A Final Summary for this topic:
It is true that the Latter Day Saints have an expanded canon of scripture. But the Christian canon of scripture was not closed either by biblical or apostolic declaration, nor were its contents fixed or agreed upon in the apostolic period. The perception that the canon was closed grew up in later periods. No single canon of scripture, or even of the New Testament books has ever been agreed upon by all Christian denominations. When church level reveleation ceased after the death of the Apostles (the revelation authorized to define Christian church wide doctrines), the church was forced to draw one of two conclusions:
1. Revelation ceased because God had said everything He wanted to say, and the church didn't need any more revelation; or
2. Revelation ceased because there were no more Apostles and prophets to recieve it, and the church was lacking one of its necessary components.
Traditional Christians accept the former, Latter Day Christians (Saints) accept the latter.
News Item: The Bible as we know it in the modern period is a product of the Christian church, rather than the other way around.
Since it is clear that there were Christians before the New Testament was written, it cannot be maintained that the Bible is what makes one a Christian.
Latter Day Saints reject this and all other enthusiastic claims ABOUT the Bible that cannot be found in the Bible.
If the modern churches can strongly disagree among themselves as to what the canon of Christian scripture is, and yet continue to accept each other (be reasonably tolerant of each other), then it is logically inconsistent and seriously unfair to deny the Mormons the same privilege..............unless of course there is someone in Blogstream that has some novel anti-Mormon ideas.
For the most part, I have been overjoyed at the real tolerance and love witnessed here by people of broad religions backgrounds. It has been heartwarming. Thank you for your support.
(The tumbling house photo was taken by my husband, Gecko in eastern Colorado when we lived there. My metaphor for the subject at hand, it sits alone without maintenance buffeted by the prairie winds, the summer heat and the winter snow drifts. Over time it has been left to the elements without care. No improvements brings us to a point where the past takes on a brighter glow than the present.)
Modern Christians DO NOT disagree (weakly or strongly) as to what the canon of Scripture is.
There may be disagreements about who wrote what and when and to whom, but the agreement about what books constitute the Bible have not been debated for over 1,000 years.
ron
Even if your assertion of 1,000 years were accurate, we're into the second millennium of Christianity. That debate continued for half its existence doesn't speak well for one faith does it?
I find it fascinating that Christians maintain that the canon is closed even though that canon prophesies of two more prophets who will appear in Jerusalem and preach for over 2 years. When that time comes, how will the Christian world go about adding their prophecies to the canon?
FABRICATION, Azron. It is a matter of history, that among Protestants Martin Luther suggested that the New Testament books were of varying worth and divided them up into three separate ranks. In the prefaces of his early editions of the New Testament Luther denied that the lowest rank (Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation) belonged among the "true and noblest books of the New Testament," and went so far as to call the Epistle of James "a letter of straw". That was less than five centuries ago. He complained that Hebrews contradicted Paul by teaching that there was no repentance after baptism, that James contradicted Paul in teaching justification by works, and that Revelation dealt with material inappropriate for an Apostle. Sounds like dispute of the first level to me.
Other respected theologians followed Luther in his views. John Oecolampadius, a Reformation preacher at Basle wrote "we do not consider the [book of] Revelation, together with James and Jude, and 2 Peter and the last two Epistles of John, to be on par with the rest [of the New Testament]."
As stated by Alma above, in the interests of Christian unity Protestants and Catholics have "agreed to disagree" among themselves on the issue of Canon. Thomisticguy's coziness with Catholicism follows a new "don't ask - don't tell" Blogstream doctrine when rubbing shoulders with the Catholic Peter at his blog.
Yet all remain Christians to one another, to all of you. You are in disquise on this issue. All of you are.
Were you unaware of Luther's opinions? It would seem.
It is a fair thing to ask yourself, where else have I been misled?
As to your points about Martin Luther and the Bible. All of these arguments are meaningless. Martin Luther had his opinions of various books of the Bible and their value for Christian theology and living. However, he never published a Bible with any of the books deleted from it (even though his first edition had the Epistle of James placed after the book of Revelation).
You say there are people who don't think that the Book of Revelation shouldn't belong in the Bible. I have never seen a Bible published without the Book of Revelation - so apparently, those who don't believe that the Book of Revelation shouldn't be in the Bible don't publish a Bible missing the book of Revelation.
People can have all kinds of arguments with the Bible but that doesn't change the fact that for over1,500 years the Bible we hold in our hands is the same one held by all those people.
Opinions about various Scriptures don't discount the canon of Scripture.
If you believe in the face of recorded history that the Bible has remained the same, you better do more than speak to the margins of the issue.
Apart from what you might excuse of Luther......There is STILL no single Christian canon or Bible. Protestants and Catholics disagree on the "deuterocanonical books" or what you call the "Apochrypha" as scripture. The books in dispute are:
Tobit
Judith
the Wisdom of Solomon
Ecclesiasticus or Ben Sirach
Baruch
Letter of Jeremiah
1 Maccaabbees
2 Maccabees
Additions to Esther
Additions to Danial whcih include the Prayer of Azariah, the Song of Three Young Men, Susanna and the Elders, and Bel and the Dragon
These books were in use beginning in the 2nd century and remain in use now in the 21st century. They have stood longer than the canon you attest to has stood.
The best way to verify all of this is simply stroll on into the Christian church that identifies itself as Catholic and check it out.
Otherwise you need to identify the Catholic Church as nonChristian for not holding to your competing canon.
I am moving on with my life and shaking the dust off my feet.