Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

48

Your premise is invalid, as the warning in Revelation cannot be honestly interpreted as referring to anything beyond Revelation itself. "The Bible" did not exist back then. The very concept of "the Bible" did not even exist back then. Each sacred writing was its own book; they weren't compiled into a collection until centuries later. In addition, John ...


23

I agree 100% with Mason Wheeler, but I thought I could clarify something. The LDS faith does not claim to add to the Bible. The only additions in their version of the King James Version of the Bible is in the form of footnotes and reference information. If that is considered adding to the Bible, then most denominations are guilty. The Book of Mormon is a ...


16

What is considered scripture The Standard Works The LDS Church accepts 4 volumes as "standard works" of scripture: The KJV Bible (minus Apocrypha) The Book of Mormon The Pearl of Great Price The Doctrine and Covenants Each book is esteemed basically equally with the others as pertaining to their scriptural value. Of course, Mormons will emphasize the ...


16

Short Answer: The Book of Enoch is not Scripture. As such, the Holy Spirit did not lead the church to include it in the canon of Scripture. The Controversy Jude 1:14-15 says this: It was also about these men that Enoch, in the seventh generation from Adam, prophesied, saying, “Behold, the Lord came with many thousands of His holy ones, to execute ...


13

The problem with this question is that the Bible is not a single book, and as such does not directly address what "other books" are considered canon. Peter, for instance, writes that Paul's books are highly profitable for reading, "even if they are sometimes hard to understand," but there is no book anywhere that says "these books are canon, these are not." ...


13

Abstract The Jewish canon was still in a state of flux when the New Testament was being written. Therefore, early Christian authors drew freely from a wide variety of works, some of which were excluded from both the Jewish and Christian scriptures at a later date. 1st Enoch falls into that category. The early church probably held theological views ...


13

The word for "scripture" in the Greek text is (ἡ) γραφή, often occurring in the plural, (τῆς) γραφῆς, which literally means "writing(s)." The word occurs approximately 50 times in the New Testament (depending on the manuscript used it is 50 or 51) and it seems pretty clear to me from a word search that this almost exclusively refers to the Old Testament ...


13

The Bible itself seems to indicate that Jesus performed no miracles until His ministry began. Non-biblical sources may disagree, but they are non-biblical. John 2 records to miracle at the wedding in Cana, where Jesus turns water into wine. John completes the account with the following statement: This, the first of his signs, Jesus did at Cana in ...


12

I prefer to look at the verse itself, in this matter. When I read this verse in Revelation it is easy to see that this is a warning to mankind: Don't add stuff! It's not your right, and you don't have the authority! But it does NOT say that God cannot (or even will not) continue revealing his word and his mind and his plans to mankind. Remember Amos ...


12

Several reasons: Historically, canonicity in the NT was restricted to the 12 apostles and direct relations of Jesus. (Mark = Peter, Luke=Paul*, Matthew & John were both disciples, Hebrews was errantly ascribed to Paul, James and Jude were brothers of Jesus // Paul was considered to be an apostle, since Jesus appeared directly to him.) Later Councils (I ...


11

This is a difficult question, given that human reasoning is itself flawed. But if we were to look at the canonization process, the most we could say is that it must be not be absurd; Consider how Matthias was chosen to succeed Judas; even though the process of 'drawing lots' seems irrational, the lots were being drawn against a few possible candidates and ...


10

There are no direct quotes, at least, not in the sense that, for example, Isaiah is quoted, but there are certainly several allusions and parallel passages. Here is a list of some of them from both NT and OT (and yes, I am well aware that some of those are debatable). As to "other books quoting them," it should be noted that neither Song of Songs, Esther, ...


10

There is no record of Jesus performing miracles when he was a child that is accepted according to the Bible. There are also these biblical reasons to believe that he did not perform any such miracles: The Bible records no such miracles, and the most remarkable event that the Bible does record is the Finding in the Temple. See Luke 2:46-47: 46 After ...


9

The key point of Luther's biblical exegesis was his conviction of Christ's being the rex scripturae1. There is a famous passage from his preface to the "Epistel S. Jacobi und Judas" saying: "This is the right touchstone to criticize all the books: See if they preach Christ or not. […] What Christ did not teach, that is not apostolic, may it have been ...


