Brothers,

Charismatic author David Wilkerson claims that the Holy Spirit has constrained him to utter a doom-oracle against New York city and other major metropolises in the United States. Although Pastor John Piper, like Wilkerson, believes that God still grants the gift of prophecy today, he questions the authenticity of Wilkerson’s prophetic word. To read more, especially Piper’s critique of Wilkerson’s “prophecy,” click the link below:

David Wilkerson Prophecies Impending Judgment for Major US Cities: John Piper Replies, “Stick with the Bible, David”

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

I'll probably get slated for this one, but here goes anyway...

A number of years ago, I read an article that the church (times square) was 'forewarned' (to a degree) just prior to 9 11. I cannot find the original article but here is an article which aludes to some of the events.

Heed David Wilkerson?s Prophetic Warning End Times Prophetic, Prophecy, Visions, Dreams, Revelation, Christian Blog

I'm not saying Wilkerson is right, but he is far more reputable than other 'charismatic' (I think he would refuse that term) ministers.

__________________
"A dog barks when his master is attacked. I would be a coward if I saw that God's truth is attacked and yet would remain silent." John Calvin

John from Scotland
Denomination: Attending Baptist church
Confessional Subscription:London Baptist Confession
Blog: [url]www.three-streams.co.uk[/url]

I LOVE Piper. But this is just dumb:

First, it does not resonate with my spirit when he claims that God told him to “lay in store a thirty-day supply of non-perishable food, toiletries and other essentials” because when disaster comes “grocery stores are emptied in an hour.” God might have said this. But it doesn’t smell authentic to me. Too prudential. Too reminiscent of the embarrassing Y2K excesses.

This has nothing to do with DW's alleged word, but what exactly is it about 100 nuclear devices missing from the USSR (detailed in the book One Point Safe by a journalist team), over 10,000 militant Jihad terrorists in the USA ( read Steve Emerson, American Jihad, or Paul Williams- several books), and the FACT that anybody can fill up a truck with conventional explosives, Tim McVeigh Style, lace it with a little bit of plutonium or cesium from the Russian stuff sold on the open market ( also detailed by Robert Baer and Ken Timmerman in books), and shut a city down. You don't even need atomic fission.

What is it about just in time shipping, manufacturing, and our total dependence on the electric grid for food, water, heat, gasoline, trucking, and everything else that people just do not get?

I don't need a "word" to know that anybody with any realistic understanding of Jihad ( or even solar flares and how they can bring down the electric grid like they did in the past) will have a few months of food stashed away- minimum. More to share would be the godly think to do. I am stashing up for us and all my friends as well.

If this really was the holy spirit talking I tend to think God would be saying to get a year of food in every church, you need to be ready to feed the hungry.
What is it about the fragility of the electric grid, the banks, and the food supply that Christians can't wrap their mind around? I just don't get it.

This was on the main page of World Net Daily this morning..FWIW.

In the fall of 2001, Pastor David Wilkerson, of Times Square Church in New York City, was warned by God that a calamity was coming. For six weeks they felt an intense burden and enormous heaviness. A critical need for intercession was so profound that Pastor Wilkerson canceled everything on the church calendar – mission's conferences, youth events and every guest speaker.

For six weeks, there wasn't a sermon. Instead, there was intercession for our nation with weeping and repentance. They knew something was coming and that something was bad. And that something was soon. So they prayed. And prayed … and prayed.

Then Wilkerson felt God telling him something that seemed rather bizarre. He felt God telling him to make sandwiches – lots of sandwiches. What were they for? Who would eat them? That part wasn't clear, but his church did what they believed God was telling them anyway.

And on the 10th of September they stayed up all night making hundreds and hundreds of peanut butter and jelly sandwiches. By morning they had about 2,000 sandwiches. At 8:46 a.m. the first plane hit the World Trade Center and Times Square Church was ready to feed and minister to rescue workers and victims of our nation's worst attack.

Hey, if you want to live in NYC with nothing in the house but a couple cartons of yoghut in the fridge and some chips in the closet, go ahead. I think it would be smarter to remember that God gave some warnings to early reformers like Rutherford and others that turned out to be true. They were RARE, and NOT His usual means of leading and speaking. But they happened on rare occasion.

edit to add- before the mods ban me for this alleged non cessationist quote about Wilkerson, somebody else started this thread to discredit him, and I think it is the righteous thing to do to allow this refutation to be added here if the original post is allowed here.

__________________
Lynnie

PCA

Central NJ

I think it is interesting that a person would "feel" like God is telling them something. Surely if it's God, he would know it to be so?

__________________
Steven Nemes
Phoenix, AZ

Good philosophy must exist, if for no other reason, because bad philosophy must be answered - C.S. Lewis

I think it is interesting that a person would "feel" like God is telling them something. Surely if it's God, he would know it to be so?

THAT IS THE POINT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


The nation is filled with thousands of charismatic idiots declaring thus sayeth the Lord like they are infallible. I know these people, I have wrestled in debate with them for YEARS. It is a sewer out there. It is unbelieveable, the arrogance and lack of humility. They think they have a hotline to heaven.

Wilkerson KNOWS he might be wrong, he might be decieved by a lying spirit, he is infallible, and he expects nobody to put him on the level of canon. He repeats this over and over.

He has a few doctrines I don't agree with but come on, give the guy a break for being humble and admitting his infallibility.

I would doubt it if I was told that any of the Old Testament prophets used the same language, as well as New Testament prophets. I don't believe him.

Looks like this is a Baptist Thing!

__________________
Gil Garcia
Rehoboth Reformed Church (RCUS)
La Habra, CA

"Ignorance of this distinction between Law and Gospel is one of the principal sources of the abuses which corrupted and still corrupt Christianity." - Calvin's successor


"By the words of the law man is admonished and taught, not what he can do, but what he ought to do. How is it that you theologians are twice as stupid as schoolboys, in that as soon as you get hold of a single imperative verb you infer an indicative meaning...?"
-Martin Luther, The Bondage of the Will

I suppose the optimistic postmillennialists aren't worried about the brother's "prophesy"...

God never speaks a "maybe."

We don't need fools telling us that "God told me" and then a week later "Whoops!"

We need Scripture and more respect for Scripture. This dumb "thus maybe saith" is getting more press than the Scripture this week, and will be used to mock the living God when it does not come to pass.

__________________
Fred Greco
Senior Pastor, Christ Church PCA (Katy, TX)
Christ Church Blog

"The heart is the main thing in true religion...It is the hinge and turning-point in the condition of man's soul. If the heart is alive to God and quickened by the Spirit, the man is a living Christian. If the heart is dead and has not the Spirit, the man is dead before God." (J.C. Ryle)

and if it does

__________________
Doug
Baptist
Hemet, Ca
Old Time Radio Podcast

Then He should be treated like the money market fund managers who advised getting out of stocks.

This is the same guy who "predicted" all the race riots that destroy NYC in the late 1990s. You know, the ones that never happened?

If it does come to pass, then [insert interpretation of proceeding events based on your eschatological affiliation]

Then the bible will be rejected, by most.

huh?

My interpretation: "People won't need scripture; we have this prophet! We can talk to him!"

Actually it'll work the opposite way. People will want to know what DW says, and they'll find out he is telling them to get into the word and prayer and serving God and stop wasting time and money on addiction to entertainment. And they will notice his rants against the prosperity gospel and his exhortations to give to missions. I think it'll be truly positive for the American church if we do have another 9-11 type event soon, and this gets big coverage. DW has the same sort of impact for missions and evangelism that guys like Piper and Alcorn have.

He quotes guys like Spurgeon, John Owen, and Edwards all the time. Maybe some of the doctrinally challenged will even want to read the authors he quotes if something big happens.

Its a moot point, really. You think 10,000 well funded Jihaders in the USA are just gonna roll over and leave us alone? Think again. I could be a prophetess myself without the holy spirit even entering into the discussion You think Kahn in Pakistan sold nuclear secrets to at least four nations (as well as maybe enriched uranium) and nobody is ever gonna float an old boat under a fake flag 12 miles off shore, open the hatch, and lob one over at a coastal city?

Something I've never understood, having grown up around a lot of Pentecostals and charismatics and dispensationalists, is why the heck is America so special? Why does God tell us that he is going to judge his people in America? Why is America his new Israel, his chosen country? Why aren't Christians in, say, Eastern European villages going to be killed by Islamic radicals in a massive nuclear attack? I don't see what is so special about America, and why God would bother letting his prophets in America know that the chosen country is going to be attacked en masse.

Why? Because we are a nation of freedom and the enemies of freedom would love to see us die

Perhaps people might remember that episode with Jehosophat and Ahab and the false prophets that abounded in Israel.

Did they receive revelation? You bet they did.

From lying spirits.

A nation with Christians too obsessed with their navels to read the Scriptures loves the kind of theology that turns our inner thoughts into Words from above.

God judges in mysterious ways and might we even consider it a judgment to have lying spirits hardening hearts in their rebellion against the revealed Word by having them continually focus on the fantastic instead of the revealed? Let us not forget that even Christ taught in Parables to leave some men condemned and judged in their sins.

__________________
Rich
PCA, Northern VA
Student, New Geneva Theological Seminary

WebsiteMaven - Web Hosting Reviews, Guides, and Advice to build and promote your web site.
SoliDeoGloria.com - A Community for Reformed Thought and Discussion

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

If he is a true prophet of God, his revelation IS infallible. Elijah, Jeremiah, John the Baptist, all gave infallible prophesies because they were speaking directly for God. If you are wrong, even slightly wrong, even once, and claim to speak in the name of God, you are a false prophet. Do you not realize how serious it is to claim that God said something he did not say? Really think about this... it is blasphemy to say God said something he did not say. Would you take the risk of committing blasphemy is you are not absolutely sure what you are saying is from God?

Personally I don't expect any further prophetic revelation from God. I think that prophets were sent for a particular reason to establish God's purposes in redemption and to establish the church. There was no need for them after the canon of scripture was established. God told us in the Bible what we need to know until the end of time, why would we want to listen to fallible men?

__________________
"I was found by those who did not seek me; I was made manifest to those who did not ask for me." Romans 10:20b

Angela Asano
Edwardsville, IL
Member, Center Grove Presbyterian Church - PCA

"History never repeats itself, but it rhymes." - Mark Twain

Do you maybe mean "fallible" here?

__________________
Ben Franks

I attend: Ketoctin Covenant Presbyterian Church (OPC)
in Purcellville, Virginia
I'm a member of: Heartland Community Church (PCA)
in Wichita, Kansas
I blog here (along with my Dad): http://rrfranks.blogspot.com/
And I'm a student here: www.phc.edu

"Remember the speeches we have spoken so often over our mead, when we raised boast on the bench, heroes in the hall, about hard fighting. Now may the man who is bold prove that he is."-Aelfwine at the Battle of Maldon

Hamalas..oops

Just curious- would anybody here have problem with saying that you THINK God led you to a particular church, or God led you to marry a certain person, or you felt led to take a certain job? He leads us, He guides us, we use our brain and biblical principles, but don't you think He personally leads us to our vocations and so forth? Is it so hard to think you might feel led to prepare for a catastrophe?


Steven, we are seen by the militant Jihad as supporting Israel. Thus the big satan and the little satan labels.

If Hungary, or Estonia, or some dinky nation somewhere announced that they were going to give money and weapons to Israel, you can be sure that they would become a target too. This has nothing to do with dispensationalism. It is a realistic look at how much Islam hates any friend of the Jews.

I assume London is targeted actually, maybe Paris. Maybe some big financial centers in the orient and India too. It isn't just the USA.

I know a guy who knows one of the military guys who was there, at the Atlanta warehouse, where they found 2 dozen empty surface to air missile boxes (or whatever they come in.) Never been found. 5% of our cargo containers get checked- what do you think is coming in? Aztlan (Mexicans) wants to take back the American Southwest and is arming to the teeth, do you know what is happening with Mexico and weapons? It isn't just Islam.

Hey, people can ignore warnings like this but a lot of folks here have babies. What harm is there in getting extra formula and diapers and baby food, and rotating it. What does it hurt to start rotating a big stash of pasta and spagehtti sauce, peanut butter and jelly, rice and beans, or whatever you eat? What is the downside?

People think nothing has happened since 9-11 so it never will. One of these days I think some Mullah is gonna look at the planets and the entrails of a goat and decide it is the day for action in the USA. And when that day comes they are armed and ready. They'll shoot at airplanes, explode bombs, and do all they can to destroy. Their fatwa demands they pay us back for 4 million Iraqi dead, and they'll kill all they can.

I lie awake begging God for mercy on His people. We live so frugally just so we can prepare a bit. I just don't get it that so many Christians don't see it coming at some point. Hey, all I can do is keep praying. People think stashing up month of food can't possibly be God's will? Like I said, I just don't get it.

There is a HUGE difference between illumination and the guiding of the Spirit on one hand, and revelation and prophecy on the other. My disagreement is not with whether someone should stock up on food, but with someone who claims to speak for God. Either he speaks authoritatively where he should not, or he makes God speak "unauthoritatively" which is EVEN WORSE, because it encourages an ignoring of God when He speaks.

I would have no problem if someone said (wisely, I would say) "looking at the Biblical accounts of hatred for Christ's people, and the historical information about Islamofascists, Americans would do well to be prepared for some kind of attack." That is worlds away (Biblically speaking) from "God told me that X was going to happen."

The first man should be listened to, his ideas, analyzed, interacted with, and either agreed with or rejected based on Biblical principles of wisdom.

The second man should be dismissed as a crank, and told to spend more time with the Bible.

Good point! There is also the occasion of the damsel with the spirit of divination who constantly followed Paul and his company and drew attention to them as the messengers of salvation. It was a grief to Paul because it associated his ministry with "divination."

__________________
Yours sincerely,


"Illum oportet crescere me autem minui."

Actually, check out Jeremiah. He would say 'the word of the Lord came to me' and later he would point to an event and would say 'this is how I knew it was the Lord'. My paraphrase...

Acts Jerusalem council 'It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and us'...

sorry, I'm writing in a hurry

I haven't read all the posts above, and am not inclined to do so.

However, I find Piper's response amazing:

First, it does not resonate with my spirit when he claims that God told him to “lay in store a thirty-day supply of non-perishable food, toiletries and other essentials” because when disaster comes “grocery stores are emptied in an hour.” God might have said this. But it doesn’t smell authentic to me. Too prudential. Too reminiscent of the embarrassing Y2K excesses.

His criteria in evaluating Wilkerson's prophecy are (1) it does not resonate with my spirit , and (2) it doesn’t smell authentic.

That is hysterical. But I guess that's what you're left with if the gifts continue today.

__________________
Jim
1689 LBCF
Independent Bible Church
North Texas, USA

But Jeremiah and the apostles knew it was the Word of the Lord. This guy is saying it feels like it is.

I saw that too, Jim. I was hoping that it was a stab at subtle irony. But I'm not so sure. . . .

__________________
Raymond Victor Bottomly
Providence Reformed Baptist Church, Tacoma, WA

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

I, like others on this thread, am a cessationist. In fact, I inserted this brief article about Wilkerson and Piper in the midst of a series of blogs I’m writing entitled, “A Humble Argument for the Cessation of NT Prophecy and Tongues.” I just posted Part 6 in which I’ll address and endeavor to refute Wayne Grudem’s attempt to distinguish OT canonical prophecy from NT congregational prophecy.

I’m sorry that Piper, an otherwise excellent preacher and theologian, has sided with Grudem on this debate. As a result, he has deprived himself of one important polemical weapon that might be employed against such self-proclaimed prophets as David Wilkerson, namely, the polemic that such revelatory gifts as prophecy have fulfilled their purpose and, therefore, have ceased.

Nevertheless, one of the purposes of this post was to demonstrate that we should resist the temptation to lump all non-cessationists together. There is, in my mind, a significant difference between a John Piper and a David Wilkerson. Piper gives a much higher place to the Scriptures as the supreme authority for matters of faith and life than does Wilkerson. Moreover, Piper, unlike some non-cessationists, is willing to “test the spirits” and to say publicly when he thinks an alleged prophecy is wrong.

