---------------------
Most of this has already been covered elsewhere in our blog. In fact, this is nearly a repeat of what we discussed here. Apparently there's nothing new or more rigorous from the author.
Therefore, we shall simply supply a link to our other writings for those points so as not to excessively interrupt the narrative.
There are a couple of new points, which we shall deal with.
The main reason we are posting this is it is a spectacularly presumptive presentation. The author simply assumes his position is correct, and barely makes an effort to biblically document or even explain his claims.
---------------
The Historic Reformed View of the Charismata
Despite the recent popularity of certain high-profile Calvinistic continuationists, such as Mark Driscoll and John Piper, the historic position of the Reformed faith on the charismata is undeniably cessationist. (In other words, cessationism is cessationist. This is a tautology.)
In fact, a commitment to the doctrine of sola Scriptura requires this. (We discuss this here and here.
We would rather commit to the truth of the Bible as opposed to the creeds of man.)
For example, John Calvin (Appeal to Authority, not the Bible.)
referred to “certain giddy men” of the Sixteenth Century who “imagine that they have some peculiar way of penetrating to God” apart from the written Word, and denied that “the office of the Spirit” was “to form new and unheard-of revelations, or to coin a new form of doctrine, by which we may be led away from the received doctrine of the gospel. . . .”1 (Interesting. The typical cessationist will complain that charismaticism is a relatively new phenomena, dating back to Azuza Street in the early 20th century. However, Calvin was apparently dealing with it hundreds of years before that.)
So important did the Westminster divines of the following century consider this subject that they included these statements in the opening chapter of their Confession of Faith: (Appeal to Authority, not the Bible.)
Although the light of nature and the works of creation and providence do so far manifest the goodness, wisdom, and power of God, as to leave men unexcusable; yet are they not sufficient to give that knowledge of God and of His will, which is necessary unto salvation. Therefore it pleased the Lord, at sundry times, and in divers manners, to reveal Himself, and to declare His will unto His Church; and afterwards, for the better preserving and propagating of the truth, and for the more sure establishment and comfort of His Church against the corruption of the flesh, and the malice of Satan and of the world, to commit the same wholly unto writing: which maketh the Holy Scriptures to be most necessary; those former ways of God’s revealing His will unto His people being now ceased. . . . The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for His own glory, man’s salvation, faith, and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations of the Spirit, or traditions of men.2This was also the position of those outside of the Reformed tradition, such as Martin Luther, (Appeal to Authority, not the Bible.)
who insisted that because God gives His Spirit “only through the external Word,” he who “would hear God speak, let him read the Scriptures,”3 and the great Baptist preacher, Charles Spurgeon, who believed that “the earlier miraculous gifts have departed from us.” (So far we have only Appeals to Authority. We yet await the Scriptural case, especially since the author has yet to quote the Bible.)
Tongues as a Sign of Impending Judgment
Tongues and prophecy both had a very specific role to play in the early days of the Christian Church. Not only were they clearly sign gifts ("Sign gifts?" The author uses a phrase not found in the Bible.)
which were given to validate the message of the Apostles, (An unsupported, false assertion.)
but, as in the case of tongues, also served as a warning to the unbelieving Jews of the imminent destruction of their apostate nation. (Well, no. The tongues in Acts were a sign to the apostles that salvation was for the gentiles as well as Jews. But as we discussed here, that is not the only purpose for tongues.)
In Isaiah 28:11-12 (Finally the author provides us with a Scripture.)
we read: “For with stammering lips and another tongue He will speak to this people, to whom He said, ‘This is the rest with which you may cause the weary to rest,’ and, ‘This is the refreshing’; Yet they would not hear.” These words were spoken by the prophet to the people of Judah as a declaration that their rebellion would soon be judged by God through an Assyrian invasion.
The presence of “unknown tongues” (We are concerned with the author's desire to insert words into that narrative that twist the meaning. He puts "unknown tongues" in quotes, but that phrase is not found in the provided Scripture.
"Another" is אַחֵר (acher) simply means another, not "unknown." Paul quoted Isaiah 28:11 in his first letter to the Corinthians. 1Co. 14:21:
1Co. 14:21 In the Law it is written: “Through men of strange tongues and through the lips of foreigners I will speak to this people, but even then they will not listen to me...”"Strange" is ἑτερόγλωσσος, ον (heteroglóssos), which means speaking another language; subst: one who speaks another language.
