If the cannon of the NT were defined today

what books would you add from historical books around the early church era.

I wouldn't add any.

FYI, the word is "canon", a body of literature.

A "cannon" is a big gun that uses explosives to shoot a projectile.

Many foreign people have seen the bible as a weapon and they where right.

He's bringing out his big guns to undermine the true canon.

Of course it is a weapon. An offensive weapon. The Sword of the Spirit. The Word of God. Designed to cut through all the Satanic lies and deception, and bring God's truth and the true Gospel to mankind. As to the canon, it must remain as it is, and any tampering with it means that Satan is up to his mischief.

something like no weapon forge shall prosper

except 4 like putting it in english?

What exactly is that supposed to mean?

well um u have the Dynamic equivalent that is the spirit then u have all the written text. all them r imperfect academic wise.

The canon of the New Testament is the sum total of the 27 books of the NT which are regarded as divinely inspired. Nothing may be added to that. You are talking about translation.

The canon has already been tampered with. The book of Enoch was considered scripture for hundreds of years, it is referred to in the new testament and there are four fragments of it found in the dead sea scrolls.

If it is not scripture we do not know very much about demons, why the flood, or angels.

um duh
Noah means rest Lamech was his dad he predicted that noah would take the curse away from the land.the water baptism of earth.we know from sos that many waters cannot drown love nor can the floods drown it.the 8 people = Circumcisiom. We know the demons did not die.we now that jesus was the arck angle..the love boat.We also that we also drown in the water but where raised in christ

I believe that the total is 22 books of the NT.

What you are suggesting people here do is a SIN! What professed believer would try to lead other believers into WILFULL SIN? No kind of believer in Jesus that I know of.....

Revelation, Chapter 22

18For 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:


19And 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.


Sooner or later you need to reveal your true purpose for being here on CC

On what basis?

1. Matthew
2. Mark
3. Luke
4. John
5. Acts
6. Romans
7. 1 Corinthians
8. 2 Corinthians
9. Galatians
10. Ephesians
11. Philippians
12. Colossians
13. 1 Thessalonians
14. 2 Thessalonians
15. 1 Timothy
16. 2 Timothy
17. Titus
18. Philemon
19. Hebrews
20. James
21. 1 Peter
22. 2 Peter
23. 1 John
24. 2 John
25. 3 John
26. Jude
27. Revelation

Yes it is rather strange that any Christian would seek to redefine the NT canon or even the OT canon. Apocryphal books were rejected because they were not divinely inspired. And God has had His hand over His written Word.

But ir was never a part of the Tanakh (Hebrew Bible). Even before the time of Christ, the Tanakh had only 24 books, and Christ put His stamp of approval on that number by defining the OT as (1) The Law (Torah) -- 5 books, (2) The Prophets (Neviim) -- 8 books, and (3) The Psalms (Ketuvim) -- 11 books (because this section called "The Writings" begins with the book of Psalms). There was no place for Enoch in this list.

For the NT, Peter calls all of Paul's epistles Scripture. Peter calls his own epistles "a more sure word of prophecy". Luke says that his Gospel was "from above" and Paul quotes it as Scripture. Revelation plainly tells it that it was from God the Father, given to God the Son, who then had it conveyed to John by an angel. John also testifies that his testimony is true and sure (regarding his other writings). And all the other books have indications that they are also from above.

So we're talking about writings inspired through the Holy Spirit to meet the qualification for Biblical inclusion?

The real question, in my opinion, is does God still send messages to prophets in the present day? If the answer is yes then it's possible that any Christian capable of receiving a divine message from God could add their own writings to the Biblical canon.

Apparently, no basis. My bad.