full cessationalism is not biblical

Discussion in 'Pneumatology' started by rembrandt, May 14, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. rembrandt

    rembrandt Puritan Board Sophomore

    Augustine's mother was a prophetess. She received revelations all throughout Augustine's 'Confessions.' She had dreams that she knew were the Lord's commands etc.

    By weight of this I would conclude that she not only has the 'gift' of prophesy, but is an 'actual prophet.' She was active in her church every day etc.

    Augustine took this as very valid, even later in his life as a theologian. So I guess prophesy in the early church lasted a bit longer than many would conclude. i.e. it was occuring long after the canon was closed, and even among people who had the full canon in their hands.

    By weight of things as the such, I have denounced the cessational argument that prophesy stopped completely after the close of canon. Reading church history, that is a most ridiculous conclusion. Instead, my argument would run on the basis that prophesy is no longer [i:ea9bfa88b4]regulative[/i:ea9bfa88b4] for the church since the apostolic era. Then, I would say that this is no longer the prophesy that Paul told us to "eagarly desire." I also argue that tongues could come back, but it is highly improbable. The only way we would know if it is true tongues, is if it is occuring among true revival of religion (not the case today). But of course there is no need for prophesy and tongues (as 1 cor. 12-14 is talking about) when the church is rightly established. Given that, it does not follow that sparadic revelation [i:ea9bfa88b4]never[/i:ea9bfa88b4] occures. But I would classify this under (as discussed under previous threads) "providential predictive prophesy."

    I don't see anything wrong with someone saying they have a dream that they believe is of the Lord, because in reality all dreams are of the Lord. But of course the Biblical concept of a 'dream' has in mind an interruption in thought patterns. But our thought patterns are interupted all the time by God. It just doesn't occur on the same level that it used to.

    Besides, all Christians receive revelation: the written word [i:ea9bfa88b4]effectually applied.[/i:ea9bfa88b4] If we are all 'taught by God,' then in some sense, we are fulfilling the role of a prophet.

    And no, I do not adhere to Grudem's views on this. I do not believe that this is the NT prophesy that Paul was speaking of. But it could be said that it is a type of it. But its purpose in the church has virtually diminished.

    Rembrandt

    [Edited on 5-14-2004 by rembrandt]

    [Edited on 5-14-2004 by rembrandt]
     
  2. fredtgreco

    fredtgreco Vanilla Westminsterian Staff Member

    Rembrandt,

    I have a word from the Lord that you are wrong.

    You're in a pickle now, aren't you?
     
  3. sastark

    sastark Puritan Board Graduate

    [quote:a8da3378b3][i:a8da3378b3]Originally posted by fredtgreco[/i:a8da3378b3]
    Rembrandt,

    I have a word from the Lord that you are wrong.

    You're in a pickle now, aren't you? [/quote:a8da3378b3]

    :lol::lol::lol:
     
  4. fredtgreco

    fredtgreco Vanilla Westminsterian Staff Member

    An additional point:

    [quote:b5257afcdc][i:b5257afcdc]Originally posted by rembrandt[/i:b5257afcdc]
    Besides, all Christians receive revelation: the written word [i:b5257afcdc]effectually applied.[/i:b5257afcdc] If we are all 'taught by God,' then in some sense, we are fulfilling the role of a prophet.
    [/quote:b5257afcdc]

    You need (like most) to study Systematics more. You have confused the categories of illumination and revelation, and will have a great many problems. If you equate illumination and revelation, you make the Apostolic and prophetic authority that of a random Christian's "application." This has horrifying results for the doctrine of Scripture.
     
  5. BrianLanier

    BrianLanier Puritan Board Freshman

    [quote:7dcd6eef81][i:7dcd6eef81]Originally posted by fredtgreco[/i:7dcd6eef81]
    An additional point:

    [quote:7dcd6eef81][i:7dcd6eef81]Originally posted by rembrandt[/i:7dcd6eef81]
    Besides, all Christians receive revelation: the written word [i:7dcd6eef81]effectually applied.[/i:7dcd6eef81] If we are all 'taught by God,' then in some sense, we are fulfilling the role of a prophet.
    [/quote:7dcd6eef81]

    You need (like most) to study Systematics more. You have confused the categories of illumination and revelation, and will have a great many problems. If you equate illumination and revelation, you make the Apostolic and prophetic authority that of a random Christian's "application." This has horrifying results for the doctrine of Scripture. [/quote:7dcd6eef81]

    :amen:
     
  6. rembrandt

    rembrandt Puritan Board Sophomore

    [quote:7e8d1a0b2c][i:7e8d1a0b2c]Originally posted by fredtgreco[/i:7e8d1a0b2c]
    An additional point:

    [quote:7e8d1a0b2c][i:7e8d1a0b2c]Originally posted by rembrandt[/i:7e8d1a0b2c]
    Besides, all Christians receive revelation: the written word [i:7e8d1a0b2c]effectually applied.[/i:7e8d1a0b2c] If we are all 'taught by God,' then in some sense, we are fulfilling the role of a prophet.
    [/quote:7e8d1a0b2c]

    You need (like most) to study Systematics more. You have confused the categories of illumination and revelation, and will have a great many problems. If you equate illumination and revelation, you make the Apostolic and prophetic authority that of a random Christian's "application." This has horrifying results for the doctrine of Scripture. [/quote:7e8d1a0b2c]

    [b:7e8d1a0b2c]Actually I say this because I [i:7e8d1a0b2c]have[/i:7e8d1a0b2c] been reading systematics.[/b:7e8d1a0b2c] Calvin on the subject. As well as B.B. Warfield's "Calvin and Calvinism." Revelation is twofold. The written word. And the testimony of the Spirit. The testimony of the Spirit (according to Calvin) is not just mere illumination of truth, because illumination itself is revelation since it is revealing somthing. So revelation is the written word AND the testimony of the Spirit. The Bible never speaks of an 'illumination' but once. All references are to revelation itself. The revelation is the Word of God. That word of God is then effectually applied as we are taught by God inwardly (could be called illumination, but also carries weight of an active revealing).

    [quote:7e8d1a0b2c]If you equate illumination and revelation, you make the Apostolic and prophetic authority that of a random Christian's "application."[/quote:7e8d1a0b2c]

    NO! The only thing being revealed is THE WRITTEN WORD. How is the word of God applied to the saint? By the testimony of the Spirit. What is the testimony of the Spirit except for the WRITTEN WORD being put on our hearts?

    Rembrandt
     
  7. rembrandt

    rembrandt Puritan Board Sophomore

    Let me make something clear, I am not saying that Calvin thought that the testimony of the Spirit [i:7fe6a2549d]itself[/i:7fe6a2549d] is revelation. Only that it carries with in revelational content, which is the Written Word.
     
  8. rembrandt

    rembrandt Puritan Board Sophomore

    [quote:38628a2c8d]Besides, all Christians receive revelation[/quote:38628a2c8d]

    Even pretending for a moment that there was no Spirit to deliver the Word of God, we would still receive revelation. If you have the written word in your hands, that is revelation. Anytime you read the Bible you have just received revelation. Not because of some sort of mystical encounter, but because you have just read the Word of God. God speaks in his Word, therefore anytime we read it, we can hear him. Not mystically, but through the thought process of reading his revelation.

    The testimony of the Spirit itself is an illumination, and this produces in us a [i:38628a2c8d]sense[/i:38628a2c8d] whereby we receive revelation (the written word). But it does not follow that just because the Spirit is delivering the revelation, the delivery itself is not a revelation (because of its content).

    So, I'm not saying that we receive new revelation in any way. This is essentially Calvin's doctrine. It manifests itself in conjuction to the revelation of the written word. In no way would the testimony of the Spirit be considered a 'revelation' by itself. In fact, I agree that it is better to call it 'illumination' since it is only in conjuction with the written word which is what is truly being revealed.

    The never operate outside of each other, and therefore together they make up 'revelation.' That is why I said revelation is twofold.

    But this is not the point of the thread. That little blurp was only a side note. That we do receive revelation (the written word by illumination of the Spirit) and therefore this itself is putting us in some kind of a role whereby God speaks to us (prophetic), but it is nothing mystical, it is only the written word.

    Rembrandt

    [Edited on 5-14-2004 by rembrandt]
     
  9. fredtgreco

    fredtgreco Vanilla Westminsterian Staff Member

    [quote:3c07b95573][i:3c07b95573]Originally posted by rembrandt[/i:3c07b95573]
    Let me make something clear, I am not saying that Calvin thought that the testimony of the Spirit [i:3c07b95573]itself[/i:3c07b95573] is revelation. Only that it carries with in revelational content, which is the Written Word. [/quote:3c07b95573]

    But this is not what you said. You equated the revelatory nature of application with prophecy, in order to bolster your argument for continuing revelation:

    [quote:3c07b95573]
    Besides, all Christians receive revelation: the written word effectually applied. If we are all 'taught by God,' then in some sense, we are fulfilling the role of a prophet
    [/quote:3c07b95573]


    You miss the purpose of revelation and illumination. Revelation was given not for the purpose of assisting us in determining God's will, but to reveal Christ and the salvation provided by God. To say that it continues in order to help us determine which job we should take, or who we should marry or for any other purpose is to make a mockery of the Scriptures.

    All continuing revelation does is put the believer at the mercy of a "prophet" who tells him what to do. It is of NO USE whatsoever, since Christ has already brought the final word (Heb 1:1-3).

    You need to read Calvin more clearly if you think Calvin had any patience for continuing revelation. He severely rebukes the "fanatics" (his word) for any such thoughts:

    [quote:3c07b95573]There is nothing repugnant here to what was lately said (chap. 7) that we have no great certainty of the word itself, until it be confirmed by the testimony of the Spirit. For [b:3c07b95573]the Lord has so knit together the certainty of his word and his Spirit, that our minds are duly imbued with reverence for the word when the Spirit shining upon it enables us there to behold the face of God; and, on the other hand, we embrace the Spirit with no danger of delusion when we recognise him in his image, that is, in his word.[/b:3c07b95573] Thus, indeed, it is. God did not produce his word before men for the sake of sudden display, intending to abolish it the moment the Spirit should arrive; but he employed the same Spirit, by whose agency he had administered the word, to complete his work by the efficacious confirmation of the word. In this way Christ explained to the two disciples (Luke 24:27), not that they were to reject the Scriptures and trust to their own wisdom, but that they were to understand the Scriptures. In like manner, when Paul says to the Thessalonians, "Quench not the Spirit," [b:3c07b95573]he does not carry them aloft to empty speculation apart from the word;[/b:3c07b95573] he immediately adds, "Despise not prophesying," (1 Thess. 5:19, 20). By this, doubtless, he intimates that the light of the Spirit is quenched the moment prophesying fall into contempt. How is this answered by those swelling enthusiasts, in whose idea the only true illumination consists, in carelessly laying aside, and bidding adieu to the Word of God, while, with no less confidence than folly, they fasten upon any dreaming notion which may have casually sprung up in their minds? Surely a very different sobriety becomes the children of God. As they feel that without the Spirit of God they are utterly devoid of the light of truth, [b:3c07b95573]so they are not ignorant that the word is the instrument by which the illumination of the Spirit is dispensed.[/b:3c07b95573] They know of no other Spirit than the one who dwelt and spake in the apostles-the Spirit by whose oracles they are daily invited to the hearing of the word. (Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion. I, ix, 3)[/quote:3c07b95573]

    and

    [quote:3c07b95573]The word is not received in faith when it merely flutters in the brain, but when it has taken deep root in the heart, and become an invincible bulwark to withstand and repel all the assaults of temptation. [b:3c07b95573]But if the illumination of the Spirit is the true source of understanding in the intellect, much more manifest is his agency in the confirmation of the heart; inasmuch as there is more distrust in the heart than blindness in the mind; and it is more difficult to inspire the soul with security than to imbue it with knowledge.[/b:3c07b95573] Hence the Spirit performs the part of a seal, sealing upon our hearts the very promises, the certainty of which was previously impressed upon our minds. It also serves as an earnest in establishing and confirming these promises. Thus the Apostle says, "In whom also, after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise, which is the earnest of our inheritance," (Eph. 1:13, 14). You see how he teaches that the hearts of believers are stamped with the Spirit as with a seal, and calls it the Spirit of promise, because it ratifies the gospel to us. In like manner he says to the Corinthians, "God has also sealed us, and given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts," (2 Cor. 1:22). And again, when speaking of a full and confident hope, he founds it on the "earnest of the Spirit," (2 Cor. 5:5). (III, ii, 36)[/quote:3c07b95573]

    and
    [quote:3c07b95573]Now, therefore, since Christ, the Sun of Righteousness, has arisen, we have the perfect refulgence of divine truth, like the brightness of noon-day, whereas the light was previously dim. It was no ordinary blessing which the apostle intended to publish when he wrote: "God, who at sundry times and in divers manners, spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son" (Heb. 1:1, 2); for he intimates, nay, openly declares, [b:3c07b95573]that God will not henceforth, as formerly, speak by this one and by that one, that he will not add prophecy to prophecy, or revelation to revelation, but has so completed all the parts of teaching in the Son, that it is to be regarded as his last and eternal testimony.[/b:3c07b95573] For which reason, the whole period of the new dispensation, from the time when Christ appeared to us with the preaching of his Gospel, until the day of judgment, is designated by the last hour, the last times, the last days, that, contented with the perfection of Christ's doctrine, we may learn to frame no new doctrine for ourselves, or admit any one devised by others. With good cause, therefore, the Father appointed the Son our teacher, with special prerogative, commanding that he and no human being should be heard. When he said, "Hear him" (Mt. 17:5), he commended his office to us, in few words, indeed, but words of more weight and energy than is commonly supposed, for it is just as if he had withdrawn us from all doctrines of man, and confined us to him alone, ordering us to seek the whole doctrine of salvation from him alone, to depend on him alone, and cleave to him alone; in short (as the words express), to listen only to his voice. And, indeed, what can now be expected or desired from man, when the very Word of life has appeared before us, and familiarly explained himself? Nay, every mouth should be stopped when once he has spoken, in whom, according to the pleasure of our heavenly Father, "are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge" (Col. 2:3), and spoken as became the Wisdom of God (which is in no part defective) and the Messiah (from whom the revelation of all things was expected) (John 4:25); in other words, has so spoken as to leave nothing to be spoken by others after him. (IV, viii, 7)[/quote:3c07b95573]


    You need to read Calvin more closely. This is another good reason why systematics is important.

    And you still haven't answered my word from the Spirit! :think:

    [Edited on 5-14-2004 by fredtgreco]
     
  10. rembrandt

    rembrandt Puritan Board Sophomore

    [quote:c34fc4c910]You equated the revelatory nature of application with prophecy, in order to bolster your argument for continuing revelation[/quote:c34fc4c910]

    Sorry for being unclear. When I was saying that we in some sense fulfill the role of a prophet, I was not talking in any way like a prophet in the OT or NT. But was thinking that we are all being restored to prophet, priest, king. Clear?

    [quote:c34fc4c910]You miss the purpose of revelation and illumination. Revelation was given not for the purpose of assisting us in determining God's will, but to reveal Christ and the salvation provided by God.[/quote:c34fc4c910]

    Yes! that is what I said. I am not talking about determining God's will in any other way than determining God's will already revealed in the written word.

    [quote:c34fc4c910]To say that it continues in order to help us determine which job we should take, or who we should marry or for any other purpose is to make a mockery of the Scriptures.[/quote:c34fc4c910]

    absolutely!

    [quote:c34fc4c910]You need to read Calvin more clearly if you think Calvin had any patience for continuing revelation. He severely rebukes the "fanatics" (his word) for any such thoughts[/quote:c34fc4c910]

    I know. I know. I read that very clearly and agree with him all the way. I was not promoting the anabaptist mysticism that he was downing.

    I am in NO way talking about continuing revelation in this conversation (not referring to my first post). Only revelation that is directly applied to believers, as is described by B.B. Warfield in "Calvin and Calvinism" under the "Knowledge of God" in the "Testimony of the Spirit" section under the "mode of this testimony" section.

    Rembrandt

    [Edited on 5-14-2004 by rembrandt]

    [Edited on 5-14-2004 by rembrandt]
     
  11. rembrandt

    rembrandt Puritan Board Sophomore

    Fred, did you read my post that I wrote and submitted before you finished writting yours?
     
  12. Mary

    Mary Puritan Board Freshman

    Not that this remotely adds to the debate, but Augustine's mother's name was Monica. (I used to have her prayer card.)

    OK, back to the discussion.

    :D
     
  13. fredtgreco

    fredtgreco Vanilla Westminsterian Staff Member

    [quote:c3c84092ac][i:c3c84092ac]Originally posted by rembrandt[/i:c3c84092ac]
    Fred, did you read my post that I wrote and submitted before you finished writting yours? [/quote:c3c84092ac]

    No, but I have now. But you've got me confused. You write:

    [quote:c3c84092ac]
    I am in NO way talking about continuing revelation in this conversation (not referring to my first post). Only revelation that is directly applied to believers, as is described by B.B. Warfield in "Calvin and Calvinism" under the "Knowledge of God" in the "Testimony of the Spirit" section under the "mode of this testimony" section
    [/quote:c3c84092ac]

    but you said:

    [quote:c3c84092ac]
    By weight of things as the such, I have denounced the cessational argument that prophesy stopped completely after the close of canon. Reading church history, that is a most ridiculous conclusion. Instead, my argument would run on the basis that prophesy is no longer regulative for the church since the apostolic era.[/quote:c3c84092ac]

    If there is no continuing revelation, then what is the point of your initial post?
     
