Catholic Answers Forums

Catholic Answers Forums (http://forums.catholic.com/index.php)
-   Apologetics (http://forums.catholic.com/forumdisplay.php?f=20)
-   -   Revelation ended with death of last Apostle (http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=461770)

MarcoPolo May 27, '10 2:53 pm

Revelation ended with death of last Apostle
 
What's the best answer to the question, "Why do you believe public revelation ended with the death of the last apostle?"

VetA May 27, '10 4:15 pm

Re: Revelation ended with death of last Apostle
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by MarcoPolo (Post 6684299)
What's the best answer to the question, "Why do you believe public revelation ended with the death of the last apostle?"

Apostolic succession. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostolic_succession

twiggymoo May 28, '10 4:47 am

Re: Revelation ended with death of last Apostle
 
That sounds like the Reformed Protestant view or Cessationist view. In other words, God doesn't work miracles through his servants anymore nor does He heal or give spiritual gifts since the death of the last Apostle.
This is false.

JustaServant May 28, '10 4:58 am

Re: Revelation ended with death of last Apostle
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by MarcoPolo (Post 6684299)
What's the best answer to the question, "Why do you believe public revelation ended with the death of the last apostle?"

When I was a Baptist, this was the 'prooftext' that was used:
Quote:

1 Corinthians
Chapter 13:8 If there are prophecies, they will be brought to nothing; if tongues, they will cease; if knowledge, it will be brought to nothing.
9
For we know partially and we prophesy partially,
10
but when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away.
The 'perfect', they claimed was the Word of God, the New Testament. And since John wrote Revelation around 95 AD, that is when they claim revelation (small 'r') ended.
There are REEMS of problems with this interpretation, not the least of which is the fact Paul is here speaking of love, not revelation. So the interpretation is read into the context.

MarcoPolo May 28, '10 6:12 am

Re: Revelation ended with death of last Apostle
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by VetA (Post 6684619)

Thanks, is the answer to the question somewhere in this link?

MarcoPolo May 28, '10 6:13 am

Re: Revelation ended with death of last Apostle
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by JustaServant (Post 6686185)
When I was a Baptist, this was the 'prooftext' that was used:


The 'perfect', they claimed was the Word of God, the New Testament. And since John wrote Revelation around 95 AD, that is when they claim revelation (small 'r') ended.
There are REEMS of problems with this interpretation, not the least of which is the fact Paul is here speaking of love, not revelation. So the interpretation is read into the context.

I don't quite see the proof in that text either. :o

MarcoPolo May 28, '10 6:18 am

Re: Revelation ended with death of last Apostle
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by twiggymoo (Post 6686160)
That sounds like the Reformed Protestant view or Cessationist view. In other words, God doesn't work miracles through his servants anymore nor does He heal or give spiritual gifts since the death of the last Apostle.
This is false.

Miracles and spiritual gifts do persist. I'm asking why we teach that divine revelation ceased after the death of the last Apostle. In Protestant terms, the question would be: "Why can't someone new write new Scripture?"

SnakeMauler May 28, '10 12:50 pm

Re: Revelation ended with death of last Apostle
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by MarcoPolo (Post 6684299)
What's the best answer to the question, "Why do you believe public revelation ended with the death of the last apostle?"

Whoa whoa whoa, what about Muhammed? He just sat in his room and made all that stuff up and spent all this time writing the Koran and ripping off the names of Christian biblicial figures and using their names?

Tomster May 28, '10 1:09 pm

Re: Revelation ended with death of last Apostle
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by twiggymoo (Post 6686160)
That sounds like the Reformed Protestant view or Cessationist view. In other words, God doesn't work miracles through his servants anymore nor does He heal or give spiritual gifts since the death of the last Apostle.
This is false.


Undoubtably, had God so willed, he might have communicated his testimony directly to each member of the human race as soon as he was capable of receiving it. The contention of Protestantism is (or was) that he does so. Sad experience has shown how easily men may be led to think that they are inspired. But apart from any other reason, an individualistic revelation seems antecedently improbable because it would not be in keeping with what we know of God's providential dealings with mankind. God deals with man according to his nature; and man is naturally social. This being so, we should have expected God to make his revelation to men as a body; and such in fact was the case.

In this way the Catholic Church was instituted, the visible, infallible society in which the revelation of Christ was to be preserved and propagated.

