Is it true to say, there is no depicting Revelation, because of the command not to edit the book?

[GoldenKingGaze]

At the end of John's Revelation we are commanded not to edit the book, not to add or subtract from it. I suppose we had no choice but to add gaps and fulls stops, also numbers... but we cannot make a work of creative non fiction of this book, due to the end command. True to say?

 

[mnorian]

At the end of John's Revelation we are commanded not to edit the book, not to add or subtract from it. I suppose we had no choice but to add gaps and fulls stops, also numbers... but we cannot make a work of creative non fiction of this book, due to the end command. True to say?

I don't know; some translations seem to have done that.

 

[spiritfilledjm]

At the end of John's Revelation we are commanded not to edit the book, not to add or subtract from it. I suppose we had no choice but to add gaps and fulls stops, also numbers... but we cannot make a work of creative non fiction of this book, due to the end command. True to say?

No, that's fine. They're not intending to add to the writings of John specifically, but rather help folks understand the meaning behind His writing. The periods, verses and chapters and things like that is not adding to the actual writings either.

 

[spiritfilledjm]

A better way to put what I said, if one says "God has given more instruction for Revelation and it needs to be added to the book of Revelation!" No...that is wrong. The more likely though is, "This bit of Revelation is not actually divinely inspired and should be removed, here's why!". I mean, there's a shockingly large group of people who claim to be Christian that thinks that virtually all of the new testament after the Gospel is not the Word of God so it wouldn't shock me if one or more of their "scholars" have already said that.

If one is like, "Hey, here's my two cents on Revelation that I have published." or "I'm writing a screenplay based on the events of Revelation." That, in my opinion, is fine. They are not specifically trying to add to the book or take away from it.

 

[BobRyan]

A better way to put what I said, if one says "God has given more instruction for Revelation and it needs to be added to the book of Revelation!" No...that is wrong. The more likely though is, "This bit of Revelation is not actually divinely inspired and should be removed, here's why!". I mean, there's a shockingly large group of people who claim to be Christian that thinks that virtually all of the new testament after the Gospel is not the Word of God so it wouldn't shock me if one or more of their "scholars" have already said that.

If one is like, "Hey, here's my two cents on Revelation that I have published." or "I'm writing a screenplay based on the events of Revelation." That, in my opinion, is fine. They are not specifically trying to add to the book or take away from it.

there is a very large group of Christians who think that all the Bible from Genesis to the Gospels is to discounted for Christians and only that which comes after the gospel accounts is applicable. That was a surprise to me the first time I heard it.

IN any case - "illustrating" the bible has never been considered "adding to it" from what I have seen.

 

[GoldenKingGaze]

there is a very large group of Christians who think that all the Bible from Genesis to the Gospels is to discounted for Christians and only that which comes after the gospel accounts is applicable. That was a surprise to me the first time I heard it.

IN any case - "illustrating" the bible has never been considered "adding to it" from what I have seen.

In portraying Revelation creatively, one may think of adding an explanation scene... to show that Jesus is not Michael for example.

 

[LeGato]

At the end of John's Revelation we are commanded not to edit the book, not to add or subtract from it. I suppose we had no choice but to add gaps and fulls stops, also numbers... but we cannot make a work of creative non fiction of this book, due to the end command. True to say?

I thought that command applied to the entire Bible?

 

[GoldenKingGaze]

I thought that command applied to the entire Bible?

There is something called Gospel harmony, so Johns's Gospel and the synoptic Gospels have been put together into one big Gospel by some scholars and I bought it.

I suppose in principal we best not add or subtract from scripture.

Martin Luther considered leaving James out of the Lutheran canon. Some Bibles have 73 books others 66.

 

[jamiec]

I thought that command applied to the entire Bible?

That passage - the gist of which also occurs in the OT, BTW - has immediate, primary, reference only to Revelation. It can, however, be given a secondary application, to the entire NT; & a tertiary reference, to the entirety of the Bible.

Compare Rev 22.18-19 (& see also Revelation 22 BSB)

with: Revelation 22:18 I testify to everyone who hears the words of prophecy in this book: If anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book.

Deuteronomy 4:2
You must not add to or subtract from what I command you, so that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God that I am giving you.

Deuteronomy 12:32
See that you do everything I command you; do not add to it or subtract from it.

Proverbs 30:6
Do not add to His words, lest He rebuke you and prove you a liar.

Revelation 22:7
"Behold, I am coming soon. Blessed is the one who keeps the words of prophecy in this book."

