6. Closing of the Canon in AD 70

What are we to make of the apocryphal and pseudepigraphal books that were written in the two centuries after Christ? Some of these claim to be written by apostles and claim to be Scripture. Should we accept those claims? Many cults have added to the canon over the last two thousand years. Islam added¹⁴⁸ the Quran in the 7th century AD and claims that it is the very word of God.

As with all additions to God’s Word, the additions eventually took precedence over the established canon and then completely replaced the true canon. The same was true of modern cults like the Church of the Latter Day Saints, which adds the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price. While they acknowledge the canonicity of the Bible, their so-called new revelations have taken precedence over the Bible. The same has happened with the Tradition of the Roman Catholic Church and the similar Tradition of the Eastern Orthodox Church. As Jesus worded it, “All too well you reject the commandment of God, that you may keep your tradition… making the Word of God of no effect through your tradition which you have handed down” (Mark 7:9,13).

This chapter will seek to demonstrate that the Old Testament (which we have already established as being canonical) talks about the addition of new revelation to the canon in the first century and also speaks of the complete closing of the canon in AD 70. Typically, the historic faith has held that the canon was closed in the age of the apostles and that no new revelations can be authoritative. Cults, on the other hand, typically say that the canon continues to be open to new additions or at least is not sufficient for faith and practice. This chapter will give one guiding principle that rules out 100% of all non-canonical additions to the New Testament. Since we have already established the Old Testament canon as authoritative and complete, we should bow to its pronouncements about how and when the canon would be added to in New Covenant times.

OT predictions of the closing of the New Testament canon

While there are legitimate differences of interpretation on New Testament Cessationist passages such as 1 Corinthians 13:8, the interpretive options of that passage would be narrowed if it would be interpreted in light of the clear Old Testament passages predicting a new covenant cessation of prophecy. Paul made it clear that he was “saying no other things than those which the prophets and Moses said would come” (Acts 26:22; cf. Heb. 3:5; Acts 17:11). The only doctrine which needed clarification by new revelation was the “mystery” of Jew and Gentile both being in “Israel” (see Ephesians 2-3).

However, everything else that Paul taught, he taught from the Old Testament. After all, the only Bible that the church had for several years was the Old Testament (Acts 8:32,35; 17:2,11; 18:24,28; Rom. 16:26; 2 Tim. 3:15-17). If Cessationism (or non-Cessationism) is true, it will be able to be demonstrated to be true from the Old Testament. This is why Paul could praise the Bereans when they “searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things [the teachings of Paul] were so” (Acts 17:11). In the spirit of being a Berean I will seek to prove from the Old Testament that there was a permanent cessationism of prophecy and prophetic Scriptures in AD 70. Only then will I move to the New Testament proofs in later chapters.

Isaiah’s witness

Isaiah 8 prophesies about a time when God’s people will be forbidden from going to any other revelation than to “the law and to the testimony” (v. 20), and speaks of all other revelation-seeking as disobedient (v. 19) because the “testimony” and “the law” would be bound up and sealed (v. 16) by the time of the war that verses 19-22 discuss (the war of AD 66-73). This is a very important prediction, and bears some careful study.

Context points to a window from the birth of Jesus to AD 70.

First, the entire context of this passage in Isaiah 8-9 is repeatedly quoted in the New Testament as having a first century fulfillment. The whole of Isaiah 8:11-9:7 is clearly Messianic (Matt. 4:13-16; 21:44; Luke 2:34; 20:17; Rom. 9:33; Heb. 2:13; 1 Pet 2:8), but with a terminus point of Israel’s first century expulsion from the land (see Romans 10-11; Luke 20:9-19). Note that Isaiah 8:14-15¹⁴⁹ is specifically applied to the casting away of Israel (see Rom. 9:31-33; 11:9-11; Luke 2:34; 20:17; 1 Pet. 2:8), verse 18¹⁵⁰ is interpreted by Hebrews as referring to Jesus in the midst of His people (Heb. 2:13), and Isaiah 8:21-22¹⁵¹ describes the anguish of the Jewish war of 66-73 AD (see Luke 21:11-12,23-24; 23:28-31). Thus the bookends of Isaiah 8:11-22 are clearly the life of Christ on the one side and AD 70 on the other. Isaiah 9:1-7 recapitulates this same time period by contrasting the Jewish war (see verses 1-5, which describe an oppression that was to occur “afterward” – v. 1) with the earlier (“at first”) revelational judgment that Jesus brought against Israel (v. 1 with Matt. 4:16). Thus, the bookends of Isaiah 9 are the incarnation of the Messiah on the one side (vv. 6-7) and His destruction of Israel on the other side (9:1-5), with a reference to His three-year ministry in the middle (v. 1 with Matt. 4:13).

