The end of revelation?

[Polaris]

This was posted in another thread and I feel that it's worthy of its own discussion...

God has revealed himself fully by sending his own Son, in whom he has established his covenant for ever. The Son is his Father's definitive Word; so there will be no further Revelation after him.

How did you reach this conclusion? I have asked this before, but I've never really received a clear answer. "There will be no further Revelation after him" is a very bold and significant statement. Where does your belief in such an idea come from? Who authoratively declared it? As far as I know there is nothing in the NT that suggests that. On the contrary I can think of at least a dozen passages that teach otherwise.

 

[wizanda]

Mat 9:38
(38) Pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, that he will send forth labourers into his harvest.

Mat 13:41
(41) The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;

Mat 23:34
(34) Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:

 

[Polaris]

By the way, the OP of this thread is directed to any Catholic or otherwise who believes that revelation ended with the NT.

 

[Scott1]

Where does your belief in such an idea come from? Who authoratively declared it? As far as I know there is nothing in the NT that suggests that. On the contrary I can think of at least a dozen passages that teach otherwise.

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church

66 "The Christian economy, therefore, since it is the new and definitive Covenant, will never pass away; and no new public revelation is to be expected before the glorious manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ." (28) Yet even if Revelation is already complete, it has not been made completely explicit; it remains for Christian faith gradually to grasp its full significance over the course of the centuries.
67 Throughout the ages, there have been so-called "private" revelations, some of which have been recognized by the authority of the Church. They do not belong, however, to the deposit of faith. It is not their role to improve or complete Christ's definitive Revelation, but to help live more fully by it in a certain period of history. Guided by the Magisterium of the Church, the sensus fidelium knows how to discern and welcome in these revelations whatever constitutes an authentic call of Christ or his saints to the Church. Christian faith cannot accept "revelations" that claim to surpass or correct the Revelation of which Christ is the fulfillment, as is the case in certain non-Christian religions and also in certain recent sects which base themselves on such "revelations".

(28) Dei Verbum (from Vatican II) 4; cf. 1 Tim 6:14; Titus 2:13.

In giving us his Son, his only Word (for he possesses no other), he spoke everything to us at once in this sole Word - and he has no more to say. . . because what he spoke before to the prophets in parts, he has now spoken all at once by giving us the All Who is His Son. Any person questioning God or desiring some vision or revelation would be guilty not only of foolish behavior but also of offending him, by not fixing his eyes entirely upon Christ and by living with the desire for some other novelty.
St. John of the Cross

 

[Polaris]

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church

66 "The Christian economy, therefore, since it is the new and definitive Covenant, will never pass away; and no new public revelation is to be expected before the glorious manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ." (28) Yet even if Revelation is already complete, it has not been made completely explicit; it remains for Christian faith gradually to grasp its full significance over the course of the centuries.
67Throughout the ages, there have been so-called "private" revelations, some of which have been recognized by the authority of the Church. They do not belong, however, to the deposit of faith. It is not their role to improve or complete Christ's definitive Revelation, but to help live more fully by it in a certain period of history. Guided by the Magisterium of the Church, the sensus fidelium knows how to discern and welcome in these revelations whatever constitutes an authentic call of Christ or his saints to the Church. Christian faith cannot accept "revelations" that claim to surpass or correct the Revelation of which Christ is the fulfillment, as is the case in certain non-Christian religions and also in certain recent sects which base themselves on such "revelations".

(28) Dei Verbum (from Vatican II) 4; cf. 1 Tim 6:14; Titus 2:13.

In giving us his Son, his only Word (for he possesses no other), he spoke everything to us at once in this sole Word - and he has no more to say. . . because what he spoke before to the prophets in parts, he has now spoken all at once by giving us the All Who is His Son. Any person questioning God or desiring some vision or revelation would be guilty not only of foolish behavior but also of offending him, by not fixing his eyes entirely upon Christ and by living with the desire for some other novelty.
St. John of the Cross

But these are declarations that were made after the death of the Apostles of the NT. If revelation ended with the NT, the revelation that declared "revelation is complete" must have occurred before the death of the NT Apostles. That in and of itself is a very significant revelation.

