Source:Nibley:CW03:Ch31:1:Block future revelation - Revision history

RogerNicholson at 19:25, 16 September 2014

2014-09-16T19:25:53Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:25, 16 September 2014
Line 19:		Line 19:
	[[Category:Apostasy/Loss of spiritual gifts\|Loss of spiritual gifts]]		[[Category:Apostasy/Loss of spiritual gifts\|Loss of spiritual gifts]]
	[[Category:Apostasy/Doctrinal change/On-going revelation\|On-going revelation]]		[[Category:Apostasy/Doctrinal change/On-going revelation\|On-going revelation]]
	[[Category:Biblical inerrancy]]		[[Category:History/Apostasy/Doctrinal change/Biblical inerrancy]]

RogerNicholson: m

2014-09-06T03:54:05Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:54, 6 September 2014
Line 17:		Line 17:
	[[Category:Prophets/Loss of prophets\|Loss of prophets]]		[[Category:Prophets/Loss of prophets\|Loss of prophets]]
	[[Category:History/Restoration/Continuity with Primitive Church\|Continuity with Primitive Church]]		[[Category:History/Restoration/Continuity with Primitive Church\|Continuity with Primitive Church]]
	[[Category:~~History/~~Apostasy/Loss of spiritual gifts\|Loss of spiritual gifts]]		[[Category:Apostasy/Loss of spiritual gifts\|Loss of spiritual gifts]]
	[[Category:~~History/~~Apostasy/Doctrinal change/On-going revelation\|On-going revelation]]		[[Category:Apostasy/Doctrinal change/On-going revelation\|On-going revelation]]
	[[Category:Biblical inerrancy]]		[[Category:Biblical inerrancy]]

RogerNicholson: m

2014-09-06T01:50:28Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:50, 6 September 2014
Line 19:		Line 19:
	[[Category:History/Apostasy/Loss of spiritual gifts\|Loss of spiritual gifts]]		[[Category:History/Apostasy/Loss of spiritual gifts\|Loss of spiritual gifts]]
	[[Category:History/Apostasy/Doctrinal change/On-going revelation\|On-going revelation]]		[[Category:History/Apostasy/Doctrinal change/On-going revelation\|On-going revelation]]
	[[Category:~~History/Apostasy/Doctrinal change/Biblical inerrancy\|~~Biblical inerrancy]]		[[Category:Biblical inerrancy]]

GregSmith at 23:24, 2 September 2014

2014-09-02T23:24:25Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:24, 2 September 2014
Line 8:		Line 8:
	It is significant that it is the intellectuals of the church who have always insisted on the apparently fundamentalist doctrine of a complete, perfect, final, and unalterable Bible; R. H. Charles can tell us why this is so: "God had, according to the official teachers of the Church, spoken His last and final word," and the policy of the doctors "so far as lay in its power, made the revival of such prophecy an impossibility." 29 The theory of complete, finished, and absolute scriptures was simply a door banged in the face of future prophets by the doctors. In a recent and important study Van Unnik has shown that until the third century the Christians had no objection whatever to the idea "that someone might still add revelations to the writings of the Gospel."30 There was originally no moral objection or mystic principle barring the production of more scriptures whenever God should see fit to reveal them; it was only when "the Church believed that the time of Revelation and therefore also the time of bringing forth new holy scriptures had come to an end with the Apostolic Age," that the expectation of more holy writings was discouraged and condemned.31 After that it was to the interest of the scholars to cry out with alarm at any suggestion of going beyond the Bible and the human mind.		It is significant that it is the intellectuals of the church who have always insisted on the apparently fundamentalist doctrine of a complete, perfect, final, and unalterable Bible; R. H. Charles can tell us why this is so: "God had, according to the official teachers of the Church, spoken His last and final word," and the policy of the doctors "so far as lay in its power, made the revival of such prophecy an impossibility." 29 The theory of complete, finished, and absolute scriptures was simply a door banged in the face of future prophets by the doctors. In a recent and important study Van Unnik has shown that until the third century the Christians had no objection whatever to the idea "that someone might still add revelations to the writings of the Gospel."30 There was originally no moral objection or mystic principle barring the production of more scriptures whenever God should see fit to reveal them; it was only when "the Church believed that the time of Revelation and therefore also the time of bringing forth new holy scriptures had come to an end with the Apostolic Age," that the expectation of more holy writings was discouraged and condemned.31 After that it was to the interest of the scholars to cry out with alarm at any suggestion of going beyond the Bible and the human mind.

