Charismatic and reformed?
- Thread starter Romans922
- Start date
- Status
non dignus
Puritan Board Sophomore
Yes, absolutely, in my opinion.
They are messing with the canon. Even though they don't admit it. If they are getting revelation from God they must write it down and share it with the church.
And I'll bet my bottom dollar there is more bad doctrine than just the charismata. Are they baptist by any chance? Gosh....ya think? (no offense)
True doctrine and godliness hates invention.
They are messing with the canon. Even though they don't admit it. If they are getting revelation from God they must write it down and share it with the church.
And I'll bet my bottom dollar there is more bad doctrine than just the charismata. Are they baptist by any chance? Gosh....ya think? (no offense)
True doctrine and godliness hates invention.
non dignus
Puritan Board Sophomore
If its healing, that's great!!
They can go into the cancer wards and do alot of good. Seriously.
If the members are closet praying in a different language I have no problem. Anything beyond that, especially doctinal, is way bad.
They can go into the cancer wards and do alot of good. Seriously.
If the members are closet praying in a different language I have no problem. Anything beyond that, especially doctinal, is way bad.
JohnV
Puritan Board Post-Graduate
When I was younger and more cockey I once responded to a charismatic with my own spiritual gift. He was extoling those gifts that he thought that we thought were dead, such as tongues, healings, and special revelations and predictions. I told him I had the gift of discernment, and that I discerned error here. He left me alone after that. I don't know why.
VirginiaHuguenot
Puritanboard Librarian
R. Scott Clark
Puritan Board Senior
It depends on what you mean by Calvinism. If it means "predestination," then, no they're not incompatible. There is a growing movement of predestinarian charismatics. I think this may describe C J Maheny and certainly describes Wayne Grudem and others.
I, for one, and Guido de Bres (the primary author of the Belgic Confession, 1561) for another, would not be happy with such a truncated definition of "Reformed" or "Calvinist."
There is much more to being Reformed/Calvinist than predestination. Augustine, Gottschalk, Aquinas, and many others were predestinarian without being "Calvinist." Lutherans are predestinarians (they confess an unconditional election that can, nevertheless, be lost).
If we allow the Reformed confessions and confessional theologians to define "Reformed/Calvinist" then, no, anyone who claims to have direct revelations from God or to practice apostolic gifts is not Reformed.
Much of what is today called "Charismatic" was denounced in the 16th century as Anabaptist fanaticism:
I'm glad folks are re-discovering the doctrine of predestination. Let's pray they rediscover the rest of our soteriology, our Christology and our covenant theology (including the notion of canon and revelation!) etc.
rsc
Pilgrim
Puritanboard Commissioner
I attended what amounts to a Reformed-Charismatic (the minister has a Yahoo group by that name) EPC church off and on for about a year or year and a half. I had been Calvinistic in the sense of embracing the doctrines of grace for several years, and attended this church while trying to figure out whether to be a Baptist or Presbyterian (Baptists are quite welcome there, and I think there are even some on the session). This church is what I would term mildly charismatic, especially compared with the numerous Oneness Pentecostals and Word-Faith adherents in my area. Some people there, including the pastor are charismatic, but most are not. The preaching was usually excellent and was the main reason I attended there. But I left there last summer and began regularly attending an OPC congregation, and will soon become a member d.v. I always kind of had the sense that if I became convinced of Presbyterianism that I would end up there.
I think my EPC pastor friends' experience is different than most "Reformed-Charismatics" you hear about today in that instead of coming from charismaticism to an understanding of the doctrines of grace, his first pastorate was in the RPCNA, thus going from covenanter to charismatic!
[Edited on 1-8-2006 by Pilgrim]
I think my EPC pastor friends' experience is different than most "Reformed-Charismatics" you hear about today in that instead of coming from charismaticism to an understanding of the doctrines of grace, his first pastorate was in the RPCNA, thus going from covenanter to charismatic!
[Edited on 1-8-2006 by Pilgrim]
BrianBowman
Posting Priviledges Revoked
... in other words "discovery" themselves rightout of being Charismatics into the glorious light of simply being Biblical Christians!