The revelation that ceases is both oral and written

The second thing to notice is that this short window of history (5BC-70AD) is predicted to be a time of both written and oral revelation. This revelation is described variously as “the law,” (8:16,20), “the testimony” (8:16,20), “this word,” (8:20), and “light” (8:20; 9:2). It might be objected that the revelation that ceases only has reference to the closing of the canon of Scripture (“the law” and “testimony”). While the canon is certainly involved, it should be pointed out that the “light” of revelation that Jesus brought in 9:1 (see Matt. 4:12-17 for interpretation) was almost exclusively oral prophetic revelation, not written. Furthermore, this revelation that came from God during the first century is also contrasted with an oral prophetic revelation of demons (Is. 8:19).¹⁵²

That there were a multitude of false prophets in the first century can be seen not only from the numerous warnings in the New Testament itself (Matt. 7:15; 24:11,24; Mk. 13:22; Acts 13:6; 1 Tim. 4:1; 2 Pet. 2:1), but also from the descriptions of the demonic that can be found in Josephus’ history of the war against Jerusalem. Thus, this is a period that is dealing with both oral revelation and written revelation from God.

An AD 70 ending of prophecy and prophet

It is in this AD 70 context that Isaiah 8:16 refers to the cessation of inspired revelation. God said, “Bind up the testimony, seal the law among my disciples” (v. 16). The word translated “bind up” (צוֹר) has a semantic range of meaning: to be narrowed, to bind up, to tie up, to wrap up, to shut up, to restrict something, to be constricted, to be cramped or restricted.¹⁵³ However it is translated, the entire range expresses “the opposite idea from that conveyed by those words that denote spaciousness.”¹⁵⁴ This first word vividly describes the contrast between the widespread revelation prior to AD 70 and the narrow source of revelation found after AD 70, the narrow source being the Biblical revelation alone (v. 20).

The next word used is to “seal up.” This word (חֲתוֹם) means to close up or to seal. The New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis says, “Sealing was a means of closing something from interference… Something sealed is closed, so the term was transferred to denote shutting inside a house (Job 24:16), a blocked spring (Song of Songs 4:12), the obstruction of a bodily discharge (Lev.15:3)” etc. The dictionary also says, “What is sealed may be taken as ended, so sins are sealed (Dan. 9:24), and sealed in a bag, not to be reopened (Job 14:17).” Applied to revelation, this word means that the stream of revelation is sealed up, the receptacle of revelation is closed off, and the giving of revelation is blocked.

These two Hebrew words could hardly be stronger in describing a complete cessation of God’s revelation. God further strengthened the doctrine of Cessationism by pitting the unfaithful Jews of that war who would seek revelation from spirits (v. 19) against the faithful Jews who appealed to the closed canon of Scripture alone (v. 20). It is a very stark contrast between the continuing revelation of demons and the completed revelation of God. From AD 70 and on, God’s people were to subscribe to the doctrine of Sola Scriptura: “To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, it is because there is no light in them” (v. 20). This is a categorical affirmation of one authority, one judge of truth, and one source for speaking truth. From AD 70 and on, there should never be an appeal to other authoritative sources. Yet the apostate Jews going through this war would ignore this command and seek alternative revelation (v. 19), and thus end up actually cursing God (v. 21) and walking in darkness (v. 22). We would expect that if the New Testament speaks of a time when prophecy will cease, it should be interpreted in light of this clear passage.

Daniel’s witness

A first century AD ending of prophecy and prophet

Though the seventy weeks of Daniel 9 are notoriously controversial and difficult to understand, the first century Cessationism of this passage is still quite clear.

The first verse of this passage says,

Seventy weeks are determined for your people and for your holy city, to finish transgression, to make an end of sins, to make reconciliation for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy, and to anoint the Most Holy.

The phrase, “to seal up vision and prophecy” clearly speaks of a cessation of prophetic revelation at some point in history. The word for “to seal up” is the same Hebrew word that was already discussed in Isaiah 8, and should be interpreted in parallel with that passage. Interestingly, the Hebrew word is used twice in this verse, earlier being translated as “to make an end of” in the phrase “to make an end of sins.” So this passage predicts an end to prophetic revelation some time after the New Covenant starts. The following points amplify upon this concept.