The page for verse 19: Revelation 22:19 And if anyone takes away from the words of this book of prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and the holy city, which are described in this book. repeats those passages, and some that are not relevant to the question.

 

[Michael V. Pardo]

At the end of John's Revelation we are commanded not to edit the book, not to add or subtract from it. I suppose we had no choice but to add gaps and fulls stops, also numbers... but we cannot make a work of creative non fiction of this book, due to the end command. True to say?

It's already been done in popular fiction by multiple authors and screen writers. I don't know of any that have suffered the plagues (yet.) However, the same principle or warning not to alter the scriptures is found in the Old Testament. As Cecil B. Demille died of heart failure rather than suffering biblical plagues, I think you're safe if you aren't denying the person of Christ. However, I'm not inclined to take unnecessary risks.

Our imagination is described in Genesis, before and after the flood, as only evil. We don't want to portray our Lord in a false light, especially considering we'll have to give the Lord an account for all our words.

 

[Torah Keeper]

It's something I am extremely cautious about when translating the Bible. I prefer a literal word for word translation, even if doesn't make sense. The reader should be able to understand the culture and context on their own. A thought for thought translation can be very dangerous.

As for adding or removing words, a lot of (mis)translations do that, unfortunately.

Yahweh is holy and His words are holy. We have to be fearfully careful to not misquote Him.

 

[Michael V. Pardo]

It's something I am extremely cautious about when translating the Bible. I prefer a literal word for word translation, even if doesn't make sense. The reader should be able to understand the culture and context on their own. A thought for thought translation can be very dangerous.

As for adding or removing words, a lot of (mis)translations do that, unfortunately.

Yahweh is holy and His words are holy. We have to be fearfully careful to not misquote Him.

I have a healthy respect for the word of Yah havah.
I was just pointing out that I saw the film "The Ten Commandments" at a drive in theatre as a child, and only learned later through the reading of scripture that it left out certain significant biblical truths and was scripted for entertainment value. This has been true of every popular film that I've seen based upon scripture, and yet, I haven't seen any writer, film producer, or director suffer biblical plagues because of taking "artistic license."

I've recently started rewriting a fiction that I started some time ago, presenting a story of biblical redemption, for worldly consumption, but personally I find it necessary to present the story according to my own theology, which will differ from that of some churches. I'll do this confidently, because of the confidence that I have in my relationship to the Lord, but it isn't scripture, nor am I presenting it as scripture.

However, biblical fiction that mischaracterizes God is worthy of judgment. My observation is only that God hasn't yet sent plagues upon writers of biblically based fiction, and some have gone peacefully to their graves.

If God were going to judge us to condemnation based upon our imagination, not one soul would be saved. Clearly though, many of our works will be "burnt up" when tested by fire. I'm pretty sure that fiction isn't going to pass that test, and monetary profit is it's own reward.

 

[Torah Keeper]

I have a healthy respect for the word of Yah havah.
I was just pointing out that I saw the film "The Ten Commandments" at a drive in theatre as a child, and only learned later through the reading of scripture that it left out certain significant biblical truths and was scripted for entertainment value. This has been true of every popular film that I've seen based upon scripture, and yet, I haven't seen any writer, film producer, or director suffer biblical plagues because of taking "artistic license."

I've recently started rewriting a fiction that I started some time ago, presenting a story of biblical redemption, for worldly consumption, but personally I find it necessary to present the story according to my own theology, which will differ from that of some churches. I'll do this confidently, because of the confidence that I have in my relationship to the Lord, but it isn't scripture, nor am I presenting it as scripture.

However, biblical fiction that mischaracterizes God is worthy of judgment. My observation is only that God hasn't yet sent plagues upon writers of biblically based fiction, and some have gone peacefully to their graves.

If God were going to judge us to condemnation based upon our imagination, not one soul would be saved. Clearly though, many of our works will be "burnt up" when tested by fire. I'm pretty sure that fiction isn't going to pass that test, and monetary profit is it's own reward.

Yeah I enjoy movies like "The Ten Commandments" with old Heston as Moses. Of course they are edited for Hollywood and profits. On the other hand at least we have movies that portray the Bible in a positive way, even if these movies are not totally accurate.

Things like "Chronicles of Narnia" are on the other end of the Christian entertainment spectrum. Do they lead people to Christ? Or has C.S. Lewis misquoted and misrepresented Christ? The concept of other created worlds, kilayim creatures (centaurs and such), and good magic, are not exactly Biblical.

I think it's best to recognize the differences in entertainment and the 100% true word for word Bible. At the least, people should know that a movie or book about God is not on the same level of holiness as the Bible.