[Edited on 1-8-2006 by BrianBowman]
Pilgrim
Puritanboard Commissioner
I was never Charismatic per se, but until last summer my position for the previous several years could be described as "open, but cautious". However, after a series of events last summer I began to question my position and realized I could no longer stay on the fence. I came across the January 2002 issue of New Horizons the theme of which was "Is the Bible Enough", which went a long way toward solidifying my position against neo-pentecostalism/charismaticism, particularly this article by Geoffrey Thomas:
http://www.opc.org/new_horizons/NH02/01a.html
[Edited on 1-8-2006 by Pilgrim]
http://www.opc.org/new_horizons/NH02/01a.html
[Edited on 1-8-2006 by Pilgrim]
SmokingFlax
Puritan Board Sophomore
Dr. Clark.
Could you please identify the author of your earlier quote.
Thanks.
[Edited on 1-8-2006 by SmokingFlax]
Could you please identify the author of your earlier quote.
Thanks.
[Edited on 1-8-2006 by SmokingFlax]
Pilgrim
Puritanboard Commissioner
The group you're thinking of is probably Sovereign Grace Ministries, formerly known as PDI. http://www.sovereigngraceministries.org/
Their best known leaders are C.J. Mahaney and Joshua Harris. Mahaney is now on the council of the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals and spoke at Grace Community Church while John MacArthur was on sabbatical this summer.
The Evangelical Presbyterian Church has a good number of Reformed-Charismatics as well.
R. Scott Clark
Puritan Board Senior
Guido/Guy de Bres, the primary author of the Belgic Confession.
rsc
WrittenFromUtopia
Puritan Board Graduate
Being Charismatic and Reformed isn't the big issue... is Charismatic phenomenon compatible with God's Word and true, orthodox, Christianity?
BrianBowman
Posting Priviledges Revoked
This is the real question that needs to be answered by those holding to various gradients of Charismatic viewpoints.non dignus
Puritan Board Sophomore
Are there reports of healings by predestinarian charismaniacs?
If so, the veracity of such reports are suspect if they don't go into the hospitals,
1) to heal childhood cancer, for example
2) to verify actual divine intervention by experts and then give testimony of such to the world. "Tell of His glorious deeds......"
Thus they are sinning by withholding the gifts for the body of Christ; OR
they are sinning by carrying the Lord's name in vain.
If I sound peeved it's because I used to believe the superstitions put forth by neo-Pentecostal teachers.
mybigGod
Puritan Board Freshman
I have been a reformed baptist for a very long time and i have always tried to balance my reading with revival stuff, bios, and works that center on the Holy Spirit. I read some of the theological works of today and they are so intellectual and dry it leaves me longing for some of the old puritian works.
I have always questioned the certianty of some today that speak as though the early churches experience was a thing of the past. In an effort to warn people about prophetic utterance crowd they have gone to great lengths to acknowlege that calvinism is supernatural but as to it working out in depending on the Holy Spirit for ministry, preaching, in all areas of spiritual service they seem to paint this picture of the Holy Spirits work as secret and personal.
Then there is the coming of the Holy Spirit, the sending of the Holy Spirit by Christ , the baptism of the early church with fire for witness books that are placed on the back shelves of the reformed library and never given attention as a normal systematic study as the other doctrines of grace. Yet the old reformers have written alot on this subject.
We take a dogmatic stance on the work of the Spirit and limit the discussion on the text of scripture in this area which scripture can be crossed referenced in many ways. If i am writing something and its not warm then i must ask myself if i really understand the doctrine of the Holy Spirit, because it may be lacking the "unction".
[Edited on 1-9-2006 by mybigGod]
[Edited on 1-9-2006 by mybigGod]
I have always questioned the certianty of some today that speak as though the early churches experience was a thing of the past. In an effort to warn people about prophetic utterance crowd they have gone to great lengths to acknowlege that calvinism is supernatural but as to it working out in depending on the Holy Spirit for ministry, preaching, in all areas of spiritual service they seem to paint this picture of the Holy Spirits work as secret and personal.
Then there is the coming of the Holy Spirit, the sending of the Holy Spirit by Christ , the baptism of the early church with fire for witness books that are placed on the back shelves of the reformed library and never given attention as a normal systematic study as the other doctrines of grace. Yet the old reformers have written alot on this subject.
