Is the Bible open or closed?

A common question among those who call themselves “Christian” is whether the Bible is open or closed. Does the Bible contains all the truth that God wants us to know and follow, or do we need to look elsewhere as well? There are two facets to the question. The first concerns the books that are included in the Bible itself. Are they a fixed set for all time, or could more be added later? The second concerns how believers should respond to the Bible that they have at a given time. Should they simply quote the Bible to each other, or are there other teachings that they should consider alongside it?

The answer to both questions is the same: the Bible is open, not closed–but it contains clear guidelines that regulate the additional material that we should consider.

Is the canon open or closed?

Let’s start with the question of the canon,the set of books that the church accepts as the Word of God, the authoritative basis of its teaching. I discuss this question further in this post: https://cyber-chapel.org/blog/what-books-belong-in-the-bible/. For our purposes here, it’s helpful to recall one conclusion from that discussion: historically, the canon has grown.

• For Israel when it left Sinai, it consisted of the ten commandments.
• After the death of Moses, it consisted of the Pentateuch.
• At the time of the captivity, it included the historical books, part of the Psalms, and some of the prophets.
• By the time of our Lord, it consisted of the law, prophets, and writings, what all Christians would recognize as the Old Testament. By this point, numerous deuterocanonical books (Maccabees, Sirach, etc.) existed, but were not considered canonical.
• By the second century, as www.ntcanon.org shows, the Spirit had led the churches to concurrence on the books of our NT.

As the canon grew, each addition anticipated some divine intervention in history that God’s people should anticipate. When that event arrived, they should expect new revelation–and it came. The last such event was the coming of our Lord, leading to the NT canon. The next great event, anticipated in the NT, is the return of the Lord Jesus, and none of us will be surprised if during the 1000 years of his earthly rule, new revelation is circulated. Islam and Mormonism falter on precisely this point: they posit the emergence of new revelation that is not associated with a divine intervention clearly predicted in the prior canon.

So the canon isn’t closed once and for all, but it tells us how to recognize new revelation. And any new claim to revelation that does not satisfy this criterion, already specified in the existing canon, is to be rejected.

Should we supplement the Bible with other teaching?

The next question has to do with believers who live during a period between the great events that expand the canon, for example, the Jewish people living after the return from captivity and the coming of the Messiah, or the church between the first and second advent. Each of these groups recognizes a canon. Is that all that they need? Or should they pay attention to other teaching?

Both the OT and the NT recognize the importance of teaching that interprets and applies the scriptures. Let’s consider the OT first.

Throughout the OT, God sent prophets to call his people back to obedience to their scriptures. The people were expected to follow their teaching, even though their words were not incorporated into the canon:

Jer 24:6 And thou shalt say unto them, Thus saith the LORD; If ye will not hearken to me, to walk in my law, which I have set before you, 5 To hearken to the words of my servants the prophets, whom I sent unto you, both rising up early, and sending them, but ye have not hearkened; 6 Then will I make this house like Shiloh, and will make this city a curse to all the nations of the earth.

Jer 26:4-6

When the land was allotted to the various tribes, the tribe of Levi had no single territory, but was dispersed throughout the other tribes. One function of their dispersal was to make teaching available to the entire nation:

Mal 2:7 For the priest’s lips should keep knowledge, and they should seek the law at his mouth: for he is the messenger of the LORD of hosts

Mal 2:7

These prophets and priests were not absolute authorities. They were subject to being judged by the explicit statements of scripture:

Isa 8:19 And when they shall say unto you, Seek unto them that have familiar spirits, and unto wizards that peep, and that mutter: should not a people seek unto their God? for the living to the dead? 20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

Isa 8:19-20

Unfortunately, by the time of Christ, this supplementary teaching was no longer judged by the explicit words of the canon, but had become an authoritative lens through which the canonical books were interpreted, leading to our Savior’s criticism:

Matt 15:6 Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.

Matt 15:6

The New Testament also recognizes the need for teachers to help God’s people interpret and apply the inspired words of scripture:

Eph 4:11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; 12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:

Eph 4:11-12

As in the Old Testament, these teachers are subject to guidelines imposed by the text of canon, and must be judged by these guidelines. Five such guidelines deserve our attention: to be accepted, supplementary teaching must be grounded in the scriptures, consistent with them, open to review by other believers, subordinate to scripture, and validated by fruit. Let’s consider each of these.

1. Grounded in the scriptures: We are to reject any teaching that has no basis in what has been revealed. Authorized teaching explains what is in the Bible. It does not add material that is not mentioned there. This principle is the basis for Paul’s exhortation to Timothy::

1 Tim 1:3 As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they teach no other doctrine, 4 Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do.

4:7 But refuse profane and old wives’ fables, and exercise thyself rather unto godliness.

1 Tim 1:3-4; 4:7

Jewish tradition loved to embellish the scripture with stories about things not included in the Bible itself. Paul calls these “fables,” and condemns them. The teacher’s task is to explain what is written, not to extend it.

Paul states this principle concisely in a passage whose meaning is unfortunately obscured by translation:

1Co 4:6 And these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and to Apollos for your sakes; that ye might learn in us not to think of men above that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for one against another.

1 Cor 4:6

The words “of men” are not part of the Greek text. Paul presents himself and Apollos as examples of the principle, “Do not think beyond what is written.” A true teaching will base all of his teaching on the scripture, and not ask his hearers to accept doctrines that are not grounded on what the church accepts as its canon.