Paul is addressing the superior nature of prophecy in this context, not the judgment of Israel.
We have additional commentary on Isaiah 28 here.)
was likewise mentioned by Moses in his prophecy of the ultimate destruction 4 of national Israel found in Deuteronomy 28:49: “The LORD will bring a nation against you from afar, from the end of the earth, as swift as the eagle flies, a nation whose language you will not understand.” The entire New Testament deals with the period just prior to the destruction of Jerusalem and the termination of the Jewish economy in A.D. 70. God began His warnings to the rebellious nation of Israel through John the Baptist, who was sent to declare that the Kingdom was at hand. Following the death of John, Jesus picked up this same theme and began to warn Jerusalem of impending destruction should the people not repent of their rebellion. Of course, the Jewish leaders sealed the nation’s doom when they rejected and crucified their Messiah. It was not until Israel had thus transgressed against her God that the gift of tongues was introduced among the Apostles and their associates on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2); they were then used to call them to repentance. (No, tongues were the manifestation of the Spirit which Peter used to confirm Joel's prophecy that God had poured out His Spirit.)
In this sense, they were, as Paul wrote, “for a sign, not to those who believe but to unbelievers” (1 Corinthians 14:22); they served as an indictment against Israel and a public declaration that her “house [was] left . . . desolate” (Matthew 23:38), and that the Kingdom of Heaven was about to be taken from the Jews and given to another people — the Gentiles (Matthew 8:10-12, 21:33-45).
The Role of Prophecy in the Early Church
Having established the purpose of biblical tongues, (Did we miss something? The author established nothing at all, and completely glossed over the function of tongues of 1 Corinthians 14.)
let us now determine the role of prophecy in the early Christian Church. According to Paul, in contrast to tongues, “[P]rophesying is not for unbelievers but for those who believe” (1 Corinthians 14:22). (A correct statement, followed by...)
Since the New Testament canon was still being written, via the epistles of Paul, Peter, and the other Apostles, prophecy served to edify and strengthen the infant Church in the midst of intense persecution, and to offer hope that God’s enemies would soon be destroyed (...an unwarranted and nonbiblical conclusion.)
(Revelation 2:8-11). (Revelation 2:8-11 is the letter to one of the seven churches, Smyrna. How this relates to cessationism is a mystery.)
However, with the close of the canon, this purpose was fulfilled, and prophecy ceased. (Undocumented assertion.)
In Jude 3, we read: “Beloved, while I was very diligent to write to you concerning our common salvation, I found it necessary to write to you exhorting you to contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints.” (Ah, we finally have a Scripture that the author thinks proves his point. It doesn't.)
This verse is very important in dealing with the finality of revelation and prophecy, (No, it doesn't.)
for in it Jude clearly anticipated the closing of the New Testament canon of Scripture. (No, he wasn't.)
The phrase “once for all” is noteworthy. Actually, only one Greek word ( παξ – hápax) is used here, which indicates “what is of perpetual validity, not requiring repetition.” Hence, the Scriptures themselves preclude any further revelation beyond the apostolic age. (No. This verse does not mention Scripture or the canon. It specifically references "the faith." The word "faith" is pistis, which means faith, belief, trust, confidence; fidelity, faithfulness.
Jude 3 has nothing at all to do with Scripture or the canon. Jude, in referring to "the faith," is telling us that the way of salvation and God's purpose in Christ have been fully made known and are not subject to revision.
If Jude was telling his readers that there would would come a time when there be no more revelation, then his letter, included in the canon, is ironic. Jude should have stopped writing after verse 3, since everything after would add to "the faith."
Jude was probably written around A.D. 60, along with Luke, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, John, and Philemon.
Books written after Jude include Acts, Titus, 1 and 2 Timothy, 1 and 2 Peter, 1, 2, and 3 John, and Revelation.
In other words, large portions of the NT had not even been composed at the time Jude wrote. It is ridiculous to claim that Jude was talking about Scripture at all, but rather was telling his readers that the Gospel, the way of salvation, was fully told to them.)