The New King James Version translates the Hebrew phrase, וְלַחְתֹּם חָזוֹן וְנָבִיא, as “to seal up vision and prophecy.” The Hebrew word translated “vision” is used of the dream of Nebuchadnezzar (Dan. 8:1-2,13), the oral prophesies of prophets (1 Sam. 3:1; 1 Chron. 17:15) as well as the recorded messages of the Scriptures (2 Chron. 32:32; Is. 1:1; Obadiah 1; etc.). It is a word that seems to cover all infallible revelation. The Hebrew word translated “prophecy” is נָבִיא (“prophet”), not נְּבוּאָה (“prophecy”). Thus, it is more literally translated as “to seal up vision and prophet” in many versions (DRBY, Yng, NRSV, ESV). Elsewhere in Scripture נָבִיא always has reference to the person who prophesies, not to the prophecy itself. Of the over 300 times this word occurs, it is never translated “prophecy” except here. Always its consistent meaning is “prophet.” Likewise the word נְּבוּאָה is never translated “prophet.” Rather it refers to the revelation of the prophet. So there are two distinct things that were promised to cease. God was going to make an end of both the vehicle of inspired revelation (“prophet”) and the inspired revelation itself (“vision”). This is not dealing with a fulfillment of prophecy, but an ending of prophetic revelation and office.

What is the terminal point of this cessation? There are two considerations that help us to understand this. The first is the meaning and duration of the 70 weeks. The second is the timing of the last event recorded in the chapter, a war which “shall destroy the city and the sanctuary” and make an “end of it” (vv. 26-27).

There is little consensus on the answer to the first question. However, in light of the fact that the New Testament clearly refers to the desolation of abomination referred to in verse 27 as occurring during the time period of the Roman war against Jerusalem and the Jews throughout the empire¹⁵⁵ (66-73AD), the cessation of vision and prophet should also occur before Jerusalem’s destruction in AD 70. Thus, whether there will ever be agreement on the nature of the seventy weeks being discussed below, verses 26-27 should be seen as the terminus point for vision and prophet. Those who do not want to work through the tedious detail of the interpretive options of the weeks can skip over the next section.

Interpretive options

It is worthwhile to work through some interpretive options with regard to the seventy weeks themselves. Even if the “week” mentioned in verse 27 is not tied to the length of the war mentioned in verses 26-27, it is clear that the war should be the latest terminus allowed for the sealing up of vision and prophet. Nevertheless, it may be helpful to articulate two interpretations of the 70 weeks that could credibly fit a first century cessation of vision and prophet.

Almost all commentaries agree that there are both weeks of days (with a Sabbath day) and weeks of years (with a Sabbath year). If Daniel were talking about 70 weeks of days, it would amount to 490 days (70 weeks = 70 x 7 days = 490 days). I know of no author who believes this is talking about what would happen within 490 days. Most commentators take a second option and see this as a reference to 70 weeks of years (or 70 x 7 years = 490 years).

Beyond that, there is little agreement with many different interpretations being offered by scholars. The two most likely interpretations are:

1. The last week of years ends 3½ years after Jesus was crucified, with the ending of sacrifice and offering in verse 27 referring not to a literal ending of sacrifices at the temple, but Christ making all sacrifices null by his death. Though verse 27 awkwardly seems to indicate that the last week occurs during the war against Jerusalem, there are a number of scholars who hold that it represents the three and a half years of Christ’s ministry plus the first three and a half years of post-Pentecost history. It just so happens that Paul, the “last” of the apostles and one “born out of due time” (1 Cor. 15:8), was commissioned three and a half years after Christ was crucified. This could literally refer to a closing off of prophets commissioned by Christ.
2. The last week of years ends in AD 73 after a literal seven year war that lasted from AD 66-73. This view has several strengths. First, it reconciles with the timing that Isaiah 8 gave for prophetic revelation being sealed up during the war. Second, the week mentioned in verse 27 happens to be the length of the hostilities against the Jews throughout the Roman Empire (lasting from 66-73 AD). Third, sacrifice and offering ended exactly in the middle of the seven-year war, just as verse 27 says. Fourth, this interpretation not only accounts for the second half of the week (the second 1290 days),¹⁵⁶ but also accounts for the 1335 days mentioned in Daniel 12:12 (the exact number of days from the day that the temple was burned until Masada fell).¹⁵⁷ Fifth, this interpretation makes better sense of the word “after” in verse 26, which describes Messiah being cut off “after the sixty-two weeks” but not during the seventieth week. Sixth, on this interpretation, verse 24a can be taken literally when it gives the number of years left “for your people and for your holy city,” whereas both people and city continued to exist for almost forty years after the seventieth week on the previous interpretation.

