Roman Catholic Exorcism

[RamistThomist]

Jacob,
I'm curious--can you point us to any sources that take the same perspective as you on demons?

Jude, for starters. But for those who can follow the languages, the following is pretty good.

The best scholarly source (which none of us can afford):
Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible, 2nd ed. (ed. Karel van der Toorn, Bob Becking, and Pieter W. van der Horst; Leiden; Boston; Cologne; Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge: Brill; Eerdmans, 1999)

Gershon Edelstein, “Rephaim, Valley of (Place),” in Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary, vol. 5 (ed. David Noel Freedman; New York: Doubleday, 1992)

http://drmsh.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Rephaim-LBD.pdf

C. E. L’Heureux, “The Ugaritic and the Biblical Rephaim,” Harvard Theological Review 67:3 (1974) 265–274

This next one is the best on the whole topic.
Amar Annus, “On the Watchers: A Comparative Study of the Antediluvian Wisdom in Mesopotamian and Jewish Traditions,” Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha 19.4 (2010): 277–320

Brian Doak, The Last of the Rephaim: Conquest and Cataclysm in the Heroic Ages of
Ancient Israel, Ilex Series 7 (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2013)

Ronald S. Hendel, “Of Demigods and the Deluge: Toward and Interpretation of Genesis 6:1–4,” Journal of Biblical Literature 106.1 (March 1987): 13-26

Archie T. Wright, The Origin of Evil Spirits: The Reception of Genesis 6:1–4 in Early Jewish Literature, Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 198, second series; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2013)

Ronn Johnson, “The Old Testament Background for Paul’s Principalities and Powers,” (PhD Dissertation, Dallas Theological Seminary, 2004
http://www.moreunseenrealm.com/wp-c...round-for-Pauls-Principalities-and-Powers.pdf

I have a lot more I'll post later.

 

[Deleted member 6112]

Jude, for starters. But for those who can follow the languages, the following is pretty good.

The best scholarly source (which none of us can afford):
Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible, 2nd ed. (ed. Karel van der Toorn, Bob Becking, and Pieter W. van der Horst; Leiden; Boston; Cologne; Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge: Brill; Eerdmans, 1999)

Gershon Edelstein, “Rephaim, Valley of (Place),” in Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary, vol. 5 (ed. David Noel Freedman; New York: Doubleday, 1992)

http://drmsh.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Rephaim-LBD.pdf

C. E. L’Heureux, “The Ugaritic and the Biblical Rephaim,” Harvard Theological Review 67:3 (1974) 265–274

This next one is the best on the whole topic.
Amar Annus, “On the Watchers: A Comparative Study of the Antediluvian Wisdom in Mesopotamian and Jewish Traditions,” Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha 19.4 (2010): 277–320

Brian Doak, The Last of the Rephaim: Conquest and Cataclysm in the Heroic Ages of
Ancient Israel, Ilex Series 7 (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2013)

Ronald S. Hendel, “Of Demigods and the Deluge: Toward and Interpretation of Genesis 6:1–4,” Journal of Biblical Literature 106.1 (March 1987): 13-26

Archie T. Wright, The Origin of Evil Spirits: The Reception of Genesis 6:1–4 in Early Jewish Literature, Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 198, second series; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2013)

Ronn Johnson, “The Old Testament Background for Paul’s Principalities and Powers,” (PhD Dissertation, Dallas Theological Seminary, 2004
http://www.moreunseenrealm.com/wp-c...round-for-Pauls-Principalities-and-Powers.pdf

I have a lot more I'll post later.

Thanks. I don't mean to discount any of the sources you've listed; I don't know anything about them, but frankly, I don't have time to read all of that. I'm curious, in particular, whether there are any orthodox Christian scholars, rather than more critical, speculative ones.

 

[RamistThomist]

Thanks. I don't mean to discount any of the sources you've listed; I don't know anything about them, but frankly, I don't have time to read all of that. I'm curious, in particular, whether there are any orthodox Christian scholars, rather than more critical, speculative ones.

I've only read half of them. My point in the overload was that the Christian and scholarly community is well-aware of these issues. They are light years ahead of most of us. We have the temptation to say, "Canon closed. None of this is real anymore." As a result, we really don't wrestle with God's word on this.