 

[Popeyesays]

But these are declarations that were made after the death of the Apostles of the NT. If revelation ended with the NT, the revelation that declared "revelation is complete" must have occurred before the death of the NT Apostles. That in and of itself is a very significant revelation.

I would suggest that it means the Epistles for instance, are not Revelation at all.

I am always amazed by the notion that God could have revealed ALL when Jesus Himself said He had things to tell us but we could not bear them yet.

Regards,
Scott

 

[Polaris]

I am always amazed by the notion that God could have revealed ALL when Jesus Himself said He had things to tell us but we could not bear them yet.

I agree. And I find it interesting that Jesus clearly taught that there would continue to be prophets, yet no revelation? Doesn't make sense to me.

 

[FFH]

Yeah, if revelation, supposedly ended, as Scott has claimed, then all other subsequent revelations, including the Catechisms of the Catholic church, should be null and void, according to their own assertions/claims..

You guys can't have it both ways

If you're entitled to revelation, so are other Christian organizations, by your own claims.

The restored gospel of Jesus Christ

 

[Scott1]

But these are declarations that were made after the death of the Apostles of the NT. If revelation ended with the NT, the revelation that declared "revelation is complete" must have occurred before the death of the NT Apostles. That in and of itself is a very significant revelation.

We have a different definition of what revelation is (public vs. private) and the development of dogma.

In a nutshell.... revelation ended with the death of the last apostle... and the Church is the guardian of the deposit of faith... I can explain more if needed.

 

[Scott1]

Or... if you folks want to continue to be rude and not let me explain (as has been my experience with LDS members)... I can go back to ignoring all LDS.

Let me know gang... charity above all else.

 

[Popeyesays]

Or... if you folks want to continue to be rude and not let me explain (as has been my experience with LDS members)... I can go back to ignoring all LDS.

Let me know gang... charity above all else.

I have not seen anyone being rude to you in this topic, not even me.

Regards,
Scott

 

[Polaris]

Scott, please understand that I wasn't meaning to be rude. I truly fail to understand the principle that you have presented, especially in light of certain statements by Jesus and Paul specifically.

It was not my intention to come off as rude toward you. I sincerely appologize and hope you will help me understand at least where you are coming from concerning this issue.

We have a different definition of what revelation is (public vs. private) and the development of dogma.

In a nutshell.... revelation ended with the death of the last apostle... and the Church is the guardian of the deposit of faith... I can explain more if needed.

This idea "revelation ended with the death of the last apostle" is specifically what I take issue with. Who specifically declared this to be the case? This is such a critical issue that I believe only an apostolic statement to back it up could give it any sort of credibility.

Who authoratively declared that "revelation ended with the death of the last apostle"?

 

[Popeyesays]

Scott, please understand that I wasn't meaning to be rude. I truly fail to understand the principle that you have presented, especially in light of certain statements by Jesus and Paul specifically.

It was not my intention to come off as rude toward you. I sincerely appologize and hope you will help me understand at least where you are coming from concerning this issue.



This idea "revelation ended with the death of the last apostle" is specifically what I take issue with. Who specifically declared this to be the case? This is such a critical issue that I believe only an apostolic statement to back it up could give it any sort of credibility.

Who authoratively declared that "revelation ended with the death of the last apostle"?

That's a very good question.

Regards,
Scott

 

[Scott1]

Who authoratively declared that "revelation ended with the death of the last apostle"?

We believe in different things.... you have faith in Joseph Smith and your group, and I have faith in the early church fathers and my group... do you honestly expect me to believe that you will respect the teachings of an "apostate church"?

I just don't want to waste my time... yet again... to be told about apostasy and blah blah...

 

[Popeyesays]

We believe in different things.... you have faith in Joseph Smith and your group, and I have faith in the early church fathers and my group... do you honestly expect me to believe that you will respect the teachings of an "apostate church"?

