Pumpkin Prophecy: Beware of Lowercase “r” Revelation - by Josh Buice

Found here. Our comments in bold.

-----------------------------

This article weighs in at an astonishing 2274 words, minus quoted material. But the author can only manage to quote two Scriptures (we redacted that section). Neither of these Scriptures come to bear on the case he is making. He also references and summarizes some other verses, but does not quote them. He does manage to quote theologians and contemporary teachers, sometimes extensively.

But the Bible is nearly absent. We must deem it Bad Bible Teaching.

-------------------------

(...) (Large, irrelevant section deleted)

Assaulting Biblical Sufficiency

(...)  (Large, irrelevant section deleted)

These so-called “prophetic utterances” serve only as a distraction from the sure revelation of sacred Scripture (The author simply states this as an opinion: Prophecy is a distraction. How so?)

that has been handed down through the ages in 66-books by 40-authors in one completed and authoritative canon that we know as the Bible. In chapter 1 and paragraph 6 of the 2nd London Baptist Confession of Faith (1689), we find these words:

 

The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for his own glory, man’s salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down or necessarily contained in the Holy Scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelation of the Spirit, or traditions of men.

(Well, since no true Christian wants to add to the Bible, this admonition is in no danger of being violated.)

Since God has provided us with everything necessary for life, salvation, and worship in his sufficient Word—why would we open the door for fresh words of God to be given to God’s people today? (The author is alluding to 2Pe. 1:3:

His divine power has given us everything we need for life and godliness through our knowledge of him who called us by his own glory and goodness. 

Notice this verse is not about "his sufficient word," it is about "his divine power." The author misrepresents Scripture in an effort to bolster his case.)

If it’s not authoritative and necessary for life and obedience (What Charismatic has asserted the Bible is not authoritative and necessary?)

—it only serves as an assault upon the sufficiency of Scripture (How does contemporary prophecy assault the sufficiency of Scripture?) 

and distracts from God’s holy Word. (He repeats his opinion as if it was self-evident.)

Jonathan Edwards in Charity and its Fruits (1738) writes the following about the cessation of the revelatory gifts of tongues and prophecy:

They are not bestowed in the way of God’s providential dealing with his children, but only … before the canon of Scripture was complete.… But since canon of the Scripture has been completed, and the Christian church fully founded and established, these extraordinary gifts have ceased.2

The revelatory gifts associated with the Apostles have now ceased (including the gift of the apostle). (This is the matter to be demonstrated, which the author has yet to do, and in fact will not do.)

The foundation of God’s church has been laid and there is no need for an additional foundation (Eph 2:20). (??? Who wants to build another foundation? How does contemporary prophecy build another foundation? Is the author going to explain anything?)

Anyone who claims to be speaking on behalf of God serves only as a distraction and assaults the sufficiency of Scripture. (Sigh. This is the third time the author has claimed this.)

Jonathan Edwards observes the following:

They who leave the sure word of prophecy [i.e., Scripture]—which God has given us as a light shining in a dark place—to follow such impressions and impulses, leave the guidance of the polar star to follow a Jack with a lantern. No wonder therefore that sometimes they are led into woeful extravagances.3 (Edwards was alluding to 2Pe. 1:19. Let's quote it:

And we have the word of the prophets made more certain, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. 

Peter was not telling his readers that Scripture is more certain compared to prophecy, he was explaining that his eyewitness experience at the Transfiguration (vs. 17) made the OT prophecies about Jesus more certain. In other words, he had read the prophecies but his experience validated them. Therefore, his readers should pay attention to them.) 

The Normalization of the “God Told Me” Language

Within evangelical circles it’s not an uncommon thing to walk into a church building on the Lord’s Day and hear a preacher make a statement that says, “God told me” or “I heard God say to me.” This is not only the case within mainline Protestant denominations, but it’s also true of conservative groups such as The Southern Baptist Convention and non-denominational Reformed evangelicals. In Sam Storms’ response to the Cessationist documentary, he writes the following:

So, I remain committed to striving in the power of the Spirit to obeying what the Spirit inspired Paul to say. My definition of sin, as I suspect yours is as well, is willful disobedience to an explicit command of Scripture. And I don’t know how Paul could have been more explicit than he is in 1 Cor. 14:1,39, etc. So, I stand by my statement, “If you are not earnestly desiring spiritual gifts, especially that you may prophesy,” you are sinning.