The choice between these two views hinges on at least three issues. First, can there be gaps in the 490 years or must they run consecutively? In favor of gaps are the following considerations:

1. The text does not say 490 years, but 70 weeks.
2. If the “command” of verse 23 is the same as the “command” in verse 25, then the countdown for 490 would start in 537 BC (Cyrus, year 1). This would make the first option impossible to justify, but fits the chronology being proposed in the second option perfect to the year.¹⁵⁸
3. The weeks are grouped into three parts: seven weeks” (v. 25), “sixty-two weeks” (vv. 25-26), and “one week” (v. 27). Why list them in three sections? At least one theory is that there are gaps between those three groupings.
4. Making gaps in the predicted 70 weeks makes the prophecy parallel to the gaps that everyone acknowledges were in place for the 70 weeks that led up to Israel’s exile.

Keep in mind that this promise of 70 weeks flows out of Daniel’s calculation of Jeremiah’s prophecy about the 70 years of exile (see Daniel 9:2). This means that there were seventy Sabbath-year violations by Israel that led to the 70-year exile.¹⁵⁹ No matter how those Sabbath violations are calculated, there are large gaps of time when Israel did indeed keep the Sabbath year mandate. It just so happens that when the recorded years in which the “land had rest” are subtracted from the time between Cyrus and 73AD, you have an exact calculation of years that amounts to 70 weeks of Sabbath violations.¹⁶⁰ The last unfaithful, Sabbathless week of years were the years from 66-73 AD. The final gap occurred as John the Baptist turned the hearts of the fathers to the children and of the children to the fathers and averted (for forty years) God’s curse on the land (Mal. 4:6). Any Jew living in the time of Christ who counted the previous three forty year periods would have been able to know the time of this war against Jerusalem to the year.

The second issue that divides between these two options is the word “after” in verse 26. When the Messiah is said to be cut off “after the sixty-two weeks” (v. 26), how far “after” the sixty-two weeks is He cut off? One view holds that it is 3½ years after the sixty-two weeks, and the second view holds that it is 40 years after the sixty-two weeks. Both views take the “after” seriously. The first view can account for “after” by saying that half way through the last week is indeed “after the sixty-two weeks.” It is an odd way to phrase the question, but it can work. If we take the second interpretation, Christ’s crucifixion does not happen either within the sixty-two weeks or within the seventieth week. The only way to speak of Christ’s crucifixion would have been by placing it after the sixty-two weeks but before the seventieth week, which is exactly the way the text lays the plan out.

The last interpretive issue is what is being referred to as happening during the “middle of the week” in verse 27. Does the “middle of the week” refer to the time Jesus is cut off or the time that the literal sacrifices and offerings are cut off? Though it could fit the first interpretation, the most natural reading of the week in verse 27 is to take it as the length of the war. This is strengthened when it is realized that verse 24 gives seventy weeks of countdown “for your people and for your holy city.” It appears that the last week will end when the “holy city” ends and when Israel is sent into yet another exile. This doesn’t make sense on the first interpretation, but it makes a great deal of sense on the second interpretation. This gives a smooth parallelism between the reason for the first exile that Jeremiah mentions and the reason for the second exile found in Daniel’s 70 weeks.

Concluding statement

Though there may be other options for interpreting the weeks, it is helpful to note that this interpretation makes the sealing up of vision and prophet consistent with the interpretation already given in Isaiah 8. Again, the seventy weeks controversy can be swept aside if the terminus can be seen to be somehow prior to the exile of the Jews in AD 70 (vv. 26-27). Vision and prophet are clearly said to end before AD 70.

Zechariah’s witness

Zechariah also prophesies a cessation of true prophecy in New Covenant times. And interestingly, it indicates that the same penalty dictated in the Pentateuch for false prophets will continue to apply in New Covenant times. Whatever other issues are unclear about this passage, those two themes come through loud and clear.