The best single source on this is Michael Heiser, Unseen Realm. He has done everything from debunk ancient alien theory to writing respected monographs on Hebrew and Ugaritic.

http://drmsh.com/

 

[Deleted member 6112]

Winzer didn't deal with the totality of biblical data, nor does his argument stand logical scrutiny. He said that demons are just dead idols. But if we take that line of reasoning and apply it to the gospels, it didn't work. Did Jesus simply cast out seven dead idols from Mary Magdelene?

Winzer is correct that what we call demons isn't entirely accurate. But he doesn't deal with the scholarship on the subject. Hebrew and Ugaritic scholar Michael Heiser, pretty much along with all standard critical scholarsip, has noted that the Bible uses a number of terms for very different entitites:

1. Rephaim.
2. Thrones
3. Powers
4. Principalities
5. Rulers in high places

He also came very close to implying, though if I recall correctly when I challenged him on this he didn't give a direct answer, that it was just the belief in demons that made the demonized suffer. This is ironic, given his conservatism, because that view is Liberalism 101.

My own take, following the Gospel data and the arguments in Jude and 2 Peter:

1. Demons are similar to cthonic forces and they are unclean spirits.
2. What we call fallen angels (which is a bad term) are those angels who wanted to mate with human women in Genesis 6, Jude, and 2 Peter 2. God is keeping them in eternal chains in gloomy darkness until that great day.
3. Therefore, demons =/= fallen angels.
4. Further, the Archangel Michael was hesitant to rebuke Satan, yet the disciples rebuke demons. So they can't be of the same class.

Jacob,

You're right to point us to the Scriptures on this matter. However, you haven't really dealt with the Biblical terms.

Thrones, powers, and principalities are all metonymies substituting an abstract principle of rule for a concrete, personal ruler. So they can all be equated with "rulers in high places." They mean the same thing.

Jude 6 says, "And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day." The word translated "first estate" is ἀρχὴν, or principality. Here, one of the same words for rule that gets used metonymically to refer to demons is applied to angels. I don't think it's any stretch to say that the two are the same--both are characterized as having principality.

In regard to the casting out of devils, it always occurs in the context of the extraordinary acts of Jesus and the apostles. Mark 3:14-15: "And he ordained twelve, that they should be with him, and that he might send them forth to preach, And to have power to heal sicknesses, and to cast out devils." This is not an ordinary gift for Christians in any circusmtance to exercise; it's an extraordinary function for extraordinary times.

So can exorcisms still occur? Yes, I think so, but only in extraordinary circumstances, along with the other extraordinary gifts and offices. One example would be an evangelist ministering in a pagan land--he may be given power by the Spirit to perform extraordinary works.

Lest anyone think I'm outside of the Reformed view of extraordinary gifts and offices, here's Gillespie:

I must say it, to the glory of God, there were in the church of Scotland, both in the time of our first reformation, and after the reformation, such extraordinary men as were more than ordinary pastors and teachers, even holy prophets receiving extraordinary revelations from God, and foretelling diverse strange and remarkable things, which did accordingly come to pass punctually, to the great admiration of all who knew the particulars. Such were Mr. Wishart the martyr, Mr. Knox the reformer, also Mr. John Welsh, Mr. John Davidson, Mr. Robert Bruce, Mr. Alexander Simpson, Mr. Fergusson, and others. -Miscellany, Chapter V, section 7.

And Calvin:

These three functions [apostles, prophets, and evangelists] were not established in the church as permanent ones, but only for that time during which churches were to be erected where none existed before, or where they were to be carried over from Moses to Christ. Still, I do not deny that the Lord has sometimes at a later period raised up apostles, or at least evangelists in their place, as has happened in our own day. For there was need for such persons to lead the church back from the rebellion of Antichrist. Nonetheless, I call this office "extraordinary," because in duly constituted churches it has no place. - Institutes Book IV, ch. III, sec. 4."

Edit: I didn't address the Rephaim that Jacob named. They were a Canaanite tribe, as in Genesis 15: "18In the same day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates: 19The Kenites, and the Kenizzites, and the Kadmonites, 20And the Hittites, and the Perizzites, and the Rephaims, 21And the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Girgashites, and the Jebusites." They were apparantly a gigantic race of men, as in Deut 2:"10The Emims dwelt therein in times past, a people great, and many, and tall, as the Anakims; 11Which also were accounted giants [Rephaim], as the Anakims; but the Moabites call them Emims." Their tribal name likely came to refer to gigantic men in general. Later legends would have turned them into some mythical creature.

 

[Deleted member 6112]

@BayouHuguenot, I meant to address the question of chains of darkness and of Tartarus.

Chains cannot be made out of darkness, darkness cannot be used to bind anyone, and angels probably can't be bound with chains anyway. So much to say, this is obviously symbolic language, intended to refer to torment and condemnation. It doesn't refer to the manner of their torment, but to the fact that they are in a state of torment. Likewise, fictional Tartarus doesn't refer to the place of their torment and condemnation, but to the state of torment and condemnation that they are consigned to. Rather than enjoying their original happy and holy estate of principality (2 Pet 2), like fallen men, they are bound by sinful corruptions and by misery.

 

[RamistThomist]

Thrones, powers, and principalities are all metonymies substituting an abstract principle of rule for a concrete, personal ruler. So they can all be equated with "rulers in high places." They mean the same thing.

I don't think they do, but it doesn't change my own conclusions even if I am wrong on that. My point was that this refutes the classic Miltonian/Dantean view of demons that everyone in the West defaults on.

This is not an ordinary gift for Christians in any circusmtance to exercise; it's an extraordinary function for extraordinary times.

To say it is an extraordinary act and ceased is begging the question. In any case, it goes against almost the entirety of Christian experience.

Edit: I didn't address the Rephaim that Jacob named.

They were giants that Moses specifically targeted for killing (Og). They are also shades that greeted Lucifer (whatever that name means) when he fell.

 

[RamistThomist]

@BayouHuguenot, I meant to address the question of chains of darkness and of Tartarus.

Chains cannot be made out of darkness, darkness cannot be used to bind anyone, and angels probably can't be bound with chains anyway. So much to say, this is obviously symbolic language, intended to refer to torment and condemnation. It doesn't refer to the manner of their torment, but to the fact that they are in a state of torment. Likewise, fictional Tartarus doesn't refer to the place of their torment and condemnation, but to the state of torment and condemnation that they are consigned to. Rather than enjoying their original happy and holy estate of principality (2 Pet 2), like fallen men, they are bound by sinful corruptions and by misery.

I am not sure exactly what that changes in my argument, though any Greek-speaking reader would have associated Tatarus with a place.

 

[Deleted member 6112]

I am not sure exactly what that changes in my argument, though any Greek-speaking reader would have associated Tatarus with a place.

The difference it makes is that it doesn't rule out the wicked angels being at large.

Any English-speaker would associate hell with a place, but when someone says, "I've been through hell today," we know he's using it figuratively.

 

[Jeri Tanner]

That, too, is an assertion. I, on the other hand, have given a logical taxonomy based on the data in Scripture.

I should have said that from Scripture, the only ones we can know had infallible knowledge about demonic activity were Christ and the apostles. And shouldn’t have used all caps

 

[RamistThomist]

I should have said that from Scripture, the only ones we can know had infallible knowledge about demonic activity were Christ and the apostles. And shouldn’t have used all caps

I don't see how it follows that the apostles had infallible knowledge, therefore we can't have any knowledge. And I don't think they necessarily had infallible knowledge all the time.

 

[RamistThomist]

The difference it makes is that it doesn't rule out the wicked angels being at large.

Certainly some are at large. We know that from the book of Daniel. Some were imprisoned via Jude, yet the archangel Michael fought the Prince of Persia and Greece.

 

[Jeri Tanner]

I don't see how it follows that the apostles had infallible knowledge, therefore we can't have any knowledge. And I don't think they necessarily had infallible knowledge all the time.

I didn’t say we can’t have “any” knowledge. We can’t have infallible knowledge about what may be going on in the spiritual realm because we’re not apostles or prophets. I think the apostles were given knowledge (infallibly) when it pleased God to give it to them.

 

[RamistThomist]

I didn’t say we can’t have “any” knowledge. We can’t have infallible knowledge about what may be going on in the spiritual realm because we’re not apostles or prophets. I think the apostles were given knowledge (infallibly) when it pleased God to give it to them.

I don't dispute that.

 

[RamistThomist]

If I may add a few penultimate statements:

1. I agree that our current view of demons is very faulty. We owe more to Milton than we do to the Bible.
2. With that said, the Bible has some very surprising suggestions on angelology.
3. I am quite willing to entertain naturalistic solutions to many phenomena. For example, the CIA mind control projects where their subjects had multiple personalities/alters looks a lot like demon possession, but a rational explanations is available.
3.1 No one likes the rational explanations I give. But that involves much on MK-ULTRA that makes people uncomfortable.
4. The X-Files is my new favorite TV show.

 

[lynnie]

Jesus called casting out demons the children's bread. It belonged to the covenant people, not the dogs. We've made it so backwards, as if it belongs to the pagans and not to the elect.

There are some awful but glorious stories out there about people who got saved, with horrible childhoods including ritual satanic and sexual abuse, and have had much struggle to get free of torment, including exorcism. Debating if the unclean tormenting spirit is inside, or outside attacking, doesn't really matter. Some times it just needs to be told to leave, period.

I grew up with a wicked Christ hating father, who believed the Aryan race was the pinnacle of evolutionary superiority, and the Jews got what they deserved with Hitler. Blacks were a subhuman race. He never touched me, but he was a merciless man. Plenty of screaming and swearing and smashing things at home.

I sought counsel as a young adult, after several years as a Christian. The presenting problem was a vague emotional torment at night sometimes for hours, that I thought maybe linked to the nights my Dad held my Mom against the wall screaming he would kill her. I was faithful in the Christian disciplines but the attacks at night came sporadically and I felt helpless during them. I had fully repented of teenage dalliances in minor occult and drug experiences.

The pastor and wife who listened to me asked a lot of probing questions. I sat there rationally and calmly talking, maybe a bit tearful, and finally the man said that without a question it was an evil spirit. He commanded it to come out, and I bent over double screaming feeling like my insides were literally coming out. (I didn't even feel that way later having four babies.) Anyway, the freedom afterwards was astonishing.

I think my mind and emotions had the most help from understanding the sovereignty of God, as I pursued sound doctrine and theology in the years to pass, and also faced some deep and strong bitterness I had to repent of. But the God of grace who has mercy on his children gave me the children's bread in a time of hunger and I will always be grateful.

Given what kids today are exposed to and into, when we have the next great revival, I hope some of you will be more open to casting out demons should such persons come for help and counsel. Not all PTSD type torment is just in the brain.

 

[Dachaser]

The difference it makes is that it doesn't rule out the wicked angels being at large.

Any English-speaker would associate hell with a place, but when someone says, "I've been through hell today," we know he's using it figuratively.

Just the worst fallen angels were being confined to imprisonment until time of their final judgment, while the rest seem to be allowed to be around and about still.

 

[Dachaser]

I should have said that from Scripture, the only ones we can know had infallible knowledge about demonic activity were Christ and the apostles. And shouldn’t have used all caps

The Holy Spirit can still reveal to any of us demonic activity, as all of us in Christ have authority over satan and his forces in Christ.

 

[Dachaser]

If I may add a few penultimate statements:

1. I agree that our current view of demons is very faulty. We owe more to Milton than we do to the Bible.
2. With that said, the Bible has some very surprising suggestions on angelology.
3. I am quite willing to entertain naturalistic solutions to many phenomena. For example, the CIA mind control projects where their subjects had multiple personalities/alters looks a lot like demon possession, but a rational explanations is available.
3.1 No one likes the rational explanations I give. But that involves much on MK-ULTRA that makes people uncomfortable.
4. The X-Files is my new favorite TV show.

The demonic forces associated with satan can and do mimic things such as mental powers and magic, as he changes with the times, as he was at first ghosts and witches, and now aliens.

 

[Dachaser]

Jesus called casting out demons the children's bread. It belonged to the covenant people, not the dogs. We've made it so backwards, as if it belongs to the pagans and not to the elect.

There are some awful but glorious stories out there about people who got saved, with horrible childhoods including ritual satanic and sexual abuse, and have had much struggle to get free of torment, including exorcism. Debating if the unclean tormenting spirit is inside, or outside attacking, doesn't really matter. Some times it just needs to be told to leave, period.

I grew up with a wicked Christ hating father, who believed the Aryan race was the pinnacle of evolutionary superiority, and the Jews got what they deserved with Hitler. Blacks were a subhuman race. He never touched me, but he was a merciless man. Plenty of screaming and swearing and smashing things at home.

I sought counsel as a young adult, after several years as a Christian. The presenting problem was a vague emotional torment at night sometimes for hours, that I thought maybe linked to the nights my Dad held my Mom against the wall screaming he would kill her. I was faithful in the Christian disciplines but the attacks at night came sporadically and I felt helpless during them. I had fully repented of teenage dalliances in minor occult and drug experiences.

The pastor and wife who listened to me asked a lot of probing questions. I sat there rationally and calmly talking, maybe a bit tearful, and finally the man said that without a question it was an evil spirit. He commanded it to come out, and I bent over double screaming feeling like my insides were literally coming out. (I didn't even feel that way later having four babies.) Anyway, the freedom afterwards was astonishing.

I think my mind and emotions had the most help from understanding the sovereignty of God, as I pursued sound doctrine and theology in the years to pass, and also faced some deep and strong bitterness I had to repent of. But the God of grace who has mercy on his children gave me the children's bread in a time of hunger and I will always be grateful.

Given what kids today are exposed to and into, when we have the next great revival, I hope some of you will be more open to casting out demons should such persons come for help and counsel. Not all PTSD type torment is just in the brain.

We have to be balanced in this area, as while a majority of things associated to satanic/demonic activities are bogus, there are still some that are indeed legit.

 

[RamistThomist]

They're here!

Once you start summarizing and systematizing what the Bible says about the spiritual world, you will realize that it is far more exciting than any sci-fi novel.

As to the apostles' having infallible knowledge, I am not so sure that is a good model. We see the apostles often acting quite fallibly. Was Peter infallible until he got to Jerusalem, and the infallibility switched off, only to switch back on again?

 

[Dachaser]

They're here!

Once you start summarizing and systematizing what the Bible says about the spiritual world, you will realize that it is far more exciting than any sci-fi novel.

As to the apostles' having infallible knowledge, I am not so sure that is a good model. We see the apostles often acting quite fallibly. Was Peter infallible until he got to Jerusalem, and the infallibility switched off, only to switch back on again?

The Apostles were only infallible when recording/speaking forth doctrines, as their theology was inspired by God.

 

[RamistThomist]

The Apostles were only infallible when recording/speaking forth doctrines, as their theology was inspired by God.

No one disputes that. I suppose we are debating, or Mrs Tanner implied, that when the apostles were casting out demons, at that moment they had infallible knowledge of the spirit realm. They might have, but there is no Scriptural evidence for that claim.

 

[Jeri Tanner]

No one disputes that. I suppose we are debating, or Mrs Tanner implied, that when the apostles were casting out demons, at that moment they had infallible knowledge of the spirit realm. They might have, but there is no Scriptural evidence for that claim.

I’ll try to put it better- God gave them the knowledge, infallibly, that they needed for the occasion, whether it was healing as with Peter and John and the lame man, or with Paul as with the slave girl with the spirit. Of course they weren’t infallible men who always knew everything infallibly! That wasn’t true of any OT or NT prophet.

Back to the OP, and it’s the last time I’ll mention this book, but exorcism is dealt with very thoroughly and biblically in the Leahy book.

 

[RamistThomist]

I’ll try to put it better- God gave them the knowledge, infallibly, that they needed for the occasion,

Except we don't have Scriptural evidence for that claim. But even if they had this infallible situational knowledge that Scripture says nothing about, it doesn't negate any of my claims.

 

[Jeri Tanner]

Except we don't have Scriptural evidence for that claim. But even if they had this infallible situational knowledge that Scripture says nothing about, it doesn't negate any of my claims.

I’m probably not understanding your issue with this, and I must not be stating it right. Do you believe that when Peter fixed his gaze on the lame man and spoke to him, Peter knew, prophetically, by the Spirit that God was going to heal this man through him?