Another verse that may be cited in this regard is Ephesians 2:20: (Ephesians was written in A.D. 60-62. Again, large portions of the NT had not even been written yet. Clearly Paul could not have been talking about the canon or the Scripture.)
“. . . [The Church has] been built on the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone.” Paul thus informs us that the teachings (No. This Scripture does not say "...built on the foundation of the teachings of the Apostles and Prophets.")
of the New Testament Apostles and the proclamations of the Old Testament prophets together provide the foundation of the Church. A building can have no more than one foundation, and the Body of Christ is certainly no exception. (This is a strange claim. Who is advocating a second foundation?)
John 14:26 tells us that the Apostles were taught “all things.” (This is egregiously false. We deal with this claim here.)
In addition, Paul commanded Timothy to “keep” the “good thing which was committed” to him in 2 Timothy 1:14. (Let's actually quote the passage: 2Ti. 1:13-14:
What you heard from me, keep as the pattern of sound teaching, with faith and love in Christ Jesus. 14 Guard the good deposit that was entrusted to you — guard it with the help of the Holy Spirit who lives in us.What was Timothy to guard, the Scripture? No, he is to guard the sound teaching Paul deposited in him. Paul tells him to get the Holy Spirit's help for this. Paul is essentially saying, "Remember and protect what I taught you. You'll need the Holy Spirit's help."
Paul keeps repeating this.
2Ti. 2:2 And the things you have heard me say in the presence of many witnesses entrust to reliable men who will also be qualified to teach others.
2Ti. 2:7 Reflect on what I am saying, for the Lord will give you insight into all this.
2Ti. 3:10 You, however, know all about my teaching...
2Ti. 3:14 But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have become convinced of, because you know those from whom you learned it...
2Ti. 4:17 But the Lord stood at my side and gave me strength, so that through me the message might be fully proclaimed and all the Gentiles might hear it.Would Timothy read this and think, "Paul is talking about the Scriptures?" Nope. Paul was not telling Timothy about the Scriptures, he's telling him to remember the teaching he received.)
Clearly, this “good thing” was identifiable or else Paul’s exhortation would have been in vain. Since the Apostles were taught all things, there would be no need for further revelation. (But Paul continued giving revelation! He continued teaching Timothy!)
Indeed, what can be added to all things? Furthermore, the Apostles’ doctrine became part of the canon, and because this revelation was complete, there can be no further “scripture” added (either verbal or written) (No one wants to add Scripture to the canon. See our discussion here.
Further, there is no such thing as "verbal" Scripture.)
unless it can be demonstrated that the apostolic era has not ended. (What is the "apostolic era," why does the author think it ended, and why is it connected to prophecy? We discuss apostles here.)
However, as noted above, the apostolic era served as the transition period between the old economy and the “new heaven and new earth” (Isaiah 65:17; 2 Peter 3:13; Revelation 21:1) of the New Covenant; once the transition had been made, the apostolic era, with its various sign gifts (2 Corinthians 12:12), ceased: (Let's quote the verse. 2Co. 12:12:
The things that mark an apostle — signs, wonders and miracles — were done among you with great perseverance.Where does this verse talk about gifts? Where does it talk about ceasing?)
These gifts were distinctly the authentication of the Apostles. They were part of the credentials of the Apostles as the authoritative agents of God in founding the church. Their function thus confined them to distinctively the apostolic church and they necessarily passed away with it. The miraculous working which is but the sign of God’s revealing power cannot be expected to continue, and in point of fact, does not continue after the revelation of which it is the accompaniment had been completed.5 (There is not a single statement in this paragraph that is true. None of it is documented. We summarily reject it.)Daniel’s “Seventy Week” Time Frame
The New Testament, of course, is not the only place from which the cessation of the revelatory gifts may be established. (Which the author has yet to do.)
