Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

samova2133

You Must Not Add To The Bible

Recommended Posts

From my statement of "Same tired, old, non-critically thought out questions", you move on to make claims that I think:

I have superior thinking skills.

The question is beneath my time.

The question is beneath my degree of learning.

of course, your statement of it as "silly questions brought by those who may be earnestly seeking an answer" doesn't really count - even if the first part of it was possibly meant facetiously.

Well, I'm done for the evening. Good night.

Correct.

Share this post


Link to post

What if we moved the Book of Revelation to some other position in the Christian Bible? That would solve

the problem -- as then the words would only apply to that book, and not to the entire canon (which was

not assembled and set into its present order, until many decades after Revelation was completed).

UD

So, are you telling me that God did not know that Revelation would be the l

last book of the Christian bible? God is omnicient and knows all things. God wrote the Bible through inspired prophets and all the books are in the right place.

Share this post


Link to post

So, are you telling me that God did not know that Revelation would be the l

last book of the Christian bible? God is omnicient and knows all things. God wrote the Bible through inspired prophets and all the books are in the right place.

Perhaps. What about the other canons Samova? The RCC has books in their Bible that are not found in yours, and vice-versa.

Since the RCC canon existed first, technically speaking the Protestants fall under condemnation for adding to and removing from the Bible.

How do you feel, knowing that you have condemned yourself to the plagues found in Revelation by your own mouth?

Also, what about the same phrase being found in Deuteronomy? Should we discard everything in the New Testament because the exact same prohibition is found midway through the Old?

Your interpretation of the phrase in Revelations is overly-simplistic. It says that no man shall add or detract from the Book of Revelations, rather than the Bible as a whole.

We agree- no man can add to the Scriptures, but the Book of Revelations is perfectly plain- God can add or subtract as he wishes. The Book of Mormon and the Pearl of Great Price were brought forth by divine command- and are not the constructs of men.

God added the BoM and PoGP to the canon, not man. Unlike, say, the Nicean heresy.

Share this post


Link to post

'Christianity,' given the opportunity, would put every 'Mormon' to the sword and burn every copy of 'Mormon' scriptures.

I did not call you a liar. You are simply mistaken.

I believe that is true. You also took issue, you said, with EVERY sentence. So, tell me, when was the Bible NOT suppressed by Christianity? It was only after Tyndale translated, and he was executed for it. Wycliffe would have been executed, but he had powerful friends. Still, most of the copies of his Bible were burned -- by 'Christians.' Those who read it were also burned in many cases. The Catholic church still teaches the doctrine of magisterium.

Sorry, I will have little sympathy for much of 'Christianity's' appeals to a book that they fought for so long and so hard to keep out of the hands of the common people. 'Christianity' asserted (and much of it still asserts) that only church leaders have the right to interpret the Bible. In other words, people who thought for themselves were considered dangerous, rebels to be executed.

Joseph Smith had the advantage of being born in the first country that had allowed religious tolerance in nearly 2000 years. But he was still killed by 'Christians' who wanted nothing to do with anyone questioning the priests' interpretation of the Bible.

Joseph Smith promoted the radical and very dangerous idea that people did not need the priests and creeds of the churches of the day. He showed us that we are all capable of receiving revelation. Joseph Smith democratized and socialized Christianity. They killed him for it, tried to exterminate all his followers, and insist on marginalizing and persecuting his followers to this day.

Share this post


Link to post

So, are you telling me that God did not know that Revelation would be the l

last book of the Christian bible? God is omnicient and knows all things. God wrote the Bible through inspired prophets and all the books are in the right place.

God obviously knows everything, but men set in place the order of the books of the Bible. If we are telling it like it is you will have to realize that Revelations almost didn't even make into the canonized collection known as the Bible. Eusebius felt it was a forgery. To the point directly, though Deuteronomy 4:2 states,"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."

Many evangelical scholars find the passage in Revelations to include only that book. It was common in scripture or other ancient writing to include a colophon or "curse" at the end of the writing.