We take a dogmatic stance on the work of the Spirit and limit the discussion on the text of scripture in this area which scripture can be crossed referenced in many ways. If i am writing something and its not warm then i must ask myself if i really understand the doctrine of the Holy Spirit, because it may be lacking the "unction".
[Edited on 1-9-2006 by mybigGod]
[Edited on 1-9-2006 by mybigGod]
Joseph Ringling
Puritan Board Freshman
So because they are charismatic they just naturally have to be baptist right? So would it be fair of me to say that if someone believes they have to work for their salvation that they must be paedo? Or can both be human and capable of error?
non dignus
Puritan Board Sophomore
Joseph,
It's good to converse with you.
I admit I jumped the gun a little bit in only one regard. There was (or is) something of charismatic "renewal" (ouch!) occuring in Roman Catholic circles. Since Roman Catholicism is paedobaptist, I could be accused of 'calling the kettle black'.
However, when we do see 'creative' or 'inventive' denominations that have a hybrid character, it's safe to assume it's not paedobaptist, wouldn't you agree? By the way, paedobaptism is not an offshoot of orthodoxy, credo' is. Credobaptism is the hybrid which is not a good thing so late in the day- historically speaking. I would enjoy discussing this on another thread if you like.
When 'credos' and 'paedos' share PuritanBoard it is good for conversation and iron sharpening iron. However we can get comfortable and think 'the other guy is alright theologically'. No it's not alright. We need to keep the boundaries well defined, in a friendly way.
biblelighthouse
Puritan Board Junior
I'm not Pentecostal. But I also don't agree with this logic used to rebut them.
After all, does Scripture record every revelation God has ever given to men? Does the Bible contain every word God has ever spoken to men? Certainly not! The Bible contains all we need to know for salvation, and the proper worship of God. But it doesn't contain everything He's ever said/revealed to men. Thus the argument above is not valid. Therefore, we should question charistmatics on other grounds.
ChristopherPaul
Puritan Board Senior
In these last days, God has already spoken through Christ (Hebrews 1:1-2). So during these last days, we are to expect no more words from God or else the canon can be reopened.
biblelighthouse
Puritan Board Junior
I am well aware of charismatic abuses.
But I'm just curious how you define "these last days" in Hebrews 1:1-2?
Did "these last days" begin with the ministry of Christ, the resurrection of Christ, or what?
ChristopherPaul
Puritan Board Senior
The last days began with Emmanuel. He spoke in person and through the pillars of the Church, the Apostles. After the ascension and with the end of the apostolic age, God ceased speaking until the Second Advent or the end of the last days.
biblelighthouse
Puritan Board Junior
How can you back this up, using Hebrews 1? So far, your argument seems to go like this:
1) According to Hebrews 1, in these "last days", God has spoken to us through his Son, instead of through prophecies, signs, etc.
2) Yet, at the same time, you are saying that God spoke to us through the signs, prophecies, etc. of the first century. And He didn't only do this through Christ personally, but also through the Apostles, and also through a number of other people (e.g. Agabus).
But #1 looks to me like it is contradictory to #2. Either the argument is "God spoke to us through Jesus instead of through charismata", or "God spoke to us through Jesus through charismata". Which is it? A person needs to pick one argument or the other . . . not both.
Furthermore, where does Scripture make a clear distinction between the church prior to the death of the last apostle, and the church after the death of the last apostle? Are you saying that, throughout the nations, there may have been people prophecying like Agabus, right up until the apostle John died? But then immediately after his death, all prophecy ceased? I am open to this idea, but I have no idea where Scripture says such a thing. Hebrews 1 certainly doesn't answer this question . . . it talks about God's revelation through His Son, not through other people. But if you argue that Christ could reveal Himself through Agabus (which I would agree), then why couldn't Christ reveal himself through the grandson of Agabus, sometime in the 2nd century?
I hope you don't mind all my questions. I am genuinely wanting to learn. I just do not think Hebrews 1 gives a convincing case for cessationism, at least not the way I have heard it presented.
Are there any other texts that make you think cessation occurred at the time the Apostle John died? Or is Hebrews 1:1-4 the only text you are relying on for this doctrine?
I look forward to hearing more about this. Thank you for your patience with my questions.
[Edited on 1-11-2006 by biblelighthouse]
ChristopherPaul
Puritan Board Senior
Joseph, good questions.
