inspiration and revelation

Preliminary: All truths known by the human mind fall into one of three categories: (1) truths known only by revelation (e.g., the Trinity), (2) truths known by both revelation and reason (e.g., the existence of God, the historical existence of Jesus), and (3) truths known only by reason (e.g., the Pythagorean theorem, the color of my shoe, the bitterness of my Czech beer last night). Even though human reason, after much labor and possibility of error, can find truths which are highly important and ought to be believed, God includes these truths in His revelation so that we may more readily believe them (since few have the genius of a Plato or an Aristotle).

Definitions: Inspiration is that special positive Divine influence and assistance by reason of which a human agent is not merely preserved from liability to error but is guided and controlled in such a way that what he says or writes is truly the word of God. God Himself is the principal author of the inspired utterance. Revelation on the other hand is the supernatural making known by God of some truth previously unknown (or at least not vouched for by Divine authority).

Reflections: By virtue of being a word of God, then, every inspired utterance is a revelation. And yet not every revelation is accompanied by inspiration. For example, when Moses stood before the imperishable bush he received a revelation of the Divine Essence, though he was not at that moment inspired; but when the author of Exodus told the story of Moses that author was inspired, whether or not he wrote of that history with an immediate communication from heaven. In fact, the historical books of the Old and New Testament seem to be written without any awareness of a supernatural dictation. How do we explain this? Of course they could be revealed without being inspired (as St. Francis received a divine message without being inspired), but we say they are inspired and therefore certainly revealed. So what accounts for their inspiration?

The definition of revelation given above is broad enough to include what, at first glace, does not appear to be revelation, namely the historical books in the Old and New Testament. The prophetic works fall into the first half of the definition, truths not previously known (e.g., "a virgin shall conceive and bear a son" etc.) and the historical works fall into the second half, truths not previously vouched for by Divine authority. Human reason unaided by revelation would later discover the truth of monotheism, but the Divine had already revealed Itself as One; historians could have pieced together the story of the early Church, but the Divine has already prepared for us an account of it. In Acts Luke may only have been telling the story of the early Church as it happened to him or as he heard it reported, but the narrative remains a revelation because it is inspired. And it can be called revelation, not because Luke supernaturally received knowledge of the events recorded (though that is possible), but because, granting its inspiration, the mode of the story's composition bears the stamp of Divine approval.

But the question remains, why do we say the New Testament is inspired? Because it was incorporated into the canon of Scripture and all Scripture is inspired. So why and by what authority was it incorporated into the canon of Scripture?

In general, because in those books the flock of God heard the voice of their Shepherd. This is the authority of the beloved who knows the call of her Lover.