 

[RamistThomist]

I’m probably not understanding your issue with this, and I must not be stating it right. Do you believe that when Peter fixed his gaze on the lame man and spoke to him, Peter knew, prophetically, by the Spirit that God was going to heal this man through him?

He may have. We have no evidence that he knew at that moment that he was infallibly going to do that. I'm not disputing the possibility. It's just an unproven claim.

 

[Jeri Tanner]

He may have. We have no evidence that he knew at that moment that he was infallibly going to do that. I'm not disputing the possibility. It's just an unproven claim.

Ok, I think this comes down to a difference in how we view the offices and gifts of apostle and prophet as they functioned in the OT and NT (apostolic) church. It also seems to have to do with ideas regarding continuationism vs. cessationism. I’m coming from the view that when the apostles and prophets received revelation from God on a matter (the lame man, the girl with the spirit of divination), they knew they had received immediate revelation from God and that they were indeed acting in accordance with his will. (Galatians 1:12) But ministers of the gospel aren’t hampered by the cessation of this kind of immediate revelation in dealing with demonic activity. God has prescribed the means for setting people free from bondage to sin and the devil in the proclamation and teaching (which includes correction, rebuke, exhortation, etc.) of his word.

 

[RamistThomist]

Ok, I think this comes down to a difference in how we view the offices and gifts of apostle and prophet as they functioned in the OT and NT (apostolic) church. It also seems to have to do with ideas regarding continuationism vs. cessationism. I’m coming from the view that when the apostles and prophets received revelation from God on a matter (the lame man, the girl with the spirit of divination), they knew they had received immediate revelation from God and that they were indeed acting in accordance with his will. (Galatians 1:12) But ministers of the gospel aren’t hampered by the cessation of this kind of immediate revelation in dealing with demonic activity. God has prescribed the means for setting people free from bondage to sin and the devil in the proclamation and teaching (which includes correction, rebuke, exhortation, etc.) of his word.

One can logically be a cessationist and believe in exorcisms. This is surprisingly common in some Lutheran circles.

Unclean spirits didn't stop demonizing people once the ink was dry in Revelation 22.

 

[Jeri Tanner]

One can logically be a cessationist and believe in exorcisms. This is surprisingly common in some Lutheran circles.

Unclean spirits didn't stop demonizing people once the ink was dry in Revelation 22.

But you’re not interacting with proposition that in dealing with troubled people, there is no longer the direct revelation from God to the Minister that there is indeed demonic activity, and what to do about it. We are no longer to directly speak to demons, to call them out, as Christ and the apostles did. To do so, considering our fallibility in discerning, could be very harmful to a troubled soul. The counsel and exhortation of the word of God is the cure offered for all troubles, including from Satan. Of course, the minister, and everyone, should pray for the Lord to deliver all people under their care from Satan and his devices! We pray this daily, as Christ taught us to pray. And in some instances, that prayer takes on new fervency.

But to speak and act as if we have direct revelation about what’s going on in individual circumstances, those gifts of revelation having ceased, is not good.

So I’d say it is indeed a matter of cessationism (I understand there some extreme forms or expressions of cessationism that are wrong) vs. continuationism (maybe inconsistent) that drives different approaches.

 

[RamistThomist]

there is no longer the direct revelation from God to the Minister that there is indeed demonic activity, and what to do about it.

I did interact with it. I argued that it doesn't logically follow.

We are no longer to directly speak to demons, to call them out, as Christ and the apostles did.

Says who?

To do so, considering our fallibility in discerning, could be very harmful to a troubled soul.

So can preaching. In any case, John told us to test the spirits.

The counsel and exhortation of the word of God is the cure offered for all troubles, including from Satan. Of course, the minister, and everyone, should pray for the Lord to deliver all people under their care from Satan and his devices! We pray this daily, as Christ taught us to pray. And in some instances, that prayer takes on new fervency.

No one disagrees with that.

But to speak and act as if we have direct revelation about what’s going on in individual circumstances, those gifts of revelation having ceased, is not good.

Assertion.

So I’d say it is indeed a matter of cessationism (I understand there some extreme forms or expressions of cessationism that are wrong) vs. continuationism (maybe inconsistent) that drives different approaches.

Cessationists would disagree with you (as would the entirety of church history), but in any case cessationism isn't a self-evident proposition.