R. Scott Clark
Puritan Board Senior
Joseph,
As been argued before, there is no question whether God can do what he wants. I grant that God is completely free and able to replicate Pentecost today if he wills.
In the history of theology, this distinction is known as the distinction de potentia Dei absoluta et ordinata. The nominalists speculated about what God might have done. To appeal to the absolute power of God is a straw man. No one in our tradition denies this power.
The Protestants rejected speculation about this power. They taught us only to speak of what God has done and promised. What we´re arguing is de potentia ordinata.
Where has God promised to continue apostolic phenomena? It cannot be shown from Scripture that God has promised to replicate Pentecost or the apostolic phenomena in the post-canonical era. It can only be argued that he can do or that he hasn´t said he won´t do. That is not sufficient for confessional Protestants. Again, please read the passages from de Bres. Please read my essay on the theology of glory.
de Bres would regard your position as "œfanatical." You are making the Anabaptist argument. None of our confessional Protestant forefathers agree with you. None of our confessions speak as you do and we don't share your hermeneutic.
I contend that, for the reasons I specified, which you not apparently accept (the covenantal nature of the canon) we are not entitled to expect any such replication of Pentecost. The cosmic shift, of which you speak, is the death of the apostle John who was an eye-witness to Jesus and who was endowed with apostolic powers. When the last OT prophet died, the miracles associated with them died also. Israel existed in an inter-testamental silence for 400 years. We are in that silence. I understand that it is disturbing and that, in order to validate and confirm their faith, folk want to believe that apostolic phenomena continue. That is why I pointed to the sacraments.
There is a fundamental difference between Reformed Christianity and fanaticism. We are content with the signs Christ has promised us. You are not. You want to be an apostle. It isn´t happening. You can´t raise the dead and you won´t and God hasn´t raised any dead folks in your midst and isn´t going to do. That´s a cosmic shift. The NT deacon was transported (or some such) from place to place by the direct operation of the Spirit. Even the most "œSpirit-filled" human today must get in his Dodge Caravan to get to the next healing service.
It´s odd, apparently God only causes "œtongues" (natural foreign languages) to be spoken where no one can verify it.
As I said before I don´t accept your premise re the onus probandi. The only way to change that is to raise someone from the dead. Until then, as my old elder (from SE Missouri) used to say, "œYou´re just talkin´."
I´m aware of the various uncorroborated testimonies and I´ve heard folks refer to such and such a prophecy from 1985. My reply: See Warfield. He addressed all that nonsense in Counterfeit Miracles.
The difference between what someone heard about what someone was supposed to have done or had done to them is that there´s never ANY question in the apostolic record about what happened and by whom and its validity
The claims of miracles made by credulous Protestants are identical to the claims made by credulous medieval Christians about this set of bones healing that person or this ounce of the Blessed Virgin´s milk rendering that miracle.
The Protestants who claim these things today claim them for the VERY SAME reason that the medievals did and that Roman Catholics do so today (how many miracles has the almost-sainted Mother Theresa already accomplished? She´s on the fast track to sainthood! What about the recently departed Holy Father himself? If he hasn´t done, he will and folk will look you right in the eye and say, "œIn 2005"¦" and they will give a specific place and specific details in order to give the story credibility.
Read Hoaxbusters.com. They have a database of such stories that circulate on the web.
Talk to a cop who "œworks" (as they say) fraud cases. They´ll tell you the same.
Blessedly, the Reformation set us free from this sort of credulity. I don´t have to credit so and so´s report of some mighty work the Spirit allegedly did through her. Why? I have the divinely inspired record of God´s saving works in history and I have the preached Gospel and I have the gospel made visible in the covenant signs and seals. We call this sola Scriptura. Neither you nor anyone else can lord it over my conscience and force me to credit things that are not explicitly or implicitly revealed in the covenantal canon.