2. Consistency with the scriptures: Any teaching that contradicts the accepted scriptures is to be rejected. Isaiah 8:19-20, quoted earlier, makes this point. This principle is the reason the NT writers quote the OT so extensively: they are showing that the coming and work of the Messiah does not violate what God has already revealed, but is in fact consistent with it. For them, the answer to any error was drawn from the scriptures. So our Lord refuted the Sadducees, “who say that there is no resurrection” (Matt 22:23), with scripture:

Matt 22:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God. …. 31 But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying, 32 I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.

Matt 22:29, 31-32

3. Open to review by other believers: Any teaching about the Bible must always be open to question and correction by others. The church accepts the canon as authoritative, but everything that anyone says about the scripture must be open to challene. It is right that believers should hold their teachers in high regard:

1 Thes 5:12 And we beseech you, brethren, to know them which labour among you, and are over you in the Lord, and admonish you; 13 And to esteem them very highly in love for their work’s sake. And be at peace among yourselves.

1 Thes 5:12-13

This respect can be seductive to the teacher. It is all too easy for the flesh to feast on this respect, promote an attitude of superiority, and encourage people to accept what is taught without question. But human teaching must always be subject to respectful review and correction. Here are some examples.

Example 1: 1 Corinthians 14 gives a description of how the early church conducted its meetings.

1 Cor 14:26 How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying. … 29 Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.

1 Cor 14:26, 29

Anything said in the meeting was subject to review by others, who would “judge.”

Example 2: One matter that often exercised the early church was the degree to which the Old Testament dietary and calendrical laws should be followed. Congregations made up mainly of Jewish believers naturally continued the practices they had observed as believers before they heard the gospel, while these practices made no sense to Gentile converts. In mediating this dispute, Paul lays down an important principle:

Rom 14:4 Who art thou that judgest another man’s servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand. 5 One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind. … 12 So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God.

Rom 14:4-5, 12

Each believer is ultimately answerable directly to God, not to the church, and is responsible for individually reviewing any teaching that he receives.

Example 3: Luke records what may be the most striking example of this principle during Paul’s second missionary journey:

Acts 17:10 And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming thither went into the synagogue of the Jews. 11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

Acts 17:10-11

Paul’s mastery of the Old Testament would impress them. His age would inspire their respect, and they might recognize his background as a rabbi from Jerusalem, further enhancing his authority. That authority got him a respectful hearing, but did not exempt him from a direct review of what he said by the people themselves. Luke calls this attitude “noble,” recommending it to our practice today.

4. Subordinate to scripture: This principle is related to #2, “consistent with scripture,” but adds a subtle distinction. A clever person can always twist or “wrest” the scriptures to make them fit a preconceived pattern of thought. Peter warns against this practice:

2 Pet 3:16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

2 Pet 3:16

Thus our Lord had to warn against the teaching of the Jewish leaders of his day, in a passage we have already considered:

Matt 15:6 Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.

Matt 15:6

Teachers must always maintain a firm mental distinction between the authoritative scripture that they recognize, and the traditions that they and those with whom they fellowship commonly hold. They must constantly examine everything other than the text of scripture in the light of the Word of God. One of the main functions of the third principle, openness to review, is helping a teacher detect when an exposition of a passage is being driven more by a desire to justify a tradition of the church than by the plain meaning of the text.

5. Validated by fruit: The words a teacher speaks must always be evaluated in light of the life he lives. Our Lord laid down this principle in the Sermon on the Mount:Rejecting teaching that comes from teachers who do not themselves live godly lives: Matt 7:15-20; 1 Tim 6:5, even if those teachers show some godly actions, Hag 2:11-14

Mat 7:15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. 6 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? 17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. 19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. 20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

Matt 7:15-20

If a teacher’s life is ungodly, we should seriously question what he teaches. Paul gives an example of evil fruit in his application of our Lord’s teaching:

1Ti 6:3 If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness; 4 He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings, 5 Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself.

1 Tim 6:3-5

Envy, strife, railings, and so forth are characteristics of the works of the flesh, not the fruit of the Spirit (Gal 5:19-23), and show that such a teacher is not controlled by the Spirit of God.

Sometimes we hear the moral failings of a teacher excused on the grounds that he has still produced some good works. But righteousness and unrighteousness are not to be balanced against one another, a principle recognized in the OT.

Hag 2:11 Thus saith the LORD of hosts; Ask now the priests concerning the law, saying, 12 If one bear holy flesh in the skirt of his garment, and with his skirt do touch bread, or pottage, or wine, or oil, or any meat, shall it be holy? And the priests answered and said, No. 13 Then said Haggai, If one that is unclean by a dead body touch any of these, shall it be unclean? And the priests answered and said, It shall be unclean. 14 Then answered Haggai, and said, So is this people, and so is this nation before me, saith the LORD; and so is every work of their hands; and that which they offer there is unclean.

Haggai 2:11-14

Our own good fruit cannot neutralize our evil fruit. Uncleanness pollutes cleanness, not the other way around.

So What?

The Bible is not the total sum of what God wants us to know. The local church is the framework within which he has provided teachers to explain the scriptures and help the Lord’s people follow them. But the Bible clearly teaches that churches and teachers can err in their teaching, when it tells us how to validate what they present to us. In particular, we are to reject any authority that

• Requires us to believe doctrines that have no scriptural foundation (Principle 1)
• Contradicts the clear and straightforward meaning of the biblical text (Principle 2)
• Requires us to surrender our duty of independent assessment of what we are taught (Principle 3)
• Makes a given doctrinal framework the required lens through which to read Scripture (Principle 4)
• Has a history of ungodly practice (Principle 5)

Little children, keep yourselves from idols (1 John 5:21).