Methods the devil uses to destroy Morality

[Dale A. Brueggemann]

If God continues to give new revelation, why would it not be appended to the Bible?

For the same reason that a lot of what true prophets said in the Old Testament didn't end up in one of the writing prophet's books. For the same reason that we have no clue what most of the NT prophets said, e.g., Barnabas, Simeon called Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen (who had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch) and Saul. (Acts 13:1 NIV)

The equation of "revelation" with "canon" doesn't cut it. All canon is revelation, but not all revelation is canon.

[dalemac]

If God continues to give new revelation, why would it not be appended to the Bible? Why would He give "new understanding" of the Bible if one can fully understand what is written simply by reading? (Eph. 3:3-4).

God didn’t choose to continue the cannon of scripture, and I’m sure there are many reasons.

1) One reason is that there would be many claims of further cannon of the scripture and man would want to add more to what is considered the inspired Word of God. There would be no end to the claims.

2) God didn’t want man to be just dependent on a book but on Him. Jesus said the Spirit will lead and guide you into all truth (john 16:13) but this would not be necessary if all we have to do is read the book. One has to have a personal close relation ship with the author of the Bible in order to understand truth or receive revelation, and it is usually given to his church through His pyramid government that He established, particularly to those who are much in the Word, pray-fully studying it.

3) The Bible is too brief and does not cove every situation and condition the church will find itself in. It is not a complete “do-it-all” manual nor is it thorough enough to cover everything. We would need a multi-volume Bible-cyclopedia for that.

For example: No where does the Bible say anything about altar calls yet those who believe like I do know this is a further revelation given by God to the church and helps the new born Christian in making an open stand before the world of his new faith in God and Jesus Christ (a principal that is found in the written word – Rom 10:9-10). No where does the Bible speak of Sunday school yet this is a further revelation of God and the principal is in the Bible. Samuel went about on a circuit teaching the Laws of God; Ezra taught the law and gave the sense of it (that is, he added things of what God showed him to what the Law meant and how to apply it); and we are to study the Word to show ourselves approved and submit to the rulers and teachers God put over us who explain the Word of God to us

4) There are several mysteries in the Bible but the principal of what you are saying applies to the Word of God (The mystery of Ephesian 3:3 is that the Gentiles are heirs with Israel). But not all the mysteries of God are revealed in the Bible and it will take further revelation to understand them. One cannot fully understand the bible by just reading it. In fact man is still studying it and there are many places we just do not understand till God reveals more. God told Daniel concerning the revelation he gave him in Dan 12:8-9 8 I heard, but I did not understand. So I asked, "My lord, what will the outcome of all this be?"
9 He replied, "Go your way, Daniel, because the words are closed up and sealed until the time of the end.


We are now approaching the “end of time” when God will reveal more.

I’m sure much more can be siad and others can do better than I can. I hope this is helps.

Dalemac

[jimofbentley]

the cannon of scripture

This reminds me of a situation in the small country town where I had my first pastorate.

The formal title of a previous Anglican (Church of England - in the USA Episcopalian) priest was that of a “Canon”.

Believe it or not, his last name was “Ball”.

It has been over 20 years and it still causes me to smile.

[Adelphos]

Not to pile on, but your entire foundation is fatally flawed, especially with regard to what God actually SAID. For example, God never told Daniel that he would add more WORDS to the canon, but that the WORDS that were ALREADY in the canon would simply LATER be UNDERSTOOD. Notice what God actually SAYS, not what you PRESUME him to have said...

"And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the WORDS are closed up and sealed till the time of the end. Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand." Daniel 12:9-10

The Bible contains ALL, ALL, ALL that is needed for a GENUINELY born again Christian to RECEIVE revelation, and that INCLUDES end-time revelation. There is not a jot or a tittle that needs to be added to the canon for a GENUINELY born again Christian to understand the Bible.

The ONLY thing that is lacking is UNDERSTANDING, not more WORDS in the canon, and the ONLY way that UNDERSTANDING will accure is NOT by more WORDS, but by the INFALLIBLE REVELATION OF THE HOLY GHOST.

PERIOD.

If you don't comprehend THAT point, you have ZERO chance of EVER TRULY UNDERSTANDING ANYTHING that God in Jesus Christ says. And there are no exceptions to that. None whatsoever.

Furthermore, just to get it out there, your entire first post positively REEKED of America-centrism, and that is ALWAYS a dead give-a-away to someone who understands not the FIRST THING about the TRUE gospel of Jesus Christ. Not the FIRST THING.

[bkMitchell]

I was not aware of the different cannons of scriptures. My understanding there is really only one Bible (or more properly one inspired Word of God) composing of the 39 books of the OT of basically the Massoretic text and of the 27 books of the Greek NT

The 24 books of the Massoretic Text and the 39 books of the Protestant Old testament are actually the same, but they are counted differently and they are arranged differently as well.

