# Special and/or personal revelation?



## natedogg1777 (Jul 22, 2010)

I'm not sure if this is the best place for this question, but its the best I could think of.

Ok, let me start by saying that I am so tired of the way evangelical and/or fundamentalist ideologies creep into Reformed churches and are just assumed to be the norm. 

A big one that bothers me is how much I hear "God told me x, y, z". It bothers me how lightly people take that these days - you are actually claiming God spoke to you? How is that different from God's revealed word in Scripture? Are you willing to bank your life on that and put it on par with Scripture? What I see in Scripture is God speaking through a mediator, be it Moses, the prophets, or Jesus, collectively to His people in an authoritative manner. Not this, "I heard a voice in my head and I think God told me to do this". There's simply no way to truly test such a thing.

First question, what is the traditional/official (if such a thing exists) Reformed position on God "speaking" _per se_ to individual believers today. I mean apart from Scripture, of course.

Second question, what is the best way to help someone see the error in their line of thinking? Whenever I've brought up the fact that I believe in the sufficiency of Scripture for all things pertaining to salvation and living life as a Christian, I get this weird look from folks as if I were speaking a foreign language!

Thanks for your help.


----------



## MRC (Jul 22, 2010)

I get this _*all the time*_ as well! The Holy Spirit illuminates and confirms the trustworthiness of the Scriptures, which are God's only method of special revelation to man. I agree that people in mainline evangelicalism instinctively recoil at this teaching, which is when I talk about what the difference between special and general revelation and the difference between a prompting/confirming by the Spirit and a message directly from God, which (as you point out) denies the sufficiency of Scripture. I think the problem is that folks today do not have a proper understanding of the doctrine of Scripture and although they affirm the sufficiency of Scripture with their lips, they deny it in their Christian practice.

I have found the book _Let the Reader Understand_ to be helpful in my own formulation of these ideas.


----------



## Andres (Jul 22, 2010)

WCF 1.6 states:



> 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.* Nevertheless, we acknowledge the inward illumination of the Spirit of God to be necessary for the saving understanding of such things as are revealed in the Word: and that there are some circumstances concerning the worship of God, and government of the church, common to human actions and societies, which are to be ordered by the light of nature, and Christian prudence, according to the general rules of the Word, which are always to be observed.



This seems pretty "traditional" to me.


----------



## MRC (Jul 22, 2010)

Andres said:


> WCF 1.6 states:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
Thanks, Andrew, great quote. The idea of the "light of nature" is well worth the Christian's study as the divines meant something very different than what the average person today would mean by "discernment". I have Shaw's commentary on the WCF which I found particularily helpful with this teaching.


----------



## Scott1 (Jul 22, 2010)

The posts above are all helpful in explaining the role of special revelation well.

_What is Reformed Theology?_ by RC Sproul may be helpful in understanding this.

It explains special revelation and natural revelation.

The former is through Scripture, specifically the Holy Spirit illuminating our understanding as we read, study, and meditate on Scripture. It reveals the person and work of Christ, for example.

The latter is God revealing certain of His attributes to His creatures, enough so they know enough about Him to be without excuse in rejecting Him (cf Romans 1). Natural revelation would not be sufficient, though, to reveal the person and work of Christ- that would come through Scripture.

I think we could also use the term "ordinarily" in the sense that God is not limited by any means, or as the Westminster Confession says:



> Westminster Confession of Faith
> 
> Chapter V
> Of Providence
> ...


----------



## natedogg1777 (Jul 22, 2010)

I did find this article linked from Mongergism.com. It points out - very well in my opinion - some of the logical problems in believing in personal revelation.

Critical Issues Commentary:The Problem With Personal Words From God


----------



## earl40 (Jul 22, 2010)

God told me not to divorce my wife or kill my kids though I may want to...kill the kids that is. Teenagers ya know.


----------



## Jack K (Jul 22, 2010)

The "God told me to do such and such" statement is damaging in large part because it tends to cut off debate. It's like the person making the claim is trying to trump any challenges to his decided course of action by invoking God's name. If God told him, what can you say?

Well, I suppose God may sometimes speak in unusual ways. But I'd like to tell those who make such claims to apply these tests:

1. If God was really speaking, did he say the same to others? Why would he tell you something and not tell some of the rest of us also, since we are all one in Christ and share the same Spirit? The answer is that he likely wouldn't.

2. If God was really speaking, does what he said fit the Scriptures? The Scriptures come from God. He doesn't contradict himself. Anything he truly says to you must fit the Bible.

3. If God was really speaking, do you see opportunities based on his providence that fit what he said. God controls this world. He will not speak out of line with his own providence. What he "said" should be sensible when we look at what he's doing—doors he's opening, if you will.

4. If God was really speaking, does what he said fit what you know of his heart? Jesus summed up God's Kingdom call with the message, "Repent and believe the gospel." If what God is "saying" to you doesn't cause you to repent or employ greater faith, does it really sound like it's from God? A course of action that'll benefit you more than others is always suspect, because it isn't in line with repentance and the gospel.

If you've considered all these and still are confident God spoke to you, I'd suggest one more test before invoking God's name in your claim. The Old Testament test of a true prophet was that he should include a varifiable prediction. Then if the prediction didn't come true, "that same prophet shall die" (Deut. 18:20). Are you confident enough that God was speaking to you that you'd risk your life—that you'd agree to be killed if proven wrong? Only if you can answer "yes" to that, should you be brash enough to claim "God told me such and such."


----------



## Ivan (Jul 22, 2010)

We had this pop up from time to time in our church, although it's rare. Recently, we had a lady (a member) tell us that God told her that we were to sell our property and give all our money to another church in another town. When she told us we all looked at one another and said, "God didn't tell us." End of story. 

I believe in the confluence of the Word and the Spirit, although the Spirit will _*NEVER*_ contradict the Word, never.


----------

