Some claim that the "Book of the Covenant" mentioned in Exodus 24:7 is a lost book of the Bible, and that because it is cited in the Old Testament, it must have been considered sacred Scripture. However, most authorities regard this as either a copy of Deuteronomy or of the Decalogue. Furthermore, simply citing a book does not make it canonical; only when a quotation is recognized by the Church's liturgical tradition as a guide for religious practice or doctrine is the text considered canonical Scripture.

We turn now to the issue of alleged "lost" books - works cited in the Bible that we no longer have available, but which some claim, since they are cited in the Old Testament, must have been considered sacred Scripture. In contrast, Bruce Metzger says of these books: "Probably not only were they not regarded as canonical, but were so little esteemed as not to be recopied in subsequent generations." Sid Leiman adds: "Only when the quotation is cited as a guide for religious practice and/or doctrine may the book it is drawn from be considered canonical."

Regarding The Book of the Covenant mentioned in Exodus 24:7: Actually, this is one we do have. Most authorities regard this as either a copy of Deuteronomy or of the Decalogue. In no sense can it be shown that this work was considered, or should have been considered, distinct "lost" Scripture.