If spiritual gifts have now ceased, how do we explain their apparent use by people in non reformed circles. (I'm not talking about whacky charismatics, I'm referring to evangelicals in general)?

Some people have suggested it is demonic, but I find that hard to believe among genuine Christians.

__________________
Bern
Evangelical
Kent UK

Not all spiritual gifts have ceased.

Just five of them, and two offices:-

"Tongues" i.e. languages; the interpretation of tongues; the gift of miracles; the gift of healing, and the gift of prophecy. The offices of Apostle and Prophet are also off the menu.

People who've never seen the genuine article can believe a counterfeit is the real deal, if they've nothing true to compare it with, and if they're told often enough that the Bible says it's for today.

Modern tongues is just people letting go of their tongue and also copying their brothers and sisters. The interpretation of tongues - where it happens, Pentecostalists don't tend to follow the Apostle's rules on tongues - is people having a feeling or hunch inside themselves that this is what it must mean.

God still promises to answer prayers for healing, sometimes miraculously. But miracles, by definition, don't happen that often. The gift of healing was a sign gift to attest new revelation. Modern day "healers" may sometimes get their prayers answered positively as those of us believers who pray for people to be healed may as well. But healings that involve a long process of healing, diseases being healed that can be healed by suggestion and healings going back after a few days, weeks or months do not constitute what we find in the Bible.

We have the complete Word of God, and Christ is the King, Priest, and Prophet unto His Church, so we expect prophecy, words of knowledge and tongues (which was prophecy in a foreign language, and was mainly a sign to unbelieving Jews that the Church was going international - I Cor. 14:20-22) to be part of the childish things that have passed away.

There have apparently been cases of supernatural words of knowledge in the Reformed church. E.g. Alexander Peden was a notable covenanter that seemed to know things that needed to be known when being hunted by the dragoons. But none of these relatively rare examples in the Reformed and Presbyterian churches set themselves up as prophets, tried to compete with God's Word in the pulpit, and sometimes their so-called prophecies failed. So we should be careful not to put the emphasis on "prophecy" that the Pentys have, even when we come accross someone like Peden in a Reformed church.

Many Penty "prophecies" are so general, vague or present-tense oriented, and also often add nothing new to what is already in Scripture, that they could not be tested anyway. They'd be better and more honest to Scripture, preaching a good but short sermon, than pretending to themselves and others that they are prophets.

A lot of Pentecostalism is mutual self-deception and confused and bad Bible-teaching rather than direct demonic activity. Many of these people are genuine believers. Some of them are/may be better Christians than us, apart from Pentyism. Some of them don't know any other teaching on these things.

Jeremiah chapter 23 has a lot on false and true prophecy. I'm not saying all the Penty prophets are as deceiving as the ones Jeremiah was dealing with, but they should be asked how they know they are prophets?, how they know they have a prophecy? and how did they receive the prophecy?

In the light of Jeremiah 23:21-32. If it is something just "laid on their hearts" they shouldn't be calling it prophecy. If they haven't had the calling of a prophet they shouldn't call what they are saying prophecy.

If these "prophets" can't give coherent answers to a few simple Qs from Jeremiah 23, then they should be temporarily excommunicated until they show the fruits of repentance for being false prophets, admittedly often ill-served by their teachers. The same goes for pastor/teachers that preach a false gospel.

__________________
Richard
communicant member, FCoS
Perth, Scotland UK

His Name forever shall endure;
last like the sun it shall:
Men shall be blessed in Him,
and blessed all nations shall Him call (Ps. 72:17)

I'm not sure if you've answered this at length in another thread, then you can direct me to it, but I'm interested to hear your reasoning behind this conclusion. Thanks.

How do you know that modern tongues are not divine? The argument sounds similar to many modernistic critiques of miracles or the existence of God. How can we know that it is not genuine?

It's not obvious from that text that childish things refers to the gifts. Paul does not succomb to chiding the gifts, in fact, he commands to "be eager to prophesy, and do not forbid speaking in tongues"(1 Cor 14:39). In context he seems to speaking of being imperfect of our knowledge and vision of Christ.

In terms of the historical testimony of the gifts in operation, doesn't it stand to reason that only 1 occurrence need happen in order for the gifts to still be operation?

__________________
Dennis Oh
Toronto, Canada
"The gospel is only good news if it gets there in time" -- Carl F. H. Henry

Dear Dennis,

Maybe you should check out other threads in this section. I believe others have contributed significantly on why the Reformed believe in the cessation of certain sign/wonder/miracle gifts.

The only other thread I think that I contributed to this section is here:-

Divine revelation, real or made up in my head?

It may answer some of your Qs on I Corinthians 13, etc.

Re your last point, Elijah, more than once, called fire down from Heaven to destroy the king's troops (II Kings 1:9-15). Is this gift still in operation?

thanks

One quick question:

What's the WCF stance? Cessationism, hands down?


D.

Chapter I
Of the Holy Scripture
Although the light of nature, and the works of creation and providence do so far manifest the goodness, wisdom, and power of God, as to leave men unexcusable; yet are they not sufficient to give that knowledge of God, and of His will, which is necessary unto salvation.Therefore it pleased the Lord, at sundry times, and in divers manners, to reveal Himself, and to declare that His will unto His Church;[3] and afterwards for the better preserving and propagating of the truth, and for the more sure establishment and comfort of the Church against the corruption of the flesh, and the malice of Satan and of the world, to commit the same wholly unto writing; which makes the Holy Scripture to be most necessary; those former ways of God's revealing His will unto His people being now ceased.

Whether your talking about the Bible or the Confession, I believe cessationism wins hands down. It may take a little study. I'll recommend one or two books, some of which may be online, later.

Amen! and I do agree with that wholeheartedly.

Having been brought up in a Charismatic framework, I know there are many different modes of understanding their practice and theology of gifts. Unfortunately, there is much vagueness on their part and a reticence to definitions and propositions.

When pressed, I think the moderates (excluding the fringe groups, open theists, etc.) would affirm that divine revelation on matters of doctrine and his will for salvation history is closed.

You will hear of them saying things like "God is doing a new thing" or "God is speaking to this church to do this or that this year." But I think this differs only in degree with some of our Pastors saying, "we feel led to preach from the book of Galatians this year" (or maybe not? perhaps Reformed pastors don't do this at all ...?). The cessation of divine revelation is maintained in this isn't it?

Does Reformed cessationism demand that God no longer speaks to the individual heart, not matters of new doctrine, but daily devotion, illumination, conviction of sin? The Holy Spirit is 'speaking' in these activities isn't he?

Anyone know whether the Westminster divines had to deal with this issue of spiritual gifts? Was there any pockets of charismatic movements then?

__________________
Ewen
1689 LBCF
Assemblies of God Bible College
Singapore

Quote from Ewenlin
You'd have to ask someone else. I think some of the extreme anabaptists in continental Europe further blotted their copybook with Luther and Calvin by this kind of behaviour.

Quote from steadfast7
We very much believe that the Spirit illumines and enlightens the pages of Scripture to the Church down through the centuries - the WCF is one result - and to individual believers, in conjunction with other believers.

We believe in seeking God's guidance on important matters e.g. your calling. By the Word, prayer, providence, and the Spirit.

We believe in conviction of sin, assurance of faith, and godly counsel based on God's written Word.

I hope others also help to answer your Qs!

Here is one way of looking at this. I'm not formally theologically trained so others may have a more completely developed answer, or may disagree.

The I Corinthians 12 gifts of speaking in tongues and interpretation of tongues is a revelatory gift of God. That is, it added new revelation on a basis like that of Scripture, at a time when God had not completed His full revelation of Scripture (the canon of Scripture). Like the Apostles, it was still in the building phase of the church's doctrine "once and for all delivered unto the saints" (Jude 1:3) by the prophets and apostles (Ephesians 3:5).

Since God has now built that foundation, His completed revelation of His will in redemption through Christ, and delivered that revelation and doctrine for His church, it is not being modified or added on to, because it was complete.

That means that, at least ordinarily, new revelation equal to that of Scripture does not now come through "tongues" and "interpretation."

Allowing that it might continue in some sort of faith building or edification sense or even extraordinarily, it is not the I Corinthians 12 revelation that it was before the foundation was completed.

Standard pentecostal/charismatic teaching is wrong biblically on this point- they do explicitly, or implicitly teach and practice that, ordinarily, new revelation equal to (or above) that of Scripture comes today through these two gifts. That leads to much disorder in their communions.