First century context

There are several indications that Zechariah 13 will be fulfilled in the time of the New Covenant. First, chapter 12:10 refers to both the piercing of Christ’s side and the subsequent pouring out of the Spirit at Pentecost (see John 19:34-37; Rev. 1:7; Matt. 24:30). Second, Zechariah 12:11-14 must be fulfilled in a period of history when Israel is still distinguishable by tribes and families (impossible after the scattering of Israel in the first century). This gives a clear first century context. Third, chapter 13:1 refers to Christ’s redemption (see John 19:34; Rev. 21:6-7; 1 John 1:7; Ezek. 47:1-5). Fourth, Zechariah 13:7 is quoted in Matthew 26:31,56 and Mark 14:27 as being fulfilled in AD 30. Fifth, Zechariah 13:8-9 is a reference to AD 70 when two-thirds of Israel is destroyed. This parallels each of the other Old Testament Cessationist passages.

Finally, all of the above sections are linked by the time indicator “in that day” (12:4,8-9,11; 13:1-2,4). Therefore (whatever the ambiguities some might see in one or two of the points above), the context should not be stretched beyond the first century.

A first century ending of prophecy

It is in this context that God not only begins a glorious advancement of the Gospel (“cut off the names of idols…unclean spirits”) but also ends the age of prophets (“I will also cause the prophets… to depart from the land”). Zechariah 13 as a whole says,

In that day a fountain shall be opened for the house of David and for the inhabitants of Jerusalem, for sin and for uncleanness. It shall be in that day, says the LORD of hosts, that I will cut off the names of the idols from the land, and they shall no longer be remembered. I will also cause the prophets and the unclean spirit to depart from the land. It shall come to pass that if anyone still prophesies, then his father and mother who begot him will say to him, ‘You shall not live, because you have spoken lies in the name of the LORD.’ And his father and mother who begot him shall thrust him through when he prophesies. And it shall be in that day that every prophet will be ashamed of his vision when he prophesies; they will not wear a robe of coarse hair to deceive. But he will say, “I am no prophet, I am a farmer; for a man taught me to keep cattle from my youth.” And one will say to him, “What are these wounds between your arms?” Then he will answer, “Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends.”

Awake, O sword, against My Shepherd,
Against the Man who is My Companion,
Says the LORD of hosts.
Strike the Shepherd,
And the sheep will be scattered;
Then I will turn My hand against the little ones.
And it shall come to pass in all the land,
Says the LORD,
That two-thirds in it shall be cut off and die,
But one-third shall be left in it:
I will bring the one-third through the fire,
Will refine them as silver is refined,
And test them as gold is tested.
They will call on My name,
And I will answer them.
I will say, “This is My people”;
And each one will say, “The LORD is my God.”

That this cessation of the prophetic office is a cessation of true New Testament prophets can be seen by the following considerations: First, the context is the first century. Second, God is the cause of Cessationism (“I will also cause… to depart” – v. 2). Third, true prophetic revelation is contrasted with the demonic (“the prophets and the unclean spirit”). Fourth, false prophets do continue to exist for a time after God causes the “prophets” to depart from the land. This can be seen by the words “It shall come to pass that if anyone still prophesies” (v. 3). The word “still” indicates that there are some prophetic claims even after God causes “the prophets and the unclean spirit to depart from the land,”¹⁶¹ so obviously it is not the false prophets whom God causes to depart; it is the true prophets.

Fifth, this Cessationism (“I will cause… to depart”) makes false prophets reticent and even ashamed to claim to be prophets (“every prophet will be ashamed of his vision” see also the context of verses 4-6) and makes God’s people unwilling to receive new prophesies from others (“if anyone still prophesies…[they] will say to him…you have spoken lies”).

Sixth, this reluctance to receive new prophesies after the time of cessation is with regard to any prophecy, whether in the name of the Lord or not (“if anyone still prophesies… in the name of the LORD… every prophet”).

Seventh, New Testament prophecy is treated just like Old Testament prophecy, and the prophets are judged according to the standard of Deuteronomy by being put to death (v. 3). This last point is a critical one in critiquing Continuationism because Continuationists do not believe New Testament prophets should be judged by the same standard as Old Testament prophets.¹⁶²

Finally, this parallels Daniel 9 in making both the vehicle of revelation (“prophet”) and the message of revelation (“prophecy”) to cease. This answers those who claim that there is no office of prophet today, but that there is a manifestation of prophecy. The passage appears to discredit both.

