Why I Don’t Believe the Canon Is Closed

By: J. Daniel Spratlin

The term “canon” refers to the accepted books of the Scriptures.

The Protestant canon contains 66 books, while other Christian
traditions will vary, adding a few books of the Apocrypha and some
additions to other books. A commonly accepted understanding among
most Christians of all traditions is that the books that belong in the
Scripture cannot be added to. In other words, the canon is “closed.”
While there is a sense in which I believe the canon is closed, there is
also a sense in which I don’t believe the canon is closed. Allow me to
explain.
In order to maintain that the canon is closed, most Christians
would refer to the first few centuries of the church. In particular,
councils such as Rome, Hippo, and Carthage, as well as Athanasius’
Easter Letter will be referred to as evidence that the canon of the New
Testament had closed. The Old Testament, according to most, was
already established and closed by the time of Christ. For this, reference
would be made to the New Testament itself, as well as the testimony
of Josephus, Philo and some of the inter-testamental works.
My contention with this assumption is that to say that the canon
is “closed” needs to be understood more in an observational way
rather than an authoritative pronouncement. The term “closed” might
not be the best word since it implies a necessary finality concerning
the contents of Scripture. This is something that I don’t believe we can
say in the way that we often say it for two primary reasons:

Scripture Itself is Silent

Scripture itself does not limit the canon to 66 books. No matter
how hard you look, one would be hard pressed to find a place that
definitely “closes” the canon. Revelation 22:18-19 is often referred to
as evidence:

I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of

this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the
plagues described in this book, and if anyone takes away
from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take
away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which
are described in this book.

The problem with using this passage is that it is specific to the book of
Revelation. Just because the book of Revelation occurs last in our
canon does not mean that this warning serves as a bookend for the
entire Bible. It is meant to communicate a general statement about
those who would be tempted to add to or take away from God’s word

Page 1 of 3
in general, and to the book of Revelation in specific. Yet the same
warning is given in the book of Deuteronomy and the Proverbs:

Deuteronomy 4:2: You shall not add to the word that I

command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the
commandments of the LORD your God that I command you.

Proverbs 30:6: Do not add to his words, lest he rebuke you

and you be found a liar.

Does this mean that once Deuteronomy or Proverbs were complete

that no one was supposed to add any other books? I don’t know
anyone who would make that argument.

The Canon Is Self-Regulating.

The idea of canon is simply a way of expressing those books that
are from God, authoritative, and, therefore, part of Scripture. There is
no reason to ever “close” it if by “close” you mean it is not possible for
God to add to it. I know that people are simply trying to say that other
people cannot add to it, but I think in doing so we have philosophically
overstepped our bounds. In other words, we don’t close anything. God
simply stops adding to it. We have no right to say God cannot add to it
because it is “closed.” This way, God regulates his own revelation.
In short, the argument that I am making is that the canon is
closed only to the degree that God is no longer adding to it. But it is
not closed in the sense that God cannot add to it were he to make an
unforeseen movement in the history of revelation. The primary reason
why we have not added anything to the canon in the last two thousand
years is simply because God has not used an authenticated apostle or
prophet to speak his word and add to it in two thousand years. Only in
this sense is the canon “closed.”
Now, to be clear, I don’t think that God will ever add anything to
the canon and I am not meaning to suggest otherwise. I believe that
the Bible’s primary purpose is to communicate the history of
redemption and I believe that we have good reason to believe that this
history is complete. Listen to the writer of Hebrews:

Hebrews 1:1-2: Long ago, at many times and in many

ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, but in
these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he
appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he
created the world.

“In these last days he has spoken to us by his Son” contrasts the
former means of revelation through the “prophets.” It suggests finality.
God is no longer speaking to us through a mediator who is unlike him,

Page 2 of 3
but through his genetic equal—his Son! What more do we need?
Therefore, I think we are safe believing that God’s revelation is
complete, even if we cannot be overly dogmatic about this.
When communicating the doctrine of canonicity, I think this is as
far as we can go: It seems that the Scriptures are complete for two
reasons: (1) God has not added to it through an authenticated
spokesperson in two thousand years, and (2) the purpose of Scripture
is completed with the advent of Christ and the communication of the
Gospel.
I know that the idea of a theoretically open canon will not sit well with
many people, especially Christian apologists who combat Mormonism
as well as cessationists who combat modern-day prophets. Yet there is
really no issue with either when we realize that Mormonism fails due to
its inability to authenticate Joseph Smith as a prophet and its
contradiction with previous revelation. Concerning modern-day
prophets, I don’t have an issue. I don’t believe that we have seen a
prophet since the time of the apostles, but this does not mean that
God cannot send one.
In short, God can do whatever he desires. Our theological
constructs and definitions of a “closed canon” do not lock him out of
our room. If he wants to add to the canon or speak through a prophet,
he can do so. Neither you, a church council, a Pope, nor I can put a “do
not enter” sign on the door of revelation. I don’t mind saying the canon
is closed so long as we qualify this. The canon is “closed” to the degree
that God is no longer adding to it.
To be fair, this proposition is not quite as provocative as it might
seem. While this will irk Roman Catholics who believe that the Church
itself closed the canon, Protestants have historically believed that the
church simply recognizes the canon, but does not have the authority to
close it.

Page 3 of 3