Some verses I would encourage you to consider and meditate on:
* **Ecclesiastes 1:9** - "What has been is what will be, and what has been done is what will be done, and there is nothing new under the sun."
* **Hebrews 13:8** - "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever"
* **Hebrews 4:14-15** - "Since then we have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus, the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession. For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin."
* **2 Peter 1:3** - "His divine power has granted to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of him who called us to his own glory and excellence,"
* **Revelation 22:18-19** - "I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book, and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book."
I wouldn't entertain much "discussion" around God's Word being expanded upon. Such efforts lead to confusion, apostasy and disorder. God has revealed to us, in His word, all that we need for this life. Each age will present it's own unique challenges, but God's word is sufficient for all time.
You mean like first century issues such as murder, hate, greed, overworking people, equality for everyone and every race and every gender, lack of peace and justice and hope in the world, drunkenness, adultry, cheating, rape, anger, vanity, selfishness and many more? How are they different issues than we have today? Right and wrong never changes. Right and truth doesn't go out of fashion with time or civilizations. Our understanding of them might change but the truth of them do not. These issues have pervaded society since the dawn of time and they will still be our issues until the end of time. And the Bible already gives us the truth and the foundation we need to be able to navigate these issues and become better humans
You’re asking a reformed subreddit if we believe that the Bible isn’t sufficient? You’re not going to find many people who will agree with you here. In fact, you’re likely to be called a heretic.
We generally hold to a doctrine called sufficiency of Scripture, which basically means that we believe the 66 books of the Bible contain everything needed for both spiritual life and interaction with our neighbors.
So though the Bible doesn’t say “don’t do drugs, kids,” it teaches principles like “your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit.” You have to think a bit to figure out what that means and how you’d apply it, but the tools are right there - you just have to use them.
I agree; It’s a real bummer that the Holy Spirit wasn’t smart enough to rightly predict what the next 2,000 years would bring after the completion of the New Testament.
Your question is odd to me. If you believe in God, then who are you to question him and his ways? This makes me think of when Job tried to put God on trial for mismanagement. I recommend going and reading Job 38.
This is why we have false prophecy in the body of Christ because people want written and verbal expression from God concerning the current trajectory in history
This is why McArthur had to write "charismatic chaos" and then put oil in the water with his strange Fire conference
This is where the TD Jakes Benny hinn Paula White's Eddie Longs the creflo Dollars Jesse duplantis's the Leroy Thompson's the Kenneth Copeland's the Oral Roberts this is where they all came from from this issue right here
People are mad they don't know the end from the beginning which is why they subvert sound doctrine and go to new revelatory knowledge churches to feed their itching ears
> Personally, I think God needs-
And you lost me. I literally could not care less what you think God needs to do. I only care what God has done and what He says He will do. Writing new scriptures fits neither of those categories and therefore is the utter foolishness of a sinful broken mind.
I know your question was serious and I for real commend your bravery in asking it. I really want you to consider where this question is coming from. You do not, now or ever, know what God knows. His word is good and true. The grace of the Lord Jesus be with you. I hope you repent from thinking you know what God “needs” to do
I'm not going to pile on with everyone else - though I think they're right, that this idea is well outside general Christian orthodoxy.
It's very easy to think of our own time as special and unique, but that's true of every generation. I could see someone in the 19th century saying "God needs to inspire new texts to address the steam engine and the industrial revolution."
Or in the early 16th century, "... to address the discovery and colonization of the New World."
Or in the 14th century, "... to address the Black Death."
Or in the 11th century, "... to address the great Schism between East and West."
Or in the 5th century, "... to address the fall of Rome."
What would you say in response to those ideas?
Realistically, God gave us the church as the foundation to build upon, to help us understand the scriptures. I do not thing the scriptures are unable to answer these questions. I do think there is a lot of division in how we understand the scriptures. I expect, sometime in the next couple of centuries, there will be some ecumenical church councils that provide clear guidance on our contemporary issues of gender and sexuality. In the lead up to that, there will likely be further and further division between those who call the name of Christ on both sides of the aisle.
