Revelation 22: 18-19

My argument will be informational: It will consist of 5 main points and a conclusion. I apologize for missing the deadline on round two, I am in another interesting debate and this one involved quite a bit of research on my behalf. I'd like to start this debate by displaying the scripture on trial. Revelation 22: 18-19 (From the KJV version of the Bible) "For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book. " Point 1: Understanding the Bible The title itself, ‘Bible', comes from the Greek word ‘biblia' meaning the books, or in modern day Greek, ‘biblio'. The biblia, or biblio, was a library, or a collection of books (or scrolls). In ancient Israel, if one wanted to read the word, he would go into something very similar to a library, and tell the worker he wanted to read the book (scroll) of Isaiah, or Moses. The worker would then search, and give such person a copy of the book of Isaiah, or Moses. All of the scrolls were not combined into one book until around 340AD. This book was given the name Biblio, or Bible due to its being a collection of many different books. Point 2: Biblical Evidence It's interesting to point out that the word Bible is never once mentioned in the Bible. Apart from the facts of history, and the records we have, this is further evidence that the Bible was never one book, but many separate books compiled into one hundreds of years after the death of the Savior. Point 3: John Breaking his own commandment Probably the most interesting Point to be made is that John himself, writer of the Book of Revelation, wrote four other Holy books AFTER the Book of Revelation was written. Point 4: Revelations position in the Bible The Bible was NOT put together in chronological order from when they were written; it was put together as a work of art almost. Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, were put into the front of the Bible, because these books were pertaining to the Life of Christ (Keep in mind the book of John was written after the book of revelation). The Acts, and The Epistle to the Romans were pertaining to life after the death of Christ the rest of the books were placed chronologically, and they are all letters to the church. The Book of Revelation was placed in the back of the New Testament because it did not fit in with any of the other books. Point 5: Evidence within the Scripture Ironically, a similar verse is found in the Old Testament. Dut 4:2, 12:32 ‘Ye shall not add unto this book. ' Unless the book of Revelation was written the same time as the book of Deuteronomy, and if that verse means exactly what Pro beliefs it means, then every book written after the book of Deuteronomy is an addition, and is then false. Knowing what we know now about the Bible, we can understand that when John states ‘no man shall take away from the words of the book of THIS prophecy,' he is simply putting a copy write on the book of Revelation, and the book of Revelation ONLY. Conclusion: Putting the 5 Points Together The Bible is a collection of many different books, all which were added to each other. If john meant anything other than a copy write on his own book of Revelation, then the Bible itself is void because all it is, is a collection of many different books. John himself ‘added to the book of revelation' when he wrote the epistles of John, and the Gospel of John. The Book of Mormon, whether it is true or not, claims to be nothing but another testament of Jesus Christ. The Book of Mormon claims to be one more book in the library. The rumor that the book of Mormon is unbiblical because of these verses is false, and can be proven false by looking at the history behind the making of the Bible. The Book of Mormon is NOT adding onto the Book of revelation, and this is all that John warned against. I feel my argument was clear and precise, the history is there, and the facts are there. People who belief this verse stands for means of discrediting the BOM are people who do not understand the history behind the Bible. I know the BOM is not a popular book, and many believe it to be false, but I hope the voters will be unbais, and vote Con. References . http://www.culham.ac.uk... . http://www.essortment.com... . http://en.wikipedia.org... . http://en.wikipedia.org... . http://www.thechristianpresident.com...