Erich May 28, '10 1:29 pm

Re: Revelation ended with death of last Apostle
 
Mark Shea, in The Lens in My Eye, calls this the Tradition of the Closure of Public Revelation... which is right up there with the Tradition of the Table of Contents, the Tradition of the Sanctity of Human Life, the Tradition of Monogamy, and the Tradition of Trinitarian Interpretation as "rock-bottom, non-negotiable, grade A, can't-do-without-'em beliefs which [are] not attested (or very weakly attested) in the Bible."

NHInsider May 28, '10 3:46 pm

Re: Revelation ended with death of last Apostle
 
Well - possibly - the Incarnation is the ultimate self-revelation of God. And when the last of the Apostles died, the last person taught by the Incarnate Logos, there was no further possibility of someone teaching/reporting something Jesus had taught. The big problem with this hypothesis, obviously, is Paul.

Holly3278 May 28, '10 3:52 pm

Re: Revelation ended with death of last Apostle
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by twiggymoo (Post 6686160)
That sounds like the Reformed Protestant view or Cessationist view. In other words, God doesn't work miracles through his servants anymore nor does He heal or give spiritual gifts since the death of the last Apostle.
This is false.

Yes, it definitely is false. But when I read the title, I immediately thought of the Mormon "church" because that is precisely what they teach as well.

MarcoPolo May 28, '10 5:49 pm

Re: Revelation ended with death of last Apostle
 
I found an interesting footnote in the book Systematic Theology: Roman Catholic Perspectives that gives reference to a couple sources. Those sources state that when Dei Verbum paragraph 4 was written at Vatican II, the phrase "ceased with the death of the last apostle" was deliberately not used so as not to give the impression that future generations could unlock better understanding of the single deposit of faith. You can see that page and the footnote here.

justamoose89 May 28, '10 10:46 pm

Re: Revelation ended with death of last Apostle
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by NHInsider (Post 6688123)
Well - possibly - the Incarnation is the ultimate self-revelation of God. And when the last of the Apostles died, the last person taught by the Incarnate Logos, there was no further possibility of someone teaching/reporting something Jesus had taught. The big problem with this hypothesis, obviously, is Paul.

I just finished a Gospel and Acts and a Pauline Writings class, and I'm glad I'm finally going to get to put some of that info to use! :D

The book of Acts considers Paul an apostle, since one of the requirements is to have seen the risen Christ, which he did on the road to Damascus. Also in nearly all of Paul's letter's he refers to himself as an apostle. So i don't think your hypothesis is wrong.

didymus May 28, '10 11:44 pm

Re: Revelation ended with death of last Apostle
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by SnakeMauler (Post 6687593)
Whoa whoa whoa, what about Muhammed? He just sat in his room and made all that stuff up and spent all this time writing the Koran and ripping off the names of Christian biblicial figures and using their names?

Yeah, he pretty much took Judaism, stirred in some Nestorian Christianity and flavored with Arabian beliefs & customs.
Also, a lot of the time he wasn't sitting in his room but leading his followers in battle and he had to dictate the Koran since he was illiterate.



Danny Clover May 29, '10 8:16 am

Re: Revelation ended with death of last Apostle
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by MarcoPolo (Post 6684299)
What's the best answer to the question, "Why do you believe public revelation ended with the death of the last apostle?"

My answer, for those of us who are Christians, would be that we don't. We believe that revelation ended with the closing of the canon of scripture.

Holly3278 May 29, '10 9:35 am

Re: Revelation ended with death of last Apostle
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Danny Clover (Post 6689811)
My answer, for those of us who are Christians, would be that we don't. We believe that revelation ended with the closing of the canon of scripture.

Ok, so then where do you get your doctrine of the Trinity at? Yes, the Trinity is mentioned (not by name) in Scripture but I am not sure that the mechanics of the Trinity are explicitly taught in Scripture. So, how do you get an orthodox view of the Trinity if you do not accept anything but the Bible?

Also, how do you know what books belong in the Bible? The Bible itself doesn't say which books belong in it so how do you know?

MarcoPolo May 29, '10 10:58 am

Re: Revelation ended with death of last Apostle
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Danny Clover (Post 6689811)
We believe that revelation ended with the closing of the canon of scripture.

An interesting take. When did that occur?

