God governs all things according to His purposes. He did not leave the formation of Scripture to chance.
The books we have in our Bible were recognised, preserved, copied, and transmitted by the community of faith across centuries and continents. Despite persecutions, book burnings, and the ravages of time, these particular documents survived in abundance. The books not preserved were, by God’s providence, not intended to be part of the permanent canon.
This does not mean lost documents were worthless. The Book of Jashar may have been a wonderful collection of poetry. Paul’s lost letter to Corinth may have contained helpful instruction for that specific situation. But God, in His wisdom, did not intend them to function as Scripture for the universal Church.
What About the Apocrypha?
The question of “lost books” sometimes gets confused with the Apocrypha—books like Tobit, Judith, Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus (Sirach), Baruch, and 1–2 Maccabees. These are not lost; they are preserved and available. The question is whether they belong in the canon.
These books were written during the intertestamental period (roughly 400 BC to the time of Christ) and are included in Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Bibles but not in Protestant ones. The reasons for Protestant exclusion are substantial: they were not part of the Hebrew canon that Jesus and the apostles used; they were never cited as Scripture in the New Testament; early Church fathers like Jerome distinguished them from the canonical books; and they contain historical errors and theological anomalies.
Protestants may read these books for historical interest—1 Maccabees, for instance, is a valuable source for the period between the Testaments—but we do not consider them inspired Scripture on the same level as the sixty-six books of the Protestant canon.
Conclusion
We have not lost any Scripture. The books mentioned in the Bible that we no longer possess were source materials, historical records, or personal correspondence—not inspired revelation intended for the permanent canon. God, in His providence, has preserved exactly what He intended His Church to have.
Our Bible is not incomplete. It contains everything necessary for knowing God, understanding salvation, and living faithfully. As Peter wrote, God’s divine power “has granted to us all things that pertain to life and godliness” (2 Peter 1:3). The Scriptures are sufficient. We lack nothing we need.
“All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.” 2 Timothy 3:16–17
Bibliography
- Bruce, F.F. The Canon of Scripture. Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 1988.
- Geisler, Norman L., and William E. Nix. A General Introduction to the Bible. Rev. ed. Chicago: Moody, 1986.
- Köstenberger, Andreas J., and Michael J. Kruger. The Heresy of Orthodoxy. Wheaton: Crossway, 2010.
- Kruger, Michael J. Canon Revisited: Establishing the Origins and Authority of the New Testament Books. Wheaton: Crossway, 2012.
- McDonald, Lee Martin. The Biblical Canon: Its Origin, Transmission, and Authority. 3rd ed. Peabody: Hendrickson, 2007.
