Question about the Canon being Closed

[Guest Judas Machabeus]

I'm reading Steve Rays book crossing the Tiber. So to help me understand the Protestant point of view I may end up with lots of questions. 

I believe everyone here agrees that the canon of scripture is closed meaning no more books can be added to the bible. 

Heres my question:

where does that teaching come from and is it biblical?

Edited May 18, 2017 by Judas Machabeus
Changed "lost I'd" to "lots of" smh to auto correct

[wingnut-]

From my point of view Judas, I believe God has delivered on His promise of preserving His word.  I have read the other writings which were not included, and I see why most of them were excluded.  A few are quite possibly inspired by God, but they don't add anything new to what we already have.  So for me, unless the Holy Spirit tells me otherwise, the bible is the complete Word of God.

God bless

[Running Gator]

16 minutes ago, Judas Machabeus said:

I'm reading Steve Rays book crossing the Tiber. So to help me understand the Protestant point of view I may end up with lots of questions. 

I believe everyone here agrees that the canon of scripture is closed meaning no more books can be added to the bible. 

Heres my question:

where does that teaching come from and is it biblical?

That is an excellent question.  I look forward to reading the responses 

[TheMatrixHasU71]

Revelation 22:18

For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:

 

Some think John was specifically referring to Revelation only but he wasn't, as he was quoting from Deuteronomy. So this speaks of the whole bible. Revelation was and is the end of the canon. No more new revelation.

 

Deuteronomy 4:2

Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.

[Guest Judas Machabeus]

1 hour ago, wingnut- said:

I have read the other writings which were not included, and I see why most of them were excluded.

I'm more looking for Hiw do we know it's closed and not what books are in it. Dabate for another thread. 

1 hour ago, wingnut- said:

So for me, unless the Holy Spirit tells me otherwise, the bible is the complete Word of God.

But that bares the question, how do we know that the Canon is closed. Where does that teaching come from. 

[wingnut-]

5 minutes ago, Judas Machabeus said:

I'm more looking for Hiw do we know it's closed and not what books are in it. Dabate for another thread. 

But that bares the question, how do we know that the Canon is closed. Where does that teaching come from. 

 

For me personally, the Holy Spirit.

[Guest Judas Machabeus]

7 minutes ago, TheMatrixHasU71 said:

Some think John was specifically referring to Revelation only but he wasn't, as he was quoting from Deuteronomy. So this speaks of the whole bible. Revelation was and is the end of the canon. No more new revelatio

Okay, not sure how that applies. There was no canon at the time and no "New Testament". There were lots of books being read as inspired. And there was no collection (canon) so I'm not sure how what John says can be applied to all books written. There's no way of knowing which books to apply that to at the end of the first century.

each individual book was scrutinized individually so Johns verse about not adding would be considered specific to the book of Revelation  

I do appreciate the reply.

 

[TheMatrixHasU71]

Just now, Judas Machabeus said:

Okay, not sure how that applies. There was no canon at the time and no "New Testament". There were lots of books being read as inspired. And there was no collection (canon) so I'm not sure how what John says can be applied to all books written. There's no way of knowing which books to apply that to at the end of the first century.

each individual book was scrutinized individually so Johns verse about not adding would be considered specific to the book of Revelation  

I do appreciate the reply.

 

No problem.

There WAS a New Testament though it hadn't yet been gathered together. And with really at best only a VERY tiny handful of exeptions there WERENT any other books circulating (nearly all of the apocryphals date to well past the first century) And it wasn't long after that, that most of the canon was set unofficially.

Look at it this way. John was the last apostle, Luke and Mark were dead too and though not all their immediate disciples were dead they could not possibly add to Scripture without the apostles. Nothing they would have written would have been anything new or different.

That last I would have to disagree with as like I said, John was (well maybe not quoting exactly but....) paraphrasing that passage from Deuteronomy. So it cant apply to just one book.

[missmuffet]

The Bible is complete and God is the Author 2 Timothy 3:16. Since AD 397 the Christian Church as considered the Canon of the Bible complete. If it is complete then it is closed.

[Guest Judas Machabeus]

1 hour ago, missmuffet said:

The Bible is complete and God is the Author 2 Timothy 3:16.

Catholic Study Bible

2 Timothy 3:16

16 All Scripture is inspired by God andprofitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, *

i agree with the verse, but this verse doesn't say that the canon is closed. 

1 hour ago, missmuffet said:

Since AD 397 the Christian Church as considered the Canon of the Bible complete.

I also agree with this, BUT it's a Church of men and fallible men, that made the decision. I've had people here argue that there was no Church, that the body of Christ is the Church and therefore we the people are the church. 

So I'm curious to hear from them, because I agree that the canon was closed in 397 AD. 

But another charge is that the Church was a pagan Church created by Constantine in 325AD. 

So how can a pagan church decide the canon of scripture. 

I'm curious to hear from those that hold to that understanding.