The Old Testament also foretold a time when
God would no longer speak through His prophets. For
instance, in Daniel’s prophecy of the “Seventy Weeks” we
read: “Seventy weeks are determined for your people and
for your holy city, to finish the transgression, to make an
end of sins, to make reconciliation for iniquity, to bring in
everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy,
and to anoint the Most Holy” (Daniel 9:24). It is clear from
verses 25-27 that once the “Seventy Week” period (490
years) had begun, it would continue uninterrupted until
completed. Since the prophetic “clock” began to tick “from
the going forth of the command to restore and build
Jerusalem,” which was given by King Cyrus (Ezra 1) exactly
483 years prior to the baptism of Jesus by John in the Jordan
River, we must look for the terminus of this period in the
First Century. As prophesied, Christ’s death and resurrection made an end of the sins of His people (the elect), and
therefore He accomplished the reconciliation promised by
God through Daniel (Romans 5:10; Colossians 1:21). Christians have consequently experienced “everlasting righteousness” because of the fact that we are clothed in His righteousness, which itself is everlasting (2 Corinthians 5:21;
Ephesians 6:14; Philippians 3:9; Revelation 19:8). The
destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 is also directly linked
to the “Seventy Week” time frame. This is proved by verse 26: “And after the sixty-two weeks Messiah shall be cut off,
but not for Himself and the people of the prince who is to
come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end of
it shall be with a flood, and till the end of the war desolations are determined.” (Wow. What an astonishing display of speculation and and guesswork. Hal Lindsey would be proud.
Our guess is the author is interpreting the phrase "seal up" to mean closed, or final, for all time. However the Hebrew word is חָתַם (chatham), which means seal, affix one's seal, in attestation; seal with king's seal.
In other words, Israel was given a time period to finish the work it was called to, including attesting to, with official decree, that which the Lord had given via His prophets. The judgment they received for failing to do this is that they would not be able to ascertain the coming of the Anointed One.)
Finally, we come to the phrase, “to seal up vision and prophecy,” which is included within the “Seventy Week” time frame. According to E.J. Young:
and the source of inspiration was the same God, there is no reason to doubt that all giving of new revelation ceased in the First Century.
Zechariah 13:3-5 is another passage that closely ties in with Daniel 9:24:
There is no denying then that continuing prophecy or revelation subsequent to the closing of the canon is viewed by God as worthy of the most severe punishment, and even of death. (Are false prophets being put to death?)
Why? Because it is false prophecy in view of the fact that God no longer speaks with men in a revelatory fashion, whether it be through the vehicle of unknown tongues, prophetic utterances, or the writing of additional “scripture.” Indeed, to insist otherwise is, in effect, to say that God’s revelation of Himself in His Son, Jesus Christ, is insufficient. The Scripture says otherwise: “God, who at various times and in different ways spoke in times past to the fathers by the Prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds” (Hebrews 1:1-2). (We deal with this here.)
Conclusion
In closing, it should be noted that, aside from a relatively small number of fringe and heretical groups throughout the centuries (i.e., Montanism in the Second Century, Mormonism in the Nineteenth Century, etc.), tongues and prophecy were not recognized as continuing by anyone in the history of the orthodox Christian Church. (This is false, and an Appeal to History.)
The “miraculous gifts” reappeared in the so-called Pentecostal “revivals” of the early Twentieth Century, and beginning in the 1960s, the Charismatic movement gave them a more widespread introduction to the professing Church that transcended denominational lines. However, the quality of these alleged gifts falls far below that of their first century counterparts, and, in the case of the senseless gibberish which passes for “speaking in tongues” today, bears no resemblance whatsoever to what is described in the New Testament. (Contemporary expressions have nothing to to with the Biblical case.)
It is also significant that the vast majority of those who claim to possess these gifts today are grossly ignorant of the most basic doctrines of Scripture and are, in many cases, proponents of outright heresy (i.e., followers of the Word of Faith Movement, the Manifest Sons of God, etc.). (Another appeal to contemporary expressions.)
This is not surprising, because if the above arguments for cessationism are correct, the manifestation of supernatural phenomena, such as tongues or prophecy, must be the “power, signs, and lying wonders” of “another spirit” (2 Thessalonians 2:9; 2 Corinthians 11:4). It is not without good reason that Scripture warns, “Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world” (1 John 4:1).
