Is the Bible a living document that can be updated with new books?
The only updates we see to the Bible are translations that can vary widely. But as a practical matter the Bible has existed in its present state for hundreds of years or longer. Given that most of us are not shepards in Bronze Age Israel, should Christians add more stories to the book itself? There are whole portions of the Bible that have nothing to do with modern life, stoning adulterers and virgin checks to name a few. Some things are timeless like the many stories of Jesus’s love for us.
You might wonder why should anyone add stories about modern life to the Bible which is perfect as is. That is a valid concern. However remember that the Bible is a collection of books and not every book made the cut. Maybe there was a book of “Charlie” that was too boring to include at the time. Mayne there was a book before genesis that spoke of existence before existence. Maybe there was a book about life after the rapture. Or maybe a detailed book about Christian cuisine.
So should Christian’s update the Bible with more books addressing the issues of the last 1000 years? Should the Bible be updated to include relatable stories of the present world?
Board index ‹ Bible
Forum rules
This site is for dialogue, not diatribe. And, by the way, you have to be at least 13 years old to participate. Plus normal things: no judging, criticizing, name-calling, flaming, or bullying. No put-downs, etc. You know the drill.
This site is for dialogue, not diatribe. And, by the way, you have to be at least 13 years old to participate. Plus normal things: no judging, criticizing, name-calling, flaming, or bullying. No put-downs, etc. You know the drill.
2 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Re: Can the Bible be updated?
by jimwalton » Tue Sep 19, 2023 12:36 pm
No, the Bible cannot be "updated." The Old Testament canon was considered completed with the writings of Malachi and 1 & 2 Chronicles, in roughly 400 BC. Subsequent Jewish writings, such as the Maccabees and other (what are called) apocryphal books are not considered to be part of that canon. They are a separate collection.
The New Testament canon was considered complete by the end of the first century. One reason is that the NT books were only considered authorized if they were written by one of the apostles or someone who knew the apostles, and therefore had 1st or 2nd-hand information. Therefore it's impossible to add to the NT because it's impossible to meet that criteria.
In Revelation 22.18, John writes that no one should add to "this book." Some take that to mean the book of Revelation, but it's also true of the whole Bible. The revelation has been given, and the revelation has been completed, or closed. The words of God are not to be altered or added to.
> The only updates we see to the Bible are translations that can vary widely
These aren't really "updates." Translation is always a matter of compromise and interpretation. Reading a variety of translations often shows they are just different verbal ways of expressing the same thoughts.
> Given that most of us are not shepards in Bronze Age Israel, should Christians add more stories to the book itself?
No, we shouldn't add. The stories should stay the way they are. If we need to know more about the culture and setting of the stories, we should do research, not fabricate things to add in at our whim.
> There are whole portions of the Bible that have nothing to do with modern life, stoning adulterers and virgin checks to name a few.
True, but we can still study those portions for the message contained in them even if the specifics don't apply to us.
>remember that the Bible is a collection of books and not every book made the cut.
Every book that's in the Bible did indeed make the cut. They are there because they have authority.
> should Christian’s update the Bible with more books addressing the issues of the last 1000 years?
No, the Bible was not written to address cultural issues but rather to reveal God to us. The Bible was not written to address our questions about climate change, party politics, capitalism, evolutionary biology, nihilism, socialism, vegetarianism, and so on. It was not written to address the challenges of Hinduism, Buddhism, or Islam. We don't expect it to speak to all questions of philosophy, ethics, medicine, economics, history, or science.
It is not our place to update the Bible with our own thoughts. God gave the Bible to us, through human writers, to reveal Himself and His covenant to us. That's its purpose and where its authority lies.
> Should the Bible be updated to include relatable stories of the present world?
It's absolutely astounding how many of the Bible's stories are relatable in our present world. One could actually say it's supernatural.
The New Testament canon was considered complete by the end of the first century. One reason is that the NT books were only considered authorized if they were written by one of the apostles or someone who knew the apostles, and therefore had 1st or 2nd-hand information. Therefore it's impossible to add to the NT because it's impossible to meet that criteria.
In Revelation 22.18, John writes that no one should add to "this book." Some take that to mean the book of Revelation, but it's also true of the whole Bible. The revelation has been given, and the revelation has been completed, or closed. The words of God are not to be altered or added to.
> The only updates we see to the Bible are translations that can vary widely
These aren't really "updates." Translation is always a matter of compromise and interpretation. Reading a variety of translations often shows they are just different verbal ways of expressing the same thoughts.
> Given that most of us are not shepards in Bronze Age Israel, should Christians add more stories to the book itself?
No, we shouldn't add. The stories should stay the way they are. If we need to know more about the culture and setting of the stories, we should do research, not fabricate things to add in at our whim.
> There are whole portions of the Bible that have nothing to do with modern life, stoning adulterers and virgin checks to name a few.
True, but we can still study those portions for the message contained in them even if the specifics don't apply to us.
>remember that the Bible is a collection of books and not every book made the cut.
Every book that's in the Bible did indeed make the cut. They are there because they have authority.
> should Christian’s update the Bible with more books addressing the issues of the last 1000 years?
No, the Bible was not written to address cultural issues but rather to reveal God to us. The Bible was not written to address our questions about climate change, party politics, capitalism, evolutionary biology, nihilism, socialism, vegetarianism, and so on. It was not written to address the challenges of Hinduism, Buddhism, or Islam. We don't expect it to speak to all questions of philosophy, ethics, medicine, economics, history, or science.
It is not our place to update the Bible with our own thoughts. God gave the Bible to us, through human writers, to reveal Himself and His covenant to us. That's its purpose and where its authority lies.
> Should the Bible be updated to include relatable stories of the present world?
It's absolutely astounding how many of the Bible's stories are relatable in our present world. One could actually say it's supernatural.
Last bumped by Anonymous on Tue Sep 19, 2023 12:36 pm.
- jimwalton
- Site Admin
- Posts: 9107
- Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2012 2:28 pm
2 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests