RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
We have no real evidence that the book of Hebrews was written by an apostle.
Accurately understanding "Reformed continuationism"
- Thread starter Moses Costigan
- Start date
- Status
We have no real evidence that the book of Hebrews was written by an apostle.
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
That idea was originally from a Muslim caliph speaking about the Koran. But even then there are several responses:
a. The quote doesn't account for non propositional encounters (visions, dreams, etc).
That's a new one.
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
See the controversy behind Caliph Omar's burning of libraries. I'm not saying that Owen got his idea from Omar, but it's not a good way to set up an argument.
earl40
Puritan Board Professor
I understand, though if words of knowledge and miraculous healings are numerous I suspect he would have seen first hand at least a few.
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
Sure, which then brings to the next question: are those particular ones true or false? Even if they are false, it is logically fallacious to move from this one particular to a universally normative conclusion.
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
And while I have pushed back on some cessationist claims on logical grounds (Strange Fire was one of the worst books I've ever read, strictly from an argument point of view), I don't want to distract from the OP. I, too, have problems with the modern Calvinist views on continuationism. I do believe there are strong cases to be made for the position, but I have problems with Grudem et al's conclusions.
earl40
Puritan Board Professor
Goes both ways does it not? It depends on ones presupposition if one believes in the gifts are for today.
iainduguid
Puritan Board Junior
I'm not a continuationist, but the quote doesn't really address Grudem et al. The second part is clearly true (and Grudem would agree). The first half is far from self-evident. Suppose that "private revelation" were "Pray for missionary X; his life is in danger". It's clearly not contrary to Scripture, and in one sense is not necessary since we should be praying at all times, but how do we know what to pray for? Does the Spirit guide us and direct us as to what we should pray? Does he use ordinary means exclusively to direct our prayers, or does he sometimes directly guide us to pray for someone? Is that a private revelation? It's one of the sorts of things that Grudem has in mind.
Or to take a case closer to home in our circles, we require candidates for the ministry to have a sense of "internal calling" from God (see for example OPC Form of Government XX.3). This is a necessary but not sufficient condition: if a woman were to sense such a call, we would reject it on Scriptural grounds. In other cases, a presbytery might discern a man's sense of calling to be inaccurate because he lacks the gifts, or because no call is presented. But we don't stone the man as a false prophet for claiming to feel called to the ministry. The evaluative steps followed by the presbytery are srikingly similar to those Grudem advocates in evaluating "prophecy".
I've examined some of the issues surrounding cessationism and continuationism of prophecy specifically in an article in Dr Poythress' recent Festschrift, Redeeming the Life of the Mind, for those who are interested. Spoiler alert: the discussion hasn't typically done enough justice to the OT background. But Vern himself has an excellent treatment in his booklet What are Spiritual Gifts?
https://frame-poythress.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/PoythressVernWhatAreSpiritualGifts.pdf
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
Not necessarily. Just because a gift is for today doesn't mean anyone can use it at any time. God never makes that promise. Jesus couldn't heal all the time in some communities. Paul couldn't heal himself, and he left some of his coworkers unhealed.
Both Word of Faith types and some cessationists have this idea that if a gift exists, one can use it at will. But that doesn't follow. I have the gift of teaching, but not every time I teach is the gift manifest.
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
The Poythress article is excellent and I have used it with both continuationists and cessationists in helping them work through these problems.
earl40
Puritan Board Professor
So you base your assumptions on what exactly if not with the closing of the cannon? Your premise does not follow in that even if some were not healed by Jesus or the apostles. The fact of the matter is that some (if not most) were healed and that testimony via scripture is what we base our faith on today. Scripture alone stands.
Also teaching is not an extraordinary sign gift.
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
I base my assumptions on the text. I don't bring in outside concepts like "the closing of the canon," since that doesn't figure in the actual exegesis of the passages.
And the gifts are charismata, grace gifts. That's how the Bible describes them.
But not all, and that was my point. There is no divine zap juice that automatically heals people. Word of Faith and cessationists seem to agree on that point.
Red herring, and for what it's worth, Scripture alone says that Jesus and the apostles couldn't always heal. And as for the majority always getting healed, that is reading into the text. Honestly, we have no clue. I happen to think that most, yes, were healed. But again, the text doesn't give a statistical list.
Puritan Sailor
Puritan Board Doctor
It all comes back to the question: by what standard? How do you define these gifts? And how to you critique the claims? The only objective standard we have is the written word of God to help us identify these things. That is where the universals come from to judge the particulars. We no longer have apostolic eye-witnesses or a collection of prophets (1 Cor 14:29-32) to confirm the truth of non-canonical prophecies, therefore it is perfectly legitimate to ask why we should take such alleged "prophecies" seriously anymore in light of a completed canon. Because people have done so in church history doesn't really matter. Were they right to do so is the ultimate question.
Furthermore, sign gifts were (in the very least) God's way of confirming the validity of apostolic testimony (Heb 2:3-4). So it is a legitimate question to ask, if the apostles are gone, is there any further need to confirm that testimony in that way? Or is the confirmed written testimony in Scripture enough?
Even with that said, strange things can happen in the world beyond our own limited ability to categorize. And in that case, we must be extremely cautious in attempting to reinterpret Scripture in order to include the anomaly. We can leave anomalies in the category of "uncertain" and withhold any judgment about them while still remaining faithful to the Scriptures. Scripture is our final authority, not our fallible interpretations of anomalous events which the Scriptures don't directly address. Thus, the modern phenomena of babblings in charismatic circles should not cause us to reinterpret "tongues" in Scripture as anything other than actual spoken languages.
Is God able to do strange things like healings and miracles in the world? Sure. And if we receive some good from them, we can still give thanks to the God of providence without fully understanding the nature of the event, or redefining the biblical definition of the apostolic gift of healing or miracles. Even alleged "words of knowledge" today may actually just be acts of illumination, where God simply crystallizes a specific application of biblical truth in the mind of the believer for his situation. It doesn't have to be a new "revelation".
Can self-proclaimed "prophecies" come true? Yes. But even in the case that predictive prophecies come true, we are still called to exercise discernment (Deut 13:1-4) and remain faithful to God's written Word, not that particular prophet. And even in the case one prophecy comes true, we are still called to evaluate whether all his prophecies have come true before we regard him as a true prophet (Deut 18:22), which may take generations to evaluate depending on the kind of predictions made. Again, we are left to rely upon the written word of God.
So when it comes back to the issue of "fallible prophecy" we have to ask, does Scripture ever teach such a thing? When we are specifically told how to exercise prophecy, is there ever such a provision made for fallible prophecy? No. The example of Agabus comes in narrative portions and as such, we need to be cautious in using him as an example, especially in a way that contradicts the clear commands and teachings about the nature of prophecy elsewhere. There are other ways to reconcile the perceived "errors" of Agabus without contradicting the rest of what Scripture says about prophecy.
Hope that is helpful...
Furthermore, sign gifts were (in the very least) God's way of confirming the validity of apostolic testimony (Heb 2:3-4). So it is a legitimate question to ask, if the apostles are gone, is there any further need to confirm that testimony in that way? Or is the confirmed written testimony in Scripture enough?
Even with that said, strange things can happen in the world beyond our own limited ability to categorize. And in that case, we must be extremely cautious in attempting to reinterpret Scripture in order to include the anomaly. We can leave anomalies in the category of "uncertain" and withhold any judgment about them while still remaining faithful to the Scriptures. Scripture is our final authority, not our fallible interpretations of anomalous events which the Scriptures don't directly address. Thus, the modern phenomena of babblings in charismatic circles should not cause us to reinterpret "tongues" in Scripture as anything other than actual spoken languages.
Is God able to do strange things like healings and miracles in the world? Sure. And if we receive some good from them, we can still give thanks to the God of providence without fully understanding the nature of the event, or redefining the biblical definition of the apostolic gift of healing or miracles. Even alleged "words of knowledge" today may actually just be acts of illumination, where God simply crystallizes a specific application of biblical truth in the mind of the believer for his situation. It doesn't have to be a new "revelation".
Can self-proclaimed "prophecies" come true? Yes. But even in the case that predictive prophecies come true, we are still called to exercise discernment (Deut 13:1-4) and remain faithful to God's written Word, not that particular prophet. And even in the case one prophecy comes true, we are still called to evaluate whether all his prophecies have come true before we regard him as a true prophet (Deut 18:22), which may take generations to evaluate depending on the kind of predictions made. Again, we are left to rely upon the written word of God.
So when it comes back to the issue of "fallible prophecy" we have to ask, does Scripture ever teach such a thing? When we are specifically told how to exercise prophecy, is there ever such a provision made for fallible prophecy? No. The example of Agabus comes in narrative portions and as such, we need to be cautious in using him as an example, especially in a way that contradicts the clear commands and teachings about the nature of prophecy elsewhere. There are other ways to reconcile the perceived "errors" of Agabus without contradicting the rest of what Scripture says about prophecy.
Hope that is helpful...
Last edited:
earl40
Puritan Board Professor
The point is these gifts were indeed grace gifts though they also were sign gifts. If one believes one sees a miracle, or hears a direct word from God, then scripture alone is not needed for ones faith....BTW this is no red herring but a fact. Of course I understand where you are coming from and am simply relieved I am not there.
earl40
Puritan Board Professor
So are these "strange things" miracles or not? Give no quarter and take none, in that scripture labels such strange things as miracles or signs that God was among them.
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
So if I get healed outside of a doctor's office, that refutes Scripture alone? If that's the case, so be it. Good luck finding that claim in Scripture.
I think it is intellectually dishonest to refuse to admit the things (word of knowledge-prophecy) Samuel Rutherford talked about in the Poythress article while at the same time extolling SR as one of the framers of the WCF.
I see the main problem, as a continuationist, with what happens to ones view of Sunday service. Instead of a usual time of singing and preaching, people start to expect "words" every week. Or long periods of time are spent on prayer for healing lines that I think should be left for after the service. Or people feel led to give testimonies that can take up 30 minutes or more. The Sunday focus shifts from scripture to all the rest.
Having said that, I have experienced so many direct leadings/impressions/words from the Lord to pray for somebody at a specific time that my natural mind knew nothing of, or been directed to give money in a specific amount also apart from knowledge that turned out to be exact, that I am convinced the Holy Spirit can indeed move in such ways. I have also twice been on the receiving end of such things, to my great edification and blessing. But I wish charismatics could save it for the other 23 days and 22+ hours of the week and leave the church services alone.
I see the main problem, as a continuationist, with what happens to ones view of Sunday service. Instead of a usual time of singing and preaching, people start to expect "words" every week. Or long periods of time are spent on prayer for healing lines that I think should be left for after the service. Or people feel led to give testimonies that can take up 30 minutes or more. The Sunday focus shifts from scripture to all the rest.
Having said that, I have experienced so many direct leadings/impressions/words from the Lord to pray for somebody at a specific time that my natural mind knew nothing of, or been directed to give money in a specific amount also apart from knowledge that turned out to be exact, that I am convinced the Holy Spirit can indeed move in such ways. I have also twice been on the receiving end of such things, to my great edification and blessing. But I wish charismatics could save it for the other 23 days and 22+ hours of the week and leave the church services alone.
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
Your earlier comment seemed to suggest that the only info God wanted to give us was entrusted to an apostle. We have no hard evidence that Hebrews was written by an apostle. Further, Phillip's daughters prophesied and they weren't apostles. Even if they were simply "preaching the truth," then we have an example of women preachers, which isn't good.
Bill The Baptist
Puritan Board Graduate
Perhaps we are not disagreeing at all. I absolutely believe that God still heals, if not, then why do we pray for the sick?, but I think it is doubtful that he still gives specific people the gift of healing.
