critical thinking made ez

I think "men" feared these words and stopped writing more books that could have been published into the scriptures. Surely some of the later writings by men of God, inspired by him etc., could have added greatly to this otherwise incomplete book. It really lacks the more detailed doctrines and arguments which could have created a more consistent religion.

With the 1000's of different denominations and splits over meaning, it seems John/God shut the door on himself and his Christian religion by writing those words about Rev and not the rest of the Bible. Writers fearing for their spiritual lives, wouldn't take the chance John meant just the Book of Rev. and not the existing scripture itself.

I think additional books should be added for clarity. Now which ones should be added?

Here is where each denomination will cry out that their version is the inspired word of God and not the others.

Well what was the difference back then when the existing ones were written. Paul had a totally different version than the Apostles of Christ did. And if given a chance it would keep changing with each new writer. Who's to say who was right and when the plug should have been pulled? King James? The Catholic Church? Oral Roberts?

Should the Bible have ended with the 5 Gospels?

Should the Bible have ended with Revelation?

[ August 02, 2001: Message edited by: critical thinking made ez ]

Winston Day

Not real sure where to go with this, lots of statements made. I will say:
Revelation has no s on the end.
It is doubtful that it was the last book written.
I have no idea what version you are talking about in relation to Paul and the apostles.

WD