Here, below, are the 24 books of the Massorectic Text/Hebrew Bible

1. Genesis
   
2. Exodus
3. Numbers
4. Leviticus
5. Deuteronomy
6. Joshua
7. Judges
   
8. Samuel
9. Kings
10. Isaiah
11. Jeremiah
12. Ezekiel
13. The Twelve Prophets
14. Psalms
    
15. Proverbs
16. Job
17. Song of Songs
    
18. Ruth
19. Lamentations
20. Ecclesiastes
21. Esther
22. Daniel
23. Ezra-Nehemiah
24. Chronicles

However, the Leningrad Codex has a slightly different order from this list.




בֶּן בַּג בַּג אוֹמֵר, הֲפָךְ בָּהּ וַהֲפָךְ בָּהּ, דְּכֹלָּא בָהּ

[Lee]

For the same reason that a lot of what true prophets said in the Old Testament didn't end up in one of the writing prophet's books. For the same reason that we have no clue what most of the NT prophets said, e.g., Barnabas, Simeon called Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen (who had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch) and Saul. (Acts 13:1 NIV)

The equation of "revelation" with "canon" doesn't cut it. All canon is revelation, but not all revelation is canon.

Yes, oral revelation was necessary before written revelation was completed. Mid-first century Christians did not have a written New Testament they could consult. But the NT alludes to a time when the reception of miraculous revelation would end (I Cor. 13:8-10). With the death of the last apostle, the means of conferring such gifts ended (Acts 8:18).

I am aware that "revelation" and "canon" are not synonymous terms. However, with the closing of the canon, Divine special revelation also ceased. If there were new special Divine revelation--other than what the Bible says--would it not be just as authoritative as what the Bible says? And would it not be incumbent upon the one receiving it to distribute it as widely as writings of the apostles and other inspired writers of the NT have been distributed?

[Lee]

2) God didn’t want man to be just dependent on a book but on Him. Jesus said the Spirit will lead and guide you into all truth (john 16:13) but this would not be necessary if all we have to do is read the book. One has to have a personal close relation ship with the author of the Bible in order to understand truth or receive revelation, and it is usually given to his church through His pyramid government that He established, particularly to those who are much in the Word, pray-fully studying it.

Jesus said He would send the Spirit to guide the apostles into all truth, and He did (cf. I Cor. 2:9-13; II Pet. 1:3). I agree that one needs to approach his study of the word with the right attitude if he hopes to understand it (Jas. 1:21; I Pet. 2:1-2). But when you say, "God didn't want you to be just dependent on a book but on Him," what does that mean? Is the word of God somehow dirty when in a book, but purer when delivered orally? I fail to see how that leads to the conclusion of continuous revelation. I also am unaware of the "pyramid government that He established."

3) The Bible is too brief and does not cove every situation and condition the church will find itself in. It is not a complete “do-it-all” manual nor is it thorough enough to cover everything. We would need a multi-volume Bible-cyclopedia for that.

That is simply not true. The Bible covers every situation and condition of man and the church. Paul wrote, "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works" (II Tim. 3:16-17). Is that a true statement, or false? If it is true (and it is), the Bible completely equips us. It's not like any situations that arise catch the Lord off-guard. He knew about the apostasy that would take place (I Tim. 4:1; II Pet. 2:1-2). He knew about the errors that would exist today. The Gospel, as God gave it, is completely adapted to man, as God made him.

For example: No where does the Bible say anything about altar calls yet those who believe like I do know this is a further revelation given by God to the church and helps the new born Christian in making an open stand before the world of his new faith in God and Jesus Christ (a principal that is found in the written word – Rom 10:9-10). No where does the Bible speak of Sunday school yet this is a further revelation of God and the principal is in the Bible. Samuel went about on a circuit teaching the Laws of God; Ezra taught the law and gave the sense of it (that is, he added things of what God showed him to what the Law meant and how to apply it); and we are to study the Word to show ourselves approved and submit to the rulers and teachers God put over us who explain the Word of God to us

Again, if the principle is in the Bible, we do not need additional revelation to tell us we can do it. But if it is not, we do not need additional revelation to tell us we cannot. "And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him" (Col. 3:17).

[Dale A. Brueggemann]

Yes, oral revelation was necessary before written revelation was completed.... But the NT alludes to a time when the reception of miraculous revelation would end (I Cor. 13:8-10).

Yes, that would be in the new heavens and new earth. A little decent exegesis of 1 Cor 13:8ff is in order here. Surely, you understand that isn't talking about a completed NT Canon.

[Adelphos]

Yes, that would be in the new heavens and new earth. A little decent exegesis of 1 Cor 13:8ff is in order here. Surely, you understand that isn't talking about a completed NT Canon.

I'm not going to get into this, but I'm glad you took that up. That is absolutely one of the most utterly abused Scriptures in all the Bible, and you have of course nailed the truth squarely on the head concering it. Godspeed.

[Lee]

Yes, that would be in the new heavens and new earth. A little decent exegesis of 1 Cor 13:8ff is in order here. Surely, you understand that isn't talking about a completed NT Canon.

"Revelation" and "canon" are not synonymous.

But, yes, ultimately that can be understood as alluding to the closing of the canon.