Talk:Continuous revelation
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines. | ||
| B | This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale. | ||
| Low | This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale. | ||
|
Assessment comments
|
|||
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Religious Society of Friends (Quakers), an attempt to better organise and unify articles relating to the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers). If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale. |
| Mid | This article is on a subject of mid-importance within Quakerism. |
[edit] Theologies
It would be good to discuss how this concept is used in progressive theology and feminist theology as well. Not exactly the same, but similar. Probably shows up in other theologies as well that I'm not thinking of.
Also, the idea of the Church being guided by the Holy Spirit is common to most branches of Christianity, Orthodox, Catholic, and the thousands of Protestant denominations. It's hardly unique to the LDS. Wesley
- True, (although in Mormonism, as in others, it goes beyond just "being guided by the Holy Spirit" to direct communication with divine messengers), but generally Protestant fundies sure don't like continuous revelation. B 22:51 15 Jul 2003 (UTC)
-
- Direct communication with divine messengers (esp. angels) shows up in most Christian traditions; it's far from unique to Mormonism. What most Christians dislike is new revelation that contradicts earlier revelation. Wesley 23:34 15 Jul 2003 (UTC)
-
-
- Ok, Wesley, please don't point out to me a third time somthing I've understood since childhood regarding what is "hardly unique to the LDS" or "far from unique to Mormonism". It's quite patronizing and condescending, especially after having explicitly acknowledged that by stating "as in others". But besides that, fundamentalists do not get uptight merely over revelation that contradicts earlier revelation; they would be very reluctant to expand their canon. For them the Bible is it, period. If they claim revelation, they would be unlikely to give it status equal to anything in the Bible. B 00:13 16 Jul 2003 (UTC)
-
After rereading this thread, I apologize for sounding condescending; I see now that your statements had already acknowledged the (weak?) point I was making. And yes, I agree with you that for most Christians the Biblical canon is closed; further revelation would be expected to build on top of what is already revealed in the Bible, not add to or replace that foundation. Wesley 16:20 16 Jul 2003 (UTC)
- Ok, please overlook my defensiveness. You do make a point though...this article does need more rounding out as now it only states the LDS view generally. If the article is not likely to be expanded much it should probably be moved to "Continuous Revelation (Mormonsim)". I've not been brave enough to write a broader article partly because, like Great Apostasy, while the underlying concept is probably common to various sects, the phraseology may be unique to only one or a few sects. If this article is to be well developed, I think we need to determine how widely the article's phrase is used, and what is the most basic/common formulation of this concept among various sects. B 18:30 16 Jul 2003 (UTC)
[edit] Use of "continuous" and "continuing" in LDS terminology
The words "continuous" and "continuing" are not synonymous. The leaders of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints have repeatedly made it clear that the doctines of their faith teach continuing revelation, and not continuous revelation. Therefore this article has been incorrectly titled, or at least this sub section has been incorrectly placed under it. Original comment by User:The fiddler, moved from article.
- See here for a conference talk by General Authority James E. Faust on the use of the term "continuous revelation." Tijuana Brass 17:23, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
