The Fool wrote: > >Non inspired books. Catholic versions of the bible contain Apocryphal >books (that are not considered to be inspired, but are of note). There >are other books not in either cannon that are apocryphal, like the >'Gosphel of Thomas' and the 'Book of Enoch' (a glaring forgery written >well after christ). > But it can't be *that* well after, because The Book of Enoch is mentioned in one of the letters. Or is the forgery the invention of a book just because it was quoted and lost?
Alberto Monteiro
