Chrisitans: When people say not to add to or take away from the Bible, why do they say it? (read on)?

Question

I hear often when people suggest that you are not to add or take away from the Bible..

I was given a number of verses.. Deut 4:2, Duet 12:32, Prov 30:5-6 and Rev 22:18-19...

First question.. If it was said WAY back in Deut 4:2.. How is it that other books of the Bible were then written to add to it? At the point Deuteronomy was written, Revelations wasn't, so wouldn't they then be considered adding?

Also, Deut 4:2 (at least in the NIV) says "Do not add to what I command you".. etc) NOT talking about a 'Bible' but about decrees and laws Moses was about to teach.

Another thing.. in Revelation it refers to "the words of the prophecy of this book"... It SPECIFICALLY references the book of Revelation by saying that. I can understand the belief that it was being said you shouldn't add to or take away from that book.. but even at that time, I am sure it wasn't known which writings would be included in "the Bible".

I AM a Christian, but am curious about your thoughts.

Answer 1

Correct concerning revelations quotes, they refer to only revelations, not other books. Really what the authors of the individual books are saying is that they don't want others to add anything more to their teachings, or to alter any part of their ethos. For instance: If you have a teacher who tells you 10 things, you will teach those ten things to your student. You will say "don't add an eleventh or subtract the 9th. Yet if another student of your teacher comes along, he also will write a book with the 10 teachings written in it. You may add the two books together and call it a collection of scripture or a canon. One may add to the canon any scripture which follows the teachings of the master. The orthodox church proclaim they only trust those teachings to have been written in the mid to late 1st century as being authentic on the grounds that Jesus' message would be diluted over the ages. Others argue that the orthodox interpretation of the teachings of Jesus is also bias towards the understandings of the disciples, and so is already corrupted.

An individual must find his own truth from the scriptures, because personal understanding is different for everybody. That is why each disciple had different angles and views upon events of Jesus' life. In teaching, it is better to allow the student all the information availible and allow him to come to his own conclusions (rather than to restrict him to your own personal bias). In some respects, the attitude orthodoxy supports is that each person should interpret the scripture for themselves rather than accept the interpretation of a teacher.

As Christians we should accept that written texts are imperfect and not God's words as God would have put them himself. Writting always causes problems, because the quality of understanding a text comes from how well it is written and not just what it says. Also, the quality of learning from reading depends upon the breadth of perception of the reader. Therefore it is advised that all students should put questions about scripture to their priest or equivalentl. Learning alone is a receipe for misinterpretation unless one adopts an open attitude.

Answer 2

The damage is already been done. The New American Bible is the United States Catholic Catechism for Adults. This is why many modern day theologians reject the King James Version of the Scriptures and prefer the new modern liberal altered versions of the Bible.In reality, these new modern liberal altered texts change many doctrines of the Bible and deny the Deity of Christ.

The leaders of the Catholic and Orthodox Church knew that the real Bible did not agree with their false teachings and their unbiblical theory. They also feared that they would lose their influence and power over the masses if the people found out the truth. This is why in the history of Roman Catholic Church outlawed commoners from reading the Bible and that is a fact. No common Person was allowed to read, study or possess one.

You have a right to know the Historical and Biblical facts for yourself.

Answer 3

First of all it doesn't say add to or take away from the bible it says add too or take away from his commands.

If Historical books do not add to nor take away from his commandments then they are acceptable

If wisdom books do not take away from or add to his commandments then they are acceptable.

If Prophetical books do not take away from or add to his commandments then they are acceptable.

If Testimonies (the gospels) do not take away from or add to his commands then they are acceptable.

If epistles do not take away from or add to his commands then they are acceptable.

This is how the book was canonized in the first place and why so many books that are from the same time period were left out. They added to or took away from the law.

That is why any religion that teaches you that Yahshua or anyone else did away with the Old testiment or the law or that we don't have to obey them then they are in error and will be least in the kingdom of God. If they even get there.

It is also why things like the Mishna and Kabala opr Quran have been discredited because they add to the commands.

Ps 119:111-115 Your statutes are my heritage forever; they are the joy of my heart. My heart is set on keeping your decrees to the very end. I hate double-minded men, but I love your law. You are my refuge and my shield; I have put my hope in your word. Away from me, you evildoers, that I may keep the commands of my God!

Answer 4

Deut is a book of the law. It does not refer to the bible except perhaps prophetically. The book of revelation and Jesus himself declared what books should be included. The recognition of canon included a trust in God. It does have an aspect of faith to it.

Answer 5

Well, I was in Seminary for a year, and I learned there that this verse applied to anything written AFTER the Bible. It is also considered a useful tool to determine cults and publications that may come out after the Bible that simply aren't true.
There are several "Christian" denominations out there who have published other books and literature who call themselves Christians and believe they are 'divinely inspired". If you believe that the Word of God is the Bible from beginning to end, you would then be able to tell that all of these forms of modern literature and books are not true and not of God.

Answer 6

i've got basically study lots of the 1st 2 books (all of Genesis and factors of Exodus) and another random verses pushed on me out of context for political reasons. maximum of that replaced right into some 365 days and a a million/2 in the past for a comparative faith class. I have not have been given any aim of analyzing lots greater of it, because of the fact what I study made definitely no experience in comparison with my very own existence reviews. Its not that i'm against the belief of God (rather, i detect it tricky to have self assurance that there replaced into no god or greater being in contact in our background) however the God I observed in the Bible replaced into pretty terrible and a few of His instructions and regulations seem to pass against nature and uncomplicated experience.

Answer 7

The whole Bible is a hoax. The overwhelming majority of people on the planet haven't fallen for it.

Answer 8

the Bible is made up of many different "books". not to add or take away from this book refers to the book of Revalation.

Answer 9

well we are not to put any different meaning to the scriptures that what it says. We are also not to add to the meaning of the scriptures.. The warning in Revelation could be taken to mean just Revelation, but I really see that we are never to add or take away at any time.. Prophets of God need to be faithful and do what their master asks of them..

Answer 10

It is clear that the intent was to discourage twisting bible messages for your own agenda. These verses you list shows that we must not change the meaning of the text.