Is there any new scriptures?

[EnemyofEdom]

Is there any new/newer scriptures since the canonization of the bible? Take the Book of Mormon for example. This is false because Joseph Smith claims the golden plates came from Native Americans were are a lost tribe of Israel. This automatically proves it to be false. But is there any new scriptures that could be inspired by Yahweh and could be included in an updated bible?

[Kentucky]

Is there any new/newer scriptures since the canonization of the bible? Take the Book of Mormon for example. This is false because Joseph Smith claims the golden plates came from Native Americans were are a lost tribe of Israel. This automatically proves it to be false. But is there any new scriptures that could be inspired by Yahweh and could be included in an updated bible?

Well, you have to consider who did the canonizing, who did the translations from 10,000 or so manuscripts and how far back or how recently you consider what's new. The Dead Sea Scrolls comes to mind. There are always hucksters passing off papyri or metalic plates or animal skins that purport to be "Scripture," which by the way should be distinguished as the Old Testament. In my humble opinion, I hope that what we've got is it and that God would not withhold His Word, when it's already enough to try and figure out. Nefarious authors like Dan Brown (The DaVinci Code) try to put doubts in people's mind that there is something missing, and would forever change the persona of Christ. Therefore, it behooves us to be ever vigilante with something "new." It's enough to have to deal with many coming in His name, saying they are Christ.

Mark

[Filidh]

not sure if this is what you're talking about, but i hold enoch, the wisdom of solomon, maccabbees, and certain other socalled apocryphal books to be canon.

but these things support the scripts, rather than undermine them. there's nothing that's able to be found that's able to change the message of the holy scripts, because father said that his word would be preserved.

[EnemyofEdom]

not sure if this is what you're talking about, but i hold enoch, the wisdom of solomon, maccabbees, and certain other socalled apocryphal books to be canon.

but these things support the scripts, rather than undermine them. there's nothing that's able to be found that's able to change the message of the holy scripts, because father said that his word would be preserved.

What I mean is modern day texts. Is the word complete and already written and there is nothing to be added or is there the possibility someone divinely inspired to come along and release a new scripture?

[Filidh]

in that case, i believe the answer is 'kind of'. such a script would need to be tested thoroly, that it might be proven to support the rest of the holy scripts. and even then, such a script must be held in accordance with and supportive of the holy scripts and never above them. cuz a little yeast yeastens the whole breadloaf, so too might falseteachings slip in and catch us at unawares if we're not careful. as such, we should always research such things fully and accept errors if they appear in them.

for example, the book "the sickness unto death" by soren kierkegaard had its role as a holy script that won over many who were given to false philosophies of the time. also, the book "for my legionnaires" by corneliu codreanu i believe to be inspired by the anointed one, but it itself had certain errors regardless.

i'm open to correction if others hold me to be in error in this regard.

edit: mark's right. nothing adds or takes away from the book of life.

it is already written, and if a new script is written that's christ-inspired, then it must only lead back to the book of life and exalt it, humbling itself in the process.

using an example above, "for my legionnaires" by codreanu has much that's able to guide us in the way of establishing an anointed assembly, but it still must be held rigorously to the rest of the holy scripts, and not added into them, but simply be a supportive pillar of them.

[Kentucky]

What I mean is modern day texts. Is the word complete and already written and there is nothing to be added or is there the possibility someone divinely inspired to come along and release a new scripture?

Now we're getting closer to the heart of your question and both Testaments answer the question.

"For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, 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 prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book." Rev. 22:18-19

"And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book" Deut. 4:2

"What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it" Deut. 12:32

It's interesting to note that the jew's bible, the talmud, does everything to circumvent Scriptures by adding and detracting and has hyphenated itself to Christianity in the oxymoron of judeo-Christianity.

I ask you this: what more could we White Christians want from the Word of God that is not already stated? By that, I don't mean clarification of the deeper things of God. Why? Because it forces the student to read and study and to learn prayerfully.

"It is the glory of God to conceal a thing; but the honor of kings to search out a matter" Prov. 25:2.

By the same token, I am of the opinion that all prophecy has already been given, therefore there are no more prophets in the sense of predicting the future. I base this on:

"Love never fails. But whether interpretations of prophecy, they shall be abolished; or languages, they shall be brought to an end; or knowledge, it will come to an end" I Cor. 13:8 So if there were some new discovery that had prophetic implications not already stated in the Word, it would contradict the aforementioned passage.

Mark

[EnemyofEdom]

"For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, 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 prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book." Rev. 22:18-19

"And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book" Deut. 4:2

"What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it" Deut. 12:32

I thought these meant adding to those specific books? We should not add or remove from the books Revelations and Deuteronomy and all other books already written because what we call the bible is a collection of different books.

This is not saying there will not be any completely new books. For example, William Fink receives prophecies from Yahweh and writes them down here. The prophecies become fulfilled proving he wasn't full of it. Could that not be a new addition to the body of Christian works?

[Kentucky]

I thought these meant adding to those specific books? We should not add or remove from the books Revelations and Deuteronomy and all other books already written because what we call the bible is a collection of different books.

Which is it? Those two books or all 66 volumes? Is there something missing in your estimation that is creating a vacuum that Christianity needs to adapt?

This is not saying there will not be any completely new books. For example, William Fink receives prophecies from Yahweh and writes them down here. The prophecies become fulfilled proving he wasn't full of it. Could that not be a new addition to the body of Christian works?

"The testimony of Jesus is the spirit of interpreting prophecy" Rev. 19:10. This would suggest that the prophecy is a given and that it then is a matter of interpretation, not that something new is discovered.

Mark

[Filidh]

mark, also remember that the 66 books of protestant canon aren't 'the bible'. much of the apocrypha, and also enoch, are canonical to we anointed even if protestants or catholics don't hold them to be so. and some of what the protestants and catholics consider to be canon isn't so to us, for example esther.

what is our bible?
http://christogenea.org/content/what-bi ... 07-24-2010

[EnemyofEdom]

Which is it? Those two books or all 66 volumes? Is there something missing in your estimation that is creating a vacuum that Christianity needs to adapt?

All books that are already written shouldn't be added to or subtracted from. I believe that is what is meant. Example, the book of Revelations. No one is to add or remove from the book. The book is completed. But that doesn't mean there cannot be any new books written after Revelations. Revelations was estimated to be written in 95 AD. Since then, has there been any work that could be considered divinely inspired and could be added to the collection of books. Or is the book of Revelation the last book?