The Bible that you carry and study and memorize consists of 66 "books." Why aren't more Bible "books" being written today? If I told you that a certain writing from, say, 1997, should be considered Scripture, on a par with Colossians and II Thessalonians, on what basis would you dispute me? How do you know I'm wrong?
2007-04-01 16:42:57 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
how many books did they kick out that predated the bible? what about the gnostic gospels? why do they call it the living word, when they terminated it?
2007-04-01 16:51:48 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Good Question. There are many who would say that the bible is complete and cannot be changed, and yet they ignore that since it was first compiled it has been changed many times. I personally have over 20 different English versions, which proves how much it's been changed. If you look at a Catholic or an Eastern Orthadox Bible you will notice that they contain more books than what are used by most protestants.
There are also those that like to quote Revelation 22:18-19, saying that this proves that nothing can be added to the Bible, but they ignore the fact that it is refering only to the book of Revelation, and that it says something very similar in Deuteronomy 4:2, and that the book of Revelation was NOT the last book of the Bible that was written.
To add to scripture it would need to follow the guidelines of 2 Timothy 3:16, in that it must be given by inspiration of God and be profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness. The key thing here is that it must come from God. The problem is that majority of Christians refuse to accept that God speaks to man today as he did in ancient times, though I have never heard a good reason as to why He would no longer speak to man as He did in ancient times and why revelation from God has ceased.
2007-04-01 17:20:44 · answer #2 · answered by serialcoyote 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
that the last inspired book of the Bible was written in 96C.E. and that completed the Holy Bible as a complete book all 66 of the inspired books others have claimed to be but were proven not to be so and rejected by Bible Authors a Scripture you may want to keep in mind is Revelation 22:18 a brief synopsis is if you add to what God has said he will deal with you and you will not like the consequences the could even prove to be loss of life permanently something to think about so dont try and improve or change perfection gorbalizer
2007-04-01 17:17:39 · answer #3 · answered by gorbalizer 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I wouldn't without reading it. Since Christ is present today I have to agree with you that we should be adding and updating the Bible. We have the benefit of modern technology and science and need to continually grow in our spiritual self and that includes updating the Bible.
What would we think of science if we used 2000 year old text books? Great insight on your part, keep up the Lord's work.
2007-04-01 16:54:59 · answer #4 · answered by NuncProTunc 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The canon is closed. The bible was compiled of the Old Testament, of course, and the books of the new testament, that were circulated and used in the first "church" (that is spoken of in Acts), and written by Paul, the apostle. They are in the bible because they were written by eyewitnesses either of the events that did take place, or a person who knew one of the apostles or, in Paul's case, he met the Lord on the road to Damascus.
2007-04-01 16:46:20 · answer #5 · answered by Esther 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I can only say that God has always known the Word (after all the Word IS God) And if God truly wnatedd you to write something for him, it would happen. After all, there isn't anything in Revelation that says thats it. However, i dont think any more will be added to the bible, just because it starts from the beggining and goes to the end of time, and seems to cover evereything clearly.
2007-04-01 16:58:32 · answer #6 · answered by Fishermaniac 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
We only have the Bible to go on for what we believe and it says in the last chapter that nothing is to be added to or taken away from this book. That has been strictly adhered to by genuine Christians since the time that the bible was completed.
2007-04-01 16:49:43 · answer #7 · answered by oldguy63 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Well the books of the Bible were written during the time of Jesus and were inspired by Him. Jesus is not here walking the earth in the human form, so how can the books be the inspired word of God if God is not there to inspire them?
2007-04-01 16:48:34 · answer #8 · answered by Lal 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It really is a moot point until such a Book actually appears on the scene. It would have to harmonize perfectly with the existing Canon, and be recognized by the greater Church as authentic.
Better to deal in reality than speculation.
2007-04-01 16:56:28 · answer #9 · answered by wefmeister 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If it is on a par with Colossians and II Thessalonians, then I wouldn't dispute it. As far as I am concerned self-appointed apostle Paul was a religious hack, too.
2007-04-01 16:49:33 · answer #10 · answered by Wisdom in Faith 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Well, the Mormons believe that The Bible has a third testament.
2007-04-01 16:47:08 · answer #11 · answered by Ben 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