Hebrews 1 is not the lone scripture used for cessation as you are well aware. However it is an important truth to consider.
The verse:
Unlike how God spoke to the Fathers and Prophets how did He speak through Jesus?
Jesus specifically discipled 13 men who were appointed to be the first stones of the New Testament Church.
God has spoken to His Church through the pillars of His Church specifically appointed by Christ. When Jesus spoke to the Apostles, He was speaking to the Church. Sure there were other sheep besides the Apostles at the time, but the Apostles were specifically called out (by Jesus) to be the stones that the Church will be built on. So everything we as a church do or say must be built on to, not in addition to, these foundation stones. The foundation is complete, we do not add to that foundation with revelation not recorded in Holy Scripture. The Eastern church will take this to say that Christ is still speaking to the Apostles per se, but through the Church as a body not as individual foundation stones. The Protestants assert that the canon was closed with the end of apostolic writings even before the Church collected them all into one document but the Church´s interpretation may be flawed.
Before the completion of the canon, some in the church did prophesy, but they were not Prophets on par with the likes of Moses, Isaiah, Micah or John the Baptist. We will take Paul´s writings and add them to scripture, but not some common Christian´s writings who had the gift of prophecy. It is implied in 1 Thessalonians 5:19-22 that prophecies could contain information that was to be tested as bad or good,
We must ask by what standard or rule did the New Testament Church test these prophecies? Was it by the Apostles doctrine along with scripture? If not, what else? Jesus´s words? Well, who knew Jesus´ words and was supernaturally granted remembrance by the Holy Spirit? You, me, the Pope, Benny Hinn? I don´t recall any of us being eyewitnesses of the resurrected Christ. Do you see how this relates to Hebrews 1?
Today we see the entire revelation of God perfect and complete face to face as in a mirror (cf: 1 Corinthians 13:12 & James 1:23). If anyone "œprophesizes" in church today it is those who hold the completed word in their heart and proclaim it either by memory or recitation. We test what they say with what the word actually says. What else is missing if we still require prophets? And again what do we test their words with? Is it their interpretation that is prophetic? Then we can say Jerome, Aquinas, Augustine, Calvin, Luther, et al were prophets who gave us some good interpretations which we hold fast to. If they were prophets, then who is Paul calling teachers and how are they different? From Hebrews one we must ask who is Jesus, what did He say, who did He say it to and by what do we test these people´s words?
Regarding your second point: I cannot dogmatically assert that it all ended with the Apostle John´s last breath. It appears that at the early stages of the New Testament Church, the Apostles were acting under Christ´s Authority to do many miracles, speaking while filled with the Spirit, raising the dead, healing the sick, receiving specific revelations, etc. However, after some time it appears the signs were not as active even while they were still living. Paul was distressed with a personal thorn that God would not take away. He went from raising the dead to recommending wine for Timothy´s stomach illness. Perhaps the Apostolic sign era ended around 70 AD with the "œcoming of the Son of man?" I don´t know. Others more versed in eschatology can add light to that discussion. But it appeared that the "œwind" blew harder at the beginning than the end even among the Apostles.
biblelighthouse
Puritan Board Junior
Chris,
Thank you for your good responses.
I totally agree that the canon is closed. That wasn't where I was trying to go. However, regarding point #2, you said:
On the one hand, I agree with you that the "'wind' blew harder at the beginning than the end".
But on the other hand, you said, "I cannot dogmatically assert that it all ended with the Apostle John´s last breath." And that is my point. On the one hand, I have to admit that I have not seen anything that I would call "healing" or "tongues" or "prophecy". But that is an argument from silence & personal experience. I would much prefer an argument from Scripture, but I honestly don't know where to find that argument.
Just for example, consider these two things that Scripture says happens in these "last days":
-and-
Now here's my difficulty:
If the "last days" in Heb. 1 are the same as the "last days" in Acts 2 / Joel 2, then we seem to have the opposite of cessationism. In other words, we can certainly say that God has spoken to us through His Son in these last days (Heb. 1), but Joel 2 and Acts 2 say that the last days *also* contain prophecies, visions, dreams, etc.