Granted, as some have pointed out, Piper’s own view of prophecy, namely, that genuine NT prophecy is by nature potentially fallible, hinders him from issuing as strong a censure to Wilkerson as we might wish. But before we’re too hard on Piper, we need to thank God that He overrules many of our own inconsistencies. When I was once Arminian in my soteriology, I, nevertheless, prayed like a Calvinist because of my commitment to certain teachings in Scripture. "Thank you, God, for overruling my inconsistency!" And I’m almost 100% sure that I haven’t arrived at doctrinal perfection and consistency yet. Hopefully, God will overrule my remaining doctrinal weaknesses and cause me to be blessedly inconsistent in those areas. With that in view, I thank God that Piper’s commitment to the supremacy of Scripture has trumped his view of ongoing prophecy.

There’s more I should say. A few of you have noted Piper’s use of subjective language. Piper is uncomfortable with Wilkinson’s prophecy because it does not “resonate with [his] spirit” and “does not have the feel of authority to [him].” Two things should be noted: first, sound epistemology recognizes that there’s no such thing as a purely objective human knowledge. That is to say, knowledge, discernment, evaluation, etc., necessarily involve the engagement of one’s subjective psychological faculties. Some may not like terms like “resonate” or “feels.” But is "know" or “think” any less subjective? According to Paul, man’s been created as the imago Dei with a sense of the Deity and conscience that “resonates” with God’s self-authenticating general and special revelation. Moreover, lest we’re too quick to fault Piper for failing to use stronger and more objective language, we need to acknowledge the the NT writers themselves sometimes used terminology that has a subjective sound to it, as one brother on the PB noted. For example,

“For it has seemed [Greek dokeo] good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay on you no greater burden than these requirements [emphasis added]” (Acts 15:28, ESV).

Of course, the point of this text is not to render the requirements uncertain or less binding. It's just to point that language like "it seems to me" or "I feel that" or "this doesn't resonate with my spirit" is not necessarily unbiblical or mere sentimental mishmash.

Second, and this complements the first point, the title of Piper’s response to Wilkerson suggests that he’s trying to follow the biblical protocol “testing the spirits” against Scripture to see whether they’re of God (1 Thess. 5:21; 1 John 4:1-6). The fact that Piper quotes Scripture in his assessment of Wilkerson’s prophecy leads me to believe that he’s using canonical Scripture as the basis for his assessment, not a prophetic hunch or a mere personal opinion. Here I’m inclined to place the best construction on Piper’s words though I still disagree with the continuationist framework from which he operates.

If you follow the rest of my posts on cessationism, I think you’ll find that I’m not justifying Piper’s own view of prophecy. Just want to be fair to the man and encourage Christians to resist the temptation of lumping men like him together with less principled and biblical oriented non-cessationists. For a chart that illustrates differences among non-cessationists, click here.

Your servant,

The best response that Piper could have given about Wilkerson's prophecy is, "Consider the source." period. Nothing more need be said nor more effort expended.

As a continuationist I say very good post!

The charitable assessment is praiseworthy. The problem is that Scripture can really only be used as a moral or doctrinal test. Where these are neutralised -- as one would expect them to be in the case of a person seeking to act in accord with Scripture -- there is really no test which can be applied except the futurition of the event. If God still speaks, then God could say anything. If the revelation is the same as that which we find in the canonical process, there is no reason why God could not require the same kinds of things as He required during the canonical process, including the offering of one's first born son or the annihilation of a nation. It is probably the case that all continuationists follow this through differently, but that is only because some are afraid of following through on the full conviction of their belief.

While it may seem slightly hyperbolic (though I don't think it is at all), I think this critique of the continuationist is spot on and needs to be more seriously weighed.

__________________
Paul Korte
OPC
Flint, MI

They who perceive in themselves discoveries of the divine goodness, so full and absolutely perfect, and who make them the subject of earnest meditation, will never embrace new doctrines, by which the very grace they feel so powerfully in themselves is thrown into the shade. --John Calvin

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

Matthew,
I would add that if Grudem is correct and if revelation is different than the canonical process, then God could also say anything, with the difference that we are left wondering if God was right or not.

