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 ...
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.
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 ...
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 ...
There was no mandate that the gospels should appear in the order they were written once they were gathered into a collection. This is true of the rest of the New Testament as well. The order is
the gospel accounts,
the history of the early church,
the letters of Paul
letters by other apostles, and
So, there ...
The canon developed gradually over the course of more than 300 years. In many cases, when decisions were made, they were simply to acknowledge what was already being read in the churches.
The process started early. Already in 2 Peter 3:16, there is a reference to the letters of Paul:
There are some things in them hard to understand, which the ignorant ...
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 ...
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 most ...
I am indebted to Dr. Peter Leithart for his writings and lectures on the Song of Songs. For further reading, you can visit his website. These thoughts might help in approaching the book.
It is helpful to consider the book’s position in the canon as part of the wisdom literature. In Proverbs, the king exhorts his son to seek wisdom and ...
There are two major variations in the Bible which has caused rifts over time: translation and canon.
It's important to not underestimate the value of translation. The New World Translation, for example, is a translation used exclusively by the Jehovah's Witnesses. This "Bible" can be considered the Jehovah's Witness Bible.
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." ...
It's because the early church fathers thought that Matthew was written first. This is known as the Augustinian Hypothesis, and its namesake, Augustine, writes:
Now, those four evangelists whose names have gained the most remarkable circulation over the whole world [...] are believed to have written in the order which follows: first Matthew, then Mark, ...
Wikipedia does a good job of summarizing the heresy, but I want to pull out some source material.
Some of the sayings do attest to the synpotic Gospels, but there is a lot of heresy in there too:
From the top, selected parts of The Gospel of Thomas:
These are the secret sayings that the living Jesus spoke and Didymos Judas Thomas recorded.
1. And he ...
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, ...
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 3:7....
Emanuel Swedenborg (1688–1772) listed the books that he considers to be the Word of God ("divinely inspired Biblical canon," in the words of the question) in three places: Arcana Coelestia ("Secrets of Heaven") #10325, The New Jerusalem and its Heavenly Doctrine #266, and The White Horse #16.
Here is the listing from Arcana Coelestia #10325:
The books of ...
Most of the books of the Bible were written by different people. An estimated 40 authors wrote the 70 or so books that various Christians accept as "the Bible". Most of these authors wrote independently from each other; if they were contemporaries, they typically did not confer with each other. If they were separated by time, the latter typically did not ...
The key point of Luther's biblical exegesis was his conviction of Christ's being the rex scripturae.1 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 ...
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 ...
The books known as "apocryphal" to Protestants are defined by Catholics as "Deuterocanonical" (a second canon). They come from the Septuagint, a Greek translation (with these additional books) of the Hebrew Tanakh. Later, around the 4th century, the Old Testament was translated by St. Jerome into Latin as part of the Vulgate. Besides the Catholic Church, the ...
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 ...
Much of when the Old Testament was written is purely conjecture, but many modern scholars believe that it was written some time in the period when the Persians captured Babylon in 538 BC. Others believe Moses authored the Pentateuch, which is Genesis - Deuteronomy, which would mean that these books were authored some time around 1300 - 1500 BC.
There is ...
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 ...
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 Peter'...
Historically, there have been two primary understandings of the Song of Solomon -
It prefigures the love that Christ has for his church
It is an erotic love story
Personally, I find it nearly impossible to accept the first, however. I submit, on the basis of SOS 5:3-6, the following:
I have taken off my robe—
must I put it on again?
I have ...
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 three ...
The Book of Jashar is mentioned in two places in the Bible:
2 Samuel 1:18 (NASB)
and he told them to teach the sons of Judah the song of the bow; behold, it is written in the book of Jashar.
Joshua 10:12-13 (NASB)
Then Joshua spoke to the Lord in the day when the Lord delivered up the Amorites before the sons of Israel, and he said in the sight of ...
It is impossible to know for sure without asking the person that said it, but I believe it is most likely, given her description of the individual in question, the historical time frame and the context of the discussion, that she was speaking of a man named Marcion.
Who was Marcion?
For the first hundred years or so of the Christian faith, documents ...