It might also be helpful to ask this question, "Why would God speak revelation to a group of people in a language not known to them, then have it translated back to a language known to them- when the Word of God is already given them in their own language?"

Now for the Corinthians, not yet having the completed revelation of God in their language, His Word, they could receive this as special revelation.

Praise be to God- that's not true for us today- we have His revealed will (His Word), until He returns.

__________________
Scott
PCA
North Carolina


"Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering; (for he is faithful that promised)"
Hebrews 10:23

The foundation has been laid - at the latest by the end of the first century.

Now the house is being built - over the last nineteen centuries. Why are people going back and tinkering with the foundation or trying to use pseudo-foundational material on the third floor?

So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, in whom the whole structure, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord. In him you also are being built together into a dwelling place for God by the Spirit. (Ephesians 2:19-22, ESV)

And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them were the twelve names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb. (Rev. 21:14, ESV)

If the charismatics indeed believe that tongues and interpretations have added to revelatory content, then we should be able compile a list of these new teachings. But we can't reallly, because the mainstream pentecostals do not believe this. They use tongues and interpretation for the edification of the church, speaking a 'present' word to the congregation, which is usually parallel to (but not spoken as well) as some passage of scripture.

Most of them also distinguish between speaking in tongues (prophetic, when interpreted) and praying in tongues (personal prayer language). Most tongues in charismatic churches are prayer languages, attested to in 1 Cor 14:2 "For one who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God; for no one understands, but in his spirit he speaks mysteries". Verse 4: "One who speaks in a tongue edifies himself; but one who prophesies edifies the church".

As to your question about revelation in unknown languages, it is clear that unknown tongues were in operation in Corinth, which Paul does not condemn, rather he elevates corporate edification over personal.

We know that Paul says "do not forbid speaking in tongues." The question is whether he has in his mind a time frame when this command will be obsolete. The "mirror glass" motif is unclear, this passage is clear. I know of any one option in applying the passage.

Get a hold of Judisch and you'll see how clear I Corinthians 13 and other passages are. I'll maybe expand on this another day.

I have to say that my book recommendations are at post number 10, on the "Divine revelation, real or made up in my head thread?" here:-

Divine revelation, real or made up in my head?

I think Judisch's analysis is excellent. It's a book that shouldn't be out of print. Maybe it can be obtained secondhand or online.

It's funny...I usually ask the opposite question. How do you explain the apparent lack of gifts today?

If you are only referring to the occasional miracle...that is not the same thing as having the gift to do these things regularly at will. God does miracles on his own timing, and we are not promised them. I also believe miracles are more common in the mission field. Let's be honest, why would God give lots of miracles to filthy rich Americans who don't use the insane amounts of resources available to them to pursue him? We have the internet, gobs of cash and cars and TVs, and printed Bibles, and we expect God to send miracles our way while we are sitting on the couch with our potato chips? Let's be real.

__________________
Austin
EE student at Texas State University
Member of Church of the Cross (PCA) in San Marcos, TX
Ps. 8:3-4 "When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained; What is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man, that thou visitest him?"

A lot of the less spectacular gifts, e.g. teaching, helps, etc, are more useful to the developing church than a real gift of e.g. healing would be today.

What do the charismatics think healing was for; to put doctors out of business? Certainly the Pentecostalist/charismatic style of healing isn't putting any doctor out of business.

It is - to the extent that it isn't the real deal i.e. positively answered prayer for healing - bringing Christ's name into disrepute.

Here are some threads to look at:

Rutherford, The Gift of Prophecy, and the WCF
Cessationist or no? Why?#2

__________________


http://www.villagecommunitychurch.org/


"Preparing a sermon is like cooking a meal. You need pots and pans and utensils, but you don't bring them out to the table where people are eating." Derek Thomas


Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

Well, maybe this is a little harsh on Americans. I don't have gobs of cash (although anyone who does is welcome to send me some), and I could use a miracle or two, with my health problems, which are not potato-chip related. I really think that the main reason that miracles appear to be more common on the mission field is because they are less verifiable. Preachers who are trying to make a name for themselves as miracle-workers in the USA might get called out on a lie if they talk about the people they raised from the dead in Detroit. But it's a lot easier to get away with stuff if they talk about raising people from the dead in New Guinea. But usually, they don't even have to go that specific. They can say, "Well, I would tell you where, but it would put the Christians who live there at risk because it's a persecuted nation." If I had a nickel for every time I've heard that line, I'd have gobs of cash.

But when my family moved to the mission field, despite all my expectations, miracles didn't happen there either.

I am very suspicious of 'gift' claims. I was a Pente for 17 years and never saw even one. And I definitely faked my 'tongues'. I didn't really mean to, but there was tremendous pressure to produce evidence of 'gifts'. I don't think most Charismatics and Pentecostals are intentionally faking their tongues, but it's terribly easy to do. And there's not really any way to prove anybody wrong about it most of the time, but I have heard 'interpretations' that were quite wrong.

It's an excellant point about most of the prophecies being so vague. And many people don't realize that the 'word' could have applied to pretty much anybody there.

"You are earnestly seeking God."

"You sometimes have doubts."

Etc

And the usual, "God is going to do a great work here soon!"

__________________
Caroline
OPC
Schenectady, NY
Blog: The Unlikely Calvinist

Caroline,

I was talking about the occasional (rare) miracle, not the gift of miracles, which I believe have ceased with the ending of the Apostolic age. However, I agree that charismatic missionaries coming back claiming to have raised the dead is ridiculous. I was more talking about missionaries who don't practice "gifts" or any of that, but sometimes will witness a miracle of sorts. But I can't give any proof of this sort of thing, so I don't think it will help for me to debate whether that happens. I honestly don't know.

As for Americans and cash...Most of us certainly do have gobs of it by comparison to many countries. In any case, we are largely a spoiled nation, aren't we?

The Bible alerts us to an implicit Satanism. The temptation of Christ (Matthew 4) reveals that questions as to the authority, sense, and application of the Word of God can be influenced by the Devil. The Lord's rebuke of Satan in Peter (Matthew 16) indicates that Satan can influence the lives of disciples to subvert the work of the kingdom. And religious people can still be children of the Devil notwithstanding their fair professions to the contrary, as the Pharisees discovered in John 8; in rejecting Christ men are doing the lusts of their father.

A false view and manifestation of spiritual gifts may have this implicit Satanic element in the way it draws men away from Christ as all in all, removes men's reliance upon the union of Word and Spirit, and sets forth a sham spirituality that is superficial, earthly, and full of pride and envy.

__________________
Yours sincerely,


"Illum oportet crescere me autem minui."

Well, my personal opinion is that 'spoiled' is putting a highly negative spin on it. People are depraved no matter whether they have resources or not, and certainly I've never known poverty to improve a society--in fact, it usually brings out the worst in people. Of course, material wealth has its own temptations. But I guess I'm uncomfortable with such a generalization because I've seen it used so much for beating people down merely to beat them down. Pentecostal preachers loved to use that at altar calls. "You Americans are all fat and lazy and won't share all of your great material wealth. Nobody cares about the poor! Nobody will look away from their TV long enough to read the Bible!" And so poor Ethel over there who is barely able to pay her bills and can't afford her prescription medications, but nevertheless turned up for church tonight rather than watch TV and gives $10 a month to missions suddenly feels horribly guilty ...

But anyway... I think the initial question I'd pose to anyone who said that they wonder how to explain miracles is that they first have to establish that they occur. Otherwise, it's like asking how we explain all the unicorns roaming around Yellowstone National Park.

'Testimonies' are the main thing that people try to use to prove that I should give up my Trinitarian Presbyterian ways. "Well, I got this great prophetic word ..." and "There was this time that my sister's cousin's neice's poodle was healed of cancer!" or whatever.

Obviously, it's a little tongue-in-cheek ... but after seeing the unicorn turn out to be a couple of guys in a unicorn costume (so to speak) about a gazillion times, I'm a little reluctant to get on board that Number Gazillion-and-One might be the Real Thing.

PS If anyone is interested in my own view of the why and how these 'miracle' stories get started though, I posted a couple of things about it several years back:

Postcards from Heaven

How to Fake a Healing

If you are referring to I Corinthians 13:9-12
I too don't find it persuasive that this is speaking of the 1 Corinthians 12 gifts of tongues and interpretation ceasing, but the biblical basis does not rest on that.

It rests on something quite substantial, reflected in how highly reformed theology values the Word of God.

