From: nlt@gboro.glassboro.edu (N. L. Tinkham)
Subject: Re: Biblical References of Future Revelations/?'s
Organization: Computer Science Department, Rowan College of New Jersey
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1992 20:29:47 GMT

Michael Million asks:

>    1). Does the Old Testament allude to future revelations?  I realize
>   that it proclaims the coming of the 'Messiah,' but 2) does it state
>   that future works (i.e. writings, letters, text) of revelation
>   would be forthcoming?  3). Specifically, does the Old Testament
>   state that the writings we now know as the _New Testament_ would be
>   forthcoming?
>    4). Does the New Testament prophesize the appearance of future works
>   of literary revelation?
>    5). Are offerings of revelational literature part of 'normal
>   administration procedure' for fostering spiritual progress, according
>   to the Bible?
>    6). How are we to recognize future works of revelation?
>    7). Does the Bible state that we should _not_ expect further reve-
>   lations, with the exception of course of the return of Christ?
>    8). Do members of this list feel that the Bible is the _last_
>   revelational offering that will be made to us?

     To my knowledge, the answer to most of these questions is negative:
I cannot think of any Bible passages that address the formation of the
canon directly, either to declare it closed or to predict future canonical
writings.  There are some NT passages that take for granted a body of OT
writings regarded as Scripture, and possibly some hints that some early
Christian writings were gaining special status for the church, but none
of that addresses future writings.  Both the Old and New Testaments speak 
of prophets and the gift of prophecy (with the expectation that this gift
is an ongoing one), but this does not necessarily speak of * written *
revelations.  So I do not think the Bible addresses the notion of a canon
of Scripture or when we will know that it is closed.

     My own opinion on revelational literature is this:  For defining the
canon, I am content to follow the tradition of Israel (for the OT) and the
church (for the NT).  This doesn't settle the question completely, since
tradition is divided on the OT apocryphal/deuterocanonical books, but it
works well enough for most purposes.

     In practice, I am skeptical about claims of divine revelation.  That is,
while I expect God to work through his people and bring them to a greater
knowledge of his truth, and while I even expect this occasionally to take the
form of direct revelation, I am cautious about accepting any particular claim
of revelation.  This is partly my cultural bias, I expect, but it comes also
from my sense that it is more dangerous to mistakenly treat human thoughts as
divine revelation than it it to mistakenly treat divine revelation as human
thoughts.

     I do, in fact, place great value on the writings of insightful Christians
who have preceded me.  Some of these writings probably did involve direct
revelation.  I think that the visions of St. Francis of Assisi and of Julian
of Norwich, for example, were probably genuine; the writings we have from
them seem to me to be human reflections on their experiences of the divine.
Other writings (those of the major theologians, for instance) seem to have a
less vivid involvement of the Spirit; they are mostly careful human thought
about the revelation that is passed down through the generations of the church.

     In evaluating the revelatory component of new writings, I look at
the quality of the person's life (does this person seem to be genuinely
seeking God or merely out to sell a story), the "spirit" of the writing (does
God's love permeate it, or is it "cold" or cruel), the orthodoxy of the
content (the writer should at least be standing within Christian tradition,
even when attempting to make additions or changes to that tradition), and
the insightfulness of the content (is the writer actually saying anything).
I do occasionally read something that bears witness to God's presence in an
unusually strong way.  I'm never tempted to add such writings to the canon
(see note of caution above), but I do listen carefully to the truth in them.

_____________________________________________________________________________

                                              Nancy Tinkham
                                              nlt@gboro.glassboro.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU