# Does The WCoF Affirm Personal Prophecy?



## Jared (Mar 28, 2010)

I don't want to argue for personal prophecy. I only want to ask everyone what your thoughts are on this:

WCoF 1.10 says this:

The supreme judge by which all controversies of religion are to be determined, and all decrees of councils, opinions of ancient writers, doctrines of men, and private spirits, are to be examined, and in whose sentence we are to rest, can be no other but the Holy Spirit speaking in the Scripture. 

Wayne Grudem claims that "private spirits" refers to personal prophecy. I am aware that the position of the Puritan Board is that the confessions are cessatinist documents. What would you say about Wayne Grudem's interpretation of this point of the WCoF. 

Like I said, I'm not trying to argue for personal prophecy. I just wanted to know your thoughts.


----------



## timmopussycat (Mar 28, 2010)

Does Grudem put forth a rationale for why he holds that view? Also, where does he say it?


----------



## Southern Presbyterian (Mar 28, 2010)

Jared104 said:


> I am aware that the position of the Puritan Board is that the confessions are cessatinist documents.


 
It seems that you have answered your own question.


----------



## Glenn Ferrell (Mar 28, 2010)

Whatever the WCF meant by "private spirits," it was not referring to infallible utterances or revelations. Although there are no extraordinary works of God to confirm additions to His Word, a Sovereign God may use special providential means to guide, deliver or protect His people, especially in times of persecution, hardship, or advancement of the Kingdom, never as a contradiction, an addition to, or with the infallible certainty of canonical Revelation, but “as gracious intimations of the will of God, granted to them in answer to prayer, for their own encouragement or direction” (McCrie, _Story of the Scottish Church_).


----------



## Jared (Mar 28, 2010)

> Does Grudem put forth a rationale for why he holds that view? Also, where does he say it?



He makes that statement in his book, The Gift Of Prophecy. 

I should clarify that his view of New Testament prophecy is that it is something that God spontaneously brings to mind and it can be thought about wrongly or interpreted wrongly and it should always be weighed against scripture. 

Sorry for the misunderstanding, I guess I thought that you would be familiar with his views on personal prophecy.


----------



## Herald (Mar 28, 2010)

Jared,

Along the likes of what Glenn said, God can use providential means for His purpose. Additionally, let's say an individual offers a personal prophecy that is faithful to scripture. Well, is it really a personal _prophecy_, or is it a person accurately declaring scripture, even if unintended? Personal prophecy is not considered prophesy in a continualist (a belief that the sign gifts are still operational) sense just because it happens to dovetail with scripture. Scripture is sufficient on it's own merit. I think what the Confessions are getting at is that all varied teachings are subordinate to the Word of God.


----------



## Willem van Oranje (Mar 28, 2010)

Jared104 said:


> I don't want to argue for personal prophecy. I only want to ask everyone what your thoughts are on this:
> 
> WCoF 1.10 says this:
> 
> ...


 
It very well may be speaking of personal prophecy. It strikes me as so. Note that just because the confession says that "private spirits" are to be judged by the Spirit's inspired Scripture, this would not imply that there may be valid instances of "private spirits" today. In other words we can counter supposed prophecies using God's word as a judge, i. e. show from the Bible that prophecy has ceased in addition to showing where some particular utterances themselves may be in error on given doctrines, etc. To say that God's word is the judge of something isn't to validate that something.


----------



## Wayne (Mar 28, 2010)

Everything in that phrase,


> all decrees of councils, opinions of ancient writers, doctrines of men, and private spirits


has to do with human opinion, contrary to what Grudem tries to read into it.

Grudem's proposal of contemporary prophesy as something which is from God yet which is non-binding or non-canonical, is a proposal which is internally self-contradictory.


----------



## Puritan Sailor (Mar 28, 2010)

Probably had in mind the Quakers too... They were the contemporary "charismatics" of that time.


----------



## KMK (Mar 28, 2010)

See this very helpful thread: http://www.puritanboard.com/f30/rutherford-gift-prophecy-wcf-27106/


----------



## lynnie (Mar 28, 2010)

While I won't go so far as to say Samuel Rutherford always represents the WCF, this is interesting:

Modern Spiritual Gifts as Analogous to Apostolic Gifts 

( Poythress is a cessationist prof at WTS)

********************************
Historical accounts of extraordinary events

The conclusions to which we have come are not really so novel, when we compare them with the history of the church. The Holy Spirit has used both discursive and nondiscursive processes through the course of church history. Christians have often been able to acknowledge both kinds of processes in a balanced way—though they also had to struggle with aberrations.

