Question about the Canon being Closed

[Guest]

7 hours ago, PlanetChee said:

There are 81 books in the Orthodox Ethiopian Canon. 

Correct. Yes I have the Ethiopian Bible. I also have other Canon included in other bibles making it 93. Dr. Joseph Lumpkin includes a copy of the EOB with the other canon.

[BobRyan]

23 hours ago, Judas Machabeus said:

I think there's a piece of the puzzle missing here. 

You are talking about different languages being the canon.[/quote]

 

Actually - I am arguing that just because you translate from Hebrew to Greek does not mean you have a "new Canon" any more than translating the Greek NT into German is "a new canon".

 

Quote

 

That's not the case. A German bible is going to have the same books as a French bible. 

True - though I think Luther included the Apocrypha in his Bible - noting as did Jerome for the Vulgate that it is not canonical.

BTW - Jerome never even heard of "Protestant". Still - he knew what the Jewish OT was and that the Hebrew Bible did not contain the Apocrypha.

Turns out that as far back as the first century - Josephus also knew that the Hebrew Bible had not been changed for about 400 years.

 

Quote

Yes the septuigent was Greek and the temple Bible Hebrew. But that's not what makes them different canons. They have different books in them. That's what makes the canon different. Not the language. 

As Jerome noted - the Septuagint did not change the canon of the Hebrew Bible.

Quote

The Apocryphal books were included in the Septuagint for historical and religious purposes, but are not recognized by Protestant Christians or Orthodox Jews as canonical (inspired by God). Most reformed teachers will point out that the New Testament writers never quoted from the Apocryphal books, and that the Apocrypha was never considered part of the canonical Jewish scripture. 

 

 

Quote

Quote

If I quote from the book of Maccabees  as scripture, that would be rejected by those here because it's not part of the Protestant Canon.

 

Nor in the Jewish Bible - the OT according to the Jews. You keep missing that point.

Edited May 22, 2017 by BobRyan

[Guest Judas Machabeus]

38 minutes ago, BobRyan said:

 

Actually - I am arguing that just because you translate from Hebrew to Greek does not mean you have a "new Canon" any more than translating the Greek NT into German is "a new canon".

 

True - though I think Luther included the Apocrypha in his Bible - noting as did Jerome for the Vulgate that it is not canonical.

BTW - Jerome never even heard of "Protestant". Still - he knew what the Jewish OT was and that the Hebrew Bible did not contain the Apocrypha.

Turns out that as far back as the first century - Josephus also knew that the Hebrew Bible had not been changed for about 400 years.

 

As Jerome noted - the Septuagint did not change the canon of the Hebrew Bible.

 

 

Nor in the Jewish Bible - the OT according to the Jews. You keep missing that point.

Okay, I understand now how we're not lining up. I don't want to get into a apocrypha debate. There's no indication that the Jews that used the septuigent did not consider those books inspired. I know some Jews that rejected it (the septuigent) because they some books were written Greek and not originally written in Hebrew (the deuterolcanonical) and written after 450 BC therefore did not consider them inspired. But You say no Jews considered them inspired.

 There were at least two competing canons at the time of Christ. The deuteralcanonical books were part of the septuigint canon. If I understand you correctly (and please correct me if I'm still wrong) you are saying they were part of the septuagint but not considered inspired therefore not part of canon.

 

 

[Guest]

Honestly if the outside books of the 66 weren't considered inspired, they'd never be mentioned by the biblical authors themselves. That's who we need to listen too imo, not the early church fathers. 

[PlanetChee]

19 minutes ago, Allroses48 said:

Honestly if the outside books of the 66 weren't considered inspired, they'd never be mentioned by the biblical authors themselves. That's who we need to listen too imo, not the early church fathers. 

Can you list the biblical authors for us? Are you aware of how many authors you are referring to? 

 

[PlanetChee]

13 hours ago, Yowm said:

 

Still hoping on your response.

Still hoping you exercise the effort to seek out the etymology of the word, bible. 

[PlanetChee]

8 hours ago, Allroses48 said:

Correct. Yes I have the Ethiopian Bible. I also have other Canon included in other bibles making it 93. Dr. Joseph Lumpkin includes a copy of the EOB with the other canon.

Other books in other Bibles would not make for the true Orthodox  T’ewehādo Biblical Canon. The Ethiopian Bible.

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, PlanetChee said:

Can you list the biblical authors for us? Are you aware of how many authors you are referring to? 

 

Yes I am. There are over 40 authors of the 66 bible. I don't know why I need to type all of them out for you. Apparently you don't believe me so that's probably why. Shrugs. 

[Guest Judas Machabeus]

3 hours ago, Allroses48 said:

Honestly if the outside books of the 66 weren't considered inspired, they'd never be mentioned by the biblical authors themselves. That's who we need to listen too imo, not the early church fathers. 

Personally I think we should leave it to the Holy Spirit to determine canon. 

Are you not guilty of the same thing as the Fathers. Using your own opinion to make a determination. No where in scriputre do we find:

A. A list of what books are inspired. 

B. Criteria how to determine what books are inspired and which are not. 

So this speaks to my OP, where does the teaching of a closed canon come from. Deuteronomy and revelation was quoted as saying nothing is to be added.  My problem with using those is that there would be no bible after Moses (if you go by Deuteronomy) because all the prophets came after Moses. As for using Revelation which was a stand alone scroll to apply to all works.... well there was no canon to apply it to, no final collection to apply it to. 

 

 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Judas Machabeus said:

Personally I think we should leave it to the Holy Spirit to determine canon. 

Are you not guilty of the same thing as the Fathers. Using your own opinion to make a determination. No where in scriputre do we find:

A. A list of what books are inspired. 

B. Criteria how to determine what books are inspired and which are not. 

So this speaks to my OP, where does the teaching of a closed canon come from. Deuteronomy and revelation was quoted as saying nothing is to be added.  My problem with using those is that there would be no bible after Moses (if you go by Deuteronomy) because all the prophets came after Moses. As for using Revelation which was a stand alone scroll to apply to all works.... well there was no canon to apply it to, no final collection to apply it to. 

 

 

I don't believe the cannon is closed necessarily. I think the early church fathers said that. I believe it should remain opened because the biblical authors mention multiple books inside their own scriptures. Too my knowledge there's 93 books in the entire Bible that is considered divinely inspired. Could there be more? I don't know, it's quite possible. I'm only basing my opinion on what the biblical authors mentioned in the Bible. There's a possibility as we are uncovering archeological evidence of ancient times every day.