A little more on this from "The Interpreters Dictionary",

The speaker of this cursing colophon may be Christ, as some maintain, but more probably the words are intended to be taken as those of the author. A warning or curse to prevent any alterations in a book was not uncommon in ancient times. Irenaeus, toward the end of the second century, appended such a curse to a book he had written against heretics, adjuring copyists to make no changes "by our Lord Jesus Christ, by his glorious advent when he comes to judge the living and the dead" (Eusebius Church History V. 20. 2). Ironically enough, the curse is about all that remains of this particular book. The author of Deuteronomy, a work that purports to be the revelation of God to Moses, includes two solemn warnings against any additions or omissions (Deut. 4:2; 12:32). According to the apocryphal account of the translation of the LXX, the assembly of Jews pronounced a curse upon anyone who altered it in any way (Letter of Aristeas 310-11). A strict warning, but not a curse, given with the knowledge that it would be disregarded, was written in the conclusion of I Enoch (104:9-13). In a much stronger statement the author of II Enoch pronounces a terrible judgment upon him who rejects his book, but a blessing on him who accepts it, for he will be released on the Day of Judgment (48:6-9). A similar view is found in II Pet. 3:16, where it is said that certain heretics have twisted Paul's letters, as they did the other scriptures, to "their own destruction."

Share this post


Link to post

Holy worn-out argument, Batman!

Go read Deuteronomy 4:2 and explain to me how it applies to your question.

Then do a little research on the compilation of the Bible.

Then realize the LDS Church doesn't believe man added anything, but that God can and does.

I have done a lot of research on the compilation of the bible. I would consider myself a scholar on bibical

compilation since it has been a subject of particular interest to me for many of my 69 years.

samova2133

Share this post


Link to post

I have done a lot of research on the compilation of the bible. I would consider myself a scholar on bibical

compilation since it has been a subject of particular interest to me for many of my 69 years.

samova2133

So thay would mean you were around when the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered. Perhaps you'd like to discuss the implications of a pre-Masoretic Hebrew text for all versions of the Hebrew Bible after 1947?

Share this post


Link to post

I have done a lot of research on the compilation of the bible. I would consider myself a scholar on bibical

compilation since it has been a subject of particular interest to me for many of my 69 years.

samova2133

So have many others, including many of us. Yours is a minority view, even among non-Mormon biblical scholars. Now, you might be right, but I suspect that the odds of that are extremely small.

Share this post


Link to post

I have done a lot of research on the compilation of the bible. I would consider myself a scholar on bibical

compilation since it has been a subject of particular interest to me for many of my 69 years.

samova2133

If true than why would you even think that Rev 22:18-19 had to do with the Bible? God did not decide what Books would be placed in your Bible let alone placed them in the order they are found in the Bible. Also there have been many Bible canons proposed or accepted throughout the history of Christianity. Even some Anti-Mormon writers have finally come to the realization how bad this argument is against the LDS faith:

"In an attempt to place all LDS extra biblical teachings, some Christians have felt that quoting Revelations 22:18-19 solves the matter. The passage warns about adding and taking away the words of "this book". Most Evangelical commentators believe John was giving a straightforward warning to the readers of the Book of Revelations, and not the Bible as a whole. Since the Bible had not been compiled the time of John's writing, it would be wrong to assume that he was speaking about books other than his own. John's warning, therefore, should not be used in any other context." (Bill McKeever and Eric Johnson, "Pinning down Mormon Doctrine" (Christian Research Journal 23: 4, 11)

Share this post


Link to post

John was NOT referring to the Bible as a whole, he was referring specifically to the Book of Revelation. There is also another verse similar to this in Deuteronomy. Maybe we should get rid of everything after that too.

I think that Deut 4:2 and Rev 22:19 refer to the Bible as a whole. They are two witnesses to the same fact.

Share this post


Link to post

I think that Deut 4:2 and Rev 22:19 refer to the Bible as a whole. They are two witnesses to the same fact.

In all respect if Deut 4:2 is correct then anything that came after that would be fraudalent, wouldn't it?

Share this post


Link to post

I think that Deut 4:2 and Rev 22:19 refer to the Bible as a whole. They are two witnesses to the same fact.

That makes no sense at all, samova. First you assert that Rev 22:19 refers to the entire Bible when it is crystal clear that it refers to the Revelation itself, because it is the last book of the Bible and God knew it would be. Now you say that Deuteronomy 4:2 also refers to the entire Bible.

Did God also know that Deuteronomy would be the last book of the Bible?

Which is it?

You are free to believe anything you choose to believe. If you read Rev 22:19 you can see that it refers to the Book of Revelation (the book of this prophesy).

In all respect if Deut 4:2 is correct then anything that came after that would be fraudalent, wouldn't it?

Yes. Samova is attempting to stretch it into covering the entire Bible in order to suppport his assertion which is based on a faulty reading of Revelation 22:19.

Share this post


Link to post

I think that Deut 4:2 and Rev 22:19 refer to the Bible as a whole. They are two witnesses to the same fact.

