I’m sorry, Allon, but God’s Word is His Word, and it is contained in all the books of the Bible. God is big enough to see to His Word, and beginning with Moses and ending with John, Jesus is there throughout, and that same warning applies, because it is a seamless revelation to mankind.
But, as I said to the last commenter, make of it what you will. I’m not going to change your mind.
My original comment was intended for the one who posted this thread—the one who chose to join catholicism. He used to believe the Bible, as the revealed Word of God, without any additional manmade writings and traditions, that we are warned about throughout the Bible.
Um, there are many MANY evangelicals that disagree with your sweeping assertion.
The bible is a collection of 66 books that were brought together and compiled into one volume long after John wrote the Revelations.
Further, John himself added to scripture after writing the book of Revelation, which is generally conceded to have been written while he was on the Isle of Patmos. It was long after John left Patmos that he wrote his first epistle. This fact standing alone would be sufficient to defeat the claim that revelation was closed and that man was enjoined from adding to scripture.
John was clearly talking about the Book of Revelations.
King James 2000 Bible (©2003)
Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which you have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.”
2Thessalonians 2:15
NOBODY on earth uses the Bible without "additional manmade writings and traditions". Absolutely nobody.
Don't believe me? Look carefully at the Church of Christ (Campbellite) movement. You will not find a sect more devoted to the idea that the Bible ALONE is the SOLE rule of faith. They *invented* slogans like "Where the Bible is silent, we are silent" and "No creed but Scripture".
Now look at how many factions and spin-offs there are from the CofC. "Institutional" versus "non-institutional". "Instrumental" versus "non-instrumental". And the spinoff denominations, like the "Christian Church (Disciples of Christ)" and others.
It isn't because any of them are using different Bibles. All of them read the same Bible, but they don't agree on what it means. *By definition*, all of those disagreements are manmade "traditions" that they are adding on to the text, even though they *explicitly* set out NOT to do that.
You can't get away from "tradition". "Tradition" is born every time a church leader opens the Bible and decides what it means. And if you're a "church of one" -- a completely un-Biblical place to be, but I digress -- that doesn't fix the problem. It just makes you into a "church leader".
And when that church leader sets his opinions down on paper, you have your "manmade writings".
You can't get away from "tradition" or "manmade writings," no matter how "Bible alone" you try to be. The best you can do is pick the right set of "traditions and manmade writings".
And no, John's warning about "not adding to this book" did not refer to the "Bible," which didn't exist as a single "book" when he wrote those words. They referred to the book of Revelation itself. To believe that it refers to the Bible is ... wait for it ... your very own manmade tradition.