  14. rembrandt

    rembrandt Puritan Board Sophomore

    If you wish to talk about the 'testimony of the Spirit' further, can you post another thread? I agree with what you said. And I admit that I was very unclear in my original post in that one line. I am in no way talking about (in our conversation- not origianl post) further revelation, only the mode of how the revelation (the written word) is revealed in the heart.

    Lets stick with my topic, please. I am only talking about the possibility of [i:38b2baf94e]providential predictive prophesy[/i:38b2baf94e], and in no way any new revelation regarding anything in the Bible. And also, I am not talking about some way that we can know the will of God for our life! I reject that as heresy!

    thanks,
    Rembrandt
     
  15. rembrandt

    rembrandt Puritan Board Sophomore

    okay, I read your post after I posted mine.

    [quote:7f2fc4be55]If there is no continuing revelation, then what is the point of your initial post?[/quote:7f2fc4be55]

    I am only talking about the possibility of providential predictive prophesy, and in no way any new revelation regarding anything in the Bible. And also, I am not talking about some way that we can know the will of God for our life! I reject that as heresy! Only the possibility of God communicating something supernatural if he wanted (of a future event, or insight into a situation).

    sorry for being unclear!

    Rembrandt

    [Edited on 5-14-2004 by rembrandt]
     
  16. rembrandt

    rembrandt Puritan Board Sophomore

    [quote:f2d8cce98c][i:f2d8cce98c]Originally posted by rembrandt[/i:f2d8cce98c]
    [quote:f2d8cce98c]Besides, all Christians receive revelation[/quote:f2d8cce98c]

    Even pretending for a moment that there was no Spirit to deliver the Word of God, we would still receive revelation. If you have the written word in your hands, that is revelation. Anytime you read the Bible you have just received revelation. Not because of some sort of mystical encounter, but because you have just read the Word of God. God speaks in his Word, therefore anytime we read it, we can hear him. Not mystically, but through the thought process of reading his revelation.

    The testimony of the Spirit itself is an illumination, and this produces in us a [i:f2d8cce98c]sense[/i:f2d8cce98c] whereby we receive revelation (the written word). But it does not follow that just because the Spirit is delivering the revelation, the delivery itself is not a revelation (because of its content).

    So, I'm not saying that we receive new revelation in any way. This is essentially Calvin's doctrine. It manifests itself in conjuction to the revelation of the written word. In no way would the testimony of the Spirit be considered a 'revelation' by itself. In fact, I agree that it is better to call it 'illumination' since it is only in conjuction with the written word which is what is truly being revealed.

    The never operate outside of each other, and therefore together they make up 'revelation.' That is why I said revelation is twofold.

    But this is not the point of the thread. That little blurp was only a side note. That we do receive revelation (the written word by illumination of the Spirit) and therefore this itself is putting us in some kind of a role whereby God speaks to us (prophetic), but it is nothing mystical, it is only the written word.

    Rembrandt

    [Edited on 5-14-2004 by rembrandt] [/quote:f2d8cce98c]

    Just to make sure you know that this is the one I was talking about.
     
  17. fredtgreco

    fredtgreco Vanilla Westminsterian Staff Member

    [quote:ea09e5eec6][i:ea09e5eec6]Originally posted by rembrandt[/i:ea09e5eec6]
    okay, I read your post after I posted mine.

    [quote:ea09e5eec6]If there is no continuing revelation, then what is the point of your initial post?[/quote:ea09e5eec6]

    I am only talking about the possibility of providential predictive prophesy, and in no way any new revelation regarding anything in the Bible. And also, I am not talking about some way that we can know the will of God for our life! I reject that as heresy! Only the possibility of God communicating something supernatural if he wanted (of a future event, or insight into a situation).

    sorry for being unclear!

    Rembrandt

    [Edited on 5-14-2004 by rembrandt] [/quote:ea09e5eec6]

    Ok, I think I understand now. But I still think you are confused. It is impossible to have ANY word from God that is not authoritative and binding. That is the nature of revelation (and prophecy is a subset of revelation). So the minute that you admit that there is continuing prophecy (which you seem to be positing) you must of necessity admit that there is extra-Biblical authoritative revelation (which you want to deny).

    For example, if I say, I have a prophetic word from the Lord that in order for you to prosper, you must marry Sally. Or I have a word that you should not marry Jane. Do you see how I have entered into the realm of morals, faith and life?

    You can't have it both ways.
     
  18. FrozenChosen

    FrozenChosen Puritan Board Freshman

    FredTRoman, er, Greco, has pointed out one of the problems I have with understanding the Pentecostal movement.

    I can't yet understand the weight of these positions, hopefully I will be able to as God grows me. Like a Chia Head. Or Pet. Sometimes it's messy.
     
  19. rembrandt

    rembrandt Puritan Board Sophomore

    [quote:d0f04d58db]Ok, I think I understand now. But I still think you are confused. It is impossible to have ANY word from God that is not authoritative and binding. That is the nature of revelation (and prophecy is a subset of revelation). So the minute that you admit that there is continuing prophecy (which you seem to be positing) you must of necessity admit that there is extra-Biblical authoritative revelation (which you want to deny).

    For example, if I say, I have a prophetic word from the Lord that in order for you to prosper, you must marry Sally. Or I have a word that you should not marry Jane. Do you see how I have entered into the realm of morals, faith and life?

    You can't have it both ways.[/quote:d0f04d58db]

    Okay, we're on the same page.

    I believe that the office of prophet has ceased.

    I believe that the prophetic gift, as is described in 1 Cor. has virtually diminished, and can be said to have ceased along with the apostolic age.

    The only thing that I am allowing for (as of now), is traces of this still occuring in particular extra-ordinary situations.

    I agree that if someone believed that they have received a 'word,' they must act on it or else they are not treating the Word of God correctly. I believe that we are not supposed to act on what we might think is the 'Word of God' according to extra-biblical revelation.

    So (again), I say that prophesy that Paul describes has ceased, only that there could be traces. But these traced are not binding. If they are not binding, could they still be called prophesy? eh... I don't think so either. I don't know if I would even call it prophesy (atleast not in the sense of the NT).

    BUT, just because it is no longer NT prophesy, does that mean that it does not contain prophetic elements?

    God would not tell us to do something through extra-biblical revelation, for the simple fact that it is no longer binding and we don't have to obey.

    I am not saying that this 'prophetic occurance' would even be something that we are to obey.

    [quote:d0f04d58db]For example, if I say, I have a prophetic word from the Lord that in order for you to prosper, you must marry Sally. Or I have a word that you should not marry Jane. Do you see how I have entered into the realm of morals, faith and life?[/quote:d0f04d58db]

    Yes. As I said, I believe that this prophetic gift has ceased. But that does not take out the possiblility that God could still implant information in our minds. And from this point, I would say that God implants things in our mind every day (unless you do not believe in immediate psychological determination). So, could God make his hand be more noticeable at some times than others in putting thoughts in our minds? I would say of course. But I hesitate to call this prophesy. Though in some sense it would be prophetic, but not any differently than the human mind can be said to be prophetic by looking at creation, thus revealing God through rationality.

    Rembrandt
     
  20. Scott

    Scott Puritan Board Graduate

    Rembrandt is right about Augustine. Here is a good article from Christian History:

    What Would Augustine Say: Miracles Ended Long Ago or Did They?
    http://www.christianitytoday.com/ch/2000/003/17.43.html

    As we established ad nauseum in another thread (http://www.puritanboard.com/forum/viewthread.php?tid=3656), complete cessastionism is out of accord with Reformed theology (which means it is not biblical). See that thread for numerous cites to Calvin, Gillespie, Baxter, Luther, et al.

    As those cites make clear, the Reformers were not talking about illumination but authentic prophecy (to head off Fred's statement on illumination).

    Scott

    [Edited on 5-14-2004 by Scott]
     
  21. Scott

    Scott Puritan Board Graduate

    As to Fred's quip of his divine revelation of no revelation, the answer is that it does not accord with scripture. New revelation must be consistent with old revelation. That was the test expressly set out in Deuteronomy and is how Israel and the Church evaluated new revelation.

    Scott
     
  22. C. Matthew McMahon

    C. Matthew McMahon Christian Preacher

    This issue is really important because many are confused as to how words and phrases like divine illumination, prophet, enlightened, etc. are used.

     
  23. fredtgreco

    fredtgreco Vanilla Westminsterian Staff Member

    [quote:e63bb9e9a4][i:e63bb9e9a4]Originally posted by Scott[/i:e63bb9e9a4]
    As to Fred's quip of his divine revelation of no revelation, the answer is that it does not accord with scripture. New revelation must be consistent with old revelation. That was the test expressly set out in Deuteronomy and is how Israel and the Church evaluated new revelation.

    Scott [/quote:e63bb9e9a4]

    Interesting. I have never seen any Reformed theologian (or even semi-reformed, claim that post canon prophecy meets the Deuteronomy 13 test. The most "convincing" case comes from Grudem, who posits a "sometimes it's right, sometimes it's wrong" approach.

    The Confession is crystal clear on the issue of continuing revelation, and I have never heard or read anything by Gillespie or Rutherford quibbling with it - and they were very influential at the Assembly. Can you provide some evidence?

    [quote:e63bb9e9a4]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. (2 Tim. 3:15-17, Gal. 1:8-9, 2 Thess. 2:2) 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: (John 6:45, 1 Cor 2:9-12) 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. (1 Cor. 11:13-14, 1 Cor. 14:26,40) WCF 1.6[/quote:e63bb9e9a4]

    I'd also like to see something direct from Calvin, since he was stridently opposed to the fanatics and enthusiasts of his day that posed "new revelation."

    The fact remains that there is a plethora of things that are not directly spoken to in Scripture, and which would be prophets would bind our consciences to. How do you refute "the Lord gave me a word that you should live in Michigan rather than Texas" ?

    Again, the purpose of revelation and prophecy is in view here. Prophecy in Scripture serves a [b:e63bb9e9a4]redemptive purpose[/b:e63bb9e9a4]. It is not a "first look at history."
     
  24. Scott

    Scott Puritan Board Graduate

    [quote:7611c2ba98]
    Calvin, Gilesspie, et. al. beleived that on special circumstacnes, (i.e. the person of Martin Luther) that God will raise up a "prophet" to procalim the written word in circumstacnes that warrant a powerful move of the Spirit. Possibly, the Great Awakenings could be classified as such. They did not, however, believe that supernatural revelation continues.
    [/quote:7611c2ba98]

    I disagree with your evaluation of their teaching. They expressly taught that men could by divine revelation know future events. One example was that someone could know by divine revelation that a certain person would die by a certain time in the future. This is more than an exposition of the written word.

    Again, I would refer to the prior thread and the numerous quotes and reference cited therein.

    Scott
     
  25. Scott

    Scott Puritan Board Graduate

    Rembrandt:

    I agree with you that it is hard, if not impossible, to take a serious view of the history of the church and deny the miraculous (and I am speaking of more than inward illumination). It is all over the early church and later.

    Scott
     
  26. fredtgreco

    fredtgreco Vanilla Westminsterian Staff Member

    [quote:3f5db4343e][i:3f5db4343e]Originally posted by Scott[/i:3f5db4343e]
    [quote:3f5db4343e]
    Calvin, Gilesspie, et. al. beleived that on special circumstacnes, (i.e. the person of Martin Luther) that God will raise up a "prophet" to procalim the written word in circumstacnes that warrant a powerful move of the Spirit. Possibly, the Great Awakenings could be classified as such. They did not, however, believe that supernatural revelation continues.
    [/quote:3f5db4343e]

    I disagree with your evaluation of their teaching. They expressly taught that men could by divine revelation know future events. One example was that someone could know by divine revelation that a certain person would die by a certain time in the future. This is more than an exposition of the written word.

    Again, I would refer to the prior thread and the numerous quotes and reference cited therein.

    Scott [/quote:3f5db4343e]

    Scott,

    What does this phrase mean?
    [quote:3f5db4343e]unto which [b:3f5db4343e]nothing[/b:3f5db4343e] at any time is to be added, whether by [b:3f5db4343e]new revelations[/b:3f5db4343e] of the Spirit [/quote:3f5db4343e]

    I'm guessing that I must not understand English.

    Whatever the "intuition" or circumstances described by the Scots, it cannot be revelation. It cannot be binding. It is not required to be obeyed. Frankly, it is of little or no use for faith and life.
     
  27. Scott

    Scott Puritan Board Graduate

    [quote:c13f724567]
    The Confession is crystal clear on the issue of continuing revelation, and I have never heard or read anything by Gillespie or Rutherford quibbling with it - and they were very influential at the Assembly. Can you provide some evidence?
    [/quote:c13f724567]

    See the prior thread. There are numerous citations there. Also the confessional standards (including your quote) do not teach complete cessastionism. See the sessional article cited in the prior thread for a lengthy explanation of the confessional standards and a proper understanding of the section you quoted.

    Scott
     
  28. rembrandt

    rembrandt Puritan Board Sophomore

    Good points webmaster.

    [quote:ee146ee8bd]I could mentally determine that every situation is special through the need to be sanctified, and then say that upon every instance, it is God implanting things in my mind.[/quote:ee146ee8bd]

    I don't see how that follows.

    [quote:ee146ee8bd]They [Calvin etc.] did not, however, believe that supernatural revelation continues.[/quote:ee146ee8bd]

    Depends on what kind of supernatural revelation you are talking about. Of course we are not talking about the testimony of the Spirit. We are talking about prophetic gifts, I assume. Did they actually say that it [any sort of prophetic encounter] COULD NEVER happen again? I know Calvin said that we are 'not showered daily with oracles from heaven' etc. etc., but he was dismissing fanatics. Where do they say that God could never reveal something supernaturally through his Spirit at ANY time during an UNUSUAL SITUATION?

    [quote:ee146ee8bd]You have just created a huge host of problems then, including god as the author of implanted sinful thoughts.[/quote:ee146ee8bd]

    I didn't say that God determines all thoughts.

    [quote:ee146ee8bd]I would say - how int he wordl woudl you know? What you would do is test the "thoughts" "impressions" that you "feel" are from God against Scripture.[/quote:ee146ee8bd]

    I don't know. And I'm not saying we can. But Monica said that she knows the difference between dreams that are of her spirit and those that are of the Holy Spirit. But, myself, I am not saying that I would know how to decipher this.

    [quote:ee146ee8bd][quote:ee146ee8bd]But I hesitate to call this prophesy. Though in some sense it would be prophetic, but not any differently than the human mind can be said to be prophetic by looking at creation, thus revealing God through rationality.[/quote:ee146ee8bd]

    That is not prophesy.[/quote:ee146ee8bd]

    I know its not NT prophesy that Paul was talking about.

    [quote:ee146ee8bd]If you describe prophesy as "foretelling" then we would have to stone you if one prophesy did not come true.[/quote:ee146ee8bd]

    So, if I make a random statement one day, that Bin Laden is going to be caught, and it turns out that he never gets caught, you would stone me? That rule to stone false prophets is only if one purposes to speak on behalf of God and it doesn't come true, not for anybody making a random statement.

    [quote:ee146ee8bd]God is not going to tell me to go down the street and buy my bible at store "Y" instead of store "W".[/quote:ee146ee8bd]

    I am not talking about directive revelation.

    [quote:ee146ee8bd]All direct revelation is binding upon the church (that is why it was written down).[/quote:ee146ee8bd]

    If God told Monica that such and such was going to happen to Augustine, it did not necessarily bind on the church.

    [quote:ee146ee8bd]As Owen says, he does nothing apart from the Spirit thorugh the Word.[/quote:ee146ee8bd]

    Good point! That is why I refer to it as extra-ordinary.

    Rembrandt
     
  29. fredtgreco

    fredtgreco Vanilla Westminsterian Staff Member

    [quote:538e490f6a][i:538e490f6a]Originally posted by Scott[/i:538e490f6a]
    Rembrandt:

    I agree with you that it is hard, if not impossible, to take a serious view of the history of the church and deny the miraculous (and I am speaking of more than inward illumination). It is all over the early church and later.

    Scott [/quote:538e490f6a]

    Scott,

    Do you understand and acknowledge the difference between miracles and extraordinary providences? The divines surely did:

    [quote:538e490f6a]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. (2 Tim. 3:15-17, Gal. 1:8-9, 2 Thess. 2:2) 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: (John 6:45, 1 Cor 2:9-12) 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. (1 Cor. 11:13-14, 1 Cor. 14:26,40) WCF 1.6[/quote:538e490f6a]

    with:

    [quote:538e490f6a]God, in His ordinary providence, maketh use of means, (Acts 27:31,44, Isa. 55:10-11) yet is free to work without, (Hos. 1:7, Matt. 4:4, Job 34:10) above, (Rom. 9:19-21) and against them, (2 Kings 6:6, Dan. 3:27) at His pleasure. WCF 5.3[/quote:538e490f6a]
     
  30. Scott

    Scott Puritan Board Graduate

    [quote:45fa9beaa3]
    unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations of the Spirit
    [/quote:45fa9beaa3]

    See the sessional article I mentioned. It is here:

    http://www.ecn.ab.ca/prce/books/prophecy/prophecy.htm

    Didn't we have this exact conversation in the other thread? We are rehashing an issue that has been completely exhausted.

    Scott
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page