I also believe that the Bible is clear that the gift of tongues involves the ability to speak an actual language which you do not know. It is also certainly possible that God could empower someone to do this today, but I have seen no evidence to suggest that such a gift is common.
I also believe that God can speak to us in ways which guide and help us, but I do not believe that God is giving people new revelations. In my experience, most of the people within so-called new Calvinism that teach such revelation mainly do so as a means of rendering their decisions as unquestionable.
In light of the evidence, I think it is likely that certain sign gifts have ceased, although I would agree that it is difficult to prove this absolutely, biblically or otherwise. On the other hand, I also see the danger of rendering our religion as naturalistic in the sense of viewing God as incapable of performing miracles anymore. God is still omnipotent and unbound by the laws of nature.
Ultimately, I think that the modern Charismatic Movement has mostly done harm to the church and I fear that these so-called cautious continuationists in our midst will likely serve to lead many straight into the arms of reckless continuationists. For this reason I think it best to err on the side of caution when it comes to these things.
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
Most New Continuationists (or whatever they call themselves) would agree with that. Revelation is a slippery term and for the sake of ease, many dont use it at all.
Would say that those that you mentioned are Calvinistic/Reformed in regards to how they view Sotierology, but in this area of how the Holy Spirit operates, they would be confused and going against the established standard of the scriptures alone being the word of the Lord unto for today.
I have heard and read from credible sources that the Lord is still at times doing things such as dreams and visions among Muslims as a means to bring them to hearing the Gospel and to get saved in Christ, but that would seem to be limited to a special ministry outreach of God, and not the normal fashion that he does things.
I would agree with you that biblical tongues were real and unlearned languages, and also that the Lord at times still heals today in a miracle type fashion, but the sign gifts on the whole as being the normal way God functions is no longer needed, as we now have the completed word of God to us.
bookslover
Puritan Board Doctor
That reminds me of the story Spurgeon told about the time a young man came up to him and said, "The Lord is telling me I have to preach from your pulpit." Spurgeon shot back, without missing a beat, "Well, when the Lord tells me that that's the case, you can do it!"
It’s important to think about who wrote Hebrews, and I think careful attention to all of Scripture helps us think well about it. When you keep in mind that the writing of Hebrews is part of the fulfillment of Christ’s promise to his apostles: “I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. 13 However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come. 14 He will glorify Me, for He will take of what is Mine and declare it to you. 15 All things that the Father has are Mine. Therefore I said that He will take of Mine and declare it to you.”- this is evidence of its apostolic nature because it’s part of the canon of that very fulfillment.
Phillips’s daughters were real prophetesses and their prophecies were of the Spirit. Their prophecies were perhaps like Agabus’, concerning practical things, having to do with current circumstances, and not doctrinal. During the unique time of “the acts of the apostles” the Spirit worked through these extraordinary means.
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
But you don't know that.
But let's suppose you are right. In some ways, that is exactly what guys like Moreland, Carson, and others mean by prophecy. No one is saying--excluding the Benny Hinn types--that new doctrine, new revelation, new ethics are being added.
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
St Paul says to test prophecy, which is what Spurgeon did. And there are also accounts of Spurgeon receiving words of knowledge.
Puritan Sailor
Puritan Board Doctor
I'm willing to say "I don't know" if I don't understand it. Certain events may be miracles in the sense that they are extraordinary works of God, but the events could just be the workings of ordinary providence that include variables which I just don't understand.
For example, you pray for someone to get healed. The healing comes, but was it extraordinary intervention or just God blessing the ordinary means of medical intervention? Either way, we give God thanks for answered prayer. Someone prays for deliverance from evildoers, and the evildoers die in a car accident on their way to commit more evil. Was it extraordinary intervention, or just God working through ordinary providence? I don't know. But I still give thanks. That's what I mean. We are not omniscient. And there are events that happen which we may not understand. But often we really don't need to understand them to recognize the good from it. And yet at the same time, we don't try to fit Scripture to our own fallible interpretations of those events either. There is no authority in those events which we must obey. We must obey the Word alone.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
