In your article last month, you said: “The best way to understand [Revelation 22:18-19] is to believe that it was in reference specifically to the Book of Revelation.” I agree with this too. But the thing is, if someone writes a book which is consistent with the Bible, can it be considered as Scripture or be added to the Bible?
Mormons, I believe, added a new set of books to the Bible. But these additions contained inconsistencies, so we can say for sure that they are not inspired by God.
But if I write a book which is consistent with the Bible, what stops it from being added to the canon? Is there a verse that states the Bible is complete and that no more books or scriptures can be added to it?
Today, we do not believe that anything should be added to the Bible because the Bible itself contains the full revelation of Jesus Christ. The Bible tells us about the creation, the fall, the birth of Christ, the death and resurrection of Christ, and it includes information about the physical return of Christ and the initiation of the eternal state. In other words, the Bible contains the entire plan of God to redeem people. There is no need to add additional revelation because the whole story is already contained in Scripture.
With that being said, the prophets wrote the Old Testament and the apostles primarily wrote the New Testament. All the books with attributed authors in the New Testament are by people who either saw the resurrected Christ or worked with someone who had (for example, Mark was a missionary who worked with Paul and Peter).
Even in the first century, within 30 years of the death and resurrection of Christ, other leaders in the church were writing manuscripts for the church, but their works were not considered inspired. The Bible contains the exact Word of God. Today, I may say many things that are in agreement with the Bible. But I am not an apostle and I do not consider my words to be the exact words of God. The apostles functioned as the New Testament iteration of the Old Testament prophets. God spoke through them to complete his Revelation. Church history suggests that after the death of the apostles, no one else considered their writings to be equal with Scripture.
Even in the first century, within 30 years of the resurrection of Christ, other leaders in the church were writing manuscripts for the church, but their works were not considered inspired
So, while there is no verse that states that there will be no new Revelation added to Scripture, the need for additional Scripture is just not there. The theological principles laid out throughout the Bible give us everything we need to know to deal with current issues in various cultures, and the Bible explains everything we need to know about salvation, sin, judgment and the way in which God will make all things new.
If you write a book that is consistent with the Bible, then you are doing a good job explaining Christian faith and living under the authority of the Scriptures, but there would be no reason to add your words to the Bible because the Bible would already contain everything consistent with it. If you are writing new revelation, this would be concerning, as the Word of God already contains all we need to understand redemption.
Again, even the leaders of the early church did not see their own writings as equal with those of the apostles. The same can be said for orthodox believers throughout history. Today, we should always strive to have our words be consistent with the overall message of the Bible, but that in no way makes our words equal in authority with the words of the apostles or the prophets. Instead, our consistency shows that we have accepted the true teachings of the apostles and prophets and informs the church that we hold true Christian beliefs.
A weekly brief of new resources and Scripture-based insights from our editorial team.