Years ago in 2005, the work by Henry Blackaby known as Experiencing God was a gateway to the modern “God told me” language that has become normative within our evangelical culture today. We must be honest, that method of discerning the will of God assaults the sufficiency of Scripture and it has a charismatic foundation. (Sigh. This is the fourth time the author has stated this opinion. Will he ever explain anything?)

A quote from the original Experiencing God study guide reads:

“When God speaks to you in your quiet time, immediately write down what He said.”

In many ways, Blackaby opened the gates for the acceptance of this “God told me” language within conservative evangelical circles. Today, it’s common for popular women’s Bible study teachers to employ that language in their studies written for women. In her book, Discerning the Voice of God: How to Recognize When God Speaks, Priscilla Shirer writes:

As I meditate upon a verse, I will often insert my name or a personal pronoun into it to make it more personal. If I’m reading and meditating on a Bible story, I will become the main character so that it’s not merely someone else’s experience with God, but my own. I often ask myself what God would have me do as a result of what I contemplated.

The book blurb online used to market the book to Christians and encourage them to purchase it at ChristianBook.com reads:

When you hear that “still small voice,” are you certain it’s the Holy Spirit? In this freshly updated guide featuring personal insights from Beth Moore, Max Lucado, Kay Arthur, and other trusted teachers, Shirer guides you through Scripture to heighten your spiritual senses so you can distinguish the voice of God from imposters’ chatter.

This is a dangerous method of biblical hermeneutics, (Why is it dangerous? What does contemporary prophecy have to do with biblical hermeneutics? Is the author going to explain anything?)

but it has become mainstream and common within our evangelical circles. How did we arrive at this point in church history? From where did all of these modern “prophets” and “prophetesses” arise? From a scholarly perspective, Wayne Grudem’s Systematic Theology has served to promote the continuation of prophecy by promoting a lowercase “r” revelation and lowercase “p” prophecy among God’s church today. According to Grudem, such revelation is non-authoritative (not on the same level as Scripture) and open to error (because we judge the prophecies rather than the prophet). In commenting on 1 Corinthians 14, Grudem writes:

This understanding of the passage depends on our view of the gift of prophecy in the New Testament age, namely, that prophecy involves not authoritative Bible teaching, and not speaking words of God which are equal to Scripture, but rather reporting something which God spontaneously brings to mind.4

Grudem creates a division between Old Testament prophecy and New Testament prophecy in a way that is inconsistent with the Bible. Bare assertion.)

All prophecy in the Scripture is authoritative. (Define "authoritative," and tell us where in the Bible we find this.)

Not all prophecy was inscripturated, but that doesn’t diminish the nature of prophecy which is always “Thus says the LORD” and carries an authoritative voice. (The author repeats his claim.)

In other words, although we may not have the prophecies of Philip’s four daughters recorded for us in the pages of Scripture (Acts 21:9), we must not see their prophecies as non-authoritative simply because we lack chapter and verse. (??? Most cessationists we have read claim that modern-day prophecy must be regarded as authoritative, and because of this it must be included in the canon. But this of course would violate the sufficiency of Scripture. So, they reason, because the canon is closed they conclude that there can be no prophecy today.

However, the author tells us that the prophecies of Philip's four daughters were authoritative but not inscripturated. We have never seen a cessationist claim this.

This means not all of what God has spoken to man is contained in the Bible. therefore, if prophecy can be authoritative and not be put in the Bible back then, it is the same situation today. Thus contemporary prophecy does not come to bear on the sufficiency of Scripture.) 

When God speaks—it’s always authoritative. (The author repeats his claim.)

Furthermore, when God spoke to the prophets or prophetesses, they didn’t ask themselves if it was their dinner the night before causing strange impulses and inner nudges or the voice of God speaking to them. They clearly knew God spoke and it was clear. (The author mentioned Philip's four daughters. Did they also know it was clearly God speaking? Well, the Bible doesn't tell us anything about this, so the author is making claims from the silence of Scripture.

