Well, contrast that to "I was in a trans and saw a vision....and wrote it down and claim it was from God."
Jesus never directed anyone to write anything down. The disciples didn't write anything down because they all expected the end of the world to be within their lifetime, so there was no need for it. Christianity was a messianic, apocalyptic movement, and everyone was rushed to give up wordily goods and embrace Christ as the end was near.
The writings came later when it became obvious that the Apostles, shall we say, "misunderstood" what Jesus meant when He said "some of you will not taste death" before I return (and they did so despite the Holy Spirit who will "teach you all things.").
If that is not correct, then what sort of revelation are you referring to?
Christianity, Judaism, Menacheanism, etc. are revealed faiths. People who were instrumental in establishing these religions claimed revelation as the source of their "knowledge." Some of it may be philosophical, and some may be even empirical.
For instance, we can say that this world is not merciful by nature and conclude that mercy must be from "another world."
Likewise, we can observe the universe around us and the earth and conclude that "something" created all this. And since there is structure and order and "rules" that this creation was intelligent, and therefore from a being higher than and greater and more powerful than we are.
The evidence of any structure suggests a builder and an architect. But that's again going back to your pets observing you as you leave your home every morning.
Their "theories" may abound as to why you do that, but your dogs, and cats and canaries, and even your toddlers, will never know why you leave the house every morning...that we can be certain of.
But as far as they are concerned, as long as your leaving is not followed by something fearful and unpleasant, they will simply "accept" it and any "theory" they may hold will be as good as any other.
Revelation Chapter 1 proves you wrong. You should read it.
So, is it your position that it is illegitimate for God to choose to communicate through dreams and visions? How about Joseph's dream in the Gospels, did that never happen?
Jesus never directed anyone to write anything down.
As Savedbygrace correctly observed, Revelation 1 is absolutely clear on the matter, and is not subject to varied interpretations among reasonable people concerning this issue. Revelation 1 is scripture, and one can either accept scripture or one can reject it.
The disciples didn't write anything down because they all expected the end of the world to be within their lifetime, so there was no need for it. ...... The writings came later when it became obvious that the Apostles, shall we say, "misunderstood" what Jesus meant when He said "some of you will not taste death" before I return (and they did so despite the Holy Spirit who will "teach you all things.").
What? Are you saying they became disillusioned and THEN wrote the Gospels and the rest of the NT? And all this DESPITE the HS??? That means they were completely on their own as far as you are concerned. Do you have any justification at all for these views since it seems that no Christian church, including your own as far as I can tell, backs them up?
FK: If that is not correct, then what sort of revelation are you referring to?
Christianity, Judaism, Menacheanism, etc. are revealed faiths. People who were instrumental in establishing these religions claimed revelation as the source of their "knowledge." Some of it may be philosophical, and some may be even empirical.
For instance, we can say that this world is not merciful by nature and conclude that mercy must be from "another world."
Likewise, we can observe the universe around us and the earth and conclude that "something" created all this. And since there is structure and order and "rules" that this creation was intelligent, and therefore from a being higher than and greater and more powerful than we are.
Is this what you call God's revelation? From all this would it be right to say that for you God's revelation to us is mostly or solely found in the observations we make for ourselves about the world around us? If so, I don't know how to square this with your earlier statements that unknowable God is only seen through blind faith. It seems like we might have a clash here between logic and blind faith. However, you may be saying that naming that "entity" that is the cause "God" is where the blind faith comes in. I still don't know what you call revelation, though.