	There are just two sources of revelation, the Roman Catholic Church declares: "No other source of [public] revelation exists except the canonical books and the apostolic tradition."32 The Protestants go even further: "We believe . . . that the sole rule and standard according to which all dogmas together with all teachers should be estimated and judged are the prophetic and apostolic Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments alone."33 So an eminent Protestant divine declares today: "I boldly assert, therefore, that God does not speak today because of the supreme character of His revelation of Himself made once for all in His Christ. . . . We must . . . recognize His voice in his ''final written Word''."<ref>{{Book:Nibley:CW03\|pages=[http://publications.maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/fullscreen/?pub=1103&index=33 Chapter 32], {{sofr}}}}</ref></blockquote></onlyinclude>		There are just two sources of revelation, the Roman Catholic Church declares: "No other source of [public] revelation exists except the canonical books and the apostolic tradition."32 The Protestants go even further: "We believe . . . that the sole rule and standard according to which all dogmas together with all teachers should be estimated and judged are the prophetic and apostolic Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments alone."33 So an eminent Protestant divine declares today: "I boldly assert, therefore, that God does not speak today because of the supreme character of His revelation of Himself made once for all in His Christ. . . . We must . . . recognize His voice in his ''final written Word''."<ref>{{Book:Nibley:CW03\|pages=[http://publications.maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/fullscreen/?pub=1103&index=32 Chapter 31], {{sofr}}}}</ref></blockquote></onlyinclude>

	{{Endnotes sources}}		{{Endnotes sources}}

GregSmith: GregSmith moved page Source:Nibley:CW03:Ch32:1:Block future revelation to Source:Nibley:CW03:Ch31:1:Block future revelation without leaving a redirect

2014-09-02T23:23:40Z

GregSmith moved page Source:Nibley:CW03:Ch32:1:Block future revelation to Source:Nibley:CW03:Ch31:1:Block future revelation without leaving a redirect

← Older revision	Revision as of 23:23, 2 September 2014
(No difference)

GregSmith: Created page with "{{FME-Source |title=Up to the third century, new revelation was seen as possible |category= |catname= }} ==Up to the third century, new revelation was seen as pos..."

2014-09-02T23:16:03Z

Created page with "{{FME-Source |title=Up to the third century, new revelation was seen as possible |category= |catname= }}<onlyinclude> ==Up to the third century, new revelation was seen as pos..."

New page

{{FME-Source
|title=Up to the third century, new revelation was seen as possible
|category=
|catname=
}}<onlyinclude>
==Up to the third century, new revelation was seen as possible==
<blockquote>
It is significant that it is the intellectuals of the church who have always insisted on the apparently fundamentalist doctrine of a complete, perfect, final, and unalterable Bible; R. H. Charles can tell us why this is so: "God had, according to the official teachers of the Church, spoken His last and final word," and the policy of the doctors "so far as lay in its power, made the revival of such prophecy an impossibility." 29 The theory of complete, finished, and absolute scriptures was simply a door banged in the face of future prophets by the doctors. In a recent and important study Van Unnik has shown that until the third century the Christians had no objection whatever to the idea "that someone might still add revelations to the writings of the Gospel."30 There was originally no moral objection or mystic principle barring the production of more scriptures whenever God should see fit to reveal them; it was only when "the Church believed that the time of Revelation and therefore also the time of bringing forth new holy scriptures had come to an end with the Apostolic Age," that the expectation of more holy writings was discouraged and condemned.31 After that it was to the interest of the scholars to cry out with alarm at any suggestion of going beyond the Bible and the human mind.

There are just two sources of revelation, the Roman Catholic Church declares: "No other source of [public] revelation exists except the canonical books and the apostolic tradition."32 The Protestants go even further: "We believe . . . that the sole rule and standard according to which all dogmas together with all teachers should be estimated and judged are the prophetic and apostolic Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments alone."33 So an eminent Protestant divine declares today: "I boldly assert, therefore, that God does not speak today because of the supreme character of His revelation of Himself made once for all in His Christ. . . . We must . . . recognize His voice in his ''final written Word''."<ref>{{Book:Nibley:CW03|pages=[http://publications.maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/fullscreen/?pub=1103&index=33 Chapter 32], {{sofr}}}}</ref></blockquote></onlyinclude>

{{Endnotes sources}}

[[Category:Hugh Nibley]]
[[Category:The World and the Prophets]]
[[Category:Collected Works of Hugh Nibley Vol. 03]]
[[Category:Prophets/Loss of prophets|Loss of prophets]]
[[Category:History/Restoration/Continuity with Primitive Church|Continuity with Primitive Church]]
[[Category:History/Apostasy/Loss of spiritual gifts|Loss of spiritual gifts]]
[[Category:History/Apostasy/Doctrinal change/On-going revelation|On-going revelation]]
[[Category:History/Apostasy/Doctrinal change/Biblical inerrancy|Biblical inerrancy]]