Ordinarily, special revelation of God is through His Word. It is not through unknown tongues and interpretation now that His Word has been completed and the faith build on the foundation of the prophets and apostles has been laid.

It is through His Word, until He returns.

Jackpot.

I'm a posting virign so... pleas be gentle :S

Steadfast can correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think that he's referring to some of the really out there stuff in the charismatic movement but rather to what I've heard called "charismatic with a seatbelt" such as what Wayne Grudem presents in his intro to systematic theology. He denies that the level of authority given to supposed prophecies and interpretations of tongues is not nearly as high as scripture. I don't know of anyone charismatic that I've ever met (and I grew up in pentecostal and free methodist churches) that would affirm that these 'prophecies' are placed at the level of scripture. I think you will find a few weirdos here and there but I have yet to speak with them. So, if anyone would like to claim that 'charismatics believe that their prophecies are at the same level as scripture' they should provide personal experience or quotes or some kind of proof. Otherwise, we should make use of the distinction between what people say they believe and the logical implications of those beliefs which they may or may not actually affirm.

Have any cessationists read Grudem on this subject? I would love to hear their thoughts.

__________________
David J. Houston
Member of Ottawa Reformed Presbyterian Church
RPCNA
Kanata, Ontario

I have read Grudem's discussion of the gifts in his Systematic Theology, and while I think he is wrong, I agree with you that he is not like the extremes of the charismatic movement.

I basically agree with your assessment, except that I think you're going way too easy on charismatic practice - there's a LOT of chaos in the charismatic movement from where I'm standing. Nevertheless, you're right that we must distinguish between their stated beliefs and the implications of those beliefs.

-----Added 10/2/2009 at 11:01:50 EST-----

Oh yeah - You might consider introducing yourself in the Introduce Yourself forum to meet some people.

I'm trying to play nice but you're definitely right about how dangerous it can be. I just left a church that had children lead services where we were informed by a prophetess that God wants the children to pray for everyone in public worship by going around and laying on hands and during their Sunday school classes they were instructed on how to hear God speaking to them. Furthermore, I had to go for training at work (I work for a christian organization) and while everyone was coming in they had a child preacher on youtube on the projector and a youth leader was telling me how he used this video to inspire his youth and tell them that they can minister too. He then told me that he had listened to a three year old who was just learning how to speak 'preaching' because he had 'had the Holy Spirit come upon him'. I wanted to cry. It shows such a lack of reverence and thoughtlessness that it makes me feel ill. How can people be so... silly? So no, I completely understand how weird it can get.

Thanks for the welcome! I think I might post an introduction thread tomorrow when I have some more time (I should be going to pick up my wife soon).

Good thoughts. I guess the charismatic movement has its ups and downs. I shouldn't overgeneralize about ALL charismatic churches, but I have seen enough to make me uneasy, and your examples are just the sort of thing I mean.

Pleasure meeting you.

If the gift of prophecy is not that which is seen in the New Testament, correct, it should not be considered as possessing the same authority as Scripture; but then the gift of prophecy is not that which is seen in the New Testament, and hence not biblical.

This is what makes Grudem's argument more plausible. He provides linguistic arguments in an attempt to show that the position of apostle who can say 'thus says the Lord' is the NT equivalent of the OT position of prophet. He then argues, based on the NT usage of the greek word(s?) translated prophet in our english bibles, that the NT prophet has less authority. These NT prophet's never have the right to say 'thus says the Lord'.

I'll try and provide some details after I get back from work but if you're interested you can get his understanding of all the gifts in a free podcast of his Sunday school class where he goes over these topics in greater detail.

I've not read Mr. Grudem on this.

However, I think I understand the reasoning that is given or assumed by charismatic/pentecostal communions.

It may be helpful to understand this as not really a matter of "balance" in its use, but as a matter of substance.

On the point of the I Cor. 12 gift of an unknown tongue and interpretation of an unknown tongue, it clearly existed in the Corinthian church at the time it is written about in God's Word.

It was being misused then, and the Holy Spirit speaking through Scripture addressed that and explained something of its purpose in I Corinthians 12-14.

The misuse of practice then is the same as the standard misuse in charismatic/pentecostal communions today (and I tried to summarize that in post #21).

But today, not only are there the same practical misuses, but there is now a difference of substance.