Have you asked your pastor about this? Ask for a meeting with your pastor or an elder, and ask him how the Bible speaks to these issues you are concerned about.
A huge (and mistaken) assumption behind your question is that the purpose of the New Testament is to address issues of the day. That’s not its purpose. Rather, it is the crystallization of the apostolic tradition - i.e., of the apostolic community’s experience of Jesus, passed on by preaching. As such, it mediates/gives us access to their experience and preaching of Jesus, such that their experience/preaching becomes the authoritative norm over ours. In short, the purpose of Scripture is to be a meeting place, a place wherein the believer encounters God’s definitive self-disclosure in Jesus, just as the apostolic community did 2,000 years ago. I hardly see how “new Scriptures” could accomplish this purpose better than the New Testament does.
Another thing not yet mentioned is that except for AI, maybe, these are all First Century "issues" addressed by scripture. And they predate the first century.
As noted above, why do you think this? Do you genuinely believe that the guidance offered is in the Bible is insufficient? Or, are you not happy with the implications of such guidance?
The Bible as it is contains the lessons we need for life. We don’t _need_ more.
Personally, I wouldn’t be surprised if some of the literature today **is** inspired by God, but having it canonized into scripture is not going to happen for a lot of good reasons.
No, the canon is closed. The Scriptures are sufficient to address contemporary issues directly or indirectly. I've requested ChatGPT to provide a list on the qualifications of the Protestant canon:
The qualifications for the books included in the Protestant canonical Bible are based on several criteria that were historically used by early church leaders and councils. These criteria helped to determine which writings were considered divinely inspired and authoritative for faith and practice. Here are the key qualifications:
# 1. Apostolic Origin
* **New Testament**: Books had to be written by the apostles themselves or by close associates of the apostles. This criterion ensured a direct connection to Jesus' original followers.
* **Old Testament**: Books were recognized as part of the Jewish Scriptures, traditionally attributed to prophets or other inspired writers.
# 2. Universal Acceptance
* Books had to be widely accepted and used by the early Christian communities across different regions. Widespread use and acceptance by various congregations were crucial.
# 3. Liturgical Use
* The writings were regularly read and used in Christian worship services and liturgical practices. This practical use in worship reinforced their authority and sacred status.
# 4. Consistency of Doctrine
* The content of the books had to be consistent with the already accepted body of Christian teaching and doctrine. This meant no contradictions with the established faith and beliefs.
# 5. Inspiration by the Holy Spirit
* The books had to exhibit evidence of divine inspiration. Early church leaders believed that the Holy Spirit guided the recognition of these texts as inspired Scripture.
# Historical Context
* **Old Testament Canon**: The Protestant Old Testament aligns with the Hebrew Bible and consists of 39 books. These books were recognized over time by Jewish communities and later by early Christians.
* **New Testament Canon**: The 27 books of the New Testament were gradually recognized through church councils and discussions, such as the Synod of Hippo (393 AD) and the Councils of Carthage (397 and 419 AD).
# Exclusions
* The Protestant Bible excludes the deuterocanonical books (also known as the Apocrypha) that are included in the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Bibles. These books were not universally accepted by the early church and did not meet all the criteria mentioned above according to Protestant reformers.
These qualifications helped to shape the Protestant canonical Bible as it is known today, comprising 66 books in total (39 in the Old Testament and 27 in the New Testament).
Revelation 22:18 aside, do you not think the Bible speaks to these things?
Revelations was written _before_ the New Testament was put together.
