Revelation Ceased?
From the
book, Here We Stand, Chapter 3, 'the Bible Says,' pages 38-48,
by Joseph Fielding McConkie
"It ought
to be asked, What about the twenty-seven books that constitute our New
Testament? By what authority were they
chosen? And who assumed the prerogative to declare that they constitute the
cessation of revelation? The story is both interesting and strangely
paradoxical.
Two
second-century heretics get leading roles in the drama: one for being the first
to close the canon of scripture, and the second for causing the church to
declare the heavens closed by
maintaining that he was the Holy Ghost.
Macrion, a
bishop's son and a wealthy ship-owner, was the first to create a list of
canonical books. His Bible was closed to all but ten of the epistles of Paul
and the Gospel of Luke, from which he
had taken all references to the Jews. He rejected the Old Testament in its entirety
because of its Jewish origins.
Jesus,
according to Macrion, was not born but
sprang, like Zeus, fully grown from God. He came to earth to preach a
ministry of redemption as a God of love in contrast with the capricious and
cruel God of the Old Testament. So final was Macrion's excommunication
from the church that even the money he had donated was returned. This
threat to the church was followed by another known to its followers as
"the New Prophecy" and to history as "Montanism," after its
founder, Montanus, a convert to Christianity from the province of Phrygia in
Asia Minor. On the eve of his crucifixion, the Savior had told his disciples
that he had many things to teach them but they could not bear them at that
time.
He then
promised that the Holy Ghost would guide them "into all truth" and
show them "things to come" (John 16:12-14). Montanus denounced the lack of revelation and the absence of
spiritual gifts in the church.
In doing so he
claimed himself to be the advocate promised by the Savior and said that he had
come to give them the promised revelation.
Through the
course of years, the church solved the problem of dealing with such
heretics by announcing that revelation had ceased and that the canon of
scripture was closed. Thus the biblical promise of continued
revelation led the church of the second century to deny continuing revelation,
while the idea of the Bible as a single, sacred, unalterable corpus of texts,
which began as a heresy, was adopted in the efforts of the church to define orthodoxy. (Wikipedia mentions 'In the
Christian sense the term orthodoxy means conforming to the Christian faith as
represented in the creeds of the early Church')…
Is it not
somewhat ironic that God himself can no longer speak in what is supposed to be
his own church? Is it not strange that a theology claiming the word of angels
and prophets as its very foundation refuses now to admit the existence of
either?"
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home