In practical fact, whenever a communion during public worship hovers in silence for a "Word from the Lord" and then something is spoken in an unknown language, and then there is an interpretation of the unknown language, the result is taken as new revelation from God.

Even though charismatic/pentecostal communions usually have no mechanism to evaluate whether "it agrees with Scripture," even if they do, they are taking it as at least equal to Scripture. They accept it as God's revealed will of what to do, what not to do, or what is coming.

In practical effect, since most do not evaluate whether it agrees with Scripture, it is taken as higher value than Scripture.

Think of it this way- If a brand new believer comes into a communion where this is being done and they hear an unknown tongue, interpretation during corporate worship and it tells the congregation to do something fairly specific, or predicts what will soon come, how does the new believer take it? Authoritative, at or above the Word of God. He may know little of God's Word and so this is the way He gets revelation from God each week.

Now, in my understanding, and some may not view it this way, the public worship revelatory gift that did exist (and I think for a specific purpose before the Corinthian church got the full revelation of Scripture, before the faith was delivered by the prophets and apostles per Jude 1:3, Ephesians 3:5) is a different question than whether God may supernaturally gift someone with a language they did not learn. I see that as a separate question, really.

But here, I'm addressing the corporate worship receiving of new revelation (unknown tongue, interpretation) that charismatic/pentecostal communions center their identity on.

The unknown tongue/interpretation gift of I Corinthians 12 was based on receiving new revelation from God in absence of the completed revelation His Word that was coming at that time through the prophets and apostles and being made part of the canon of Scripture, His Word.

So, we might say the Corinthian Church at that time did not have all of God's Word and all that God was to reveal through the special revelation of His Word. They did not have God's revealed will (His Word) in their language.

Today we do.

So, reformed theology (and I think God's Word) says, we have a difference of substance, not one of balance.

Since Wayne Grudem, recognized as a moderate continuationist, is already coming to the stage, then

I would like to recommend 2 books on the subject, as any response to this debate must come from the Scriptures and never from experience itself.

A sound exegesis of the common passages quoted for this matter is required and I think after you've read these 2 books, actually quite small, about 150 pages, and easy to buy,

surely you will accept that there is no room on Scripture for those NT Testament Gifts of Prophecy and Tongues after all the Special Revelation we should consider is given to us on the Canon of Scriptures.

These authors are both renowned Biblical Theologians

Amazon.com: Perspectives on Pentecost (9780875522692): Richard B., Jr. Gaffin: Books

Amazon

__________________
César Proença

there is no will nor running by which we can prepare the way for our salvation, it is wholly of the Divine Mercy Jean Calvin Institutes II . V. 17

Reformed Churches in The Netherlands (liberated) http://www.gkv.nl/main.asp?intTreeviewID=954

Igreja Reformada em Massamá Portugal http://www.igrejareformada.pt

"Thus says the Holy Spirit" is close enough for me. This passage, among others, proves to me that NT prophecy was not just "I feel prompted to say such and such," as Grudem argues in his Systematic Theology- It was revelation from God to prophet.

__________________

But God worked foundational, revelation through and around the Apostles to establish their mission to build the faith "once and for all delivered" to the saints.

I don't think this supports post apostolic "apostles" or, ordinarily, new revelation equal or above that of scripture coming through unknown tongues and interpretation.

Are you saying it does?

I agree. I was arguing against Grudem's "non-revelatory" position on NT prophecy, which he believes continues today. My position is that NT prophecy was roughly the same as OT prophecy, and that it has ceased.

"prophecies" of future happenings which are of a specific nature are very rare in church wide Pentecostal settings, I've never seen it happen. There is certainly no intention to place spoken words above scripture, for some churches do practice corporate discernment, to see whether the word was of the Lord. Other churches even require that words of prophecy be screened through the senior pastor before being released to the congregation. you'll find that the 'words' are really just echoes of what is found in scripture (this is what i mean by parallel, like in the way the WCF and creeds echo scripture). Also, as Grudem argues, New Testament prophecy did not function like old testament prophecy, in terms of infallibility and authority either. Prophets like Agabus were not completely accurate in their prophecies.

I don't think they are undermining the sufficiency of scripture, they are simply seeking God for a Present Word of edification, and I think this differs only in degree and not substance with our concepts of the Holy Spirit speaking to us personally in his ministry of illumination, conviction, calling, etc.