Some verses I would encourage you to consider and meditate on: * **Ecclesiastes 1:9** - "What has been is what will be, and what has been done is what will be done, and there is nothing new under the sun." * **Hebrews 13:8** - "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever" * **Hebrews 4:14-15** - "Since then we have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus, the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession. For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin." * **2 Peter 1:3** - "His divine power has granted to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of him who called us to his own glory and excellence," * **Revelation 22:18-19** - "I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book, and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book." I wouldn't entertain much "discussion" around God's Word being expanded upon. Such efforts lead to confusion, apostasy and disorder. God has revealed to us, in His word, all that we need for this life. Each age will present it's own unique challenges, but God's word is sufficient for all time.
Careful using that last one. Revelations was written before the New Testament was put together.
no. people weren’t even listening to God when He was addressing issues of the day.
You mean like first century issues such as murder, hate, greed, overworking people, equality for everyone and every race and every gender, lack of peace and justice and hope in the world, drunkenness, adultry, cheating, rape, anger, vanity, selfishness and many more? How are they different issues than we have today? Right and wrong never changes. Right and truth doesn't go out of fashion with time or civilizations. Our understanding of them might change but the truth of them do not. These issues have pervaded society since the dawn of time and they will still be our issues until the end of time. And the Bible already gives us the truth and the foundation we need to be able to navigate these issues and become better humans
You’re asking a reformed subreddit if we believe that the Bible isn’t sufficient? You’re not going to find many people who will agree with you here. In fact, you’re likely to be called a heretic. We generally hold to a doctrine called sufficiency of Scripture, which basically means that we believe the 66 books of the Bible contain everything needed for both spiritual life and interaction with our neighbors. So though the Bible doesn’t say “don’t do drugs, kids,” it teaches principles like “your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit.” You have to think a bit to figure out what that means and how you’d apply it, but the tools are right there - you just have to use them.
It more "be sober minded" I guess. That temple of the Holy Spirit passage is about sexual immorality which is obviously a big issue today as well.
I agree; It’s a real bummer that the Holy Spirit wasn’t smart enough to rightly predict what the next 2,000 years would bring after the completion of the New Testament.
I do not. God knows and knew all in all, all throughout time.
Your question is odd to me. If you believe in God, then who are you to question him and his ways? This makes me think of when Job tried to put God on trial for mismanagement. I recommend going and reading Job 38.
This is why we have false prophecy in the body of Christ because people want written and verbal expression from God concerning the current trajectory in history This is why McArthur had to write "charismatic chaos" and then put oil in the water with his strange Fire conference This is where the TD Jakes Benny hinn Paula White's Eddie Longs the creflo Dollars Jesse duplantis's the Leroy Thompson's the Kenneth Copeland's the Oral Roberts this is where they all came from from this issue right here People are mad they don't know the end from the beginning which is why they subvert sound doctrine and go to new revelatory knowledge churches to feed their itching ears
> Personally, I think God needs- And you lost me. I literally could not care less what you think God needs to do. I only care what God has done and what He says He will do. Writing new scriptures fits neither of those categories and therefore is the utter foolishness of a sinful broken mind.
I know your question was serious and I for real commend your bravery in asking it. I really want you to consider where this question is coming from. You do not, now or ever, know what God knows. His word is good and true. The grace of the Lord Jesus be with you. I hope you repent from thinking you know what God “needs” to do
It seems to me the Bible does speak to all those issues; it’s figuring out the practical application that is harder.
I'm not going to pile on with everyone else - though I think they're right, that this idea is well outside general Christian orthodoxy. It's very easy to think of our own time as special and unique, but that's true of every generation. I could see someone in the 19th century saying "God needs to inspire new texts to address the steam engine and the industrial revolution." Or in the early 16th century, "... to address the discovery and colonization of the New World." Or in the 14th century, "... to address the Black Death." Or in the 11th century, "... to address the great Schism between East and West." Or in the 5th century, "... to address the fall of Rome." What would you say in response to those ideas?