Danny Clover May 29, '10 11:21 am

Re: Revelation ended with death of last Apostle
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Holly3278 (Post 6690005)
Ok, so then where do you get your doctrine of the Trinity at? Yes, the Trinity is mentioned (not by name) in Scripture but I am not sure that the mechanics of the Trinity are explicitly taught in Scripture. So, how do you get an orthodox view of the Trinity if you do not accept anything but the Bible?

Typical Catholic strawman. Who says we don't accept anything but the Bible?

Quote:

Also, how do you know what books belong in the Bible? The Bible itself doesn't say which books belong in it so how do you know?
Because I can look at the criteria the church used to determine the canon and conclude that they were correct.

MarcoPolo May 29, '10 12:23 pm

Re: Revelation ended with death of last Apostle
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Danny Clover (Post 6690277)
Because I can look at the criteria the church used to determine the canon

Which was what? And when did the canon close?

Danny Clover May 29, '10 1:19 pm

Re: Revelation ended with death of last Apostle
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by MarcoPolo
Which was what?

1) Was the book written by a prophet of God?
2) Was the writer authenticated by miracles to confirm his message?
3) Does the book tell the truth about God, with no falsehood or contradiction?
4) Does the book evince a divine capacity to transform lives?
5) Was the book accepted as God's Word by the people to whom it was first delivered?

Quote:

And when did the canon close?
When the last book was completed. Although, in all fairness, on second thought, I probably would not argue with your belief that it ended with the last Apostle, assuming we're talking about the twelve Apostles spoken of in the Bible.

JustaServant May 29, '10 3:12 pm

Re: Revelation ended with death of last Apostle
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Danny Clover (Post 6690540)
1) Was the book written by a prophet of God?
2) Was the writer authenticated by miracles to confirm his message?
3) Does the book tell the truth about God, with no falsehood or contradiction?
4) Does the book evince a divine capacity to transform lives?
5) Was the book accepted as God's Word by the people to whom it was first delivered?



When the last book was completed. Although, in all fairness, on second thought, I probably would not argue with your belief that it ended with the last Apostle, assuming we're talking about the twelve Apostles spoken of in the Bible.

Where is your proof for this?

VetA May 29, '10 5:32 pm

Re: Revelation ended with death of last Apostle
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by MarcoPolo (Post 6686361)
Thanks, is the answer to the question somewhere in this link?

when i posted that link i didnt read the full question, i thought it was a question that coud be answered with the simple answer of 'apostolic succession':o

Danny Clover May 29, '10 5:46 pm

Re: Revelation ended with death of last Apostle
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by JustaServant (Post 6690854)
Where is your proof for this?

Sorry, not playing the infinite regress game with you. A question was asked and I answered it.

Chris S May 29, '10 10:57 pm

Re: Revelation ended with death of last Apostle
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Danny Clover (Post 6691182)
Sorry, not playing the infinite regress game with you. A question was asked and I answered it.

You just claimed to know what criteria that the church used 1600 years ago to determine the canon of Sacred Scripture. Forgive us if we would like to know how you came by that information.

MarcoPolo May 29, '10 11:26 pm

Re: Revelation ended with death of last Apostle
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Danny Clover (Post 6690540)
1) Was the book written by a prophet of God?
2) Was the writer authenticated by miracles to confirm his message?
3) Does the book tell the truth about God, with no falsehood or contradiction?
4) Does the book evince a divine capacity to transform lives?
5) Was the book accepted as God's Word by the people to whom it was first delivered?

When the last book was completed. Although, in all fairness, on second thought, I probably would not argue with your belief that it ended with the last Apostle, assuming we're talking about the twelve Apostles spoken of in the Bible.

Ok, five criteria, plus the canon was completed officially in approximately 90 A.D. correct? And on what basis do you assert the early Church held these 5 criteria?

NHInsider May 31, '10 4:23 pm

Re: Revelation ended with death of last Apostle
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by didymus (Post 6689176)
he had to dictate the Koran since he was illiterate.

I'm not sure why you made this remark, but it's probably worth pointing out that most of the Apostles were also illiterate. Even Paul dictated his letters, although he was literate. Scribing was a respected position in most of the ancient and medieval world.

brb3 Jun 1, '10 6:00 pm

Re: Revelation ended with death of last Apostle
 
" .... and also I will remove from the land the prophets and the unclean spirit. And if any one again appears as a prophet, his father and mother who bore him will say to him, "You shall not live, for you speak lies in the name of the Lord'; and his father an mother who bore him shall pierce him through when he prophesies. On that day every prophet will be ashamed of his vision when he prophesies ...." /// Zechariah 13:2-4

All the prophesy ended with Christ. St. John just pulled all the old prophesies together and synthesized / represented what had been told before ... with a few new twists.

