Hey, and ignorant Rusty–the word is spelled “grotesquely.”

Thanks for your relply.

Wikipedia has an acceptable description of Deuterocanonical books.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deuterocanonical_books

These books, including Tobit, Judith, additions to Esther, Wisdom, Sirach, Baruch, Song of the Three Children, Story of Suzanna, Bel and the Dragon, 1 & 2 Maccabees, 1 & 2 Esdras, Prayer of Manasses and others are recognized by very significant parts of the church (esp. Roman Catholic & Orthodox) as scripture. They are not part of the Hebrew Jewish Bible, but are Greek works of God’s revelation in the “intertestamental” period of time (between the end of the Old Testament and the beginning of the New Testament). It would seem, that since Mormons don’t want humans to limit what is scripture, that these would be included in your Bibles. If they are not, then why not?

Likewise, there were many so-called “gnostic” scriptures written in the 2nd and 3rd centuries. A pretty complete listing again can be found on Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnostic_texts . Why do Mormons exclude these?

The Dead Sea Scrolls did reveal 5 additional Psalms. The Dead Sea Scrolls also revealed a text of Jeremiah 1/7 longer than the version in our Bibles. There were other texts found too. I’ve not heard of Mormons inviting change to the texts of the Bible based on these discoveries. I’ve not heard of Mormons accepting these as “sacred writ”.

You see, Mormons have accepted a canon of the Bible, as accepted by the church, and closed by the church. Mormons have added to the list, but only those texts unique to Mormonism. That doesn’t sound like what you were describing about recognizing all revelations of the Lord.

I see the church as the living body of Christ. It is guided by the Holy Spirit. The guidance of the Holy Spirit has been that this canon is sufficient. I think that term is of ultimate importance here, and one that is not an option in your opening post on this subject. Closing the canon by the guidance of the Holy Spirit indicates sufficiency of that which is recorded.

Thanks for your response.

Pondering Pastor

It seems, by your description (and please correct me if I’m wrong), that you’re suggesting that for most Christian churches, canonization was a mechanism for man to prevent pollutants from being regarded as scripture. Whereas my understanding of the LDS (Mormon) view of canonization is broader, seeing it as a mechanism to describe the whole of the Lords teachings, whether it be in times past or today.

Your fascinating illustration of the 5 missing psalms is a terrific example. You suggest that it’s likely, even if they were found, that they’d not be accepted into the cannon, because they haven’t BEEN in the canon, haven’t played a role in the lives of Christians and their worship. Illustrating the idea that even though they were inspired, and prophetic, they’d be denied because of timing, and therefore stating that inclusion in the canon has less to do with God’s choice, and more to do with man’s. Perhaps that sounds more rude then it was intended. What I mean is that God directed their writing the same as the other 100 psalms, but it is man who would decide to exclude them from the canon.

The LDS view of the canon is more encompassing, endeavoring to leave God as the judge of what is canonized, allowing the canon to stretch as far back as possible, and as far forward as possible, that the whole of Gods communication to prophets might combine to create a sweeping view of as much inspired revelation as possible, and as complete a picture as possible.

Your other illustration of this point is that you suggest that there is “no longer a church body which could authoritatively ‘open the canon’”. Again suggesting that the canon is a mechanism for the convenience of man, whereas my view would be that something’s worthiness of cannonization should not be subject to (nor decided by) man, but determined by God. In other words, if the 5 missing psalms were found, the lack of a single authoritative body to approve them, shouldn’t determine their addition to the canon.

So on the one hand, based on the traditional view of the canon, the 5 missing psalms aren’t worthy because they weren’t found in time, practiced early enough, or able to be approved by a single authoritative body.

Whereas the LDS view of the canon (and to answer your question), would likely be the opposite, if the 5 missing psalms were found, they too would be considered sacred writ, no less important than the other psalms. Leaving the definition of their value to the Lord (since he inspired their writing the same as the other 100).

As for the deuterocanonical books. I’d actually never even heard of that word until I read your post (yeah, I know, in some things I’m grotequely ignorant), so I must confess I know nothing about them.

PP, I totally agree. God communicates to men and women today, just as he would have during biblical times, but that doesn’t negate the role of the prophet, today, as before the need for prophets persist, for the precise reason Margaret (Margaret D, that is suggests.

I really don’t mind “man” meaning humanity. I think political correctness has gotten out of hand. I’m a daughter, sister, wife, mother and grandmother. I’m very secure in my femininity.

I know that God speaks to anyone who is in tune and will listen. Wouldn’t it be great if everyone listened and acted upon what he or she heard? However, God is not going to give me a revelation that concerns the state of the world. I expect revelation concerning myself, my children & grandchildren, my marriage, my relationship with friends, my Church callings, etc. Only my sphere of influence. For local congregations, it would be the Bishop. Revelations concerning the entire Church, or mankind in general, are given the the Prophet. Heavenly Father is a God of order and has procedures He follows as any organized person does. That’s why when the Prophet speaks, we listen.

Pondering Pastor

But I guess the bigger question is, “Does God still speak to man?” Mormons believe wholeheartedly–YES! Isn’t it wonderful? Through a living prophet God can reemphasize certain commandments that we are not following so well. In the past few years we have heard of the evils of pornography, gambling, child abuse, and how the internet can bring these evils so close to us. We are encouraged to strengthen our families, pray often, save for a rainy day. It is so comforting to have guidance in this way.

Now we don’t rewrite the scriptures every time our prophet opens his mouth. But we can learn from his inspiration and leadership as if new scriptures were made available.

We both await Rusty’s reply . . .