No new Canon?

[cheddarsox]

Why doesn’t the church continue to add books to the Bible?

cheddar

 

[Ghosty]

Why should it? On what grounds? All existing books from Apostalic times have been discerned and decided upon, so any (highly unlikely) addition would have to be a new discovery of an Apostalic era work that had been completely unknown previously, which itself would count against its authenticity. Such works in Apostalic times were highly treasured and guarded, after all.

Peace be with you!

 

[awalt]

It is also Church teaching that no new revelations will occur until the end of time.

 

[threej_lc]

awalt:

It is also Church teaching that no new revelations will occur until the end of time.

That is, no new public revelations that all faithful will be bound to believe. That is why the church will never add no new canons to the bible. When God fully became man and entered into our presence, in doing so he revealed the fullness of truth to humanity through his apostles. Everything given to the apostles has been passed down through scripture and tradition. We will not know any more then the apostles who knew God personally, nor will we know less when God has given us the fullness of the spirit, who will lead us to all truth. Therefore, nothing new will ever, nor ever needs to be added, to the canon.

Josh

 

[cheddarsox]

Does the church have a statement saying that nothing will be added to Canon?

Why does anything that might be added need to come from Apostolic times?

Many books in the Old Testament are history, prophecy, or admonition, reminding the faithful how to live. I guess I am surprised that in two millenia God had nothing new to say, or encouragement etc to offer that is worthy of including in the Canon.

That has always puzzled me.

I can see how Jesus, being the word incarnate can be a “nuff said” on God’s part however.

cheddar

 

[threej_lc]

cheddarsox:

Many books in the Old Testament are history, prophecy, or admonition, reminding the faithful how to live. I guess I am surprised that in two millenia God had nothing new to say, or encouragement etc to offer that is worthy of including in the Canon.

That has always puzzled me.

God does have a lot more to say, and gives encouragement to the believers. But that is private revelation. PUblic revelation, that which is in the canon, is binding on all believers, and a source of new doctrine and teaching.

God’s closing of public revelation was a gift to the church. There is so much we haven’t yet uncovered that is still in the canon we have, how could we handle anything new being added in? Then, he do we determine what is revelation for public use or not? Instead of having a set standard to judge revelation by, now we have to fully investigate every joseph smith claim that God revealed that no religion is right, and commanded that he start a new one. We have to investigate every claim that the third secret of fatima was really that Mary is really God, the third person of the trinity, the Holy Spirit.

But from the gift of the canon, and public revelation bing closed, we do not have to tear ourselves apart trying to figure out what is true and what isn’t. We already have the spirit, who has guided us to all truth.

Josh

 

[mlchance]

cheddarsox:

I guess I am surprised that in two millenia God had nothing new to say…

God says things to us all the time through the Magesterium. Here’s a start. Paragraph 14 is of especial importance, and has been ignored for too long by too many, including many who are Catholic. Numerous other examples could be provided.

– Mark L. Chance.

 

[Verbum]

Hi Cheddar__,

Your question implies that the Bible was put together by the Church. The Church received the Bible from God. It took a while to discern the various books. But once this was done, it was over.

Jesus is the Word. All that needs to be revealed was revealed through his life and sayings. This was communicated to us through his disciples. When they were gone, the message was wholly delivered.

Verbum