I´m content to muddle through, thank you very much.
rsc
[Edited on 1-13-2006 by R. Scott Clark]
[Edited on 1-13-2006 by R. Scott Clark]
As been argued before, there is no question whether God can do what he wants. I grant that God is completely free and able to replicate Pentecost today if he wills.
In the history of theology, this distinction is known as the distinction de potentia Dei absoluta et ordinata. The nominalists speculated about what God might have done. To appeal to the absolute power of God is a straw man. No one in our tradition denies this power.
The Protestants rejected speculation about this power. They taught us only to speak of what God has done and promised. What we´re arguing is de potentia ordinata.
Where has God promised to continue apostolic phenomena? It cannot be shown from Scripture that God has promised to replicate Pentecost or the apostolic phenomena in the post-canonical era. It can only be argued that he can do or that he hasn´t said he won´t do. That is not sufficient for confessional Protestants. Again, please read the passages from de Bres. Please read my essay on the theology of glory.
de Bres would regard your position as "œfanatical." You are making the Anabaptist argument. None of our confessional Protestant forefathers agree with you. None of our confessions speak as you do and we don't share your hermeneutic.
I contend that, for the reasons I specified, which you not apparently accept (the covenantal nature of the canon) we are not entitled to expect any such replication of Pentecost. The cosmic shift, of which you speak, is the death of the apostle John who was an eye-witness to Jesus and who was endowed with apostolic powers. When the last OT prophet died, the miracles associated with them died also. Israel existed in an inter-testamental silence for 400 years. We are in that silence. I understand that it is disturbing and that, in order to validate and confirm their faith, folk want to believe that apostolic phenomena continue. That is why I pointed to the sacraments.
There is a fundamental difference between Reformed Christianity and fanaticism. We are content with the signs Christ has promised us. You are not. You want to be an apostle. It isn´t happening. You can´t raise the dead and you won´t and God hasn´t raised any dead folks in your midst and isn´t going to do. That´s a cosmic shift. The NT deacon was transported (or some such) from place to place by the direct operation of the Spirit. Even the most "œSpirit-filled" human today must get in his Dodge Caravan to get to the next healing service.
It´s odd, apparently God only causes "œtongues" (natural foreign languages) to be spoken where no one can verify it.
As I said before I don´t accept your premise re the onus probandi. The only way to change that is to raise someone from the dead. Until then, as my old elder (from SE Missouri) used to say, "œYou´re just talkin´."
I´m aware of the various uncorroborated testimonies and I´ve heard folks refer to such and such a prophecy from 1985. My reply: See Warfield. He addressed all that nonsense in Counterfeit Miracles.
The difference between what someone heard about what someone was supposed to have done or had done to them is that there´s never ANY question in the apostolic record about what happened and by whom and its validity
The claims of miracles made by credulous Protestants are identical to the claims made by credulous medieval Christians about this set of bones healing that person or this ounce of the Blessed Virgin´s milk rendering that miracle.
The Protestants who claim these things today claim them for the VERY SAME reason that the medievals did and that Roman Catholics do so today (how many miracles has the almost-sainted Mother Theresa already accomplished? She´s on the fast track to sainthood! What about the recently departed Holy Father himself? If he hasn´t done, he will and folk will look you right in the eye and say, "œIn 2005"¦" and they will give a specific place and specific details in order to give the story credibility.
Read Hoaxbusters.com. They have a database of such stories that circulate on the web.
Talk to a cop who "œworks" (as they say) fraud cases. They´ll tell you the same.
Blessedly, the Reformation set us free from this sort of credulity. I don´t have to credit so and so´s report of some mighty work the Spirit allegedly did through her. Why? I have the divinely inspired record of God´s saving works in history and I have the preached Gospel and I have the gospel made visible in the covenant signs and seals. We call this sola Scriptura. Neither you nor anyone else can lord it over my conscience and force me to credit things that are not explicitly or implicitly revealed in the covenantal canon.
I´m content to muddle through, thank you very much.
rsc
[Edited on 1-13-2006 by R. Scott Clark]
[Edited on 1-13-2006 by R. Scott Clark]