Further, when the apostles and elders sent Paul and Barnabas to Antioch with a letter, was God absolutely clear?

Ac. 15:28 It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements...

When Samuel heard the voice of the Lord he did not recognize it:

1Sa. 3:4-5 Then the LORD called Samuel. Samuel answered, “Here I am.” 5 And he ran to Eli and said, “Here I am; you called me.” But Eli said, “I did not call; go back and lie down.” So he went and lay down.

Paul did not recognize the voice of the Lord: 

Ac. 9:5 “Who are you, Lord?” Saul asked. “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting,” he replied.

So the author's statement that God's voice is always clear and recognizable is false.)

Tom Schreiner observes the following regarding New Testament prophecy:

New Testament prophecy doesn’t differ from Old Testament prophecy, and like Old Testament prophecy, it is infallible and always true. New Testament prophecies aren’t mixed with errors.5

(The author quotes an undocumented opinion that agrees with his own. However, it is quite clear that the nature of prophecy has changed: 

1) Prophecy was very narrowly bestowed in the OT, but it is widely distributed in the NT: 

He. 2:4 God also testified to it by signs, wonders and various miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his will. 

1Co. 14:5 I would like every one of you to speak in tongues, but I would rather have you prophesy.

2) Prophecy in the OT was mostly directed at nations and peoples, and often spoke of God's judgment, while the NT prophetic is primarily edifying: 

1Co. 14:3 But everyone who prophesies speaks to men for their strengthening, encouragement and comfort. 

1Co. 14:12 So it is with you. Since you are eager to have spiritual gifts, try to excel in gifts that build up the church. 

1Co. 14:31 For you can all prophesy in turn so that everyone may be instructed and encouraged.

Ro. 1:11-12 I long to see you so that I may impart to you some spiritual gift to make you strong — 12 that is, that you and I may be mutually encouraged by each other’s faith. 

3) Prophecy in the OT was a full articulation of what God said, but NT prophecy is incomplete and imperfect.

 For we know in part and we prophesy in part... 1 Cor. 13:9

4) Prophecy in the OT flawless, but NT prophecy is partly obscured:

Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known. 1Co. 13:12 

5) We don't put false prophets to death, we ignore them or correct them:

 1Co. 14:37-38 If anybody thinks he is a prophet or spiritually gifted, let him acknowledge that what I am writing to you is the Lord’s command.38 If he ignores this, he himself will be ignored. 

2Ti. 4:2 Preach the Word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage — with great patience and careful instruction.

6) In the OT, the prophet was judged. In the NT, the prophecy is judged.

1Co. 14:29 Two or three prophets should speak, and the others should weigh carefully what is said.

Modern charismatics function as mystics—always searching for a fresh revelation, revelatory dreams, visions, extraordinary signs, personal nudges, inner promptings, or some extrabiblical communication and prophecy from God. (The flaws of contemporary Christians do not speak to the biblical case.)

While we can expect that to be true of Benny Hinn, Isaiah Saldivar, or Daniel Kolenda—sadly it’s likewise true of respectable voices such as Sam Storms, Wayne Grudem, and John Piper.

While I have learned and benefited from both Wayne Grudem and John Piper and consider them to be brothers in the Lord, I believe they have redefined prophecy in the New Testament in a way that the biblical text does not permit. (What Bible text is this? Is the author going to explain anything?)

For instance, following in Grudem’s argument, Piper commenting on the gift of prophecy in the New Testament era and the command found in 1 Corinthians 14:39 suggests that the command is to be viewed as prescriptive for today. (Let's quote it: 

1Co. 14:39 Therefore, my brothers, be eager to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues. 

Why is this not prescriptive? What part of this verse does not permit Piper's assertion?)

