All of this (the previous posts about Peace, Jesus, and eventually the Scriptures) is form the pen (er…., the keyboard) of a graduate of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. But as you may know, I was there in the latter years before the unholy heathen secular humanists were cleansed with one stroke of the mighty SBC police-state pen (I was there 1978-81, got my MDiv in June 1981).

But what I brought into Seminary, and took with me strengthened ten or a hundred-fold, was a reverence and a dependence upon Scripture. But also an ever deepening reverence and seeking after Revelation (not as in “The Book of Revelation”, but the reality of Revelation; the belief in a God who continues to and always will Reveal to humanity what is expected, what they are called to do, and how they are to achive this in communities called Church.)

When we ask the questions and pay attention to “what the Spitit is saying to the Churches” (that quote, IS from The Book Of Revelation), there is always conflict with the status quo; even the “religious status quo”. The idea of Canon seems to me to be antithetical to the larger idea of Revelation. The idea that there is nothing more to be said to the Churches than has already been collected and canonized by official decree, seems to contradict the whole revelation reality. God does not have “dispensations” (but this seems to be exactly what has happened with the Scriptures. They canon is closed, and the whole process is deemed “case closed” , even though those who accept this fact most absolutely are often the very same ones who would, if this canonization process were done today, would reject the idea of an ecumenical council of ANY kind, much less a “Catholic” one. But this seems entirely lost upon the most Bible-worshipping crowd.

I feel that prophets continue to speak. I have no idea how, in today’s world, where the idea of “Church” is so anti-ecumenical, anti-world, and anti-global, and no concept of anybody speaking for anybody, we could re-open the canon. So the Bible will remain “intact”. I guess we are to be satisifed with “in the tradition of Scripture” to make the connection from contemporary revelation and “Biblical revelation”. I’m not at all sure that one is greater than the other. I don’t think it is blasphemy to suggest that God’s Revelation continues.

These days, espeically in Southern Baptist Churches(though in no way exclusively), this idea of Church and Revelation has become an endangered species becuase the nature of that Revelation has become subsumed UNDER the illegitmate throne of Empire. The Messiah has been replaced with “The Book” which has become “prooftext” for the interests of empire expansion and worldwide domination, arrogance, and violence to the opponents. A living and Revealing God is a threat; an appropriated “Book” divorced from the salvation history to which it testifies, is but fodder for fueling greed-driven interests, and the details of justice and freedom to the captives is removed from the emphasis of the new “American Gospel”. The Old Testamtent and the accompanying imposition of ideas foreign to those people of God, but music to the ears of those who see “Religion on a Roll” in the direction of becming partner to the Powerful; a far cry from the Prophetic Voice which Jesus recognized in these prophets of old. His first public speech called for the “acceptable year of the Lord” and that he was the fulfillment of that. Somethin quite different is happening in America, except where the “alternate reality” to which Revelation points is being recognized.

I suppose there is always EMPIRE, and always Church; at certain points in history, the way these two come together and how they contrast remains fairly consistent. Power and violence and greed vs the Kingdom that Jesus announced and into which Jesus continues to invite us.