What Bible? The Jews have as much right to use Deuteronomy to declare all Christians heretics for using the New Testament at all as anyone has to use either scripture against us. In fact, you can toss out the writings and the Prophets too. If God wanted to declare his 'Bible' unchangeable he really should have had one of the Apostles be much, much clearer. Perhaps maybe have one of them compile it in the first place and add an appendix declaring this.

Share this post


Link to post

I posted this commentary earlier from the Interpreters Bible (hardly a Mormon publication), but it was really garbled so here it is again....

The speaker of this cursing colophon may be Christ, as some maintain, but more probably the words are intended to be taken as those of the author. A warning or curse to prevent any alterations in a book was not uncommon in ancient times. Irenaeus, toward the end of the second century, appended such a curse to a book he had written against heretics, adjuring copyists to make no changes "by our Lord Jesus Christ, by his glorious advent when he comes to judge the living and the dead" (Eusebius Church History V. 20. 2). Ironically enough, the curse is about all that remains of this particular book. The author of Deuteronomy, a work that purports to be the revelation of God to Moses, includes two solemn warnings against any additions or omissions (Deut. 4:2; 12:32). According to the apocryphal account of the translation of the LXX, the assembly of Jews pronounced a curse upon anyone who altered it in any way (Letter of Aristeas 310-11). A strict warning, but not a curse, given with the knowledge that it would be disregarded, was written in the conclusion of I Enoch (104:9-13). In a much stronger statement the author of II Enoch pronounces a terrible judgment upon him who rejects his book, but a blessing on him who accepts it, for he will be released on the Day of Judgment (48:6-9). A similar view is found in II Pet. 3:16, where it is said that certain heretics have twisted Paul's letters, as they did the other scriptures, to "their own destruction."

Share this post


Link to post

I have done a lot of research on the compilation of the bible. I would consider myself a scholar on bibical

compilation since it has been a subject of particular interest to me for many of my 69 years.

samova2133

But you don't understand what you are reading, samova. Here is your opening post again:

"The last few verses of the Bible clearly state that, "If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophesy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things that are written in this book. Why then did you add the Book of Mormon and the Pearl of Great Price?"

Those are NOT the last few verses of the Bible. Those are the last few verses of the Book of Revelation. The Bible isn't a book, it is a collection of books.

Look at this part: If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophesy,

Once more...the Bible isn't a book. It is a collection of books. The words you quoted are the last few verses of the Book of Revelation. The verse itself refers to the Book of Revelation.

"The book of this prophesy" cannot refer to the Bible. The Bible is not "the book of this prophesy"...

"The book of this prophesy" is the Book of Revelation.

Share this post


Link to post

Well its very well known fact that John wrote rev? well after he wrote what you quoted.

he went on to write three other apistles! So if john was referring to the entire Bible when he made

the statement not to add to any of the scripture of this book. then he would have violated his

own words from god? he was not writing in referrance to the entire Bible. he was writing in referance to revealation only.

Also in deuteronamy. the same referance is made, then that would mean that every book in the holy bible

that came after deuteronomy was not valid? Once again the verse in Deuterononmy was not in referance to the entire bible.

also when statements in both Revealation and deuteronomy were nade, Niether of these books were part of the biblical cannon that we know today, So how could either of these statement been meant for the entire bible?

{This information is very well known stuff.}

You are incorrect. You cannot say that Johns epistles were written after Revelation. They are generally understood to have been written to the Asiatic 'circle of churches 'and are thought to be amoung the earlier epistles. They were written from Ephesus according to tradition, but no definite statement can be made as to the place and time of writing according to scholars. The character of the contents indicates a much earlier date that is usually supposed. Lightfoot says the Johannine Epistles were written about 55-56 A.D.

John was a very old man in 95 A.D. when he wrote Revelation as a prisioner on the Isle of Patmos and although tradition says he died at Ephesus after his release, I do not think he had the the energy or inspiration to write any more epistles.

:P

Share this post


Link to post

I'm curious as to which anti-Mormon site said to ask this question; I wonder also if they said that Mormons won't have any response for it...

Same tired, old, non-critically thought out questions.

I thought of the question myself. There was no anti-Mormon site. Don't be so paranoid.

Share this post


Link to post

Samova,

Biblically scholarship has generally concluded that the warning in Revelations were for those people taking the writings of the apostles and adding and subtracting things in their transcriptions. This was an ongoing problem at the time. They didn't have the internet nor did they have satellite broadcasts. An apostles words could only be read by letters that were duplicated into several epistles for distribution purposes. Many mistakes came out of this process and sometimes words were added or changed.