(...)  (Large, irrelevant section deleted)

It has become commonplace to hear pastors, authors, and conference speakers using the “God told me” language in various forms. As you see in Matt Chandler’s own words, he attributed the extravagant vision involving a pirate ship, cannons, and a shark to direct revelation from an internal prompting of the Holy Spirit. I would argue that such practices diminish the importance of holy Scripture and serve as Edwards said, as “jack-o’-lanterns” that lure the eyes of God’s children away from the sure polar star that shines brightly in the dark of night. Beware of such pumpkin prophecy—those words hinder God’s church and muzzle God’s Word. (How does it do this? Is the author going to explain anything?)

A Word to My Continuationist Brothers and Sisters

The sufficiency of Scripture remains to this hour a central battleground for Christ’s church. (The author has yet to explain how modern day prophecy impacts the sufficiency of Scripture.)

Perhaps it will remain so until the end of the age, for it has persisted from the Garden of Eden to this very hour. It was a central issue through the earthly ministry of Jesus when he was tempted by Satan to disobey the Word of God and lured to violate the law of God by the Pharisees. No matter what controversy or schism arises, the church of Jesus must look to the sufficient and authoritative Word of God.

It is essential to distinguish between the categories of unorthodox heretics (such as Benny Hinn, Isaiah Saldivar, Daniel Kolenda, and Alexander Pagani) and orthodox brothers and sisters who teach error (such as Wayne Grudem, John Piper, and Sam Storms). It’s likewise essential in such discussions to distinguish between error and heresy in the technical sense. However, it’s improper to allow official errant-filled positions on the gifts of the Spirit to go unchecked in the public sphere. The modern continuationist movement may be distinguished from the rabid charismania movement, but there is a natural connection that one must readily and openly admit.

You may not agree with Charles Spurgeon’s choice of vocabulary, but he was crystal clear in a sermon he preached on October 6, 1872 from John 14:16 titled, “The Paraclete.” In that fiery sermon, Spurgeon referred to people who commonly suggest that they are receiving a word from the Lord as maniacs and semi-lunatics. With stern unapologetic language, he said the following:

Never dream that events are revealed to you by Heaven, or you may come to be like those idiots who dare impute their blatant follies to the Holy Spirit. If you feel your tongue itch to talk nonsense, trace it to the devil, not to the Spirit of God! Whatever is to be revealed by the Spirit to any of us is in the Word of God already—He adds nothing to the Bible, and never will. Let persons who have revelations of this, that, and the other, go to bed and wake up in their senses.

I only wish they would follow the advice and no longer insult the Holy Spirit by laying their nonsense at His door. At the same time, since the Holy Spirit is with you, Beloved, in all your learning ask Him to teach you. In all your suffering ask Him to sustain you. In all your teaching ask Him to give you the right words. In all your witness-bearing ask Him to give you constant wisdom and in all service depend upon Him for His help. Believingly reckon upon the Holy Spirit. We do not continually take Him into our calculations as we should. We reckon up so many missionaries, so much money and so many schools—and so conclude the list of our forces. The Holy Spirit is our great need, not learning or culture! Little knowledge or great knowledge shall answer almost as well if the Spirit of God is there—but all your knowledge shall be worthless without Him.

I would urge my continuationist brothers and sisters to cling to the trustworthy and inerrant Scriptures that remain sufficient and authoritative to this very hour. Dear brothers and sisters, walk away from pumpkin prophecy. We have a sure and certain Word that shines brightly in the darkness of our present evil age. As the Psalmist declared, it is that trustworthy Word that serves as a lamp unto our feet and a light unto our path (Psalm 119:105).

References

1 2 Peter 2:1
2 Jonathan Edwards, Charity and its Fruits (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth, 1969), 29.
3 Jonathan Edwards, The Distinguishing Marks, Sect. 3: Practical Inferences, 141. For an online version see: https://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/sdg/edwards/edwards_distinguishingmarks.html
4 Wayne A. Grudem, Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine (Leicester, England; Grand Rapids, MI: Inter-Varsity Press; Zondervan Pub. House, 2004), 939.
5 Thomas R. Schreiner, Spiritual Gifts: What They Are & Why They Matter (Nashville, TN: B&H Publishing Books, 2018), 105.
6 Ask Pastor John, Episode 215.
7 David Platt, IMB Report, 2018-6:14-8:05