It's true that many occurences of the gifts, especially interpretation, are fake and/or abused. DA Carson's collegue once rattled off John 1 in Greek during a charismatic worship - the 'interpretation' was a far cry. However, even so, with abuses, excesses and disorder in the Corinthian church, as in the charismatic churches today, Paul does not dismiss them as invalid or condemn its practice, but regulates it for maximum benefit.

In terms of the apparent use of tongues, I have heard reports (not sure of its authenticity) of known languages being spontaneously spoken by people who never learned it. If even one of these occurrences is true, then it demonstrates that the gift has not ceased.

There is a certain appeal to look at the continued revelation aspect of certain gifts beyond Scripture as one of "moderate" v. "extreme." That is particularly understandable since so many of us have been exposed to charismatic/pentecostal influence.

But really, one has to look at this from Scripture, from the standpoint of what the reformers called the "ordinary means of grace" (prayer, Word, sacrament). How does God ordinarily confer grace to His people in light of His Word.

The Word completed by those eyewitnesses (apostles) who saw the completed plan of redemption in Christ and under inspiration of the Holy Spirit wrote of it, and established the church upon it.

If by "moderate continuation" we mean that new revelation, equal or above that of scripture continues outside of scripture through unknown tongues and interpretation of unknown tongues but in smaller, more scrutinized doses, we still are saying the scripture is not really complete, that we need it to be supplemented, and base our corporate worship and life on the supplementation.

And while we need illumination from the Holy Spirit to understand it, exhortation from it, teaching of it by those gifted to do so, and while God can do miracles at any time and in any way He pleases, we can say the Word is fully sufficient until our Lord returns because God intends it to be.

Excellent discussion of Tongues Today? by Palmer Robertson here :-

Tongues Today? by O. Palmer Robertson

Also discussion of prophecy on audio here:-

http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninf...SID=2180472645

and tongues here:-

http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=218047284

On prophecy:

As a semi-strict cessationist, I would argue that while it's clear that the office of prophet has ceased, I can't make a categorical claim that it is impossible for prophecy to happen. It's not the norm, but I can't discount it utterly. Instead, I have a criterion: does this word that a person has given me point me back to Scripture or does it put itself on a level with or above Scripture? If it's the former, it's from God. If the latter, it's not.

__________________
Philip
Potomac Hills Presbyterian Church (PCA) Leesburg, VA
Attending Reformed Presbyterian Church, Lookout Mountain, GA
Student Covenant College

The Importance of Being Orthodox

Scott1, I think I need to clarify. In the post that you quoted of mine, I was trying to demonstrate that Grudem's view of prophecy is incorrect. Grudem teaches that NT prophecy was not authoritative like OT prophecy, and that it continues today. I believe that NT prophecy was an authoritative message from God, and that it has ceased.

Well, that's rather the point, isn't is? That's a really big IF. You can use that for a lot of things. IF there is even one more God besides God, then there are two Gods. IF there is even one error in Scripture, then the Bible is not infallible. IF tongues are still ongoing in even one situation, then they have not ceased. The idea that something is theoretically possible doesn't mean that it is so. I have heard lots and lots of people who claim that they have seen the Virgin Mary appear before them. I suppose if even one of them is right, then Mary is appearing.

But in regard to the first paragraph, I have seen many cases of specific prophecies that did not come to pass. And I have seen people actually misquote Scripture in 'prophecies' and 'interpretation of tongues'. My favorite example was when a man gave a 'word from God' that told us to 'be like the five virgins who asked for more oil so that their lamps would not go out'.

But even if something is not OPPOSED to Scripture, that still doesn't mean that God said it. The problem isn't so much with the content (although sometimes there are problems with that too), but the fact that people say, "This is a word from God" when it is not. That's a violation of the third commandment. If something is not a word from God, then it is not a word from God. It doesn't matter if it's a NICE word or an ENCOURAGING word or anything else. For those that claim to be able to discern, I'm not sure how they would do that ... a feeling, I suppose. But then, I have a very strong feeling that it isn't a word from God, so there we are. Who is right? We can't both be right. And it either is from God or it isn't.

I have found "ordinarily" a good word in reformed theology, because we can never exactly restrict God from anything except violating Himself.

Here is the Westminster Confession explanation of what we might call "miracles":