That to me is even more frightening than a re-opening of the canon (which I agree with you is extremely problematic).

So many looking for that crystal ball even if they won't admit...David tries to supply one I guess

__________________
sarah
WI
OPC
My Pastor's Sermons: Mark Jenkins...he's awesome!!!

Just to point something out, that I thought would have been fairly obvious to the people posting it. The Greek verb dokew, translated "seemed" in Acts 15:28 does not at all necessitate uncertainty. The verb implies subjectivity, but not uncertainty. For example, if I say "The barbecue seems too sweet," I am not saying that I am unsure if the barbecue is too sweet. I'm saying I am sure that in my opinion the barbecue is too sweet.

Obviously, in Acts 15:28 the Holy Spirit is not unsure about what is good. The Holy Spirit has decided what is good, and the council agrees with that assessment. The problem with Piper's assessment is not that it is subjective, but that it is subjective and uncertain. There is no corresponding biblical parallel.

__________________
Charlie Johnson
Downtown Presbyterian Church (PCA)
Greenville Presbyterian Theological Seminary, student

Charlie,

Your description of the relationship between subjectivity and uncertainty/certainty is correct. Both the English term "to seem" as well as the Greek word dokeo highlight subjectivity but need not imply uncertainty. The issue is, however, more complex than you've portrayed it.

First, epistemic certainty and/or uncertainty may vary in degree. In other words, it's not as simple as the barbecue illustration you employ. For example, when a pastor or theologian attempts to argue for a particular interpretation of a given text, his interpretation of the passage may "resonate" or "fail to resonate" at different levels with the receptor audience (whether hearers or readers). Greater certainty or doubt vis-a-vis the interpretation may only be obtained when the listener or reader carefully and prayerfully weighs the interpretation in the light of his own grammatical-historial analysis of the text, the analogy of Scripture, the opinions of other learned interpreters, and the guidance of God's Spirit.

Second, I agree that Piper's assessment of Wilkerson's prophecy lacked the degree of skepticism that you and I might entertain as cessationists. Nevertheless, Piper's measured or qualified doubt concerning the validity of Wilkerson's prophecy when assessed within the framework of his own non-cessationist viewpoint is not, in my mind, too far removed from at least some of the initial uncertainty ancient Jews or early Christians may have entertained when alleged NT prophecies were initially uttered.

Remember that the canons by which new prophecy was to be tested included (1) the consistency of that prophecy with extant canonical revelation and (2) the fulfillment of that prophecy if it portended an event in the future. It follows, then, that during the time period in which the prophetic utterance was weighed the hearers or readers may have felt degrees of certainty or uncertainty that were not resolved until (1) they had time to compare the alleged new revelation with prior canonical revelation and/or (2) they had time to see whether the event portended would come to pass.

Accordingly, when the Bereans first heard Paul, their initially impression may have been that Paul's message "seemed" with a qualified degree of certainty consistent with the message of the OT canon. But their level of certainty did not increase until they invested the effort of studying Paul's message in light of the Scriptures (see Acts 17:11). Only then did Paul's gospel more certainly "seem" authentic. Similarly, degrees of uncertainty may have attended a "first-time" prophetic portension of coming good or ill. This lact of absolute certainty might only be removed when the portended event either happened or failed to happen.

I do not say this to give Piper a free pass. As you're probably aware, I'm currently posting a series in defense of cessationism, and I am interacting primarily with Wayne Grudem, whose overall view of NT prophecy Piper advocates. I hope, in that series, to underscore some of the same weaknesses and potential dangers that some on this thread, like the Reverends Winzer and Greco, have already noted. It is my opinion, however, that those who may have been swayed by Grudem's and/or Piper's arguments for continuationism will be more willing to listen to our cessationist arguments if we make every effort to be fair and charitable in our critiques of men whom they esteem. Of course, if I believed Wayne Grudem and John Piper were heretics (in the fullest sense of that term), which I certainly don't, my polemic would take on a different tone.

Your servant,

It is also worth noting that what seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to the council of elders was in fact made binding on the churches, and was not presented as something which might be followed.