I just don't want to waste my time... yet again... to be told about apostasy and blah blah...

Besides the holes in your palms from the nails make it difficult to type? In all sincerity taking your ball home is not a good way to play with others.

Regards,
Scott

 

[Polaris]

We believe in different things.... you have faith in Joseph Smith and your group, and I have faith in the early church fathers and my group... do you honestly expect me to believe that you will respect the teachings of an "apostate church"?

I just don't want to waste my time... yet again... to be told about apostasy and blah blah...

Scott, I promise I will say nothing about the apostasy. All I want to know is who it was that specifically and authoratively declared that "revelation ended after the death of the last apostle".

 

[Mustard Seed]

At the heart of this issue is whether the Catholic Church is the one "true" church and if it is so does it have the monopoly on interpreting revelation.

When you look at the issue there is points on both sides of the story....
then it comes down to faith. Which side you want to accept as true or not.

thanks,

daddyholland

 

[Polaris]

At the heart of this issue is whether the Catholic Church is the one "true" church and if it is so does it have the monopoly on interpreting revelation.

When you look at the issue there is points on both sides of the story....
then it comes down to faith. Which side you want to accept as true or not.

But your missing the point. I'm not trying to debate who's right and who's wrong here. All I want to know is why Catholics and others believe that "revelation ended with the death of the apostles". Who authoratively declared that to be true?

 

[Scott1]

Scott, I promise I will say nothing about the apostasy. All I want to know is who it was that specifically and authoratively declared that "revelation ended after the death of the last apostle".

It's been part of Christianity...well... since the death of the last apostle.

Maybe this will help:
Then, after speaking in many and varied ways through the prophets, "now at last in these days God has spoken to us in His Son" (Heb. 1:1-2). For He sent His Son, the eternal Word, who enlightens all men, so that He might dwell among men and tell them of the innermost being of God (see John 1:1-18). Jesus Christ, therefore, the Word made flesh, was sent as "a man to men." (3) He "speaks the words of God" (John 3;34), and completes the work of salvation which His Father gave Him to do (see John 5:36; John 17:4). To see Jesus is to see His Father (John 14:9). For this reason Jesus perfected revelation by fulfilling it through his whole work of making Himself present and manifesting Himself: through His words and deeds, His signs and wonders, but especially through His death and glorious resurrection from the dead and final sending of the Spirit of truth. Moreover He confirmed with divine testimony what revelation proclaimed, that God is with us to free us from the darkness of sin and death, and to raise us up to life eternal.
The Christian dispensation, therefore, as the new and definitive covenant, will never pass away and we now await no further new public revelation before the glorious manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ (see 1 Tim. 6:14 and Tit. 2:13).
DOGMATIC CONSTITUTION
ON DIVINE REVELATION
DEI VERBUM

The apostles recognized that their task was to pass on, intact, the faith given to them by the Master: "[A]nd what you have heard from me before many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also" (2 Tim. 2:2); "But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have firmly believed, knowing from whom you learned it" (2 Tim. 3:14). However, this closure to public revelation doesn’t mean there isn’t progress in the understanding of what has been entrusted to the Church.

It all boils down to trusting in the early church... which you don't... so I don't know how this helps you...

Peace my friend,
S

 

[FFH]

Scott,

Revelation flows through any organization or person who claims Christ as the only way wherby salvation is offered to man..

This includes Catholicism, LDS, Baha'i, Evangelicals, Baptists, etc. etc..

Revelation is an ongoing process...

For example see these links: 2007 | 2006 | 2005 | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 | 1999 | 1998 | 1997 | 1996 |1995 | 1994 | 1993 | 1992 | 1991 | 1990 | 1989 | 1988 | 1987 | 1986 | 1985 |1984

Those are direct messages from Mary, the earthly mother of Jesus Christ, given to her chosen visionaries.

Revelation flows through various sources.

Also see The Official Website of Kim Clement