Should we add the Book of Enoch to the canon? Should we remove the book of Revelation?
What’s in, what’s out, and how do we decide?
How do we know which religious texts should be included in the Bible and which shouldn’t? Some people claim that books like the Book of Enoch should be included. They might point out that this book elucidates other parts of the Bible. This may as well be true, but if we accept this book, on which basis should we avoid adding others?
Suppose we go in the other direction; suppose that all of the Christian religion aims at a simple idea that is easy to describe though potentially quite difficult to put into practice, and suppose the rest of the Bible elaborates and/or leads to the simple idea. If so, then the religion is like an onion. We can keep peeling layers without fundamentally changing the true nature of the thing. In other words, we can reduce the Bible to its core. We still have a few problems: where do we stop, and where is the core?
And we have another question: how do we know that more prophets can’t come around to add more to the existing texts? If Christ is the capstone on the religion, then nothing that came before can truly add up to the ultimate religion. And if Christ is this capstone, can we then on this basis remove the book of Revelation? It stands in such contrast from the rest of the texts that it’s hard for me believe that it belongs. It contains some pretty weird imagery, and these weren’t Christ’s teachings any more that Muhammed’s teachings weren’t Christs.
The Council of Laodicea (AD 363) omitted the book of Revelation from its canon. Martin Luther at one point said it was “neither apostolic nor prophetic”, before changing his mind. John Calvin wrote on every other book in the New Testament except for this book. the Eastern Orthodox Church doesn’t include the book in its liturgy (Wikipedia).
Now, removing Revelations would be a heretical move to many people who fear the Mark of the Beast. However, it would be a relief to Christians who keep worrying about being implanted with a chip. Many Christians have refused the vaccine on the basis that it might be such a chip. In the future, they might refuse digital payments.
Arguably, the capstone of the Christian faith is the Sermon on the Mount. Many would say it’s Christ’s death and resurrection. Even so, what was the example and message did he came down to give us? The difficulty with his sermon is that it demands an inhuman level of perfection. If this sermon is the capstone, then the Gospels serve to explain the life of Christ, and the Epistles serve to teach us how to apply Christ’s example in our own lives. For example, Christ never married, but we can’t all be celibate. There could be other epistles or other teachings, but we are left to judge all of them by their adherence to a few basic principles.
The Pharisees asked Jesus: “Teacher, which commandment is the greatest in the Law?”
Jesus, who often spoke in parables, answered directly, “ ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.” (Matthew 22:37–40)
If we boil the religion down this way, we lose a lot. Not only are we not including the book of Enoch, but we hardly need the rest of the Bible. But, perhaps that’s not exactly true. The two commandments imply a question in the same way that in the Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Universe, the computer spit out the meaning of life to be 42.
This implied question is paralleled in the book of Genesis. Adam and Eve are banished from paradise for eating the forbidden fruit. But of course the situation is very bizarre. Banished for eating fruit? When atheists poke at the Bible like this, many Christians get uncomfortable; they’re quick to jump to apologetics. They might say that such verses are mysteries that will one day be revealed in Heaven. This is unsatisfying to the skeptic, but their prodding is helpful for establishing an important truth: if Genesis was a complete work, then the Bible would not only not need Enoch, but it wouldn’t need the New Testament, Proverbs, Deuteronomy, or any of the other books.
So if the Bible is true, then what we should have is a through line that started with Genesis, and patiently unfolded a plot that didn’t resolve itself until the death of its ultimate hero. This is a bizarre story. Other stories in Western culture attempt similar themes where the hero is left at the brink of death before being imbued with a supernatural energy that causes him to finally defeat his enemy. Even if the Christian story is a mere myth, it is more realistic. The hero dies, and the supernatural resurrection is not obscured but made apparent.
Clearly, Christ cannot mark the end of history, and his example is a difficult one to follow, yet it’s difficult to imagine that really is nothing more to say. This is where the Jews are left. It’s difficult to believe that the messiah has already come, and the book is now closed.
Related: