Revelation vs. Theological Speculation

[Elijah John]

Which parts of the New Testament are "revelation"?

Which parts are theological speculation or exposition ?

How do we know the difference?

[DPMartin]

[Replying to post 1 by Elijah John]

read it and let us know what you think

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 1 by Elijah John]

read it and let us know what you think

I'm asking you (the collective "you" ) what you think?

Also why do you assume that because someone disagrees with your interpretation that they haven't read the Bible, or enough of it?

[dio9]

[Replying to post 1 by Elijah John]

These are really deep biblical studies questions.

[jgh7]

The most obvious examples I can think of are in 1 Corinthians 7. We can see Paul saying that he has not received specific revelations from the Lord concerning certain rules for marriage and sex, but gives his own insight. Beyond that and other similar examples, I think it would be very hard to tell and would be merely our own opinion.


1 Corinthians 7:12-14
To the rest I say this (I, not the Lord): If any brother has a wife who is not a believer and she is willing to live with him, he must not divorce her. 13 And if a woman has a husband who is not a believer and he is willing to live with her, she must not divorce him. 14 For the unbelieving husband has been sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife has been sanctified through her believing husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy.

1 Corinthians 7:25-28
25 Now about virgins: I have no command from the Lord, but I give a judgment as one who by the Lord’s mercy is trustworthy. 26 Because of the present crisis, I think that it is good for a man to remain as he is. 27 Are you pledged to a woman? Do not seek to be released. Are you free from such a commitment? Do not look for a wife. 28 But if you do marry, you have not sinned; and if a virgin marries, she has not sinned. But those who marry will face many troubles in this life, and I want to spare you this.

[tam]

Peace to you EJ,

Can you please define what you mean by 'revelation' (since you put it in quotations)? Thank you!

[Elijah John]

Peace to you EJ,

Can you please define what you mean by 'revelation' (since you put it in quotations)? Thank you!

Not the book of Revelation per se. But revelation in a small "r" general sense. The Word of God, the direct inspiration of God. This as opposed to someone giviing the reader their own theological treatise on the subject. In this sense, personally, I do not see Paul as much different from Aquainas, or Ausustine, expounding on the teachings of Jesus and of Hebrew Scripture.

"Thus saith the LORD.." would be an example of revelation.

Or, arguably "verily verily I say unto you"...If indeed Jesus brought us a new revelation.

But it seems to me that if Jesus did bring us a new revelation, than he would not need Paul to give us further revelation.

If Jesus and not Mohammed is in fact the "seal of the Prophets" or the living Word of God, than anyone who comes after him can only be a theologian, rabbi or a teacher...at best.

That would include Paul, his opinions in that case would not, should not be considered "sacred Scripture" and "revelation", any more than the writings of a Pope with his pastoral encyclicals to the flock.

That's my take on it anyway. The OP certainly invites other perspectives as well.

[steveb1]

Which parts of the New Testament are "revelation"?

Which parts are theological speculation or exposition ?

How do we know the difference?

I don't think we can know the difference. Critical scholarship is of crucial value in understanding a text, its authorship, its dating, its intended audience, but there is no test for a text's "Godness", inspiration, or inerrancy.

Catholicism attempts to get around this by saying that God gave the Church an infallible teaching authority, the Magisterium, Tradition, the Apostolic Succession, the Deposit of Faith and other foolproof interpretive gifts. I have no idea on what Protestantism relies, other than "prayerful scripture reading guided by the Holy Spirit".

[dio9]

[Replying to Elijah John]

from what I know, Matthew's Gospel has a theology presenting Jesus as a second Moses. His theology was directed at Jewish Christians that Jesus was bringing a new covenant between God and Man.
John's theology presents Jesus as the pre=esistent word of God a co-eternal personality .
Luke gives us a gentile sympathetic theology.
Mark had his own theological position as well
In the gospels we have 4 theological points of view.

What about the revelation?
Jesus is the Messiah and the kingdom is at hand , Repent, the kingdom of God is his revelation.

[tam]

Peace to you EJ, and thank you for the explanation.

Peace to you EJ,

Can you please define what you mean by 'revelation' (since you put it in quotations)? Thank you!

Not the book of Revelation per se. But revelation in a small "r" general sense. The Word of God, the direct inspiration of God. This as opposed to someone giviing the reader their own theological treatise on the subject.

Well, the book of Revelation fits both of those criteria, lol. But in addition to that, I understand 'revelation' as meaning something a little bit different.

Revelation is something that is revealed. It does not have to be something brand NEW; it can also be something that has been hidden from the beginning (or any earlier time) that has now been revealed (opened/understood).


You also mentioned the Word of God (or that which is inspired) in your explanation. Well, Christ is Himself the Word of God, and He also said that He spoke just as His Father told Him to speak:

I have not spoken on My own, but the Father who sent Me has commanded Me what to say and how to say it. John 12:49

"He who receives you receives Me, and he who receives Me receives the One who sent Me." Matthew 10:40 (same point repeated at Luke 9:48 and 10:16, Mark 9:37, John 13:20)



So His words are from God. His teaching is from God.

The authors of the gospels did not receive those words in a revelation though. The authors were witnesses to Christ speaking those words and they recorded what they heard themselves, or what they received from others who were witnesses. We have examples of both in the NT: the author of the book attributed to John was an eyewitness and an apostle; while the author of the book of Luke received what he wrote from others who had handed down their testimonies to Christ.



But the words and teachings of Christ that others wrote down cannot be classified as 'theological speculation'. Revelation (the book) can also not be classified as theological speculation; John wrote down what he saw and heard, just as he was told to write it down.

In this sense, personally, I do not see Paul as much different from Aquainas, or Ausustine, expounding on the teachings of Jesus and of Hebrew Scripture.

As jgh7 said earlier, sometimes Paul differentiated between what he received from the Lord and what he did not receive from the Lord but that he thought was true.


Some things he wrote were related to specific problems of the time period; and some things Paul did not understand accurately at first (Paul would have had some baggage leftover from his time as a Pharisee - like many of us at the start when leaving a former religion - and at first Paul taught people TO judge. He later corrected that error as he learned better from Christ).

"Thus saith the LORD.." would be an example of revelation.

Or, arguably "verily verily I say unto you"...If indeed Jesus brought us a new revelation.

As mentioned, revelation does not have to be new; it might just be newly revealed. For instance, Christ opening the scriptures to His apostles, so that they could see what was written in the scriptures about Him.

But it seems to me that if Jesus did bring us a new revelation, than he would not need Paul to give us further revelation.

If Jesus and not Mohammed is in fact the "seal of the Prophets" or the living Word of God, than anyone who comes after him can only be a theologian, rabbi or a teacher...at best.

I do not understand this phrase "seal of the prophets" or where it comes from, sorry. If something is sealed, it means it is hidden, sealed up until a later time, etc.

Might this "seal of the prophets" contradict what the prophet Joel stated about the last days?


‘- In the last days, God says, I will pour out My spirit on all people; your sons and daughters will prophesy, your young men will see visions, your old men will dream dreams. Even on My servants, both men and women, I will pour out My spirit in those days, and they will prophesy."


Regardless, those who come after Christ are to bear witness TO Christ; He also teaches them and sometimes directly commands them to share what they have received from Him with others. (of course we are warned to TEST the inspired expressions - both those expressions that others claim to have heard, as well as those inspired expressions we may have heard.)

That would include Paul, his opinions in that case would not, should not be considered "sacred Scripture" and "revelation", any more than the writings of a Pope with his pastoral encyclicals to the flock.

I'm pretty sure Paul never claimed his writings to be sacred scripture.

Which parts of the New Testament are "revelation"?

Which parts are theological speculation or exposition ?

How do we know the difference?

An author often states which is the case (this I received from the Lord; the Word of God came to me, the Spirit said to me; etc). But I understand that this may only get you their belief about the source of their writing.

Either way, you should test the inspired expression. In order to do that, one needs to test against what Christ says (ask HIM, personally), one may test also against love (is this statement from love; if not, how can it be from God); and one may test also against what is written (beginning with what Christ is written to have said).



I am personally more interested in what is TRUE rather than what might be revelation or theological speculation. But the only way I know, to know for sure, is to ask and receive the truth of a matter (any matter) from Christ Himself.





Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy