» Site Navigation | | | » Online Users: 101 | | 34 members and 67 guests | | asc, austinww, bconway52, Chippy, ChristianHedonist, ChristianTrader, gene_mingo, greenbaggins, Grillsy, Hamalas, Honor, Jack K, jambo, jpfrench81, KSon, Lincolnshire Paul, Micah Everett, Pergamum, raekwon, reaganmarsh, Rich Koster, SolaGratia, Southern Presbyterian, Susanna, T.A.G., Theoretical, ubermadchen, Wayne, westminken | | Most users ever online was 856, 07-06-2007 at 12:19 AM. | |  | 
03-04-2009, 11:57 AM
|  | Puritanboard Sophomore | | Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Greenville, South Carolina
Posts: 897
Thanks: 385
Thanked 363 Times in 181 Posts
| | | The Cessation of Special Revelation, Part 2
Brothers,
In Part 1 of this series, we noted that many believers today debate the question of whether God is continuing to confer on the NT church the the gifts of prophecy and tongues. Some say, “Yes” (continuationists). Others respond, “No” (cessationists). And a third group cautiously answer, “Maybe” (open-but-cautious). I’d like to provide an argument for the cessation of tongues and prophecy in the form of a syllogism: Major Premise: All divinely authoritative special revelation (canonical) has been completed and has, therefore, ceased. Minor Premise: NT prophecy and tongues are forms of divinely authoritative (canonical) special revelation. Conclusion: Therefore, tongues and prophecy have ceased. In this segment of our series, we’ll begin to develop the major premise, namely, that all divinely authoritative special revelation (canonical) has been completed and has, therefore, ceased. First, we’ll have to identity and establish the boundaries of that corpora of inspired literature known as the Old Testament. Along the way, we’ll briefly lists some reasons why we don’t include the Jewish apocryphal books as part of the Old Testament canon. Then, in Part 3, we’ll identify the NT canon. The NT canon brings special redemptive revelation to its final form and historical goal, we’ll argue in Part 4, which will establish our first major premise. The Cessation of Special Revelation: A Humble Argument for the Cessation of Prophecy and Tongues, Part 2
Enjoy!
Your servant,
__________________
Bob Gonzales Jr., Dean Reformed Baptist Seminary
Easley, South Carolina
"Persons need not and ought not to set any bounds to their spiritual and gracious appetites." Jonathan Edwards
| | The Following User Says Thank You to Dr. Bob Gonzales For This Useful Post: | | 
03-04-2009, 01:24 PM
| | Puritanboard Sophomore | | Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Des Moines, Iowa
Posts: 806
Thanks: 388
Thanked 206 Times in 127 Posts
| | |
You're definitely right on that last point about the Apocrypha. When I taught on the Belgic Confession's doctrine of canon for a Sunday School class, I had the class members read sections of the Apocrypha (and other extra-canonical writings). The side-by-side comparison of Bel and the Dragon to the canonical Daniel leaves no doubt as to the truly inspired text.
__________________
Bryan Peters Providence Reformed Church ( URCNA)
Des Moines, Iowa
Doctrinal truth should be preached always, openly, without compromise, and never dissembled or concealed. There is no offence in it; it is the staff of uprightness.
~Martin Luther~
| | The Following User Says Thank You to Dearly Bought For This Useful Post: | | 
03-04-2009, 01:45 PM
|  | Puritanboard Senior | | Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: North Texas
Posts: 2,187
Thanks: 700
Thanked 818 Times in 448 Posts
| |
Bob,
Good work. I'm getting ahead of you, but want to challenge your thinking in regard to your Minor Premise. To support the conclusion, the Minor Premise must say that NT tongues and prophecy were exclusively used to convey "canonical" special revelation.
Is that really demonstrable from Scripture? E.g. could not tongues function as a supernatural witness to the gospel without necessarily "adding" to special revelation?
If so, then the conclusion does not necessarily follow, at least regarding tongues. I'm not contending here, merely thinking out loud.
__________________
Jim
1689 LBCF
Independent Bible Church
North Texas, USA
| | The Following User Says Thank You to Jimmy the Greek For This Useful Post: | | 
03-04-2009, 01:55 PM
| | Puritanboard Sophomore | | Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Des Moines, Iowa
Posts: 806
Thanks: 388
Thanked 206 Times in 127 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by Gomarus Bob,
Good work. I'm getting ahead of you, but want to challenge your thinking in regard to your Minor Premise. To support the conclusion, the Minor Premise must say that NT tongues and prophecy were exclusively used to convey "canonical" special revelation.
Is that really demonstrable from Scripture? E.g. could not tongues function as a supernatural witness to the gospel without necessarily "adding" to special revelation?
If so, then the conclusion does not necessarily follow, at least regarding tongues. I'm not contending here, merely thinking out loud.  | From what I remember, if you follow O. Palmer Robertson's arguments in The Final Word then tongues are a subset of prophecy. Prophecy with a twist, so to speak.
| 
03-04-2009, 02:51 PM
|  | Puritanboard Sophomore | | Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Greenville, South Carolina
Posts: 897
Thanks: 385
Thanked 363 Times in 181 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by Gomarus Bob,
Good work. I'm getting ahead of you, but want to challenge your thinking in regard to your Minor Premise. To support the conclusion, the Minor Premise must say that NT tongues and prophecy were exclusively used to convey "canonical" special revelation.