On the other hand, if the "last days" in Heb. 1 are supposed to be understood differently than the "last days" of Acts 2 / Joel 2, then how can we demonstrate that from Scripture?
In short, my question is this:
How can we prove from Scripture that God won't send a prophecy to someone now, or a vision to someone now, or cause someone on the mission field to speak in a foreign tongue they never learned? --- Obviously, we believe the canon is closed. But I am talking more about the type of prophecy we see with a non-Apostle in the New Testament, i.e. Agabus (cf. Acts 11:28, 21:10-11). How do we *know* that God won't/doesn't still have Agabus-type people around?
I admit that I've never experienced such a thing. But lots of people in the Old Testament never experienced such a thing, either. When God does wonders, He usually doesn't show them to everyone. Are we just espousing a personal-experience-theology, or are there good Scriptural reasons to believe that prophecy, tongues, visions, dreams, etc. all ended in the first century?
Thank you for helping me think through this question.
Thank you for your good responses.
I totally agree that the canon is closed. That wasn't where I was trying to go. However, regarding point #2, you said:
On the one hand, I agree with you that the "'wind' blew harder at the beginning than the end".
But on the other hand, you said, "I cannot dogmatically assert that it all ended with the Apostle John´s last breath." And that is my point. On the one hand, I have to admit that I have not seen anything that I would call "healing" or "tongues" or "prophecy". But that is an argument from silence & personal experience. I would much prefer an argument from Scripture, but I honestly don't know where to find that argument.
Just for example, consider these two things that Scripture says happens in these "last days":
-and-
Now here's my difficulty:
If the "last days" in Heb. 1 are the same as the "last days" in Acts 2 / Joel 2, then we seem to have the opposite of cessationism. In other words, we can certainly say that God has spoken to us through His Son in these last days (Heb. 1), but Joel 2 and Acts 2 say that the last days *also* contain prophecies, visions, dreams, etc.
On the other hand, if the "last days" in Heb. 1 are supposed to be understood differently than the "last days" of Acts 2 / Joel 2, then how can we demonstrate that from Scripture?
In short, my question is this:
How can we prove from Scripture that God won't send a prophecy to someone now, or a vision to someone now, or cause someone on the mission field to speak in a foreign tongue they never learned? --- Obviously, we believe the canon is closed. But I am talking more about the type of prophecy we see with a non-Apostle in the New Testament, i.e. Agabus (cf. Acts 11:28, 21:10-11). How do we *know* that God won't/doesn't still have Agabus-type people around?
I admit that I've never experienced such a thing. But lots of people in the Old Testament never experienced such a thing, either. When God does wonders, He usually doesn't show them to everyone. Are we just espousing a personal-experience-theology, or are there good Scriptural reasons to believe that prophecy, tongues, visions, dreams, etc. all ended in the first century?
Thank you for helping me think through this question.
youthevang
Puritan Board Freshman
Also, 1 Corinthians 13:9-10 proves that prophecy would cease. When some people read these verses they believe that Paul is speaking of Christ when he states, "But when the perfect comes." If Paul is speaking of Christ here, he is being very vague about it and what we know of Paul, he is never vague when He is speaking of Christ and Him crucified. Verse 9 and 10 are antithetical parallels. The word "part" is set against the word "perfect." We must not try to put our postmodern definitions to words when reading them in Scripture, but we must pay close attention to the definition in which the author gives to the word. Since the word "part" is antithetical to "perfect" then Paul can't mean perfect as meaning someone is perfect without sin. Instead Paul is meaning "completeness" or "wholeness." So when the "whole/complete/perfect" comes then the "part/partial/incomplete" will be done away with.
However, some will say that the above explanation makes no sense in light of verse 12 when Paul states, "For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face." But according to the analogia fidei, it would be stange of the author to change subjects without giving any indication that He is now talking about heaven. Yes, the phrase "face to face" is used in the Scripture elsewhere with regards to heaven, but still we must keep things in context and understand the author's intent.
Therefore, there are no more new revelations. Let's say someone speaks a word of prophecy in the Netherlands. How is the whole body edified through a prophecy that some of us might not even hear? That is why we have the Scriptures because the Scriptures are suppose to keep us unified and keep us one. The body is not divided and the only way to be of one mind is to know what God is saying to all of us in all generations and that is through His Word.
- Status