As a whole, modern Charismatics are guilty, much like the “certain giddy men” of Calvin’s day, of willfully rejecting the final testimony of the written Word of God in favor of the “ear-tickling” of false prophets. Does it not seem strange that God would choose to “pour out His Spirit” upon such rebellious people today, while failing to so “bless” those within the Reformed community who have remained faithful to His Word? Such a question is food for thought, indeed. (What a strange statement. God would fail to "bless" a reformed church when that church doesn't believe in this particular blessing? Why would God do that? Indeed, if someone attempted to practice these "blessings" they would be thrown out of the author's church.
And the arrogance. "We reformed people have remained so faithful to the Word. We are right, they are wrong. Why would God bless them instead of us?"
For some odd reason the author expects these "blessings," but argues against them!)
All Scripture quotations have been taken from the New King James Version of the Holy Bible Copyright © 1996, 2016 by Greg Loren Durand All Rights Reserved. Sola Fide Publishers Post Office Box 2027 Toccoa, Georgia 30577 www.solafidepublishers.com
1. John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion (Henry Beveridge Translation), Book I, Chaper IX:1.
2. Westminster Confession of Faith, Chapter I:1, 6.
3. Martin Luther, commentary on Psalm 119; Ewald M. Plass, editor, What Luther Says: An Anthology (St. Louis, Missouri: Concordia Publishing House, 1959), Volume II, page 62; ibid., Volume III, page 1359.
4. Charles Haddon Spurgeon, “Receiving the Holy Spirit,”sermon preached on July 13, 1884
5. Benjamin B. Warfield, Counterfeit Miracles (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1918), pages 5-6.E.J. Young, Commentary on Daniel (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Banner of Truth Trust, 1988), page 200
Our guess is the author is interpreting the phrase "seal up" to mean closed, or final, for all time. However the Hebrew word is חָתַם (chatham), which means seal, affix one's seal, in attestation; seal with king's seal.
In other words, Israel was given a time period to finish the work it was called to, including attesting to, with official decree, that which the Lord had given via His prophets. The judgment they received for failing to do this is that they would not be able to ascertain the coming of the Anointed One.)
Finally, we come to the phrase, “to seal up vision and prophecy,” which is included within the “Seventy Week” time frame. According to E.J. Young:
Vision was a technical name for revelation given to the OT prophets (cf. Isaiah 1:1, Amos 1:1, etc.). The prophet was the one through whom this vision was revealed to the people. The two words, vision and prophecy, therefore, served to designate the prophetic revelation of the OT period. (To the nation of Israel!)
. . . When Christ came there was no further need of prophetic revelation in the OT sense.6 (Then how did the NT get written?)Since there is no essential difference between Old and New Testament revelation, (Another unsupported and false assertion. We discuss here the substantial change between OT prophecy and NT prophecy.)
and the source of inspiration was the same God, there is no reason to doubt that all giving of new revelation ceased in the First Century.
Zechariah 13:3-5 is another passage that closely ties in with Daniel 9:24:
It shall come to pass that if anyone still prophesies, then his father and mother who begot him will say to him, “You shall not live, because you have spoken lies in the Name of the LORD.” And his father and mother who begot him shall thrust him through when he prophesies. And it shall be in that day that every prophet will be ashamed of his wisdom when he prophesies; they will not wear a robe of course hair to deceive. But he will say, “I am no prophet, I am a farmer; for a man taught me to keep cattle from my youth.”The context of this passage of Zechariah places “that day” in the First Century (see 12:10, 13:1, and 13:7). (Let's quote these verses:
Zec. 12:10 And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of grace and supplication.
Zec. 13:2 “On that day, I will banish the names of the idols from the land, and they will be remembered no more,” declares the LORD Almighty. “I will remove both the prophets and the spirit of impurity from the land. 3 And if anyone still prophesies, his father and mother, to whom he was born, will say to him, ‘You must die, because you have told lies in the LORD’s name.’ When he prophesies, his own parents will stab him.
4 “On that day every prophet will be ashamed of his prophetic vision. He will not put on a prophet’s garment of hair in order to deceive. 5 He will say, ‘I am not a prophet. I am a farmer; the land has been my livelihood since my youth.’ 6 If someone asks him, ‘What are these wounds on your body?’ he will answer, ‘The wounds I was given at the house of my friends.’
7 “Awake, O sword, against my shepherd, against the man who is close to me!” declares the LORD Almighty. “Strike the shepherd, and the sheep will be scattered, and I will turn my hand against the little ones.The author places all of this in the first century. But have idols been banished from the land? Is there any record of parents stabbing their children because they prophesied? Is there any historical account of prophets being ashamed and pretending to be farmers? Has God turned his hand against the little ones?)
There is no denying then that continuing prophecy or revelation subsequent to the closing of the canon is viewed by God as worthy of the most severe punishment, and even of death. (Are false prophets being put to death?)
Why? Because it is false prophecy in view of the fact that God no longer speaks with men in a revelatory fashion, whether it be through the vehicle of unknown tongues, prophetic utterances, or the writing of additional “scripture.” Indeed, to insist otherwise is, in effect, to say that God’s revelation of Himself in His Son, Jesus Christ, is insufficient. The Scripture says otherwise: “God, who at various times and in different ways spoke in times past to the fathers by the Prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds” (Hebrews 1:1-2). (We deal with this here.)
Conclusion
In closing, it should be noted that, aside from a relatively small number of fringe and heretical groups throughout the centuries (i.e., Montanism in the Second Century, Mormonism in the Nineteenth Century, etc.), tongues and prophecy were not recognized as continuing by anyone in the history of the orthodox Christian Church. (This is false, and an Appeal to History.)
The “miraculous gifts” reappeared in the so-called Pentecostal “revivals” of the early Twentieth Century, and beginning in the 1960s, the Charismatic movement gave them a more widespread introduction to the professing Church that transcended denominational lines. However, the quality of these alleged gifts falls far below that of their first century counterparts, and, in the case of the senseless gibberish which passes for “speaking in tongues” today, bears no resemblance whatsoever to what is described in the New Testament. (Contemporary expressions have nothing to to with the Biblical case.)
It is also significant that the vast majority of those who claim to possess these gifts today are grossly ignorant of the most basic doctrines of Scripture and are, in many cases, proponents of outright heresy (i.e., followers of the Word of Faith Movement, the Manifest Sons of God, etc.). (Another appeal to contemporary expressions.)
This is not surprising, because if the above arguments for cessationism are correct, the manifestation of supernatural phenomena, such as tongues or prophecy, must be the “power, signs, and lying wonders” of “another spirit” (2 Thessalonians 2:9; 2 Corinthians 11:4). It is not without good reason that Scripture warns, “Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world” (1 John 4:1).
As a whole, modern Charismatics are guilty, much like the “certain giddy men” of Calvin’s day, of willfully rejecting the final testimony of the written Word of God in favor of the “ear-tickling” of false prophets. Does it not seem strange that God would choose to “pour out His Spirit” upon such rebellious people today, while failing to so “bless” those within the Reformed community who have remained faithful to His Word? Such a question is food for thought, indeed. (What a strange statement. God would fail to "bless" a reformed church when that church doesn't believe in this particular blessing? Why would God do that? Indeed, if someone attempted to practice these "blessings" they would be thrown out of the author's church.
And the arrogance. "We reformed people have remained so faithful to the Word. We are right, they are wrong. Why would God bless them instead of us?"
For some odd reason the author expects these "blessings," but argues against them!)
All Scripture quotations have been taken from the New King James Version of the Holy Bible Copyright © 1996, 2016 by Greg Loren Durand All Rights Reserved. Sola Fide Publishers Post Office Box 2027 Toccoa, Georgia 30577 www.solafidepublishers.com
1. John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion (Henry Beveridge Translation), Book I, Chaper IX:1.
2. Westminster Confession of Faith, Chapter I:1, 6.
3. Martin Luther, commentary on Psalm 119; Ewald M. Plass, editor, What Luther Says: An Anthology (St. Louis, Missouri: Concordia Publishing House, 1959), Volume II, page 62; ibid., Volume III, page 1359.
4. Charles Haddon Spurgeon, “Receiving the Holy Spirit,”sermon preached on July 13, 1884
5. Benjamin B. Warfield, Counterfeit Miracles (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1918), pages 5-6.E.J. Young, Commentary on Daniel (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Banner of Truth Trust, 1988), page 200
No comments:
Post a Comment