Is that really demonstrable from Scripture? E.g. could not tongues function as a supernatural witness to the gospel without necessarily "adding" to special revelation?
If so, then the conclusion does not necessarily follow, at least regarding tongues. I'm not contending here, merely thinking out loud.  | Jim,
Thanks for raising this issue. I do believe that certain modes of special revelation functioned as "signs" that in turn validated the message of the man of God. This would include things like divinely appointed sacraments or symbols, theophanies, the Urim and Thummim, and, as you point out, even tongues. Nevertheless, as Bryan suggests above, I will interpret tongues as a forms of prophecy, which, in turn, is a facet of canonical (in the sense of divinely authoritative) revelation. Hence, even if prophecy and tongues served as "signs," the fact that they're forms of special revelation (which remains to be proved) and the fact that special revelation has ceased until Christ's return (which remains to be proved) still, I think, leaves the minor premise intact. Feel free, however, to offer further criticisms along the way if you're not sure I've proven a point.
Your servant,
| 
03-04-2009, 03:00 PM
|  | Puritanboard Senior | | Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: North Texas
Posts: 2,187
Thanks: 700
Thanked 818 Times in 448 Posts
| | |
Thanks for the clarification, Bob. I look forward to your treatment of the issue.
| 
03-04-2009, 03:05 PM
|  | Puritanboard Doctor | | Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Deep in the heart of Dixie - Mobile, Alabama
Posts: 6,144
Thanks: 764
Thanked 2,921 Times in 1,453 Posts
| | |
What about the prophets that existed as recorded in the NT, such as the daughters of Phillip and the others who prophesied regarding Paul's coming imprisonment? Are all the words that they spoke canonical?
__________________
We shall not adjust our Bible to the age; but before we have done with it, by God's grace, we shall adjust the age to the Bible. - Charles Haddon Spurgeon
Lawrence Underwood, Jr.
Pastor - Providence Family Fellowship / Mobile, Alabama
1644/46 LBC My Blog - Imprimis | 
03-05-2009, 10:22 AM
|  | Puritanboard Sophomore | | Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Greenville, South Carolina
Posts: 897
Thanks: 385
Thanked 363 Times in 181 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by LawrenceU What about the prophets that existed as recorded in the NT, such as the daughters of Phillip and the others who prophesied regarding Paul's coming imprisonment? Are all the words that they spoke canonical? | Thanks for the questions. Actually, I was using the term “canonical” equivocally, that is, to refer to two different but related concepts. The term is most commonly used to delimit those writings considered to be inspired by God, i.e., Scripture, which is one form of special revelation. The term may also be used more broadly to refer to special revelation itself as opposed to general revelation. For example, when Paul writes, "So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter" (2 Thess. 2:15), he expected these believers to treat his teaching whether oral or written as canonical, that is, divinely authoritative and normative for the covenant community. I intend this latter sense in both the major and minor premises. I intend the former sense when speaking of the corpora of the Old and New Testaments. Nevertheless, to avoid confusion, I have reworded my premises above. Thanks for pointing out the ambiguity.
| 
03-05-2009, 01:46 PM
|  | Puritanboard Senior | | Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: North Texas
Posts: 2,187
Thanks: 700
Thanked 818 Times in 448 Posts
| |
Bob,
Please see R. Bruce Compton's treatment of the Cessation of Miraculous Gifts in The Detroit Baptist Seminary Journal (Fall, 2004).
He interacts extensively with Gordon Fee, Wayne Grudem, Gaffin and others and seemingly ends up where you are aiming. I've only give a cursory read so far, but it looks good.
It is online here; http://www.dbts.edu/journals/2004/Compton.pdf | | The Following User Says Thank You to Jimmy the Greek For This Useful Post: | | 
03-05-2009, 04:11 PM
|  | Puritanboard Freshman | | Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Folsom, Ca
Posts: 246
Thanks: 44
Thanked 72 Times in 45 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Bob Gonzales Brothers,
In Part 1 of this series, we noted that many believers today debate the question of whether God is continuing to confer on the NT church the the gifts of prophecy and tongues. Some say, “Yes” (continuationists). Others respond, “No” (cessationists). And a third group cautiously answer, “Maybe” (open-but-cautious). I’d like to provide an argument for the cessation of tongues and prophecy in the form of a syllogism: Major Premise: All divinely authoritative special revelation (canonical) has been completed and has, therefore, ceased. Minor Premise: NT prophecy and tongues are forms of divinely authoritative (canonical) special revelation. Conclusion: Therefore, tongues and prophecy have ceased. In this segment of our series, we’ll begin to develop the major premise, namely, that all divinely authoritative special revelation (canonical) has been completed and has, therefore, ceased. First, we’ll have to identity and establish the boundaries of that corpora of inspired literature known as the Old Testament. Along the way, we’ll briefly lists some reasons why we don’t include the Jewish apocryphal books as part of the Old Testament canon. Then, in Part 3, we’ll identify the NT canon. The NT canon brings special redemptive revelation to its final form and historical goal, we’ll argue in Part 4, which will establish our first major premise. The Cessation of Special Revelation: A Humble Argument for the Cessation of Prophecy and Tongues, Part 2
Enjoy!
Your servant, | I am covering syllogisms and enthymemes in my writing class...this will be interesting to see. I am looking forward to see the argument.
__________________
Claudiu
Reformed Baptist
attending Immanuel Baptist Church
Sacramento, CA
|  | | Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes | Linear Mode |
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts HTML code is Off | | | |