In part one, I discussed the Biblical canon and debated along the lines of if the Biblical Canon was closed. This time will be a bit different. I was in a few discussions before and have heard what they teach in many churches and what they teach in many seminary schools: "The Bible canon is 66 books and the books are sealed, with no new revelation to come." Where did we come up with the teaching that there are only 66 books within GOD's Word?

The Church has been physically divided by man's differences, and have fallen into the following categories with the following Biblical Canon:

Protestant Churches: 66 books
Lutheran Churches: 66 books (however, Martin Luther made an attempt to remove the books of Hebrews, James, Jude and Revelation from the canon)
The Roman Catholic Church, & Eastern Catholic Churches: standard 66 plus the deuterocanonical books
Ethiopic Churches: 81 books (contains Enoch, Jubilees, and three books of the Meqabyan)

...and the list goes on....

Full dogmatic articulations and the closing of the Church Canons were not made until the Council of Trent of 1546 for Roman Catholicism, the Thirty-Nine Articles of 1563 for the Church of England, the Westminster Confession of Faith of 1647 for British Calvinism, and the Synod of Jerusalem of 1672 for the Greek Orthodox.Is it biblical, traditional, or just an assumption? Is it accurate or deceiving?

I guess my question is this: Who decided your Bible's number of books, and was GOD involved in this?

Views: 143

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I have PROOF that JESUS quoted the book of Enoch right here for you and anyone else to read!

As for the early Church Fathers, they weren't hesitant of reading and teaching from it at all. "The Book of Enoch was extant centuries before the birth of Christ and yet is considered by many to be more Christian in its theology than Jewish. It was considered scripture by many early Christians. The earliest literature of the so-called "Church Fathers" is filled with references to this mysterious book. The early second century "Epistle of Barnabus" makes much use of the Book of Enoch. Second and Third Century "Church Fathers" like Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Origin and Clement of Alexandria all make use of the Book of Enoch. Tertullian (160-230 C.E) even called the Book of Enoch "Holy Scripture". The Ethiopic Church even added the Book of Enoch to its official canon. It was widely known and read the first three centuries after Christ. This and many other books became discredited after the Council of Laodicea (about 363-364 A.D.). And being under ban of the authorities, afterwards it gradually passed out of circulation."

(a quote from

If Enoch is strange to you, then Isaiah should be just as strange, as well as Daniel, Jeremiah, Zechariah, Ezekiel, Jude, and the book of Revelation. If the apostles found it profitable to read, then why consider it strange? The only reason why it would be strange is simply because you aren't used to reading it. There is no contradiction of other scriptures found within the Book of Enoch whatsoever, NONE.
No Enoch is strange to me buth the books of the OT you quoted are not.
You can go ahead and read Enoch as if it were the Word of God...but no thank you - I bow out.
I cant play that game.
He is right Newview, the Bible does reference the book of Enoch, but if you are unlearned of the knowledge of the purpose of man and his salvation, then I would not recomend reading it because the Lord can put a strong delusion on you if you are unlearned and of unstable wrest, meaning you would believe a lie because you would make conclusions out of your own mind instead of what is written. There are also other books in the Apocrypha that are worth reading. I would recommend reading the books of Eden. Here is a link to an online version.
Brutha Hez---you are right it ain't for everybody & i agree ,with this "everything we need to get salvation is in the 66 books" of what we've come to know as the Holy Bible........
I agree with Newview, and Brutha Pharoah. All we need is the Bible.
Consider this question people:

If all we need was the 66 books of the Bible that we currently possess, then why did GOD give Enoch his revelations in the first place?

Hezekiah, there is one part that I disagree with you on: if one is seeking truth with a sincere heart, and truly seeking the true and living GOD and His only begotten Son, I don't believe that GOD will send a spirit of delusion. That would contradict His ways and purpose altogether.
It is my understanding that the entire Bible, as it is, points to Jesus as our Savior.

Although I have not read any of the other books mentioned, do any of them point to Jesus?

Wasn't the agreed upon canonization of the 66 books to show the world God's plan and purpose of salvation?

My reason for asking these questions is because, as it stands now, we do not all agree on the interpretation of all scriptures for one reason or another. Mankind has this need to seek deeper knowledge, yet overlooking vital knowledge that's right in front of his/her face. In other words, if the other books describe various events that took place, but these events do not point towards Jesus as our Savior, we may get too caught up with these other events and lose focus.

Think about it. There are the evolutionists who do not believe the Creation story in the Bible. God will only reveal knowledge and understanding as He sees fit. This is why our faith and trust in Him is vitally important. If God wanted mankind to know the details of how He created heaven and earth and all living creatures, wouldn't He have given it to us?
"It is my understanding that the entire Bible, as it is, points to Jesus as our Savior. Although I have not read any of the other books mentioned, do any of them point to Jesus?"

Yes they do actually. For example, the Book of Enoch was quoted by both OT and NT Apostles and Prophets, including JESUS Himself. The book of Enoch spoke of the Son of Man before any other book; the book of Enoch spoke of Heaven and Hell, and a coming Redeemer.

"Wasn't the agreed upon canonization of the 66 books to show the world God's plan and purpose of salvation?"

Yes, but so were the other Canons.
Many of the deutercanonical books confirm the original canon. For example, The Maccabees confirm Daniel 9 where the temple was desolated and sacrifices ceased for a period. The wisdom of Sirach gives insight on obedience to the Torah, etc, etc. So, the biblical canon is never closed.

Anyone ever heard of the Gospel of the Hebrews? It was written by Hebrews who kept Torah and believed in Messiah.
James, good observation on all points.........
James & Trevor,

So, there are other canons, such as the deutercanonical books . . .what are other cannons?
The Eastern Orthodox Church has a longer Canon of Scripture than us, with the Eritrean Orthodox Tewahedo Church having the longest of all (81 book I believe). The Roman Catholic Church has a longer Canon of Scripture than we Protestants as well. For example, we do not (as a whole) regard 1st and 2nd Maccabees as scripture, while the rest of the Body of Christ does. If I'm not mistaken, the ONLY ones who do not regard those books are Protestants.

Even though the Body of Christ is divided in this way, one thing stands firm: ALL of the Church worldwide regard no less than the 66 books that we Protestants regard. Consider that the bare minimum. Everyone regards the books we do, we just don't regard what they do.


© 2023   Created by Raliegh Jones Jr..   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service