However, even if the timing of the above interpretation is not accepted, one still has to deal with the clear statement that at some point in history God Himself will remove prophets from the land. This is not at the end of history (see “still” in v. 3, and the progress of history in verses 1-6). So regardless of one’s interpretation of the Zechariah 13 time period, the standard Continuationist interpretation of 1 Corinthians 13 and Ephesians 4 (which says that prophecy will continue until the end of history) is contradicted. This also contradicts the interpretation that concedes that the office of prophet will cease in the first century, but insists that the occasional act of prophesying will continue, because this rules out both office and prophetic revelation at some point in history.

Joel’s witness

Joel 2 details a time of God’s marvelous presence and blessing with His people (vv. 18-27) followed by a later time in which people would prophesy and dream dreams and see visions.

And it shall come to pass afterward that I will pour out My Spirit on all flesh; Your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions; and also on My menservants and on My maidservants I will pour out My Spirit in those days. And I will show wonders in the heavens and in the earth: blood and fire and pillars of smoke. The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the coming of the great and awesome day of the LORD. And it shall come to pass that whoever calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved. For in Mount Zion and in Jerusalem there shall be deliverance, as the LORD has said, among the remnant whom the LORD calls. (Joel 2:28-32)

The first point relevant to Cessationism is that the church can have God’s full favor, blessing, and presence (vv. 18-27)¹⁶³ without having this pouring out of charismatic gifts. Note that the pouring out of revelation comes after God’s Inter-Testamental blessing. To speak of a lack of ongoing prophecy as a sign of God’s curse is not consistent with Scripture.

Second, these revelatory gifts come after the Inter-Testamental period mentioned in verses 18-27 but “before the coming of the great and awesome day of the LORD” when God’s wrath is poured out upon Jerusalem in the war of AD 66-73 (vv. 30-32). This makes this passage on New Testament gifts occur during the same time period that the previous Old Testament Scriptures do - the last days leading up to AD 70. To stretch the application of Joel beyond that is not only unnecessary, but it violates the immediate and broader context.

Third, when Acts interprets this passage as being fulfilled in the “last days” of the Old Covenant, it is interpreting this consistently with each of the Old Testament passages on Cessationism. Every reference to “last days” in the Bible refers to the time period of foreign domination of Israel that culminates in Israel’s destruction as a nation in AD 70. Thus Jesus was born in the last days (1 Pet. 1:20), spoke in the last days (Heb. 1:1), and the Spirit was poured out at Pentecost on the last days (Acts 2:16-17). These are the last days of Israel, temple, sacrifices, priesthood, Old Covenant, etc. Hebrews uses the present tense when it says “Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away” (Heb. 8:13). The final “shaking” and evidence of the new kingdom was to be the destruction of Jerusalem (Heb. 12:25-29 with Haggai 2:6).

Fourth, connected to these spiritual gifts are miraculous signs in verses 30-31. These signs in some way confirm the revelatory gifts of God. (The New Testament indicates that this is not the exclusive function of miracles, but it was certainly a significant function of miracles.¹⁶⁴)

All “New Testament” apocrypha and later cultic writings were written after AD 70 and therefore are not canonical

The gnostic gospels and miscellaneous other writings that cults have claimed as Scripture were all written after AD 70. The following books have been thoroughly discredited on many other grounds, but the presupposition of cessationism given in this book automatically rule every one of them out.

• The Gospel of Thomas
• Oxyrhynchus 1224 Gospel
• The Egerton Gospel
• The Gospel of Peter
• Secret Mark
• The Gospel of the Egyptians
• The Gospel of the Hebrews
• The Apocalypse of Peter
• The Secret Book of James
• The Preaching of Peter
• The Gospel of the Ebionites
• The Gospel of the Nazoreans
• The Oxyrhynchus 840 Gospel
• The Traditions of Matthias
• The Gospel of Mary
• The Dialogue of the Savior
• The Gospel of the Savior
• The Epistula Apostolorum
• The Infancy Gospel of James
• The Infancy Gospel of Thomas
• The Acts of Peter
• The Acts of John
• The Acts of Paul
• The Acts of Andrew
• The Acts of Peter and the Twelve
• The Book of Thomas the Contender
• The Acts of Thomas

Conclusion

The preceding information makes it clear that the Old Testament anticipated the complete closing of the canon in AD 70. This rules out all writings that were produced after that time as being counterfeits to true Scripture. This rules out not only Gnostic literature of the second and third centuries AD, but also the writings of all cult leaders since then. Nothing more is needed than these Old Testament prophecies to rule out the Koran, the Book of Mormon, and other claims to continuing inspired revelation.