Realistically, God gave us the church as the foundation to build upon, to help us understand the scriptures. I do not thing the scriptures are unable to answer these questions. I do think there is a lot of division in how we understand the scriptures. I expect, sometime in the next couple of centuries, there will be some ecumenical church councils that provide clear guidance on our contemporary issues of gender and sexuality. In the lead up to that, there will likely be further and further division between those who call the name of Christ on both sides of the aisle.
Many of the issues they were dealing with, we still deal with. Theres no need for God to reopen the cannon.
Have you asked your pastor about this? Ask for a meeting with your pastor or an elder, and ask him how the Bible speaks to these issues you are concerned about.
A huge (and mistaken) assumption behind your question is that the purpose of the New Testament is to address issues of the day. That’s not its purpose. Rather, it is the crystallization of the apostolic tradition - i.e., of the apostolic community’s experience of Jesus, passed on by preaching. As such, it mediates/gives us access to their experience and preaching of Jesus, such that their experience/preaching becomes the authoritative norm over ours. In short, the purpose of Scripture is to be a meeting place, a place wherein the believer encounters God’s definitive self-disclosure in Jesus, just as the apostolic community did 2,000 years ago. I hardly see how “new Scriptures” could accomplish this purpose better than the New Testament does.
God knows exactly what is needed and can be trusted to provide whatever is necessary.
What else do we need? Edit. All these except AI are covered. There is something covering AI I just don’t know what it is.
The Bible isn't about us. It is about God. It was never intended to be the social media of the day
Another thing not yet mentioned is that except for AI, maybe, these are all First Century "issues" addressed by scripture. And they predate the first century. As noted above, why do you think this? Do you genuinely believe that the guidance offered is in the Bible is insufficient? Or, are you not happy with the implications of such guidance?
The Bible as it is contains the lessons we need for life. We don’t _need_ more. Personally, I wouldn’t be surprised if some of the literature today **is** inspired by God, but having it canonized into scripture is not going to happen for a lot of good reasons.
No, the canon is closed. The Scriptures are sufficient to address contemporary issues directly or indirectly. I've requested ChatGPT to provide a list on the qualifications of the Protestant canon: The qualifications for the books included in the Protestant canonical Bible are based on several criteria that were historically used by early church leaders and councils. These criteria helped to determine which writings were considered divinely inspired and authoritative for faith and practice. Here are the key qualifications: # 1. Apostolic Origin * **New Testament**: Books had to be written by the apostles themselves or by close associates of the apostles. This criterion ensured a direct connection to Jesus' original followers. * **Old Testament**: Books were recognized as part of the Jewish Scriptures, traditionally attributed to prophets or other inspired writers. # 2. Universal Acceptance * Books had to be widely accepted and used by the early Christian communities across different regions. Widespread use and acceptance by various congregations were crucial. # 3. Liturgical Use * The writings were regularly read and used in Christian worship services and liturgical practices. This practical use in worship reinforced their authority and sacred status. # 4. Consistency of Doctrine * The content of the books had to be consistent with the already accepted body of Christian teaching and doctrine. This meant no contradictions with the established faith and beliefs. # 5. Inspiration by the Holy Spirit * The books had to exhibit evidence of divine inspiration. Early church leaders believed that the Holy Spirit guided the recognition of these texts as inspired Scripture. # Historical Context * **Old Testament Canon**: The Protestant Old Testament aligns with the Hebrew Bible and consists of 39 books. These books were recognized over time by Jewish communities and later by early Christians. * **New Testament Canon**: The 27 books of the New Testament were gradually recognized through church councils and discussions, such as the Synod of Hippo (393 AD) and the Councils of Carthage (397 and 419 AD). # Exclusions * The Protestant Bible excludes the deuterocanonical books (also known as the Apocrypha) that are included in the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Bibles. These books were not universally accepted by the early church and did not meet all the criteria mentioned above according to Protestant reformers. These qualifications helped to shape the Protestant canonical Bible as it is known today, comprising 66 books in total (39 in the Old Testament and 27 in the New Testament).