This makes perfect sense when you put the book and writing in it's proper context.

To believe the warning refers to the Bible as a whole is to ignore both how the book was compiled and when it was compiled.

Share this post


Link to post

Heh... Post and run. Regardless, when John wrote that the Bible did not exist. So when he wrote that, he was referring to the book of Revelations itself.

No you are wrong. The Bible existed in 95 A.D. when John finished Revelation. All the books had already been written. What you mean is that it had not yet been compiled and put in its present form. That happened 225 years later under Constantine. I maintain that God knew the final form that the cannon would take and that Rev. 22:19 refers to the whole bible.

Share this post


Link to post

No you are wrong. The Bible existed in 95 A.D. when John finished Revelation. All the books had already been written. What you mean is that it had not yet been compiled and put in its present form. That happened 225 years later under Constantine. I maintain that God knew the final form that the cannon would take and that Rev. 22:19 refers to the whole bible.

And here you make my point exactly, samova. "All the books had already been written".

The Bible is NOT a book. It is a collection of books...a compilation of books. The verse in Rev 22:19 refers to the Book of Revelation.

Share this post


Link to post

No you are wrong. The Bible existed in 95 A.D. when John finished Revelation. All the books had already been written. What you mean is that it had not yet been compiled and put in its present form. That happened 225 years later under Constantine. I maintain that God knew the final form that the cannon would take and that Rev. 22:19 refers to the whole bible.

If that were the case, then there was no need for any bishops to assemble and vote on admitting texts

to the canon. To my way of thinking, this removes human agency and free will, and leaves us as robots.

If it is your teaching that no changes were made in any of the canonical texts after the Book of Revelation

was completed, I feel you are making a big mistake. But I probably can do nothing to convince you of it.

But one last query here -- the letter of Jude speaks of extra-canonical texts as though they were scripture.

Should they have been included in the Bible John the Revelator supposedly fore-knew, or was Jude mistaken?

UD

Share this post


Link to post

Samova,

Biblically scholarship has generally concluded that the warning in Revelations were for those people taking the writings of the apostles and adding and subtracting things in their transcriptions. This was an ongoing problem at the time. They didn't have the internet nor did they have satellite broadcasts. An apostles words could only be read by letters that were duplicated into several epistles for distribution purposes. Many mistakes came out of this process and sometimes words were added or changed.

This makes perfect sense when you put the book and writing in it's proper context.

To believe the warning refers to the Bible as a whole is to ignore both how the book was compiled and when it was compiled.

I believe that God knew the final form the bible would take. After all God is a bit smarter than early fathers of the church who chose the books of cannon based on the basis of certain criteria. Many books, such as the Gnostic texts did not make it into the cannon because they were obvious frauds to the early church fathers. I wonder how they would vote on the BOM and POGP. I think they would have been rejected.

Share this post


Link to post

I believe that God knew the final form the bible would take. After all God is a bit smarter than early fathers of the church who chose the books of cannon based on the basis of certain criteria. Many books, such as the Gnostic texts did not make it into the cannon because they were obvious frauds to the early church fathers. I wonder how they would vote on the BOM and POGP. I think they would have been rejected.

It doesn't matter if God knew the final form that the Bible would take. The Bible is not a book.

Share this post


Link to post

But you don't understand what you are reading, samova. Here is your opening post again:

"The last few verses of the Bible clearly state that, "If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophesy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things that are written in this book. Why then did you add the Book of Mormon and the Pearl of Great Price?"

Those are NOT the last few verses of the Bible. Those are the last few verses of the Book of Revelation. The Bible isn't a book, it is a collection of books.

Look at this part: If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophesy,

Once more...the Bible isn't a book. It is a collection of books. The words you quoted are the last few verses of the Book of Revelation. The verse itself refers to the Book of Revelation.

"The book of this prophesy" cannot refer to the Bible. The Bible is not "the book of this prophesy"...

"The book of this prophesy" is the Book of Revelation.

O.K. Have it your way. Your so-called prophets are adding to the Book of Revelation.

Share this post


Link to post

No you are wrong. The Bible existed in 95 A.D. when John finished Revelation. All the books had already been written. What you mean is that it had not yet been compiled and put in its present form. That happened 225 years later under Constantine. I maintain that God knew the final form that the cannon would take and that Rev. 22:19 refers to the whole bible.

:P

It did?

Thats news to the Nicean Concil... how did they miss that memo!

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...