Ben used to work with a Methodist pastor who thought it would be good if the Christian Church could add to the scriptures over time. As his nomination from the 20th C was "Letter From Birmingham Jail," I think he has effectively illustrated what can go wrong with such things, as the MLK essay is a political document that draws from scriptural ideas. Not the same thing, Binky.
The Roman Catholics have something a bit like adding to scripture in the Church Fathers and some of the great lights in Church history; the Episcopalians have "tradition" in their three-legged stool; the Methodists similarly have their quadrilateral. There have been Calvinists who have urged greater attention to Calvin's explanation of the Scriptures than to the Bible itself (too many Puritans in that group), and all groups can get overfond of their Small Catechism, or the volumes of Ellen G. White, or whatever. "Our faith is built on nothing less, than Scofield's Notes and Scripture Press."
Here is my nomination from the 20th C, The Weight of Glory, a sermon delivered by CS Lewis in 1941. Scroll down to page 13. See if that works.
There is a YouTube audio version
3 comments:
Link doesn't work.. I'll try and figure it out.
The apostle John had a thing or two to say about trying to add to the Scriptures without divine authorization.
To be clear, I don't think as a practical matter it can be done, and perhaps never could after the canon was closed in the 300s. Too much can go wrong.
However, in the Revelation to John God warns not to add or subtract from the prophecy. He would not have recognised the NT as scripture then, and we are still arguing about what belongs in the OT. There are Apocryphas within Apocryphas.
Post a Comment