Reformed tradition may serve as a suitable example. This tradition is typically associated with cessationist theology. Reformed writers repeatedly stress the completeness and sufficiency of Scripture. They show an appreciation for discursive processes for deriving conclusions from Scripture. Yet we also find testimony to extraordinary works of the Spirit of a nondiscursive kind. The following may serve as examples.

First, the words of Samuel Rutherford are of special interest, because he was one of the people involved in drawing up the Westminster Standards.

Samuel Rutherford says:




There is a 3 revelation [a third kind of revelation, in addition to canonical revelation and to the internal testimony of the Spirit giving assurance] of some particular men, who have forefold [sic; foretold] things to come even since the ceasing of the Canon of the word, as Iohn Husse, Wickeliefe, Luther, have foretold things to come, and they certainely fell out, and in our nation of Scotland, M. George Wishart foretold that Cardinall Beaton should not come out alive at the Gates of the Castle of St. Andrewes, but that he should dye a shamefull death, and he was hanged over the window that he did look out at, when he saw the man of God burnt, M. Knox prophecied of the hanging of the Lord of Grange, M. Ioh, Davidson uttered prophecies, knowne to many of the kingdome, diverse Holy and mortified preachers in England have done the like: no Familists, or Antinomians, no David George, nor H. Nicholas, no man ever of that Gang, Randel or Wheelwright, or Den, or any other, that ever I heard of, being once ingaged in the Familisticall way, ever did utter any but the fourth sort [satanic prophecies] of lying and false inspirations: Mrs Hutchison, said she should be delivered from the Court of Boston miraculously as Daniel from the Lyons, which proved false, Becold prophecied of the deliverance of the Towne of Munster which was delivered to their enemies, and he and his Prophet were tortured and hanged, David George prophecied of the raising [p. 43] of himselfe from the dead, which was never fulfilled, now the differences between the third and fourth [satanic] revelations, I place in these. 1 These worthy reformers did tye no man to beleeve their prophecies as scriptures, we are to give faith, to the predictions of Prophets and Apostles, foretelling facts to come, as to the very word of God, they never gave themselves out as organs immediately inspired by the Holy Ghost, as the Prophets doe, and as Paul did Rom. 11. prophecying of the calling of the Jewes, and Ioh. Revel. 1.10. and through the whole booke; yea they never denounced Iudgement against those that beleeve not their predictions, of these particular events and facts as they are such particular events & facts, as the Prophets and Apostles did. But Mrs. Hutchison said Rise, Reigne, pag. 61 art. 27. That her particular revelations about future events, Were as infallible as any scripture, and that shee is bound as much to beleeve them as the Scripture, for the same Holy Ghost is author of both, ….

[p. 44] 2 The events revealed to Godly and sound witnesses of Christ are not contrary to the word: But Becold, Iohn Mathie, and Ioh. Schykerus (who kild his brother for no fault) and other Enthysiasts of that murthering Spirit Sathan who killed innocent men, expresly against the fixt command. Thou shalt not Kill, and taught the Boures of Germany to rise and kill all lawfull Magistrates, because they were no Magistrates; upon the pretence of the Impulsions and Inspirations of the Holy Ghost, were acted by inspirations against the word of God; All that the Godly reformers foretold of the tragicall ends of the proclaimed enemies of the Gospell, they were not actors themselves in murthering these enemies of God, nor would M Wishart command or approve that Norman and Ioh. Leslyes should kill the Cardinall Beaton, as they did.

2 [sic; should be 3] They had a generall rule going along that Evill shall hunt the wicked man: onely a secret harmelesse, but an extraordinary strong impulsion, of a Scripture-spirit leading them, carried them to apply a generall rule of divine justice, in their predictions, to particular Godlesse men, they themselves onely being foretellers not copartners of the act.24


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Mar 28, 2010)

Wayne said:


> Everything in that phrase,
> 
> 
> > all decrees of councils, opinions of ancient writers, doctrines of men, and private spirits
> ...


 
Precisely. The problem I have with these ideas is equivocation. What the Bible meant by a Prophet or Apostle, in terms of laying down what God had breathed out authoritatively, is cheapened by attempts to say: "...but there is a kind of prophet today that might be non-binding...."

We're not even talking about the same thing. The issue of cessationism has to do with Apostolic gifts and whether they have ceased. The moment you begin to qualify the gift to define it as something other than the kind of authoritative gifting is to talk about not something continuing but a whole other species of "prophecy" altogether.


----------



## MW (Mar 28, 2010)

Jared104 said:


> Wayne Grudem claims that "private spirits" refers to personal prophecy.


 
This would be a mistake. In historical context the term was regularly used in relation to the interpretation of Scripture and the use of conceived prayer, where there was no claim to inspiration.


----------