Erich Jun 2, '10 1:41 pm

Re: Revelation ended with death of last Apostle
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Danny Clover (Post 6690540)
assuming we're talking about the twelve Apostles spoken of in the Bible.

There are more than twelve Apostles spoken of in the Bible.

From By What Authority?

Quote:

Scripture shows that only the Apostles are "entrusted" with the care of the Gospel message:
St. Paul
"...they saw that I had been entrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been entrusted with the gospel to the circumcised."(Gal. 2:7)

"...in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation." (2 Cor. 5:19)

"...in accordance with the glorious gospel of the blessed God with which I have been entrusted." (1 Tim. 1:11)

St. Timothy
"Paul, Silvanus [Silas], and Timothy, To the church of the Thessalonians... we have been approved by God to be entrusted with the gospel." (1 Thess. 1:1, 2:4)

"O Timothy, guard what has been entrusted to you." (1 Tim. 6:20)

"...guard the truth that has been entrusted to you by the Holy Spirit who dwells within us." (2 Tim. 1:14)

You may object at this point that St. Timothy was not an apostle. I will concede that he was not an "Apostle," with a capital "A," but you must concede that Scripture clearly calls St. Timothy an apostle, thereby attesting to his apostolic authority:

"Paul, Silvanus [Silas], and Timothy, To the church of the Thessalonians... nor did we seek glory from men, whether from you or from others, though we might have made demands as apostles of Christ." (1 Thess. 1:1, 2:6)

It is not only St. Timothy who is called an apostle by Sacred Scripture, but also St. Barnabus, Apollos, and St. Titus:

St. Barnabus - "But when the apostles Barnabas and Paul heard of it, they tore their garments and rushed out among the multitude..." (Acts 14:14)

Apollos - "I planted, Apollos watered... He who plants and he who waters are equal." (1 Cor. 3:6, 8)

"I have applied all this to myself and Apollos for your benefit, brethren... For I think that God has exhibited us apostles as last of all, like men sentenced to death." (1 Cor. 4:6,9)

The objection will be raised: Titus is nowhere in Scripture explicitly called an apostle. I reply, it is implicit in what kind of authority is accorded to the apostles. Scripture testifies that only apostles are given full authority. Compare what is said of St. Paul and St. Timothy (both of whom are called "apostles") with what is said of St. Titus:

St. Paul - "...nor did we seek glory from men, whether from you or from others, though we might have made demands as apostles of Christ." (1 Thess. 2:6)

St. Timothy - "As I urged you when I was going to Macedonia, remain at Ephesus that you may charge certain persons not to teach any different doctrine..." (1 Tim. 1:3)

"Command and teach these things." (1 Tim. 4:11)

"Remind them of this, and charge them before the Lord to avoid disputing about words, which does no good, but only ruins the hearers." (2 Tim. 2:14)

St. Titus - "This is why I left you in Crete, that you might amend what was defective, and appoint elders in every town as I directed you." (Tit.1:5)

"Declare these things; exhort and reprove with all authority. Let no one disregard you." (Tit. 2:15)

"...our boasting before Titus has proved true. And his heart goes out all the more to you, as he remembers the obedience of you all, and the fear and trembling with which you received him." (2 Cor. 7:14-15)

didymus Jun 2, '10 1:44 pm

Re: Revelation ended with death of last Apostle
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by NHInsider (Post 6697219)
I'm not sure why you made this remark, but it's probably worth pointing out that most of the Apostles were also illiterate. Even Paul dictated his letters, although he was literate. Scribing was a respected position in most of the ancient and medieval world.

It was intended as a fact, not a slam.
Looking back, I was responding to "was Mohamed sitting in his room &c?"

As for most of the Apostles being illiterate, I don't know. Of the Evangelists I think all were literate even if they sometimes used amanuenses. The only exception I can think of might be St. Peter.

I wonder about the term "literate" in this context as well. Can't remember the source but I've read that as late as 19th cent. in England reading and writing were taught as separate skills so that many folks could read but not write.
Could this have been true in the ancient world?


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 1:44 am.


Copyright © 2004-2014, Catholic Answers.