9

A more ecumenical answer: They weren't considered equal because they had been considered of dubious origin for quite some time. Back when the Vulgate was being put together Jerome made the points that The original Hebrew for those texts could no longer be found* Jews of the late first century onward did not consider them canonical. Others in the Church ...


9

The "books" of the Bible are just that- they are separate works by separate authors in separate contexts. Yes, Luke wrote 2, Moses wrote 5, and Paul wrote somewhere between 7 and 13, but Stephen King has written more than one book, too :) Matthew, for example, was written by the Apostle Matthew. Luke, by Paul's traveling companion. Mark was written by ...


9

Given the clarification of the question, an entirely new answer is in order. The quick answer is that most of the rest of the NT was written before the Gospels, and was sourced by eyewitnesses in any event. Every writer was in some way written by somebody who had first-hand knowledge of Jesus. As such, there would have been no need to go back and read ...


8

You, my friend, have a hard heart if you can't find anything interesting in Ezra. ;-) And when the builders laid the foundation of the temple of the LORD, the priests in their vestments came forward with trumpets, and the Levites, the sons of Asaph, with cymbals, to praise the LORD, according to the directions of David king of Israel. And they sang ...


8

According to Talmud, the Tanakh canon (Protestant OT) compiled in 450 BC, but modern scholar puts the canon as a process between 200 BC to 200 AD. First the Torah, then Nevi'im and the latest is the Ketuvim.


8

The books known as "apocryphal" defined by Protestants are defined by Catholics as "Deuterocanonical" (a second canon) comes from Septuagint, a Greek translation (with these additional books) of Hebrew Tanakh. Which later around 4th century, was translated by St. Jerome to Vulgate, a Latin edition of the OT. Besides the Catholic Church, the Constantinople ...


8

Technically, the only "criteria" for canonicity is widespread acceptance. Looking at canonical lists up through the Festal Letter canonicity was always based on "what seemed most profitable to the reader" at the time. That said, the Council of Trent said All New Testament Books share a claim to apostolic authority: Matthew & John were disciples Luke ...


8

I think that the easiest answer is that it was excluded because it was never properly included. None of the groups who formed a version of the canon felt that this book accurately reflected Jewish values sufficiently to be included in the Tanak or the LXX. Christians just followed suit. Just because a book is cited by the Bible, that does not make for ...


8

This answer brings up an interesting verse in 1 Corinthians 7, when Paul distinguishes between his words and the Lord's. Now to the married I command, yet not I but the Lord: A wife is not to depart from her husband. But even if she does depart, let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband. And a husband is not to divorce his wife. But to ...


8

There was a manuscript that began circulating in the 2nd century written by someone who called himself "Thomas the Israelite," claiming that Jesus was able to do miracles as a child. The manuscript was later given the title, "Infancy Gospel of Thomas", and you can see a full English translation here. The first story in this manuscript tells of Jesus' ...


7

Note that this answer refers to the Protestant Bible. The Catholic Bible, and the Eastern Orthodox Bibles largely follow this pattern, but contain different books. More on the differences can be found here. The differences are also noted below. First, understand that the Bible is not a single book It's a collection of 66 books, written at different ...


7

One of the closest examples would be Paul's Letter to the Laodiceans. Scholarship is divided about the authorship, whether it is Paul or a Marcionite forgery - but the point is that at the time, when canonization was occurring, it was not accepted as such. Most everything else (Gospel of Peter, Gospel of Thomas, etc...) was pretty much rejected even at the ...


7

Briefly: Paul's letters were probably first, beginning with 1 Timothy and Galatians. Romans was a middling book, 2 Timothy was probably his last. They range from 52 ad to 62 or 68, depending on what you think about deutero-Pauline scholarship Of the Gospels, Mark is usually considered to be first, although some have proposed Matthew. Luke is usually dated ...


7

Martin Luther disliked James, in particular, for its emphasis on works. He called it his "epistle of straw." That said, there is simply not a mechanism for removing anything from the canon in Christian circles. Likewise, of Revelation, Luther said: About this book of the Revelation of John, I leave everyone free to hold his own opinions. I would not ...


6

Parts of this answer is taken directly from the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1994) which carries the seal of Imprimi Potest, by which the Catholic Church recognizes the publication to be free of doctrinal error (as I understand it). On the Inspiration and Truth of Sacred Scripture, attesting to divine authorship: 105 God is the author of Sacred ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible