-------------------------
In honor of the Truth Matters Conference on the sufficiency of Scripture, I thought this article from August 31, 2017 might be appropriate:
Charismatics have claimed personal words from God for years. That figures, since the bulk of charismatic theology (despite their insistence to the contrary) depends on exalting experience over Scripture. (The author's summary contradiction of a summary claim is nothing more than an "is not, is to, is not, is to," lampooned by Monte Python.
The author is not at liberty to make undocumented global claims, as if she knows every charismatic church. Indeed, it is preposterous on its face that the "bulk" of charismatic theology exalts experience over Scripture. We only need to open a browser page and check some charismatic doctrinal statements:
In honor of the Truth Matters Conference on the sufficiency of Scripture, I thought this article from August 31, 2017 might be appropriate:
Charismatics have claimed personal words from God for years. That figures, since the bulk of charismatic theology (despite their insistence to the contrary) depends on exalting experience over Scripture. (The author's summary contradiction of a summary claim is nothing more than an "is not, is to, is not, is to," lampooned by Monte Python.
The author is not at liberty to make undocumented global claims, as if she knows every charismatic church. Indeed, it is preposterous on its face that the "bulk" of charismatic theology exalts experience over Scripture. We only need to open a browser page and check some charismatic doctrinal statements:
- The Assemblies of God was our first. Its first statement of doctrine is The Bible is our all-sufficient rule for faith and practice.
- Bethel's statement of faith begins, The Bible is the inspired and only infallible and authoritative Word of God.
- IHOP opens with The Bible is the final authority for all we believe and how we are to live.
- T.D. Jakes' Potter's House doctrinal statement has this in bold letters at the top: The Bible, the Scriptures, both Old and New Testaments, are the inspired Word of God without error in the original writings, and are the complete revelation of His will for the salvation of men, and the divine and final authority for all Christian faith and life.
Remember the author's claim that the bulk of charismatic theology exalts experience over Scripture? We countered with actual evidence. The author will never cite any resource or document any claim she makes.)
In light of that fact, (Fact!)
I can almost expect them to believe that God speaks apart from the written Word of God. (This is the premise, but the author never demonstrates it. She merely asserts it.)
Now comes anecdotal evidence, which the author will use as a representative position of all charismatics...)
Now comes anecdotal evidence, which the author will use as a representative position of all charismatics...)
A Facebook conversation with someone from the Charismatic church I belonged to in California reminded me recently that a primary argument for God speaking personally pits the living Holy Spirit against the “dead letter” of the Bible. It’s not a denial of Scripture’s authority. In this person’s mind, it’s not even a denial of Scripture’s sufficiency (though that’s pretty much exactly what he’s doing). Rather, it apparently (Apparently? Perhaps the author ought to be a little more sure of the situation before drawing conclusions.)
adds a personal relationship with the Spirit that Scripture somehow can’t provide.
Of course, my friend hastens to add, the Spirit never contradicts Scripture. Which raises the question: Why would He then need to speak apart from Scripture in the first place? (Indeed, why did Paul spend so much time explaining the gift of prophecy? The author needs to come up with some answers as to why the Scriptures describe prophecy but people like her reject these Scriptures.
Of course, my friend hastens to add, the Spirit never contradicts Scripture. Which raises the question: Why would He then need to speak apart from Scripture in the first place? (Indeed, why did Paul spend so much time explaining the gift of prophecy? The author needs to come up with some answers as to why the Scriptures describe prophecy but people like her reject these Scriptures.
As an aside, we are very fortunate indeed that the Apostles didn't believe this. They had the Scriptures, but never said, "Why would God speak apart from the Scripture? We don't need it." For some reason, they were not cessationists.)
Why not trust Him to speak through the Bible He inspired? (Who, exactly, doesn't trust Him to speak through the Bible?)
The mere suggestion that God’s Word is a “dead letter” needing augmentation with personal experiences absolutely chills me. (Chilled by one person's opinion? Or is the author extrapolating that opinion as being representative of all of the Charismatic church?)
That very idea completely ignores what the Bible says about itself.
For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart. ~~Hebrews 4:12 (ESV)
As we read God’s Word, the Holy Spirit uses it to convict us of sin, instruct us in righteousness and reveal Who the Triune God is. Through Scripture, the Holy Spirit teaches us what to look for in a spouse, how to conduct ourselves in business, how to order our families and what His Church should do. Above all that, He shows us His nature and His priorities. He lets us know what angers Him, what pleases Him and what honors Him. (No charismatic would deny these statements, which makes them irrelevant to the discussion.)
Certainly, during the course of a day, the Holy Spirit will bring Scriptures and/or Scriptural principles to our minds that we can apply. Even then, please notice, He’s speaking Scripture. (What are "scriptural principles?" Are these different than actual Scripture? They must be, since the author mentions them separately.
For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart. ~~Hebrews 4:12 (ESV)
As we read God’s Word, the Holy Spirit uses it to convict us of sin, instruct us in righteousness and reveal Who the Triune God is. Through Scripture, the Holy Spirit teaches us what to look for in a spouse, how to conduct ourselves in business, how to order our families and what His Church should do. Above all that, He shows us His nature and His priorities. He lets us know what angers Him, what pleases Him and what honors Him. (No charismatic would deny these statements, which makes them irrelevant to the discussion.)
Certainly, during the course of a day, the Holy Spirit will bring Scriptures and/or Scriptural principles to our minds that we can apply. Even then, please notice, He’s speaking Scripture. (What are "scriptural principles?" Are these different than actual Scripture? They must be, since the author mentions them separately.
So, if a scriptural principle is different than Scripture, and is brought to our minds by the Holy Spirit, then He is speaking more than Scripture, is He not?
The author manages to contradict her whole thesis at this point.)
He doesn’t, as some claim, direct us to brush a stranger’s hair (An act of kindness is a scriptural principle.)
or purchase an extra bottle of milk. (Preparing for future needs is a scriptural principle.
The author continues to make summary denials. She has some sort of secret knowledge about the Holy Spirit that tells her that He categorically does not do these things. How she knows this is a mystery.)
Rather, He commands us to love Him with all our heart, soul, mind and strength and to love others as much as we love ourselves. (The author makes this statement as if it contradicts the other statements. It doesn't.)
Until we obey everything He tells us in His Word, what would be the point of Him speaking personally to us? (Whaaaat? Has God said that He will tell us more when we completely obey everything He's said in the Bible? Is there some sort of quid pro quo here? Does the author really believe perfect obedience is required before God will speak again?)
****
Until we obey everything He tells us in His Word, what would be the point of Him speaking personally to us? (Whaaaat? Has God said that He will tell us more when we completely obey everything He's said in the Bible? Is there some sort of quid pro quo here? Does the author really believe perfect obedience is required before God will speak again?)
****
(We now proceed to provide further commentary as the author responds to a comment on her article.)
-----------------
(Author:) Going back to the 1 Thessalonians passage that you raised yesterday, (We are guessing she's referring to 1Th. 5:20: do not treat prophecies with contempt.)
(Author:) Going back to the 1 Thessalonians passage that you raised yesterday, (We are guessing she's referring to 1Th. 5:20: do not treat prophecies with contempt.)
John MacArthur preached on it last night to close the Truth Matters Conference. His understanding, based on the Greek construction in that specific verse, is that the phrase rendered “prophetic utterances” refers to the speaking forth of God’s Word. In other words, preaching. (The basis of this assertion is a mystery, except to the degree that Dr. MacArthur is using his preconceptions to interpret the verse.
We, however, shall examine the verse for ourselves. Here's a larger portion of the passage for context, 16-22:
16 Be joyful always;
17 pray continually;
18 give thanks in all circumstances, for this is God’s will for you in Christ Jesus.
19 Do not put out the Spirit’s fire;
20 do not treat prophecies with contempt.
21 Test everything. Hold on to the good.
22 Avoid every kind of evil.
We can see here that Paul is giving a list of instructions, including a reference to the Holy Spirit's fire, followed by the subject verse, and then a subsequent command to test [δοκιμάζω (dokimazo), which means to test, examine, prove, scrutinize (to see whether a thing be genuine or not), as metals...] everything, keeping the good.
A quick paraphrase would be, we don't put out the Spirit's fire by treating prophecies with contempt, instead we test them to find the good.
A quick paraphrase would be, we don't put out the Spirit's fire by treating prophecies with contempt, instead we test them to find the good.
The word "prophecies" is προφητεία, ας, ἡ (prophéteia), which means prophecy, prophesying; the gift of communicating and enforcing revealed truth. A prophecy is giving a message of what God has revealed. This is not teaching.
The same word (prophéteia) is used in 1 Cor. 13:8, which cessationists use to claim the gift of prophecy and tongues have ceased. So which is it? Has prophecy actually ceased, or has it somehow transformed into teaching? And if it is now teaching, where is the verse that says this?
In addition, we shall turn to 1Co. 12:28: And in the church God has appointed first of all apostles, second prophets, third teachers... Hmm, prophets and teachers, separate.
A prophet is προφήτης, ου, ὁ (prophétés), which means a prophet (an interpreter or forth-teller of the divine will), a prophet, poet; a person gifted at expositing divine truth.
Notice that the definition of "prophecy" we cited previously exactly matches the description of "prophet" (prophéteia), just cited. A prophet tells prophecies. He reveals truths of God by supernatural means.
Notice also that "teachers" are mentioned as a separate item. But Dr. MacArthur claims that "prophecies" actually mean "teachings," according to the author.
Notice also that "teachers" are mentioned as a separate item. But Dr. MacArthur claims that "prophecies" actually mean "teachings," according to the author.
However, "teachers" is διδάσκαλος, ου, ὁ (didaskalos), an instructor, a teacher, master... a teacher, an instructor acknowledged for their mastery in their field of learning; in Scripture, a Bible teacher, competent in theology.
The two words are completely different and mean different things. Dr. MacArthur is wrong.)
To your latest point, if God gives further revelation, the canon of Scripture isn’t closed and any revelation He gives has equal authority to the Bible. (Neither of these claims can be documented biblically. Continuing prophecy has nothing to to with the canon, and there is no biblical requirement to raise prophecy to the level of Scripture.)
How could He speak with any less authority now than He spoke then?
I’d encourage you to read MacArthur’s book, Strange Fire, and keep checking the Grace to You channel on YouTube for videos from this week’s Truth Matters Conference on the Sufficiency Of Scripture. Those resources might help. Also, search YouTube for Phil Johnson’s teaching on providence, (We commented on a article on providence by Mr. Johnson here.)
which gave me better clarity on this whole matter.
I’d encourage you to read MacArthur’s book, Strange Fire, and keep checking the Grace to You channel on YouTube for videos from this week’s Truth Matters Conference on the Sufficiency Of Scripture. Those resources might help. Also, search YouTube for Phil Johnson’s teaching on providence, (We commented on a article on providence by Mr. Johnson here.)
which gave me better clarity on this whole matter.
No comments:
Post a Comment